|
Post by Rasputitsa on Oct 2, 2015 11:38:30 GMT -6
I am for as much flexibility as possible, within the game system.
|
|
|
Post by networkpesci on Oct 2, 2015 15:59:57 GMT -6
I voted yes. It's not exactly clear to me the benefit of using subs over coastal subs, or minelaying subs over regular subs, and this system would allow me to see more of the benefits in addition to adding tactical flexibility. I tend to not use anything besides coastal subs because I have no control over them and they're going to die anyway. This change would give me incentive to deploy something besides the cheapest sub option.
|
|
|
Post by derflinger58 on Oct 4, 2015 18:15:31 GMT -6
i vote yes
|
|
|
Post by Fredrik W on Oct 5, 2015 11:11:18 GMT -6
Just to let you know, there were IMO some good arguments in this thread for keeping it as it is, so I've put player controlled sub moving on hold.
|
|
|
Post by bshaftoe on Oct 6, 2015 4:21:44 GMT -6
Another yes here.
I guess the game will eventually develop to at least touch all areas that a "grand admiral"/secretary of the Navy would need to touch. Submarines, surface units, etc....
|
|
|
Post by tbeard1999 on Oct 28, 2015 8:32:47 GMT -6
If you implement this, please make it optional. I prefer to spend game time on battles and shipbuilding.
|
|