|
CuddlyZombie posted:How do Team Techs work with players that don't have a role, such as Evoker and Bard? Oh poo poo that was ANOTHER thing we discussed that I just forgot to write down! Classes with no Role simply declare one at character creation if you're using the Team Tech module
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 14:36 |
|
|
Countblanc posted:You may be misinterpreting it; It requires you to to move exactly 5 spaces, the Xs on step charts are where the dancer ends up at after performing it, not which enemies it hits. This is almost assuredly because I didn't properly explain it but some of these have been stewing in dev mode jargon for months now. But hey that just means the packet is doing what it's supposed to do! The picture example didn't help which is why I mistook it in the first place!
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
Illusionist's False Enemy should probably say something like "an At-Will Attack that you have seen it make", rather than simply "an At-Will Attack that you have seen" (Although, I suppose that PARTICULAR wording raises the question of what happens if you fight two enemies that are the same type of enemy, and enemy A uses an at-will, does that mean you can't make enemy B use that at-will since you haven't seen enemy B use it?)
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
I may be missing something, but some of the Gambler's powers seem to only work 50% of the time. What happens if you use Duck or Dodge, you have chosen Tails and the GM chooses to Dodge? I like the concept of the class but I don't know if I'd pick a power like that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:In our playtest one of the testers found some really funny/dumb stuff with /Blaster in particular. And my Summoner/Leader gets a ton of mileage out of a Minor Blaster feat when dropping his summon encounters. e: Plus leaping from Superhuman helped a ton with melee AoE placement. Ah, that was such a fun build. ImpactVector fucked around with this message at 22:00 on Jul 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
I've given the book a read through and many of the new classes look fantastic. I'm particularly excited for Bard; having an interesting pure support would be great. I must ask how Ogre's intended to work though; I found the concept of it a little confusing. You share the character with another player, but you have your own health and sheet?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
It's more simple than you think; mostly everything is tracked separately both in and out of combat, you just share a token in combat. There's a few rules oddities,and I'm sure a few others we haven't found yet, but yeah. Even if you play the character as a straight two-headed ogre instead of two heroes who join together in combat you'll still function separately out of combat in terms of skills, tricks, etc
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:It's more simple than you think; mostly everything is tracked separately both in and out of combat, you just share a token in combat. There's a few rules oddities,and I'm sure a few others we haven't found yet, but yeah. Even if you play the character as a straight two-headed ogre instead of two heroes who join together in combat you'll still function separately out of combat in terms of skills, tricks, etc So, a monster attacks the ogre; he picks one of the two entities in that space to hit?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
Correct, barring bursts and similar effects. So for instance if the Magic half was /defender and marks an enemy, and then that enemy attacks the Might half, the Magic side would get an Opportunity since the monster didn't attack her.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 22:37
|
|
|
So if the Ogre provokes an opportunity by leaving a square without shifting, both heads take the hit? What about statuses, what happens if an enemy targets one head and knocks it prone, or immobilizes it, or somesuch with an attack?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
Is there any particular reason you share a square, then? It feels like it could just be a Buddies thing with two classes that combo with each other.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
paradoxGentleman posted:I may be missing something, but some of the Gambler's powers seem to only work 50% of the time. What happens if you use Duck or Dodge, you have chosen Tails and the GM chooses to Dodge? I like the concept of the class but I don't know if I'd pick a power like that. Yes, the effect only works if the GM picks wrong on those two powers (Duck or Dodge and Fight or Flight). It's not exactly like a coin flip though, because there is a bit of psychology to the guessing game since the two options have different effects. And the effects are encounter power strength if they go off. I've been having fun with Fight or Flight even though Count has guessed correctly 80% of the time through some wizardry.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
The Engineer's ability Armor Up is a bit confusing at least initially. For one thing you might want to qualify whether an ally can spend both their Move and Roll actions to double-up on the Resist bonus (I'm pretty sure the intent is they can only gain up to Resist 1, but it never hurts to explicitly spell stuff out), but the bit that I had some trouble wrapping my head around on a first read is the whole "this effect lasts until it is used 3 times or until the start of your turn, whichever happens first." At first I was reading "this effect" as "the ability for allies to use this" and thinking it was strange that everyone would lose their bonuses after the third person used it...but then it turned around in my head and I realized what you almost certainly meant was something like "this Resist bonus lasts until it prevents 3 damage or until the start of your turn."
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
Making the ability prevent a solid 3 damage during the round before poofing out would make more sense but I guess it would just be a generic "you get 3 temporary hit points".
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
TheLovablePlutonis posted:Making the ability prevent a solid 3 damage during the round before poofing out would make more sense but I guess it would just be a generic "you get 3 temporary hit points". Well giving "Resist 1, works 3 times before vanishing" means that if a big enemy hits you for, I dunno, 5 damage let's say that Armor Up will only drop it to 4, whereas giving you 3 temp HP would turn that big hit from 5 to 2 damage. In other words it actually works the way that armor works in Overwatch (which I gather is the inspiration for this particular power) in that it works better against numerous weaker attacks than it does at mitigating single big attacks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 00:51
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:In other words it actually works the way that armor works in Overwatch (which I gather is the inspiration for this particular power) in that it works better against numerous weaker attacks than it does at mitigating single big attacks. So you think! https://gfycat.com/InbornObedientChihuahua
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 00:58
|
|
|
As someone who enjoys both Torbjorn and Winston I'm not sure how I should feel about that gif. Someone's either doing something really right or really wrong. I really like the Engineer overall, I was actually thinking if there was a way to do something similar using the Buddies but a purpose-built class is even better, and I like how there are enough options to slant it towards all the various roles. Another thing I noticed, both in the Engineer and several other classes that do this, are abilities which say something like "if you have Advantage then roll 3 dice and take the best results." I can't actually remember off the top of my head how the main Strike! book handles stuff like this but given that using 2d6 instead of 1d6 is one of the more common custom rules people use it might be worth it to change those to read something like "if you have Advantage then roll another additional die and take the best results," something along those lines. Kai Tave fucked around with this message at 01:20 on Jul 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:As someone who enjoys both Torbjorn and Winston I'm not sure how I should feel about that gif. Someone's either doing something really right or really wrong. It's mostly the latter, that Torbjorn is unbelievably incompetent and Winston has help -- he gets Zarya shielded about halfway through, and I think maybe some healing in there as well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
Something like Zarya would make for an interesting Defender-esque (or maybe Leader-esque) role the way that the Lurker is meant to be an alternate, more complex take on the Striker, where you have the ability to proactively and reactively give your teammates damage resistance and every time you prevent them (or yourself) from taking damage you gain charge which can then be spent boosting your next attack or something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 01:32
|
|
|
These mostly look great. Some of them are a bit over-complicated, and I think many could use a pass of going "what is this class's Thing and does each power reinforce that," but that's pretty much exactly what playtesting is for, so... yeah, thanks for pre-emptively implementing my suggestion. Here are some things I noticed while reading through: The Gambler's All or Nothing seems like it doesn't work with her own Lv.1 Encounter powers, since they have a weird roll. Or maybe it does, but it's just worded wrong, since a 1 isn't a miss there. The stated point of the Engineer is to have a mostly-immobile turret that you want to protect. However, you lose nothing if it dies, and you can trivially bring back a dead turret. You don't even waste an action, since you get an RBA at the same time. As for being immobile, it effectively ignores most cover, which makes its positioning, and thus its lack of mobility, way less important. And in fact, if you pick the Micro-Machines class feature, it's not even remotely stationary. Seems fishy to me. If you want a turret that's powerful, but mostly immobile and in need of protection, then do that; don't immediately go back on your decision by giving it a bunch of ways to ignore those restrictions. At the very least you should take a strike when your turret dies. As a bigger change, I'd also remove the RBA from Weekly Maintenance and rework Micro-Machines so your turret doesn't get essentially free movement. I think the Squire would be much cleaner without Declare Errand, as you suggested at the end of its write-up. Even aside from the effect timing rules, the theme is all about toadying up to one particular ally. That doesn't really scan if you can switch to a new Errand every single turn. Freelancer is neat. I like it. You may have noticed my predilection for stuff that's simple and solid. Ogre is cool, but really needs a section clarifying that the two partners share the same space and what that means. Also, you addressed Melee Shooter, but what about Reach on the Might head? Here's the big one. Evoker is ridiculously complicated. I mean, I know you know that, and it's experimental, but it bears noting; the others all look like they'd be fun to play, but this one just gives me horrible flashbacks to (Incidentally, if I'm reading this correctly, the Level 9 version of Conjure Elements doesn't work unless you have taken the Broad Mastery Feat, since you'll only have two Basic Elements mastered and they'll be opposed.) Sorry to write a bunch of negative stuff. I really like most of what's there! Keep up the good work, and thanks for letting us look through it all. megane fucked around with this message at 01:59 on Jul 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 01:53
|
|
|
megane posted:(Incidentally, if I'm reading this correctly, the Level 9 version of Conjure Elements doesn't work unless you have taken the Broad Mastery Feat, since you'll only have two Basic Elements mastered and they'll be opposed.) Yeah it does, you just summon two of the same. Cloud, Wall, and Daemon are the elements I'm least certain about leaving in their current state, though - they might have to last only one turn or something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 02:26
|
|
|
If Micro-Machines obviates one of the turret's downsides (that of being a stationary emplacement) too much then the immediate suggestion that springs to mind is reducing the size of its Field when that option is taken, making it more dependent on coordinating with allies it's attached to or jumping it from creature to creature.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
I don't really get the micro-machines option. A mobile persistent buffing aura you attack through is a neat idea. A stationary turret is a neat idea (that I wish the class leaned into harder by having the choice of placement be a bigger deal). They don't seem like the same idea.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:I don't really get the micro-machines option. A mobile persistent buffing aura you attack through is a neat idea. A stationary turret is a neat idea (that I wish the class leaned into harder by having the choice of placement be a bigger deal). They don't seem like the same idea. I like Micro-Machines because I like that it gives the Engineer some flexible build options, however it might be trying to do a few too many things at the moment being a thing you can attach to allies for buffs, enemies for debuffs, and you also attack through it. Personally I think that if you simply kept it as a way to anchor turrets to allies and buff them while attacking through it, stripping out the ability to attach it to enemies, that it would still be a worthwhile option.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 03:04
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I like Micro-Machines because I like that it gives the Engineer some flexible build options, however it might be trying to do a few too many things at the moment being a thing you can attach to allies for buffs, enemies for debuffs, and you also attack through it. Personally I think that if you simply kept it as a way to anchor turrets to allies and buff them while attacking through it, stripping out the ability to attach it to enemies, that it would still be a worthwhile option. My comment assumes that, as other people have said, it should really be a bigger deal to have your turret out of position. If you're making something inspired by The Engineer or Torbjörn, turret placement is an important part of the tactical thinking of the player. And so the design of the class should reflect that you will make and then have to live with the placement, at least not without a decent bit of inconvenience. If you can strap it to somebody, that obviates that whole aspect of things. Similarly, there's an interesting design space for a character that controls a persistent mobile aura and there's a lot more you could do with it if it's not part of a class that's also supporting a stationary turret. And I don't know how much value there is in giving the Engineer that sort of flexible build option that completely redefines the class. The Necromancer and Summoner wouldn't become meaningfully more flexible classes if you merged them together and then had a level 1 choice to pick which one you were really playing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 03:15
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:My comment assumes that, as other people have said, it should really be a bigger deal to have your turret out of position. If you're making something inspired by The Engineer or Torbjörn, turret placement is an important part of the tactical thinking of the player. And so the design of the class should reflect that you will make and then have to live with the placement, at least not without a decent bit of inconvenience. If you can strap it to somebody, that obviates that whole aspect of things. Similarly, there's an interesting design space for a character that controls a persistent mobile aura and there's a lot more you could do with it if it's not part of a class that's also supporting a stationary turret. I'm not playtesting so much as theorycrafting but I think that it would be a reasonable tradeoff to have something like Micro-Machines but reduce the turret's Field compared to a regular stationary turret, possibly as low as 5x5 compared to the regular 9x9, at which point the tradeoff becomes one where you can either cover a large chunk of the battlefield outright but that area is anchored to a stationary object or you can have a mobile zone but with a reduced area and at the whim of another person...yes, I'm sure players will be cooperating, but you still can't (or shouldn't) take over someone else's character because you think optimal turret coverage would be better here than there. I'll be honest, babysitting a turret is maybe the least interesting way to play Torbjorn and there's a reason why in Overwatch you are strongly encouraged to not do so, and I don't really have a ton of interest in it here either. I'm not sure how you're supposed to play up the importance of placement without dragging the class more towards a feast-or-famine outcome. Did you gently caress up your turret placement? Hope you enjoy wasted turns. I don't really see how it's going to make the Engineer more enjoyable to play if you can wind up inconveniencing yourself significantly before the fight even starts imo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 04:03
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:My comment assumes that, as other people have said, it should really be a bigger deal to have your turret out of position. If you're making something inspired by The Engineer or Torbjörn, turret placement is an important part of the tactical thinking of the player. And so the design of the class should reflect that you will make and then have to live with the placement, at least not without a decent bit of inconvenience. If you can strap it to somebody, that obviates that whole aspect of things. Similarly, there's an interesting design space for a character that controls a persistent mobile aura and there's a lot more you could do with it if it's not part of a class that's also supporting a stationary turret. I appreciate all the critique, thank you. The particular reason for adding the Micro-Machines build is basically the same as adding Blood Adept to the Magician - it lets people who want to use the powers but aren't super into the primary gimmick (immobility in this case, cooldowns in the magician's) have access to those toys. I clearly haven't perfectly accomplished that, but I'd like to wait for people's actual playtest results before making changes to better facilitate that goal (it originally had a 7x7 field range but I wanted to test the 9x9 before making that sort of change, same with 5x5) or scrapping it entirely. e: another example would be the Single-Form Shapechanger. So yeah I'd like to mess around with the idea before completely removing it if necessary. There's definitely other alternatives, the most obvious just being making the turret mounted on you at all times. Countblanc fucked around with this message at 05:06 on Jul 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 05:02
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:I don't really get the micro-machines option. A mobile persistent buffing aura you attack through is a neat idea. A stationary turret is a neat idea (that I wish the class leaned into harder by having the choice of placement be a bigger deal). They don't seem like the same idea. They serve the same mechanical function of "extended zone of control", I would assume. Also mechanically, having an extended zone of control seems like a non-starter if that zone of control can just be ignored by enemy movement (which is what a single stationary turret has to worry about). It's why you always followed up a fog spell in D&D with Evard's  , for example. You cannot have the same level of tactile control over turret placement in an elfgame that you do in an arena shooter where every level is designed to have choke points designed around said ability. They're completely different things.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 05:02
|
|
|
MadRhetoric posted:You cannot have the same level of tactile control over turret placement in an elfgame that you do in an arena shooter where every level is designed to have choke points designed around said ability. They're completely different things. This is a good way of putting one of the points I was trying (and probably failing) to articulate, which is that a class that uses stationary defenses is cool, but making it onerous and difficult and inconvenient to reposition those defenses doesn't, in my opinion, seem like good gameplay in either an RPG or in a video game, which is one reason why Torb doesn't work like a TF2 Engie in that you can build up a brand new level 2 turret in about five seconds of quiet time instead of an extended period of vulnerability, and repositioning your turret frequently is one of the keys to better Torbing. edit; and even then this is on a limited selection of predefined maps with predefined chokepoints. I would, I have to confess, be a little disappointed if the Micro-Machines option went away entirely because I do like having classes with some more flexibility to them, it's not like Strike! lacks for extremely focused classes but part of what I liked about 4E is how they (not always successfully, but it was still more hit than miss) incorporated new slants into classes over time so you eventually wound up with Bravura Warlords and Brawler Fighters and sneaky cover-shooter Rogues and the like. I won't be able to really playtest this stuff because god knows I don't really have time to do as much elfgaming as I would like these days, nor do I have a group of my own, so my own opinion here probably doesn't matter as much as someone who really sits down and puts it through its paces, but there you go. Kai Tave fucked around with this message at 05:28 on Jul 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 05:22
|
|
|
As someone who's been thinking "Steven Universe Strike" for a while (since my group of nerd friends is super into it) I'm very glad to see the Ogre, because it's finally a solid answer to the question "what if they want to fuse".
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 07:39
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I'll be honest, babysitting a turret is maybe the least interesting way to play Torbjorn and there's a reason why in Overwatch you are strongly encouraged to not do so, and I don't really have a ton of interest in it here either. I'm not sure how you're supposed to play up the importance of placement without dragging the class more towards a feast-or-famine outcome. Did you gently caress up your turret placement? Hope you enjoy wasted turns. I don't really see how it's going to make the Engineer more enjoyable to play if you can wind up inconveniencing yourself significantly before the fight even starts imo. I agree that it's not fun to have to babysit a turret. Fortunately, nothing about making it less mobile or repositionable increases the extent to which you have to sit by it. Anyways, making tactical decisions that have significant impact on the outcome of encounters seems to me like the point of tactical combat. I'm not saying the class is badly designed or wouldn't be fun to play, but when it's sold as a turret-based class it's odd that it doesn't lean into the tactical consideration of analyzing the map and figuring out how to best control it using an object in place for an extended period. Rather, it comes across as a class built around a slow summon or drone. I'm not a game designer, I'm not trying to tell the Strike people how to do their job, but my reaction to reading this is that the mechanics don't seem to match the flavor, particularly for the micro-machines option. Kai Tave posted:I would, I have to confess, be a little disappointed if the Micro-Machines option went away entirely because I do like having classes with some more flexibility to them Can you clarify what it is about having character flexibility being embedded as options within classes rather than, say, options between classes that specifically appeals to you? It seems like it should be all the same to the player.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 07:41
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Can you clarify what it is about having character flexibility being embedded as options within classes rather than, say, options between classes that specifically appeals to you? It seems like it should be all the same to the player. Well for starters: Countblanc posted:it lets people who want to use the powers but aren't super into the primary gimmick (immobility in this case, cooldowns in the magician's) have access to those toys. Putting another spin on Countblanc's point, I like a lot of the Engineer's toys but maybe I might want to play an Engineer with a different slant on it and that's fine. A lot of people like to talk about how 4E didn't waste time trying to make you awkwardly smash a Fighter and a Wizard together to make a Fightwizard, they just gave you a Swordmage...but the thing is that 4E also gave Fighters the option to go barehanded and chokeslam dragons as opposed to the usual melee fare and let you build a Fighter around that sort of grappling and brawling style instead of making an entirely new Brawler class and that's fine too, because it's fun to play a Brawler Fighter who has access to things like Come And Get It which were made with the regular weapon-users in mind originally. tl;dr maybe "placing a mobile attack aura on a person" could be spun into its own class but I like it just as well as a subdivision of the Engineer the same way I like that Rogues can be sneaky backstabbers or they can be dirty brawlers, or that Magicians can be a riff on Vancian casters or you can say "nah I'm gonna go Blood Mage." In both instances, the standard turret and the micro-machine version, I feel like the fundamental theme of placing an offensive force multiplier onto something which you then have minimal control over is preserved so it doesn't come across to me as a smashup of two unrelated classes stuck together just because.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 08:30
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:In both instances, the standard turret and the micro-machine version, I feel like the fundamental theme of placing an offensive force multiplier onto something which you then have minimal control over is preserved so it doesn't come across to me as a smashup of two unrelated classes stuck together just because. The phrase "something which you then have minimal control over" seems like a real stretch to cover both a fellow PC that you're cooperating with in a team game and a stationary square on the map.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 09:08
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:The phrase "something which you then have minimal control over" seems like a real stretch to cover both a fellow PC that you're cooperating with in a team game and a stationary square on the map. I dunno, I try not to micromanage my fellow players' movements too much so maybe that's just me. Regardless I don't think I'm going to conjure up an argument that sways you here so I'm gonna chalk this one up to agreeing to disagree.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 09:36
|
|
|
In what situation would a Bard not want to use the Riff associated with their melody? Maybe to do a standard attack? I guess in certain situations it might be counterproductive, like if you are playing the Melody of Action, there's a goon near you and you don't want the rest of the group to stop fighting the main baddy to take care of it (possibly triggering Team Mascot as a side benefit?) Speaking of Team Mascot, it's a bit of a weird power. Is it in the best interest of the Bard to get hurt to trigger it? Is it an emergency button for when the situation is so lovely that even the Bard is getting hurt?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 09:48
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I dunno, I try not to micromanage my fellow players' movements too much so maybe that's just me. Regardless I don't think I'm going to conjure up an argument that sways you here so I'm gonna chalk this one up to agreeing to disagree. I'm fine if you want to drop it, but it seems weird to not see the distance between someone you cooperate with, if not control, and a literally immobile spot on the map.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 09:51
|
|
|
Character generator now supports outputting kits and a "print" option.
hyphz fucked around with this message at 19:03 on Jul 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
paradoxGentleman posted:In what situation would a Bard not want to use the Riff associated with their melody? Maybe to do a standard attack? I guess in certain situations it might be counterproductive, like if you are playing the Melody of Action, there's a goon near you and you don't want the rest of the group to stop fighting the main baddy to take care of it (possibly triggering Team Mascot as a side benefit?) The Bard is Jim's baby so I'll let him field this in case there's something more to it, but the game I played as a Bard I used a Basic Attack or two. You don't get a Role Boost so it's fairly esoteric but like you said, sometimes it's worth popping a Goon in the jaw or pushing damage against an enemy you have Advantage against. Also a bit ago people were asking about the engineer's "Armor Up". First I'd like to say that the power is definitely not in its final incarnation, but the current intended effect is that 3 allies may use the power's boon before it fizzles, not that the effect lasts for 3 uses on the ally who uses it. I put this clause in because I was designing the Engineer at about the same time Jim was working on the Bard and I noticed that the Bard got stronger the more party members you had, and I wanted something to prevent the same thing for the Engineer. It probably isn't worth it in retrospect and I'll likely remove that line unless playtesting shows it to be really degenerate with larger parties for some reason, but yeah, that's the idea.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
Yeah, that's basically it - sometimes you'd rather Basic Attack than use a riff. Also later you'll have multiple melodies going at once and get to pick which riff to use. Or if you're dazed, you might want to use a Chord or move around instead of a Riff.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 14:36 |
|
|
I do think the Engineer is a cool concept, and I agree that having the turret be super difficult to reposition would be bad, since you don't want to set it up in the wrong place and then basically sit out the battle. How about this:quote:Weekly Maintenance
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 01:38
|
|