Thread Rating:
  • 5 Vote(s) - 2.4 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Portapuke too stronk
#18
(05-01-2023, 08:33 PM)Lord_earthfire Wrote:
(04-29-2023, 02:29 PM)Jakson Wrote: The best compromise here would be giving it the clown car treatment, if anybody clicks on the Puker once, it dumps everybody.

It's still a 7TC item, in comparison to the 5TC cost of the car. Besides,  the clown car is utmost useless for rampages because of functionalities like this. And it is in geberal functionslly different.  And i see the same happening woth the port-a-puke if, in combat, a single click would suffice to dump everyone out.

I can see that making sense with a 4 second action bar, though. That way, for as long as the rampager can hold claim on the port-a-puke,  noone gets out.

Sadly, that will destroy RP use, since , instead of warching in horror how the poor fella gets shredded in the machine, people simply rush in and pull the person out. And the item is extremly loud, for obvious reasons.

To be fair, people barely use it on RP as it is, so it's not a complete loss.

BUT... I think this change is a sign of another problem in Classic over RP.
Afterall we discerned the fact the port-a-puke rampage is mostly tied to SPIEFS and not TRAITORS.

And while my personal theory is "Classic tends to keep doors wide open cause greytiders"

The fact remains that people are complaining about something that is suppose to be a rare chance.
It's suppose to be rare for a SPIEF to get items like a Port-a-puke + Wrestler belt.
But here people claim it's OFTEN that a SPIEF gets a Port-a-puke + item to take down sec + flash/stun baton.

So while I think I am skeptical of this happening a lot, considering Classic has a lot of antagonists too... and SPIEFs generally are enemies to eachother... how does this keep happening or is it rare and people are complaining?

Eh eitherway the change is fine, but it feels like there is an underlying problem that lays more in the hearts of classic, as in RP this is a non issue.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Portapuke too stronk - by Mouse - 04-28-2023, 07:14 AM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by Jakson - 04-28-2023, 09:51 AM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by Lord_earthfire - 04-28-2023, 10:29 AM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by Kotlol - 04-28-2023, 01:25 PM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by Lord_earthfire - 04-28-2023, 07:33 PM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by Kotlol - 04-29-2023, 06:03 AM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by Mouse - 04-29-2023, 07:57 AM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by Kotlol - 04-29-2023, 09:59 AM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by jckrfc03 - 04-29-2023, 10:16 AM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by nefarious6th - 04-29-2023, 01:10 PM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by Kotlol - 04-29-2023, 02:24 PM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by Jakson - 04-29-2023, 02:29 PM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by Lord_earthfire - 05-01-2023, 08:33 PM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by Kotlol - 05-02-2023, 03:23 AM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by StaringGasMask - 05-04-2023, 02:41 PM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by Lord_earthfire - 05-02-2023, 04:05 AM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by Kotlol - 05-05-2023, 05:13 AM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by babayetu83 - 05-05-2023, 10:54 AM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by Jakson - 05-05-2023, 05:01 PM
RE: Portapuke too stronk - by Kotlol - 05-06-2023, 05:40 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)