.44 - your response satisfies the question i didn't ask, which is why there are bombardments in the first place. Personally, i don't enjoy playing maps with the feature (i find it annoying to fight for a terit and then only end up being able to deny it to an enemy) but as i said, that's a personal feeling. I'm not asking why there are bombardments. they're there for those who do like the feature, and i have no problem with that. I can simply choose not to play the maps that have them. and i'm not as frustrated as i sound. i have that problem when typing, i sound more... passionate about every issue than i really am. my appologies
bryguy wrote:. Not every map has bombardment tho, and it is hardly ever suggested.
first, not every map has bombardment because bombardment is not a good idea for every map. which is the point i was making in my original post.
to the second half of the sentence... go read thru the whole drafting room forum. That's where i'm commenting on. at least 90% of the maps (don't quote the number, it's an estimate) have someone suggesting bombardment. I made the post right after seeing one in a map that simply had no reason to have bombardments. Personally, i find this very annoying. Thankfully, most map-makers don't add bombardment to add bombardment.
I just posted to see if anyone agrees on this: don't suggest bombardment unless there's a reason.
if no one does, or i'm the only one who thinks it's suggested far more often than merited, I'll happily shut up on the issue, and continue to comment in the map forums as i do now, having learned somewhat more about the merits of adding bombardments. Since starting to post here, i have learned the merits of one-way attacks, which i found annoying at first as well. So i'm not attempthing to be closed-minded on the issue.
_ - Ustus - _
))
