ImTimK

> By average, it means that they would be picked, perhaps the words don't describe what we mean. I mean, just not op stuff. Like Frenzy is, 30% for 10s...

> It's best just to make the cooldown non-existent, It should be four minutes now. > > Try 1 minute, It already gets 20% more infantry than rebel ambush, 16...

40% md's is very strong, on one hand this is needed to make it a viable alternative, on the other hand level 1 could be a little too powerful? It...

can be shot in the air?

My proposal would be to make it cheaper. USA doesn't need better defensive capabilities, therefore I think the performance shouldn't be touched. Now $800 would reflect it's performance better while...

Whatever we do: 1. The EMP and vPat need equal treatment. 2. EMP needs NO buffs. It's already very strong and not SWG's weak point, in fact the EMP already...

Here is the power requirement/investment cost (assuming standard BO early game, dual Sup + WF): |Pat quantity ($1000)|Reactor quantity ($800)|Cold Fusion ($500)|Total Investment (minus first reactor)|versus FB investment ($1000)| |--------------------------|-------------------------|--------------------|-----------------|------------------------------|...

### Proposal 5: Reduce Patriot power requirement from 3 to 2 power units. |Pat quantity ($1000)|Reactor quantity ($800)|Cold Fusion ($500)|Total Investment (minus first reactor)|versus FB investment ($1000)| |--------------------------|-------------------------|--------------------|-----------------|------------------------------| |1|1|0|$1000|$1000| |2|1|1|$2500|$2000|...

> You're kinda breaking your first rule there. 🧐 > I guess kinda yea. > > I considered a power requirement reduction but the introduced inconsistency bothered me, as I...

Another proposal would be reducing XP for killing the vPat, since it's weaker than Laser/EMP Pats.