Jump to content
EN
Play

Forum

Ricochet, Twins, Railgun


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

They already balanced out the weapons and hulls this year. Everything is equal if you know what you are doing.

Rico, even tho there are paints with alot of pro on it it has a lot of knockback and impact force so its not exactly balance. even with titan on the test server i got flipped by  a rico m3.

 

And twins doesnt really allow u to turn your tank properly, or allow you to aim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Titan gets flipped by M3 Ricochet?

FLIPPED?

You sure? :lol: Unless you pushed the Titan off a platform, flipping a Titan won't be possible.

Im sure. A Viking wedged itself underneath and started shooting with rico. That's how i usually use rico when im about to run out of ammo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah right, Rico flipping M3 titan. 

Turn on your news channel, I heard pigs have started to fly.

How else are they supposed to get to heaven?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im sure. A Viking wedged itself underneath and started shooting with rico. That's how i usually use rico when im about to run out of ammo.

Duh, wedging yourself under another tank almost makes it stand on its side. The rico didn't flip the titan alone. It got the help of viking too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh ok so it included other factors as well.

A Ricochet alone can't flip a Titan. Like what is said above, the Viking played a major role.

um i was the viking and rico, u should have guessed that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The identity of the person driving the tank has no importance in this case. You should've guessed that.

DidYouKnowThat i felt stupid reading the viking and the rico pushed the tanks, and besides the identity of the tank is Viking+Ricochet. The owner/player is the person that the tank belongs to

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The identity of the person driving the tank has no importance in this case. You should've guessed that.

DidYouKnowThat i felt stupid reading the viking and the rico pushed the tanks, and besides the identity of the tank is Viking+Ricochet. The owner/player is the person that the tank belongs to

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The identity of the person driving the tank has no importance in this case. You should've guessed that.

DidYouKnowThat i felt stupid reading the viking and the rico pushed the tanks, and besides the identity of the tank is Viking+Ricochet. The owner/player is the person that the tank belongs to

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The owner/player is the person that the tank belongs to           "

Which is equivalent to the identity of the person driving the tank. The tank doesn't drive itself. Lol!

 

And alright, but next time be a bit more accurate. The original way you put it made it seem as if it flipped it naturally whereas the Viking actually had leverage on it since it was wedged under, heaving it upwards, and leaving it vulnerable to being tipped over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kayitsiz: "Maybe you should research. İn real, looking is part of tanks armor. İn this game, it is paint. "

Be more clear with your English. I don't care if your English is not good, but this sentence doesn't make sense.

"Looking" is a verb, NOT a noun.

 

Actually, looking is a gerund or present participle. Both of those function as nouns (being verbals).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@One-Foot: Oh true. In the context, he referred to it as a noun. -sigh-

But it's not supposed to be used as one. I mean seriously. . .LOOKING. . . . :mellow:

 

(edit) The word "look" would be the gerund/present participle.

Looking would not.

 

Example: The look of the tank is cool. (Correct)

The looking of the tank is cool. (Wrong)

 

He used the wrong part. Looking. LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@One-Foot: Oh true. In the context, he referred to it as a noun. -sigh-

But it's not supposed to be used as one. I mean seriously. . .LOOKING. . . . :mellow:

 

(edit) The word "look" would be the gerund/present participle.

Looking would not.

 

Example: The look of the tank is cool. (Correct)

The looking of the tank is cool. (Wrong)

 

He used the wrong part. Looking. LOL.

We understood this:

sight=looking

İ am still learning english, and probably other too much players are still learning english

Thanks for helping...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@One-Foot: Oh true. In the context, he referred to it as a noun. -sigh-

But it's not supposed to be used as one. I mean seriously. . .LOOKING. . . . :mellow:

 

(edit) The word "look" would be the gerund/present participle.

Looking would not.

 

Example: The look of the tank is cool. (Correct)

The looking of the tank is cool. (Wrong)

 

He used the wrong part. Looking. LOL.

look is a verb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can also be used as a noun. Depends on how you use it.

The LOOK of something. That isn't a verb.

True. 

 

@One-Foot: Oh true. In the context, he referred to it as a noun. -sigh-

But it's not supposed to be used as one. I mean seriously. . .LOOKING. . . . :mellow:

 

(edit) The word "look" would be the gerund/present participle.

Looking would not.

 

Example: The look of the tank is cool. (Correct)

The looking of the tank is cool. (Wrong)

 

He used the wrong part. Looking. LOL.

Here, you said look would be the gerund/present participle. However, it is obviously not even a verbal. You could use looking correctly as in "That tank is looking good."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...