Topics and Duration before duration

[arun246 67]

Hello tanki, one of my topics was locked like an hour after it was made and that doesnt seem right. MarineMan2 said "The idea you are suggesting actually makes practically no sense. As Isida, Freeze, and Firebird, are equally, if not more susceptible to Shafts and Railguns everywhere. That is just what you must sacrifice when you wish to use a close range turret.

 

Idea rejected, closed."

 

Topics should last for a couple of days before getting locked. If it didnt make sense to him thats his problem. Ban me for all i care, im just speaking up for myself, and trying to make a point. You need to heed advice from the players tanki. we are the ones you are investing in so, actually listen. I played with the hammer turret for at least 3 hours and it was perfect but it had a couple of problems and i suggested a couple of ideas to make it better. Also if MarineMan2 is reading this, where in that topic did i say anything about Isida, or Firebird?  Also i wish to use a close range turrets, and all close range turrets in tanki have a secondary effect in order for the short range weapons to retreat, reload or give the opponent something else to think about. 

[arun246 67]

sorry the title was supposed to be Topic duration before deletion.

[r_DidYouKnowThat0 1,662]

So in the end, the result is forcing the topic to stay open for a certain amount of time. THEN it could be closed?

Well first of all, if the topic was valid, followed rules, reasonable, and overall appropriate, then it wouldn't have been closed now would it?

Second of all, if you think your topic was unfairly closed, then consult someone and sort it out in PM.

In my opinion, the closing of your topics are justified clearly. The mods know what they're doing. And I have to agree with them that your ideas make no sense.

 

And it depends on what kinds of information you suggest. If it's just something that doesn't make sense, persistence will not do you much except wasted effort. If your topics keep getting closed, it's time to stop looking at, and blaming others and perhaps see what is wrong with your topic.

 

I went to the topic, and went over it. I realized that I had read that exact same topic before, and didn't even BOTHER to comment on it. I facepalmed myself painfully after reading it - sorry. But I have to agree with MarineMan for closing it. Your idea did not make any sense.

 

Furthermore, you actually had misunderstood his point. He was merely using Firebird, Isida, and Freeze as an example, as it should be the turrets most closely associated with the new Hammer, as they are all close-ranged weapons.

 

The ideas you suggested doesn't make sense, and is not fair. Equipping Hammer automatically gives you 14% protection from Shaft? Last time I checked, it was Hulls that gave us health points, and Paints that gave us protection. MarineMan was saying that those other turrets had the same susceptibility as being a prey of Shaft as well. So your point did not make sense. -Justified.

It's the Con you take when you use a close-ranged weapon.

 

"Also can you guys make it possible for the turret to do double damage on heavy hulls with double armor, when hammer doesnt have double power equipped?"

 

Ridiculous. Another idea that does not make sense. Can you read this over again?

If you want to nullify a tank's double armor, simply use Double Power. It's there for you.

The game does NOT revolve around you. How would you like it if you used drugs, and some guy doesn't like it. So he suggests that your drugs have no affect. Come on dude, think before you post.

[Maf 32,326]

Your topic was closed because the idea was 100% going to be rejected, which I agree with. There is no point discussing something that will never be implemented anyway.

[XXgamercool_TURBO 14]

your idea wasnt going to be implemented so why discuss it?