Will things that get destroyed in a map always remain and stay destroyed through out the war? I.E. if my army destroys the Eiffel Tower in Paris, will it still remain destroyed when the next army comes in and battles for the city a few days(in the real world) later?
Will things that get destroyed in a map always remain and stay destroyed through out the war? I.E. if my army destroys the Eiffel Tower in Paris, will it still remain destroyed when the next army comes in and battles for the city a few days(in the real world) later?
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by john_chi:
Will things that get destroyed in a map always remain and stay destroyed through out the war? I.E. if my army destroys the Eiffel Tower in Paris, will it still remain destroyed when the next army comes in and battles for the city a few days(in the real world) later? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Excellent question!
----In your application of military force, be just, fair, precise, but to conquer your enemies' will, heart and mind, seek to improve his lot- atacms-----
That's a good question to send to the Devs. questions@endwargame.com It would be awesome if they did that!
"To Protect Life and Property"
i don't believe so from that new vid interview on ign how the guy says that the same battle can be fought countless times in one day to decide who actually holds the territory at the end of the day so i would think it would have a certain level of destruction or it may have random things destroyed that aren't destroyed in other battles but i don't think it'll keep a memory of what's destroyed
i don't think that would be good, with the number of people fighting for these places it wouldn't take long for them to be turned to rubble
I rather start fresh with a new city to burn to the ground..
Although keeping it as ruble would be more realistic..
ANTI-PC For ENDWAR :smash:
keeping it as rubble i think would possibly detract since so many people will fight out the same battle it would be rare to fight in a city in which u get to burn it to the ground and i think that would detract.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KJ_White:
keeping it as rubble i think would possibly detract since so many people will fight out the same battle it would be rare to fight in a city in which u get to burn it to the ground and i think that would detract. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
ya, the first few people who play would play in a city, after that you would only have an open field with rubble in it to fight in
Dude when I said start fresh with a new city to burn to the ground I meant They should regenerate the city so Everytime I play the same battlefield I can burn it to the ground...
Gosh, you people are to literal.
ANTI-PC For ENDWAR :smash:
Posting Permissions
john_chi
Reply With Quote
