It's time to end this once and for all

Okay, so Maerique has been saying how it’s so awful that the Lightning Tower is weak to Fire when it has a “molten core.” Let me tell you something. According to science, Lightning is made when ICE PARTICLES collide and create an electric charge. Therefore, it is perfectly reasonable to have it be weak to fire

Molten core? 

that’s what Maerique said about it, not me

the fire is the wrong weakness for Lightning. If I read what I got on google. Its suppose to be Ice the weakness of Lightning but according from others games the weakness of Lightning is Earth or ground. In many games the logic is Water more strong than Lightning. We don’t have Water element in RR2 so the closer is Ice

Lightning cometh from static electricity build up which cometh from friction (mostly) and dissipates/discharges through/onto “earth” (or ground). A lightning tower doesn’t need molten cores, a conveyor belt of brushes and a capacitor will work just fine. :stuck_out_tongue:

What magic type is strong against lightning depends on the system but it’s usually earth. Since RR2 is outside both logic and known magic systems, it can be weak to whatever because reasons. I vote poison, because it makes as much sense as anything else. :wink:

I see it differently. The lightning is the result of the tower. But it still has to do with what the tower is weak against. If the tower is made out of material weak to fire it makes sense. 

It’s a game and when creators decide it’s weak to fire, it’s weak to fire. Even if they made it weak to stun or poison, that’s up to flare. Des there alway have to be a logical explanation?

Probably you don’t play really video game? Apart Royal Revolt 2? that explain why you say that. I play since over 25 years probably over 1000 video game in my life. at 100% the creators of a video game follow the real logic like in real life. If a mob is a Fire mob its gonna be weak to Water. if its a Water mob its gonna be weak in Fire. Like the mob is a earth one Fire will be the weakness,etc…

Only Flare don’t respect the logic behind each stuffs. Like Cannon weak to Fire or Heal Tower weak Piercing like Swordrain,etc… make no sense and maybe others weakness,etc…

I think RR2 is the only game to have a bad logic in it.

for the Lightning Tower I admit its hard. Can be ice but if you talk about the main structure made in crystal. None of element should hurt the tower. One fact its clear Lightning Tower cannot be weak to Fire. Crystal or Iron whatever. Fire don’t do anything with those materials. So its illogical 

we cannot do anything about this if Flare decide its Fire well its weak to Fire


sounds like you have been away from real life too long. Go try put out a oil fire with water.
In real life plumbers do not grow twice their size when collecting mushrooms, nor can they shoot fireballs after collecting flowers.

if staying away from real life is more your thing, then try play pokemon where water mobs are not weak to fire, and earth ones are not weak to fire. 

its a giant crystal or iron object, that shoots lighting, and floats in the the air - how much logic do you want to put into it?
use your imagination and pretend it floats as its filled with hydrogen. 

on the other hand,  it makes no sense that a cannon with wooden wheels (and presumably lots of gunpowder nearby) might be weak against fire? 

You are absolutely right. It’s also quite understandable there’s a strong backlash to things that seem too “outside the norm”. You can make a game where you regain health by getting stabbed in the eyeballs and kill enemies by throwing marshmallows at them, but the most common reaction will be “who designed this sh*t?!”. :lol:

Maybe there doesn’t need to be an explanation but that’s going more in the realms of faith - people seek reasons and explanations for anything, so when things aren’t explained enough, they will come up with their own theories (as with LT’s molten cores, whatever that is). Often times that is fun in and of itself.

That depends on the mushrooms/flowers. If it’s the “woah, dude” kind of mushroom (*wink* *nudge*) they indeed might get twice their usual size, or at least believe they do. They might even see spiky turtles in pipes and stuff. :stuck_out_tongue:


You know what? Let’s make a permanent thread somewhere where we’d try to dissect game mechanics in terms of real physics (like where does the poison in snake towers come from). Might be fun.

Actually, I think the lightning tower’s weakness to fire is very logical: The “yellow crystal” of the lightning tower is obviously amber, a fossilized tree resin. Already in ancient times it was known to charge electrically (before these terms were even known) when rubbed with certain materials, and then it can discharge with tiny flashes. The lightning tower in the game is just a XXXXL version of that. And amber is weak to fire: It burns when ignited!

I think you guys are getting me confused. I am saying that the lightning tower being weak to fire is correct! I am not saying it should be weak to ice

It remains to discuss the covering of the road … Asphalt, soil, sand???

Nope, I played some games that were far from realistic, mario Kart, where cars fly through the sky and land without any damage for example. Very unrealistic, but still it was fun to play. 

What fourofjacks says is true, does it have to be realistic? Is it realistic that a young hero is able to use magic? So should we eliminate all spells? Monsters also only exist in fairy tales, so should we eliminate them? What about Frosters, necromancer, monk with healing power and pyro? A normal person getting hit by a cannon is dead, so how does the hero survive?

Also surviving damage from  towers is not very logical plus getting healed 100% from serious injuries in no time doesn’t make sense at all, so by reasoning in a logical way this game has no solid base to exist at all, since reasoning this way we could eliminate every aspect of this game.

So that’s why you should not expect this game to follow any logic or common sense at all, also not in being vulnerable to a specific kind of damage or not. So… Since it doesn’t follow logic at all, why on earth follow logic for what kind of damage troops, towers plus structures need to be weak or resistant against?

That makes no sense at all. Especially since offensive troops are invulnerable from offensive damage and defense seems to be invulnerable from defensive damage. Take for example a bomb from bomb tower. To be realistic, defensive troops should be hurt also from an exploding bomb or when they run over a frost trap, they should be damaged also a lot. 

But they don’t get hurt, because defending troops would be receive that many damage from own defense that hero just needs to blow with his mouth to take defensive troops out. We take for granted that damage from friendly troops, structures or spells is zero. 

So by accepting that, why is it unacceptable that some tower is weak against damage type A and weak against type B? Why that suddenly needs to follow any logic?  

Just enjoy the game, that makes sense.