Board Thread:Plants vs. Zombies 2/@comment-26239911-20151227220415/@comment-24275721-20151230082927

IG Gaming + Maramok= Awesome wrote: TheGollddMAN wrote: IG Gaming + Maramok= Awesome wrote: TheGollddMAN wrote: IG Gaming + Maramok= Awesome wrote: TheGollddMAN wrote: IG Gaming + Maramok= Awesome wrote: TheGollddMAN wrote: Dekagamer7X9 wrote:

TheGollddMAN wrote:

Dekagamer7X9 wrote:

TheGollddMAN wrote:

Dekagamer7X9 wrote:

TheHandsomePlant wrote:

RobuxShooters wrote:

Dark Ranger 007 wrote:

Dekagamer7X9 wrote: Why does everybody want a defensive shadow plant in part 2? We have enough defensive plants as it is, what else could it do? Must I list all the ones we have so far?


 * Wall-nut
 * Tall-nut
 * Pumpkin
 * Infi-nut
 * Chard Guard
 * Endurian
 * Celery Stalker
 * Garlic
 * Primal Wall-nut
 * Sweet Potato

And as for China exclusives...


 * White Radish
 * Vigorous Broccoli
 * Torchwood (when upgraded to level 2 or higher)
 * Small Chestnut Team
 * Pineapple

Let me know if I missed any. Bottom line, there's not much you can do with a defensive shadow plant that can't already be achieved by plants we already have. Pumpkin!? Also you missed Peanut Pumpkin is in Plants vs. Zombies 1, is it not? But it's not in PvZ2, thus not counting for the list. What more could a new one do that we haven't already seen? Most new plants already do what we've seen by combining abilities. Even the existing Shadow plants are old abilities rehashed somewhat into new abilities. So what's the problem combining two defensive plants in one with that powered and not powered gimmick? Moonflower, Nightshade, and Shadow-shroom, for the most part bring at least something new to the table. What could a defensive shadow plant do? Here's some I can think of:


 * It could be a generic defensive plant that has more health when boosted. (Wall-nut, Red Stinger)
 * It could be a generic defensive plant that gains a long-ranged attack when boosted. (Wall-nut, Red Stinger)
 * It could be an attacking plant that becomes defensive when boosted. (Red Stinger, Pea-nut)
 * It could be a generic defensive plant that gains a melee attack when boosted. (Wall-nut, Endurian, Level Upgraded White Radish)
 * Or we could literally give it the function of any other defensive plant when it's boosted.

But, I can't even think of a way it could have an ability that doesn't just outright copy the abilities of another plant. All the abilities you listed are something just like what you said happens with the other shadow plants. Why is it that you yourself think that the other plants bring something new to the table when the defensive plant can have any of the above abilities but is considered generic?

From my eyes, I see all the above abilities also as something new to the table. Funny how you yourself point out the pros that can be from a shadow defensive plant but then call it generic while calling the other generic plants as something new. Hypocrite much? MF is basically a plant that was made to boost other shadow plants. That seems an awful lot like Sunflower Singer which is even better and came before. Nightshade is basically an offensive plant that loses leaves like Chard Guard (and even the same three times).unless you boost it. Then it becomes a Red Stinger without column restrictions. Visually it even has almost the same throwing animation as Bloomerang.

Shadow Shroom is another plant that needs to be eaten in order for the effect to work. There are already a lot of plants in PvZ2 that do that. Also the effect of killing zombies but slowly (depending on health) is basically what Chili bean does but after 2 seconds delay.

In a way, all these plants have some sort of recycled or reskinned abililty. Similarly, another reskinned shadow defensive plant wouldn't be bad. A fast recharge defensive plant that can heal itself faster after boosting it with MF. Simple concept, rehashed idea from Infi-nut but works nonetheless. 1. MF also produces more sun with more shadow plants.

2. That's like comparing Chard Guard and bowling bulb!

3. So you think Hypno Shroom is similar to chili bean. And some zombies have higher health and won't be killed that fast. Also, the boosted effect is unique.


 * Primal Sunflower is the best sun producer in the game without any kind of Zen Garden boosts. I won't even use shadow plants. None of the plants are strong for my taste.


 * Since there is a similarity, no matter how vague it is, it's there nonetheless. The losing leaves is definitely similar to Chard Guard which no other plant did until now. Also, I don't see how anyone would compare CG and BB. I don't see anything similar between them.

1. Primal sunflower=max 75 sun. Moonflower=max 100 sun.
 * Just in terms of how the effect is done. Hypno doesn't hypnotise like Pumpkin Witch, it needs to be eaten. By that POV, it is similar to Chili Bean which also needs to be eaten in order for it work.

2. You can do that, but that's only you.

3. Chard guard is for delaying while Nightshade is solely for attacking. It's like the time you compared Electric Blueberry to Lightning Reed. LR is for hordes like chickens while EB is terrible with hordes!

4. So hypno isn't like pumpkin witch but it is like Chili bean/Sun bean. That's insane! I'm sure many would agree with me. 1 and 2. I still won't use MF for just a 25 sun bonus. That's me and I understand that. None of the shadow plants pique my interest in the slightest.

3. I meant as an aesthetic perspectivew ehn both plants lose leaves in order for them to work against zombies. It's the same concept just rehashed into something else (one for defense and one for offense). Also, You didn't explain why you think Chard Guard and Bowling Bulb are similar. I never compared EB to LR. I just said their attack patterns are similar when both of them use clouds (one normally and one during PF). That's it. Try to use your brain before you spur up old talks.

4. I still don't see what's so insane about that and why anyone would agree with you when you haven't even made a point as to why. All the plants you said above work when they are eaten unlike that Chinese plant. That's just what I said. I'm not saying the end result is same, just the method (except for PM). I don't understand what's so hard about my sentence to get something so simple. 3. One for offense: peashooter, one for defense: wall nut. Are they similar? Chard uses three leaves, bulb uses 3 bulbs. And no, you said they were a very close pair.

4. You were saying in my talk page you only care about the end result, and now you say the opposite. Close in the sense that both of them lose leaves while none of the other plants do so. You can't compare CG with BB just because they have that number 3 attached to them. You have to compare them with atleast some similarity which Nightshade and Chard Guard atleast has. Same goes with PS and WN. You cannot just compare them as nothing is common between them. This is like you comparing Chard Guard with Threepeater since both of them have that 3. That's just bullcrap debate you're trying to put through. I guess you don't know the meaning of the word "aesthetic". Try to understand first what others mean through their sentences. I cannot talk you through that via a screen.

I do care about the end result but here I am not talking about what I care; rather how those effects take place (by eating them). That's what I meant. My point is that you are trying to compare totally unrelated things while at the same time denying similar things, pumkin witch and hypno, are similar. Sigh, Hypno and Pumpkin Witch both hypnotise but using different methods So they have a similarity AND a difference at the same time. Is my English so hard to understand?