Jump to content

CnCNet Forums

Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

AchromicWhite

Members
  • Content Count

    1,904
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

283 Excellent

4 Followers

About AchromicWhite

  • Rank
    Grenadier
  • Birthday 06/04/1987

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Well done. I should take the time to bash through this. If I can get my video software working properly again, I'll make upload the plays!
  2. I actually agree that too many of the settings are variable, and have asked for years that we have a tighter standard of play. But it's usually thrown out. So, we're actually somewhat on the same page there. I think, if we could be successful in making a well rounded change that enhanced competitive play, we could make the option lock in other features like 10,000 starting cash, bases on etc. Just to give that solid standard of competitive play. Let people know what to practice. At the moment, people just play whatever... but then when they want a competitive match, a random opponent will simply have another idea of what it means to play competitive C&C, and so that two cannot really play one another without one person having to play in a way that they haven't practised.
  3. The patch is not really to balance the teams as much as it's to balance units and allow for more compositions. But I understand the philosophy of conserving the game, none the less.
  4. The speeds have a % multiplier depending on if they're on foot, wheeled, or tracked. However, in TD, there are not different terrain types (like road). Areas are simply passable, or not.
  5. Useless is a pretty strong word for a completely untested change, that didn't even have a number applied to it. Honestly, it can become hard to take people seriously if they're heavily bias. Be careful with that.
  6. That's an interesting idea. The main issue with the crushing is the lack of counter micro. Every other crusher allows for a dance of micro between the two players, and for the person choosing forward to crush, as if they miss, they will often end up with their vehicle surrounded by infantry, and taking a lot of damage. The APC, on the other hand, took a lot less damage, mainly due to it's speed. This mostly eliminates that interaction. Speed reduction would be one way to help to bring that back into the game. Worth discussing, at least; it's a change that I hadn't considered.
  7. Pretty cool looking... but isn't the really iconic unit of RA1 the heavy tank? tehe Nah, this looks good, though. I'll be interested to see how these sort of units look when they're scaled right down to just tiny units on the screen, in game.
  8. Exactly, Ore Truck. FFA you can just do that. And it's not rule breaking to do it, nor to take revenge by 3v1 someone... because it's FFA.
  9. Yeah, there's no rules in FFA. You just made that up because you felt that it was unfair. FFA has no rules. As I was saying, how would you police it; by getting people to spit their attacking force evenly between other players?.... Then you just drew a line and said that it's the rule, that it's rule breaking if they choose to not attack someone from the start... well what about the other extreme; if you put a lot of your resources into knocking out a particular player (what's the difference between not attacking one player or attacking ONLY one other player?). You're a bit of a cheeser, you must have done this, no? FFA has no rules, because it's impossible to police it. It's not a competitive mode of play.
  10. What's with the funny look... it's FFA, anything goes. How would you make it "fair" and "by the rules"? Have everyone split their armies evenly between all players and only let them use those units against those opponents? People can just attack whom they like, so even if there's no alliance, there's always going to be tactical decisions to choose who you attack.
  11. lol... FFA is a free for all. You can always make shaky alliances. Even without speaking. This is what I've said about FFA for years; it's more political than skill/strategy/tactically based. It can still be fun, but it's not competitive.
  12. I think the depth of the game comes more from it's tactics than it's strategies, to be honest. Strategically, the game mostly leans towards bike/buggy and Med/Grens.
  13. I actually use hotkeys to move my sidebar up and down, so that I can be microing/placing a structure while I get the icons ready to go back to the sidebar (TRUE multitasking xD). But mostly I sit the bars so that multiple important icons are visible.
  14. I mean, they CAN keep it like this, but I'd rather it was customisable. I thought that at first myself, but then, most of the units you make are only a handful, and then the rest are mostly just a few that you scatter in. With the old sidebar (at least the extended one that we have now), you can often fit all the cameos you need to click on in the visible list. So this will always make sure that you HAVE to hit extra buttons to switch between different stuff, even basic units. Pretty ruff on GDI at a point where they're pushing, as you're likely to be going for mass gren + meds (maybe some structure, as well). That's actually a lot harder to manage than the current one. All in all, it's nothing I can't get used to... but still.
×
×
  • Create New...