Graion Dilach

Regarding the voice thingy: convert the files to a really low Opus bitrate (<15 kbps) and back would be my first suggestion. The Opus compression artifacts do sound like a terrible radio.

I'll accept the rest of your post but I have to respond to this: this will gonna change. Hopefully. Because, you remember, I also felt like that, there was no point in looking into that RA2 mod without caring about how RA2 itself worked. These days though, I am supposed to be an actual maintainer (with rights and such, I just have hardware issues), with Phrohdoh seemingly abandoned it for good, so while I can not promise I will do stuff 1:1 - because, well, as you said, I'm biased against WW Pacific codebase, and stuff like the additional UI queue buttons like navy, I find nice - I do intend to be as accurate as meaningfully possible at least (for example, I'd still feel generalizing IronCurtain to something like an Ares GenericWarhead SW to make sure it kills infantry, plays deathanims and can apply the IC would be better than hardcoding something to do this all, since the "RA2 hardcode" way would only let all this happen if the infantry would disappear instead of being killed). Especially when it comes to the ingame logics.

Your opinion is blind, though. One can argue about the community, it did went into "pr0 srs bsns" to the point of meh. Especially since balancing can be changed "on the fly" (between release cycles, I'd say 5 months atm) and that means 95% of the active topics are balance discussions. The interface is clearly better. It actually provides less need to scrolling/hotkeys/whatnot with the tabs (something RA2 also introduced btw) and it also don't have the onhold-when-you-run-out-of-credits bug. Pathfinding could be better, that's true. Gameplay is a very YMMV stuff, so whatever. Engine sucks... compared to what? Westwood? Are you kidding me? It's widely known that while you can respect WW for creating what they did, their coding skill ended up more and more choppy with the years. The OpenRA engine might lack at cases - and I do grind my teeth sometimes when I run into these cases - but it's definitely not "bad" compared to Westwood coding. It do has it's own fair share of spaghetti shenanigans, but I feel WW had worse. Even better, you need a lot less effort to polish OpenRA (because you have the source code and thereby fix sloppy coding there) compared to the classics (because you need to binaryhack through ASM if you can actually capable of changing what you have to). I respect CnCNet for what they achieved, and you guys will have RA++ longterm to resolve the skill issue required for maintenance (and hopefully to fix the sloppy coding on WW side), but blind idiot hatred without actually understanding what you hate is retarded. I'm actually looking forward to RA++ in this matter, because I'm interested to see where the traditional community goes with it: will it start polishing balance along with the bugfixes when they get every tool for actually doing that or really keep everything strictly 3.03p, or add thousands of switches on top of 3.03p to customize it for one's needs, kinda like how gameplay evolved in OpenTTD. The thing is, right now OpenRA can evolve on a lot faster pace than CnCNet (I empathize the speed, I'm aware CnCNet also evolves, although on a different rate and on a smaller field), and evolution isn't a bad thing. Yer, it's only bad if you're a strict purist, because OpenRA decided years ago to go it's own path and not aim "to reimplement everything on an 1:1 basis".

Tunngle had conn issues. At least that's what I experienced. Seriously, this flamewar is stupid. I am pretty sure that CnCNet 5 will be interesting. I remember CnCNet3 was glorious after everyone could see everyone in the lobby (unlike Tunngle) and I dunno Kali... and I remember that on some PCs CnCNet4 made this thing worse since on some conns enabled p2p will cause this Tunngle disappearence. So yes, having that thing fixed to have safe p2p mode for all... it just alone worths the change. OK, I only use the MO lobby, but still, it works. Unlike many MANY other things... CnCNet won the trust via stability. I am really sure hifi won't throw that away. Considering that in the last months the amount of players on the statistics grown a lot. I remember back when Mental Omega team tried it out the top was around 30 players. Now 110. Of course it needs to evolve, it is too close to the limits. And have to say, I can see that the CnCNet playerbase is growing like heck so the step to forward is needed as possible.

Hm. Latest CnCNet didn't requred messing with routers here. I think he has the issue that hamachi is set as the primary network adapter (since RA2 only checks that).

After yesterday night I had to do this over TeamViewer, I thought it's good if I write a tutorial about it. Especially since most Netters doesn't use XCC. 1) Put CnCNet to the base game's folder and launch the base game unmodded. Check via the statistics that you can connect to the lobby. 2) After you made sure that you can connect to the lobby, quit game, start the mod via XCC. 3) When you arrive to the main menu, Alt-Tab to the OS and search out your base game's folder. 4) Order the files via last modification date and you should see that your game's folder has some new files (amount is depending on mod) with the same last modification date usually one minute earlier than your game's config ini (SUN.INI/RA2(MD).INI) Copy these files into a separate folder. 5) Go back to your game and quit. 6) You should see that the files you copied into the other folder are now missing from the base game's folder.* 7) Copy back the files from the place you copied to at step 4. 8) Launch CnCNet as usual. Keep in mind that as long as you have the backupped files in the folder you are playing the mod you activated at step 2. *some mods actually ask if you want to disable them after the game, saying No will save you from steps 2-5. DO NOT launch the XCC launcher via CnCNet. That won't work.

Kali could support 6P, maybe even 8P with IPX back at the day, so what? IIRC even TTD already had 8P MP.

Where should we report bugs? Is here fine? Because CnCNet4 ignores the Timeout setting in the ini. Back at CnCNet3, I could set it to 0 after I set it up but I can't disable the countdown in 4 in this same way. Congratz upon release tho.

Uh-huh, I see. Yeah, that sounds entirely logical.

Oh my. No YR. Still, nice job, guys, for keeping this alive.

Until it works, no problem. Tunngle got messed up itself a month ago or so, until you don't do this same, I'm happy, like and keep telling "ignore that setup said for TS, RA1, it's the same for RA2 as well". Especially because you're even faster than them when it worked. And in response, I likely try to participate in that tournament... until it's not TS.

Hi, guys, I'd like to ask for something related to CnCNet but not to the dll... output RA2(YR) players on the serverstatus. Or update the site, mentioning that RA2 works as well. It's unmentoned in the whole page. And until OmegaBolt didn't tell me it works, I didn't want to use this...