cn2mc

A couple of suggestions for the client: -Currently any action in a game room (change side, colour, etc.) by any player causes everybody in the game to revert to 'not ready' status. Make it so that only the host's actions unready everybody, while individual players that fiddle about only lose their 'ready' status. -Often players (hosts) who are unfamiliar with the client or simply distracted will press 'leave game' instead of 'start game', thus kicking everybody out to the lobby and not even knowing what happened. There should be some sort of safeguard for this, like a popup asking for confirmation. Both of these will significantly speed up the pre-game process.

It's a touchy subject, really. After all it is one of the best and most complete games in the genre. So much so infact, that you could easily call it the ultimate RTS even today, if it wasn't for a few very minor flaws: 1. Pathfinding - it very much needs improvement to prevent units getting stuck in narrow spaces and to prevent harvs from going for faraway or unreachable Tiberium. 2. Now, even though that pathfinding is all the AI I need, I wouldn't mind having some sort of rudimentary skirmish AI, which possesses a threat assessment mechanism and uses that to determine its targets, instead of proximity to the North pole. Very much like it worked in later games. 3. Full control of units. Of course, this starts off with the player being able to select and target units in the air and might include the option to get your men to go prone (just as you can in C&C get them to stand up by doubleclicking them away). Maybe a 'deploy' keyboard command could work for that, which will also be useful for APC's, choppers and any other units, which might need deployment of some sort. I am tempted to say I kinda like the q-move of RA, so I think a limited number of movement waypoints and patrols for units, like say 3WP, might be good for the game. TD's slower tanks will be harder to abuse than RA's anyway. Also, having at least mission making options for fully controllable (and fully rotating) hovercraft and gunboats would be nice too. 4. Fix South advantage. It's really rarely decisive for games but it is an annoyance. I actually think that South advantage is negated by some of the original game's North advantages, like units coming out between the enemy and your factories instead of behind them as they would in the South. Also, harvesters travel a couple of squares less every other trip or so. Now, basically these are the flaws of TD. And for '95 they are pretty minor. For me everything else in this game has stood the test of time. The fluidity of gameplay and the many yet simple and intuitive things one can do with their units, as well as the (sort of) assymetrical balance of GDI and Nod went unmatched until StarCraft came out and was reasonably patched and expanded. C&C simply is a versatile little RTS. All of these suggestions are made as improvements for the old game, which would not change its feel or balance. Now for some possibly game-changing additions: I've always wondered what TD will play like with real fog of war? I assume that more scouting men and vehicles will generally be built and moved around, and that having a comm. centre will be more of a neccesity rather than a luxury. Which reminds me that the game needs a 'jump to' key for 'base is under attack' and 'unit lost' events, maybe activated by building said comm. centre. I also imagine that FoW would make certain tactics like APC rushes a bit scarier but I don't think it will really change the game balance. Giving air units sight and the ability to scout would make for some fun games, but I'm not sure if they should then remain with only barracks/HoN as prerequisites, maybe add comm. centre. I have loads of other crap ideas but will refrain from posting them for now. The fact that we can still play some C&C online is good enough for me.

As far as I recall, chem-warriors are multiplayer only. If buildlevel 99 doesn't work, maybe if you set the player house in the mission to Special it will, but then you'll also get all other tech. (I think).

I think the computer builds at the same speed the player does, BUT the AI can simultaneously (as opposed to just faster for human players) produce units from its factories. It can also erect two buildings at the same time if it has two CYs, etc.

This sounds like something from the Flame Dancers mini campaign, but I can't be quite certain. I'm sure someone else here'll know.

To make it simpler for everybody, the players that own you at top speed will still most probably own you (even harder) at medium. End.

I know next to nothing about programming, but I guess this is ultimately going to be used to make downloading bandwidth-heavy map previews in CnCNet 5 obsolete. So, great job!

I've experienced this bug, but only in certain SP missions, never in multiplayer. One particular map comes to mind, Defection at Drabar by LKO, which would regularly bug my airstrip like that. If I had the time I'd play it again to see exactly when/how it happens so one of the hackers here can take a look at it. But yeah, no time right now.

Also, XCC Editor shows row and column numbers on mouseover. First square (map border) is 0, last one is 63 (again, map border in a 62x62 map), so the true centre of a 62x62 map is a 2x2 square on rows 31 and 32 and columns 31 and 32.

I have memories of playing Utah in the late 90's on Kali or Mplayer. It was quite popular, but I can't remember what it was like, really. The fact I can't seem to open it with either XCC or CCMap doesn't help. If anyone did, please post a screenie or something.

Umm, all of this (excluding civilian nuisances) has zero to do with the actual maps and state of the TD multiplayer community. LW. ------ EDIT: added hi-res previews for whiners. Love me now.

That's the code imgur gave me, and I didn't bother removing the [a href] or whatever part. Maybe I'll add hi-res previews later. Maybe.

Yes, I realize that, Nyer. Also I have allied the civilians to multi1 through 6, but that didn't really seem to work. There are only a couple of guys with guns anyway, so it's not an issue. If people really complain I will remove the armed civilians, but I don't think anyone minds, unless there are like 30 guys just getting in the way of your base (and that is not the case).

Yeah, you play and see them ingame, as they're supposed to be.

OK, so my previous maps have gotten some downloads and I appreciate that, and hope you enjoy them. The problem is I don't see 20+ people playing TD online, more like 5. Where are you, guys that download multi-maps? Playing LAN? Anyway, I made two new maps, which I will only preview here. Behold: This one's called High Tide and if you play it you'll know why. It's a three player map with very scarce resources, most of which are only reachable by air. It features guest appearances by Dr. Chan, Nikoomba and agent Delphi, all at your tender mercy. Note, harvesters get confused because of unreachable Tiberium in the expansions and other places, so mind the morons. And then there's Black Hill Sanitarium: It can house up to four players and is basically a South vs. North map (can probably be played EvW too). It has many different approaches to the enemy's base and an unfortunate hospital in the middle, which can be used to gain control of the small island. So, these two beauties are already available in CnCNet 5 as are my other maps and the big official unofficial mappack by MattAttack, which basically contains all of the (good) maps from this particular subforum. FunkyFr3sh has been so awesome to not only make the CnCNet 5 client, but to also include all of these maps and make it easier for players to connect. So play, dammit! And expect more maps.

I will very probably be there for TD too if it's Saturday/Sunday evening.

Well, engineers f. ex. would still try to enter my NW turret or whatnot, and go for NW buildings instead of my CY or WF. Coupled with the fact that when making such a mission you don't know how the player's gonna build, it makes it very hard to coordinate more than simple attacks through waypoints and guard and attack base/units commands. I will give it a shot when I have the time though. Maybe sometime next month. I have a couple of other missions planned so this too is on queue...

I'm actually very tempted to try and make a mission with AI that builds, rushes and cheeses like a human player, but due to the stupid logic of attacking the NW-most unit it would be near impossible to pull off right. Plus I don't have a lot of spare time. But I've played some well scripted maps, I think one of them is somewhere in this forum.

Changing the health of the WF is a drastic balance change I am not in the least fond of (even while being more of a GDI player myself). This would make GDI near unstoppable in early tank rush. About the gunboat, pichorra kind of summed it up - it's weird. Back in the day, players on wchat ladder used hacks to build gunboats, they would just pop out of the WF and do their patrol throughout the whole map East to West and back and forth. Hovercraft can only move South-North, leave units and go back. Although I've once 'evacuated' a unit on a hovercraft. The LST got bugged and remained on shore, so I ordered the commando that just got out to go back in again, and when he did, the LST carried him off the map. In conclusion, a working navy in TD is impossible even with heavy modding and hacking. Engineers being able to repair is one of the nicer additions in RA. Let's leave it at that. It's a major balance AND gameplay change for TD. If I had to bet some money on it, I think it would make Nod much stronger, they have a tough airfield and very powerful defences (assuming engineers will be able to fix an obelisk f. ex.). The one-time airstrike when you build a comm. centre/AGT (if you want it just for GDI) is something that just might be possible. I've done it in a test version of my Desert Duel map and it worked flawlessly in skirmish with AI, but I never tested it with another player. Funky said it would go OOS, but I still haven't gotten empirical confirmation of that. I have the triggers lying around somewhere in a .txt, maybe some time we can test it with players.

Comm. centre would definately be more useflul. I tend to keep it when I build it, even though I play in 800x592 (hint: 592 fits exactly 8 icons in the sidebar). It is mostly useful for spotting that lone APC taking the back route to your base, choppers landing, stealths appearing, that kind of thing.

That's basically what I was asking. And it's great. I wouldn't want to play the role of an authority that judges the quality of maps though. If they don't really take up space, let them be.

Well I've made three, but they're not 'officialized' in the CnCNet5 client. I also believe there's some maps in it that need to be pruned to make room for newer and better ones, since the map list is almost full, and there are also a lot of silly and imba maps. Or even better, instead of making room for new maps this way, enable the client to automatically download and launch alternate .mix files, therefore increasing the number of possible maps by having two or more on the same number, a kind of hotswapping. (I don't really know if this has been discussed/developed already.) Funky?

No need to apologize really, this forum is exactly for this kind of stuff. From what I can make out from the vid, there seems to be nothing wrong with the money sound per se. Gunfire does sound a bit too loud in comparison though, but that may be due to the way he recorded the video or the fact that he's focusing on the action and multiple machineguns are firing at all times. I never really paid attention to it, but did test it now in SP: often the money sound will 'crack' when you start building something, the first 'spurt' of credits can be noticably louder than the rest, which just blend in with the other credit sounds and make them play faster. I'm pretty sure this also can happen when harvesters start unloading and possibly when you sell stuff or get money from crates. Other than posting a video yourself, which would be great, you should try and see if these issues turn up with any consistency, like the cases already mentioned in this thread. Also you might want to test a regular line-out headset and see whether that does anything for you.

Made me giggle XD Compared to DOS C&C's 320x200, RA's resolution is stellar, pretty much in tune with what people considered high-end at that time, and certainly on par with WarCraft II. Sure, you could go 800x600 and even 1024x768 on some games, but did you really need/benefit from that? Display sizes were much smaller back then and monitors were mostly oldschool CRT. I remember high resolutions bugging the hell out of me in Quake 2 and to this day play it in either 640x480 or 800x600.

It's the other guy's chinook, apparently.