cn2mc

There's different armor types and different warheads for projectiles, all of which correlate by percentages. For example: heavy armor (mostly tanks and some buildings like the turret and airstrip have that) takes very little damage from small arms, flames and high explosives, but full damage from AP projectiles such as tank shells and anti-tank rockets. For the complete data check: http://nyerguds.arsaneus-design.com/cnc95upd/inirules/warheads.ini The first numbers after the 'verses' part for each warhead are what you're looking for. Full damage is 256. And the six numbers in the line represent the fraction of damage dealt verses the six armor types, but you only need the first four numbers, as only four armor types are used in the game. They are as follows: 0 (first number) - no armor - infantry units; 1 - very light armor - a curious case. The only unit it's used for is the bike, but many structures have it. 2 - light armor - hummers, buggies, other fragile units and some structures. Main difference to type 1 is that 2 offers much better flame and HE protection. It takes more damage from small arms though. 3 - tank armor. Good vs. everything but armor-piercing and special warheads. Type 4, which is unused is supposed to be 'concrete' and judging by the numbers it looks like it was intended for structures but was left out. Sixth number is an empty slot I think. The other .ini files tell the complete story. Look around Nyer's stuff.

Easy way to test this: build barracks, build helipad, sell barracks, place down pad. Is the orca/apache option there? Haven't thought about it, but I'd bet on a yes.

Nice discovery. This just goes to show you that they found out very early it screwed with the balance. BTW, these charts have other major errors. Helicopters do not require a factory or airstrip, SSM only needs obelisk and not temple...

I'm pretty sure I've heard chrono sounds in The Philadelphia Experiment from 1984 with Michael Pare. So it must be from an old-ass sound bank, and the movie is pretty much a direct inspiration for the intro and part of the plot.

I'd argue against that. TS has a lot of units that are very rarely used. TD almost has none. True, TS has more units and more combinations, in many (but not all) respects it's a more versatile game with more possible strategies, but are they more viable in an actual toe-to-toe game than the bulk of TD tactics? I'm not convinced, and I've watched plenty of high-level TS vids. The main difference is that the tech tree is a bit more stratified in TS, mostly due to the addition of the tech centre building and the fact that air tech comes after radar. In TD you have that option right off the bat with barracks.

Hehe, have a go then, mr. Friedman.

I'd, like, cut your lists by about 50-60%, and that's if I'm being generous. There's hardly 20 players total, let alone enough for a top 20 list. Let's make it a hundred and then even my grandmas are in, and they're both dead. MrBuggy is by far the most impressive player that I've faced enough times to really gauge. The surest way to spot him (besides him playing like himself, mostly playing classic maps, etc.) is the tiberium growth setting. He turns that off. Even though he namehides, location is still shown too, AU or NZ, somewhere down under. As for history, at one point, a few other older players from wchat popped up at cncnet. Austin was hard on classic maps, weaver can be dangerous with Nod but he seems terribly out of shape.

It's most decidedly a Bradley IFV in the cutscenes, and a pixelated tin can ingame. In RA rocket soldiers actually have two different weapons for ground and air targets, with the AA weapon having a faster projectile, longer range, etc.

Actually, I didn't say I think GDI was initially supposed to have the flame tech (per concept). I said that from a balance perspective it would've been overkill for them to have the SSM, which is essentially a way for GDI to indirectly fight Nod defences (and bikes). Fun fact: besides being terrible vs. orcas and apaches in the game, the actual real-life MLRS is a strictly ground-to-ground weapons system, not an AA one.

Why are multiplayer rules like Nod having the MLRS strange? Multi also has APCs, chem warriors and apaches for Nod, chinooks for both sides, a weaker nuke, commandos... Infact, why do you think balance needs fixing? If anything, these exceptions were obviously made to improve balance and buff Nod. You think GDI is supposed to have the SSM too, am I right? Well, I guarantee you that if they did, Nod would stand no chance in any sort of longer game.

Nope, the outcome is you're both silly and immature, in different ways but still managing to complement each other quite well. Even funnier how someone who's supposed to be above it all still gets dragged down. Good job, White, you're grade A troll-food now, and have been for a while, because of the way you react. Change your nick to AchromicWhine.

Good idea, low priority, probably not currently possible. Otherwise, consider my remarks a kind of help on your newly-chosen path towards maturity. PS: passive aggression is still aggression.

I deal with them easily, but I'll gladly offer my opponent a restart if I see him getting mauled by one, as should any decent player. Of course, if my opponent did get mauled by a visceroid, I'll probably snap him like a twig in 2 minutes flat, even without the help. But that's totally beside the point and a far cry from me taking a side in the childish online rivalry you have with White. You know precisely well what I don't agree with so don't play coy.

Didn't read your entire wall of text, Chem, but please stop implying I somehow 'agree' with you about something just to further your very immature arguments with White. This is not the first time you're doing it either. In short: stop putting words or opinions in my mouth. In fact, as I stated, visceroids can be game-breaking and in any actual 'pro' competition I'd like to see them gone, but then I'd also like to see everybody playing at a set resolution, etc. And that's a whole different thread.

Like all other AI units, it attacks top left, yes. Since it's a crusher though it will also go out of its way to try and squish men that attack it. That's why grenadiers are the best to take care of it. The incoming grenade triggers the scatter mechanic and the visceroid just gets confused and stumbles around. Same thing you can see with Nod tanks in the GDI campaign when you attack them with grenades. Sure, they can ruin the occasional game, but I don't find them all that troublesome. It's like a 1/100 chance or less that someone gets their first power or CY killed, which is the real blow. They're also kinda like god's way of telling you to build barracks before factory. If people badly want to eliminate the visc-risk, it can be done even without outright stopping them from spawning - change the stats: take away the weapon, make it a non-crusher, give it pathetic health, etc.

Damage is probably pixel related, how exactly, IDK. But also: inaccuracy - tank first shots and shots while moving are not dead on, etc.

The percentage part of the chart makes some sense of it, although I believe it would look better done the other way around, i.e. helipad doesn't build 500% more quickly but at 20% of the time it theoretically should. Adding columns with more unit stats, especially the unknown variables from Nyer's .inis might also result in a correlation, perhaps? (I could do that too, but can't really bring myself up to it on a weekend.)

No unit stats were changed in CnCNet besides the speed of the cargo plane, so, the game's right. The only official balance patch ever done to C&C AFAIK was upping the cost of the turret to $600. That was done very early for the DOS version, before C&C Gold came out, I think. Everything else WW patched was bug-fixes and exploits. Such errors can occur when manuals are printed before the game is completely finished and itself ready for the presses. I even have memories of reading a story about a specific case like this, but I can't remember if it was for C&C or Civilization I, which is notorious for the errors and omissions in its manual.

http://nyerguds.arsaneus-design.com/cnc95upd/inirules/units.ini Unless Nyer ALSO made a mistake, which is as close to impossible as can be, considering his OCD with C&C, the buggy is at tech 4, while the bike and hummer are at 2. So that explains your 'buggy limbo' situation. If I were to venture a guess, it's probably related to the APC also coming in at 4. Edit: what I neglect to mention this whole time is that pound for pound hummers are equal to or even better than bikes for a variety of reasons, they're the real hard counter to pure bikes. But hummers are also decidedly worse than buggies. Having both bikes and 300-buck buggies available at tech 2, while GDI doesn't even have meds and can't APC rush is overkill.

Buggies come later in the tech tree than bikes. Bikes come at the same tech that GDI gets hummers. Buggies are the tech level above that.

If by disconnects you mean OOS, probably latency. When too many players from too many different parts of the world play, some with high ping, etc. there are much more opportunities for someone's game to miss a beat. Any difference in object position should and would cause an instant OOS. The only thing that could possibly be different for players, IMO, is maybe infantry idle animations, like I would see your men doing push-ups, while for you they would be just standing about... probably even that is synced and goes by game ticks though.

I'm no programmer or anything and I've tested nothing of the sort, but I'm pretty sure that if what you're describing from Dune II was also in C&C it would've made multiplayer impossible because of constant synchronization errors. That's why I said it with such confidence, but I may still turn out to be partly or entirely wrong.

Not really possible, I think. Even with all of its exceptions, the cargo plane is a unit like every other. So its speed should be constant, and unlike helicopter-class aircraft, which can hover and land/take off in TD, it doesn't even have a (game-specific) reason to accelerate or decelerate. In theory the effect you mentioned should be reversed - the plane should slow down a bit on the descent towards the strip, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't do that either.

I am very well aware of the 'ready' issue, it was me who suggested the speed upgrade for the plane to resolve it. Your second sentence does not follow. How exactly can't GDI start a new vehicle after building one?

Yes, Nod does get screwed like that, because ultimately WF gates opening and closing is quicker and more convenient than planes. Then there's the flawed primary strip logic where you can't always get the units to land where you want them to. Plus the disadvantage of actually giving away how much you build with planes flying overhead. And also, I'm pretty sure the sped-up plane only changes things as far as the delivery time of the first unit being built goes, or otherwise has negligible impact. It was sped up to remedy the 'ready' situation, where spamming Nods would need additional clicks to ship their units. So yeah, Nod most probably need that production boost. In reality, they should be able to build everything at like buggy speed if they have the cash for it, it's a delivery after all. But then again - where does it stop, make the planes legit targets (cash back and all)?