Jump to content

CnCNet Forums

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

Jacko

Members
  • Content Count

    1,273
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Jacko

  1. Looks like a trigger error to me. Best solution is to identify what triggers fire at the time of crash and debug it.
  2. Jacko

    Map Size

    Usually because mapmakers won't utilise map sizes to their fullest. Does anyone know what the largest WW mission map size is? (I'm confident it isn't 126x126)
  3. Jacko

    Map Size

    My honest opinion is for a game this scale, the maps don't need to be any bigger than 100x100 Any larger and the game becomes too stretched and lacking in intensity.
  4. I imagine you'd get a crazy Tiberium Island - type game if everyone did that. Utter god damn Chaos.
  5. I wish there was a way to force the [base] Section to jump to next line if structure placement is occupied. Would make life much easier when plotting AI base deployment.
  6. Maybe becayse they'd build the wall, which then converts to overlay, and try to build it again (because theres no structure there), but find it occupied by the original wall piece.
  7. That would be Brutal xD Do it.
  8. AGTs are half decent vs bikes and buggies. Just, like any GDI unit, not on their own. (unless you got like 4 of them)
  9. The only problem with the Base Trade is that Nod will end up winning overall around 90% of the time anyway, simply because of how much faster their stuff is, so the Nod player has time to build turrets and rockets, while the GDI player does not.
  10. When will people learn? chem_2016_2.txt
  11. I mean that the missions are so similar it almost seems a bit of a waste to have two different missions there. Almost like they were too lazy to write extra mission content.
  12. You should be able to mute people via the playerlist and "ignore" them.
  13. Looks like somebody is in some trouble Can't imagine talking crap about an admin is going to help you very much.
  14. Thats only because RA has the logic to just change features like that in any mission/maps (in a rules.ini style of things), whereas C&C1 never had that, so any special "one-time" things (such as Stealth tanks or capturing the Adv Comm centre) were hardcoded into the game specifically for those missions (Nyerguds fill me in here?).
  15. Why would you make Apocs anyway? Those things are slow and useless.
  16. Yes thats true, theres also Multi2 (Blue) and Multi3 (Red), but for the majority of the time its just Greece and USSR.
  17. The only bugged Country bonuses were for England (Armour) and France (Rate of Fire). Turkey, Greece and Spain had no bonuses (but were originally disabled from multiplayer) But for singleplayer missions the Country bonuses are switched off. Plus you are Red, which is always USSR in the game, and Allied Blue is always Greece.
  18. It works for AIs in singleplayer RA, I've used it to limit the stupid amounts of infantry the enemies kept building for some reason.
  19. I agree with what White says. Giving grens +1 Range will just smash all other infantry into the ground. Pricing changes are an easy "quick-fix" but if its possible its always worth trying to rework the power balance of the units as well. (Again, going to drop a massive plug for CW - check my signature ) Again as white says, changing the properties of one unit means you have to incorporate how it affects ALL sorts of other features. Like if you buffed light tanks, its a thought that maybe Medium tanks could need a buff as well (In fact I think they could use a little more armour anyway)
  20. This looks like some really in-depth serious stuff. Sounds awesome but a lot of work. I would be willing to support it except my lack of.... Skills in most of these things mean I will mostly be limited to playtesting and maybe some mapmaking. if I make any Singleplayer missions I can try and do more than barebones this time - Kilk knows what I mean.
  21. My thought on Nod's light units are they are all about taking risks. You risk that little bit of damage to your units every time you hit-and-run enemy vehicles/infantry/harvesters/whatever. The problem with buggies that they have far too much HP, combined with such a low cost, for that to be even determined "a risk to use in combat". I.e. the $300 loss for a buggy is basically nothing. Hence I think there should be a "higher risk and control" factor that involves a skill of using buggies effectively without wasting them, similarly to how poorly controlling bikes (usually involving infantry) will get you rekt. This leads onto my suggestion that if you halved (or even more of a nerf) buggy HP, they could still be dangerous IF they are controlled properly or if the enemy simply doesn't make an effort into dealing with them. That way using them isn't totally useless but it means that it takes more skill to use them and they are easier to fight against. The other advantage is it forces people to use other anti-infantry more (perhaps even an Arty or 2). Comparing that to a $500 loss for a bike, which is still fairly small but can build up quickly, because GDI ARE capable of dealing with bikes significantly better than they are with buggies. Light Tanks as I mentioned are not very good. I think that many Nod players forget that they are even there. There are some good things to use light tanks for, mostly cannon fodder and infantry squishing but they are still ok I guess. The problem with building light tanks (Prepare for RA-Style reasoning) is the time you've spent building that sluggish piece of junk, you could've built 2 buggies which go around trashing things instantly. A Light tank has the damage almost the same as a bike, except it costs $100 more, moves incredibly slowly and is easy to kill with most Anti-Armour fire. As I said, they are more a utility unit than an actual combat unit, which is sad. If Light tanks did get a damage buff then I think there would be nothing wrong with giving bikes a small damage nerf (only a small one), as this would fit my "Risk strategies" theory better. If anyone ever bothers to check out my RA mod (link in my signature), I made a different solution where the more "Nod-like" faction actually has no buggies, and their bikes are basically Armour-munching glass-cannons. I'm not suggesting removing buggies altogether (although its always a thought). SSM, Arty and Rocket Launcher. I agree SSM needs to have its requirements changed. Having thought about it, what would happen if the requirements for SSM and Rocket Launcher got swapped (including appropriate Rocket Launcher Buffs and making it GDI only)? Temple of Nod/Adv Comm are very late-game buildings, so I'd say it would be about the appropriate time for a Nod player to maybe need to break down or taunt a stubborn GDI player. I would say if you changed SSM and Buffed the Rocket Launcher, could you not give Arty a minor buff too? It is powerful but VERY slow and an easy sitting duck. It might convince people that they are worth using every once in a while. (I use them on Obelisks a lot). Flamers and Chem Warriors I do agree that flamers are too powerful. I also agree that Chem Warriors are actually a nerfed version of flamers (for what people use flamers for) that require a temple to build, which is silly. Chem Warriors have a different warhead type, which has less infantry damage but more damage vs Armour types (Especially Light armour). Having these guys as an early-mid game unit would be quite a cool thing really. Flame Tanks however are fine, in fact they would be much better if you incorporated the buggy nerf into it. In fact, why not make Infantry considerably cheaper to make? It makes them more viable without being overpowered, as it puts more pressure on players to use Anti-infantry weapons effectively. When I made CW I did this, and I think infantry now have good balance. These pricings work quite well: Minigunner: $50 Grenadier: $100 Bazookas: $150 or $200 Flamers: $200 Engineers: $600 (gotta protect them carefully). Finally for apaches (based on what White told us recently), changing their warhead from HE to SA would probably work fine.
  22. No. Even as a non-YR online player I can tell thats a silly idea. Last thing we want is another C&C4 clone. (Yeah, I went there)
  23. I've never seen nor heard of that before. Pretty funny though xD Maybe it was the music in the background that did it for me.
  24. Jacko

    Fun fact...

    Well that explains a lot... Although it doesn't explain enough as to why the Guard tower still has crappy damage.
×
×
  • Create New...