Jump to content

CnCNet Forums

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

X3M

Members
  • Content Count

    787
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

152 Excellent

2 Followers

About X3M

  • Rank
    Grenadier
  • Birthday 10/14/1983

Recent Profile Visitors

1,376 profile views
  1. https://steamcommunity.com/app/686260/discussions/0/1693785035806967325/?ctp=4 Interesting topic about it.
  2. They have asked the original team on it. I once suggested that too (not assuming they saw my suggestion though). But that is a good thing imho. It isn't just EA-games. No need to be negative, I'd say. Lets see what they can do. And the best way is to consider all our points (from all communities) one by one.
  3. I decided to wait. And see what they have for us. When it is finished. I think it is great that they are undertaking such a risk.
  4. 1 Thing to mention. Then have others up or down vote your 1 thing is a good idea. Rework Squishing That's it, rework the squishing. That is what the vote is for. I feel that the balance needs some work on regarding squishing. It is so far the biggest thorn in my eye's for both TD as RA. The rest of here are merely suggestions on how to do it, any of them might do: - Either make squishing tanks slower when having to deal with multiple infantry in number or health. Thus only slower when they truly start running over infantry. - Or make them more expensive in terms of their speed. Speed is the ROF for squishing in most early RTS games. - Or let the tank gain damage from it because of exploding weapons under the tracks. With rocket soldiers doing the most damage of course. As one reply to one of the other posts. I second the placement. It has to be worked on too. This one got from me an upvote so that I don't have to post it myself. As of how to rework the placement on structures. I think 2 cells in between for both TD as RA. This allows for cliff jumping. And if players disagree. How about also applying a penalty on the number of cells? +50 for 1 cell, +100 for 2 cells? Edit: I also feel that Ravage has a possible answer to Mortisanti.
  5. I find that having to click all the time is part of the skills of players, for these retro games. However, I would not be troubled if a que for units is possible. But this should be an option. It has been discussed many times before. As option, it would be the best to keep all parties happy. The limit? Just have it like C&C3 I guess. I find 5 to low if you are using que's anyway. Shift click should always be applied if there is a que regarding units. The same for shift right click to be cancelling asap. Then the following special cases. I don't think they suit C&C TD and RA. But if they have to be present. Make it optional for players. And I posted the way how I think would be most fair. A que for buildings? No. Having an entire base ready for placement is even worse. On the other hand as option: Placing the basics for the structures like in KKnD or AoW3 can be optional. Because here the enemy can destroy starting buildings. To prevent abuse however, the spend money should still be a constant stream. So what I mean is, no instant missing of resources when an engineer stands close to one of the refineries. A que for walls? That might be a good idea (as option). It would stimulate players to build more walls. But it should be done like how EbfD builds walls. You select the places where you want the walls to be build. Then it starts building them asap. Also, allow players to strike through anything that is in the way. The walls should be build there where possible. This allows for faster repairing of damaged walls, the gaps that is. We could even throw in an automatic sell/rebuild mechanic on this one.
  6. I know it is you, in the video. I was talking about Chem in YET another chat in the youtube community.
  7. I bet you too rape people in that game. As long as you are willing to be strategic with the upgrades. Once you start. I could give you pointers. Also, patience can be very, very powerful. The pointers should remain private though. Since aow3 noobs might be lurking around for things they can't find out by themselves. So, once you start. Give me your game name on this forum. Then I can explain every good choice.
  8. I sometimes go even 6 red with 2 pow on ffa games as a gamble. Ps. Is it reeaaly you on the youtube? Ps^2 trollololol!♤♡◇♧ ...really needing that raping partner 4fun on aow3 that is at least rape-level 10.
  9. X3M

    "Useless" units

    Any one using the "normal" orca and harpy?
  10. I agree with Ferret. But my reasoning is that I like that layout because the players have at least a private tiberium patch.
  11. X3M

    Who play Red Alert 3?

    I enjoyed TaxOwlBear series on it.
  12. X3M

    "Useless" units

    @c0rpsmakrCan't help with the hate speech. I am not an admin, sorry. Hope we can at least continue the topic a bit normally. Can you perhaps direct your comments a bit more to who you are responding. I think that might reduce confusion. At least on my part. But yeah, a project by itself, created by those who suggest alterations. Free to try it out. That could work. That could still work. it needs devotion though. But I think that even someone who doesn't know the games, should be able to make a mod with their own name on it. It can be funny to try such mods out. IF, certain unwritten rules are met. I find it strange that with an editor as good as tibed. Something like amass modding didn't really happen. Or did it?? I know there are some mods out there. But they are mainly created to have some trolling action in the game itself. Which is one of the 3 main reasons why I strayed away from TS. No guidance or whatsoever with the implemented statistics of the units, only free wins for the ones creating the mods. Aka, wasted time for others. A real modder will watch from the sidelines and keeps modifying the game. The single player mission games are the best in this regard. Here you get to play against ai for fun. I like those. By the way. Where did your idea come from that this topic was a "forcing the game (or more specific TS) to change" topic? That... was never my intention. I said before what my goal was with the topic. I also still don't understand why it was moved to the TS section. Was it really just because I started with the hoover MRLS? What if I decided to start with an unit from another game?
  13. With all respect. That topic asks only things that should not be changed. Of course people are posting suggestions of what should be changed. Which imho is ok. But there is also a fight going on in there about the topic title and that there should not be any suggestions. And some want to even close it already. So I think that this topic is a bit more mature for now. How to make the game even work? I mean, if they keep the basics the same. What could make it work so that (new) players will play it?
  14. Well, if you don't like the mobile factory. I understand. Somehow it felt off for me as well. It didn't really add up to the main strategies. It was a very cheap proxy too. Mistakes are to be learned from too. And the only way to make mistakes, is to try things out. But what exactly didn't you like about it? Was it the fact that you didn't had to base creep? It could be carried over to a place where you would not scout at all after the first scout? Or that its build speed was that of the main base in cooperated? PS. If you have trouble with AoW3. PM me. Also, no bikes, but 2 buggies.
  15. Hey! You are looking at how they are thinking. cool. If that was their train of thought. Why didn't they allow for both options? Or better yet, a second option for refineries like a re-deployable refinery (+power). A bit more expensive. But worthwhile the money and trouble. Just like the mobile war factory in TS. Enough about "off topic". I have experienced something this last month regarding RTS gaming on the mobile phone. If EA-games came to the community about 2 years ago regarding this. THEY could have made something similar like AoW3. Now, I am not going to write what this game has. But EA-games could study it and get idea's from it. Maybe making a better mobile app than rivals, while using TD as the basis. All they need to do is study AoW3. And apply this to C&C TD. Of course with better and more realistic graphics. Less money grabbing!! Have commercials or something for their income. And if they really want players to pay them money. Simply allow for free download. But let the players buy cards in a shop. Like how WOW works. Not a monthly pay. Just a one time payment for buying the game. And if they really want to, have the same card for the same money, provide something else in the game. I dunno, module's for customisation of units and such. Like how CoD has expansion packs.
×