X3M

...your sarcasm detector is clearly acting like Norton Antivirus. There was no sarcasm there :-\ Well, giving the fact that you know most of us all. It surprises me that you didn't know about this.

I meant of the normal campaign. The disable 4 nukes mission was right before. And I guess every one hated that mission of disabling the nukes.

Hah! I never realized that xD I smell sarcasm. And yeah, I felt that Sovjets was(is) easier than allieds. Even the Aftermath missions gave me this feeling. The most troublesome for me was the nuke mission. I wonder how you will pull that one off. But the last allieds mission was relatively very easy.

Since red alert doesn't have the money exploit. This mission is the only one to do it by placing A LOT of buildings. Notice how the convoy also needs to reach the end for your mission accomplished? If you manage to block the convoy with your own troops, you have plenty of time. Mission 4 is easy, but you can make it easier this way.

The learning curve of cncnet seems to be from 0% at once to 100%. This is waaay to steep. It chases away new players. If I may suggest: There should be some co-op missions against AI. Easy, medium and hard missions. But the key point is a co-op for the new. Reasons: This encourages new players to work together with some one. Facing things alone might be scary/boring etc. The new players need the option to work with other (new) players. And not against other players, but against an AI. Facing another player that has been around for a while is "scary" or troublesome for new players. They know they will loose 99%. And are discouraged to continue playing. Especially when they have been beaten several times. The fun will be gone very quickly. And the game is clearly a waste of time for them now. Most of them are permanently gone. Consider the average player to be weak in mind to continue several weeks. They need at least 1 victory a day. They only get stronger when they get to train at lower levels first. If you think they should train more often and get their asses beat, they will simply leave. That is a fact. I do not suggest this to only TS, but the other games as well. I know that it is impossible with TD, but perhaps there you should (as pro) allow 2 vs yourself. If you still win, allow 3 vs yourself. It worked for me with starcraft. And there where games where I even allowed 7 vs 1 in certain ums maps (clearly I need to be in the team of 7 with cncnet if I where ever to play again)

Harvesting a path for your commando? But that will not work, since, once you have taken over the refinery. The mission also ends with the trigger for going to mission 7. Mission 7 has to be a secret mission.

It never happened to me, but there was a rumour. Can an engineer take over an APC? If so, then you need to get an APC from the enemy. This for going over a tiberian field that is too large to cross for any other infantry unit. So, if it is possible to take over an APC. Then I have an idea for you.

To bad that people need a chemist to tell which table is best to use. I rather would have seen that there is just one complete one. And a simpler version would have the complex parts blacked out. I have used a table in my study that would scare plenty of people. Simply due to the fact that it is rather unreadable by the ammount of infornation on it. The fun starts with radioactive decay.

I blame the auto correct. This one time, "pen" was turned in another word. I often only notice after posting. Soft and hard counters. A hard counter is simply having a flame tank shoot infantry units. 1 shot, 8 kills. The infantry cannot win this no matter how you turn it. A soft counter is having some grenadiers shooting at a light tank. It takes time, but the grenadiers eventually can win. But it takes work too. If you don't work it, the tank might run them over and survive. But if both players work hard, the grenadiers win. If you rather have numbers as explanation, I will provide.

P is awesome in my lab Any way, you have a box in the periodic system with transition metals. But there are 4 that are not in that box (outside of the box), yet still behave in the same way. The reason for this is already explained (these atoms have obesity compared to others ) The transition metals don't need to have obesity for having multiple shells offering valence electrons. That is the difference for outside and inside the box. The green ones are the 4 outside the box. The pink IS the box.

For a main group element, a valence electron can only be in the outermost electron shell. In a transition metal, a valence electron can also be in an inner shell. P is a transition metal that is outside the box (just like C, S and Se). Meaning that it has valence electrons from more then one shell. The outer shell provides 3, the inner shell provides another 2. PCl3 and PCl5 are both stable molecules this way. The reason why P offers more shells to contribute to bonding. In comparison to neighbours that also might offer more shells, but don't. Are a bit too complex to describe. It has to do with the configuration of the shells (each electron has a ranking, some ranks miss electrons). But also shape and energy levels are important. These 3 factors determine where the shell is positioned. In simple terms, if the second shell falls outside of the halogen equivalent. It can be used for making bonds. By seeing how you can tell those molecules apart. You are heading towards being the biochemist. Although, the nasty tasting part isn't the chloride itself It is the combination of that benzene ring with chloride. Where the chloride is probably locked in the molecule. You like salt, right? Salt is more chloride in comparison. Hmmm, according to the wiki. It is a good medicine in various area's.

And then you say you have trouble with math...? Silly you. You have just given an answer to my question that is, logical, understandable and not an easy answer for others to give.

I feel that a game with hard counters is easier to balance than a game with soft counters. C&C TD is a game with mainly hard counters. One unit can obliterate another unit. But gets obliterated by yet another unit. WC2 is a game with mainly soft counters. And well balanced. But their bloodlust spell is a mistake in design. They did it wrong in many aspects. I wonder how your game will turn out.

http://www.musclefreaksnutrition.net/2a-3a-epithio-17a-methyl-5a-androstan-17b-ol/ Don't loose your libido. The molecule structure of this organic compound looks weird to me. But I am sure a bio chemist can tell a normal chemist where the working parts are to be found in this molecule structure.

Looks like you are right. So if he has turrets. All he needs is to order the bazooka to support in firing. 2 turrets or 1 turret with 2 bazooka. What would do more damage if you manage to keep the turret while it was meat?

Why didn't you use a bit of bazooka support for your turrets, against the medium tanks? Do the MRLS first shoot infantry instead of the base in that mission?

many game developers backport features from their newer games to older ones, like with Doom/Doom2 (engine updates), Quake/Quake2 (OpenGL renderer), Warcraft2/Starcraft (Windows support, Battle.net support, right-click action, production queuing and much much more features from SC) Half-Life/Half-Life2 (Source engine) and much more. Heck, even westwood did that with C&C/RA - windows port, higher resolution! they just forget/were too lazy to fix stuff they knew need to be fixed Don't forget the unreal engine. When that one was ported back to the original Unreal. Awesome improvements where seen in the game.

Rifle Infantry Light Infantry Minigunner Minigun Infantry Rifle Men I have seen these 5 names for the exact same unit. Although, I think that the Rifle names are from RA. The other 3 are certainly seen by me in TD.

didn't they intended to crush sandbags/bwire but never do so? They did in red alert. And shooting walls too! Back then I expected them to program this into C&C 95. But they never did.

Well, I still had one of the older versions running. So I certainly need to reinstall DTA now.

The light tank/flame tank combo is one of the best choices against the AI. Those flame tanks actually being meat shield against the medium and mammoth. However, would this combo beat the rush that at least holds recon bike's? Any way, flame tanks are very effective against structure's too. And that is what makes them so satisfying.

It would actually have been awesome if the light tank of NOD was an APC as well. An APC with an cannon instead of a chain gun is still something original in the RTS series. (hint for the modders out there)

Zooming out further and further. Starts to feel like you play TA instead. I rather play games where you wonder about "what's in the dark?".

This is the child, if it comes to wrecking armor.

Are you able to disable them in the game? I mean, no one builds walls. Except for these kind of tricks. Setting their tech level to 98 or something would be enough. If it is possible to do for a custom map.