Sam-I-am

Well said. That's why I was trying to simplify it. He doesn't need to edit any files, just pick from the original dropdown menu, and he doesn't need a client to play alone or to change the resolution. BTW, how'd you get my pic? You hacked my phone or what?

But it is. no?

These great old games officially support high resolutions by design, without the need for a client. There are several ways to change the resolution. For RA2, If you type "hires" while in main menu, you'll see more resolution options, including your current monitor resolution. Not sure if the same applies to TS, but you can try. That is the easiest, most normal way to do it. Hope it works for you.

I don't see your vote, sir.

Nice. 👍

The long bridge in the middle reminded me of "Bridges Too Far": This map has so many versions. This one doesn't have MCVs in the middle, but maybe there are MCVs in other versions. Does it look anything like it? Another version: No MCVs or a parliament building, but.. 8 players, long bridges, water around, 2 hospitals, capturables, high ground, low ground...

Wow. Great news. Getting closer.

Thanks. Yeah, I was joking as usual. I should change my nick to Bad-Joker. Maybe becuase there're cameras attached to each unit, so even if it dies, you'd still be able to see what's going on around it. Makes sense. Unless if the damage is severe enough to destroy the cameras too, as in most cases.

Any idea why there are vanilla bugs but not strawberry bugs? Is it because bugs prefer vanilla for some reason? and if so, why? Sorry. Couldn't resist. Yeah, I remember that, but it could be that you have scattered units that're close enough to see them. A single dolphin can be enough, y'know.

Good point. If anything required is missing, an error would happen. You may wanna review any changed attributes of suspected units.

Black Eagles again... interesting, but not very surprising; they were already on the list of main suspects. OK, so focus on those. You don't need 4 players to cause a recon. I think a 1v1 would be enough. If you and someone else record it, that would be good. Try only Eagle strikes on his stuff and see what happens. First without any resistance, then let him put GGIs, then Patriots, then Prism tanks, and hopefully you'll get a recon. GL!

Just kidding, bro. Even if they belonged to the sinking carrier, they'd just crash, which is normal; shouldn't cause any error anyway. There could be something with the carriers, but it's not that.

Good job recording it. OK, I'll take a guess and say it may have something to do with the carriers. Hornets were in the air when their carrier sank, and they didn't know what to do or where to go, so the confusion caused the error. Pilot #1: "Do we land temporarily on another one, like Harriers do with airfields or what?". Pilot #2: "Makes sense, but we're supposed to just crash, so I'm crashing this whole game with me!" haha. jk. BTW, this may be unrelated but as I was testing, I noticed something a haven't seen before; if you make dolphins "force-fire" on trees within their range, the trees would disappear! That's what I was thinking.

If you take another look at the pics, you can see that recons usually occur either when there are dolphins around or jets/rocketeers; so, to narrow it down, I suggest that you guys focus on dolphins, jets, rocketeers, and flak (ground and naval). It's most likely one of these that is triggering the error, with dolphins being the main suspect. If I'm playing only for the sake of testing, I would only use these 4 for starters, and try to "reenact the scenes" exactly as they happened when the errors were triggered. If nothing happens after a good amount of testing, I would start bringing other units to the scenes, one by one, reenacting the whole thing with one kind of additional unit at a time. If an error does happen, I'd start excluding one kind of unit at a time, until I'm able to determine which unit is the culprit. The thing is, we're only seeing the last frame of one screen, and we're not sure if it was you or someone else who triggered it, so, if all players record the game, it would be much easier to know what is causing it (we only need the last 10 seconds of each recording). and BTW, we're seeing different kinds of error messages, so it could be different things on different maps. GL.

Haha. Yeah, I noticed. Another reason to host your own. If they wanna have ridiculous money, they can put 100k credits on any version, which is more than enough, especially if crates are on. Not counting the revenue of oil and PPs. By the time the original 100k runs out, another 100k would've already been generated.

I used to get irritated by this when I wasn't mature enough to accept the existence of Soviet spies in the game, at a time when there were no spyless-versions, but now that we have those (and I'm mature enough), it's no longer an issue for me. Versions in which the no-spy option doesn't work properly are earlier releases that have other issues as well. The ones that have a release number like 1.1, 2.0, 3.0... etc shouldn't be played anymore, given that we now have better, final versions. To be honest, I find it really stupid that some people still host and play those beta versions. There's nothing better about them to make them preferable. Smaller map, less money from oil rigs/power plants, Soviet spy available even when the Allied spy is removed.. to name a few issues. But it seems like noob hosts who can't tell the difference pick whatever version, although they have the final ones, but they're too noob to know where custom maps are located. Some don't even know there's a search bar (not kidding). It's like you're complaining about issues in old versions of the client when those issues have already been fixed in the current one. You only need to update. The no-spy option applies to both Allied and Soviet spies in the final versions. So, if you want my advice, favorite the final ones and delete all those early releases (so that you don't get confused) and only play your favorites. That is indeed the solution to this insignificant problem. BTW, I played with a host who calls himself the best; he was playing Soviet and used spies by cheating, although spies were off for both sides, but that's another story. Just so you know.

I didn't tell anyone not to play it, I just told you why I stopped (one of the reasons, not THE reason); because it's bugged. That's the point; to tell you that it's bugged, not to tell you to stop playing it. Go ahead; play, crash, fix. GL HF. I'd rather play something else. Crash-free. No shortage of maps. Well, what if it is? We're only talking about two "sea-maps"; His and Tsunami, no "other sea maps". I played several other sea-maps. No issues. What if these two particular maps are bugged? Isn't that a high possibility? OP did an incredible job. His map is spectacular, but generally speaking, a fan-made map is more likely to be bugged (not underestimating them, I love fan-maps). That's normal. As you play, you identify the bugs and fix them in later versions. As for Tsunami, just because it's official doesn't mean it can't be bugged. They didn't notice some of the bugs at the time, and official-map-patching is not a thing. BTW, Tusnami is not the only official map that is bugged. Recons used to happen regularly on Sedona as well (not a sea-map). Also on Redzone (another popular fan-made map; no sea). I played more maps than I can count, of all kinds, some battles lasted for over 6 hours, some on sea-maps, like WW5. No issues, mostly. Only a few are known to cause recons; like the ones I named. Some even have "recon error fix" in the title (still happens though ). So, I think map-bugs are to blame, which makes total sense.

Tsunami was one of my favorites. Recon errors are regular on this map. One of the reasons why I quit playing it years ago. It's bugged.

Hey, fellow XP-user @Ezer_2000. I was just like you. I thought If they drop support for XP, I won't be able to play this game again (at least for a while), but I was sooo wrong, and now I thank them for doing it, because that forced me to upgrade, which turned out to be a great thing, a life-changing experience for a guy like me, who's been using XP for two decades! Many years ago, I was told that my old rig can't handle anything beyond XP smoothly; they were wrong, and I regret not verifying that myself earlier. I found out that this age-old rig is capable of running Win-10 64! So I upgraded to Win-10. It worked well, but was a little bit sluggish, so I downgraded to Win-7, and I'm very pleased with it. I kept XP on the main HDD and installed Win-7 on another, and now I have the best of both worlds (sort of). haha So, I'm able to update the client on Win-7 and still play on XP! I absolutely recommend any XP-user to upgrade. You won't regret it. On a side note, I overclocked my rig to a stable 40% increase, which I also recommend to you and everyone else. Unlock the full potential of your PC. Better performance for free. BTW, I overclocked the CPU, GPU, and RAM. It works like a charm. Can't believe it. Amazing. haha

Yeah, and BTW, I didn't say it's a bad mod, it's just not for me, because as I said, I'm not a fan of rebalancing (original units), and also not the biggest fan of mods in general. I'm only speaking for myself. Like you said, other people have different opinions and some of them prefer mods and rebalancing. On a side note, most fans of X2 no longer play non-X2 maps. X2 is the new standard, regardless of anything else, but please don't edit it just for me. I don't wanna take more of your time and effort, which are really precious. I hate to be negative, but this comment encouraged me to be brutally honest: Again, I liked the new units. Fun to play with bots. Thank you.

Hey, man. Good to see you again. Sorry, but I won't be playing the ZH mod, because many units are rebalanced and I'm not a fan of rebalancing. Rebalancing requires a lot of testing and it's unlikely to be accurate. Once we change the original values, it's ruined (for me at least ). I prefer the popular X2 mod, because the changes made there do not break the balance of power, it's just that everything is doubled, the speed and power are increased for all units equally and building time and recharge time for all SWs is reduced, all to speed things up and allow for more action, fast-paced gameplay, and so there's no need to retest each and every unit to know its new strengths and weaknesses. No complicated changes. Nothing major. Same game. Almost everything you're already used to is still the same, just a little bit faster. I tried ZH with real players and felt like I'm playing for the first time. I mean, X2 is simple. Anyone can get used to it immediately. On the other hand, the ZH has cool new features, but it's confusing and requires everyone to test everything, which isn't very practical, takes time, and is particularly not fair for new players who need to take an extensive course first. Most people don't wait 2 minutes in a room, so I don't expect them to study the new changes.

Wait. I thought you made that account 7 years ago and posted this earlier:

Me neither. There are over 800 OIL maps (no exaggeration). Inspecting them (or even just a few) would be a pointless waste of time as long as there's no way to have the fake ones deleted from the database and blocked/blacklisted on the client. BTW, is this the one from that infamous game or you're not sure?

I don't think the language barrier has anything to do with that; It's a matter of choice. I mean, even non-English speakers can say: Cheater! Player X (or any color) is cheating, but they don't care. "Whatever. Just a game". Of course that's not good; "Silence is complicity" as they say, right? but only cheaters should be named and shamed, if you ask me. Anyway, we can't just accuse people without proof; Otherwise, you'd have a ton of false accusations. You only need a short clip to prove that cheating happened, but to make sure/prove that the cheater's teammates were OK with it, you need to watch the whole game and read every comment; something that won't be interesting to anyone. Nobody got time for that and no one cares about it. Some people just want to play; they don't like to say anything, and maybe they would avoid playing with the cheaters afterwards, but when the game is ruined, it's ruined. It's not the silence that ruins games; it's the cheating. That's what we need to eliminate.

All official maps are included with the game/client. Needless to say; any map that doesn't come with the game/client is unofficial, so the fact that you had to download a map that is a copy of an official one is in itself a warning. You should immediately delete the new one. I didn't think it's fake. I was certain and proved that it is, and anyone who plays it can verify that, simply by choosing spot 2, as I mentioned before. Most cheaters use other methods to get unlimited money that are much better and less obvious than having hidden oil rigs. Anyway, how about you check the map you were playing when you got your buildings sold? I don't think I have the same fake one that you were playing, so I can't do it. You don't need Final Alert, just select the spot where Purple was, also same color (and side, if you remember) and see if there's anything unusual.