Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

About Darkstar387

  • Rank
  • Birthday 05/18/1990
  1. Rather quiet around here...
  2. 6 new missions have been deployed. Time to go to work! Feeback plz
  3. Ok guys, new missions are in the pipe. Anybody still out there?
  4. Modifying A Classic

    If you guys wanted, I guess I could put up a copy of my .EXE so you guys can play with my changes loaded, but they're not hard to replicate on your own.
  5. Modifying A Classic

    The light tank was near useless and needed help, increasing its speed makes it more effective at flanking, which is nod's flavour anyway... So in this case I''m actually adding flavour. I think if i upped the ROF or damage, like you suggested, then we'd actually be bringing the light tank closer to the medium tank in terms of DPS, which would start to infringe on GDI's flavour. I didn't touch the speed of the humvee, just the armor value. The buggy and the humvee actually have the same speed, Westwood set them both to 30. All I did was buff the HP of the hummer to justify the price. It could actually probably stand to have its speed dropped to 28 to make the buggy the faster vehicle. In-game, the change isn't very noticeable. The only time you'll really see the difference is when the humvee takes on single infantry units or lone buggies. The humvee comes out of the fight with just a little bit more health than it would normally, but humvees still die easily to groups of infantry and groups of buggies. IMO, the humvee hardly had any advantage over the buggy. I think buffing them to equal the grenadier would be a step too far, minigunners are cheap and are quite dangerous when grouped together. When in a squad, the minigunners ROF and collective DPS make it more effective than grenediers, who have a much slower ROF and cost $60 more. You also have to think about how this would affect Nod, 3-4 minigunners would easily outrange and kill advancing flamethrower infantry, who cost twice as much and should be one of the most effective anti-personnel units. On the subject of bikes, I think the key to balancing the bike is to do what I already did, lower the HP to make it more fragile. This makes them easier to counter with more than just grenadiers. I think the bikes have always been a bit OP, given the punch they pack.
  6. Modifying A Classic

    Added in some changes to the Humvee and artillery i forgot to mention. Humvee got a slight HP buff, artillery got a speed buff. Argument for each change listed in OP. While I haven't tested these changes with a large community, they've played out pretty well in local LAN games i've played within my own circle. They certainly add a nice spice to the campaign, which has been my main focus.
  7. Modifying A Classic

    I don't have any ethical qualms about modifying the game, I only jokingly called it treason because people don't like having their cherished classics played with years after they've gotten into the hall of fame.
  8. Modifying A Classic

    Well they'd effect the whole game, multiplayer included. I don't think the impact would be that significant, since Nod still has access to the Chinook. Nod players would basically have to play the same way they did in the campaign. I've never liked the Idea of Nod having GDI's units, it just didn't feel natural. There has to be a reason Westwood decided to remove the Nod APC from the campaign, I feel this change reflects the developers original design. The decision to give it to them in multiplayer has always confuse me. Besides, If I can find a way to modify the transport capacity, Nod would still have a transport with the light tank, but with a reduced capacity. I feel GDI is too vulnerable to early-game engineer rushes, this change would mitigate some of that.
  9. Modifying A Classic

    Nyer, I knew you'd give me a hard time about TibEd . And I beg your pardon sir, each and every change was heavily researched and considered before being implemented. Taking the APC away from Nod is not as big a change as you think. Nod only uses it in the Covert Ops. Mission "Infiltrated!". Removing the APC will break a teamtype, but no serious side effects have been discovered. Nod can still build the APC if they capture a GDI weapons factory. I've played the entire campaign and all of the covert ops missions with these changes loaded. The only drastic change is the Light tank's new ability to transport infantry: that one I'm still debating the fairness of. Besides, this is all simply fuel for thought, Obviously, I saved the original C&C95 file so I can unload the changes whenever I want to jump back into normal multiplayer.
  10. Map Archetypes

    I might take stab at multiplayer map making, just for kicks. My maps wouldn't be symmetrical, my priority would be to make them feel natural but asymmetrically balanced. What do you guys care most about in a competitive map?
  11. Modifying A Classic

    To keep them unique to GDI. With my changes to the MLRS, I don't want Nod to have 2 heavily armored infantry killers. The flame tank is suprisingly durable and undoubtedly the best anti-personnel weapon on the game. For them to have both the flame tank and the MLRS seems redundant to me.
  12. Modifying A Classic

    Ahh, the original Command & Conquer.... The great great grandfather of an entire genre. A holy relic from the golden age of strategy games. Despite the broken mess of coding beneath the surface of the campaign missions, despite the issues with multiplayer "balance", It has rightfully earned its place in the history books and will forever have a special place in our hearts. But what if we didn't just take it as it is, what if we changed things up a bit for the sake of spicing up an old classic. My question to you all is this: would you... or have you ... ever changed the balancing in the original C&C? If so, what would you / have you done? Using TibEd, I changed some things around to alter my C&C experience to better fit my idea of balance. You see, it has always been my opinion that GDI got the short end of the stick. They only have 11 units total, out of which only 5 are unique to them. Compare this to Nod, who has 13 units total, 9 of which are unique (not used by both factions). In my opinion, Nod has a very diverse tactical playbook and it's arsenal can support a number of different play styles. GDI simply pales in comparison, and is restricted to using heavy armor en masse to achieve victory. To even the playing field, this is what I did: GDI changes Increased the HP of the MLRS to 127 (Max TibEd will allow) and changed the armor type to 3, making the MLRS more resistant to infantry and bringing the MLRS into compliance with GDI's theme of being heavily armored but slow and expensive. At a cost of $800, the MLRS is priced the same as the medium tank. Being GDI's most effective infantry fighting vehicle, I feel the price tag justified the buff. Changed the MLRS build requirements to only include the Adv. Guard tower, to match the Nod SSM (which only required the obelisk). This allows the MLRS to be used earlier in the game, and not restricted to a final tier unit. Increased the HP of the Humvee to 170 to bring it into compliance with the GDI theme of heavily armored but more expensive. Infantry can still destroy the vehicle effectively, but the Humvee now has a slightly larger edge over the Buddy in one-on-one combat. Nod changes Removed the APC and the MLRS from Nod's arsenal, making them unique to GDI like in the campaign. This makes GDI feel more unique as a whole. Increased the speed of the recon bike to 42, while lowering its HP to 150. This makes the recon bike more of a glass cannon , and restricts its use as Nod's primary front line armored fighting vehicle. It gives Nod more of an incentive to use light tanks. Increased the speed of the light tank to 26. As it stood, the light tank had no advantage over the medium tank save for being cheaper to build (by a mere $200). I increased the speed of the light tank by 8 so it actually feels like a light tank, and plays more to Nod's overall theme of hit & run tactics. Lowered the HP of the SSM to 115, but increased its speed to 25 bring it into compliance with Nod's theme of "light but quick". Lowered the build level of the SSM launcher to 11, so it can be built in the campaign. Lowered the ammo capacity of the Apache by 25% to make it less effective against structures and to reduce the effectiveness of Nod chopper spam. Increased the price of the turret to $800 because of it's highly effective gun. Increased the speed of the Artillery to 14 (turning speed left unchanged). This was done because the artillery is too inaccurate to be relied upon and therefore should have the ability to outrun at least tanks when fleeing after a miss. *PROPOSED* Give the light tank a transport capacity of 2. To compensate for Nod's lack of an APC, I gave the light the ability to transport infantry, but its not nearly as effective as an APC. Seeing as how the light tank is based off of the M3A1 Bradley IFV, I felt it was fitting to return the vehicle to its role as an IFV / armored recon vehicle. General changes Increased sight range of all wheeled units to 4, making them ideal scouting units. Reduced sight range of all tanks to 2, to the reflect the real-life restricted vision of tank crews, who mostly rely on sensors and fire control computers for targeting and firing solutions. Thoughts? The only change I'm split on is the decision to give Nod's light tank the ability to transport infantry. This might make engineer rushes too easy to pull off as Nod, given that the light tank is more durable as the APC and GDI's base defenses are largely anti-infantry.
  13. Tiberian Dawn - Green Death (Single Player)

    Welcome to the forum ghost! I Can't wait to play your mission and I look forward to seeing more from you. It always warms my heart to see this community expand and bare fruit.
  14. Map Archetypes

    I can see this is going to be very productive.