New UnitTypes flags

[Nyerguds]

Well, that and the "100 units bug" from TS, which most likely exists in RA1 too.

[Jacko]

100 units bug?

never heard of that.

[Nyerguds]

100 units bug?

never heard of that.

It's a bug from TS, that was also in C&C1, meaning it's pretty certainly also in RA1. Basically, the game's AI function determining what to build has a fixed array in which it stores its "should I build this?" status for each unit. In TS that array supports 100 units, in C&C1 (and RA1, I presume) it has exactly the amount of existing units. If you exceed that array by adding units, it'll try reading that "should I build this?" status from whatever data happens to be stored in the memory beyond the array, meaning some random crap is evaluated as if they were booleans, usually with a a "not 0" check, meaning it'll trigger as "yes, build this" practically all the time.

 

Basically, it causes the AI to madly keep building the overflow units until it runs out of money.

[Iran]

There's also a limit of 75 cameo items per strip in the sidebar in TS.

[Allen262]

I'm not sure it would be possable to make 100 vehicles for RA1. You would be spending months if not years making .shp just to get to 100.

[Nyerguds]

I'm not sure it would be possable to make 100 vehicles for RA1. You would be spending months if not years making .shp just to get to 100.

READ, please -_-

 

In TS that array supports 100 units, in C&C1 (and RA1, I presume) it has exactly the amount of existing units.

In other words, RA and C&C don't have a "100 units bug"; they have a "the AI craps out from the moment you even add a single one" bug.

 

My patch fixes this in C&C95, but seeing as there's no exposed way of adding more units, it doesn't really matter

 

 

Also, I think you underestimate the amount of custom SHPs already made by people

[AchromicWhite]

Not to point out what seems obvious, but RA 1 and CNC95 don't have 100 units... And doesn't RA1 have more units than CnC95?

I'm lost as to what you're saying there Nyer. I'm sure you are actually saying something that does make sense, just not sure what. HAHA

 

  -Liam

[Jacko]

I think RA and C&C had similar numbers of units

but then aftermath added quite a lot so I'm not sure

[Allen262]

Also, I think you underestimate the amount of custom SHPs already made by people

 

Maybe...

 

I think RA and C&C had similar numbers of units

but then aftermath added quite a lot so I'm not sure

 

The 100 unit bug from Tib Sun is not total count of evey unit but 100 for each type. Max of 100 vehicles, max of 100 infantry and max of 100 aircraft. Side note: Tib sun dosn't have ships but RA2 dose and the ships are listed with vehicles.

[Nyerguds]

Not to point out what seems obvious, but RA 1 and CNC95 don't have 100 units... And doesn't RA1 have more units than CnC95?

I'm lost as to what you're saying there Nyer. I'm sure you are actually saying something that does make sense, just not sure what. HAHA

 

  -Liam

 

In other words, RA and C&C don't have a "100 units bug"; they have a "the AI craps out from the moment you even add a single one" bug.

^ what part of that is not clear?

 

The reason I compared it to TS' 100 units bug is that it was first discovered in TS, and does exactly the same thing, namely making the AI build tons and tons of that unit for no reason. As I clearly said, that doesn't mean the bug also triggers at that exact same magical number "100".

 

For example, C&C1 has 22 unit types. That means the AI's "should I build this?" logic has an array with 22 spots on it. Add a 23rd unit, and it messes up because its array isn't big enough. Same thing goes for all types (infantry, ships, air, probably buildings too) in both games; the game's AI can currently only handle the exact amount the games contain right now.

[AchromicWhite]

Oh, I see, thought you were saying it was when there was over 100, which there clearly wasn't in RA or C&C. No, makes sense now.

  -Liam

[AchromicWhite]

Iran, when creating a NEW unit, how do you give it a new image (SHP)?

 

  -Liam

[Allen262]

You don't need to use Image=. Just make sure you unit use the name of the shp you want.

 

EX: You add a new tank. Make sure the tank is [5TNK] and you have a shp named 5tnk.shp

[Jacko]

so say I made a map where <insert country here> gets a special unique unit (i.e. 5tnk]

 

would the rules.ini section of it look like this?

 

 

[5tnk]

Owner=Greece

Cost=x

sight=y

speed=z

etc.

 

If this map would be loaded into the cncnet5 database how would everyone get the new .shp files?

[AchromicWhite]

Pretty sure you still have to get the players to get the new .shp files. Does that mean building new .mix files?

  -Liam

[Allen262]

This needs to be moved into the Unhardcoded internal (type) lists thread http://cnc-comm.com/community/index.php?topic=2603.0 from now on since this thread is for new keys and not [*NAME*type].

 

Anyway I do not know if of the [*NAME*type]s like [unitTypes] can be used in maps.

[Nyerguds]

Oh, I see, thought you were saying it was when there was over 100, which there clearly wasn't in RA or C&C. No, makes sense now.

  -Liam

Well, as I did mention, I raised the limit in C&C95 to 100 in my patch, as part of my experiments on adding new units in the game. That's why I knew it was the same bug

[Lovehandles]

Any chance it would be possible to add a rules.ini tag of sorts that determines how long it takes to build a certain structure or unit, instead of using the build cost to determine build time?

 

 

Edit:

 

Oh yeah, and a rules.ini tag that basically removes all the build speed limits.

[Jacko]

that would be quite useful

ferret probably put a 1 second timer on his god-damn helipads like the sort of jerk he is on TA

[AchromicWhite]

Actually, he just used a cheap pad with the "pad comes with free copter" = no, or whatever exactly it is, under "general". Because in RA, unlike TD, you have to wait for the full 1500 cost of a pad being built. It was my own idea to change it, so it wouldn't stop you making over buildings while you made copters.

 

The reason I come to this thread though, is that I was wondering if anyone was using this EXE. There's no chance of it being the main used EXE for CNCnet anytime soon, is there? Really would like to be able to use some crusher=no tags in map mods hehe

 

  -Liam

[Allen262]

Iran said the code was in the current .exe a awhile back. Make a map and see if it still is.

[Nyerguds]

Any chance it would be possible to add a rules.ini tag of sorts that determines how long it takes to build a certain structure or unit, instead of using the build cost to determine build time?

In C&C1, it's based on the sell price. (Which explain why the helipad and refinery build way too fast )

[AchromicWhite]

OK. So it turns out I have both the old and new .exe

The new one is called ra95-spawn.exe and while it also has the extended sidebar (and the crusher= tag ) the power bar is really messed up. The very top and bottom are fine, but the middle is just nothing... further more, because it doesn't refresh this area, it creates a load of blurs and left over name tags that appear when hover over icons in the side bar.

 

Also, would using different exe files cause OOS error? I would guess yes... but. Does it?

 

  -Liam

[Allen262]

ra95-spawn.exe is for online play. It read the spawn.xdp and spawnam.xdp. spawn.xdp is the rules.ini and spawnam.xdp is aftrmath.ini for the ra95-spawn.exe. They both open in notepad just fine. The extended sidebar need new .shp files. They should be in EXPAND3.MIX with frunky's set up. They are named powerbar.shp, powerext.shp, side4na.shp, side4us.shp, strip2na.shp and strip2us.shp. Note the EXPAND3.MIX likes to crash XCC Mixer.

 

I'm going to guess that different exe files cause OOS error or not let you even start a game on Net 5.

 

 

[AchromicWhite]

OK yeah, that's what I wanted to know.

As I'm planning to release the mod on 5, I guess I'll just skip and not worry about it.

  -Liam