Since unit-to-unit conversion is now a thing, and different modes of a unit are actually their own units, clones of the original one, I think there should be a tag that groups these clones as instances of a unit, so build limits are respected.
For example, if I have some HTNK with BuildLimit=1, deploying it into HTNK2 will allow me to build another HTNK, which is not desires because I can bypass the limit. To avoid this, HTNK2 should either be a negative prerequisite for HTNK (unit types are not supported so far afaik) or should be affected by the same build limit check that happens for HTNK (in that case HTNK2 would use some tag like InstanceOf=HTNK QUICK_EDIT
[Warhead]PreventProne=(bool)
Wether infantries affected by this warhead should not prone, this tag is for warheads that attach positive AE to friendly units, which usually should not deal damage, and damaging AE to enemies, i.e. bleeding effect, that natually can't be dealt with prone.
[InfantryType]Armor.Deployed=(float-multiplier)
This tag is similar to the existing [Warhead]Damage.Deployed=, for some infantry may not deploy himself in order to build up their defense, i.e. hackers in Generals.
With the warhead tag all deployed infantries recieve the same modifier, this unit-specific one is more customizable, just like the versus-based EMPModifier I proposed on page 10. QUICK_EDIT
Require a fix on the C4 ability so that its users no longer get killed themself when blowing up a building in water. Vanilla Tanya and SEALS die after they sabotaged a shipyard time to time. QUICK_EDIT
Regarding putting weapons on Animations, the documentation states:
Quote:
Currently, the created projectile is neither owned by the player who created the animation nor the owner of the unit or structure the animation is attached to. While damage delivered using Warhead at least knows about the player who created the animation for scoring purposes, weapon damage does not pass on this information. This might change in the future.
I'd like an expansion on that, with an option to attach the projectile to either the unit or to the player who created the animation (depending on whether you want the unit to gain veterancy from the anim kills or not) and so my dreams of a psychic dominator tank become a reality. _________________ MIdAS - Turning wages into beer since 2002 QUICK_EDIT
Cant remember if I've mentioned this before, but cloning structures currently dont required power to work. So they can't be disabled when a player has low power, by using PoweredBy & they are immune to EMP weapons.
I'd suggest adding this vulnerability to them, which would add some more tactical options to the player & open up some new possibilities for modders. _________________
Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 2:56 am Post subject:
3x Feature Requests
Feature 1:
Swimming or amphibious infantries (Seal, Tanya, etc) to be able to enter from water in amphibious and other water-only naval vehicles that have 'Passengers' string added to their rules code, and of course to be able to exit from them also in the water.
Jumpjet infantries to be able to lend on amphibious and on water-only naval vehicles that have 'Passengers' string added to their rules code, and of course to be able to exit from them also in the air.
Sub-feature: When some ship is destroyed to have occupants, as follow:
IsThisVehicleHasOccupants=yes
VehicleOccupantsType=ROCK,LUNR,GHOST. (Jumpjet, and amphibious infantries.)
OccupantsVeterancy=N% ;Where N stand for % (1-100%).
If the vehicle is a sub then only TANY and GHOST or other amphibious infantries to be able to be occupants.
Feature 2:
Support underwater buildings;
Feature 3:
Multiple tank garage/hangar building - as some kind of garage/hangar for tanks.
So this not to be building as classic Tank Bunker, from this building tanks shouldn't be able to fire, just to hide in it on some time, and to be unloaded outside when needed. This garage or hangar, of course further will be able to be protected with Iron Curtain or Shield.
This building can store 5-10 tanks - realistically.
Edit: Feature 4:
Hacker's hacking mechanism (abilities) from Generals.
Yuri's mind control link can be used for the link between hacker and the affected building/unit.
Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 8:31 am Post subject:
Re: 3x Feature Requests
wiwimax wrote:
Feature 2:
Support underwater buildings;
Already supported in same capacity as underwater units are, even without Ares. Granted it could probably improved by allowing them to not uncloak even when fired upon. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Already supported in same capacity as underwater units are, even without Ares. Granted it could probably improved by allowing them to not uncloak even when fired upon.
In that sense, it's be better if CloakDelay= from [General] can be made overrideable by a TechnoType Flag of the same name. QUICK_EDIT
Lone-player skirmish works, but not lone-team skirmish.
Please fix.
I'm curious as well as to how the AI will handle being alone _________________ One and only developer of the Command & Conquer Dune "C&C D" mod.
m7 wrote:
I tend to release things I create so that assets are never lost to hard drive problems, accidental deletion, or me having to pretend to care about rippers taking things from my project when it is done.
Feature 3:
Multiple tank garage/hangar building - as some kind of garage/hangar for tanks.
So this not to be building as classic Tank Bunker, from this building tanks shouldn't be able to fire, just to hide in it on some time, and to be unloaded outside when needed. This garage or hangar, of course further will be able to be protected with Iron Curtain or Shield.
This building can store 5-10 tanks - realistically.
This can already be done if the tanks are damaged/lost ammo, so it really just requires docking to be changed to accept full health/full ammo vehicles. _________________ "Don't beg for things; Do it yourself or you'll never get anything." QUICK_EDIT
You can use the Campaign List to make individual missions playable.
No I meant a different list for fanmade missions. A separated list that doesn't alters official missions and avoids requiring to select official one in order to play fanmade ones. Like in the later c&c games _________________ Lurker. English isn't my primary language. QUICK_EDIT
Potential follow up idea to the cloaked stuff. Maybe new tags to let a weapon or warhead have the option of not triggering decloak on hit so we can have underwater or cloaked units not breaking out of it.
An additiomal Suppress.DeathSound or something similar to go alongside Suppress.UnitLost _________________ ~ Excelsior ~ QUICK_EDIT
Cant remember if I've mentioned this before, but cloning structures currently dont required power to work. So they can't be disabled when a player has low power, by using PoweredBy & they are immune to EMP weapons.
This wasn't the case before, and i don't know exactly at which point it was changed, but in 2.0 cloning facilities do cease to function when they are low on power (didn't check PoweredBy= and EMP, though). This is also the case in 2.0p1 and the 3.0 testbuild. QUICK_EDIT
My bad, I double checked & I forgot to add Powered=yes to the test building, which enables low power & EMP deactivation. However PoweredBy= still doesn't work which is what I'm mainly interested in using. _________________
Also want to expand the cloak feature that it can also act similar to Robot Control Center with PowersUnit. Basically, a building whether it gives cloaking to certain units and once this building is absent, cloaking for certain units will be removed.
Also, make Cloakable.Powered applicable to other TechnoTypes. QUICK_EDIT
Something about Ares 3.0, is it possible to make AI respect shroud when firing a SW? Or will AI fire a human-player-owned SW with UseAITargeting=yes and FireIntoShroud=no into shroud like it is firing its own one? QUICK_EDIT
The AI does not "scout" the map like human players. It doesn't keep track of which cells it revealed and which not. That's also why gap gens have no effect. There's no information to act on. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
The AI does not "scout" the map like human players. It doesn't keep track of which cells it revealed and which not. That's also why gap gens have no effect. There's no information to act on.
More to the point, isn't the shroud completely revealed to AI anyway? or at least it "knows" where everything is, even Stealthed units. _________________ MIdAS - Turning wages into beer since 2002 QUICK_EDIT
Wether an Insignificant=yes building should be considered as a threat if it has ThreatPosed>0 and thus be automaticlly attacked.
Idea behind these two tags is to seperate the several functions Insignificant= has into different parts and avoid the side effects from those unwanted parts. QUICK_EDIT
Posted: Thu May 23, 2019 1:27 am Post subject:
Jumpjet Hijacker
Feature 5:
@AlexB: Is it possible for "Hijacking" to be made to work in air?
Example: Jumpjet Hijacker - as James Bond, or air terrorist kidnaping air units as ZEP, DISC or BLACKHAWK (when is positioned above water). QUICK_EDIT
Is it possinle to customize how fast a transport loads in/unloads passengers? So you can have a transport that can drop off passengers quickly, like Technical from Generals, or a transport that has only one entrance/exit so filling or unloading it takes longer. Something like:
Isn't this what DeployTime does, if only for unloading?
DeployTime is likely obsolete. And even if it worked, the implication is that it would only adjust delay between the act of deploying and the object carrying out the appropriate deploy action - which wouldn't actually change how fast the unit unloads its passengers, only how long it waits until it starts doing it. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Extend IsPassable
IsPassable.By=units
Or
IsPassbale.TerrainType=Clear or Rough or Rock or etc Last edited by cxtian39 on Wed May 29, 2019 8:56 pm; edited 1 time in total QUICK_EDIT
Something I've always wanted to see fixed is the AI's 'enemy selection' process when you have an AI player on your team with no human players on the opposing team.
Currently when the AI goes to pick an enemy/target at the start of a match, it appears to only consider human players and will never pick an AI faction as its enemy by default, even if there are no human players to pick from on the opposing team. This means when I play a singleplayer 3v3, both my AI partners just sit on their hands, doing nothing but building up their base and training IsBaseDefense=yes teams. This ends only when something from the opposing team finally happens to attack them, at which point they will start building attack teams and send them at the player that attacked them. This also has the somewhat more consequential effect of giving them no data for their base defense weights, meaning they will typically build nothing but pillboxes/sentry guns for base defense until something attacks them.
This is Vanilla YR behavior as far as I know. Not the end of the world but would love to see it fixed sometime down the road. _________________ New name: Sir Prize. I've switched to a new account to update to the name I've been using everywhere else for the last several years. QUICK_EDIT
Being able to toggle the display of your own units and structures on the minimap would allow modders to spawn dummy buildings or invisible helper units and use them without their appearance given away on the minmap to the player. This would also allow modders to disable the 0x0 buildings from appearing on the minimap despite having no physical representation on the game map. It could be a useful feature for my project and I'm sure others could take advantage of it as well. QUICK_EDIT
AttachEffect.ROFMultiplier= ? _________________ New name: Sir Prize. I've switched to a new account to update to the name I've been using everywhere else for the last several years. QUICK_EDIT
That has no effect on ammo reload and Gatling
These units' attack speed wouldn't increase. Last edited by cxtian39 on Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:42 pm; edited 1 time in total QUICK_EDIT
Per this thread, having Country-specific crew (ie like Sides) would be nice. Eg Allies normally get GIs, but my modified Americans have Crew=GGI (or whatever).
Beyond that, more TibSun logic is always nice. Tiberium veins & veinholes, threat nodes, IonSensitive= and grounding hovering / flying units during ion storms... QUICK_EDIT
That has no effect on ammo reload and Gatling
These units' attack speed wouldn't increase.
Ah ok I understand now, your original statement was very weirdly worded. It looks like you said those features were already in the game, and what was missing from the game was a general buff to attack speed, but what you meant was actually precisely the opposite of that
ROFMultiplier does work on Gatling units though and does properly decrease the ROF of the weapon that it's firing currently. It just doesn't make the unit advance through the stages any faster. QUICK_EDIT
That has no effect on ammo reload and Gatling
These units' attack speed wouldn't increase.
Ah ok I understand now, your original statement was very weirdly worded. It looks like you said those features were already in the game, and what was missing from the game was a general buff to attack speed, but what you meant was actually precisely the opposite of that
ROFMultiplier does work on Gatling units though and does properly decrease the ROF of the weapon that it's firing currently. It just doesn't make the unit advance through the stages any faster.
Sry for being not clear
Rephrase:
Add
AttachEffect.ReloadMultiplier=
AttachEffect.GattlingStageMultiplier= QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 09 Mar 2008 Location: Osaka (JP)/Hong Kong/Germany
Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 5:36 pm Post subject:
Since the introduction of type transformation by promotion, the following would allow to approximate the feature, appearing in Generals, of granting access to TechnoTypes and SuperWeapons to players when their units have accumulated experience.
On a TechnoType:
Code:
Experience.FriendliesModifier=%%
Defaults to 0; any TechnoType will gain this percentage of the experience gained by any unit owned by the same player.
(A bool can be inserted prior to this, as in "Experience.FromAirstrike" is sorted before "Experience.AirstrikeModifier", but there doesn't appear a reason to do so.)
This is the most basic; it could be cut down to be limited to BuildingTypes only and the Gen/ZH General Promotion system could still be largely simulated in this way. It could also be expanded into a more complex system:
Allowing only certain units to pass experience to the TechnoType:
It could be made possible to define the recipients of experience gained by a unit, possibly in combination with allowing different shares of experience for these recipients:
Code:
[XXXX]
Experience.YYYYModifier=%%
Where "YYYY" can be replaced with any string, and any object whose Type's ID is equal to that string will grant %% of its' experience to XXXX.
If this (consider that ID strings can be 24 characters in length) taxes the syntax too much (the expansion further down certainly would tax this syntax further), consider the following format instead:
Here, "YYYY" defines the Type for which the "Experience.Modifier" with matching "<n>" (replace with numeral) provides the percentage of experience that XXXX will gain. The first tag could also take a list, and the second tag's value would be applied to all entries.
This can, again, be expanded to include certain relations to exist between XXXX and YYYY. For example, while the existing features allow experience to be gained from airstrikes and spawns, which are soft-coded to be binary relations (the rules only allow certain combinations of spawner-spawn and invoker-airstrike, which cannot be altered in-game), they also allow for experience from Passengers and MC, which can be numerous different relations, which depend on the way the game is played. If the feature above were to include these relations, and perhaps others, it would be possible to account for such customizable relations, and possibly others (perhaps even "ENEMY"?), with customized experience shares. I suggest such a tag to default to "SELF", which would allow units to define how much experience they gain from their own kills, allowing units to gain more or less experience than other units for the same cost:kill ratio.
It is of course possible to invert the code:
Code:
[YYYY]
Experience.To<n>=
Experience.Modifier<n>=
This would be contrary to the format established in the other experience-distributing settings added by Ares. There are also some other implications for parsimony, but I'm not sure those are worth stating without having in mind an idea what people might do with such a system. _________________
Mao Zedong wrote:
Our mission, unfinished, may take a thousand years.
Last edited by Millennium on Wed Jun 12, 2019 6:44 pm; edited 1 time in total QUICK_EDIT
Well currently the promotion conversion is not cascading. A unit that is already an elite version of some other unit will simply ignore Promote.EliteType= And no further conversion would happen when this unit becomes elite.
You can only change form via promotion at most twice. QUICK_EDIT
Well currently the promotion conversion is not cascading. A unit that is already an elite version of some other unit will simply ignore Promote.EliteType= And no further conversion would happen when this unit becomes elite.
You can only change form via promotion at most twice.
Not strictly true. You can use Promote.Veteran/EliteExperience to remove experience from the unit when it converts, allowing for further promotions and thus transformations. Of course if you do not wish to remove experience, then you are limited to a single veteran and a single elite promotion transformation. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Good to know. In that case select by veterancy never works. Maybe Ares should provide option to disable select by veterancy completely. _________________
Couple of ideas (that some may find stupid and uncessary, not sure if they were on the blueprints, haven't found them through search)
BuildingsGainSelfHeal, similar to the UnitsGainSelfHeal from the Tech Machine Shop and InfantryGainSelfHeal from the Tech Hospital except it affects buildings.
Code:
BuildingTypes>BuildingsGainSelfHeal=<true/false>
A HealType flag to determine from which of the three InfantryGainSelfHeal, UnitsGainSelfHeal and possible BuildingsGainSelfHeal. The source of healing currently depends on whether the value of the Organic tag.
Code:
ObjectType>HealType=<infantry/unit/building>
The ability to customize the animation used by parasties with Organic=yes and the properties of the attack as they are currently hard-coded to cater to the Squid unit from the base games.
Code:
Organic hard-coding from what I've seen on modenc is linked to a lot of things, I'm not sure whether this is even feasible or not.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum