Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2008 11:22 am Post subject:
Phobonaut wrote:
Loading screens and such.
But it has been ages since I played C&C, don't know if they have that.
No such things, except the main menu and WSA animations. Not to mention, it's limited to 256 colours, usually on palettes that are hard to edit because all SHP graphics drawn on them use the palette of the background image.
Reaperrr wrote:
Does the amount of work for you depend on the length of the list? If yes, I guess it's better to not ask you for an expanded animation list... Although that would be really cool, too... *hinthint*
Not really. Copying the existing offsets is peanuts, and all references to the list just point to the first item in the list anyway, so the length doesn't matter. The only thing I still need to check is if there are some values indicating how long the list is.
IMPORTANT:
I'll be offline for the next week or so though, since they're rebuilding the central heating system in our house, and this kinda starts in the room where our LAN is distributed. I'll try to keep posting on the forum from school (as I'm doing now), but the fact I won't have the chance to chat with Hyper on MSN while disassembling C&C95 will make it hard for me to work on it. Heck, I don't even know if I'll be able to comfortably connect my PC since my desk is moved to the other side of the room.
I'll try to look into the unit expanding thing though... _________________ Last edited by Nyerguds on Thu Oct 02, 2008 10:53 am; edited 1 time in total QUICK_EDIT
Im not so sure I want to help with any jobs listed here, but im quite the ideas man. So I'll be watching and posting my ideas. I think what would be cool would be an "outpost" building, which esencually is an MCV which doesn't give any construction options, but becasue its a building which you and drive out and build, you can make offshoots of your base without sandbag/siloing, which is kinda stupid, lol. Once the AI is worked on it can be made to try and get rid of these quickly as obviously they can make someone much stronger alot faster. Also something that turned into a turret or so (like not tick tank) would also be interesting, though I dont like the idea of it "burrowing" so it could deploy more like the MCV.
-Liam QUICK_EDIT
Reaperr, Nyer has school, so i would happily write to code for him, thus this gives him more time to test it and play around with it.
Well, anything that helps getting the new stuff in faster would be great, so go ahead
@Crimsonum: Sure, I'm glad about any help in mapping I can get
And about the triggers, since we have Nyerguds as trigger guru (and I'm not that bad either) that shouldn't be a problem.
Am I able to work with the regular C&C Map Editor or should I wait until you've got the most crucial new features done? _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Sat Oct 04, 2008 9:12 am Post subject:
whiteshoes-n-gloves wrote:
Im not so sure I want to help with any jobs listed here, but im quite the ideas man.
99% of your ideas are also highly unrealistic. We don't even know if it's possible to make more than just the MCV deploy. Not to mention, deploy logic in C&C1 has a power balance bug, where the power that the building requires is subtracted from the power pool TWICE... the main problem with this is that it's only returned ONCE if you sell/undeploy the building, wbich means deploying things this irrepairably adds too much to your power usage. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Sun Oct 05, 2008 6:59 pm Post subject:
Crimsonum wrote:
Reaperrr wrote:
Hyper wrote:
Reaperr, Nyer has school, so i would happily write to code for him, thus this gives him more time to test it and play around with it.
Well, anything that helps getting the new stuff in faster would be great, so go ahead
@Crimsonum: Sure, I'm glad about any help in mapping I can get
And about the triggers, since we have Nyerguds as trigger guru (and I'm not that bad either) that shouldn't be a problem.
Am I able to work with the regular C&C Map Editor or should I wait until you've got the most crucial new features done?
Yes you can work with the regular map editor, some changes might affect the maps but adjusting them shouldn't be much of a problem.
@Nyerguds: Well, in the case of the con yard it can be "fixed" by setting the power usage of the CY to 0.
@whiteshoes-n-gloves, I'm sorry but the main focus of this expansion is on new maps, balance improvements and maybe a few new units and weapons, also I can't say I have a lack of ideas myself (and I know what's realistic and what's not). QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Sun Oct 05, 2008 10:58 pm Post subject:
The power buffer you get prevents you from getting 22 times the normal build time when all of your power plants get destroyed though. RA has it that way, and it's awful if they manage to kill your power plants. There's no way to recover, simply because of the build time increase.
Removing that power would make the start of GDI mission #2 incredibly annoying. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
er, couldnt you HALF what you wanted to be the power output of the deployable building, therefore giving the value you want? or have i missenterprited? anyways, I still think you should put the jets in (even if just as alternate versions of the airstrike) would be cool to have A-10s in the desert, while the advanced GDI jet in other areas. Nod obviously could have the F-22 like in the vids, could drop something other than the napalm strike. And no, im not going to ask for paradrops, thats just an accedent waiting to happen in the dawn modding world lol.
-Liam
and what are you talking about, I always sell the bar and build my base IN the nod base on that mission. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:24 am Post subject:
whiteshoes-n-gloves wrote:
er, couldnt you HALF what you wanted to be the power output of the deployable building, therefore giving the value you want? or have i missenterprited?
They already did that. The problem is that you only get that half back when selling it.
whiteshoes-n-gloves wrote:
anyways, I still think you should put the jets in (even if just as alternate versions of the airstrike) would be cool to have A-10s in the desert, while the advanced GDI jet in other areas. Nod obviously could have the F-22 like in the vids, could drop something other than the napalm strike. And no, im not going to ask for paradrops, thats just an accedent waiting to happen in the dawn modding world lol.
-Liam
umm... and you're totally ignoring the fact that airplanes in C&C1 can't land, and if they're on the ground they can't lift off? Really, this isn't that simple. Not to mention they'd all appear on the helipad.
Really, at least experiment a bit with game editors before giving such insane ideas.
whiteshoes-n-gloves wrote:
and what are you talking about, I always sell the bar and build my base IN the nod base on that mission.
What? That's totally useless... the AI doesn't build units in that mission. That's choosing between either attacking them from the start with just the few units you have, or first building a decent army and THEN attacking them. _________________ Last edited by Nyerguds on Sun Oct 12, 2008 9:12 pm; edited 1 time in total QUICK_EDIT
oh, I get you you on the power issue now, that is wierd, pitty too.
Yeah, I know about the idea of building the jets is stupid and they have heli logic, ive dont it, hovering A-10 is funny but not useful. No, what I was saying was making them as airstikes. What would be cool would be some sort of "if" statement that would make a strike happen in a pre-chosen place after you take out some perticular units/sams stated in the mission briefing. What I was saying about the GDI "super" jet, is that it'd be nice to see it as an alternate type of airstrike, even if just for the purpose I just stated. for example: you have to move in with some light stuff, take out a few sams, the "super" jets fly in and wipe out some deffences (oblisks). Then you move in and set up a base, but you still have to kill off the rest of the sams to get multi A-10 airsrikes as usual. Getting me now?
-Liam QUICK_EDIT
What? no it wouldn't. Not if the stikes were pre-decided in the coding of the game, so you didnt get comtinual ones, just one after you kill SOME stuff, AND that one would go where the programmer (you) decided it to go. Then you get them as a "super weapon" after you kill the rest that are surounding the base etc.
on another note, about the deployable units, IF you can get other stuff to deply (other than MCV is what im talking about) could you not just make it that you CANT sell it, like the hospital and tech centre? that way getting rid of the issue you told me about? Or can you just not get other stuff to deploy anyway?
-Liam QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 6:21 am Post subject:
whiteshoes-n-gloves wrote:
What? no it wouldn't. Not if the stikes were pre-decided in the coding of the game, so you didnt get comtinual ones, just one after you kill SOME stuff, AND that one would go where the programmer (you) decided it to go.
AFAIK, impossible without a huge amount of work, and I don't think the feature is worth it.
whiteshoes-n-gloves wrote:
on another note, about the deployable units, IF you can get other stuff to deply (other than MCV is what im talking about) could you not just make it that you CANT sell it, like the hospital and tech centre? that way getting rid of the issue you told me about? Or can you just not get other stuff to deploy anyway?
-Liam
again, a feature that isn't worth the effort IMO.
You seem to completely underestimate the time and work it requires to get even such "simple" features in.
Other stuff like support for new weapons, projectiles, units etc. is far more important, and Nyerguds is already busy enough with that stuff. QUICK_EDIT
your probly right reaperrr, Ill keep that in mind. Stealth black hand would be nice to have as a unit, though im making an assumption that stealth is realatively easy to clip to a unit...
one thing that anoys me to death, when you build sams as nod, they suck at taking down the A-10s, even if you do manage to get one, its probly after its done the damage to your base, if you made them more deadly, you could put in A-10s once GDI get comm centre up and keep the game realatively balanced. One thing that I thought could bring the airstikes into multiplay better is (and more assumptions on how easy this would be) Once comm centre is up (or a new building, air command maybe) you can BUILD the air strike, so you click on the icon, it builds and when its done you launch it normally, basicly you replace the "charge" function with a "build" function. Then again, this may also be near impossible.
-Liam QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:26 pm Post subject:
whiteshoes-n-gloves wrote:
AND that one would go where the programmer (you) decided it to go.
Correction.. HACKER. This is like, a million times harder than programming new features the normal way. So please stop suggesting crazy stuff. It's hard enough to just change existing features without destroying the entire program. Just yesterday I tried adding 2 additional music tracks to the game, and even though all my code seems to be correct, the game crashes every time I start a mission now.
whiteshoes-n-gloves wrote:
your probly right reaperrr, Ill keep that in mind. Stealth black hand would be nice to have as a unit, though im making an assumption that stealth is realatively easy to clip to a unit.
Oh yes. Just not to an INFANTRY unit. As it is, the option is only available for vehicles. It's impossible to apply it to an infantry unit without completely researching and rewriting the way infantry objects are made in the game. _________________ Last edited by Nyerguds on Sun Oct 12, 2008 9:13 pm; edited 1 time in total QUICK_EDIT
lols fair enough. IF you DID want to introduce them into the game, I would sugest looking through sole survivor code, as you definately could have stealthed inf in that.
My point about the A-10s was not so much as a nod player, but actually mroe as a GDI player. I think SAMs should stop you airstriking certain areas, as opposed to stopping you from bringing A-10s on the map. But from a Nod point of veiw, its easier to just put minigunners at the top of the map as the AI always strikes the northen most unit/structure. Also, if they could be taken out easier, would alow them to be implemented in multiplayer matches as something other them a crate pickup (which is near to impossible to stop from hitting your base, even though it seem plausable that you should be able to stop it). Personally I think I'd be nice to see GDI have such things in multiplay.
-Liam QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 9:20 pm Post subject:
whiteshoes-n-gloves wrote:
IF you DID want to introduce them into the game, I would sugest looking through sole survivor code, as you definately could have stealthed inf in that.
This isn't about having stealth infantry ingame... C&C can have that with stealth crates in multiplayer. Heck, buildings too. It's about he fact that the function that exists ingame to make new infantry objects doesn't support giving a unit stealth from the start, because no existing infanry units uses it in the original game. So technically it's possible, but in reality I'd have to completely figure out all parameters of the infantry unit as it is finally stored in memory and then change the code of the function to add stealth. Which is tons of work.
The only reason the vehicles have the option is because the stealth tank needs it to be activated by default. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
lol, fair enough... was actually wondering when you were going to do that Reaperrr. Yeah, ive seen stealthed buildings, funny becasue you can still see the bib... which kinda gives it away a tad.
-Liam QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 Location: North America Posts: You cannot comprehend...
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 5:36 pm Post subject:
Better lookin infantry would be nice - maybe add some detail to their completely one colour uniforms. The minigunner should look like he's equipped with a minigun; or you could make another infantry unit (once it can be done easily...), called the Rifle Soldier, armed with an assault rifle; have him along with the minigunner... actually that could be pointless, you really only need one automatic bullet based soldier.
Also, the grenadier should have a grenade launcher. I mean, come on, are there really troops dedicated in armies to just throwing grenades as hard and fast as they can? That's talent, but... unrealistic.
The Chemical Warrior has the best look out of all the infantry, 'cept the Commando. The commando might benefit from a shorter reload time, and is it possible for C4 to destroy buildings without enemy soldiers emerging from the ruins?
When the commando takes damage from every building he takes down (because of the soldiers emerging), the game rewards microing him efficiently.
The vehicles, especially the tanks ('cept the mammoth) could use some added graphical detail.
Hell, is it possible to make it so that infantry loading into an APC or Chinook all get in relatively at the same time as each other? That would be awesome.
DAMN, while were at it, create a new feature for the game: queing up multiple UNITS! This single feature, if it could be implemented successfully, would be the greatest feature ever.... good luck trying to do this!
Finally, bildings would look great if they were a little bigger. You see in C&C1, unit scaling was decent, except for buildings. They just need to be a tad bit larger.
And DEFINITELY, when adding new missions, add one where you have a computer ally, with a base already established, that attacks the other AI's base frequently. EPIC.
Well, thats all for now.
I realize some of these proposed ideas will be difficult, time consuming, possibly impossible to achieve. All I can say is: good luck. _________________ Destroy to create. All for the hunt to dominate!
I am really interested to hear what these new units are. I do hope more air power gets added, I felt the origonal CnC was quite lacking in the department. And if I may ask, will you mke new units that are actual milatary units that werent in CnC origonally, or are you just making new Sci-Fi stuff, or have you now yet decided? lol
-Liam QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 12:47 pm Post subject:
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
Better lookin infantry would be nice - maybe add some detail to their completely one colour uniforms.
They're too small for that kind of detail. Not to mention, over 500 frames to edit and the fact players should still be able to recognise the side.
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
The minigunner should look like he's equipped with a minigun; or you could make another infantry unit (once it can be done easily...), called the Rifle Soldier, armed with an assault rifle; have him along with the minigunner... actually that could be pointless, you really only need one automatic bullet based soldier.
Uhm... basically all the stuff you're saying here comes down to one single fix: renaming the minigunner to "Rifle Soldier".
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
Also, the grenadier should have a grenade launcher. I mean, come on, are there really troops dedicated in armies to just throwing grenades as hard and fast as they can? That's talent, but... unrealistic.
Meh. At least grenadiers are different now. Not just "another infantry unit holding another type of gun".
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
The Chemical Warrior has the best look out of all the infantry, 'cept the Commando.
Actually it's exactly the same as the flamethrower besides the 3 grey pixels put on his face as mask.
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
The commando might benefit from a shorter reload time, and is it possible for C4 to destroy buildings without enemy soldiers emerging from the ruins?
When the commando takes damage from every building he takes down (because of the soldiers emerging), the game rewards microing him efficiently.
You're kinda contradicting yourself here...
I know the code that influences the spawning of units (though I haven't reall looked at it), but I have no idea how it could be possible to make the weapon that was used to destroy the building affect that.
Also, You're really going towards Liam's suggestions here, you know.
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
The vehicles, especially the tanks ('cept the mammoth) could use some added graphical detail.
Adding details makes the units look like a mess of pixels. And that just looks bad. We've had this discussion on the team forum.
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
Hell, is it possible to make it so that infantry loading into an APC or Chinook all get in relatively at the same time as each other? That would be awesome.
Going even more towards Liam's suggestions...
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
DAMN, while were at it, create a new feature for the game: queing up multiple UNITS! This single feature, if it could be implemented successfully, would be the greatest feature ever.... good luck trying to do this!
Finally, bildings would look great if they were a little bigger. You see in C&C1, unit scaling was decent, except for buildings. They just need to be a tad bit larger.
Please. Do you have any idea what that would do to the game? It would mean making maps that are adapted to the fact bases are bigger... which can't be done because C&C1 maps simply can't be made big enough for that. 64x64 is the limit, and keeping in mind that the outer edge of that is never usable, it becomes 62x62.
I could look into changing that, but only if you volunteer to make a map editor that supports the bigger maps AND are also willing to recreate all existing maps & missions to fit this new width. Keep in mind ALL of C&Cs code counts on the fact that [cell+64 = cell one row south of it]. And yes, that includes building foundations. Probably even bib foundations, which I know nothing about, at the moment.
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
And DEFINITELY, when adding new missions, add one where you have a computer ally, with a base already established, that attacks the other AI's base frequently. EPIC.
Seems kinda lame... you should fricking win on your own. Anyway, mission design is all up to Reaperrr.
A more fun variation on this, which I've already seen is a mission, is that an automated GDI main army attacks a Nod base with a full frontal assault, while the player has to infiltrate the back of the enemy base to take out the power / economy / CY or something like that.
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
Well, thats all for now.
Thank the Maker and his Water
whiteshoes-n-gloves wrote:
I am really interested to hear what these new units are. I do hope more air power gets added, I felt the origonal CnC was quite lacking in the department. And if I may ask, will you mke new units that are actual milatary units that werent in CnC origonally, or are you just making new Sci-Fi stuff, or have you now yet decided? lol
-Liam
At this point we first need to figure out if it's even possible to add new units without the AI going nuts and building tons of em. Apparently this bug is in TS too if you make over 100 unit types. On TD it happened after adding just one. Since this is AI-related I have no idea if it can be fixed. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 10:05 pm Post subject:
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
And DEFINITELY, when adding new missions, add one where you have a computer ally, with a base already established, that attacks the other AI's base frequently. EPIC.
I can't guarantee any of the other stuff (mostly for the reasons nyerguds already mentionend), but this one is like TOTALLY what I'm planning to do (and in MORE than just one mission )
@Nyer: don't worry, I'll make things more interesting than plain "human + AI ally vs. 2 enemy AIs". There will always be a twist that makes things interesting and fun, not just some simulated skirmish. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 Location: North America Posts: You cannot comprehend...
Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 10:13 pm Post subject:
Nyerguds wrote:
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
Also, the grenadier should have a grenade launcher. I mean, come on, are there really troops dedicated in armies to just throwing grenades as hard and fast as they can? That's talent, but... unrealistic.
Meh. At least grenadiers are different now. Not just "another infantry unit holding another type of gun".
BUt THiS IsN'T A bALl GAME!! Damn shift key, not 100% working. Come on, it would be cool, and doable, much more so than my other ideas. At least I think it is. Of course, this can wait until the new balancing and missions are done.
Nyerguds wrote:
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
The Chemical Warrior has the best look out of all the infantry, 'cept the Commando.
Actually it's exactly the same as the flamethrower besides the 3 grey pixels put on his face as mask.
And it makes him look badass! Don't you agree?
Nyerguds wrote:
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
DAMN, while were at it, create a new feature for the game: queing up multiple UNITS! This single feature, if it could be implemented successfully, would be the greatest feature ever.... good luck trying to do this!
Thats shit from a bull's ass, I'm WAY different than Liam.
You see he's all like this:
Everyone watching would be like this:
Dude who laughs at everybody's misfortune be all like this:
Davinci would be like this:
And I'd be like this: Chillin out, sippin a beverage: and packaging up heat:
Nyerguds wrote:
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
And DEFINITELY, when adding new missions, add one where you have a computer ally, with a base already established, that attacks the other AI's base frequently. EPIC.
Seems kinda lame... you should fricking win on your own. Anyway, mission design is all up to Reaperrr.
A more fun variation on this, which I've already seen is a mission, is that an automated GDI main army attacks a Nod base with a full frontal assault, while the player has to infiltrate the back of the enemy base to take out the power / economy / CY or something like that.
That does sound pretty fun. I'd play it.
Nyerguds wrote:
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
Well, thats all for now.
Thank the Maker and his Water
What? Come on, are you really going to thank the maker, who makes some good stuff and alot of bad stuff?
You should be thanking the destroyer, for he can destroy the bad things! Although I do agree that the Makers water is bitter sweet. I like it. _________________ Destroy to create. All for the hunt to dominate!
hahaha, my anoyance has finally been blatantly admitted in this forum... was kinda waiting for that. Me and myself would like to appolagise for all the stuff that I though MIGHT have had a chance to be made, but instead was near impossible. On another note, could you just make it that the computer CANT (doesnt have the construction ability) to make the "new unit(s)" and just GIVE them some to begin with, and maybe re-enforce them with some more with a bunch of triggers? Or am I once again, RIGHT out of the ball park. OF course, getting them to build would be much better, so fiddle more, please, but if you cant get it to work, then its another idea...
lol, im pretty sure its ALREADY been stated that he cant make build ques, it's like asking to get chinooks to pick up hummers, or for stealth generators (actually, if you could copy the crate code to a building... in saying that, even IF you got it, I doubt you'd be able to make it "unstealth" when the building dies) ok, probly not, my point is, these guys clearly know shit we dont, and even though it sounds doable, most just isnt... at all. Would be cool to have this stuff, isnt going to happen. Much respect guys, make the old WWers proud.
-Liam QUICK_EDIT
However, you MUST get Grenaiders to stop throwing and start wielding a dark grey coloured grenade launcher.
You'll be able to differentiate him between Rifle Soldiers & Rocket Soldiers, as their weapons look different and are coloured black and white, respectively.
It's just a no brainer, this change. The firing sounds will be unique. _________________ Destroy to create. All for the hunt to dominate!
Uh Liam isn't THAT bad at all really, I have no idea about the limits and problems which can occur in TD, I'm just as likely to ask questions which an experienced TD modder could call me a total n00b for, yeah Liam's a bit persistent, but at least I learnt how limited this mod is from some of his posts .
Though from what I do know, we should be discussing missions and maps over new units and adding new features as that seems to be what's most likely possible. Also, since when is CnC series about realism, each unit is unique and the grenadier is unique because it throws it's grenade making it stand out from the mash up with black pixel wielding soldiers. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 9:49 pm Post subject:
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
However, you MUST get Grenaiders to stop throwing and start wielding a dark grey coloured grenade launcher.
500 frames. For one infantry unit. All of them need to be changed to make the grenadier hold a weapon.
No thanks.
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
What? Come on, are you really going to thank the maker, who makes some good stuff and alot of bad stuff?
Go read Frank Herbert's Dune. NOW.
Morpher wrote:
Uh Liam isn't THAT bad at all really, I have no idea about the limits and problems which can occur in TD, I'm just as likely to ask questions which an experienced TD modder could call me a total n00b for, yeah Liam's a bit persistent, but at least I learnt how limited this mod is from some of his posts .
Man, I was joking about that "Liam #2" part . But yes, changing hardcoded logics is extremely hard. Modifying the existing options of units, structures, infantry, aircraft, terrain tiles, overlay, trees, and music is pretty easy, as is expanding the existing lists to add new ones (after I find all instructions that determine the list size). But actual game behaviour is hard to modify. I generally prefer to stay away from that stuff, since it's terribly hard to understand the way it works in assembler code, and even harder to modify it into something that does more than just crashing the game.
On a kinda related note, I successfully enlarged the music list in C&C1, and added 2 new tracks to it. The 2 added tracks are the previously-unused Nod score and map themes.
They don't show up in the playlist, but I HAVE added code to play them on the Nod score and map screens. The fact they don't appear on the playlist is deliberate though... this hack allows me to add as many new tracks to the playlist as I want. I just don't think there ARE any more C&C1 tracks to be added, and these map and score themes shouldn't be in the list, since they automatically repeat, breaking the music cycle.
Talking about that music cycle, I noticed that none of the extra themes that were enabled in 1.06 but which came after the end of the original playlist (Enemies To Be Feared, Destructible Times and Ride of the Valkyries) were played unless you actually select them in the list and pressed Play. The loop repeated from the first track after playing track #32 (We Will Stop Them/Deception). That is also fixed now.
I'm planning to release a lot of this (minus actual added units or other advanced TDX stuff like that) as a 1.06b patch later.
whiteshoes-n-gloves wrote:
On another note, could you just make it that the computer CANT (doesnt have the construction ability) to make the "new unit(s)" and just GIVE them some to begin with, and maybe re-enforce them with some more with a bunch of triggers? Or am I once again, RIGHT out of the ball park.
Problem is that the C&C1 AI doesn't give a damn about build rules. If a unit is GDI only and requires an Advanced Comm Center, a Nod AI can still build it if the mission programming tells him to, even if the AI doesn't have the Advanced Comm Center, and the mission's build level isn't high enough to build the unit.
So I'm afraid the only thing I can do is make it completely unbuildable and hope that that stops it. IF that works, I could shift the (unbuildable) dinosaurs to the end of the units list, so they become the "overflow units". That way, the dinosaur spots can be used for making 4 new units that work correctly.
[edit]
well, the AI seems to obey the Can Be Built rule... it doesn't build unbuildable units . Now there's still the matter of changing which units get the dino voices... from what I've seen that's not set in the actual unit data. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 1:57 pm Post subject:
Nyerguds wrote:
well, the AI seems to obey the Can Be Built rule... it doesn't build unbuildable units . Now there's still the matter of changing which units get the dino voices... from what I've seen that's not set in the actual unit data.
There must still be some unlocated data for units, afterall we haven't found stuff like turret offset, firing offset, for which side the unit is allowed to start in MP etc. either. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 4:01 pm Post subject:
yeah... but I'm afraid much of that is probably not in the normal InitTypes data. It may be in a different section altogether.
On that note... anyone who has ever taken a look at DOS C&C infantry (with CCEDT or similar tools), must've noticed it literally has dozens more options than the C&C Gold infantry. Not only was none of that data ever identified, but I also found out that in C&C95, each infantry section contains a link to a second data section which contains a load of stuff which is most probably that missing DOS C&C data. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 Location: North America Posts: You cannot comprehend...
Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 4:03 pm Post subject:
EDIT: Unidentified new data? For Infantry? GOLD!!!!!! It's buried gold, I can smell it, which is IMPOSSIBLE!!
Nyerguds wrote:
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
However, you MUST get Grenaiders to stop throwing and start wielding a dark grey coloured grenade launcher.
500 frames. For one infantry unit. All of them need to be changed to make the grenadier hold a weapon.
No thanks.
.... Well, when you put it that way, I can understand why you wouldn't want to do this, yet.
We can do this another time.
Nyerguds wrote:
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
What? Come on, are you really going to thank the maker, who makes some good stuff and alot of bad stuff?
Go read Frank Herbert's Dune. NOW.
Oh, I thought you were talking about god. The christian God.
I have read Frank Herbert's Dune, at least 3 times, at different stages in my life.
Heh heh, oh yes, NOW I FULLY understand why you'd thank THE Maker; his water is waaaay better than.. jehova's. I'd definitely thank him as well.
lol. Glad we got that cleared up.
Reaperrr wrote:
I can't guarantee any of the other stuff (mostly for the reasons nyerguds already mentionend), but this one is like TOTALLY what I'm planning to do (and in MORE than just one mission )
@Nyer: don't worry, I'll make things more interesting than plain "human + AI ally vs. 2 enemy AIs". There will always be a twist that makes things interesting and fun, not just some simulated skirmish.
YYEESSSS!!!!!!! All-Right, I new at least one of my ideas would be GOLD!
I have dreamed of this mission.......... think beach assault, but MUCH, MUCH longer, with at least three different AI armies, appearing at different intervals; basically, it would be very complex.
It would be a FUCKLOAD of work, but it would be worth it, because I, and other people, would play it hours on end.
I'd take a break from Dawn of War to play this insanely cool (coolness being the insane type - the only cool type of cool) mod/mission.
Until that time, good luck Reaperrr, Nyerguds, and every other fine soul working on TDX. _________________ Destroy to create. All for the hunt to dominate!
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 5:02 pm Post subject:
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
YYEESSSS!!!!!!! All-Right, I new at least one of my ideas would be GOLD!
hehe, well, I've had plans for this for years, but before all these recent patches (and the suggestion to force cnc95 to use only 1 CPU core) the game was unplayable on my machine (all kinds of crashes, freezes and so on), that's why I didn't bother about it until recently.
But yeah, I never understood why WW didn't make use of the Multi houses in singleplayer. It allows for some interesting stuff. QUICK_EDIT
Nyer, you gotta map out the AbstractClass's, from there you will know where the virtual tables are and what functions belong to what class, time consuming but worth it in the end. QUICK_EDIT
I bet all that extra crap is from when they were going to make inf capible of fighting in hand to hand combat. Not that I expect you could just flick it on, it probly doesnt even work, lol. And no, I wouldnt expect you to try and get it to either. Further more, anyone who DOES tell you to complete such a task should have a burgett shuved up their ass, lol. Though, it could be interesting if you could get that tib missile for nod, even if its mission specific. Once again, even this seemibly simple task may be well out of range.
-Liam QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 6:29 pm Post subject:
extra crap? I was talking about the tons of stuff that is vital game code but which I simply haven't identified yet.
There are some extras though, like stuff that looks like it was left over from a built-in map editor (the game doesn't only contain methods methods to read mission files, but also to also WRITE them), and an ini file to read VQA player settings... but hand-to-hand combat was never implemented as far as I know. There are no traces of it anywhere, like extra unused hand-to-hand weapons, or even h2h combat sounds in the DOS mix-files.
And let me assure you, there's a lot of unused stuff in these DOS mixfiles. Like helicopter takeoff sounds, a pistol reload sound, a tree burn sound, the Nod-specific map and score themes, a ton of unused EVA sounds... _________________ QUICK_EDIT
have a look, tell me what u think. Perhaps you can find the graphics and use them for something, lol. Though I do kinda doubt it.
http://members.aol.com/ztxjim/cncdawn.htm
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:13 am Post subject:
-infantry fight anims and messy deaths aren't used ingame, but are shown in one of the Nod briefings
-The Studio (unused civ building which is the old WW Studions building) appears in these same briefings
-infantry names can be activated with the [Advanced] options in my v1.06 patch. And yes I know they're the WW team. Eydie Laramore wrote the original story.
-Visceroids exist AND appear in the game. They are randomly spawned in multiplayer.
-tib trees... come on. Everyone knows those
-Mobile helipad wasn't actually implemented anywhere until they made the (unused) Helicarrier ship in RA: Aftermath.
-The beta hand of Nod is already in my patch
-Hovercraft doesn't even contain these graphics frames ingame.
-spelling errors in the vid names were fixed by user patches ages ago, before C&C95 was even made. Still, it wasn't fixed in C&C95 though, so my patch includes them.
So yes, I've seen this page. Ages ago. This one is also interesting. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 7:33 pm Post subject:
Transports have no maximum capacity as far as I know. Maybe internally, it's 256 or something, but ingame I haven't noiced any. I've once let 40 mammoth tanks emerge from a chinook.
And yes as long as both people use the same data changes, there's no problem. In fact, C&C only desyncs if a changed stat becomes used. So for example, if you change the weapon of a tank, it will probably not desync until the tank actually shoots. _________________ Last edited by Nyerguds on Mon Oct 27, 2008 5:48 pm; edited 2 times in total QUICK_EDIT
yeah, was pretty sure he'd seen it before. I think what could be helpful would be to inhance the effect of the blossom tree (more like tib sun) so make it spawn a full OR med filled sqaure of tib, as opposed to the only just sprouting stuff, just so that you each one is more effective (and you dont have to make a bunch i order for them to be seriously effective). Obviously this would mean that they'd be some place on the battle field where you'd have to capture them as opposed to just start near by them.
Wow, really RA had a sea transport for heli (kinda like in RA 2?) secretly hidden and unused... kinda cool, opens some oppertunities there in future.
Would be cool to implement the extra carnage to the men (pleaaaase...) lol. I like the inf gore, its so sad its gone in the later CnC games. A chem missle that makes damages AND tib when it lands would be cool, but probly really hard to do.
And yeah, I know about the other Chem stuff like viceroids, theyve attacked many players in games of CnC early in game and finished them, its sad when it happens and you just have to play another game, lol. Would be cool if you could make it so that chem spray ACTUALLY made them too even if this was to be what the chem missile did). I know where just throwing ideas at you that you've probly already thought of, we just want to make sure this is the best it can be, that nothing that SHOULD have been in this awsome expantion ends up not making that cut for some reason that never should have been.
-Liam QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 5:44 pm Post subject:
burton6747 wrote:
Nyer, Have you found the data for editing weapons yet? Damage of weapons, range, accuracy?
Nyer found the weapon stats ages ago, and I found the projectile stats (which control stuff like bullet speed, accuracy and so on). Warhead data (efficiency of certain weapon types against certain armor types) is also known.
Improving the balance would have been tricky without these
Nyer already made a Con Yard icon, besides, you'll never see it in-game since ConYards aren't directly buildable.
@whiteshoes: Actually, I haven't had any of those ideas, because that's completely off from what I have in mind for TDX. Even if it was possible, we wouldn't implement ANY of these things, because they would totally ruin the TD-feeling QUICK_EDIT
No... GDI and Nod use the same construction yard graphics, so that's impossible.
And even if I'd be able to go deeper into that and make it separate (which I don't think I'll ever succeed in) I only have the Nod version in original quality.
burton6747 wrote:
Lol Actually the A-10 is very weak, weaker than any other plane except the cargo plane which is only destroyable if you make it.
well it's not actually invulnerable... it just has a special logic set that makes all stuff unable to target it
I once messed around until I got a C17 landed on the ground, and even though I couldn't target it (even force-fire wasn't allowed), splash damage of weapons still damaged it. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
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
Chillin out, sippin a beverage: 
and packaging up heat: 
.
. But yes, changing hardcoded logics is extremely hard. Modifying the existing options of units, structures, infantry, aircraft, terrain tiles, overlay, trees, and music is pretty easy, as is expanding the existing lists to add new ones (after I find all instructions that determine the list size). But actual game behaviour is hard to modify. I generally prefer to stay away from that stuff, since it's terribly hard to understand the way it works in assembler code, and even harder to modify it into something that does more than just crashing the game.
