:: Home :: Get Hosted :: PPM FAQ :: Forum FAQ :: Privacy Policy :: Search :: Memberlist :: Usergroups :: Register :: Profile :: Log in to check your private messages :: Log in ::

Do you want to advertise at Project Perfect Mod. Find out how to do it HERE.

The time now is Wed May 27, 2020 3:19 am
All times are UTC + 0
 Forum index » Featured Projects » Dawn of the Tiberium Age » Support & Feedback
Naval Transport
Moderators: Dawn of the Tiberium Age Staff
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1 [39 Posts] View previous topic :: View next topic
Author Message
birddog
Civilian


Joined: 01 Nov 2015

PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2015 2:34 pm    Post subject:  Naval Transport
Subject description: I think it should be included
Reply with quote

Hello everyone.

I'm very sorry if this has already been posted or if I posted it somewhere wrong.

I love DTA, it's awesome, but I do feel like the naval transport is missing. Being able to only transport across sea using chinooks is a bit ineffective. RA95 has the naval transport, is it left out intentionally? You could just give it to all factions like the chinook.
Also, the chinook seem to function quite strange in regard to unloading troops, not like it worked in RA, instead it just drops some of them when it touches down.


Thank you, and feel free to move/remove this post if it's posted somewhere wrong.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
^Rampastein
Rampastring


Joined: 11 Oct 2008
Location: Gensokyo

PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2015 3:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

We'd love to have naval transports in DTA, but the Tiberian Sun engine does not support them. The Chinook's weird infantry unloading behaviour is also because of the TS engine's limitations; it's as good as we can make it.
_________________
Dawn of the Tiberium Age
DTA CnCNet Client


Tiberius wrote:
I'm not entirely convinced Ramp isn't some kind of super-cyborg from the future sent to perfect the art of RTS

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message ModDB Profile ID Facebook Profile URL
Isaac_The_Madd
AA Infantry


Joined: 16 Jul 2015

PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2015 8:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I thought we found an air transport fix so we wouldn't need to use the carryall work around.

I guess not then.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
^Rampastein
Rampastring


Joined: 11 Oct 2008
Location: Gensokyo

PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2015 8:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Isaac_The_Madd wrote:
I thought we found an air transport fix so we wouldn't need to use the carryall work around.

Hyper's air transport fix has some serious flaws that prevent it from being used in DTA. Most notably, if you unload the air transport while it's on a helipad and there's infantry inside, the unloaded infantry will disappear while still being "alive", preventing you from losing the game. So, DTA doesn't use the fix.
_________________
Dawn of the Tiberium Age
DTA CnCNet Client


Tiberius wrote:
I'm not entirely convinced Ramp isn't some kind of super-cyborg from the future sent to perfect the art of RTS

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message ModDB Profile ID Facebook Profile URL
Lin Kuei Ominae
Seth


Joined: 16 Aug 2006
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2015 8:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I wonder if Insignificant=yes on every infantry would be acceptable.
_________________
SHP Artist of Twisted Insurrection:  Nod buildings

Public SHPs
X-Mech Calendar (28 Mechs for GDI and Nod)
5 GDI, 5 Nod, 1 Mutant, 1 Scrin unit, 1 GDI building

Tools
Image Shaper______TMP Shop______C&C Executable Modifier

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bittah Commander
Defense Minister


Joined: 21 May 2003
Location: The Netherlands

PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 12:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Even then the fix can't be used, because aside from the Chinook, there's no other way to transport vehicles over water. In other words, the Chinook needs Carryall=yes (to be able to pick up vehicles) and this is also what's causing the unloading issue for infantry.
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail ModDB Profile ID YouTube User URL Facebook Profile URL
E1 Elite
Commander


Joined: 28 May 2013

PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 5:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If the pad comes with a freeunit that is invisible and immobile, the pad will always be occupied. In such cases, all
the aircrafts will land near the pad. Pad could look like an ATC tower. Aircrafts have to be given unlimited ammo
as reload won't be available. By doing this, AI can have paradrop aircrafts too as it can take passengers when on
ground. Just a stray thought.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
^Rampastein
Rampastring


Joined: 11 Oct 2008
Location: Gensokyo

PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 7:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aircraft with unlimited ammo wouldn't fit DTA at all.
_________________
Dawn of the Tiberium Age
DTA CnCNet Client


Tiberius wrote:
I'm not entirely convinced Ramp isn't some kind of super-cyborg from the future sent to perfect the art of RTS

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message ModDB Profile ID Facebook Profile URL
Lin Kuei Ominae
Seth


Joined: 16 Aug 2006
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 7:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bittah Commander wrote:
Even then the fix can't be used, because aside from the Chinook, there's no other way to transport vehicles over water.

Then of course having 2 airtransports.
1 carryall which can transport 1 vehicle only (e.g. Cost=750)
1 helitrans for infantry transport (e.g. Cost=1000)

I think a helitrans with 8 or even 10 passengers would then also make it worth building it.
_________________
SHP Artist of Twisted Insurrection:  Nod buildings

Public SHPs
X-Mech Calendar (28 Mechs for GDI and Nod)
5 GDI, 5 Nod, 1 Mutant, 1 Scrin unit, 1 GDI building

Tools
Image Shaper______TMP Shop______C&C Executable Modifier

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Einhander
Cyborg Soldier


Joined: 17 Apr 2014

PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 8:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why not instead have the Chinook air drop infantry like a badger bomber like in red alert?

While I don't know if that would be possible with the ts engine (Maybe make them airdrop?) but I think that would effectively solve the issue of taking a long time to drop infantry. Plus you could still use the transport for vehicles which is nice because players don't have to worry about using another unit to transport their forces.

Also increasing the amount from 5 to 10 would be extremely useful as players would not need to build as many transports to effectively use the contents stored inside. (Plus less air transports are easier to shoot down Very Happy).

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lin Kuei Ominae
Seth


Joined: 16 Aug 2006
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 8:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Einhander wrote:
Why not instead have the Chinook air drop infantry like a badger bomber like in red alert?

Possible, but not without lots of bugs and bad user control.
-you have to force fire (only a dummy weapon parachutes infantry out)
-aircraft goes crazy when not loaded (bad bug, though this might be fixed with Hypers patch. Not sure since i only tested back then an unarmed transport)
-since we use carryall logic, the vehicle would be parachuted down as well when forcefiring on ground (so we would need again 2 different airtransports for vehicle/infantry)
_________________
SHP Artist of Twisted Insurrection:  Nod buildings

Public SHPs
X-Mech Calendar (28 Mechs for GDI and Nod)
5 GDI, 5 Nod, 1 Mutant, 1 Scrin unit, 1 GDI building

Tools
Image Shaper______TMP Shop______C&C Executable Modifier

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
birddog
Civilian


Joined: 01 Nov 2015

PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 10:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am glad to see my topic has started a debate. I'd love for transport to be somehow optimized if the engine at all allows it. it's quite ineffective atm Sad.

I have another completely unrelated question: Is there any place you can see what the tech levels contain? You have tech levels 1-7, but I havn't been able to find anywhere stating what these tech levels allow to be built.

Thanks

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bittah Commander
Defense Minister


Joined: 21 May 2003
Location: The Netherlands

PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 12:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It hasn't been documented, so at the moment the best thing you can do is to just check it for yourself ingame or opening Rules.ini, searching for the unit or structure you want to know about (use the search function with Ctrl+F and then for example search for Name=Chinook to find the Chinook) and checking what value it has for TechLevel= (mind that the game balance has mainly been optimized for tech level 7 however).
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail ModDB Profile ID YouTube User URL Facebook Profile URL
Isaac_The_Madd
AA Infantry


Joined: 16 Jul 2015

PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 5:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I propose we make an undockable secondary Chinook that carries infantry with the fix, while removing the infantry capabilities from the other.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lin Kuei Ominae
Seth


Joined: 16 Aug 2006
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 5:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Isaac_The_Madd wrote:
make an undockable secondary Chinook

not possible
Even if an aircraft has no building set on Dock=, the human player can still give it the command to land on a helipad anyway (like a force land on the pad). Thus causing the trouble with infantry that leaves and vanishes while landed on a helipad.

The current CarryAll solution is already the best gameplay, handling and logic wise that is possible in the old TS engine.


The only other option would be a flying vehicle type, but that comes with issues as well (like no auto attacking by AA units on this flying vehicle).
_________________
SHP Artist of Twisted Insurrection:  Nod buildings

Public SHPs
X-Mech Calendar (28 Mechs for GDI and Nod)
5 GDI, 5 Nod, 1 Mutant, 1 Scrin unit, 1 GDI building

Tools
Image Shaper______TMP Shop______C&C Executable Modifier

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Einhander
Cyborg Soldier


Joined: 17 Apr 2014

PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 9:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Honestly if a "fix" or overhaul is going to cause more issues than correct I don't see a point. While some ideas may very well bear fruit I can't see a way to implement such a thing with the information we have been discussing.

So far from my observation while it may be "possible" to work around the original issue, it however will cause substantial issues that will affect game play and balance in the over all game. (Like the air drop or second unit)

Even if a work around was discovered that perfectly solved every ones proposed issues it would still of course greatly impact game play which may result in the loss of the games current theme and style.

For example the artillery debate, while it was an interesting concept is was discussed and ultimately rejected simple because the proposed changes would as a result completely change game play.

Don't get me wrong I am all for change but we all have to understand that while "item A" is cool and interesting it may not fit with "item B".
Unless a form of homeostasis can be achieved that will not impact the current way the game is played I fail to see any room for innovation.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mig Eater
Defense Minister


Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Location: Eindhoven

PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2015 8:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Random thought, what about adding FirestormWall=yes to the helipads? Infantry/units should then be able move over the helipads & not get stuck.

AFAIK the only side effect would be that the buildup anim wouldn't work any more.
_________________



Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website ModDB Profile ID YouTube User URL Facebook Profile URL Twitter Channel URL
Lin Kuei Ominae
Seth


Joined: 16 Aug 2006
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2015 8:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

interesting unusual idea. Smile
would be worth a test.
Though i fear it will lead to other issues, like a tank standing on the helipad blocking it for incoming helis.
Not sure if FirestormWall even works on anything else than 1x1 Foundation.
It might also allow you to then build 5 helipads in a row. #Tongue

\Edit
tested
wow, it really works.
FirestormWall=yes allows infantry to leave a docked helitrans.
It also still allows aircraft to dock there and being produced.
Even when units stand on all 4 cells of the building, the aircraft can still dock.

Only issues:
-no buildup anim
-needs special SHP frame layout like walls to show up ingame (easy to fix by copy pasting the frames)
-not sure how damage frames behave. i think they aren't working on this logic. (TS had damage frames in the firestormwall SHP but they were never shown ingame)

\Edit
Did some more tests
-normal helipad with Foundation=1x1 in hope infantry would be able to leave the building. Didn't work.
-Bib=yes without success. Bib makes it unfortunately only passable for vehicles.
-ExitCoord and GDIBarracks=yes in hope infantry would follow the barrack spawning logic. Didn't work.
-Passengers=5 in hope infantry would enter building. Didn't work.

So it seems FirestormWall=yes is the only way to make infantry leave correct a docked helitrans.
_________________
SHP Artist of Twisted Insurrection:  Nod buildings

Public SHPs
X-Mech Calendar (28 Mechs for GDI and Nod)
5 GDI, 5 Nod, 1 Mutant, 1 Scrin unit, 1 GDI building

Tools
Image Shaper______TMP Shop______C&C Executable Modifier

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mig Eater
Defense Minister


Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Location: Eindhoven

PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2015 9:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I used to use FirestormWall on my flat airfields so units could move other them. Ares has since added a tag that has the same effect without the side effects tho.
_________________



Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website ModDB Profile ID YouTube User URL Facebook Profile URL Twitter Channel URL
Bittah Commander
Defense Minister


Joined: 21 May 2003
Location: The Netherlands

PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2015 2:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's an interesting solution. I'd definitely consider using it in DTA as well, if it wasn't for the fact that we'd then need 2 transport aircraft for every single faction and a new Carryall unit would actually only be fitting for GDI.

Rather than doing that, I'd be even more in favor of making the Chinook unable to carry infantry so that players will have to just make it pick up an APC to transport infantry. That might help with the confusion where players don't realize that the Chinook is able to pick up vehicles (we've had a good number of people asking about how to transport tanks to other islands because they don't realize that the Chinook can do this).
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail ModDB Profile ID YouTube User URL Facebook Profile URL
^Rampastein
Rampastring


Joined: 11 Oct 2008
Location: Gensokyo

PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2015 2:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bittah Commander wrote:
That's an interesting solution. I'd definitely consider using it in DTA as well, if it wasn't for the fact that we'd then need 2 transport aircraft for every single faction and a new Carryall unit would actually only be fitting for GDI.

Surely other sides getting Carryalls wouldn't be any less fitting than the Chinook magically lifting vehicles as it does right now though #Tongue

Bittah Commander wrote:
Rather than doing that, I'd be even more in favor of making the Chinook unable to carry infantry so that players will have to just make it pick up an APC to transport infantry. That might help with the confusion where players don't realize that the Chinook is able to pick up vehicles (we've had a good number of people asking about how to transport tanks to other islands because they don't realize that the Chinook can do this).

It would just lead to more confusion because carrying infantry is the only thing that the Chinook does in TD and RA. People would build the Chinook, find out that it can't carry infantry and then just assume that the thing is bugged and cannot do anything.

I'd personally be fine with having a separate Chinook and Carryall for each side. Having the current Chinook transfer both vehicles and infantry (properly) would be the most optimal solution, but it appears to be impossible.
_________________
Dawn of the Tiberium Age
DTA CnCNet Client


Tiberius wrote:
I'm not entirely convinced Ramp isn't some kind of super-cyborg from the future sent to perfect the art of RTS

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message ModDB Profile ID Facebook Profile URL
Lin Kuei Ominae
Seth


Joined: 16 Aug 2006
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2015 3:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Let Hyper or Iran hack the exe to allow internal transports for all unittypes (working dropships and naval transports)
or
lets switch to OpenRA
_________________
SHP Artist of Twisted Insurrection:  Nod buildings

Public SHPs
X-Mech Calendar (28 Mechs for GDI and Nod)
5 GDI, 5 Nod, 1 Mutant, 1 Scrin unit, 1 GDI building

Tools
Image Shaper______TMP Shop______C&C Executable Modifier

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
^Rampastein
Rampastring


Joined: 11 Oct 2008
Location: Gensokyo

PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2015 4:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lin Kuei Ominae wrote:
lets switch to OpenRA

This would be the most effective fix, but not a very quick one.

I think I'm going to learn OpenRA modding soon though, while the engine isn't good enough yet, it's progressing fast.
_________________
Dawn of the Tiberium Age
DTA CnCNet Client


Tiberius wrote:
I'm not entirely convinced Ramp isn't some kind of super-cyborg from the future sent to perfect the art of RTS

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message ModDB Profile ID Facebook Profile URL
Bittah Commander
Defense Minister


Joined: 21 May 2003
Location: The Netherlands

PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2015 4:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

^Rampastein wrote:
Surely other sides getting Carryalls wouldn't be any less fitting than the Chinook magically lifting vehicles as it does right now though #Tongue

Chinooks lift tanks in real life as well and surely invisible ropes don't look nearly as "magical" as invisible rotors.

So I actually would say that giving other sides a futuristic VTOL Carryall would be less fitting. And while giving other factions a different kind of aircraft for lifting vehicles would be better, I'm not a fan of adding yet another helicopter with invisible rotors.
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail ModDB Profile ID YouTube User URL Facebook Profile URL
Mig Eater
Defense Minister


Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Location: Eindhoven

PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2015 5:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What about this?
_________________



Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website ModDB Profile ID YouTube User URL Facebook Profile URL Twitter Channel URL
Bittah Commander
Defense Minister


Joined: 21 May 2003
Location: The Netherlands

PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2015 5:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Considering that's a GDI unit, it wouldn't really solve the issue that only GDI would have a fitting Carryall unit, would it? #Tongue

That's what I meant when I said that giving "other" sides a VTOL Carryall wouldn't be fitting earlier: VTOL is GDI technology (and too futuristic for Allies or Soviet).
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail ModDB Profile ID YouTube User URL Facebook Profile URL
^Rampastein
Rampastring


Joined: 11 Oct 2008
Location: Gensokyo

PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2015 5:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you already have a bunch of aircraft with invisible rotors, does adding one really make the situation worse? #Tongue Seeing one helicopter without rotors is disturbing, seeing more of them just gets you used to it.
_________________
Dawn of the Tiberium Age
DTA CnCNet Client


Tiberius wrote:
I'm not entirely convinced Ramp isn't some kind of super-cyborg from the future sent to perfect the art of RTS

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message ModDB Profile ID Facebook Profile URL
Einhander
Cyborg Soldier


Joined: 17 Apr 2014

PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have to agree with Bittah, the adding and subsequent additional work of making "carryalls" for all the factions that fit with the setting and theme would be rather silly. Honestly compared to the "issue" and the proposed fixes and work around the debated topic seems superflous. I cannot see how adding an additional unit to fix a unit that already works as intended could be a viable choice to improve game play as the chinook is already a defined unit players are familiar with and know how to properly use.

The only way I can see any proposed changes being viable is if they retain the already established unit, as that would reduce the confusion to players. Suddenly giving them the option of building two units who for all intents and purposes should do the same thing is rather silly. Plus with established norms in the CnC universe its common to see factions that are not equal across the board. In tibsun only GDI had the carryall, because if Nod had one all they would have to do every map is make artillery and carryalls to win every map.

My question is why fix it if it isn't broken?

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Allen
Cyborg Specialist


Joined: 13 Feb 2007
Location: C:\Westwood\ TechLevel=12

PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2015 7:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lin Kuei Ominae

How about using a non looping ActiveAnim for the build up if FirestormWall= will use ActiveAnim? It won't work for selling though...
_________________


C&C in RA-1 Get it here
http://www.ppmsite.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=30101 100+ Single Player Missions! Now playable on CnCNet 5!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lin Kuei Ominae
Seth


Joined: 16 Aug 2006
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2015 10:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

yeah, you can "simulate" some kind of buildup with an ending activeanim. But since the building is instantly shown in ready state, the buildup would need to be right from the start big enough to cover the already ready building and then slowly go away to show the building under it.

Too much work for a hacky solution.
I think the OpenRA switch would be really the next big step for DTA. Especially when it then finally has the possibility to add all logics it needs
-naval and air transport (allies & soviets could get a big cargo plane instead of a heli)
-all superweapons from RA and TD
-no workarounds necessary for things like big area damage
etc
_________________
SHP Artist of Twisted Insurrection:  Nod buildings

Public SHPs
X-Mech Calendar (28 Mechs for GDI and Nod)
5 GDI, 5 Nod, 1 Mutant, 1 Scrin unit, 1 GDI building

Tools
Image Shaper______TMP Shop______C&C Executable Modifier

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Allen
Cyborg Specialist


Joined: 13 Feb 2007
Location: C:\Westwood\ TechLevel=12

PostPosted: Wed Nov 04, 2015 1:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm trying to give idea...
_________________


C&C in RA-1 Get it here
http://www.ppmsite.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=30101 100+ Single Player Missions! Now playable on CnCNet 5!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Isaac_The_Madd
AA Infantry


Joined: 16 Jul 2015

PostPosted: Mon Dec 07, 2015 2:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

^Rampastein wrote:
We'd love to have naval transports in DTA, but the Tiberian Sun engine does not support them.


Sorry to bump but I thought there was a way to make naval transports to work.
You have to edit the land characteristics, aka speedtype, to have a speedtype that can move on shores, but not the land around them and then have a unit with this speedtype be able to hold infantry (and use the old amphibious apc art changing logic.)

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Atomic_Noodles
Defense Minister


Joined: 05 Oct 2011

PostPosted: Mon Dec 07, 2015 2:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What about just using the Amphibious APC thing as a basis and just make them buildable from the Naval Yard and War Factories? After all they were Hovercrafts...
_________________
~ Excelsior ~

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Bittah Commander
Defense Minister


Joined: 21 May 2003
Location: The Netherlands

PostPosted: Mon Dec 07, 2015 2:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There's really no need for that type of naval transport however, since the Chinook already fulfills that role and using a naval unit just to transport infantry is rarely preferable (and thus not worth the trouble it takes to implement it).

The main reason why people ask for naval transports is to transport vehicles over water and this is still impossible.
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail ModDB Profile ID YouTube User URL Facebook Profile URL
Lin Kuei Ominae
Seth


Joined: 16 Aug 2006
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Mon Dec 07, 2015 9:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Isaac_The_Madd wrote:
Sorry to bump but I thought there was a way to make naval transports to work.

Naval-Infantry transports: no problem
Naval-Vehicle transports: not possible at all and that's the main request of this topic. Wink

btw, DTA already has Naval Infantry transports. Wink It's the TD Hovercraft.
Several of my maps (Tiber, Dantes Desert, Africatorial, Frosty Lake etc)  include them as civil transports, which the player can use to cross a river.
On some maps, you even get them as a buildable unit when capturing a civil tech center.
_________________
SHP Artist of Twisted Insurrection:  Nod buildings

Public SHPs
X-Mech Calendar (28 Mechs for GDI and Nod)
5 GDI, 5 Nod, 1 Mutant, 1 Scrin unit, 1 GDI building

Tools
Image Shaper______TMP Shop______C&C Executable Modifier

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Isaac_The_Madd
AA Infantry


Joined: 16 Jul 2015

PostPosted: Mon Dec 07, 2015 1:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Chinook transfers vehicles quite fine and naval transports work for infantry only, unless it is actually a aircraft with carryall=yes but that has the same problem as the Chinook plus it looks odd when it carries vehicles over water.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
^Rampastein
Rampastring


Joined: 11 Oct 2008
Location: Gensokyo

PostPosted: Mon Dec 07, 2015 2:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, but like already said, a naval infantry transport is fairly pointless. It should be a vehicle transport, like in Red Alert.
_________________
Dawn of the Tiberium Age
DTA CnCNet Client


Tiberius wrote:
I'm not entirely convinced Ramp isn't some kind of super-cyborg from the future sent to perfect the art of RTS

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message ModDB Profile ID Facebook Profile URL
Panzermann11
Civilian


Joined: 13 Dec 2018
Location: Somewhere in 'Nam

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2018 9:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

In Tiber map, when playing I saw a transport hovercraft that works simillarly like the trains in a few other maps. And suprisingly enough the hovercraft has the ability to move on water, so it might be possible for a naval transport vehicle.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message ModDB Profile ID YouTube User URL
Bittah Commander
Defense Minister


Joined: 21 May 2003
Location: The Netherlands

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2018 4:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As mentioned above, it's not possible for vehicles to enter the transport.
And while it's indeed possible to make the transport hovercraft you see on Tiber buildable, the implementation of naval units in DTA causes the path-finding amphibious units (units that can travel on both land and water) to be broken in the sense that they can't automatically navigate around obstacles such as cliffs, trees, rocks and so on (they'll just entirely refuse to move at all whenever there's an obstacle in their path).
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail ModDB Profile ID YouTube User URL Facebook Profile URL
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1 [39 Posts] View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Featured Projects » Dawn of the Tiberium Age » Support & Feedback
Jump to:  
Share on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on DiggShare on RedditShare on PInterestShare on Del.icio.usShare on Stumble Upon
Quick Reply
Username:


If you are visually impaired or cannot otherwise answer the challenges below please contact the Administrator for help.


Write only two of the following words separated by a sharp: Brotherhood, unity, peace! 

 
You can post new topics in this forum
You can 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


Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group

[ Time: 0.5273s ][ Queries: 10 (0.0543s) ][ Debug on ]