Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:17 pm Post subject:
Goals, features, story and team of TDX: The Info thread
THE GOAL
The goal of TDX is simply to put one last, strong breath of life into one of the greatest games of all times, C&C1, by closing some balance holes, adding many new high-quality single- and multiplayer maps and if possible, add some units, weapons and graphics that fit into the TD universe and enhance it.
FEATURES (updated 5th Sept. 2010)
What TDX WILL feature:
- New multiplayer maps
- New singleplayer campaigns
- Heavily revamped balancing
- A few new units
- A few new weapons
- A new terrain theater
What TDX MIGHT feature (not guaranteed, but possible):
- a few new explosions and other animations
- even more single- and multiplayer maps
- some tweaked graphics
- another new terrain theater
What TDX WON'T feature (no matter how much you ask for it):
- A RA1-like skirmish AI. Programming a working AI would be hard enough; assembly-hacking one is simply impossible.
- new superweapons
- RA1-like airfields/buildable A-10s
- Anything else that would require too much programming/hacking
THE STORY
The time-frame of TDX spans from the time around mission 4/5 from the original game until some time AFTER GDI destroyed Kane and his Temple of Nod.
For both sides, the player takes the role of a commander that starts out rather low-ranked, working his way up the ladder during the campaign. You'll even get some info on what happened after Nod was defeated in Sarajevo, and why GDI wasn't able to fully defeat Nod after the destruction of the temple.
Further details will follow.
THE TEAM
Currently, following people are working on TDX:
Reaperrr (me)
Position: Team Leader
Working on: maps, missions, balance, story
Nyerguds
Position: Coder
Working on: adding support for new stuff
raminator
Position: Unit gfx guy, terrain artist
Working on: Unit gfx and terrain
Hyper
Position: Art guy
Working on: stuff like logos, also helping Nyerguds with coding
Crimsonum
Position: Mapper
Working on: single- and multiplayer maps
Tore
Position: Mapper
Working on: single- and multiplayer maps
revolutionary
Position: Tester
Working on: Testing balance changes etc. Last edited by Reaperrr on Sun Sep 05, 2010 8:00 pm; edited 4 times in total QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 Location: North America Posts: You cannot comprehend...
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 5:07 pm Post subject:
What did you guys have in mind for reorganizing GDI and Nod's tech tree? Different prerequisites, and such? _________________ Destroy to create. All for the hunt to dominate!
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 Location: North America Posts: You cannot comprehend...
Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 10:16 pm Post subject:
Definitely no.
But seriously, has the new tech tree for the game been finalized. I mean, theres not much to change, but it's interesting to see what you guys have in mind.
For example: does the SSML really need a defence building to be made? What if you wanna keep your power free'd up? What are your thoughts on this? _________________ Destroy to create. All for the hunt to dominate!
oh, I didnt realise it would out range the ob. nah, keep the range as is then. Though it deffinately shouldnt need advanced comm to build, it makes a unit that should probly have a lower pre-requeset than a mammoth into one thats the HIGHEST tech available. and then you STILL playing 800 for something that i think is only a little better than an artillery, which I remind you is only 450.
-Liam QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 Location: North America Posts: You cannot comprehend...
Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 1:56 pm Post subject:
Also, the Mammoth Tank requiring a repair bay.... I dunno about that one.
The MCV requiring it instead of each factions superweapon/final tech building could allow base expansions happening at lower tech level games. NEATO! _________________ Destroy to create. All for the hunt to dominate!
Also, the Mammoth Tank requiring a repair bay.... I dunno about that one.
Oh LOL. That reminds me of the one time in the third last mission with GDI: I was repairing a damaged Mammy, when suddenly some Nod engies sneaked in from the southern corner and captured the repair bay and the Mammoth too _________________ QUICK_EDIT
I dont think the HP really comes into it, both are light and are killed with anything other than troops. Yeah, the big differences beteen the two are:
1. AA (though please not that note nod ONLY has apache, and apache will waste it AND only requires hand of nod)
2. accuracy, the fact taht the MRLS is turretted allows it to aim properly, I feel the artys "im not going to bother to try to shoot because that target is moving, even though I'm bloody inacurate anyway" really anoying, and on that note, this IS the main differnce between the two.
3. speed, arty slow, nuf said. But both are PRETTY swow, and if caught, are dead.
The point im getting at is that its really only a troops killer, and you need FULL tech level to get it, its just silly. WHY do u need advanced comm? I know people think "mmm, its only as expensive as a med tank" but thats quite expensive really, same as a flame tank (which is awsome btw) and only 100 less than stealth. Yet its not anywhere near as good, shouldnt it be more like 500-600?
regular comm, ok, ill give you that, but not advanced. Its not even a really high tech veh, its a real thing. I think I like the idea that you'd mix it (or keep it behind) med tanks, and have the mrls dealing damage over the top of them, but it just NEVER works that way at all. What's other peoples thoughts on the veh. I think its perhaps the ONLY one in the whole game I dont perchase. Id like to see it used in games. And I think its cool and would like to use it myself.
-Liam QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 6:06 am Post subject:
Turret doesn't matter at all, seeing as a turret's turning speed and the vehicle's turning speed are exactly the same.
Not to mention, the Rocket Launcher & SSM have a special logic that practically disables the turret's independent rotation anyway.
Liam, you seem to forget that both are artillery. They are incredibly good at what they're made for - taking out structures. Use an MLRS or artillery against power plants and you'll see they mow through it faster than any other unit, and from a relatively safe distance.
Giving GDI stuff that requires a comm center is kinda useless; it'd force players to keep the useless comm center around after they build the Adv. comm center.
You're right about the MLRS only being an infantry killer though. I guess it is kinda weak. It should get some kind of buff, either in health or in weapon damage.
Reaperrr argued that it's Nod's only decent mobile anti-air, but it's also pretty useless in that aspect, imo. 3 salvos of any air unit kill it, their weapon is terribly inaccurate, and they're only good vs air in groups. They're too expensive for that. When you put Stealth tanks on Guard mode they're generally better at taking down helis.
On top of that, GDI players never build them because they prefer using mammoths as AA. One mammoth is less expensive than 2 Launchers, it's lower tech (only needs repair bay) and loads stronger. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 8:31 am Post subject:
Nyerguds wrote:
Turret doesn't matter at all, seeing as a turret's turning speed and the vehicle's turning speed are exactly the same.
Not to mention, the Rocket Launcher & SSM have a special logic that practically disables the turret's independent rotation anyway.
Liam, you seem to forget that both are artillery. They are incredibly good at what they're made for - taking out structures. Use an MLRS or artillery against power plants and you'll see they mow through it faster than any other unit, and from a relatively safe distance.
Giving GDI stuff that requires a comm center is kinda useless; it'd force players to keep the useless comm center around after they build the Adv. comm center.
You're right about the MLRS only being an infantry killer though. I guess it is kinda weak. It should get some kind of buff, either in health or in weapon damage.
Reaperrr argued that it's Nod's only decent mobile anti-air, but it's also pretty useless in that aspect, imo. 3 salvos of any air unit kill it, their weapon is terribly inaccurate, and they're only good vs air in groups. They're too expensive for that. When you put Stealth tanks on Guard mode they're generally better at taking down helis.
On top of that, GDI players never build them because they prefer using mammoths as AA. One mammoth is less expensive than 2 Launchers, it's lower tech (only needs repair bay) and loads stronger.
hm... good reasoning. I did buff the MLRS a bit in the balance beta, but I guess it could still use some more tweaking.
Do you think lower requirements (Weap/Afld only) and lower price (650) would do the trick? QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 10:48 am Post subject:
Together with the weapon changes, that may do the trick, yes
It's a pity C&C prerequisites don't allow one building OR the other... then we could give it the Comm Center. Oddly enough, this exception does exist to make Barracks equal hand of Nod, and ACC equal the Temple (as seen on respectively the Helipad and MCV prerequisites). _________________ QUICK_EDIT
you can't make it only need WF + comm. centre? you cant make it like the flame/stealth pre-requesets? Im a little lost on that. 650 seems still too much to ME, but I supose that's for you to figure out in the balance issuses, hell, you have one guy that HAS that job, so make him sort it, and sort it good, lol.
Yeah, as it stands, its almost unusable. I think if it did HEAPS of damage it would be fine AND still be 800 to build. Think about it, med has the armour but lower attack value, while the MRLS has high attck but low amour. And this way its NOT just a GDI artillery, and adds flavour to the using of a GDI army, which I do think it lacks in multiplay, another reason why I think you should be looking at trying to bring the airstrikes into multiplay.
It IS possible to make GDI have airstikes there right? or am I barking up the wrong tree and the programming for it is out the window?
-Liam QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 12:37 pm Post subject:
whiteshoes-n-gloves wrote:
you can't make it only need WF + comm. centre? you cant make it like the flame/stealth pre-requesets? Im a little lost on that. 650 seems still too much to ME, but I supose that's for you to figure out in the balance issuses, hell, you have one guy that HAS that job, so make him sort it, and sort it good, lol.
Yeah, as it stands, its almost unusable. I think if it did HEAPS of damage it would be fine AND still be 800 to build. Think about it, med has the armour but lower attack value, while the MRLS has high attck but low amour. And this way its NOT just a GDI artillery, and adds flavour to the using of a GDI army, which I do think it lacks in multiplay, another reason why I think you should be looking at trying to bring the airstrikes into multiplay.
It IS possible to make GDI have airstikes there right? or am I barking up the wrong tree and the programming for it is out the window?
-Liam
I guess it's possible (although only Nyer can really answer that), the thing is I don't WANT GDI to have airstrikes.
about the mlrs: it DOES heaps of damage, it's just the inaccuracy that makes it somewhat useless, especially vs. units and base defenses. But yeah, maybe a little boost in that area, too.
I think ALL artillery units are a bit too weak by default, that issue will be adressed. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 3:56 pm Post subject:
Liam, the problem is that everyone sells their comm center after building the advanced one. That means that if you happen to lose your weapons factory after that, and have to rebuild it, advanced comm center doesn't count as prerequisite for the rocket launcher, so you need to build the (useless) normal comm center again.
I haven't looked at superweapons yet (Hyper has though, I believe), but people seem to forget that the airstrike has always been GDI's most destructive superweapon. It is horribly overpowered. Not to mention, giving GDI an additional superweapon in MP just isn't fair.
In the campaign, it's perfectly possible to give the player access to airstrikes once he builds a comm center. The problem with that is that the airstrike will be kept even after the comm center is destroyed or sold... it's not actually linked to it. This is pretty much like the fact that destroying an enemy ACC/Temple in a mission disables the AI's superweapon, but they don't get it back after rebuilding it. Because the building isn't really linked to the superweapon. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 4:51 pm Post subject:
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
Is it possible to nerf the Airstrike without breaking it? Lower the HP?
You mean lower the HP of the A10? That would make the airstrike even more a matter of luck; simply too unpredictable, and lowering the damage of its bombs would make it almost useless in singleplayer.
And as Nyerguds said, giving GDI a 2nd superweapon wouldn't be fair. QUICK_EDIT
Could you lower the hp of the A-10 for multi only, so that a single sam shot (2 missiles) can take care of 1 A-10? I know your against the idea, but if its a stoppable super weapon, then it could be ok? (also, would it be possible to make it so only 1 A-10 would fly in when in multi play) IDK, I supose you'd have to figure it out balance wise. So, game testing is the answer? your ball.
On the MRLS, I was thinking, instead of it dealing more damage, could it just have a higher attack rate, so its more likely to GET hits and obviously doing more damage because of it.
hmm, I see what you mean about the idea of having the regular comm. as the requirement. Do you think this is a serious problem? one thing I would like to point out is that I think it should NOT be buildable from JUST WF, as this would alow GDI to get a quick inf killer early, which might prove an issuse against nods old early flame inf rushes. Though obviously it means they can ACTIUALLY kill them, I feel it might ruin the ballance a bit. Again, your thoughts?
-Liam QUICK_EDIT
I can see where the MRLS should fit into the GDI army, it just doesnt quite work the way it should. As far as I can see, the Advanced gaurd is perhaps the only thing stopping Nod from rolling over them with light vehcs, so as soon as GDI is in the field, its nod's game. The MRLS is the mobile AGT, but with so little health, it cant really sort them out, if you can stop it with med tanks, thats cool, but the bikes and buggies can really just make there way around or even through the tanks, so the MRLS needs to be able to dish the damage BEFORE they get though, it doesnt have to kill all of them, just be good enough to fighten the nod player so he's not so keen on throwing them in. At least, I THINK that's where its suposed to fit.
-Liam QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:48 am Post subject:
whiteshoes-n-gloves wrote:
I can see where the MRLS should fit into the GDI army, it just doesnt quite work the way it should. As far as I can see, the Advanced gaurd is perhaps the only thing stopping Nod from rolling over them with light vehcs, so as soon as GDI is in the field, its nod's game. The MRLS is the mobile AGT, but with so little health, it cant really sort them out, if you can stop it with med tanks, thats cool, but the bikes and buggies can really just make there way around or even through the tanks, so the MRLS needs to be able to dish the damage BEFORE they get though, it doesnt have to kill all of them, just be good enough to fighten the nod player so he's not so keen on throwing them in. At least, I THINK that's where its suposed to fit.
-Liam
ummm...
you ARE aware that this is really the way it was intended, are you? without the ability to avoid enemy fire, the buggies and bikes would be completely useless. QUICK_EDIT
well, I dont know how GDI is suposed to beat nod in the field. Im really a nod player... but then, thats because I like to be able to win... that and speed is my thing.
theyd still avoid fire, just not fromt eh MRLS. Which is why you should need more than just WF to build (that and to still alow nod inf rushes at the start). I just think GDI should have the ABILITY to beat nod in the field. If you can explain to me how its suposed to work with GDI out of the base I'll shut up, everwise, Id say thats where the MRLS goes.
lol, I dont know what's funnier, T-rex out of the WF, or dropped off by the hurculies XD. I love how it says "building" when you click on it too, makes me think about engineers putting together a T-rex... funny thing is, says the same when you click on a man to build too, only in RA did they change it to "trainning".
-Liam QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:05 pm Post subject:
whiteshoes-n-gloves wrote:
well, I dont know how GDI is suposed to beat nod in the field. Im really a nod player... but then, thats because I like to be able to win... that and speed is my thing.
theyd still avoid fire, just not fromt eh MRLS. Which is why you should need more than just WF to build (that and to still alow nod inf rushes at the start). I just think GDI should have the ABILITY to beat nod in the field. If you can explain to me how its suposed to work with GDI out of the base I'll shut up, everwise, Id say thats where the MRLS goes.
The last 2 times I played as GDI vs. Nod, the Nod player didn't have a chance. Spamming AGTs and Med. Tanks to defend the base and then spam Mammoths to roll over him, maybe with some infantry to distract the fire of his defenses. Worked both times.
Also, Nod has a hard time vs. defensive GDI players. A base full of AGTs and mammoths is almost impossible to break with Nods weak vehicles. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Sat Oct 18, 2008 9:27 am Post subject:
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
And buildings.
It's good to have mixed force.
They're only good vs. buildings that a) are big, so the missiles don't miss and b) use the armor types 1 (wood) or 2 (light).
Vs. buildings that are small and/or use 3 (heavy), like Gun Turrets, Obelisks, SAMs and the Airfield, the MLRS is less efficient than a Med. Tank.
I think I'll give the MLRS the boosts I gave it in the internal balance beta (80 damage per missile instead of 75, range 7 instead of 6) plus a lower price, lower build requirement and more hitpoints. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Sat Oct 18, 2008 3:07 pm Post subject:
whiteshoes-n-gloves wrote:
you going to highten the range? I thought we said taht was no go area?
-Liam
We said we don't want it to outrange the Obelisk, and it won't. But it will at least outrange the Gun Turret, which combined with the other changes should make it more useful. QUICK_EDIT
OH, I thought that when you told me that you didn't want it to out range the ob that it meant that it was on the verge of actually doing that, but not quite, which meant that if you made it higher taht it would. Pft, well that's what I meant. LOL.
-Liam QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:53 pm Post subject:
This kind of things is actually what the Discussions thread is for... I'll answer it here for you now but if you want to disuss it further, please do it there.
burton6747 wrote:
When is the chemball.shp used?
Chem warrior death.
burton6747 wrote:
Can you find a way to play multiplayer/westwood online game with edited executibles. I would like to play against a real player with enhanced stats. That's something I been wanting.
That works anyway, as long as both players have the same edited stats.
burton6747 wrote:
Also...This is for Nyerguds...I said graphics were bleeding in Skirmish (Multiplayer with AI's)...Um If you want I can try taking some screenshots with FRAPS and upload em to show you. The rocket launcher still bleeds sometimes along with other units.
Restoring Print Screen screenshots isn't that hard.
I should make a guide for it -_-
burton6747 wrote:
That grenade throw sound enabled in the 1.06 patch...yeah it sounds weak and fake. I like the sound from RA better. More realistic.
Well the point of my patch isn't "put RA things in C&C" but restoring/enhancing existing features. Not to mention, the RA one isn't used ingame either. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Sun Sep 05, 2010 7:38 pm Post subject:
It seems my "working on" tag can be changed. I completely finished adding support for new units
Next: expanding the weapons and projectiles and such (finally). Which will be loads easier, since there's no AI that tries to build those and acts odd when I add more _________________ 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
Goals, features, story and team of TDX: The Info thread
, I'll fix it asap.
