I can do it, Millennium. It's simple. Really. I already implied it. I'm cba to showcase it atm but tomorrow I prolly do it just to prove it. It needs much trial and error to get the timing right and I'm tired to do it tonight.
that's what i thought you meant.. ya and that would be a pain to do... i mean with splitting or next anim or w/e... timing the delay of the second weap to acocunt for the velocity of the plane... sounds like a pain lol.
Graion Dilach wrote:
No, scientists does not share information. Data yes, but information not, and many times people tend to rediscover stuff.
well that's just being pedantic... i wasn't in for bickering about the use of words...
rediscoveries happens sometimes, but not all the time. science progresses because we use past knowledge to bolster our studies today. we don't go re-figuring out relativity every day, we learn it and move onto frying a bigger fish. everyone isn't re-figuring out the same shit because everyone wants to learn the new big thing. thus the quickest way to do that is to get info out and peer reviewing and move forward.
Graion Dilach wrote:
Articles are not about sharing information but the tool to gain reputation and reputation gets the payment for a scientist. Discoveries needs proof and depending on the subject and the method, it could be enough lengthy as a process that someone else could steal the credit just because of having a better proving method/being faster.
i was talking about the philosophy of science, not the way it's used in business
kenosis wrote:
I mean. Who are you to say: you should work on ares instead of ur modified npatch. What you know about our mod? If you mean my laboratory, then, my mod? You imagine about certain exe hacks for it so you go jelly... and you could get mega creative with my exe? oh. Just go ahead and take the exe from the mod and search for any tags you never know in it.
oh, i meant nothing by it, i just meant, if you were working on ares and making it more able to do nptach things and beyond then everyone would benefit, that's all. there'd be one central base that could do it all.
kenosis wrote:
You certainly daydream a lot, and does few real work, and speak nonsense without giving any reasons.
everything i'm mentioned i've applied or am in the process of applying. i don't dump random ideas, i come up with ideas within potentiality of the script, i ask if it's possible, if not, then i move on, if it is then i work on implementing it, that's the point. example: i think of gattling on vehicles, my next assumption, gattling possible for aircraft? what could i do with that? oh gattling can't be used for aircraft? alright, next alternative. if there's no alternatives then i scrap the idea.
Trans_C wrote:
There is no magical tag like IsYak=yes or IsYuyuko=yes in NPExt.
i'm sure you could make the tag with it's conditions if you wanted to...lol.
ps: i found a zoo structure on YR argentina stuff, so i might use that for animals instead.... the animals are not really for tactics, they're there for lulz, and they aren't completely useless... storming a base with monkeys that are actually annoying, is funny.
as for police cars and school busses, yuri could already mind control them and use them for stuff, so i just make them less yuri-nonsense.
....as for the rest of the garrison buildings and so on, they're just meant to be easter eggs and such... having more things throughout the maps that have benefits causes for more dynamic gameplay, ur moving around and making use of things instead of just storming bases. which is also applicable to real warfare, you capture locations with strategic or tactical value. you need radio cuz urs broke? you find a place with radio.
i'm aware it sounds silly on paper, but it's more just me fiddling with things. it's largely experimental, and much of it will need a big overhaul before anything even suggests developing towards public release. i mentioned in my other posts, this is more of a demo thing. a dumping ground.
All things said, the point is this: the more ideas and solutions and so on are shared, the quicker things get done. you know the whole "you rub my back, i rub yours" philosophy. even if i don't have fresh ideas yet, i dunno what ideas are fresh or not without someone telling me (and i don't plan on trying out every mod out there to find out myself what's been done). There's absolutely no reason to cause confrontation over it.
Millennium wrote:
GenesisAria, maybe try this:
Code:
[YAK]
Primary=ChainGun.stage1
; Yak's weapon firing
[ChainGun.stage1]
Damage=0
Warhead=SA
Projectile=ChainGunProj.stage1
Range=X; whatever you like, but...
ProjectileRange=X ;...these two should be identical
[ChainGunProj.stage1]
Image=NULL
Vertical=yes
DetonationAltitude=20000;tweaking this may be helpful... I've not determined yet what this actually does.
Ranged=yes
Splits=yes
Cluster=1 ; however many impacts you would like
AirburstWeapon=ChainGun.stage2
[ChainGunProj.stage2]
Image=none
Inviso=yes
Cluster=Z ; however many impacts you would like
Inaccurate=yes
i hadn't even tried fiddling with it yet, i was simply wondering if it were doable, and by what method (splitting,anim delay,airbirst, wtf ever needed to be done)... i wasn't intending for a big discussion over it although it happened XD
if i am to make an A10 do vulcan AND bombs, then i'd want a line of vulcan, but only like 2 bombs, maybe 4. not aiming for carpet bombing, a-10's don't carpet bomb... once i thought about the vulcan, someone hinted the FLH thing and brainblast i figured that out.
One issue is the sound of A-10 firing, without gattling or anything, it'll be difficult to trigger one sound and the beginning of shooting and not have it spam or anything. To get the distinct sound you'd need one single sound, and make the duration of the fire to match.
(is it possible to make airstrike call-ins that you can select and tell them to change their target? if so then the bomb solution is super easy as a secondary haha, although i dunno how ammo works with more than one weapon)i was getting a little ahead of myself on the a-10 thing... but anyways.
for now my project is compacting these factions. _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm Last edited by GenesisAria on Sat Apr 25, 2015 5:33 pm; edited 1 time in total QUICK_EDIT
Updated original post with factions and their arsenals. It may need working on for balance etc but ya.
What i'm going to do is duplicate a lot of stuff (like the buildings), so that individual faction's tech can be captured and utilized, but for now i'm just doing the lazy required/forbidden stuff. Change up a lot of initial veteran stuff with different versions of the units and so on.
So you get a better idea of what i'm actually doing, rather than just "ooh perdy, tech buildings are op!" _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 22 Nov 2010 Location: Iszkaszentgyorgy, Hungary
Posted: Sat Apr 25, 2015 8:03 pm Post subject:
Uhm, FactoryOwners are your friends. http://ares-developers.github.io/Ares-docs/new/prerequisites.html#require-factory-built-by-country _________________ "If you didn't get angry and mad and frustrated, that means you don't care about the end result, and are doing something wrong." - Greg Kroah-Hartman
=======================
Past C&C projects: Attacque Supérior (2010-2019); Valiant Shades (2019-2021)
=======================
WeiDU mods: Random Graion Tweaks | Graion's Soundsets
Maintainance: Extra Expanded Enhanced Encounters! | BGEESpawn
Contributions: EE Fixpack | Enhanced Edition Trilogy | DSotSC (Trilogy) | UB_IWD | SotSC & a lot more... QUICK_EDIT
does factory owners include buildings (counting conyard as factory)? that'll make a lot of things simpler, but i'll still be duplicating a lot of things.
i do like how they brought back queue divvying... like if something builds too fast from one factory, it kicks it off to the next. _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 22 Nov 2010 Location: Iszkaszentgyorgy, Hungary
Posted: Sat Apr 25, 2015 9:14 pm Post subject:
Yes, it does. A conyard is a building factory logicwise... _________________ "If you didn't get angry and mad and frustrated, that means you don't care about the end result, and are doing something wrong." - Greg Kroah-Hartman
=======================
Past C&C projects: Attacque Supérior (2010-2019); Valiant Shades (2019-2021)
=======================
WeiDU mods: Random Graion Tweaks | Graion's Soundsets
Maintainance: Extra Expanded Enhanced Encounters! | BGEESpawn
Contributions: EE Fixpack | Enhanced Edition Trilogy | DSotSC (Trilogy) | UB_IWD | SotSC & a lot more... QUICK_EDIT
but it does apply to if someone captures a -russian- conyard they can build things that require the -russian- house? or is that still blocked out by needing to be said faction? _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm QUICK_EDIT
You would still have to be that faction if you captured that conyard unless it was set up in such a way that each country had it's own MCV and ConYard. _________________ "Don't beg for things; Do it yourself or you'll never get anything." QUICK_EDIT
so if i put FactoryOwners=Russia on a technotype, and i'm americans, i can't get that unit/building from capturing their structures?
i noticed that Owners= does more for AI than it does for players.
then perhaps it's best to stick with forbidden logic then... so that if ur terrorists, you don't get russian stuff even if you capture a russian base . . . well, less stuff anyways.
i'd probably end up making separate barracks/pp and stuff for the separate sub-factions. _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 09 Mar 2008 Location: Osaka (JP)/Hong Kong/Germany
Posted: Sat Apr 25, 2015 11:20 pm Post subject:
No, that means:
Ares Documentation wrote:
[TechnoType]►FactoryOwners= (list of houses)
The list of countries whose factories can build this object. If empty, every country is allowed to build this object. Otherwise, players need to own at least one factory built by a country in this list or the plans of at least one of these countries to produce it.
so that means if you capture their structure, you can build all the units it provides to them. But if you build the same structure, it does not provide you with the same units. In effect, it's pretty much the same as Owner did in Tiberian Sun I think - both sides get the same ConYard, but it provided them with different PPs, and so with a different tech tree. And if you captured another side's barracks/factory, you could only ever build their units from their own factory, not from yours, even if you met the prerequisites. QUICK_EDIT
That's what happened in TS, yeah, does that mean that the factory production is per-factory as well? or has ra2 rewritten that so it still comes out of whichever has primary?
from the sounds of it the factoryowner thing imitates a duplicate building with it's own trees...
just trying to work out how i want to properly tackle separating these subfactions. _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm QUICK_EDIT
Regarding controllable airstrikes. Nope its not possible to control them. The only way to control an aircraft is via ones built from the airfield/helipad. Ones spawned by Superweapons cannot be controlled and only follow a designated mission of attacking that specific cell you clicked on. _________________ ~ Excelsior ~ QUICK_EDIT
Hmm, seems the ai exploded when i gave them my allied tech faction, (prob because of the tech center replacing battle lab) i'll let ai's have broken factions for now... or rather let it substitute with the normal battle lab.
Until i can get someone to do some ai work on this, or i get around to figuring it out.
Anyways, this mod is just about in alpha phase... actually got a mostly working prototype of the factions and stuff. _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm QUICK_EDIT
I'm kinda torn on "when" to update the AI regarding game changes, but there's obviously no harm leaving the AI ignorant of new units. Aiding you is the fact that the normal AI is pretty dumb and pretty generic, there aren't too many thing that will trip you up in it easily.
I would suggest tracing what the AI is doing with my script AICLEAN, it will write you a translated.log you can look over to see if anything looks silly or impossible, you can then remove the offending code from activating. _________________ http://www.moddb.com/mods/scorched-earth-ra2-mod-with-smart-ai QUICK_EDIT
Yeah i usually just keep the ai so i have something to shoot at other than dead buildings... use a cheap bottleneck test map where i start with all the tech structures around me anyways lol.
The AI is actually not bad just stock with ares... Like i've played C&C for quite some time and am pretty good at the newer ones, but even with the generic attack patterns if ur not on top of it it can demolish you quickly. (assuming you put on max difficulty).. i could be imagining things but the ai definitely seems more swift with ares. Also the fact that the resources actually replenish themselves properly in my basic edits... (they just kinda fall asleep when they run outa money)
I'm pretty sure i know exactly what the problem was, and should have fixed it... not gonna test again tonight though, i'm pooped and my eyes are an inferno. _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 09 Mar 2008 Location: Osaka (JP)/Hong Kong/Germany
Posted: Sun Apr 26, 2015 11:15 am Post subject:
GenesisAria wrote:
That's what happened in TS, yeah, does that mean that the factory production is per-factory as well? or has ra2 rewritten that so it still comes out of whichever has primary?
This I am not sure... it's kind of obscured further by YR having all countries in the Owner list of all buildings, and TechnoType Owners get inherited from the building that constructs them, for example:
(the old Kennel method):
You are Americans.
You have access to this structure:
You will have access to that unit and you can train it from your Barracks, even if you are not Russians and hence do not meet the Owner requirement, simply because the barracks you own has Russians in its Owner list (This was used to replicate Kennels and other split production facilities pre-Ares).
FactoryOwner limits that, ie you could define FactoryOwner=Russians on the Conscript and it would no longer be buildable to Americans.
But to me, I don't realize how the FactoryOwner feature is in any way different from just removing the incorrect Owners on all the YR buildings, ie having [GAPILE] with just Owner=Americans,British,Germans,French would - as far as I understand it - achieve the same effect as giving the Conscript the FactoryOwner=Russians,Confederation,Africans,Arabs statement.
The only differences I see:
1) that via listing all countries in the Owner of a TechnoType, that TechnoType becomes buildable from the other countries' factories, not just the factory of its "native" country. Via FactoryOwner, you could limit the factories from which a technotype can be built INDEPENDENTLY from limiting the factory that has to be owned, but Prerequisite can already do that too. Eg you could have [CONS] FactoryOwner=Russians Owner=Russians,Americans, and it would allow you to train it from both Barracks, but require you to possess a Russian Barracks, but you might as well just set Prerequisite=NAHAND for the same effect.
2) If two countries happen to have the same Factory structure, but are supposed to get different things out of it, then it is useful. Eg the Tiberian Sun ConYards.
Default YR prevents units from being accessed by other countries simply through Prerequisite and to me that seemed totally sufficient, but maybe I'm missing an important point about the FactoryOwner feature. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 22 Nov 2010 Location: Iszkaszentgyorgy, Hungary
Posted: Sun Apr 26, 2015 1:02 pm Post subject:
The original request shall answer the questions... oh btw, Millennium, the kennel method does not work in Ares (it's an NCO bug), and you have BuiltAt instead. _________________ "If you didn't get angry and mad and frustrated, that means you don't care about the end result, and are doing something wrong." - Greg Kroah-Hartman
=======================
Past C&C projects: Attacque Supérior (2010-2019); Valiant Shades (2019-2021)
=======================
WeiDU mods: Random Graion Tweaks | Graion's Soundsets
Maintainance: Extra Expanded Enhanced Encounters! | BGEESpawn
Contributions: EE Fixpack | Enhanced Edition Trilogy | DSotSC (Trilogy) | UB_IWD | SotSC & a lot more... QUICK_EDIT
Sweet, then that effect is awesome. I'm glad i made full use of FactoryOwners. I had done all my prerequisites that way, simple because it's easier
...using the regular Owners, as i said, primarily affects the ai, and often doesn't listen if you have the appropriate prerequisites (for infantry it causes NCO bug), even just having an additional list -even if it didn't work with captures- makes things just work better.
It's amazing how just a handful of fundamental changes (on Ares' part) that makes everything 9001x easier.
Edit: added a couple more units to main post, natasha,tesla vanguard, and medic.
Edit2: added a bunch of theatre specific versions of infantry
PS:crediting everything i use is gonna be crazy... i'm gonna have like a tvshow episode's amound of credits if this ever comes to release XD _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm QUICK_EDIT
Well, there was that deployable tesla trooper called tesla vanguard on yr argnetina, but i used the tesla commando with the vanguard icon. (the tesla commando icon is gross)
oh yeah, i decided to fiddle with animation damage as well.. my rift legionnaire, i added damage to the projectile animation, and damage to the impact animation, so it'll do damage by frames instead of on first hit.
which actually leads me to another question, is there a way to make animations, like, behave with damage differently? as in, when i added damage to fire, even with one damage, it hit every frame which totally obliterated anything the warhead allowed it to do a solid 1 damage to. is there a way to lower the hit rate or w/e? make it do damage less often?
i've also sorta wondered how they added sounds only to particular animations on the t-rex... _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 09 Mar 2008 Location: Osaka (JP)/Hong Kong/Germany
Posted: Sun Apr 26, 2015 9:59 pm Post subject:
I believe that is why the fire animations in TS has damage in the decimal numbers, eg .06 or so. I'm not sure if that actually works though. Maybe it's something special that only works on animations, dealing damage whenever it rolls over to a whole number. _________________
Mao Zedong wrote:
Our mission, unfinished, may take a thousand years.
Less than whole number damages don't work. if i have 1 damage and the warhead says 75%, it won't do anything.
interesting, TS does have that, Damage=.006 . . . nice. i'll have to see if it works in RA2 as well... (cuz it was kinda annoying when it decimated buildings and such)
I should consider doing the next thing as well... well, in certain cases...
The way i have it worked out is that some fires do damage to infantry only, and others do nothing. And don't last long... largely because flamer weapons ignite a fire every single time. for the same reason i stick with just the small flames as what scorch and flamer weapons cause.
...I also see how you can amass insane chains of devastation via this method lol.
i made some more changes, another easter egg unit for kicks, and fixing up stuff, trying out missiles using the smokey2 trailer instead of lines... gonna take another break. but yeah if there's any suggestions or anything as far as what i've been doing, or if someone pokes me enough i'll add screenshots for stuff...
Not sure why you not just adjust the warhead(s) to solve any problem of buildings etc dying too fast by animation damage... You may use low values of dmg or use low verses, either way no need to think so narrow.
Should actually math the equations on damage so its clearer how damage is applied, key note however... buildings often take multiple hits due to foundation size as dmg is applied per cell than an object, I'd advise using CellSpread.MaxAffect=1
by default to avoid building problems. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 09 Mar 2008 Location: Osaka (JP)/Hong Kong/Germany
Posted: Mon Apr 27, 2015 11:55 am Post subject:
The issue in his case is that he can't use lower verses because when net damage drops below 1 through verses, 0 damage is applied. But net damage of 1 is already too high.
TS did it, or tried to do it, with decimal damage on the fire animations, so that's what he's trying to do now. We're not sure if it works in RA2 (or even worked in TS). _________________
Mao Zedong wrote:
Our mission, unfinished, may take a thousand years.
Joined: 22 Nov 2010 Location: Iszkaszentgyorgy, Hungary
Posted: Mon Apr 27, 2015 12:06 pm Post subject:
Rate affects the damage application speed as well. _________________ "If you didn't get angry and mad and frustrated, that means you don't care about the end result, and are doing something wrong." - Greg Kroah-Hartman
=======================
Past C&C projects: Attacque Supérior (2010-2019); Valiant Shades (2019-2021)
=======================
WeiDU mods: Random Graion Tweaks | Graion's Soundsets
Maintainance: Extra Expanded Enhanced Encounters! | BGEESpawn
Contributions: EE Fixpack | Enhanced Edition Trilogy | DSotSC (Trilogy) | UB_IWD | SotSC & a lot more... QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 09 Mar 2008 Location: Osaka (JP)/Hong Kong/Germany
Posted: Mon Apr 27, 2015 12:20 pm Post subject:
Fire with low Rate would look very laggy and weird... maybe invisible fire animation with low Rate to deal damage, then having the visible fire in TrailerAnim with high Rate, but no damage.
(Yes, I've learned a thing or two about TrailerAnims lately)
Of course it depends just how much he'd have to tune the Rate down... maybe a small change already makes a huge difference in damage output but doesn't cause visual weirdness. _________________
Mao Zedong wrote:
Our mission, unfinished, may take a thousand years.
Well, normal rate is 900 so damage every frame..450 is damage per 2 frame delay and so on...
Anim can be trimmed to run faster to compensate rate for damage purposes or alternatively abuse a trailer 1 frame to apply dmg in given intervals, it isn't that hard to think solutions... QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 09 Mar 2008 Location: Osaka (JP)/Hong Kong/Germany
Posted: Mon Apr 27, 2015 9:44 pm Post subject:
If ParaDisk is using the same function as the [DISK], then it won't spin at all - it's an aircraft, aircraft can't have turrets, and DISK's spinning depended on it having a turret. Perhaps you can use an animated rotor though that looks like an UFO. _________________
Mao Zedong wrote:
Our mission, unfinished, may take a thousand years.
I have no idea how to do animated voxels XD
the first plane is still PDPLANE for some reason...
like the GI plane is still PDPLANE but the GGI plane is an osprey...
i haven't tested on other factions.
also i just randomly clued in, wouldn't it be easiest to make instantly suiciding units with attach effect using an anim that has damage? for example if you wanted to spawn a single infantry from a crate, have a dummy vehicle that has attach effect that deals damage and blows it up and then has a spawn infantry on a next anim... _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 09 Mar 2008 Location: Osaka (JP)/Hong Kong/Germany
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2015 12:00 am Post subject:
Next doesn't work on AE.Animations, however you can use MakeInfantry on the vehicle's Explosion animation(s) (if you give it several animations in the Explosion list and give each one a different MakeInfantry, there would even be a random factor!), or else, much simpler, just give it the Survivor tag and define your infantry there.
I'm not sure Explosions would inherit the Owner of the vehicle though, so your infantry might spawn as Neutral if you used that method. But I don't know. _________________
Mao Zedong wrote:
Our mission, unfinished, may take a thousand years.
Well th epoint was, i kept seeing people suggest like a suicide weapon that targets something random, and attacheffect with warhead seems simpler.
is there any way to make aircraft circle where they're told to move but also able to land at the airpad? or is it a one or tother type thing? _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 09 Mar 2008 Location: Osaka (JP)/Hong Kong/Germany
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2015 12:18 am Post subject:
Then yes, AE is certainly useful for that, if you want it to be instant and not triggered by being powered or something.
Aircraft is AFAIK one or the other, it works via SlowdownDistance, which applies to all Move orders, no matter if to Dock or to terrain. Maybe someone else will know more about this though. _________________
Mao Zedong wrote:
Our mission, unfinished, may take a thousand years.
Yeah i know how to make it behave like RA3 aircraft, but it never ever lands.... now this would be a nice thing if i wanted air units with unlimited ammo (or self-reloading ammo) to fly like planes . . . but ya.
Another thing i don't know, justa simple thing... when using trailer anims, what defines how often it "puffs"? _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm QUICK_EDIT
Rate did the trick... also something i did made the planes land on the airfield without turning lol . . .
Edit: man people really underestimate the ability to have high quality sound in this game, i got a load of 48kHz 16-bit LPCM's (from RA3, just mono-afied) in there and they all work fine.... only for stuff in mixes, aka music stuff, do i need to use IMA ADPCM, but i can still use 44.1kHz, and can still be stereo.
the 20.5kHz thing is a joke (and sounds like ass).
I gotta find me a bigger cargo plane... found me a bigger plane, pretty sure it was mig eater's make...
does anyone have a destroyer, like the stock game one, except with a turret?
yeah for allied forces, i'm thinking i'll probably completely scrap the weather controller, and just load up on airstrikes and stuff... a-10's, raptors, maybe c130's (iono how/if the orbit firing works but worth a look...), predator drone could maybe do something....
i'm also thinking i might make spysat something more difficult to obtain..., or limit it to neutral structures only... i find it more enjoyable actually when i don't see everything for free....
i also wanna get my hands on an actual flak turret and something to replace the flaktrack...
i'm already finding some things i could potentially use as japanese units lol
but i really need buildings or at least have an idea of which direction i wanna go so i can make other stuff in the meantime....
soon on my list is a mobile war factory for legion of terror...
i also should try and find that shp for the fancier looking allied war factory (the one with the dark curved semi-archways), to use for allied tech div...
oh yeah an annoying issue i come across a lot, is when the props or whatever animated things on a voxel cast the shadow instead of the main body, is there a fix?
sorta big question: i read that that mooman's terrain was okay to use as long as it was credited to mooman, but where do i get it? lol
(there's so many dead links to things around) _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm Last edited by GenesisAria on Tue Apr 28, 2015 10:51 am; edited 1 time in total QUICK_EDIT
does anyone have a destroyer, like the stock game one, except with a turret?
Not recomended, if you want the same Allied Destroyer.
The turret will some times fire trough the Destroyer itself and it will not look cool. Especialy for the crew. : (
GenesisAria wrote:
yeah for allied forces, i'm thinking i'll probably completely scrap the weather controller,
and just load up on airstrikes and stuff... a-10's, raptors, maybe c130's (iono how/if the orbit firing works but worth a look...), predator drone could maybe do something....
How about an Ion Cannon? Maybe Ballistic Missile Strike? Maybe the RA3 Time Bomb? Different Superweapons. : )
GenesisAria wrote:
i'm also thinking i might make spysat something more difficult to obtain..., or limit it to neutral structures only...
i find it more enjoyable actually when i don't see everything for free....
Sounds like a good idea, just make some recoloring to the building and place the Tech Flag on it. : )
GenesisAria wrote:
i also wanna get my hands on an actual flak turret and something to replace the flaktrack...
What I would do with the Flak Cannon is place a guy on a chair on the right side of the turret (voxel guy).
On the FlakTrack you could just make it Flak Car, or BTR with AA Autocannon. No need for it to attack ground.
You could make it opentopped to compensate for it. Or give the MBTs a machine gun that will deal with infantry instead of making a third unit that kills infantry only.
GenesisAria wrote:
oh yeah an annoying issue i come across a lot, is when the props or whatever animated things
on a voxel cast the shadow instead of the main body, is there a fix?
Go to artmd.ini and find your voxel unit.
[ExampleUnitName]
bla bla bla=yes
ala-bala=yes
ShadowIndex=3 ;indicates which voxel section to use for the shadow
DisableVoxelCache=yes ;not sure what it does, check ModEnc
DisableShadowCache=yes ;not sure what it does, check ModEnc
Not recomended, if you want the same Allied Destroyer.
The turret will some times fire trough the Destroyer itself and it will not look cool. Especialy for the crew. : (
i had a turreted one ages ago and it wasn't too bad... but oh well. (the ra1 destroyer had a turret)
PillBox20 wrote:
How about an Ion Cannon? Maybe Ballistic Missile Strike? Maybe the RA3 Time Bomb? Different Superweapons. : )
The forces faction is not a tech faction, they're literally meant to be army/airforce/navy... whilst the tech division has all the prism and chrono stuff.
PillBox20 wrote:
Sounds like a good idea, just make some recoloring to the building and place the Tech Flag on it. : )
the garrisonable communications building is already a spysat when you're inside it heh.
PillBox20 wrote:
On the FlakTrack you could just make it Flak Car, or BTR with AA Autocannon. No need for it to attack ground.
You could make it opentopped to compensate for it. Or give the MBTs a machine gun that will deal with infantry instead of making a third unit that kills infantry only.
as far as the flak goes i'm kinda hoping for something with a barrelled turret so i actually aims at what it's shooting at... (the normal flak cannon is huge enough to be a hefty artillery lol) . . . or perhaps a quad cannon would work...
edit3: i found a mobile sam truck, but i'm still thinking i want sovs to have some kind of btr or apc
edit4: no dice, turned out that sam truck was too big, unless someone can tell me how to downscale voxels... still need a new AA turret for sov though
edit5: i found some nice btr's by andrewmarley, i'll just have to see how much they contrast with the base game's voxels... if they're good there's an aa one in here too.
and the japan faction that i hope to make will be either even more high tech, or supernatural or hybrid of the 2... so saving the toys like railguns for them...
i'm wanting to knock each faction down to a play style instead of loading to much into them... like 2 superweapons was unnecessary... hence why i'm doing one faction with iron curtain, one faction with missile silo (only because it suits their splodey kamakaze nature), chronosphere (the most op sw of them all) and lightning storm is meh .... and we don't need to talk about psychic dominator... the terror faction's dominant unit will be ivans lol. when they got a bit of range thye're uber useful (better than stupid terrorists).
ps: i added a few pics to the main post. all of the bases i made ingame, no map staging. i literally used a map i called gm_flatgrass lol.
i'll be replacing the allied tech division's WF, and giving the legion of terror a packable/unpackable WF, so it'll be completely mobile.
when i get more done i'll stage screenshots with superweapons heh.
edit: oh yeah i take back what i said before about rate working for trailers... there's still more than a whole puff diameter between each puff... i tried copying the stat from a fireball (uses pulseball script) which had a v3trail and it worked well, but maybe it's because the normal patriot and ggi missiles etc are moving too fast... so what's TrailerSeperation? edit: i tried yoloing numbers in ther,e like 50 and 10, and nothing happened
edit: that shadow index thing doesn't work on turrets :< it causes crash. UseTurretShadow=yes only works on shp's... qq
edit2: updated original page, photoshopped screenshots with new War Factories. Legion WF is repackable.[/s] _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 09 Mar 2008 Location: Osaka (JP)/Hong Kong/Germany
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2015 10:34 pm Post subject:
GenesisAria wrote:
edit4: no dice, turned out that sam truck was too big, unless someone can tell me how to downscale voxels... still need a new AA turret for sov though
This is very easy, there is a Scale option in Voxel Editor which edits the voxel header, so you can just leave the voxel as-is and set it to a smaller scale. No other edits to the file are needed. QUICK_EDIT
No wonder i didn't find it, it was hidden in the file menu under properties under tab names i woudlnt expect them to be... I looked everywhere but there. Only found that upscale thing.
Well the numbers i don't get, the scale didn't do what i want it to do, but now i know how to do it (mess with the numbers)
for some reason 0.5 is bigger than 0.8xxxxx lol i don't even know.
-Edit-
Well, i totally clued into how long i've been procrastinating something i really want to do...
I was re-reading the Negima manga a while back but took a break at an arc end to catch up on shows for the next season, but then i randomly found the inclination to start modding RA2, and i just kept going lol.
The only thing i love more than the negima manga is my own story i'm writing, and when i get to the good parts i'm in it till it's done...
With that said i'm going to be taking a break from this, prob a couple weeks or so, just until i finish re-reading the manga, then i'll make sure i get myself to come back to doing this.
(nothing worse than that half-assing where you set something down and never manage to get back to it haha) _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 09 Mar 2008 Location: Osaka (JP)/Hong Kong/Germany
Posted: Thu Apr 30, 2015 3:47 pm Post subject:
Not a problem, I keep going back and forth between working on my particular mod, and not modding at all for months, since at least 2007 or so. _________________
Mao Zedong wrote:
Our mission, unfinished, may take a thousand years.
The Flak Cannon was a Allied Defense early on in development. Everybody probably remembers that Screenshot of Flak Cannons defending the Statue of Liberty as well.
The Flak Cannon had alot of things hinting it was a Allied Defense too. From the unused Flak Turret in the files. The Overall design looking very similar to the Grand Cannon. Those Large Yellow Rivets and the bluish-black it used.
To Downscale Voxels just open it in HVA Building and use the Transform Option. The 3 numbers that are usually 1 and form a diagonal down lets you control how big they should be. Generally its used to shrink voxels by deducting the amount in increments. (I.E: 1 = .95) _________________ ~ Excelsior ~ QUICK_EDIT
hoho, maybe i should consider changing that around... a quick boo on wikipedia shows that sovs hardly used flak if at all. they had regular guns and missiles.... that also leaves the question "what about the flak trooper?" maybe i'll just leave him as is.
when i get back to modding this i think i'm going to be scrapping yuri pretty quick, giving a handful of assets to sovs and then leaving it as an npc faction and hole for whenever japan comes around.
at that point i'm unsure if i'll want to be re-purposing yuri into japan, or simply building japan on top and leaving yuri for the campaigns (which will be a bit messy anyways)...
i see that in view transform in hva builder, but i don't get these numbers at all... in vxlseIII there is a "scales" under misc in voxel properties... but when i set it to 0.5 it was bigger than original size, even though the original number was 0.8xxxxxxx something.... there's no explanation really as to what these numbers represent. _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 09 Mar 2008 Location: Osaka (JP)/Hong Kong/Germany
Posted: Fri May 01, 2015 4:18 pm Post subject:
Maybe you could take some inspiration from Red Alert 1, where the Soviets had SAM launchers and the Allies had anti-aircraft guns, which were presumably autocannons, in a dual mount. Pretty accurate for late 40s/early 50s technology, especially if the push of SAM technology by the Nazis did not happen.
If you want it to be realistic and modern, all sides would probably use SAMs, except in close-in protection systems.
The more general question to ask if you are wondering about Who-used-What would be what "flak" even is. I'm sure you know where the abbreviation comes from and the guns historically used by the Germans for air-defense were high-velocity guns firing fragmentation or shrapnel shells. The high velocity was necessary to get to the altitude of bomber aircraft in reasonable time and the use of fragmentation or shrapnel was a necessity (and still continues to be so for anti-aircraft missile systems) because airplanes are fast-moving and the guns would have terrible accuracy problems against them. So, by using fragmentation, a larger "killzone" could be generated around each projectile, as opposed to the pin-point impact of an AP shell or even the blast area of a purely explosive shell. At least armor penetration was (and continues to be) of little concern for anti-aircraft weapons, because aircraft for the most part was unarmored and shrapnel from a nearby explosion would have no problem tearing through hulls and fuselage.
I'm not sure if these shells were timed-fuse or proxy-fuse, but given the technology of the time, I believe they must have been timed, which means the timer would have to be set depending on the projectile velocity of the gun, and the altitude of the aircraft. Of course, fuses do not really have a bearing on gameplay or code in RA2, so this is more like just something of a side note.
Anyway, I believe this is what the flak-type weapons in RA2 represent - a gun firing shrapnel shells into the sky in an effort to saturate it with blast zones, with no real effort to attain accuracy on the targets themselves (which would be easy enough in the RA2 engine and not limited by any of the considerations of real life).
Now for the question if the Allies (which includes the Soviets in our timeline!) in ww2 used anything like that - technology-wise, they probably did, I'm not sure actually. But it's really not high technology, I doubt they would not have been able to use it - although some Axis designs were clearly very advanced, the basic principle of high-vel gun/frag shell must have been known to all sides of the war.
However, as to quantity, I believe the Allies (and Soviets) were never in the situation that would make it necessary to field large numbers of high-altitude anti-aircraft guns. The only side of the war with a considerable fleet of strategic bombers were the western Allies (USA and UK). Although the German airforce clearly presented a threat on a tactical level, there was never a great need (apart from a brief period in 1941, the so-called "Battle for England") to defend against aerial attacks on settlements and infrastructure. Tactically, the Allies would have probably used autocannons (such as the famous Bofors 40mm) and even heavy machine guns to defend against Axis aircraft. That means, by sheer volume, Axis anti-aircraft systems of the type I described above and from which the term "flak" originates, must have far outweighed Allied systems of the same kind. That is not to say that the Germans did not also use autocannons in an anti-aircraft role (see the "Kugelblitz" and "Ostwind" flak tanks), but proportional to the amount of anti-aircraft weapons deployed in total, these weapons must have been much more important for the Allies.
Autocannons (which I assume the AA Turret of Red Alert 1 has) function differently from the big "flak" guns. Although there is some overlap in that fragmenting projectiles may have been developed (I'm not sure), and muzzle velocity is still important, the autocannon attempts to fill an area of airspace with as much volume of bullets as possible to create its "killzone". That is why so many rapid-fire weapons are put in double or quadruple mounts when used as anti-aircraft weapons - by increasing the amount of barrels directed at a certain area, it increases the sheer volume of bullets. The bullets themselves would be fairly conventional, although autocannon shells could be AP (armor-piercing) or API (armor-piercing, incendiary). I'm not sure actually about the ammunition technology of WW2 HMG and autocannon, but if you look at the Bofors 40mm, you might get a good idea.
While autocannons clearly excel in the close-range defense (and are still used in that role, see the "Phalanx CIWS"), they lack the range of the larger, more slow-firing "Flak" guns with their longer barrels. An autocannon could hope to defend against tactical aircraft (think of a Pearl Harbour situation), but against strategic bombers, flying several kilometers high, they would probably have been very useless. By the time of Red Alert 1, the Soviet Union uses jet aircraft with standoff missiles. Warding off the Hinds and Yaks with autocannons is realistic, but the AA Turret being able to hit the Mig - not so much, I think. But I'm no Military Aviation buff and not sure how deep a Mig has to dive to gain solid accuracy with its missiles (especially in the 50's). If footage from the Iraq war etc is any help, even modern jet aircraft do seem to be flying pretty low sometimes when attacking, so using autocannon as AA defense might not be TOO much out of place even vs modern aircraft.
And on the next episode: Lasers and missiles, oh my!
Tbh, I think MigEater will probably know more about Who-used-What, if you want to go for historical consistency, you might want to ask him.
tl/dr: RA2's Flak is clearly German, replace with autocannon and SAMs
A more realistic take on the Flak Trooper (for the Soviets) would be a guy with a portable anti-aircraft missile (see Rise of the Reds, a mod for Gen/ZH, which has the... Strela Conscript? I believe? in that function). _________________
Mao Zedong wrote:
Our mission, unfinished, may take a thousand years.
Maybe you could take some inspiration from Red Alert 1, where the Soviets had SAM launchers and the Allies had anti-aircraft guns, which were presumably autocannons, in a dual mount. Pretty accurate for late 40s/early 50s technology, especially if the push of SAM technology by the Nazis did not happen.
the allied AA guns had auto-fire, but it's heavier duty rounds. Better than like a chaingun, but not quite as heavy as cannon shots. At times have explosive rounds? Think of quad cannon and slingshot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M45_Quadmount?
Ps: i'm familiar with the bofors (because of AC-130's)
Millennium wrote:
If you want it to be realistic and modern, all sides would probably use SAMs, except in close-in protection systems.
flak was effective because there was a universal cruising altitude that was ideal for bombing etc that they could set their flak to blow at.
Millennium wrote:
Anyway, I believe this is what the flak-type weapons in RA2 represent - a gun firing shrapnel shells into the sky in an effort to saturate it with blast zones, with no real effort to attain accuracy on the targets themselves (which would be easy enough in the RA2 engine and not limited by any of the considerations of real life).
well the purpose of flak was indeed to just create a wall of death to take out whatever tried to fly through it... it was used on carriers and stuff as well i believe, and has been re-demonstrated well in things like battlestar gallactica.
Millennium wrote:
However, as to quantity, I believe the Allies (and Soviets) were never in the situation that would make it necessary to field large numbers of high-altitude anti-aircraft guns.
well in the case of the Battle of Los Angeles (just an incident i'm familiar with) it's clear that they were pounding an asston of AA into whatever that was in the sky, though i'm not sure how much of it was flak, vs conventional rounds, but it's clear that there was a lot of AA to go around.
Millennium wrote:
Warding off the Hinds and Yaks with autocannons is realistic, but the AA Turret being able to hit the Mig - not so much, I think. But I'm no Military Aviation buff and not sure how deep a Mig has to dive to gain solid accuracy with its missiles (especially in the 50's). If footage from the Iraq war etc is any help, even modern jet aircraft do seem to be flying pretty low sometimes when attacking, so using autocannon as AA defense might not be TOO much out of place even vs modern aircraft.
maybe sams as longer range, and flak as short range AA... i don't think i'll go too crazy with aa though, i'll stick with just the 1 aa weap per faction unless i start making more aircraft...
Millennium wrote:
And on the next episode: Lasers and missiles, oh my!
not prepared for AA lasers yet haha. (although the armour types already exist, i could make anti-ballistic missile lasers, we'll see.) I intend for japan faction, if not supernatural, to be sufficiently advanced in comparison to the others, so they would be more likely to have AA railguns or laser... (i already have the stock railgun look working how i wish it to, but i still can't get the building impact logic to work with gattling, having 2 weapons follow eachother only a frame or 2 apart won't work, it only fires one of them)
Millennium wrote:
tl/dr: RA2's Flak is clearly German, replace with autocannon and SAMs
allies includes germany in ra2... (think tank destroyer "deutscheland's finest") the intention was to change with aa guns or sams anyways, flak is more about the munitions than the actual weapons. i was sorta referring to a replacement weapon for flak. and like i've said, the stock flak guns look like substantially big artillery lol. (which i may very well end up making those particular turrets into, arty emplacements)
Millennium wrote:
A more realistic take on the Flak Trooper (for the Soviets) would be a guy with a portable anti-aircraft missile (see Rise of the Reds, a mod for Gen/ZH, which has the... Strela Conscript? I believe? in that function).
he's got the same looking weapon as GGI, but the issue is the voices.
i definitely do plan to work barrels into aa weapons though, could probably do it with dummy turrets and just rename turret as barl (iono how well it aims at air, it might need to be designed to face horizontal to face air properly)
i'm definitely not going for super historical realism here (clearly), but just giving a little realist spirit is always good.
that said i am learning a fair bit about world war era arsenal that i wasn't familiar with before taking on modding lol. _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 09 Mar 2008 Location: Osaka (JP)/Hong Kong/Germany
Posted: Sat May 02, 2015 12:06 am Post subject:
GenesisAria wrote:
Millennium wrote:
However, as to quantity, I believe the Allies (and Soviets) were never in the situation that would make it necessary to field large numbers of high-altitude anti-aircraft guns.
well in the case of the Battle of Los Angeles (just an incident i'm familiar with) it's clear that they were pounding an asston of AA into whatever that was in the sky, though i'm not sure how much of it was flak, vs conventional rounds, but it's clear that there was a lot of AA to go around.
I'm not familiar with the air-defense systems stationed in the LA area during the 1940s (imagine me like Gandalf in that one LotR scene where he's in the Gondor library, turning all those ancient tomes), but given that damage was caused by shells falling back to the ground, I think it's reasonable to say that these were not time-fused, so not optimized for anti-air combat. However, very few non-dedicated anti-aircraft weapons are useful for attacking high-altitude aircraft, so probably those were infact shrapnel shells. It is not necessarily a "flak" just because of the ammunition used - any gun dedicated to anti-aircraft purposes is a "flak", it's just that these guns do not make alot of sense for aa roles when loaded with anything else than proxy- or time-fused fragmentation shells. So the term "flak" stuck with the explosion and fragments too, but the term itself denotes the weapon, no matter what you load into it (like the famous 88mm FlaK, which ended up loaded with AP shells in an anti-tank duty and turned out to be terrifyingly effective in that role).
Quote:
Millennium wrote:
tl/dr: RA2's Flak is clearly German, replace with autocannon and SAMs
allies includes germany in ra2... (think tank destroyer "deutscheland's finest") the intention was to change with aa guns or sams anyways, flak is more about the munitions than the actual weapons. i was sorta referring to a replacement weapon for flak. and like i've said, the stock flak guns look like substantially big artillery lol. (which i may very well end up making those particular turrets into, arty emplacements)
I think that's a better idea... with SAMs being prolific in the Allied faction, even if Germany is part of it, they would not use WW2-era ordnance against aircraft.... I should've said "RA2's Flak is clearly WW2-era German". It's just not consistent with the general tech level of the RA2 premise. QUICK_EDIT
i can manage the flak trooper, and the flak track i was gonna ditch anyways, but the bigger issue is, what do i replace the sea scorpion with? . . . and for a soviet AA-gun i need an shp or voxel for one lol. (i guess i wouldn't complain if i had to recolour something, but definitely not allowed to be ugly haha) i did do a fair bit of searching... _________________ ????????MyAnimeList my Last.fm QUICK_EDIT
As I said before, in my mod, the allied guns and ordinance in general is more powerful than the soviet equivalents, they are also more accurate. The balance to this is soviet armor is heavier, they have tougher units in general, with a few special units matching or exceeding the allied equivalent in firepower only.
A good example is my Ranger, it lobs shrapnel mortars at things, great against infantry, but has poor armor, worse than the IFV, which is a light tank chassis. The IFV also has more firepower in its rockets than the original, and like the Ranger has more bite than defense.
There is no basic anti-personnel vehicle common to all the soviets, Cuba has the Gattling tank (based on the Light tank), Arabs get the Chemical tank, while Lybia has the Desolator for that role. Although Russia has nothing to fill that gap, Tesla troopers or tanks are pretty effective already, so really just comes down to changing tactics.
After WW2 the allies had taken a lot of the rocketry designs and kept playing with it, so if we draw a parallel in the RA2 universe, it only makes sense that things get muddled along the way doesn't it?
During WW2 no one side specialised in specific anti-aircaft weapons more then another, they all used a wide variety of weapons ranging from 7mm to 150mm.
The German 88mm Flak36 is probably the most famous AA weapon of WW2 but the Americans had the M2 90mm, the British QF 94mm & the soviets the 85mm 52-K. All of them were very similar & performed the same role, they were also all modified to be used as tank guns.
The true king of flak is the 40mm Bofors tho, which was used by every major combatant during WW2 & has continued to be the main AA weapon of many countries around the world to this day. So if you want to make a new flak gun you cant go wrong with the Bofors.
Post-WW2 both the Allies & Soviets designed SAM systems to replace their heavy flak weapons. The Soviet SAMs are generally more well known tho because of their success at shooting down U-2 spy planes during the cold war. _________________
Joined: 09 Mar 2008 Location: Osaka (JP)/Hong Kong/Germany
Posted: Sat May 02, 2015 10:15 am Post subject:
^ There ya have it.
Mig Eater wrote:
During WW2 no one side specialised in specific anti-aircaft weapons more then another, they all used a wide variety of weapons ranging from 7mm to 150mm.
This surprised me though - if there was not even a proportional specialization, that would mean all of the US would have been plastered with high-altitude anti-aircraft guns that would
a) never see any use
b) get replaced with missile-based defenses just a few years later
What a waste of resources!
As for the Sea Scorpion, I think a light sea raider unit like that isn't really "Soviet". For comparison, in my mod, the Soviets have an icebreaker and a whaler as vessels. I think big, heavy ships are the way to go for the Soviets - maybe you can give the Dreadnought an anti-aircraft capability and make it a more generic "missile cruiser" (missile cruisers are a primarily Soviet/Russian class of warship, and the Dreadnought is a close proxy). With some clever editing, you could make a decent illusion of the Dreadnought firing the same kinds of missiles vs both air and ground targets. Anyway, change the name! Dreadnoughts are 1920ish British ships, not 70's soviet missile cruisers. _________________
Mao Zedong wrote:
Our mission, unfinished, may take a thousand years.
You cannot 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
