Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602
#7
Fight 1

Issue 1 has a few clarity issues here.

Issue 1: The reporter for this issues is asking to have tags to control the inaccuracy of a weapon. Which has its uses, just not enough uses, inaccurate=yes seems to be fine in making weapons inaccurate to the correct degree. It seems to be based on the cruiser's (from RA1) inaccuracy, range and inaccuracy seems to be directly related, though this is from what I can remember about the MO battleship.

Issue 2: Now this is asking for warheads to define how EVERYTHING dies. This can be used to make a cellspread temporal effect, or Tesla blast out of tank when dead, or a frozen tank shatter. So it has a few uses, and more than issue 1 in my opinion. However, it does need to include a tag to control the overwriting dead weapons, so your demo truck will still explode at a electric jolt but not when erased from time by a chrono missile.

Support: [0000392] DestroyAnim / Explosion / DebrisAnims Override
Kill: [0000914] it will be ok to add a coeficient of accuarcy as default to the unit type and also an option to change it for a specific unit


Fight 2

Issue 1: Now the super stealth generator idea is crazy, the thing that makes it crazy is LAG. Stealth generators are limited to a small radius in mods because the game wasn't build to have stealth generators, and thus has little support for them. Thus, the idea of increasing the radius with this logic seems useless, it would only be a small amount and a waste of time. Modders just wouldn't have any need for it.

Issue 2: Issue 2 has a lot more value however, it allows vehicles to use the same recoil logic of the Grand Cannon.

Support: [0000602] TurretDecompressFramesOn Tanks!
Kill: [0000283] Allow upgradable cloaking towers like gap generators
[Image: darkstormsmall.png]


Messages In This Thread
DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by AlexB - 17.07.2010, 19:04:28
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by MRMIdAS - 17.07.2010, 22:01:23
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by reaperrr - 17.07.2010, 22:25:51
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by Beowulf - 17.07.2010, 23:39:13
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by Darkstorm - 18.07.2010, 00:47:03
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by reaperrr - 18.07.2010, 02:57:04
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by WoRmINaToR - 18.07.2010, 22:34:56
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by reaperrr - 18.07.2010, 23:47:42
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by WoRmINaToR - 19.07.2010, 17:23:49
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by WoRmINaToR - 19.07.2010, 18:46:24
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by WoRmINaToR - 19.07.2010, 20:00:40
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by AlexB - 22.07.2010, 06:43:53
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by DCoder - 22.07.2010, 11:02:25
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by Renegade - 22.07.2010, 22:41:45
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by DCoder - 26.07.2010, 20:34:31
RE: DFD: 914 vs. 392, 283 vs. 602 - by Renegade - 27.07.2010, 02:38:06



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)