Nighthawk
24.07.2010, 02:17:51
For fight one:
Given that I'm the original submitter of #564, it's probably fairly obvious which one I'll go for, but anyway.
Campaigns are somewhat hindered by this limitation. Say you wanted to have a mission as the Allies, followed by a mission as the Soviets, or even some custom side of your own. Well, in the current game, that can't be done. The side must remain the same for all missions in that campaign. Given that campaigns are meant to put across the story of a mod, it basically limits the modder in how they're allowed to do that. However, as Blade has already mentioned, fully switching sides between missions isn't a complete necessity - instead, the logic can be emulated by simply allowing the new sides/countries flags to be read from map INI sections, thus making it appear to the player that the side has changed.
As for the second issue, I'm not sure I see the benefits of it. Easter eggs are fun and all that, but I find it hard to think of any reasons why an easter egg feature that will probably go very under-utilised should win out over a campaign-breaking bug. How many people made use of the THETEAM thing when it was around in TS? Personally, I only ever used it once to see what it was, then never touched it again, nor even considered incorporating it into a mod. If people want to make strange additions, why not just use a game mode? Does it just not have the same dramatic effect?
As you can probably tell, my stance is support #564, kill #265.
As for fight two:
The first issue sounds quite interesting - building pre-loaded transports could be quite handy for those mods that rely heavily on infantry usage. Additionally, it would have some added benefits when combined with the Operator logic. However, are Taskforces really the best method of implementing it?
As for the second issue, this basically sounds like a more limited version of the FreeUnit expansion in the other DFD... and yet it also sounds like basically things like V3 rocket ammo should be purchasable from the sidebar? I can maybe see some uses for it, but it's a bit of a roundabout method. This sounds very Generals-inspired, but people keep forgetting that, unlike Generals, YR lacks the contextual command bar that Generals throws at you. Where would this rocket ammo go? Coding-wise, they're AircraftTypes, thus would be in the Vehicles tab, but wouldn't that look a bit out of place?
Given that the FreeUnit logic expansion could cover the same as the second issue, and more, and that I prefer the idea of the first issue, my stance is support #732, kill #331.
Given that I'm the original submitter of #564, it's probably fairly obvious which one I'll go for, but anyway.
Campaigns are somewhat hindered by this limitation. Say you wanted to have a mission as the Allies, followed by a mission as the Soviets, or even some custom side of your own. Well, in the current game, that can't be done. The side must remain the same for all missions in that campaign. Given that campaigns are meant to put across the story of a mod, it basically limits the modder in how they're allowed to do that. However, as Blade has already mentioned, fully switching sides between missions isn't a complete necessity - instead, the logic can be emulated by simply allowing the new sides/countries flags to be read from map INI sections, thus making it appear to the player that the side has changed.
As for the second issue, I'm not sure I see the benefits of it. Easter eggs are fun and all that, but I find it hard to think of any reasons why an easter egg feature that will probably go very under-utilised should win out over a campaign-breaking bug. How many people made use of the THETEAM thing when it was around in TS? Personally, I only ever used it once to see what it was, then never touched it again, nor even considered incorporating it into a mod. If people want to make strange additions, why not just use a game mode? Does it just not have the same dramatic effect?
As you can probably tell, my stance is support #564, kill #265.
As for fight two:
The first issue sounds quite interesting - building pre-loaded transports could be quite handy for those mods that rely heavily on infantry usage. Additionally, it would have some added benefits when combined with the Operator logic. However, are Taskforces really the best method of implementing it?
As for the second issue, this basically sounds like a more limited version of the FreeUnit expansion in the other DFD... and yet it also sounds like basically things like V3 rocket ammo should be purchasable from the sidebar? I can maybe see some uses for it, but it's a bit of a roundabout method. This sounds very Generals-inspired, but people keep forgetting that, unlike Generals, YR lacks the contextual command bar that Generals throws at you. Where would this rocket ammo go? Coding-wise, they're AircraftTypes, thus would be in the Vehicles tab, but wouldn't that look a bit out of place?
Given that the FreeUnit logic expansion could cover the same as the second issue, and more, and that I prefer the idea of the first issue, my stance is support #732, kill #331.
Ares Project Manager.
![[Image: t3wbanner.png]](http://thirdwar.cncguild.net/images/t3wbanner.png)
![[Image: cncgsigsb_sml.png]](http://nighthawk.cncguild.net/things/cncgsigsb_sml.png)
Open Ares positions: Documentation Maintainer, Active Testers.
PM if interested.
Open Ares positions: Documentation Maintainer, Active Testers.
PM if interested.