+- Renegade Projects Network Forums (https://forums.renegadeprojects.com)
+-- Forum: Modding (https://forums.renegadeprojects.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Red Alert 2 & Yuri's Revenge Editing (https://forums.renegadeprojects.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: Proposed development of YR 1.002 Community Patch (/showthread.php?tid=20)
- Guest - 20.02.2005
turkish eill be hard
?ll?m d?r?m d?m d?m
- CannisRabidus - 21.02.2005
Marshall;date=Feb 20 2005, 09:58 AM Wrote:FakeC4? I'm guessing that FakeC4 can destroy the flag whereas true C4 can't. In my opinion (and indeed, in my mod), true C4 should be able to destroy the flag. After all, if it's a critical structure it's your own silly fault if you don't build a wall around it or provide sufficient defense to stop a few infantry.Instant kill on the flag is cheap IMO. Chrono Commandos win the game every time. C-Commandos + Chronosphere is unstoppable.
I don't see how we can stop FakeC4 destroying the flag without using a different armor type. I would suggest allowing true C4 to destroy the flag.
Note that the Assault mode will only be enabled when running the YRCP launcher, or another mod that supports it. As such, it's up to the modder. All we're deciding here is the 'unmodded YR version of Assault mode'.
Quote:Regarding the Assault flag imagery, I'd like to include the generic flag shps that (I believe) you made, so that anyone wanting to support Assault mode can use that imagery (they can still make their own if they'd prefer). Is this okay?They're not 'generic'. They're CR Assault flags. I'll release them after 1.8 is out (and when PixelOps is being updated again).
Quote:Land Rush. My point is, does Yuri get dogs or not? I think he might still get dogs. If he doesn't, then maybe he should get [YDOG]s?Then he can train dogs all the time.
See, this is the thing here, and it applies to Assault too. My impression of the YRCP is that it's supposed to be a patch, which fixes problems and restores what should have been in the game. With these 2 items, it's turning into a mod.
- Marshall - 21.02.2005
Okay, you want C4 not to work on the Flag, that's fine, but I can't see how to stop FakeC4.
Regarding the flag imagery, I meant "generic flag" not "generic shp", sorry for the confusion. I will attempt to find or make a public domain shp for the YRCP to use.
Regarding Yuri in Land Rush I simply meant the starting units.
I didn't think the game would let you have no starting units if 'starting units number was greater than 0'.
I'm simply trying to ascertain if there's any bugs that need fixing.
If Yuri isn't supposed to get any infantry at the start of Land Rush, then no infantry he shall have.
I certainly have no intention of turning the YRCP into a mod.
I don't think including Assault mode should be considered a mod as such. I'm sure there are people who would like to see Assault mode in unmodded YR and for those that don't then they don't have to use it.
But it's your baby Cannis, if you tell me not to include Assault mode in the YRCP then I won't.
- Blade - 21.02.2005
Marshall;date=Feb 20 2005, 01:53 PM Wrote:@Blade, I see you're right of course. Very well, I shall include your fixed bio reactor shps (but note that your ygpowr_a.shp is clearly using the arctic shadow. I have fixed this and will include it in the YRCP).
Regarding the Weather Controller - great! can you fix it?
I still need to check out the polish flag loop blip.
But once that's done, the TX should no longer need to include any shps (if you still want to include them in the TX, could you at least replace ygpowr_a.shp with my fixed one?)
Regarding the animated gap gen, it's not really a bug so I don't think it should be forced upon the user. I suppose it could be included as a resource that modders could make use of (provided we had the author's permission) however, it would essentially be providing it with the YRCP instead of with the mods that want to use it. If someone never plays a mod that uses it then they didn't need the resource.
Similarly, I love your new yuri sidebar and I plan to include it in my mod, but not the YRCP, given it's filesize.
If PixelOps or some other central-resource-site gets picked up then such resources should be made available there.
Finally, Blade, what's the score ragarding that TX ini idea I had several posts again?
[right][snapback]515[/snapback][/right]
Did I miss something, when did this patch go from considering including the entire TX to being some ultra minimalistic update? If we are not going to put in some extra eye candy to at least make use of the modded exe, what would be the point of including it at all? I would think a unique UI for Yuri would be one of the first things to be considered for the patch for example and the animated Gap generator would again be something in that vein. I was also going to suggest adding all the new turrets me and cannis worked on and using some of them that don't need adjustments to the actual weapon behaviour itself. Yeah, lets fix some bugs, but lets also add a little bit more variety into the YR experience as a value added feature of the patch. I appreciate many people are still on dialup (particularly in more rural areas or less developed nations), but I'm sure they will be willing to suffer a few more minutes of downloading for an enhanced experience out of the box that will automatically work with everyone else who uses the patch.
As for the TX .ini idea, I don't really have the means to test it and I've never experienced a reconnect error when using the TX against non-TX people myself. I believe you can add the .ini files without any adverse effects so long as no one tries to use a TX map without the art assests themselves. I do think that a few of the TX tiles should be included as standard in the patch too, such as the NewUrban paved road ramp that has the wrong slope facing set on it so units lean the wrong way as they use it.
- DCoder - 21.02.2005
Renegade;date=Feb 20 2005, 08:56 PM Wrote:...which is why we can add ?s, ?s and ?s without a problem
(ph33r the ?g?iskreuzer)
Renegade;date=Feb 20 2005, 08:56 PM Wrote:So, both Big Jah and DCoder: Can you give a definite statement of what the Russian patches are?
- Are they mods?
- Are they real, official patches?
- Are they modified (cracked) official patches?
- Or are they patches like our CP?
D talked about cracked .exes and Big Jah about bad cameos, so I'm sure it's not official, but a clear statement what they really are would help us plan
[right][snapback]521[/snapback][/right]
They're just localized versions. The amount of work put into localizing all the game, incl all the cameos, CSF, audio, taunts, movies, etc. is enormous. But the russians localize every game they can get their hands on... There's even a saying - "A drunk Russian hacker cannot be stopped".
But it's definitely not official - you don't find \crack\yuri.exe in official versions, do you?
Btw, it automatically installs the localized files without asking (using the original setup program), so it's a "modified/cracked official release", IMO.
- Marshall - 21.02.2005
@Blade, I can understand your point about outting some extra eye candy in but, as Cannis said, the YRCP is not a mod.
For example, the IFV turrets can have an effect beyond looking pretty (enemies can more easily determine what unit is inside).
What is everyone's opinion on that?
Regarding the TX, why do Reconnection Errors happen at all (in non-TX maps)? I can't imagine that different graphics files cause the problem so it must be code. I assume that including the latest TX inis inisde expandmd02.mix would solve the problem?
Either you're lucky not getting any REs or I'm unlucky - I get them almost every game when I play against my friend when one of us has forgotten to install the TX.
Any TX stuff that fixes an actual bug should be included - let me know what needs doing and I'll do it.
- Blade - 21.02.2005
Marshall;date=Feb 21 2005, 12:54 PM Wrote:@Blade, I can understand your point about outting some extra eye candy in but, as Cannis said, the YRCP is not a mod.
For example, the IFV turrets can have an effect beyond looking pretty (enemies can more easily determine what unit is inside).
What is everyone's opinion on that?
Regarding the TX, why do Reconnection Errors happen at all (in non-TX maps)? I can't imagine that different graphics files cause the problem so it must be code. I assume that including the latest TX inis inisde expandmd02.mix would solve the problem?
Either you're lucky not getting any REs or I'm unlucky - I get them almost every game when I play against my friend when one of us has forgotten to install the TX.
Any TX stuff that fixes an actual bug should be included - let me know what needs doing and I'll do it.
[right][snapback]529[/snapback][/right]
An enemy could look at the tool tip and tell what was in an IFV anyway for the most part so I don't think that would be a problem and the animated Gap gen certainly wouldn't. I was also going to suggest my improved Yuri load screen that has a green map so it looks consistent with the other countries.
I don't understand the reconnection error myself, since during the TX development, I jumped online numerous times into random games with people and never had any errors amongst any of the competitors. These were internet games, I'm not sure how network games would fare though since they play over IPX and not what I presume is an emulated layer over TCP/IP that the internet uses.
The TX fix is the only paved highway slope for NewUrban that is in the TX mix IIRC, its just a simple fix that stops units tilting the wrong way.
- CannisRabidus - 22.02.2005
The underlying question is, what is YRCP's target audience?
As I understand it, it has 2 audiences.
1) Gamers who are 'purists', and see only official patches and updates as 'valid', and may also have antipathy towards mods in general. (Yes since the YRCP is unofficial, this is a contradiction, but we're taking into account that YR is essentially abandonware).
2) Modders who would essentially use the YRCP as a base to build their mods on.
- Marshall - 22.02.2005
I'm inclined to agree with Cannis. The only changes to the normal play of YR should be certified bug fixes.
The only exception to this should be basic game mode and map changes:
The Assault mode, which gives players a chance to play "unmodded" Assault mode, and is still optional for them to play).
The Minor Super mode (I've heard several people complain that they can't have just the basic SWs), again optional to play.
Team Alliance map freedom.
The game mode and map changes are part of the YRCP launcher and so are not forced upon 1.002 enabled mods. Instructions in the dev pack will be made available so that such mods can include the features if they wish to.
There's nothing stopping someone making some kind of "enhanced vanilla YR" in the form of a mod for 1.002.
- Blade - 22.02.2005
CannisRabidus;date=Feb 22 2005, 04:51 AM Wrote:The underlying question is, what is YRCP's target audience?
As I understand it, it has 2 audiences.
1) Gamers who are 'purists', and see only official patches and updates as 'valid', and may also have antipathy towards mods in general. (Yes since the YRCP is unofficial, this is a contradiction, but we're taking into account that YR is essentially abandonware).
2) Modders who would essentially use the YRCP as a base to build their mods on.
[right][snapback]542[/snapback][/right]
This being the case (which I do agree with), I think it would be wise to post a link to this discussion in the StrikeTeam forums since there are a great many purists who would contribute valuable insight into what the community might want from such a patch.
- Renegade - 23.02.2005
Something tells me I'll need to assign more moderators soon...
Just kidding
If you think it'd be a good idea, then I will not stand against it...
- Blade - 23.02.2005
I do think that on the whole it would be a good idea, since people who simply play the game have quite a different take on what needs to be changed and what doesn't. That kind of contrast would be useful to those directly working on the patch and probably to a wider audience of modders.
- CannisRabidus - 24.02.2005
When I read this last night I thought it was a good idea, but upon reflection I don't anymore. Personally I have already gotten the benefits of that perspective when I lurked in the old official forums gathering info for the first version of CR. I don't believe there will be anything new beyond what the latest maphack is.
Given that perspectives run the range of how on one hand, the game should be completely untouched, to how the Yuri side should be nerfed out of existence on the other hand.... all I think will result is flame wars that we could really do without.
Also there has never been a gaming community that has been strung along for such a long time over a promised patch as this one has. First Westwood's US community manager kept up the 'upcoming patch' fiction for 9 months, followed by a campaign in the official forums for a supposed community patch which favored one clan's style of play, followed by an online petition, followed by a completely absurd scam by PCNC to make fans believe they were working with developers of the game to make a real official patch. At this point I believe there's little point in talking anymore... if you're going to do this, then just deliver it. Once delivered, then work on getting acceptance for the patch, and gather whatever feedback that is offered to tweak it for a subsequent update.
Acceptance hinges greatly on limiting the modding to the very subtle. If these guys smell a mod this thing will go nowhere with them. This also means no new game modes. Maybe you can get away with the super mode (only strategic supers on). But definitely not Assault. I would very much like Assault to get wider acceptance and use (which would tend to introduce more players to the mods that use Assault, which after all is the main reason Assault exists). Assault could be included in the second release as a trial sort of thing, if the acceptance level of the first release is good. Even then, it would probably have to be limited to a special mappack that included nothing but assault versions of offical maps (these guys will not play fan maps. Fan maps are the kiss of death if you want acceptance).
Well I've said my piece. The decision is yours.
- Marshall - 24.02.2005
Whilst I think that Assault mode should be in the YRCP, I have to agree with Cannis. Once the YRCP gets wide distribution and has a homepage/forum, then we can get the community's thoughts on such things as Assault.
But in that case, we should probably postpone the minor super mode and even the map freedom...?
If that were done though, the only thing introduced by the launcher would be the CSF. Although I still believe it's the only viable way of providing it.
- Blade - 24.02.2005
Marshall;date=Feb 23 2005, 11:56 PM Wrote:Whilst I think that Assault mode should be in the YRCP, I have to agree with Cannis. Once the YRCP gets wide distribution and has a homepage/forum, then we can get the community's thoughts on such things as Assault.
But in that case, we should probably postpone the minor super mode and even the map freedom...?
If that were done though, the only thing introduced by the launcher would be the CSF. Although I still believe it's the only viable way of providing it.
[right][snapback]556[/snapback][/right]
Don't worry about the xcc mod launcher for the CSF, all it does is dump it ito the main directory anyhow and you can do that with any installer.