AlexB
28.07.2010, 06:13:47
Fight 1
Expanding the campaign list feature would be a good thing to prevent gamers from playing missions they haven't reached yet and still have them select every mission already unlocked. This feature requires the campaign list to be there, as one poster pointed out a month after it has been implemented.
The charge thing is just a graphical gimmick. It hasn't gathered any supporters in more than two years. Show/hide campaigns.
Fight 2
I see many problems with the modular way of multiplayer modes as described by 227. What if I disable cloaked units and supers together with some more of the proposed check boxes? Most likely, other units and buildings have to be altered also. But how does one define that some check boxes interact with each other and that special files must be parsed as consequence thereof? Parsing yet another set of files files like MP_ASSAULTSUPER.INI, MP_ASSAULTSUPERCLOAK.INI would not help to reduce anything, it would make creating INIs more complicated. Not supporting such interactions would lead to a rather basic system.
Using some other value than cost for veterancy isn't a real game changer, but it is possible to implement two new tags defaulting to cost, one used to in case a unit is promoted, one in case it is destroyed. I'd vote for the Veterancy changes.
Expanding the campaign list feature would be a good thing to prevent gamers from playing missions they haven't reached yet and still have them select every mission already unlocked. This feature requires the campaign list to be there, as one poster pointed out a month after it has been implemented.
The charge thing is just a graphical gimmick. It hasn't gathered any supporters in more than two years. Show/hide campaigns.
Fight 2
I see many problems with the modular way of multiplayer modes as described by 227. What if I disable cloaked units and supers together with some more of the proposed check boxes? Most likely, other units and buildings have to be altered also. But how does one define that some check boxes interact with each other and that special files must be parsed as consequence thereof? Parsing yet another set of files files like MP_ASSAULTSUPER.INI, MP_ASSAULTSUPERCLOAK.INI would not help to reduce anything, it would make creating INIs more complicated. Not supporting such interactions would lead to a rather basic system.
Using some other value than cost for veterancy isn't a real game changer, but it is possible to implement two new tags defaulting to cost, one used to in case a unit is promoted, one in case it is destroyed. I'd vote for the Veterancy changes.