Does Ares have Moving Building Logic?

[linglin]

This logic from FireStorm,Cabal's Defender is a Building that can Deploy,Attack and move

[DCoder]

Code:

; Core Defender (deployed)
[DDEFD]
Name=Core Defender
UndeploysInto=DEFENDER

, same as MCVs or artillery.

[Nighthawk]

The undeployed Core Defender is functionally a VehicleType, it just has a selection box like a building.

[Radaral]

Just small talk. if you made it so buildings actually could somehow move like tanks or infantry. wouldn't that cause massive lag and major graphical glitches when going up or down uneven land?

[WoRmINaToR]

Not sure about massive lag, but graphics certainly would look funky for a moving building.

Thus, why buildings don't move (among myriad other reasons).

[Beowulf]

I wouldn't put it past C&C to have one... oh WAIT, I forgot. It does. Thank you, Tiberian Twilight!

[WoRmINaToR]

Lol.

But logically it ceases in many ways to be a building; it undeploys, grows wheels, etc. All characteristics of a vehicle (but it can still build stuff, which is retarded).

However, I do agree with your point; Tiberian Twilight did just about everything to the CNC universe that a CNC game should never do.

[Beowulf]

No, I disagree with that statement. The implementation of the ideas were poor, but the ideas themselves are not intrinsically bad. A fully mobile command fortress is a really cool idea, but Tiberian Twilight removed a few too many C&C staples like harvesting. That was the worst move for C&C4 to be honest.

Because, let's be honest, C&C needed a new direction. It's stale and everyone knows it. There's only so much GDI and Nod bullshit one can see before growing bored.

But anyway. Back to the topic at hand...

[WoRmINaToR]

Agreed.

To the topic: in YR, buildings shouldn't move.

[Beowulf]

In vanilla YR, yes. In a total conversion, why the hell not?