Ravendark

Fair point in general. But i feel the video is more intended to consider a absolute scenario. Unit A vs Unit B strength and weakness. Alot of the tactical nuances that make a great "total"game aren't or shouldn't be considered. Things like player skill, terrain, economy strength, ruses, abilities etc. That aside something interesting related to this topic: I was working on my mod yesterday, haven't had alot of time this year so do so, but now i got sometime. so i decided to do a quick skirmish to refresh myself on what i ha done so far and some of the changes was working on. I have a infantry unit that basicly has 2 weapons: a rocket weapon (think along the line of a LAW) and a missile weapon (something like a JAVELIN). The rocket weapon is on by default and uses a sort of defragmentation warhead. Its basicly explosive dmg and some aoe dmg. Rather effective vs infantry (if it hits close enough, it isnt accurate vs infantry), light vehicles and medium armor. When the unit enters cover and a garrison it switches to its missile weapon. Shit vs infantry but does amazing dmg vs vehicles. Due to how the weapons work, the infantry gets decimated out in the open by most vehicles, strength in numbers determines most of the time who wins. But when that unit is in cover or a structure it melts armor like its nothing. So: open terrain: i it has strength of numbers its rockets can some serious dmg to anything depending on rng how they hit or miss. A good focus fire from something like a apc or buggy can counter that specially if those vehicles have a strength in numbers aswell. Something like a mammoth tank can withstand the rocket onslaught long enough to crush them with some micro. The explosive defrag warhead of the rocket is a treath to rifle infantry even. But in a urban environment: The missile weapon is 100% accurate to vehicles and 2-3 missiles can kill a apc like armor/hp vehicle. Garrisoned they are protected and cant be crushed, cover i tweaked the armor bonus so they have increased survivability even if you would focus them. But they are absolute shit vs infantry now. And riflemen can advance without effort onto them. I also changed my sniper to be able to clear (shot per shot) garrisons instead of grenadiers. So the sniper is a serious hardcounter in general to them. So in a ideal scenario like the above video...yes most in that video is accurate. But when you bring more complexity to a single units design those rules go out of the window partially or fully. Even with disregarding player aptitude.

In general the same logic presented in the video will be applicable to c&c as well. Where a difference might come into play is that in c&c or more modern themed games is the following: Secondary weapons that shift the rock/paper/scissors and hp based logic out of the black and white into a more grey area: Consider the following scenario: 1. going from the video logic: enemy = 1 heavy tank, 6 light tanks and you have a squad of missile/rocket aka anti armor units. Most of the time he video logic will prevail, kill the light tanks first to reduce the enemies global firepower output and sustain less dmg/losses. 2. More modern weapon loadout/logic: 1 heavy tank, 6 light and you have 1 anti armor squad, BUT the heavy tank has a secondary anti infantry machine gun. That heavy tank will decimate your squad. In this scenario you have to remove that type of weapon (the machinegun on the heavy) from the equation. So focusing the heavy tank becomes a prio. And in more modern setting games those scenarios happen more often i would guess. What i can recall from most of the more old era or sword and sorcery themed games, they usually focus more on a single weapon loadout. Archers are archers, swordsmen are swordsmen. etc. When they break away from that rock/paper/scissor -ish system engagements become more complex and not so strait forward. A second thing that will change the videos scenario is layers. Air layer vs ground layer or sea layer units. A untouchable air unit with a shitty weapon can demolish a awesome ground unit with a godly weapon if its not able to target the air unit. From a c&c 3 point: 5 venoms vs 6 predators and 1 mammoth -> focusing the mammoth due to its aa missiles is a bigger prio then those predators most of the time? But if those 5 preds and the mam are attacking your harvester, you might go back to focussing the preds to lower dps on the harvester and give it a chance to survive/return to base and just take the dmg from the mammoth on your venoms?

Seen the first 4 (or is it 5) episodes. The first 2(pilot) had me put off....those felt like some bad trekkie fan fiction writing...all holier-then-thou star fleet shit. But then it turned a bit darker and more intriguing from episode 3 when the discovery and its purpose was tipped off. Kind of committed myself to watching it now for the moment. Still feel the main character of Michael is utter crap. The actress isn't convincing either. the captain of the discovery (the name escapes me atm) is interesting, way darker then previous star trek captains, i find it good that he breaks that generic good guy chain and is more practical and opportunistic in regards to the war backstory. the support cast for the most part give a good effort and their acting is more solid(for a ST tv-series anyway) then the main protagonist.

Not sure what is more concerning, EA not getting back into the RTS pool or Petroglyph staying in the pool but they keep pissing in it. At this time i don't have much faith in both companies. And Honostly Petro needs to start distancing them self from the WestWood name/brand. The majority of the company isn't Westwood staff. Journalist need to stop dropping fanboy bait like that in their articles. It is just preying on the community nostalgia. Same with the Frank Klepacki thing. A score should be match made to the theme of the game, not vice versa. Frank K. did some good work obviously but his style isn't suited for every game or theme. Well at least its not that 8bit cashgrab nonsense, i'll give it a fair try when it comes available next year. But i'm not awestruck atm. we'll see what gives.

no point in sending me anything atm, im only at my pc in short bursts. Mostly using my leftarm to do everything now and thats a pain ontop of the pain. But i might look into it later this week, when i feel more able. home for 3 months , so seems like good time to catch up on my modding stuff aswell .

doesnt the GiveOrRestoreSpecialpower cover that part? as its a extension of the base Specialpower? Iirc? he is stil using that to trigger his replace self upgrade. On second thought, he might also be able to skip all of that , and use a direct upgrade+button to trigger his replace self and trigger a statusbitupgrade module that gives his no_attack status? something worth trying aswell.

This is all in your gameobject <behavior> section right? Get rid of the <specialpower> coding you dont need that. You only need <SwitchLocomotorsSpecialAbilityUpdate in your gameobject, you prob dont need the dispatch part either i posted earlier, not sure tho atm. also i think facetarget only works if you are using a targeted specialpower, if you are using a self triggered special power (like a mcv deploy or orca sonar pulse) it doesnt work. make sure you are using a unitability button and not a specialpower button linked to your commandset and the switchloco module.

Disclaimer: I just got out of the hospital yesterday for a shoulder surgery, and i might be abit off on painkillers atm, so im feeling abit fussy at times and im not testing this myself because sitting at the pc to long hurts like a motherfucker and feeling sleepy at times, so the time between my reply might varry and you def need to check for spelling errors :s But: <SpecialPower id="0x028447855" SpecialPowerTemplate="SpecialPower_GrantPackUpgradeCondor" AvailableAtStart="False" UpdateModuleStartsAttack="True"> <SwitchLocomotorsSpecialAbilityUpdate id="ModuleTag_UnpackupdateUpdate" SpecialPowerTemplate="SpecialPower_GrantPackUpgradeCondor" UnpackTime="2s" BusyForDuration="2s" UseUpgradedLocomotor="false" Options="IGNORE_FACING_CHECK" SetObjectStatusOnTrigger="NO_AUTO_ACQUIRE NO_ATTACK_FROM_AI"/> <AttributeModifierAffects Rule="UNPARSED"/> <RequirementsFilterMP Rule="UNPARSED"/> <RequirementsFilterStrategic Rule="UNPARSED"/> </SpecialPower> this seems fucked up, the switch locomoterability shouldnt be in that specialpower module at all, tbh you should be able to remove it whole and just keep the restoeupgrade moduel and the switchloco module, that should work tbh. Again im not testing it myself for the next few days, so....

try triggering your unpack specialpower with this <SpecialPower id="ModuleTag_unpackdispatch" SpecialPowerTemplate="SpecialPower_your_unpack_sp" UpdateModuleStartsAttack="true" /> <SwitchLocomotorsSpecialAbilityUpdate id="ModuleTag_UnpackupdateUpdate" SpecialPowerTemplate="SpecialPower_your_unpack_sp" UnpackTime="0.57s" /experiment with this setting to see what is the best time/duration to match your replaceselfupdate BusyForDuration="1s" /experiment with this setting to see what is the best time/duration to match your replaceselfupdate UseUpgradedLocomotor="false" Options="IGNORE_FACING_CHECK" SetObjectStatusOnTrigger="NO_AUTO_ACQUIRE" />

try to add the following to your unpack specialpower AttributeModifier="yourattribmodifier" AttributeModifierAffectsSelf"true" then create a attribute modifier that sets the following object status: NO_AUTO_ACQUIRE NO_ATTACK_FROM_AI see if that works

that is exactly how the alieen mcv does it. it uses a in-between object with a lifetime update and a createdie module that spawns the conyard. the in-between object (AlienMCVUnpacking) has a NOT_AUTOACQUIRABLE status, so the enemy ignores it mostly during that phase. you could try to add some lua to the mix, and instead trigger a object status triggered by UNPACKING and set the object status to UNATTACKABLE or such

You can trigger a model and status condition with the switchloco specialpower, so you can "transform" without switching units. There are some benefits to that and also some drawbacks ofc. But if you want it to attack like a firehawk (circlesforattacks=true) you cant use the switchloco, you basicly have to switch to a unit that has the correct jetaiupdate with circlesforattack=true. Altho a while ago i expiremented with changing the gameobject.xsd so it could include more then one ai update and changed the aiupdate to be toggleable by using the need/forbidden upgrade element. It had mixed result, so i gave up on that.

<TiberiumCrystal id="ModuleTag_TibCrystalBehavior" NumBoxes="50" ValuePerBox="7" <======================= GrowthStages="3" GrowthTimePerStage="3s" TimeBetweenGrowthStages="30s"> <RadarColor R="110" G="254" B="4" /> </TiberiumCrystal> The worth of a tiberium crystal(green) 7x50 =350 credits <SupplyTruckAIUpdate id="ModuleTag_AI" AutoAcquireEnemiesWhenIdle="YES" MaxBoxes="200" <============================ SupplyWarehouseScanDistance="5000" SupplyCenterActionDelay="100ms" DepletedAnnounceDistance="600" HarvestTiberium="true" HarvestActivationRange="35" HarvestPreparationTime="0.5s" HarvestActionTime="2.2s" CanPathThroughUnitsWhileDocking="true" CanPathThroughUnitsWhileHarvesting="false"> <UnitAITargetChooserData CanPickDynamicTargets="false" RotateToTargetWhenAiming="false"/> </SupplyTruckAIUpdate> maxboxes defines how much tiberium the harvest holds, so 7x200= 1400 credits for a full green tiberium haul. either change the tiberiumcrystals value or change the harvesters

1. I dont think the FadeIn coding works like that, but not totally sure, you can try it yourself. 3. Might want to start with the question of what are you trying to do with the transformation? If its just a transformation of the same unit i would suggest using the switchlocomotor power from the nod shadows instead. But if you its a different unit you want to transform into then yes use the replaceself module. are you replacing from a AIR to a GROUND unit? Shared sync and player power aren't relevant flags, you can use water ok and ignore map extents, al tho i dont think map extents matters much either.

1. Not that i know off, or at least can think of directly atm. 2. no idea what would cause that or how to fix it, can't remember coming across that bug in TW with anything i ever done, might be its KW related maybe? 3. Not directly, but you could code it so it will look like it does: Have the veterancy upgrade trigger a commandsetupgrade. So you will have a veteran, elite and heroic commandset with each respectively deploying into the veteran,elite, heroic version of the object, you can use use the EquivelantTo coding addressed in your other topic to make it look like they are still the same units.

And what am i looking at? What is the problem with the building in wb? Well if the KW gamelod.xml is identical to TW you could convert the TW xsd schematic into a KW xml definitions and that should work. If you rly want to understand how those relate to eachother, have a look at TW schematic files and have a look at the the KW definition files, you can find the TW schematics in modsdk/schemas/ folder and the KW ones you can find in your wrathed folder under /tools/game/kane's wrath/ folder

Try changing the <geometry> settings of the unit, reduce the size of the MajorRadius and MinorRadius or maybe vice-versa. Nope, that would mean altering the schematic and altering the schematic is extremely limited in what you can add to it, most is hard coded and dependent on extension/inheritance.

Make sure your game object has a </Laserdraw> section which matches the correct laster Id (id=1 i assume from the above code) and in the behavior section have a <LaserState id="ModuleTag_LaserState" LaserId="1" /> as well. Also as i haven't mentioned anything about the spinning hammerhead, got no real idea there. Could be your extra bones are interfering with his exit bone (if none is defined it will use its center(roottransform)bone). So no real clue on how to fix that, maybe give it a defined exit/entry bone (altho atm can't recall what it should be called, iirc that type of bone is hardcoded in the engine and needs a certain name, like EntryPos_1 or something like, not sure tho what the correct name was), but thats all speculation if it will even fix it tbh.

Your specialobject filters in your dmgnugget and activatelasernugget should match up. Try using the following in both: Rule="ANY" Relationship="ENEMIES" Exclude="INFANTRY HORDE AIRCRAFT HUSK"

oops the macgyver theme isnt 2min in its the one from the start. Ye the 2min in one is familiar to everyone i bet.

Its remix of the macgyver theme song

The only thing i can think of is that your condor uses the JetAI update and your hammerhead uses the TransportHelicopterAI update, and i'm thinking the JETAI update prob uses the take off and landing coding....so you might try adjusting those settings in the locomotor for example TakeOffAndLandingSpeed="6" TakeOffAndLandingSlowDownDelta="25" TakeOffAndLandingSlowDownTime="1s" But i'm just speculating here, for the rest i cant directly think of anything that could effect that behavior as for your weapon <SpecialObjectFilter Rule="ALL" Relationship="" Alignment="NONE" Include="" Exclude="INFANTRY AIRCRAFT HORDE HUSK" StatusBitFlags="" RejectStatusBitFlags="" AcceptModelCondition="" RejectModelCondition="" /> Rule="ALL" works like a AND function, so you basicly said Exclude any unit that has the following Conditions : It must be INFANTRY AND a AIRCRAFT AND a HORDE AND a HUSK What you meant to do was OR : it must be INFANTRY OR a AIRCRAFT OR a HORDE OR a HUSK So use Rule="ANY" instead and try that then.

upload the new units xml

Use WrathEd or bibbers big extractor to extract the the global_common.manifest from Globalstream.big found in your kw installation directory something like Kwinstall/core/1.0/ Then use bibbers asset extractor to have a look in that manifest file and you can use it to extract the Audiofile Types, these are the actual sound and music files used. Ye the definitions can be added to Wrathed so it can read them from the gamefiles. But you need to know what to add and how to add them to wrathed.

Did you bother looking at the harvester and tiberium xml's before asking that question? Because you can manipulate that in either the tiberium xml and/or the harvester xml. Then a more important question will arise: What are the consequences and which can i live with in my mod? Modifying the tiberium increases the amount of aviable money per crystal and thus per field. so it alters economic balance map wise. Modifying the harvester basicly increases his cargo space, which means he takes longer to get a full haul. so he is out longer and increases his time as a target, also you will have to wait longer before money injections but they are greater.