Jump to content


Community Leader
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Tore

  1. 19 minutes ago, Egozi44 said:

    I think he meant that in TS cyborgs will still look broken even after you heal them, don't recall such behavior in TS and it sound more like a bug than intended behavior.

    In TS all cyborgs loose their legs if damaged enough (around middle of red health?) this causes them to move slower as they crawl forward. Healing them by walking on tiberium or by other means do not restore their legs or speed.

  2. The only way currently to stretch TS, RA2 etc right now is through options on your graphics card/monitor. As far I can see VMware does not support such stretching. This is why TS has black borders around it if you run it in a res lower than your VM's resolution. The only reason why this works in C&C1 and RA1 is because of cnc-ddraw which can stretch the game to the res it is provided.

    You can however install TS on your host OS and enable stretching on your graphics card or monitor and all full screen applications will automatically stretch.

  3. The black sections are there because you have chosen a resolution larger than the map itself, the first missions of C&C are on small maps, the later ones are on larger maps. If you choose a reasonable res it will fill the screen.

    As for windowed mode you need to enable cnc-ddraw in ccconfig.exe and select "run in windowed mode.".

    Note that in ccconfig there are different types of resolution settings one that changes game resolution, letting you see more of the map and one for cnc-ddraw that stretches the game to a resolution without affecting how much of the map you see.

    If you are getting crashes using cnc-ddraw you have to disable any compatibility mode you might have on C&C95.exe (right click on C&C95.exe, click on "properties", find the "compatibility" tab and uncheck all.).

  4. Quote

    Disc throwers are useless. The disc travel time is way too high vs someone who spreads out and micros, light infantry is a lot more cost efficient. (Similar issue in TD, though the Grenadiers at least do more damage when they hit something). A Cyborg Commando has only 4x the health and can only kill 1 light infantry unit at a time. It fires once each 3.3 seconds. It needs ~50s to kill all of them. Assuming 16 light infantries (with money left over) do 128 dps, it would take them about 5 seconds to kill the Cyborg Commando. So even a few dying, coming late to the party, or whatever would overwhelm a Cyborg Commando with ease. In TS all units in a higher tech level have this issue. Sure they do more damage and have more health, but they also cost quite a lot more to produce. Additionally the time and credits invested in tech invested in more inf/rax/hon increases that discrepancy. Tanks that can crush them in TS are also not fast enough to crush enough of them.

    Cyborg Commando's do splash damage, they do not only damage one infantryman at a time. Same applies to disc throwers, sure you can mico to avoid them, but they can also be microed themselves for better range etc and they will most of the time hit a bunch of charging light infantry. The reason I brought them up is because if they are used right they are a decent multi purpose unit and are often used to support light infantry.

    Sure you can spend all your money on light inf, but if they meet a wall of Titans alone there isn't much they can do. I'm not saying light inf are useless as I said they are great if you manage to surprise the enemy and even as units to support higher tier units. Any decent player will be expecting an infantry rush and will have infantry there to counter them.


    In TS, there's a stupid mechanic which allows you to sell your Tech Center but retain all the units and buildings it allows you to build. Not sure if it applies if the Tech Center is destroyed forcibly...

    This applies not only to tech centers, but every building that unlocks any tech in games pre-RA2. Tech is only lost if tech structures are gone and every production facility of a type is gone.

    As for anything I said about ZH it is based upon very fuzzy memories from ages ago, but I do remember the hum-vee thing too and something about quad cannons having insane DPS. TS is a bit fuzzy too. The C&C game I have played the most online is C&C1.

    and no I do not play "no rush" games.

  5. 22 hours ago, Lauren said:

    Gen and ZH have excellent balance 

    FS/TS spamming light infantry is king

    TD  as with TS spamming light infantry is mostly king (5 can kill a mbt with ease, a few more even a mammoth tank).

    RA was mostly just a reskin of TD


    While infantry is important in TS, spamming only light inf wont get you very far, maybe as a surprise attack. Disc throwers are pretty powerful though and infantry in general are useful. TS usually ends up with tons of titans, banshees, orca bombers and tons of disruptor, mammoth and cyborg commando drops.

    In C&C1 minigunners alone will be wrecked by grenadiers, flamethrowers, buggies, hum-vees and any vehicle that can squish. Infantry is still important though and can be used to support defenses or even attack. C&C1 games usually end up with tons of bikes, buggies, hum-vees, medium tanks, light tanks and the occasional engie filled APC, commando, stealth tank, rocket launcher and streams of infantry of different kinds pouring out of barracks. The most OP unit being the Apache, followed by the Orca.

    As for Zero Hour...quad cannon, aurora alpha........

    As for RA you pretty much only need heavy tank, heavy tank, heavy tank, 7 MCV's, tesla coil, tesla coil, tesla coil, V2, V2, V2, tesla coil.....................................

  6. 20 hours ago, Luvaskot said:

    Anyone can just play another genre of games than RTS, to play single player and campaign if who is interested in scenario. There are plenty of adventure games with epic story and singleplayer. How come you rate EA:LA C&Cs lower than TA where you just can make 1 production facility of each kind and even no fog of war. Buggy game play, etc. 2D C&C games were wrecked pretty hard by StarCraft both in story and multiplayer.

    I for one like a good story in my RTS games, like StarCraft 1 or C&C games and I don't really like adventure (like point and clicks) games that much. The story doesn't have to be an epic dialogue heavy story (like StarCraft 1) just an enjoyable story that fits in with the missions you play (like C&C) it doesn't even need a lot of dialogue the sounds, units and environments can do a lot of story telling too (like Homeworld).

    As for the old 2D C&C the one that fits the description of buggy gameplay is Tiberian Sun, the rest are polished fairly well. As for one production facility units come out of. I don't know I kind of like that idea it keeps things simple, rather than having to click through several factories you worry about one while the others you build assist in construction. As for SC1 wrecking C&C in sales numbers sure, Blizzard did support the game for over a decade not to mention the 3D C&C's were "wrecked pretty hard" by SC2.

    • Upvote 2

  7. Quote

    This reminds me the AmigaOS developers. They sweat over very restricted source code to deliver things as basic as TCP/IP protocol. They could write something visually similar to AmigaOS and compatible with modern hardware but they crossed a point of no return so long ago, that abandoning that much work after so many years of development would be more devastating than maintaining of AmigaOS.

    Creating an entirely new OS looking like Amiga Workbench would be missing the point entirely. AmigaOS is about the passionate Amiga and Commodore fanbases. They want a continuation of the OS some of them started using 32 years ago which is compatible with the old software they still like to use.

    Not to mention that creating a new OS from scratch would take years to reach the stage AmigaOS is at now and be incompatible with the software library of Amiga's making the entire project kind of pointless.

    Implementing anything "basic" like TCP/IP into an OS is not easy especially with most likely a tiny group of developers. Initially even Microsoft didn't entirely write the TCP/IP support built into Windows themselves even with their gigantic budget and tons of developers the TCP/IP stack in Windows was based upon BSD.


    IMHO it's like playing with microcomputers from 80's. You can add Internet browser, drivers for modern printers etc., but in reality solving the problems which apply to less than 1% of human population is art for art's sake. Admirable but nostalgia finally ends and developer ends with huge expertise in things no one cares about. 

    Not sure about that. "Playing with 80's micros" even for nostalgia's sake can be a very educational experience especially if it leads in to an understanding about soldering, electronics repair, PCB design, how operating systems work, microcode, the manufacturing of chips, programming etc. while the methods used in creating old microcomputers are obsolete, the basics behind it all are still highly relevant today and skills regularly sought after. 

    Even if things are old doesn't make them automatically bad.