Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » C&C 4 Coming!!!!
| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #396218 is a reply to message #396216] |
Sat, 25 July 2009 14:00   |
 |
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| so say we all. wrote on Sat, 25 July 2009 13:54 |
Why would nobody play it? practically every rts out there is somewhat imbalance and favors one race or another. ZH was just a bit more extreme, nothing major. Im playing WiC on a competitive level and its quite imbalanced. it still was played on CPL. (granted, CPL died shortly after, but anyway)
|
Nobody would play it if the imbalance was really terrible (Like in Nox, which had the potential to be real fun but was imbalanced as hell). If people still play ZH it means the imbalance isn't that bad and people need to stfu about it.
| so say we all. wrote on Sat, 25 July 2009 13:54 |
SO WAS ZH. EA had abandoned it.
I'm a highlevel WiC Airplayer and I still condoned a change that nerfed air in the beta for patch 11. Is your theory disproved now?
|
EA abandoned ZH already? I didn't know that. Whatever.
And no. You're just the exception to the rule.
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #396221 is a reply to message #396218] |
Sat, 25 July 2009 14:27 |
 |
Herr Surth
Messages: 1684
Registered: July 2007
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Sat, 25 July 2009 16:00 |
| so say we all. wrote on Sat, 25 July 2009 13:54 |
Why would nobody play it? practically every rts out there is somewhat imbalance and favors one race or another. ZH was just a bit more extreme, nothing major. Im playing WiC on a competitive level and its quite imbalanced. it still was played on CPL. (granted, CPL died shortly after, but anyway)
|
Nobody would play it if the imbalance was really terrible (Like in Nox, which had the potential to be real fun but was imbalanced as hell). If people still play ZH it means the imbalance isn't that bad and people need to stfu about it.
|
The imbalance is/was bad, BUT:
casual gamers dont mind imbalances or cant see them. Also, the balance may or may not be better on lowerlevel games because of limited knowledge. Highlevelgamers might still stay because the other two races are somewhat balanced and fun enough to play. They might also have a money incentive. ( I frankly dont know if cw.cc ever gave out money prizes for ZH)
| Quote: |
| so say we all. wrote on Sat, 25 July 2009 13:54 |
SO WAS ZH. EA had abandoned it.
I'm a highlevel WiC Airplayer and I still condoned a change that nerfed air in the beta for patch 11. Is your theory disproved now?
|
EA abandoned ZH already? I didn't know that. Whatever.
And no. You're just the exception to the rule.
|
EA abandoned ZH after Patch 1.03 I believe. 1.04 was then largely made (everything safe for one bugfix)by the community. EA only made it an official patch, all the balancing changes were community made.
1.05 is, as far as i know, still only unoffical and not ea approved. but i dont know about that.
going a bit back to the issue at hand btw, wasnt tiberian sun insanely inbalanced as well?
|
|
|
|
| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #396224 is a reply to message #394552] |
Sat, 25 July 2009 15:05 |
 |
R315r4z0r
Messages: 3836
Registered: March 2005
Location: New York
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
*ignores last bunch of posts in this thread*
When I was posting my last rebuttal in this thread, I wanted to do it quickly because I got home from work late and wanted to do other things after. I didn't think making the post would take that long so I figured I'd give it a whirl.
Well, it took 1 and a half hours to compose (distractions and all.) Most of the time was taken from formatting the post with the quote by quote breakdown.
So, in this post I'm just going to take your main idea that you've started to form with all your posts and combine it into one argument:
You are apart of the group of people that are so fixed on how they've seen something one way that you want everything to be a "clone" of it. A lot of people were like this when C&C3 was in development. Many people kept on suggesting things that would have made C&C3 a Tiberian Sun clone.
One of my ongoing points is that no game should be stremelined with other games of the same genre. It doesn't matter at all if one way is better or worse than another way. You wouldn't buy two different bottles of soda and expect them to taste the same. You wouldn't buy two mystery novels and expect them to playout the same. Just like different games shouldn't use the same structure and format, even if they are in the same genre. Different games are made for the reasons that people have different tastes. A game is not based on your opinion and your opinion alone.
Starcraft should play different than Generals. Tiberian Sun should play different than World in Conflict. Stormride should play different than Halo Wars. And they do. If a game wants to share some basic ideas from another game, that's perfectly fine, but once they take all the core mechanics from one game and copy it into their own game and simply just change the units used and call it the "standard" then that's when things get boring.
If you don't like a game, you don't play it. It's as simple as that. There are different games for that reason. If all games played the same way, then people who don't like how it's played would be completely out of luck.
So realize that your opinion on how a game should be isn't the only opinion that matters. Logical or not, people have their own ways of seeing things. And just because you like to look for reasoning in things, doesn't mean you're always right about it. If you can't find a reason in something and argue that it's wrong, it doesn't make you right, just arrogant. Not everything has reason. And everything shouldn't always have reason either. It's what makes life interesting. If you judge your way through life using logic and reasoning alone, then you've never really lived at all. Like my signature says, "Kick logic to the curb and do the impossible!"
[Updated on: Sat, 25 July 2009 15:11] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #396229 is a reply to message #396224] |
Sat, 25 July 2009 15:41 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| R315r4z0r wrote on Sat, 25 July 2009 15:05 |
*ignores last bunch of posts in this thread*
When I was posting my last rebuttal in this thread, I wanted to do it quickly because I got home from work late and wanted to do other things after. I didn't think making the post would take that long so I figured I'd give it a whirl.
Well, it took 1 and a half hours to compose (distractions and all.) Most of the time was taken from formatting the post with the quote by quote breakdown.
So, in this post I'm just going to take your main idea that you've started to form with all your posts and combine it into one argument:
You are apart of the group of people that are so fixed on how they've seen something one way that you want everything to be a "clone" of it. A lot of people were like this when C&C3 was in development. Many people kept on suggesting things that would have made C&C3 a Tiberian Sun clone.
One of my ongoing points is that no game should be stremelined with other games of the same genre. It doesn't matter at all if one way is better or worse than another way. You wouldn't buy two different bottles of soda and expect them to taste the same. You wouldn't buy two mystery novels and expect them to playout the same. Just like different games shouldn't use the same structure and format, even if they are in the same genre. Different games are made for the reasons that people have different tastes. A game is not based on your opinion and your opinion alone.
Starcraft should play different than Generals. Tiberian Sun should play different than World in Conflict. Stormride should play different than Halo Wars. And they do. If a game wants to share some basic ideas from another game, that's perfectly fine, but once they take all the core mechanics from one game and copy it into their own game and simply just change the units used and call it the "standard" then that's when things get boring.
|
In theory, this is a sound idea, but in practice you quickly find there is good difference and bad difference. Pepsi is sweeter than coke, and that's different and good. Poo-flavored soda is different and bad. That's why although things (Be it soda, games, whatever) are never identical, they are always similar. Why do modern RTSes involve issuing commands to units with your mouse? Doesn't the fact that EVERY RTS does this make it boring? No, it makes it smart.
| R315r4z0r wrote on Sat, 25 July 2009 15:05 |
If you don't like a game, you don't play it. It's as simple as that. There are different games for that reason. If all games played the same way, then people who don't like how it's played would be completely out of luck.
|
You're absolutely right, and case in point is that more people play StarCraft and WarCraft than C&C, therefore their system is superior. The people have spoken. It's been 11 years since StarCraft was released and they still have a very very active professional scene (One that is GROWING and not SHRINKING, mind you). How can you argue with that?
| R315r4z0r wrote on Sat, 25 July 2009 15:05 |
So realize that your opinion on how a game should be isn't the only opinion that matters. Logical or not, people have their own ways of seeing things. And just because you like to look for reasoning in things, doesn't mean you're always right about it. If you can't find a reason in something and argue that it's wrong, it doesn't make you right, just arrogant. Not everything has reason. And everything shouldn't always have reason either. It's what makes life interesting. If you judge your way through life using logic and reasoning alone, then you've never really lived at all. Like my signature says, "Kick logic to the curb and do the impossible!"
|
I love how you accuse me of being stuck in my ways when you refuse to apply logic to any arguement you make in any debate I've seen you post on. Everything is logical. It's a matter of seeing it or not. Have you ever stopped and considered that you might be the one who's wrong? The evidence is certainly against you.
Show me one thing that is devoid of reasoning. I dare you. And don't use some dumb copout like "God LOL!".
And not to flame, but your signiture is retarded. Emotions and feelings lie and lead people to false conclusions. Logic doesn't. Again, have you ever stopped and considered that you might be the one who has it wrong?
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
[Updated on: Sat, 25 July 2009 15:43] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #396233 is a reply to message #396232] |
Sat, 25 July 2009 16:01 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| so say we all. wrote on Sat, 25 July 2009 15:57 |
since this is for some reason now about logic and reason and its also 1 am, i am going to post WEIRD IMAGES!!!!
and then log off.
|
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
[Updated on: Sat, 25 July 2009 16:01] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #396285 is a reply to message #394552] |
Sun, 26 July 2009 12:44 |
_SSnipe_
Messages: 4121
Registered: May 2007
Location: Riverside Southern Califo...
Karma: 0
|
General (4 Stars) |
|
|
|
Stop fucking spamming plz just have one real post without fucking spamming, anyways cnc4 is going kinda make me sad knowing once your done, ts is done,after that all we have left is generals and red alert series
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #396289 is a reply to message #396229] |
Sun, 26 July 2009 12:58 |
 |
Starbuzzz
Messages: 1637
Registered: June 2008
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Sat, 25 July 2009 17:41 |
Emotions and feelings lie and lead people to false conclusions. Logic doesn't.
|
Damn right. Church attendance rose after 9/11; the motivator was fear. So it can be concluded that fear motivates people to look to imaginary supercreatures for insta-help. lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #396302 is a reply to message #394552] |
Sun, 26 July 2009 17:44 |
|
R315r4z0r
Messages: 3836
Registered: March 2005
Location: New York
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
@ Dover
A few things things.
You asked me to explain to you one example that doesn't use logic or reasoning. Well I have one answer: Women.
But seriously, emotion. Emotions don't use logic or reason in all cases. One might start feeling depressed or anxiety for an unknown reason. And don't go and start talking about "chemical imbalances in the brain" because that's not what I'm getting at. Things we do can be compelled through emotion, regardless of if the action is logical or not. Look at the person who invented sky diving.
If you don't wish to disbelieve something that is core in how your life is run, then that's totally fine by me. I'm not going to try and change how you run your life.
Also, fyi, my signature is a quote from an anime called "Tenga Topa Gurren Lagaan." It's not my direct words, but my implication on how the fictional quote be applied to life (whether it works or not).
Now, secondly, I forgot to reply to this in my last post. You asked me to share my idea about the production structures that takes the best of both worlds. This is what I came up with:
When you build a production structure, say a barracks, you put it on the map and then are allowed to queue up and produce infantry.
Now, when the barracks is set up, you would be given a certain "radius" around that structure. If you build another barracks inside of that radius, then you wouldn't be given a second queue, but rather an increase in how fast your units are produced. And I mean two barracks means infantry and made at half the speed. (So if you produce a riflemen in 5 seconds with one barracks, you would produce two riflemen in 5 seconds if you had two barracks). There would be a maximum speed of x3 (you could make more than 3 production structures in the same radius, but it would be a waste of time and money (for a lack of better thought)). And one more thing: the total amount of power consumption between similar production structures in the same radius would be less than similar production structures out of the same radius.
If you were to make a second barracks outside the radius of the first, then you would be given a second infantry queue to simultaneously produce infantry from different structures.
Working either way has their own advantages. A sped up single queue of units is better for your economy while a multi-queue is better for multi-pronged attacks.
And it makes logical sense too. Different bases would produce out different groups of units. While structures that are closer together would use their combined resources, staff and facilities to reach a common goal faster.
[Updated on: Sun, 26 July 2009 17:50] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #396357 is a reply to message #396302] |
Mon, 27 July 2009 12:49 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| R315r4z0r wrote on Sun, 26 July 2009 17:44 |
You asked me to explain to you one example that doesn't use logic or reasoning. Well I have one answer: Women.
|
Har har.
| R315r4z0r wrote on Sun, 26 July 2009 17:44 |
@ But seriously, emotion. Emotions don't use logic or reason in all cases. One might start feeling depressed or anxiety for an unknown reason. And don't go and start talking about "chemical imbalances in the brain" because that's not what I'm getting at. Things we do can be compelled through emotion, regardless of if the action is logical or not. Look at the person who invented sky diving.
|
An unknown reason doesn't equal no reason. EVERYTHING has a reason, and mood swings are no different. As you already mentioned chemical imbalances in the brain is one thing. Ask anyone that sky dives, they have their reasons, ranging from conquering one's fear to doing it for the rush. NOBODY does something for no reason. No exceptions.
| R315r4z0r wrote on Sun, 26 July 2009 17:44 |
If you don't wish to disbelieve something that is core in how your life is run, then that's totally fine by me. I'm not going to try and change how you run your life.
|
You're completely missing the point again. This isn't about changing or convincing.
| R315r4z0r wrote on Sun, 26 July 2009 17:44 |
Also, fyi, my signature is a quote from an anime called "Tenga Topa Gurren Lagaan." It's not my direct words, but my implication on how the fictional quote be applied to life (whether it works or not).
|
Again, not to flame, but if the saying comes from an anime it only makes it that much faggier.
| R315r4z0r wrote on Sun, 26 July 2009 17:44 |
Now, secondly, I forgot to reply to this in my last post. You asked me to share my idea about the production structures that takes the best of both worlds. This is what I came up with:
When you build a production structure, say a barracks, you put it on the map and then are allowed to queue up and produce infantry.
Now, when the barracks is set up, you would be given a certain "radius" around that structure. If you build another barracks inside of that radius, then you wouldn't be given a second queue, but rather an increase in how fast your units are produced. And I mean two barracks means infantry and made at half the speed. (So if you produce a riflemen in 5 seconds with one barracks, you would produce two riflemen in 5 seconds if you had two barracks). There would be a maximum speed of x3 (you could make more than 3 production structures in the same radius, but it would be a waste of time and money (for a lack of better thought)). And one more thing: the total amount of power consumption between similar production structures in the same radius would be less than similar production structures out of the same radius.
If you were to make a second barracks outside the radius of the first, then you would be given a second infantry queue to simultaneously produce infantry from different structures.
Working either way has their own advantages. A sped up single queue of units is better for your economy while a multi-queue is better for multi-pronged attacks.
And it makes logical sense too. Different bases would produce out different groups of units. While structures that are closer together would use their combined resources, staff and facilities to reach a common goal faster.
|
I'm glad EA ignored you. That proposal presents the worst of both worlds. Speeding up production of a production queue is a poor consolation prize when compared to the ability to diversify your forces or get the full effect of the structure you're paying for. In addition it forces you to create multiple bases to get the second queue you payed for, which is unnessessarily difficult when not using the peon system.
You're deluding yourself if you think there's anything logical about a complex of 30 war factories when there's only one tank coming out of one of them. Explain to me how a sped-up single queue is "better for your economy"? You're spending the same amount of resources and getting the same amount of units in the same time frame, it's just they're producing in a roundabout illogical manner.
I payed for a second war factory, so I deserve a second war factory, not an upgrade to my first.
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #396395 is a reply to message #396357] |
Mon, 27 July 2009 17:47 |
|
R315r4z0r
Messages: 3836
Registered: March 2005
Location: New York
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Mon, 27 July 2009 15:49 |
An unknown reason doesn't equal no reason. EVERYTHING has a reason, and mood swings are no different. As you already mentioned chemical imbalances in the brain is one thing. Ask anyone that sky dives, they have their reasons, ranging from conquering one's fear to doing it for the rush. NOBODY does something for no reason. No exceptions.
|
I knew you were going to say that. Perhaps I spoke too soon. I don't necessarily mean that people don't always do things for a reason. What I mean to say is more on the lines of people don't always do things for a logical reason.
Conquering one's fears is an arguable logical reason to do something. It really depends on what you're doing and how it affects your life.
Doing something "for the rush" is not a logical reason. In fact, doing anything for entertainment value isn't logical. Having fun isn't logical. It's just an emotional pleasure one gets. Hell, most of the things that we know and have become accustomed to in modern society is pretty illogical. The point of our lives is to hunt, eat, sleep and die. Money, housing, jobs, communities, morals, are all tacked on illogical ways of our life. Just because we find reason to do them, it doesn't make it logical when compared to what are bare primitives of life really are.
Everything has a reason, but not everything uses a logical reason. Someone might be faced with impossible odds to overcome an obstacle. Their reasoning is to overcome the challenge, but it defies logic as the odds are highly against them. However, just because logic says it won't work, that doesn't mean that a person wont try.
What I was getting at with the skydiving example is this. The person who invented it decided one day to jump from a high altitude and hope that enough wind could be caught so it would slow them down so they could land safely. But who decides to risk something like that for any logical reason? No one, that's who. It takes illogical notions to progress in life. If you live your life following logical reasoning, then nothing new or exciting (enough) will happen.
| Dover wrote on Mon, 27 July 2009 15:49 |
Again, not to flame, but if the saying comes from an anime it only makes it that much faggier.
|
Why's that?
| Dover wrote on Mon, 27 July 2009 15:49 |
I'm glad EA ignored you. That proposal presents the worst of both worlds. Speeding up production of a production queue is a poor consolation prize when compared to the ability to diversify your forces or get the full effect of the structure you're paying for. In addition it forces you to create multiple bases to get the second queue you payed for, which is unnessessarily difficult when not using the peon system.
You're deluding yourself if you think there's anything logical about a complex of 30 war factories when there's only one tank coming out of one of them. Explain to me how a sped-up single queue is "better for your economy"? You're spending the same amount of resources and getting the same amount of units in the same time frame, it's just they're producing in a roundabout illogical manner.
I payed for a second war factory, so I deserve a second war factory, not an upgrade to my first.
|
Perhaps I didn't explain it well enough.
First of all, I didn't say one production radius would completely fill an entire base. You can have multiple radii in a single base.
Second of all, just because you have a sped up production speed for one queue, doesn't mean you're only using one production structure. Let me clarify:
If you play RA2 and build like 5 War factories and then spam tanks from your single queue, you will notice that tanks will start coming out of multiple war factories, not just one. That's because the building speed is so fast, that one war factory is unable to respond quick enough to produce a second unit right after a first one comes out. So in that case, it is customary that the second-to-primary structure produce the unit instead. And if the speed is increased again, it may even take up to 3 or 4 different war factories to produce the units from a single queue.
My idea would look a little like this:
Three production structures in the same radius share a single production queue. However each structure produces one unit at a time because they are produced so rapidly.
Now, you asked how a single queue is better for your economy. Think about it for a second.
1 queue takes money for a single unit one at a time. When that unit is produced, money starts to be deducted for the second unit. It's also better because it automatically focuses your resources on a single unit at a time. (This is talking in terms of C&C, because in games like Starcraft, money is deducted instantly when you queue up a unit)
With multiple queues, your resources are being divided in real time and thus your funds end up being depleted much more quickly. You have credits going into creating one unit and credits going into creating another unit at the same time. This is the reason why it is very important to have a surplus of income in a C&C game that uses mutliple queues because if you don't and you use mutliple production queues, you will find that you have many idle periods in the match were you are waiting on your units because your resources aren't being collected fast enough.
If you require money to create 10 units, you will probably get the units out faster in a single queue than with a multiple queue.
Now, I know what you might be thinking: "Well that's nothing a little micro production management can't fix." And you would be correct. However, if you pause production on one queue to allow another queue to gain full access to all your resources, then what's the difference between doing that and simply having just a single queue?
[Updated on: Mon, 27 July 2009 17:54] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #396413 is a reply to message #396395] |
Tue, 28 July 2009 02:00 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| R315r4z0r wrote on Mon, 27 July 2009 17:47 |
| Dover wrote on Mon, 27 July 2009 15:49 |
An unknown reason doesn't equal no reason. EVERYTHING has a reason, and mood swings are no different. As you already mentioned chemical imbalances in the brain is one thing. Ask anyone that sky dives, they have their reasons, ranging from conquering one's fear to doing it for the rush. NOBODY does something for no reason. No exceptions.
|
I knew you were going to say that. Perhaps I spoke too soon. I don't necessarily mean that people don't always do things for a reason. What I mean to say is more on the lines of people don't always do things for a logical reason.
Conquering one's fears is an arguable logical reason to do something. It really depends on what you're doing and how it affects your life.
Doing something "for the rush" is not a logical reason. In fact, doing anything for entertainment value isn't logical. Having fun isn't logical. It's just an emotional pleasure one gets. Hell, most of the things that we know and have become accustomed to in modern society is pretty illogical. The point of our lives is to hunt, eat, sleep and die. Money, housing, jobs, communities, morals, are all tacked on illogical ways of our life. Just because we find reason to do them, it doesn't make it logical when compared to what are bare primitives of life really are.
Everything has a reason, but not everything uses a logical reason. Someone might be faced with impossible odds to overcome an obstacle. Their reasoning is to overcome the challenge, but it defies logic as the odds are highly against them. However, just because logic says it won't work, that doesn't mean that a person wont try.
What I was getting at with the skydiving example is this. The person who invented it decided one day to jump from a high altitude and hope that enough wind could be caught so it would slow them down so they could land safely. But who decides to risk something like that for any logical reason? No one, that's who. It takes illogical notions to progress in life. If you live your life following logical reasoning, then nothing new or exciting (enough) will happen.
|
I'm sorry you see things that way, but I could see a perfectly logical explaination for any of those things. You have a very skewed idea of what "logic" entails, and for that I pity you.
| R315r4z0r wrote on Mon, 27 July 2009 17:47 |
Why's that?
|
Because generally speaking anime is pretty faggy.
| R315r4z0r wrote on Mon, 27 July 2009 17:47 |
Perhaps I didn't explain it well enough.
First of all, I didn't say one production radius would completely fill an entire base. You can have multiple radii in a single base.
|
Then all it is is an arbitrary limitation on where I can place my buildings, and if C&C's sidebar system didn't have enough of that already.
| R315r4z0r wrote on Mon, 27 July 2009 17:47 |
Second of all, just because you have a sped up production speed for one queue, doesn't mean you're only using one production structure. Let me clarify:
If you play RA2 and build like 5 War factories and then spam tanks from your single queue, you will notice that tanks will start coming out of multiple war factories, not just one. That's because the building speed is so fast, that one war factory is unable to respond quick enough to produce a second unit right after a first one comes out. So in that case, it is customary that the second-to-primary structure produce the unit instead. And if the speed is increased again, it may even take up to 3 or 4 different war factories to produce the units from a single queue.
My idea would look a little like this:
Three production structures in the same radius share a single production queue. However each structure produces one unit at a time because they are produced so rapidly.
|
That's still stupid. It's a special case in the War Factory that the building animation can't keep up with unit production if you produce units at a stupidly-fast rate. The barracks, to use your original example, wouldn't do that.
In any case, having units almost always coming out of the primary, occasionally out of the secondary, and never out of any other war factories isn't really that much of an improvement over all units coming out of the primaery, and both systems are inferior to all structures being used to their full potential.
| R315r4z0r wrote on Mon, 27 July 2009 17:47 |
Now, you asked how a single queue is better for your economy. Think about it for a second.
1 queue takes money for a single unit one at a time. When that unit is produced, money starts to be deducted for the second unit. It's also better because it automatically focuses your resources on a single unit at a time. (This is talking in terms of C&C, because in games like Starcraft, money is deducted instantly when you queue up a unit)
With multiple queues, your resources are being divided in real time and thus your funds end up being depleted much more quickly. You have credits going into creating one unit and credits going into creating another unit at the same time. This is the reason why it is very important to have a surplus of income in a C&C game that uses mutliple queues because if you don't and you use mutliple production queues, you will find that you have many idle periods in the match were you are waiting on your units because your resources aren't being collected fast enough.
If you require money to create 10 units, you will probably get the units out faster in a single queue than with a multiple queue.
Now, I know what you might be thinking: "Well that's nothing a little micro production management can't fix." And you would be correct. However, if you pause production on one queue to allow another queue to gain full access to all your resources, then what's the difference between doing that and simply having just a single queue?
|
You seem to be misinformed (Or willfully ignorant) on how the economy in C&C works. If you're producing something twice as fast, you're losing your money twice as fast also. If a unit costs $500 and takes 5 seconds to make and you speed him up to where he'll be done in 2.5 seconds, then you're being drained for $200 a second instead of your original $100 per second. It would be as if you're producting two units at once. The difference being if I'm producing two units at once, not only am I getting exactly what I purchased but I have the option of producing two different units at a time. This is, of course, assuming you're suggesting each additional structure speeds up production by exactly 100%. Any less and you're getting ripped off, and all the more reason to use the multiple queue system. Any more than 100% and it's WORSE for your economy because you'll be draining resources FASTER.
If you have idle periods in your matches then can I kindly suggest you L2RTS. If you've extended your production capacity beyond what your income can support, then you deserve the idle periods. Take a look at any match from any professional (Or even any high-level) gamer on any RTS and you'll always. always find that once a production structure is placed it almost never sits there idle.
| so say we all. wrote on Mon, 27 July 2009 15:36 |
| Dover wrote on Mon, 27 July 2009 14:49 |
. NOBODY does something for no reason. No exceptions.
|
you're sounding a bit like cheesesoda and that worries me no ends :/
|
Taxes suck government sucks blah blah!
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #396446 is a reply to message #394552] |
Tue, 28 July 2009 13:07 |
 |
Tupolev TU-95 Bear
Messages: 1176
Registered: April 2009
Location: Rìoghachd Aonaichte
Karma: 1
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
This should be in HoF 
Decent people = Reaver11, ErroR, all of the mods and admins, DRNG Naffets199, Amber, Dover, GEORGE ZIMMER,Zeratul, Starbuzzzz, kane,R315r4z0r,gnoepower, Danpaul88,HaTe,WNxVerty Tiberian Technologies Generalcamo,  ,  . If you want me to add you on the decent peoples list PM me.
Quotes or w/e Toggle
| Zeratul2400 |
.AIRCRAFT KILLER YOU AR NOT JUST A BIG JACKAS AND YOU THE BIG HEAD JUST YOU CREATE GLACIER FLAYING FUCK YOU BIG JAKAS YOUR MAPS IS BAD YOU WANT I WRUGHT THIS THE MAPS IS BAD HEY IS 1 YEAR
YOUR PROMESS A CON YARD WIRH A SINGLE PLAYER POWER PLANT IN ONE
MAPS AND IS DONT JUST ACK I TELL IT ALL REPLYER IN THIS FORUM I DESLIKE YOUâ„¢ 2003
|
Zeratul PT2 | zeratul2400 wrote on Mon, 10 November 2003 09:49 |
GENOCIDE YOU AR NOT JUST A BIG JACKAS AND YOU THE BIG HEAD JUST YOU CREATE DUSK FLAYING FUCK YOU BIG JAKAS YOUR MAPS IS BAD YOU WANT I WRUGHT THIS THE MAPS IS BAD HEY IS ONE YEAR YOUR PROMESS A WARPATH MOD WERKING BUT IT NO WORK AND DONT JUST GENOCIDE I TELL IT ALL REPLYER IN THIS FORUM I DESLIKE YOU.
|
lol| nikki6ixx wrote on Wed, 09 June 2010 05:11 |
With only 14 people living in Canada, the retarded one was bound to show up around here sooner or later.
|
| HaTe wrote on Sun, 04 July 2010 16:17 |
| Good-One-Driver wrote on Sun, 04 July 2025 01:37 |
everything is possible just need to know how to code
|
Jumping from the empire state building onto concrete head first and surviving is possible if I know how to code? Wow, teach me please.
|
| CarrierII wrote on Mon, 19 November 2007 22:35 |
I am in a bad mood with you, you wasted my time.
|
| Altzan wrote on Wed, 30 September 2009 14:10 |
| Dreganius wrote on Wed, 30 September 2009 07:27 |
| Good-One-Driver wrote on Wed, 30 September 2009 09:03 |
lol fuckin russians damn communists
|
That was the worst comment to this thread ever.
|
| Nightma12 wrote on Wed, 08 June 2011 14:27 |
your mum is a stupid language
|
|
| reborn wrote on Sun, 20 November 2011 11:54 |
Liquedv2, yew need to branch out a little on your thinking. I'm sure you'll twig it soon enough, but you're barking up the wrong tree.
The map is budding with new ideas and great game-play, AitcraftKiller just has to get to the root of the problem, it seems to have him pretty stumped right now.
Leaf him alone, he's doing a good job. I'm going to go out on a limb here, and say this map isn't fir you.
Anyway, this thread is really starting to lumber along, all this over some sap's map? I thought the game was dead, but this thread at least is poplar. It makes me pine for the days of yonder.
At the end of the day, life's a Beech.. Who wood of thought it?
|
| Ethenal wrote on Sun, 25 March 2012 16:53 |
| Azazel wrote on Sun, 25 March 2012 10:20 |
6 Players don't know how to use a tank.
|
But 1 knows how to use triggerbot!
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #396464 is a reply to message #396413] |
Tue, 28 July 2009 16:36 |
|
R315r4z0r
Messages: 3836
Registered: March 2005
Location: New York
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Tue, 28 July 2009 05:00 |
Because generally speaking anime is pretty faggy.
|
I find this funny (whether your intending it to be or not) because you are doing what you say I do. Why do you think it's faggy?
| Dover wrote on Tue, 28 July 2009 05:00 |
You seem to be misinformed (Or willfully ignorant) on how the economy in C&C works. If you're producing something twice as fast, you're losing your money twice as fast also. If a unit costs $500 and takes 5 seconds to make and you speed him up to where he'll be done in 2.5 seconds, then you're being drained for $200 a second instead of your original $100 per second. It would be as if you're producting two units at once. The difference being if I'm producing two units at once, not only am I getting exactly what I purchased but I have the option of producing two different units at a time. This is, of course, assuming you're suggesting each additional structure speeds up production by exactly 100%. Any less and you're getting ripped off, and all the more reason to use the multiple queue system. Any more than 100% and it's WORSE for your economy because you'll be draining resources FASTER.
If you have idle periods in your matches then can I kindly suggest you L2RTS. If you've extended your production capacity beyond what your income can support, then you deserve the idle periods. Take a look at any match from any professional (Or even any high-level) gamer on any RTS and you'll always. always find that once a production structure is placed it almost never sits there idle.
|
Not necessarily. Lets say you have 1000 credits and are using multiple queues. You wish to construct two tanks, one via each production facility. However, the a single tank costs 700 credits. If you were to queue up a tank for each queue, you would run out of money before a single tank is produced. But if you had just a single queue that simply produced the units twice as fast, then you would at least get one unit out into the field before your resources got depleted. And, it would be in half the time of the normal queue speed.
However, it still goes to show that there really wouldn't be very much difference between the two methods, gameplay wise. Multiple queues just makes it easier for the game to play itself. (Just so long as you have the resources to back you up)
Personally, I would prefer to have a steady trinkle of a single unit being produced every 3 seconds rather than two units being produced every 6 seconds. It might be the same in the long run, but at least it gives you some more forces to work with while you wait.
And I never suggested my general C&C matches composed of long idle periods of time. I was giving an advisory tip as to why it's important to make sure you have more money than you're looking to spend.
[Updated on: Wed, 29 July 2009 17:35] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #397509 is a reply to message #394552] |
Mon, 10 August 2009 11:23 |
 |
GEORGE ZIMMER
Messages: 2605
Registered: March 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
I kinda preferred RA2's method of dealing with multiple production structures. C&C3's just overcomplicated it a bit. Yeah, it's nice to be able to have diversity in what you build, but seeing as how C&C shaped up to be... I dunno, it just felt almost overwhelming.
Then again, that was also C&C3.
Toggle Spoiler| Scrin wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 13:22 |
| cAmpa wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 12:45 |
Scrin, stop pming people to get the building bars.
|
FUCK YOU AND THIS SHIT GAME WITH YOUR SCRIPTS!!! I HAVE ASKING YOU AND ANOTHER NOOBS HERE ABOUT HELP WITH THAT BUILDING ICONS FEATURES FOR YEARS, BUT YOU KEEP IGNORING ME AND KEEP WRITE SHIT, SO BURN YOU AND YOUR ASSLICKERS FRIENDS, THIS TIME I'M NOT COME BACK!!!!!!!!!   
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #397788 is a reply to message #394552] |
Wed, 12 August 2009 21:45 |
 |
NukeIt15
Messages: 987
Registered: February 2003
Location: Out to lunch
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Until somebody gives me terrain deformation again, it's still all a step backwards from TS. That one feature alone added a depth that simply doesn't exist in the newer games- to say nothing of the other environmental hazards. Forget all the pre-release bullshit promises for one second and the game still has more depth than the entire rest of the series- combine the environments and dynamic terrain from TS with newer features like garrisoning and you'd have a real winner.
If, that is, you didn't ruin it all by putting in too many and too powerful superweapons and epic units, too few defensive units, structures, and abilities, combined with obscenely fast build rates and weak-as-paper structure armor. Which EA would.
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine
Remember, kids: illiteracy is cool. If you took the time to read this, you are clearly a loser who will never get laid. You've been warned.
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon May 06 14:10:34 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01186 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
