Ice

They're just various old-fashioned stop signs from different countries. From left to right: America, England, Germany, Czechoslovakia, Italy, Finland

Added a few minor details to the traffic light model. Now it's officially done and ready for unwrapping.

The bare-metal parts of the signs now have actual textures, instead of blank blue test fill-ins

Just showing a couple other things I've been working on lately; A WIP collection of old-fashioned stop signs with the traffic light from before (not quite to scale), and a Russian-style rural water tower:

So why not make him a little bit like Volkov with dedicated AT and AP 'nades and see how that works for a test? So have the current F1 grenade for anti-personnel, and an RPG-6 (an AT hand grenade, not to be confused with the other 'RPG') or RKG-3 for anti-tank (probably with shorter range than the F1)?

I completely disagree with the idea of removing the Grenadier. He's a Red Alert unit and needs to stay, and his removal would disrupt the infantry balance and require yet another grueling session of balance testing. Aside from that, what exactly is people's problem with the Grenadier? He's a jack of all trades, which is exactly what I like about using him; He can fill multiple roles while not being too powerful in any single role, and doesn't need to be shoehorned into a specific niche. Plus I just generally find him fun to play as. Personally I'd say leave him as-is. He's not causing any real issues, he fills multiple roles and doesn't seem OP in any particular way, and he offers a unique play-style. IMO it feels like people are just fishing for problems that don't actually exist.

When the grenades are well-aimed, I find they're good for defending buildings from infiltrators since they have longer range than Starshinas and are faster/cheaper than Kapitans, and the grenade's AoE allows it to easily harm multiple enemies at once. Instead of rushing straight into the MCT room to fight the attacker(s), chuck a few grenades in there first and the enemy will quickly find themselves in bad shape.

IMO that would seem pretty redundant for such a humble vehicle as the supply truck and other similar units. At most they should maybe get a tan-painted variant for the desert, but anything more is kind of excessive.

Ah, I see what you mean now Okay I'll install gmax and try that.

I've tried that but it doesn't recognize gmax files. :/ Is there a plugin I need or something?

Hi, Just wondering how one would go about converting Gmax models to work in 3DS Max, for use in W3D games.

I would think that free-falling bombs should be easily possible in the RA engine, considering it's merely an updated version of the Tiberian Dawn engine, which featured A-10 airstrikes with free-fall napalm bombs. Plus I recall modding RA1 a couple years ago and messing around with various units/weapons via the rules.ini, and I'm pretty sure I got free-falling bombs to work in-game. I always thought the decision to use parabombs in RA was mostly a balance choice; Allowing units time to escape the danger zone before the bombs impacted.

Overall good changes, although I don't know about the Destroyer's turret rotating 360 degrees; Looks pretty weird seeing it shoot missiles through itself.

Capturable structures (oil derricks, etc.), usable assets (Reward crates, pre-spawned Rangers/Supply Trucks like on some current maps, a 'pilotable' MG nest/AT gun position/AA battery, etc.), or even just more areas to take cover and mount a defence from (more trenches/foxholes, heavy vegetation, civilian buildings and ruins, small abandoned/destroyed bases, etc.), probably combined with the above two ideas would still be really cool to see. So far all the map revamps have been moving in the right direction with this, and I hope it continues.

^ Agreed Ditto, but I would like a camo preference for maps set up. Do you mean having the camo list being ordered on each map based on suitability, but still having choices available? Because this already the case on several maps. I do, but I mean for maps where this isn't the case. Like in under, complex, or camos canyon. Yeah, I agree that the camo choices would be best put in a specific order on a per-map basic, as long as the individual player retains the final choice in whether to use the 'primary' camo on that map, or choose one of the alternatives based on their own personal preferences and tactics; For example, using urban camo on their Heavy tank or desert camo on their Medium tank for the sake of RA nostalgia, or using forest camo on a diverse map if they plan on going through the forested area, and later using urban camo if they want to go through the village, etc.

^ Agreed Ditto, but I would like a camo preference for maps set up.Do you mean having the camo list being ordered on each map based on suitability, but still having choices available? Because this already the case on several maps.

^ Agreed

Although a cool idea, this isn't Tiberian Sun.

I like Metro (and would like to see more urban maps in general), but the art direction needs a complete overhaul, ideally to look like a 1940's/50's European city, not downtown Los Angeles circa 1991. Also I'd love to see Canyon River and Camos Crossing come back, and of course, APB isn't really complete without the map which shares its name and is one of the most well-known maps in RA1. Okay, back on topic now.

How does waiting an extra 2 seconds for a tank hamper the balance?

And what a lot of people are saying is that they shouldn't be forced into only using a specific camo on a given map, and want to retain the ability to choose. At most the "correct" camo could be "suggested" by making it the first one on the list, but the others should still be available.

^ Indeed. Like the A-bomb, there should be some way of preventing the airstrike from reaching its target. The most logical way is to simply have the planes be destructible.

^ This. Plus some players simply prefer to use certain camo schemes regardless of the setting (although I admit seeing snow camo on a non-snow map is rather jarring). Personally, I like using urban camo most of the time, partially due to personal taste, and partially due to RA nostalgia (in the case of the Heavy Tank, which was most often shown sporting its dark urban camo in cutscenes). If AR's system of forced theatre-specific camo, for example, was adopted for APB, there would be very few maps where urban camo would be seen, and this lack of choice would be too restraining for APB IMO. Also, from a realistic perspective... This happens all the time in real life too. Whitewash isn't always gonna be in supply.

Personally I like OWA's idea of the Phase Tank being available on certain maps, and the Chrono Tank on others, with both filling a similar role but with their own unique advantages/disadvantages. Not only would it vary things up a bit and sorta make sense lore-wise, but in theory it would also require a lot less balancing effort, since you'd simply have to balance the Chrono Tank around the overall balance, rather than having to balance everything else around the Chrono Tank. This should prevent the current balance from needing to be revamped and potentially messed up.

It would be nice if ship maneuverability could be tweaked a bit. Currently any attempt to turn while going at a respectable speed results in the boat going completely sideways and often slamming into a cliff. Fact check: We may have to dig a little deeper into this matter.