Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Raap last won the day on August 22 2019

Raap had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

599 Excellent


About Raap

  • Rank
  • Birthday 09/04/1988

Profile Information

  • Ingame Username
  • Gender
  • Location
    The Netherlands
  • Icon

Contact Methods

  • Steam

Recent Profile Visitors

9,276 profile views
  1. Hopefully people will find these aircraft controls to be a good middle-ground between the old and new ones.
  2. The heightfield editor has been removed in Mammoth since the engine never properly supported it to begin with. If you wish to do level design for a W3D project, you will need 3DS Max8 (released in 2006), or 3DS Max 2017. We encourage using 3DS Max 2017 if you can accord it or own a student licence. Unfortunately the texture blending you experienced in the old LevelEdit (that is now only used for Renegade) is not supported in 3DS Max, because of the limitations of the W3D material system. So either way you'd be looking at learning to do it the way we do it ourselves. Fortunately most tutorials we have are still fairly accurate despite frequently using older versions of 3DS or even RenX in screenshots. If you have more specific questions, feel free to ask them. We also have a #modding channel in the W3DHub discord if you wish to ask questions about making content for W3D games.
  3. Any change is technically a violation of source material. But there comes a point where you have to make some changes. The source material is an RTS from 20 (!) years ago. What is important here is that the changes do not violate the "feeling" of the universe. The EMP Cannon does not do this because it logically makes a hybrid of two source materials; The Mobile EMP vehicle, and the EMP Cannon defense structure. The latter does not exist in TSR so by merging it into the Mobile EMP, we effectively added something from the original source material into TSR. Likewise, any other additions or alterations applied to TSR that deviate from the source material, are not necessarily bad, as long as they do not exceed the realm of plausibility, providing that the rationale behind the change(s) are well grounded.
  4. Thanks for writing this up. I'm hoping we can find a more user friendly workflow for this in the future, that doesn't involve hacking away at the files.
  5. The Nod APC can dig, a very useful function that is difficult to counter. We're also considering giving it a harmful drill like the Devil's Tongue. It's a very small weapon, it doesn't even the vehicle silhouette. As for fun; This is subjective. For each person saying X is fun, there is someone saying X is not fun. The general assumption here is however, that units that "got nothing to do besides moving" is more likely to be considered not fun by more people. Either way, play testing will dictate if this is a keeper or not. I'm personally optimistic, since the Mobile EMP overhaul did in fact see positive feedback, and those changes were made primarily for very similar reasons (with the added effort put into making it not a frustrating unit to fight as a Nod player).
  6. We're trying to not limit gameplay design for a shooter based on arbitrary restrictions such as "the RTS didn't do it". Remember, this is not an RTS. We will respect the source material in terms of visuals and high level gameplay, but a lot of the combat and control mechanics must be tailored towards being suitable for FPS gameplay, otherwise you'd be left with a bunch of niche units only a few people would enjoy playing. Perfect example: The old Mobile EMP. This should come to no surprise for long-term Reborn followers, as the game always deviated from source material for gameplay purposes. See for example the expanded infantry character roster. The only difference now is, TSR isn't getting more new units added, but the existing ones will be more refined and more fun, to more people.
  7. Some context for the GDI APC gun, which is still in concept stages. It is most likely going to be an auto cannon weapon, something no TSR unit has right now. Damage-wise it will be worse at anti-infantry than the Wolverine, and worst against vehicles and structures than the Titan. It would be a sort of "sub-par jack of all trades, master of nothing". Useful to help finish off low health enemies, but mainly to help make the driver have something to do while driving. It's also a decent tool for communication; Being able to fire upon the intended target so the crew knows, without having to directly communicate, what the intended target is. Being an auto cannon, it would mean it has a relatively low RPM (something like 1 round per 0.75 seconds, give or take).
  8. In regards to maps, I can only say that you need to take everything you know about TSR maps right now, and delete it. When we are further along, we will share more details.
  9. In a lot of cases it was the GDI buildings that had more issues, compared to the Nod ones. Expect to see more building updates when the game launches, especially in regards to optimizations.
  10. Basically, the justification just isn't there. So much work for something people run through maybe just once. The Sole Survivor Renegade mod was fun - I remember the multiplayer. I do not remember the singleplayer, which indicates 2 possible things; That the singleplayer campaigns were not memorable nor replayable, or that I have a bad memory.
  11. I'm a bit late here but let me clarify the main issues with singleplayer. There is no technical limitation. We can do singleplayer, we can do a whole lot of whatever we want, since we control the full engine codebase. Yes, some things are hard coded, but if someone has both the time and motivation, there isn't technically much stopping us from doing something. Why we've not seen singleplayer content in released projects yet, is simply because most of us as developers/designers do not feel much for it. Most of us prefer working on multiplayer games because of the replayability and social aspects. But no, to re-iterate, right now I could make a singleplayer mission if I wanted to (I'd just have to check up on a few things). But I lack the time and have no motivation to do so, since I believe for our engine, multiplayer is the heart of it. Something else to keep in mind is that while the engine has improved a lot over the years, we've not put any work into singleplayer stuff, so mechanically we're still very limited there. It would make more sense to create singleplayer games on a different engine. AR will be using a little bit of singleplayer for a tutorial mission. (And you will want to play it, because AR works a little different from your typical C&C shooter!)
  12. The maps we have selected for launch are receiving a lot of changes, especially in the realm of optimization. If you're ever curious about whats being changed and why about that map, you should message ChopBam as he's the one tasked to it. (I'm personally tasked with bringing Field, Cliffs, and Snow up to standards.)
  13. Bzzzt. Also, I've already updated the lightning-struck effect on both characters and vehicles (EMP blast), so it is now extra crispy zappy.
  14. I'd suggest removing the older and duplicate files from that download page, at the moment the latest file is listed at the bottom.
  15. @Pushwall Perhaps its time to consider just fully supporting AI in maps (all but HostileWaters I guess, I have no idea how the AI would be able to make sense of that, perhaps @moonsense715 has some ideas?). At this point I mainly see benefits to it. The negatives might be worked out as Moonsense improves the AI. Even just 6 bots per team will improve the flow for skirmish exploration and might help populate the server a bit more easily since you actually have something to shoot at. Ideally we'd drop the bots out as matches begin to populate with players, but again, at this point I'd rather just have 6 bots per team permanently than none at all. I also like how my 2016 posts in the topic are really not that true anymore, the AI IS better now. Far from perfect, but no longer purely idiotic.
  • Create New...