Yah-Nosh

Given the new airplane physics, any more maps with planes will most likely require appropriately tailored design (longer distances, more generous flight ceiling, etc.) For those of you who want that (such as myself ), make noise about it so the devs get motivated to work on it. In the long run, we might even experiment with "plane only" maps and gamemodes, sort of a "low budget War Thunder / World of Warplanes" thing, but we'll have to do a lot of internal fixes before that, particularly in the netcode. As some of you might have noticed, planes have a tendency to glitch out when you have high ping. I'll talk to the others, we'll put together a comprehensive tutorial video

I second what the others here said: no good can come out of a premature release. Even if we had the capacity to do some kind of "Early Access" approach, an actual business with more people and more experience than us can mess that up. We have to good on the first impression. That being said, if you think more of a PR push would be a good idea (i.e making sure people don't think these projects are "dead"), then feel free to make suggestions. Ah, Miyamoto. Why didn't we listen to you?

I recently moved to the UK for work. No panic just yet, in fact I kind of wish the government stepped up its game in public awareness and action, but other than that, the only nuisance is a lot of empty shelves in the stores. My workplace is taking measures to let us work from home, and while it's not yet mandatory, it's already strongly recommended (i.e "everyone should pack up their projects and get ready to dig in at home")

The graphics I was sort of on the fence about, it really depends what they are going for in the long run. Deep Rock Galactic made it work superbly, and they had to, since the destructible terrain means they have to strip down the graphics to avoid murdering performance. Maybe since the scale of the battles is intended to be large, and Petro can't exactly work with things like Frostbite or whatever, they want to make sure it looks decent and performs well (plus maybe creating assets is easier, so they can make more in less time). Sure, a "realistic" Renegade-esque game would be awesome too, but I'm on board with this as long as they make it work.

On the one hand, super excited about this! On the other, I'm a bit worried about Petroglyph. Was it not less than a year ago that they came out with Conan Unconquered (which has a C&C pun right there in its name)? And previously it was the 8Bit series, Grey Goo, Universe At War... all of these were competently made, but it kind of feels like they just can't stick to a single project.

@FRAYDOThat shot of a MiG sniping a Gunboat, pure awesome :D

@GraYaSDF Wow, Renegade EVA even had lines for construction and all that? @Killing_YouNice stuff, though I'd up the recoil effect somewhat. Right now it's barely visible unless you're firing a machine gun at full auto.

Not even an honorable mention for me? j/k most of my changes aren't really TSR-specific, or haven't even been applied in gameplay yet. Congrats to everyone for all the hard work!

I'm of the camp that, in spite of all the real life difficulties (which I recognize), still tries to consider how and why such designs would be implemented. It's just more fun to think of how to get around the obstacles and come up with reasons for why this design would be chosen, instead of just dismissing everything outright. So that would be our starting point: why do it? There are a number of considerations. 1) It is intended to be a "mobile fortress" instead of a "tank". This is already sort of implied by the armaments and other features it has, such as the self-healing. If we look past video game logic, these features could in real life be more sophisticated functions, e.g carrying emergency supplies, extra fuel, extra parts, etc. Same goes for the weapons systems: it's not literally firing two cannons and the missile launchers, but is instead equipped to deliver different types of firepower, depending on what the current target is. Air units would be dealt with using missiles, and the cannons can bombard enemy positions. I think it's fair to assume the Mammoth is expected to attack at long ranges instead of fighting up close in tight quarters (e.g urban warfare). So if one imagines it as a "battleship turret on land", it's not quite as ridiculous anymore. Yeah, artillery could take it out, but a moving target is already a big step up in difficulty. AA rockets may pose a greater threat, but to have a safe bet, you'd need to be close and at an angle where the Mammoth can't easily fire back. Engage on an open field, and you're likely to die well before you could get a shot off. 2) With the above in mind, a Mammoth would probably suit defensive action much better. You have this beast presenting a big and dangerous target, and it can take a beating, so it will both attract enemy attention and keep them occupied. This can be quite valuable if you've got friendlies nearby, especially if they're setting up an ambush. Fighting all on your own is bad in any vehicle, so it's not really worth considering scenarios where Nod has 30 troops flanking one Mammoth from all around. It's more interesting to consider how it cooperates with other units. That said, offense could work as well, albeit not in the long term. The Mammoth would have a hard time keeping up with advancing units, and no doubt a lot of heavy-duty logistics would need to follow it as well. As a breakthrough tank (much like the Pz VI, i.e Tiger), however, it could work, again by delivering lots of firepower and forcing the enemy to focus on it. If only limited ranges are required in the first place, then this can be an effective tool. Really, you have to consider it this way: it's a bulldozer, not a truck. One is expected to be at the construction site, driving back and forth to bulldoze things. The other (i.e a smaller tank) is expected to make long distance trips reliably. 3) Crew safety. Obviously you're in a bigger target, so there is an increase in risk, but you are also effectively carrying your shelter with you. And no equipment is more valuable than its crew. The former can always be replaced, the latter is much harder to replace (the experience gained is lost forever). Not to mention that, since the Mammoth can draw fire to itself, it can increase the safety of other units nearby. Given the resources GDI has at its disposal, this seems like an acceptable tradeoff. 4) Fear factor. Just imagine seeing that giant beast rolling toward you, its engine rumbling and its massive cannons going off, destroying entire buildings around you. No doubt part of the Mammoth's mission would just be to scare off the enemy and remind everyone who's boss. And if you're the only one who can build a Mammoth, you will be a lot more scary than the other powers, who can only afford "lesser vehicles".

@JeodReally? I thought everyone was just too busy with other things to get around to it :D In any case, yeah, I'll try and help figure this out. I've already considered bringing up the topic of localization, since I figured that there's a ton of people out there who would be more interested in the game if they could play it in their own language (might even attract more modders too). And now we know there is actual demand for it.

Hi @__nEmPoBu4__ I'm one of the developers. I just wanted to add that we definitely should not give up hope on the localization just yet. I have an idea for solving the netcode issue mentioned above, and I'm discussing it with the team. Stay tuned. Also, I have a Russian friend who is currently looking for game projects where he can do translation/localization work. Do you guys already have a team assembled, or are you looking for contributors? Glad to have you on board!

Do let us know if it does work, and if so, how well. Might be worth looking into in the future, as the new plane physics have opened up a lot of new gameplay opportunities. More flying will mean people might want more control schemes.

Yeah, just making the engine free to use would be a big boost. It wouldn't be too hard to make a "totally-not-C&C-we-swear" game from that point forward.

By "putting us on Steam", do you mean actually being able to sell the games, or merely feature them as F2P mods? I would love either scenario, as even without money, the extra publicity would be a great boost. And with EA's apparent enthusiasm about the remasters, maybe they'll also be more lenient about mods. It's probably a pipe dream, but making some kind of deal with EA to officially endorse us, in return for some profit-sharing, would be super amazing. Would definitely make it a lot more appealing for devs to join if it's not just an unpaid hobby. Then again, I fear that even if EA were willing, they would (rightfully) also demand some QA benchmarks, which I doubt we could meet the same way AAA dev teams can. And this is probably why they don't even consider it. Also, w.r.t Steam: while the existence of C&C games already on there speaks in favor of putting W3D projects there as well, the recent issues with Steam (e.g the feud with Epic) might also be worth considering. Of course, while EA won't feature C&C on Origin either, there's not many other places we can go.

Give me a break. Nobody is going to your house to arrest you for what you posted into that channel. Nor did the shitposting and any humanitarian actions depend on each other. This kind of rhetoric makes the concept of "free speech" a joke. While there are people out there fighting actual legal battles for real violations of free expression, here we are, arguing over the fact that a Discord channel got axed for being full of content people don't want to associate themselves with. If you want, I can offer my own experiences: not long ago, a Discord server I'm a member of was nearly axed by Discord staff itself over someone reporting it for inappropriate content. Whoever did it was probably a troll, but it was a difficult case to convince the admins, mainly due to a lot of people (un)ironically posting alt-right memes and whatnot in that server. So it's not even just a thing our staff might take issues with, Discord itself does not like this kind of stuff. You don't like it, take it up with them. Personally, I'd rather not see the W3D server get dropped over something like this. And as others have pointed it out, we are going off topic, so that's my last bit of input on that subject.