Reset Password · C&C Labs Forums

Welcome Guest! You can not login or register.

Posted by: Sloane - Friday, September 26, 2003 6:28:11 PM
[sunglasses] Ya know what would make a good mod better? Boats. There are already images for a battleship and hovercraft so use em.

Posted by: Blbpaws - Saturday, September 27, 2003 6:54:58 AM
a bit late. Maybe for another mod.

Posted by: SUBZERO - Saturday, September 27, 2003 10:02:01 AM
I totally agree with you Sloane. I've always wanted naval units in Generals, because it would add a ton of gameplay to it. However, it isn't as easy as you think to add that kind of stuff to a game or mod. You can't just say," oh! we should put boats into the game." and then it happens overnite. Regardless of the fact that there are already images for hovercraft, or battleships, you still have to write the code for them, write their behavior code, write code for water/shore boundries, write code for all the other units so they can attack boats, and syncronize the voice clips with the boat's actions, etc. etc. I would love to see naval units in future installments, but it just may not happen.[disappointed]

Posted by: SUBZERO - Saturday, September 27, 2003 10:02:01 AM

I totally agree with you Sloane. I've always wanted naval units in Generals, because it would add a ton of gameplay to it. However, it isn't as easy as you think to add that kind of stuff to a game or mod. You can't just say," oh! we should put boats into the game." and then it happens overnite. Regardless of the fact that there are already images for hovercraft, or battleships, you still have to write the code for them, write their behavior code, write code for water/shore boundries, write code for all the other units so they can attack boats, and syncronize the voice clips with the boat's actions, etc. etc. I would love to see naval units in future installments, but it just may not happen.[disappointed]

Posted by: Firion Corodix - Sunday, September 28, 2003 9:48:54 AM
maybe an idea for EA to make another expansion for generals that includes naval. but i dont think it's something for generals. if they make like a ra3 then it could be in there. units in generals are just too big so just imagine how big ships would be then. in ra2 ships where just a little bit bigger than tanks they cant be that big in generals that would look stupid and ruin the game. and there might be a hovercraft and battleship but what will the other sides get then? hovercraft aint that good in a game though. it would have to be big if it even has to carry like 2 tanks. chinook is kinda stupid that it carries 2 tanks that togheter are bigger then the chinook. so the hovercraft would have to be as big as a ship. and that would be too big for a warfac. so it cant be made there if it is then it aint realistic. if you make a shipyard then that would have to be HUGE too. and i wonder how much it would cost. or how much a ship would cost when you look at the cost of a tank well maybe a ship should cost 30000 then. and if you have a aircraftcarrier whit the capacity for 40 aircraft then when you make it it would cost 80000 then and then the aircraft that you still need to make how you planning on getting cash for that? well no no naval for generals generals is based to much on realism to be able to have a navy. but a new ra could have a navy.

Posted by: Firion Corodix - Sunday, September 28, 2003 9:48:54 AM

maybe an idea for EA to make another expansion for generals that includes naval. but i dont think it's something for generals. if they make like a ra3 then it could be in there. units in generals are just too big so just imagine how big ships would be then. in ra2 ships where just a little bit bigger than tanks they cant be that big in generals that would look stupid and ruin the game. and there might be a hovercraft and battleship but what will the other sides get then? hovercraft aint that good in a game though. it would have to be big if it even has to carry like 2 tanks. chinook is kinda stupid that it carries 2 tanks that togheter are bigger then the chinook. so the hovercraft would have to be as big as a ship. and that would be too big for a warfac. so it cant be made there if it is then it aint realistic. if you make a shipyard then that would have to be HUGE too. and i wonder how much it would cost. or how much a ship would cost when you look at the cost of a tank well maybe a ship should cost 30000 then. and if you have a aircraftcarrier whit the capacity for 40 aircraft then when you make it it would cost 80000 then and then the aircraft that you still need to make how you planning on getting cash for that? well no no naval for generals generals is based to much on realism to be able to have a navy. but a new ra could have a navy.

Posted by: Andy - Monday, September 29, 2003 5:07:55 AM
[angry] RA2 ALREADY HAS A NAVY! FOR THE ALLIED FORCES, THE SOVIET FORCES, AND EVEN YURI HAS A SUB PEN THAT BUILDS "BOOMER" SUBS! SO WHAT'S "...BUT A NEW RA COULD HAVE A NAVY (-cdlord)" S'POSED TO MEAN???

Posted by: Firion Corodix - Monday, September 29, 2003 5:34:40 AM
ea could make a RA3 and that would most likely be 3d as generals but in thatone they could do ships because ra2 wasn't based on realism and tanks and ships where too small there so they can be too small in ra3 too so it could have ships in a game that's more like generals then like ra2 in graphics.

Posted by: Andy - Monday, September 29, 2003 5:44:48 AM
ah, ok, i get it

Posted by: Blbpaws - Monday, September 29, 2003 12:35:59 PM
reminder: no ships in RT

Posted by: Firion Corodix - Wednesday, October 1, 2003 6:26:57 AM
we know that blb. can i call you blb blbpaws? o wait i already did.

Posted by: Blbpaws - Friday, October 3, 2003 2:07:22 PM
i don't mind

Posted by: incia - Friday, October 3, 2003 4:13:08 PM
Blbpaws I have wondered a long time now... What does blb stand for? I know what paws mean though.

Posted by: Marek - Friday, November 7, 2003 5:41:43 AM
i know btw means by the way it took me ages to figure that out but i'm not sure what blp means probably blurb or something

Posted by: Blbpaws - Saturday, November 8, 2003 5:32:26 AM
i don't know either

Posted by: incia - Saturday, November 8, 2003 8:05:11 AM
Well I think the rest speaks for itself...

Posted by: Marek - Friday, November 21, 2003 12:25:06 AM
yup, i agree with Incia on that one.

Posted by: Flaming_Phoenix - Friday, November 21, 2003 12:46:49 AM
ships wouldnt be fair in generals then amerika wins i mean wat ships should the gla have? they already have a weakness cause they dont have plains and heli's but gla will even be weaker with ships

Posted by: Marek - Thursday, November 27, 2003 4:50:52 AM
no if you have ships iu think gla should have tham becuase usa and china have planes so gla should have ships ok? Incia make a mod for ships and release it next month ok?

Posted by: incia - Thursday, November 27, 2003 11:17:11 AM
Incia don't do MODs.

Posted by: Marek - Friday, December 5, 2003 12:44:21 AM
wh not my mate has neraly finished your one he just needs to assess the games quality of your MOD

Posted by: Talal - Monday, December 8, 2003 3:46:01 PM
GLA could have pirate ships with those cannon ball launchers (forgot the name) and a Age of empire style fishing net to earn money, lets see, rafts for transport, cannoes full of gunpowder, and the naval yard can actually be called the sea port!

Posted by: Marek - Friday, December 12, 2003 3:56:07 AM
lol hey yeah that would be good cuz usa and china have planes so give gla ships!

Posted by: Overlord - Friday, February 20, 2004 12:23:54 AM
so what the gla would suddenly be pushed back into the middle ages? no ships should be added they are just another way to waste money and time building as most maps wouldnt be able to support ships and when you play generals you really dont think about sea units do you? also whoever said that crap about realism i have this to say, it is an rts game, if it was realistic then usa would win all the time and it isnt based entirely on realism. 1 have you ever seen a laser tank or an emperor tank? have you ever heard of speaker towers that magically heal you? tanks in real life move a hell of a lot faster than the ones in generals, automatic weapons ARE actually automatic miniguns dont look like rifles, in real life ppl dont level up stripes when they kill each other. it is a game for entertainment purposes without these unrealistic units and whatever the game wouldnt be that great its more challenging and fun when chinooks drop lots of tanks in ur base, its boring when 1 chinook drops 1 tank or whatever its more fun when ur infantry gen and u put ecm tanks in front of ur bunkers and watch the stealth fighter missles miss and their plans are ruined and you have a laugh then nuke their base for insulting you with futile attempts to destroy you. its all also about balance because 1 nuke would really wipe out an entire base instead of just a few structures. i rest my case.

Posted by: Overlord - Friday, February 20, 2004 12:23:54 AM

so what the gla would suddenly be pushed back into the middle ages? no ships should be added they are just another way to waste money and time building as most maps wouldnt be able to support ships and when you play generals you really dont think about sea units do you? also whoever said that crap about realism i have this to say, it is an rts game, if it was realistic then usa would win all the time and it isnt based entirely on realism. 1 have you ever seen a laser tank or an emperor tank? have you ever heard of speaker towers that magically heal you? tanks in real life move a hell of a lot faster than the ones in generals, automatic weapons ARE actually automatic miniguns dont look like rifles, in real life ppl dont level up stripes when they kill each other. it is a game for entertainment purposes without these unrealistic units and whatever the game wouldnt be that great its more challenging and fun when chinooks drop lots of tanks in ur base, its boring when 1 chinook drops 1 tank or whatever its more fun when ur infantry gen and u put ecm tanks in front of ur bunkers and watch the stealth fighter missles miss and their plans are ruined and you have a laugh then nuke their base for insulting you with futile attempts to destroy you. its all also about balance because 1 nuke would really wipe out an entire base instead of just a few structures. i rest my case.

Posted by: sai - Thursday, March 11, 2004 3:36:41 AM
overlord is so right. the game isnt realstec if they would have whanted to put ship they could they justt diciedid it wasnt in place

Posted by: Marek - Thursday, March 11, 2004 5:28:45 AM
FFS! Who brought this topic back to life?. This is/was a dead topic it means no-more people to post, but.... Its not breaking the rules so carry on!.

Posted by: incia - Thursday, March 11, 2004 7:06:17 AM
Wasn't it you Marek who brought this topic to live?

Posted by: KingRaptor89 - Thursday, March 11, 2004 7:27:42 AM
bah. ships. GLA ships when they're in e middle east? i don;t think so..wad r dey gonna hav? lousy motorboats vs huge air craft carriers??

Posted by: Warbringer - Thursday, April 8, 2004 5:07:01 AM
[quote=Overlord] its all also about balance because 1 nuke would really wipe out an entire base instead of just a few structures. i rest my case. [/quote] The nuke in Generals is a BFLBM. Also known as BattleField Launched Ballistic Missile. It wouldn't destroy a whole base but destory all buildings n units. n u do know man cannot run around shooting with a minigun. coz of the strong recoil they have...

Posted by: Warbringer - Thursday, April 8, 2004 5:07:01 AM

[quote=Overlord] its all also about balance because 1 nuke would really wipe out an entire base instead of just a few structures. i rest my case. [/quote] The nuke in Generals is a BFLBM. Also known as BattleField Launched Ballistic Missile. It wouldn't destroy a whole base but destory all buildings n units. n u do know man cannot run around shooting with a minigun. coz of the strong recoil they have...

Posted by: Blbpaws - Thursday, April 8, 2004 6:13:16 AM
Generals is not super realistic. It would be boring if it was.

Posted by: Warbringer - Tuesday, April 20, 2004 4:34:26 AM
in some cases yes but sumtyms not. like in generals ZH the fighters dont have a machine gun on em. like the a10 thunderbolt. most tanks have 2 machine guns n GL Launchers. Those would b alrite. and infantries with grenades. and should also have inaccurate missiles.

Posted by: Marek - Wednesday, April 21, 2004 3:24:43 AM
actuallt it wasn't me who brought this topic back to life it was...Overlord. Damn I hate it when people do this. Bring dead topics back to life. I used to but I got my post count reduced becuase of it. regards, marek ;) 0(-_-)0

Posted by: ArtilleryMaster - Thursday, May 27, 2004 12:15:59 PM
Just an idea: instead of shipyards, a ship can be called in to the map. It would appear where you click like an attack tunnel and leave after awhile like a spectre.

Important Information: