147 replies to this topic

[caltor]

Oops, forgot to mention...I have seen the tech sam site before and I do like it. I do think that it should have a different sound effect. It shouldn't have the same one as the patriot missile. If you have ever seen the movie "Behind Enemy Lines", there is a "sam site" type structure that fires. That sound effect I think would be really neat.

Caltor

[Bob]

Thanks, that helps a lot. So I can go into World Builder and upload the default maps and place tech same sites in each base and other tech buildings? Is this difficult? You will have to tell me how, lol. What I meant by the artillery barrage is that say you capture a tech navy base (when 8.0 comes out) and it gets destroyed. You can no longer build the naval forces which I would like to build. I think maybe there should be a regular naval base, like there is an airfield, and build a tech naval base for units you normally you wouldn't see in the game (like the tech airfield). This way you can always have naval forces.

Caltor

Well, if your talking about editing maps that you download ('fan made' maps) from websites such as C&C Den Then it's pretty easy to edit these maps using worldbuilder. Not much of a problem, once you start poking around with worldbuilder, and start learning about it.

If your talking about taking the 'official' EA game maps that came with Generals/Zero Hour, or the maps that were officially created by PR staff and contributors, then It becomes much more involved. In this case you have to use what's known as a .big editor just in order to get to these maps.

The steps to access these maps are posted here.

As for the arty barrage, I really can't answer at this time whether it will take one shot or two to take it out completely at this point. Vanguard hasn't released a beta version of 8.0 yet, so I haven't even seen the tech naval yard yet. Everything that I've been reporting on, has been information that Vanguard has posted previously throughout this forum over the last few months. I'm looking forward to the day that I can play with the tech naval yard, so I can see what changes to the naval units have been made, play with the new subs, and finish my map that I've been tinkering with for the longest time. Kinda looking forward to getting it out of my hair and moving on to a new map.

As for a buildable navy, there was one in previous versions prior to version 7.0. Then there was discussions about how few naval maps were out there that supported such large naval units, and how it looked funny having big ships in rivers, etc... etc... . So basically after this discussion, Vanguard decided (and I agree with this thinking) that it should be left up to the map makers decide whether their maps were of an appropriate size and nature for naval battles with the larger ships (and now subs). So, the Tech Naval Yard idea was born.

I also think this is a good idea to have it, and now the GPS station as well, as a tech structures. Now there's more important things on the battlefield to fight for in the game. It's now not just a given that you will have a naval yard and GPS station to build at your command anymore, each and every game. Now you have to fight for it (possibly, depending how the map is set up), and defend it. If you fail to defend it, then your SOL.

The exception to that however, is if the map maker sets the the tech structure up as an indestructible building, then it cant be destroyed. Sound good however after tinkering around with that setting, I've come to realize that the AI is stupid enough lock on to it, sit there all game, and try to take it out. Even if you put a carrier out in the middle of open water (the carrier is invincible) the AI will lock on to it, plunge itself against the shoreline, and sit there for the game. I guess the AI's waiting for the tide to come in or something.

So when you make/edit your map, and decide to make these structures indestructible, then you're going to have to take the AI's crappy behavior into consideration.

[Vanguard]

I wont take stuff from a movie. They get what they get, the sounds take a lot of space in the installer, so there probably wont be to many more sound or music files.

Time for you guys to choose.

1) AS-90

2) This

Edited by Vanguard, 04 May 2006 - 08:19 PM.

[00 Nobody]

I choose #2.

[Soul]

Wat's #2 anyway?

[Bob]

Glad to see I wasn't the only one watching the Discovery Channel last night!

#2 is the NLOS (Non Line Of Site) cannon self-propelled artillery:

'NLOS cannon fires 1,000th test round
By Maj. Desiree Wineland
April 22, 2005

YUMA PROVING GROUND, Ariz. (Army News Service, April 22, 2005) -- The Army’s newest self-propelled artillery system fired its 1,000th test round on April 14, capping many months of testing that began at Yuma Proving Ground in August 2003.

The Non-Line of Site cannon is a one-of-a-kind artillery system, capable of firing a round every 10 seconds and maintaining a sustained rate of six rounds per minute at ranges of nearly 15 miles.

The NLOS cannon was designed to move rapidly, stop quickly and deliver lethal fire in near-record time. The aluminum-armored vehicle has a diesel engine that provides power to a hybrid-electric drive that propels two extremely quiet 18-inch band tracks. With a two-man crew, the NLOS cannon features an automatic ammunition-handling system and is being designed to easily fit inside the cargo bay of a C-130 aircraft. The NLOS will be more fuel efficient than existing self-propelled artillery systems, according to officials who estimate perhaps as much as 30 percent more.

Manual tasks -- such as having to manually handle projectiles and powder charges, and yank a rope lanyard to fire each round -- have become automated. In the NLOS cannon this entire process is completed by using an automated ammunition handling system which includes a laser igniter, robotics, all-electric drives, networking, and much more. It’s a more efficient, faster and less labor-intensive system, according to officials.

The NLOS is also a much lighter vehicle; weighing in at 23 tons in its Full Combat Configuration, compared to the Crusader, which weighed in over 40 tons. For a light vehicle, it packs a punch.

As a demonstrator, officials said the NLOS shows great promise as a key component of the 21st century’s Future Combat System, or FCS.

“This is the lead system in manned ground vehicles for the Future Combat System,” said Maj. Darby McNulty, assistant product manager for the NLOS cannon and mortar. “It will be one of eight FCS variants across the combat vehicle family, but all will use the same chassis.”

An actual prototype is scheduled to arrive at Yuma proving ground in the summer of 2007, with an operational capability two years later.

As America’s longest overland artillery range, Yuma Proving Ground sees a great deal of firing activity throughout the year, hosting both U.S. weapon systems and those from friendly foreign nations. McNulty said the testing capabilities of the proving ground closely matched what needed to be with the NLOS cannon.

“We get fantastic testing support here and we have a close working relationship with all the organizations involved – the Army program management office, United Defense and the proving ground,” McNulty said.

The NLOS cannon promises to be a fixture at the proving ground for many years as it evolves and matures into an operational combat system, McNulty said. For now, 100-pound projectiles fired by the NLOS cannon demonstrator will continue to fly through the clear desert skies of southwest Arizona.'

Article above from Army News Service and posted on Global Security Org at:
http://www.globalsec...22-arnews02.htm

One thing that I found extemely interesting is that the NLOS cannon has a 'stealth mode' that allows this vehicle to travel for up to 20 minutes on battery power, without running the onboard diesel engine.

So, given the choice, I vote #2.
Vote Yes to NLOS in this election year.

Edited by Bob, 05 May 2006 - 02:24 AM.

[Soul]

Then i vote for #2 go NLOS!

[AlphaVergo]

Holy, that is one cool peice of armor GO NUMBER 2.

[Fire Ze Missiles!]

This! This! This! NLOS!

[00 Nobody]

Well, looks like everyone wants the NLOS instead of the AS-90. Go on VG, replace it. you know you wanna...

[Delta24US]

I say #2

[00 Nobody]

Hey Delta, haven't seen you in a while.

[caltor]

Thanks, that helps a lot. So I can go into World Builder and upload the default maps and place tech same sites in each base and other tech buildings? Is this difficult? You will have to tell me how, lol. What I meant by the artillery barrage is that say you capture a tech navy base (when 8.0 comes out) and it gets destroyed. You can no longer build the naval forces which I would like to build. I think maybe there should be a regular naval base, like there is an airfield, and build a tech naval base for units you normally you wouldn't see in the game (like the tech airfield). This way you can always have naval forces.

Caltor

Well, if your talking about editing maps that you download ('fan made' maps) from websites such as C&C Den Then it's pretty easy to edit these maps using worldbuilder. Not much of a problem, once you start poking around with worldbuilder, and start learning about it.

If your talking about taking the 'official' EA game maps that came with Generals/Zero Hour, or the maps that were officially created by PR staff and contributors, then It becomes much more involved. In this case you have to use what's known as a .big editor just in order to get to these maps.

The steps to access these maps are posted here.

As for the arty barrage, I really can't answer at this time whether it will take one shot or two to take it out completely at this point. Vanguard hasn't released a beta version of 8.0 yet, so I haven't even seen the tech naval yard yet. Everything that I've been reporting on, has been information that Vanguard has posted previously throughout this forum over the last few months. I'm looking forward to the day that I can play with the tech naval yard, so I can see what changes to the naval units have been made, play with the new subs, and finish my map that I've been tinkering with for the longest time. Kinda looking forward to getting it out of my hair and moving on to a new map.

As for a buildable navy, there was one in previous versions prior to version 7.0. Then there was discussions about how few naval maps were out there that supported such large naval units, and how it looked funny having big ships in rivers, etc... etc... . So basically after this discussion, Vanguard decided (and I agree with this thinking) that it should be left up to the map makers decide whether their maps were of an appropriate size and nature for naval battles with the larger ships (and now subs). So, the Tech Naval Yard idea was born.

I also think this is a good idea to have it, and now the GPS station as well, as a tech structures. Now there's more important things on the battlefield to fight for in the game. It's now not just a given that you will have a naval yard and GPS station to build at your command anymore, each and every game. Now you have to fight for it (possibly, depending how the map is set up), and defend it. If you fail to defend it, then your SOL.

The exception to that however, is if the map maker sets the the tech structure up as an indestructible building, then it cant be destroyed. Sound good however after tinkering around with that setting, I've come to realize that the AI is stupid enough lock on to it, sit there all game, and try to take it out. Even if you put a carrier out in the middle of open water (the carrier is invincible) the AI will lock on to it, plunge itself against the shoreline, and sit there for the game. I guess the AI's waiting for the tide to come in or something.

So when you make/edit your map, and decide to make these structures indestructible, then you're going to have to take the AI's crappy behavior into consideration.

I downloaded the .big editor, and extracted the PR maps (they also include some maps like Twilight Flame that haven't been edited by PR staff. I copied the maps into my C:/Documents and Settings/My Documents/Zero Hour/Maps. I opened World Builder, and edited Twilight Flame. I just added a few new PR tech buildings. I saved it as a user map, in the location specified above as "New Twilight Flame". When I ran PR, the maps that I extracted from the .big editor weren't in Unofficial Maps, including my New Twilight Flame. The edited Twilight Flame map opens in World Builder, but not in the game, along with the rest of the PR maps that should be under unofficial maps that I extracted. Please help me out with this problem.

Thanks, Caltor

[Bob]

Make sure that the edited maps are in the C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\My Documents\Command and Conquer Generals Zero Hour Data\Maps folder.

The path name may be slightly different on your system for various reasons, but the big thing is to make sure your edited maps end up in the ...\My Documents\Command and Conquer Generals Zero Hour Data\Maps folder.

Also, in the maps folder make sure that the actual name of the edited map (the .map file) matches the folder name that the map sits in exactly. Otherwise, the edited maps will not show up in the game.

[caltor]

Make sure that the edited maps are in the C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\My Documents\Command and Conquer Generals Zero Hour Data\Maps folder.

The path name may be slightly different on your system for various reasons, but the big thing is to make sure your edited maps end up in the ...\My Documents\Command and Conquer Generals Zero Hour Data\Maps folder.

Also, in the maps folder make sure that the actual name of the edited map (the .map file) matches the folder name that the map sits in exactly. Otherwise, the edited maps will not show up in the game.

Yea, I checked this, and it is in the correct place, and the folder is named "New Twilight" and the .map is named "New Twilight" as well. It does not appear in "Unofficial Maps" section. I don't know what the problem is.

Caltor

[Bob]

Well, I'm stumped then.

I don't know what else to recommend, other than trying again, and saving it under another name. Beats me. Anyone else here have a clue as to what's up with that?

[00 Nobody]

Is the map a simple multiplayer map, full-blown mission, heavily modded map...? If so, you may be a little outta your league (ok, maybe not a little). I'm only recently beginning to mod my maps to have different buildings and units available.

[caltor]

All I have done to the map is a dd a few tech sam sites, a few tech airfields and a few new buildings you can place troops inside. That is it. I extracted it from the 0project file (or whatever the name was) and opened it from World Builder, madea few changes and saved it. Doesn't even show up in the game a s unofficial maps. That section is blank.

Well I will try again, extracting again and redoing the change for the map. Good thing it only took about 20 minutes.

Thanks again, Caltor

[00 Nobody]

What's the map's name? Twighlight Flame? Maybe I should see it, but I'm not gonna fix the problems, you are. I'll just tell you what to do.

Edited by 00 Nobody, 10 May 2006 - 11:27 PM.

[Vanguard]

All the maps in there have been edited wether you want to believe me or not, because if they weren't in there, then the Militia wouldn't work on the default EA maps, due to the fact that they wouldn't have the folder slot for the Militia's AI.