discuss ideas for harvesting in new C&C

[MarkedofDave]

sinse in past C&C's harvesting used to be less worrying to lose until in C&C3 both harvesting and harvesters becomes more important than base because of players such as begginers or type that isnt good with rushing like pro players loses much more faster cause of it takes to lose all harvesters to lose more faster than losing your base. That would explain why EA did harvesting way different in RA 3 and in C&C4 they took away harvesting which then it becomes less fustraiting to fight enemies without need to keep eye on harvesters for everysingle secs.

The kind of suggestions i have in mind for making harvesting survive much better from small group of teir 1 units like attackbikes and pittballs is giving harvesters more bonus stuff like rocket launcher weapon, shield ability, all conyards start with a couple of slots able to build basedefences there for early matches, harvesters have much more HP.

Some ideas that atlease help noob/beginner players to survive longer in early matches and changes the gameplay from 'it takes losing harvesters to lose and youll just quit' into 'it takes losing your base to lose'.
Making harvesting much less painfull to keep an eye on.

[Klandri]

In new CnC they should have more armor, like in TS or older.

In CnC 3, just keep a few rocket squads ready to defend and you'll have little problems with bikes.

[VasquezMkII]

sinse in past C&C's harvesting used to be less worrying to lose until in C&C3 both harvesting and harvesters becomes more important than base because of players such as begginers or type that isnt good with rushing like pro players loses much more faster cause of it takes to lose all harvesters to lose more faster than losing your base. That would explain why EA did harvesting way different in RA 3 and in C&C4 they took away harvesting which then it becomes less fustraiting to fight enemies without need to keep eye on harvesters for everysingle secs.

The kind of suggestions i have in mind for making harvesting survive much better from small group of teir 1 units like attackbikes and pittballs is giving harvesters more bonus stuff like rocket launcher weapon, shield ability, all conyards start with a couple of slots able to build basedefences there for early matches, harvesters have much more HP.

Some ideas that atlease help noob/beginner players to survive longer in early matches and changes the gameplay from 'it takes losing harvesters to lose and youll just quit' into 'it takes losing your base to lose'.
Making harvesting much less painfull to keep an eye on.

Huh huh...

Also, I understand what you're saying and i'm pretty sure that it frustrates everyone as well, but it's just something that I don't think you can change.

[EddySaf]

What about my workers. Workers can be very easily killed and they also must be protected which has to be taken seriously in consideration.

Workers' tasks included building and repairing structures and carrying supplies (harvesting), and also trained to safely remove landmines. Being one type of infantry, they could be moved freely quickly by walking particularly faster if you provided them with new shoes, also they could enter a transport vehicle.

http://members.wideband.net.au/safcav/1A/CnCGensWorker.jpg

[Commander32]

indeed, if we have a gens2, then most likey we will have the old gens resouce system back, which works mostly(expect maybe the RA3 resource system)

[EddySaf]

indeed, if we have a gens2, then most likey we will have the old gens resouce system back, which works mostly(expect maybe the RA3 resource system)

Wherever there is basebuilding and harvesting there will be players who will try to destroy or cripple the opponent in one way or another. Even in RA3 say like with the early Cryo Vindi. Whatever is used it is very important to recon, to get into the opponents base ASAP to see what they are doing and try to counter that. There is risk involved if an early is a failure where the game could swing to the person who reconned and defended well. Game developers should be aware of such things and to give each side a chance that they can recon for the early and have a chance at defending themselves.

[CrazyGDIfan123`]

rofl... how about just l2p'ing instead of dumbing down games for noobs?
harv harassment was one of the intense bits of kw gameplay and added depth to the game.


the problem in cnc3/kw, or actually or ANY cnc game, was that noobs DID NOT KNOW THE CORRECT BUILD ORDERS, which made them vulnerable to all kinds of rushes.
cnc4 eliminates this problem by COMPLETELY REMOVING BUILD ORDERS; hence more noob friendly.


what needs to be done is making the skirmish ai and gameplay tutorials actually TEACH noobs about basic multiplayer gameplay. things like
1) how to setup eco properly
2) how to defend vs certain rushes
3) how/when to expand your base

currently skirmish/singleplayer/tutorials teach noobs absolutely nothing about multiplayer - theres a huge gap. when playing offline players are often accustomed to building simcity-style pretty bases and hardcore turtling with less regard for actual gameplay. so once they go online they get owned.

ofcourse that naturally happens to almost anyone... noone exactly starts pro. but i can understand some people just lack the time or sometimes the capability to grasp the basics of the game... which is why singleplayer needs to help ease the process.


secondly people should be made aware of websites like gr.org which can help improve their gameplay.

right now sadly the only thing EA can think of saying in the scrolling ad banners ingame in cnc3/ra3/cnc4 is marketing propaganda bs like "get RA3 NOW COMRADE OGMGOFMG!!one".
they need to do a LOT better than that if they want long-term suvivability for their games.
eg
- make the ingame banners inform players about the existence of the cnc official website/forum where they can report grievances/ask for help, and report cheaters
- post up tips/guides created by gr.org on the official website

[methuselah]

Scouting is op.

Seriously you have to have some way to harass that is one of the things I missed most about C&C 4. If there is no early way to harass then it is simply a race to eco spam and tech up. There is nothing wrong with eco spam and teching up but I don't want the early harass developed out of the game simply to make it a little more nub friendly.

[Noodlesocks]

the problem in cnc3/kw, or actually or ANY cnc game, was that noobs DID NOT KNOW THE CORRECT BUILD ORDERS,

And that is what is wrong with old C&C games online.

[CrazyGDIfan123`]

thats no way a fault with the games
knowing the 'standard' bo's is simply part of the learning curve, and an inevitable part of any rts that features resource collection and base building

in every cnc so far there have also always been variations in bo's, and many good players have also been able to create their own innovative adaptations of these bo's

as i said there just needs to be better ways to help players get to grips better with these basics

[JaguarXKR-S]

I like the crystal's for tech points, but not as main economy. I want harvesters for monies, and Crystals for teching up.

[EddySaf]

Scouting is op.

Seriously you have to have some way to harass that is one of the things I missed most about C&C 4. If there is no early way to harass then it is simply a race to eco spam and tech up. There is nothing wrong with eco spam and teching up but I don't want the early harass developed out of the game simply to make it a little more nub friendly.

Yes scouting is op, and there needs to be some way to harass but in a way where people can play a bit longer than a few minutes. Maybe somewhere a line could be drawn that would satisfy the gifted players and the nubs.

There allways will be not so gifted players and they play the campaign missions either solo or co-op. Then after that they may have a few games against other players and soon they loose interest in playing. I think that the figure was 70% of players say they are done and leave. If the game in the works has base building and harvesting I think that it will go like previous such games. Making the game better will help towards more playing staying longer but heaps will still leave soon after playing the campaign missions, and that heaps or 70% tends to be the "bread and butter" of games.

[R315r4z0r]

I never viewed build orders as strategical. I always saw them as boring ways to ruin "real time" property of the game. A build order just has players rushing to get to a certain part of the tech tree so they can out spam their opponent. Where is the strategy in that? Structure functions need to be more balanced with each other to allow for many different types of build orders that are all balanced with each other. Everyone shouldn't be forced to play one way if they want to win.

But anyway, for the topic about harvesting:

I liked the system with the ore nodes in RA3 since they paced the game and drew it out. It also made it really hard to spam units. If you wanted to end the game quicker, you were forced to use a select number of units based on the situation at hand. What was bad about it was the removal of field harvesting and it made collectors much less valuable than they were in previous C&C games.

So I got to thinking, what would be the best way to combine an economy system that paces the game but at the same time doesn't remove the strategy of economy harassment? I came up with an idea.

They should first put resource fields back into the game. When the player builds a refinery, a collector starts to gather resources from the field and then deposit it at the refinery. The difference, however, is that the deposited money wouldn't instantly be transferred into credits. Instead, it would pool up and convert to credits over time.

This way, you can have as many harvesters collecting money as you want, it wont increase the rate of income... merely the rate of deposit. You would need multiple refineries to process money faster and silos to hold excess resources prior to them being converted into funds.

I think it's a good idea because it:
-Paces the game depending on how many refineries you have and how you manage their usage.
-Makes refineries more valuable structures (and higher priority targets)
-Makes silos an essential part of the game (rather than tacked on money holders like in C&C 3)
-Marks the return of resource fields and non-limited amounts of collectors per refinery.

[Moongrave]

Make the Harvs become a tier 2/3 armoured like vehicle but can be produce in tier 1

I hate how Harvs are now so weak compare to well the good old days

[CrazyGDIfan123`]

I never viewed build orders as strategical. I always saw them as boring ways to ruin "real time" property of the game. A build order just has players rushing to get to a certain part of the tech tree so they can out spam their opponent. Where is the strategy in that? Structure functions need to be more balanced with each other to allow for many different types of build orders that are all balanced with each other. Everyone shouldn't be forced to play one way if they want to win.

But anyway, for the topic about harvesting:

I liked the system with the ore nodes in RA3 since they paced the game and drew it out. It also made it really hard to spam units. If you wanted to end the game quicker, you were forced to use a select number of units based on the situation at hand. What was bad about it was the removal of field harvesting and it made collectors much less valuable than they were in previous C&C games.

So I got to thinking, what would be the best way to combine an economy system that paces the game but at the same time doesn't remove the strategy of economy harassment? I came up with an idea.

They should first put resource fields back into the game. When the player builds a refinery, a collector starts to gather resources from the field and then deposit it at the refinery. The difference, however, is that the deposited money wouldn't instantly be transferred into credits. Instead, it would pool up and convert to credits over time.

This way, you can have as many harvesters collecting money as you want, it wont increase the rate of income... merely the rate of deposit. You would need multiple refineries to process money faster and silos to hold excess resources prior to them being converted into funds.

I think it's a good idea because it:
-Paces the game depending on how many refineries you have and how you manage their usage.
-Makes refineries more valuable structures (and higher priority targets)
-Makes silos an essential part of the game (rather than tacked on money holders like in C&C 3)
-Marks the return of resource fields and non-limited amounts of collectors per refinery.
its a good idea which has been mentioned before, and i agree its a logical step forward for eco.
but i dont see how it impacts pace honestly...


also build orders-
its true theyre not really strategical in the 'real time' point of view... theyre basically just the starting point of an overall long-term plan that you decide before the game. thats all there is to them.
but ofc the opponent has his own plans, so the way you adapt to eachother later on is what contributes to 'real time strategy'.

in previous games there -was- typically a good choice of build orders.
it wasnt always about eco'ing and outspamming the opponent... and honestly that doesnt even make sense.
if the opponent is equally good he could just do the same.

but usually there was more to it than just that anyway.

[EddySaf]

Make the Harvs become a tier 2/3 armoured like vehicle but can be produce in tier 1

I hate how Harvs are now so weak compare to well the good old days

Well if emp is available at tier 1 it will be used against the MARV, so maybe the devs might make emp available a bit later.

People will look for ways to kill or cripple the opponent as early as they can, be it going for the harvestors or buildings and recon was important to see what the opponent was going to do. Yeah I think we have seen it all in various games Gees the Empire early "attack of the harvesters" was LOL when I first saw it.

[m4dn3ss]

Does chess have build orders? No...

[129375860]

New CNC needs more variety for opening build orders. Tiberium Wars has about five different ways to open that work. Kane's Wrath only has two. Better, the new game doesn't need to be build-order centered. Let the better micro and timings decide the fate of the match instead of the superior build order.

[CrazyGDIfan123`]

Does chess have build orders? No...
ofc it does

the way you open with pawns/knights etc... theyre all build orders.
build orders are 100% the player's own choice - its the way he wishes to start his game.

[R315r4z0r]

its a good idea which has been mentioned before, and i agree its a logical step forward for eco.
but i dont see how it impacts pace honestly...

Since the money you deposit isn't instantly transferred into credits, you would only get credits at a set rate. This rate would not change unless you spend time to construct a second refinery and deposit funds into there as well.

It impacts the pace because it wont allow you to ecoboom. If you can't ecoboom, then you can't get a surge of credits that allows you to spam 30 tanks all of a sudden. It makes you think of the units you want to use rather than a random amount of your teams MBT. If you wait too long to create a large army, you might fall pray to an enemy attack. But if you go too fast with too few or poorly chosen units, your attack might fail and you open yourself up to a counter.

It takes the right amount of time to create the ideal strike force. That amount of time is decided by how well the economy system is implemented. Too much money means quick, mindless spam. Too little money makes the game too slow and less action packed. There needs to be an equilibrium that doesn't let you amass large armies in under 5 minutes, but at the same time doesn't take you a half hour to create a respectable rush on your opponent's base defenses.

[CrazyGDIfan123`]

ecoboom is a very relative term

in cnc3/kw eco boom is used to describe a build where the player focuses on going heavy on eco and compromises on early units.
but thats in no way the ONLY viable build.

there are also aggressive builds like fast rushes like 3-5 bike rushes, or fast 2nd warfactory for a quick spam etc
this build would have the disadvantage of losing momentum soon due to limited eco, so youll have to focus back on building economy soon after.

but regardless of eco setup, there will pretty much -always- be a 'standard' build, an 'eco boom' build and an 'aggressive' build

in your eco setup for eg, the optimum/standard build could be getting 2 refs and 4 total harvs.
if you get more, thats an eco boom and places you at risk of being rushed easily.
if you get fewer and spend on units instead, thats an aggressive build... but youll still have to get those 2 refs 4 harvs total eventually because thats the optimal build for the long term.


on the issue of actual eco pacing and amount of money available to the player...
i dont see what exactly is wrong with getting a 'big mass' (even though thats totally relative.. im guessing the equivalent of atleast 8-10 cheap tanks) of units within 5 mins - thats what cnc's always been about.

[Incia]

Any unit in the battlefield would be able to carry the resource... it would give it a speed/armor penalty.
You could also drop the resource if you wanted to, if someone faster would come and gather it instead.
And it would hover over your head through magic.

And if you want, you can use dark magic and make the resources explode. Though, your unit is a nublet so he dies while doing it.

[R315r4z0r]

on the issue of actual eco pacing and amount of money available to the player...
i dont see what exactly is wrong with getting a 'big mass' (even though thats totally relative.. im guessing the equivalent of atleast 8-10 cheap tanks) of units within 5 mins - thats what cnc's always been about.

When I say "big mass" in under 5 minutes, I'm talking about a substantial blob of units that you just throw at your opponent without a second thought. At least 20+ of the same unit devoid of any variability and strategy.

Don't get me wrong, swamping your opponent with an endless supply of MBTs should be a viable option, but it shouldn't be an effective option. There should be a counter to that unit on the enemy's team and that counter should dominate the unit spam.

I do enjoy large scale tank battles... that's definitely a C&C staple. But even still, I'd prefer to have smaller, yet more frequent skirmishes all around the map as opposed to a 30 vs 30 clash in the center.

I like large battles. I like fast paced matches. But I also like lengthy matches. I think the harvesting idea I proposed would allow players to eventually earn credits fast enough to play quickly but at the same time not be able to obliterate the opposition in a single bound. It really just comes down to how fast a pace deposited resources are converted into credits at.

[EddySaf]

Any unit in the battlefield would be able to carry the resource... it would give it a speed/armor penalty.
You could also drop the resource if you wanted to, if someone faster would come and gather it instead.
And it would hover over your head through magic.

And if you want, you can use dark magic and make the resources explode. Though, your unit is a nublet so he dies while doing it.

This appears to be what you might be thinking and something even like this mod.

http://members.wideband.net.au/safcav/1A/CnC4Harvester.jpg

[CrazyGDIfan123`]

When I say "big mass" in under 5 minutes, I'm talking about a substantial blob of units that you just throw at your opponent without a second thought. At least 20+ of the same unit devoid of any variability and strategy.

Don't get me wrong, swamping your opponent with an endless supply of MBTs should be a viable option, but it shouldn't be an effective option. There should be a counter to that unit on the enemy's team and that counter should dominate the unit spam.

I do enjoy large scale tank battles... that's definitely a C&C staple. But even still, I'd prefer to have smaller, yet more frequent skirmishes all around the map as opposed to a 30 vs 30 clash in the center.

I like large battles. I like fast paced matches. But I also like lengthy matches. I think the harvesting idea I proposed would allow players to eventually earn credits fast enough to play quickly but at the same time not be able to obliterate the opposition in a single bound. It really just comes down to how fast a pace deposited resources are converted into credits at.
if the opponents are evenly matched theres really no reason the match should end in like 5 mins after a huge tankspam or w/e
the opponent can do the same or can use counters (provided they work), and then the opponent reacts accordingly again etc and the game progresses further

length of games really has nothing to do with average army sizes tbh

[Kellogen]

Given you gotta ask maybe rather what series is based placed with any new ideas. Given Generals within question of a new resource management theme for a 2nd release or not.

And that givne that Twilight had given think more of an idea of not needing to be so fixed within resource management and prior releases are.

Generals 1 and expansaion release contains a small mix within it to say more geared towards fixed or classic to say.

Like maybe randome Tib fid or Spkie Generators to say, might be outside story aspects to some points, but of it though an idea of direction maybe for anything new, if what has been in play to say far isnt looked into for further releases, even on TTs part.

Generals i dont know...Idk of Cargo Depots to say is kinda not used out so much in RTS gaming to some points. Usually random is just a stationary use of a building or addition which applies som extra source credits or goods, but nothing main.

Visually resource management is different. Of if though is still its means. Which seemed to set for its release. Given variety of resource management over one. I dont mind esource management so much myself really, so i dont really favor a niche to say even within gameplay for the most part, but gameplay does factor within balances alot though. I probably have and not really paid attention.

But with newer units and minatained balance to say of development with core concepts still within some place shouldnt be an issue, but probably does make a bother with too much new. Given as said before, resources do get into being an extensive task to process and run on a computer after awhile with any vast theme of use of them rather detailed or not.

[Nyerguds]

Good gods this thread is retarded...

people, if you don't like the concept of building up your base, harvesting and then building and sending troops to your opponents... go find some other game than C&C, mkay?

[ScotlanD]

I don't see why theres a debate on this,

Tiberium game should be.. tib fields and harvesting

Generals universe should be supply's and collectors + late game eco buildings + oils

[Incia]

I don't see why theres a debate on this,

Tiberium game should be.. tib fields and harvesting

Generals universe should be supply's and collectors + late game eco buildings + oils

Eco buildings, right... loved those. And oils? Well we got tib spikes as well, works similar to oils.

[Commander_McNash]

Tradition should be kept, dogma must be enforced.

WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, and IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING!

So yeah, old tiberium/ore harvesting and supply depots will be ok, dont change it.

[m4dn3ss]

i dont see what exactly is wrong with getting a 'big mass' (even though thats totally relative.. im guessing the equivalent of atleast 8-10 cheap tanks) of units within 5 mins - thats what cnc's always been about.

I'm positively sure C&C1 wasn't about tank spam...

[Commander_McNash]

I'm positively sure C&C1 wasn't about tank spam...

No, it was about spamming light vehicles, like C&C3.

[CrazyGDIfan123`]

cnc1 was like light tank spam or bike/buggy spam for nod
humvee spam or advanced guard tower+minigunnner spam as gdi

[R315r4z0r]

It was just harder to do that because you couldn't queue up units. You had to build one at a time... and they took a while to build. As a result, players used smaller armies.

[Commander_McNash]

It was just harder to do that because you couldn't queue up units. You had to build one at a time... and they took a while to build. As a result, players used smaller armies.

*Unable to comply, building in progress*
*Unable to comply, building in progress*
*Unable to comply, building in progress*

[CrazyGDIfan123`]

It was just harder to do that because you couldn't queue up units. You had to build one at a time... and they took a while to build. As a result, players used smaller armies.
not really
it was harder but it still happened.. it just took more 'skill'

[Commander_McNash]

not really
it was harder but it still happened.. it just took more 'skill'

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_lpAazdH2SuA/TPKko6KdJKI/AAAAAAAAAJ4/_pMIlxouFPo/s1600/dipping-bird.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_rtOXMZlMTkg/RZWVjP3f49I/AAAAAAAAADs/YpHlSwXpiUg/s1600/drinking_bird.jpg

[Kellogen]

Smaller Armies maybe....Maybe ore Maps to size of Armies and hardware to process it all. Probably had its greater limitations overall in terms of gameplay.

Cause the idea of like Wave attacks of 20 units or so is still fairly the same. Just Base Building maintains it interest in size and scoop, and infantry is probably now like 5 squads instead of like 10 seperate infantry guys. Given its a one unit selection given unit being a group, instead of just a one unit. Maybe a few light tanks, few meduim tanks, couple heavy or specialy tanks. and Like Support units, Few air craft maybe. Or just more Bigger tanks.

Otherwise its just spam of 10-20 of just one unit. Which usually gets into light and heavy tanks. Maybe less or more. Just the units are more efforts of work to process probably, given detail and rendering of the units in CGI. Or parts of CGI. Sprites to say which are all probably to some point. But in terms of being 3d maybe sprite might have a new meaning to CGI then before. Least leaving 2d and 3d open for conversation of such maybe. I dont know.

Harvesting is basically been the same, but in 4. Where Harvesting has been taken out and put into Mobile uses of income. Since i think attacking is place within the same means of things. But what is ganined maintains itself within currency. You dont have to build a harvesting system to gain funds though.

Basically awhole lot hasnt changed but a few things. Which are hammered on heavily given that idea of how matches are played.

[Commander_McNash]

We need to nerf tanks.

Also, and on-topic, we need more resistant harvesters. And bigger maps.

[Zaptagious]

Maybe some kind of inclusion of carry-alls like in the Dune universe, they take the harvesters to and from a resource field, it'd make sense since it would be less vulnerable but bai bai harvester harassment I guess. I don't really think there needss to be changed anything in terms of harvesting; don't fix what isn't broken.

[Commander_McNash]

Maybe some kind of inclusion of carry-alls like in the Dune universe, they take the harvesters to and from a resource field, it'd make sense since it would be less vulnerable but bai bai harvester harassment I guess. I don't really think there needss to be changed anything in terms of harvesting; don't fix what isn't broken.

attack bikes attack air too, and have a bonus AA damage if I remember well.

[Kellogen]

Carry-alls, once they took there toll maybe to say.They took off. They where probably just not in terms of harvesting. You could use them for almost anything else but that. Its a nice idea, but yet of it though, even though Dunes Carry-alls was really really fast. Compared to alot of carry-alls now. SupComs are fairly placed within speed too.

But of it though is the thought of lose, if carry-all doesnt really come with the harvestor is too much an expense. That and having a huge dependence on a far away field is very likely within thoughts of harvesting/mining.

Dune harvesting and place of it fit very well..thinking of it now at least. Many release fit with niche of gameplay. Alot of thought really...Maybe..

[Zaptagious]

Yea, I can imagine that if you're not close enough for a tiberium field you'll just set up an expansion base instead. Maybe the harvesters could hover and burrow respectively? For a vehicle like a harvester, maneuverability is your best friend.

[Commander_McNash]

Burrowing sounds like a good idea.

[Kellogen]

Maybe a Harvestor Drop-in, but in doing so Pick-up would be basically the same. Rather a refinery should be just one use and or say or two differents ones. But just one drop in probably would fit the most. 4 work with alot of drop-in, with no harvesting to say..no harvestors.

[Commander_McNash]

Something like RA3 could work, but then it would mostly restrict harvesters to being too close to base.

[Kellogen]

To close to base, only causes conjestions fairly easier. Giving the path layouts arent very practical. I still dont always/really "buy" that to say, but guess happens. Then a harvestor catches something else, or defaults to not running to say. Since it doesnt have "orders"

Or find itself harvesting in a field on the otherside of the map with like 2 Tiberium Spikes while that one at or around your base is almost completely with the other harvestors harvesting.

But rather at least if not, and still within some perspective of practical means, with advanced additions to gameplay, then changing a basis of what hasnt changed would further increase possibly that of advance gameplay. Maybe long term or short.

Ideas of carry-alls with that given you can just fly them anywhere and dont really have to worry about conjestion of feilds from entering and existing. Rather this was really any thought into intial carry-all uses i dont know. But in terms of gameplay it would change it around at times. Maybe not many times or for long. But any change does have it differences when it does. All within ideas of notice and its sense to say.

So too "restrict" harvestors still to base, idk. I dont mind. I havent played 4. The above wouldnt apply a need to or sense of lesser purpose in doing so.

Given on the idea, whole feilds dont usually move around in Tiberium series also.

And if you can say "recon" other fields, then going to harvesting is probably best. You might be able to use Airlifts is what i think is called more then anything, cause thats it is more then anything then a Carry-All. But its going to probably be more instances based then anything. And they aint that strong compared to what they carry. I know for i didnt use them for harvestors much if at all when i played. So i dont know for TWs of KWs. Let alone any idea of use in other releases within the same kinda of avenues of use. 4 dropped harvesting from what ive gotten the most basically for sure.

[Commander_McNash]

To close to base, only causes conjestions fairly easier. Giving the path layouts arent very practical. I still dont always/really "buy" that to say, but guess happens. Then a harvestor catches something else, or defaults to not running to say. Since it doesnt have "orders"

Or find itself harvesting in a field on the otherside of the map with like 2 Tiberium Spikes while that one at or around your base is almost completely with the other harvestors harvesting.

But rather at least if not, and still within some perspective of practical means, with advanced additions to gameplay, then changing a basis of what hasnt changed would further increase possibly that of advance gameplay. Maybe long term or short.

Ideas of carry-alls with that given you can just fly them anywhere and dont really have to worry about conjestion of feilds from entering and existing. Rather this was really any thought into intial carry-all uses i dont know. But in terms of gameplay it would change it around at times. Maybe not many times or for long. But any change does have it differences when it does. All within ideas of notice and its sense to say.

So too "restrict" harvestors still to base, idk. I dont mind. I havent played 4. The above wouldnt apply a need to or sense of lesser purpose in doing so.

Given on the idea, whole feilds dont usually move around in Tiberium series also.

And if you can say "recon" other fields, then going to harvesting is probably best. You might be able to use Airlifts is what i think is called more then anything, cause thats it is more then anything then a Carry-All. But its going to probably be more instances based then anything. And they aint that strong compared to what they carry. I know for i didnt use them for harvestors much if at all when i played. So i dont know for TWs of KWs. Let alone any idea of use in other releases within the same kinda of avenues of use. 4 dropped harvesting from what ive gotten the most basically for sure.

No, harvester didnt have caryalls back in C&C3, a shame since it would have added some interesting possibilities.

[KidNamedJoey]

Why would this be discussed? I think it's pretty clear which system should be used. For the Red Alert and Tiberium universe somekind of harvesting. Just like the systems of the old games. For Generals the workers/trucks harvesting. Especially not the system in Twilight.

Everyone is talking about the online multiplayer and all. Being vurnerable on your harvesters. You should not only protect your base, but your harvesters as well. That's what I already have to do when I started playing C&C, whatever universe.

I'm done with the ''noob-friendly'' thing on the online gameplay. A player shouldn't expect, when they buy the game, they immidiately can go online and defeat players. You start with the missions, the storyline, find out about the gameplay step for step. When you have finished that you already got some experience.

After that you start the skirmish. And play against computers. If you still can't defeat the easy,medium or hard bots, it should be pretty clear you can't defeat the real players. When you are on that lvl to defeat those computers on skirmish, then you can go for the online multiplayer.

If all goes planned, you get enough experience and tactics from the missions and skirmish to know how to attack someone, how to defend yourself + how to defend your harvesters.

I don't see any reason to change the system, or to make something ''noob-friendly'' just for the online gameplay. They should just practice more.

[stephanovich]

Campaign and skirmish plays nothing like a human does against you online so you being good at skirmish doesn't really translate to you being anywhere decent online.

[KidNamedJoey]

Ofcourse it is not the same. But if you even can't defeat a computer, how do you think to defeat a real player? The point I want to make is that you can get some good experiences from battles with computers. Like thinking about strategies how to deal with your harvesters- how to defend them.

[HOPE1134]

Tib = tib fields
Ra = ore fields
Gen = supply depots

[TonyP7]

You all remember the first harvester from C&C 1 ??? that funny looking thing. Sure wanna see that just in nicer grapich. I think they did it in C&C Renegade

[stephanovich]

Ofcourse it is not the same. But if you even can't defeat a computer, how do you think to defeat a real player? The point I want to make is that you can get some good experiences from battles with computers. Like thinking about strategies how to deal with your harvesters- how to defend them.

The AI doesn't really go after your harvesters and don't rush as fast as a human does so IMO it really teaches you nothing.

[Heron]

I didn't read through this thread, so I apologise if someone has suggested it.

For the Tiberium world, I will love the aesthetics of the TS Tiberium harvesting, but with a faster speed like it is in TW (slightly slower though), and with a little twist. It does involve dynamic map interactions though, but it will be interesting to see new Tiberium fields pop out of originally no man's land, courtesy of Tiberium meteorites smashing into the Earth, or popping out from the ground where new Tiberium deposits are found.

In balanced, bigger 1v1 maps for example, it could result in 2 Tiberium fields popping out at the same time at different locations of the map, so that you actually do know where potential Tiberium fields can be, you just do not know when they will get accessible. And ideally there will be more than 4 spots where these potential fields can pop out so one cannot anticipate where it comes next.

Some decisions will have to be made on size of Tiberium field, whether the formation of the new field should cause damage to nearby units, time it takes for a new Tib field to form, and the like, but the general idea is to have dynamic fields coming out.

This has a few pros and cons.

Pros
- Gives even more importance to holding territory
- Dynamic, so battles can happen over places unexpected in multiplayer
- A good lore extension given how Tiberium meteorites have struck the world bringing with it Tiberium. And possible new introductions to the lore with the EA change to Tiberium, where huge Tiberium crystal formations were found, so new fields popping out underneath the surface isn't surprising as well.

Cons
- Harder to code, given how this is supposed to be a random event.
- Dynamic and random, something RTS e-sports pros might not be willing to accept.

So, basically, that's my idea for harvesting.

[Kellogen]

Computers i think have limits though given the fact of basis of how the processing works.

But i think a computer can be at most like 3% ahead of you maybe more or else, and still be reasonable to a decent in terms of most difficult. Given time taken to move and counter build is then only within small margin based on loss and-in time.

Players typical will be within the same means just not as predictable. The predictable is the biggest different given early and late game.

[Commander_McNash]

Computers i think have limits though given the fact of basis of how the processing works.

But i think a computer can be at most like 3% ahead of you maybe more or else, and still be reasonable to a decent in terms of most difficult. Given time taken to move and counter build is then only within small margin based on loss and-in time.

Players typical will be within the same means just not as predictable. The predictable is the biggest different given early and late game.

WEll, after a while most people become predictable too, I mean, they end abussing of a few tactics all the time, it's just like choosing a random AI type.

[CrazyGDIfan123`]

players are never as predictable as ai

[Havok2100X]

i always liked Yuris slave miner concept. refinery and harvester in one.

[Commander_McNash]

i always liked Yuris slave miner concept. refinery and harvester in one.

That was a nice concept, shame people where always demanding "NO YURI" online, which is funny since most of them played as allies spammed the same tactics and had too much anti-Yuri specific units.

[Havok2100X]

That was a nice concept, shame people where always demanding "NO YURI" online, which is funny since most of them played as allies spammed the same tactics and had too much anti-Yuri specific units.

True dat. I think it should be different concepts for every faction. sort of spice it up a little.

[Lonely_guy]

i think every faction should have a different concept of harvesting*cough*Ra2:yr*cough*
however harvesters shall be harrasable,not like in Ra2 where a warminer could defeat a Rhino 1-on-1(ok,ok a conscript could defeat a grizzly,but you know what i mean),but not too harrasable that it will be abused.and it isn't just about armor.
in generals i think it worked very well

[Wlof25]

@Lonely_guy
Also RA2 ore miners are immune on radiation,mind control and have self repair :P

[Lonely_guy]

yeah,i remember miners pwned back then,but this is past,altough ra2(yr) is one of my alltime favs,i don't think miners should be so strong that they can go to an enemy base,collect gold,and come back.
i remember i played a game where i won with war miner spam(lool),but i don't remember correctly

[animal19640]

harvesting must be the same , its a part of a good ballte .
keep the battles alive , killing harvesters and the refs , that make the game more fun
red alert 3 that new thing for harvesting ore was stupid
c&c 4 wtf , oeps sry i always forget that c&c 4 was never a c&c game ( FAIL)
don't make a new red alert 3 or c&c 4 , but if you do maybe you get a mix of bullshit to harvest

[Elven]

Hmm, I do agree that they removed many bad stuff from cnc 4 what took many elements out of the game. Especially like Methuselah said - early base harrass, etc. It is just part of the game. And that what makes players into good categories: Good players and bad players. All those who fail to defend their base from early attacks are bad players and those who are successful in that, can enter next stage: Good players or very good players, etc :P. Then comes into game like attacking, making good unit mixes, mirco, macro, etc :).

[Bobug]

tbh tho they shud have done something like make the maps bigger or enable pre-built bases, wudve worked better