Civillians and Human Resources

[calipor]

Ok, thanks, i appreciate the correction and the suggestion. it is true that when i write something that long in an impromptu fashion it disrupts my chain of thought. But surely there are some points that you agree on???

=0=

Revision of Points:

1.) fine, i'll leave the story to the EA team. =)

2.) Infantry unit: I'm quite positive that they should still make use of the squads mechanics of CnC3 for CnC5 'cause it will be easier for players to make a small initial army with which they could use to defend, attack or to scout.

3.) Base Building: The Base building as a classic CnC signature should make its way into all classes, minimal with the offense, moderate with the support and well defense should have moderate-high usage of base building (just suggesting). CnC will never be the CnC i knew if they reduce the base building to a bare minimum in such a way that it may have a feel like Dawn Of War 2.

4.) Resource Gathering: As mentioned in the previous post that i read here, i think adding a motor and population pool will not be nice because it will be too much like THQ-Relic's other games where they use that kind of resource. So i am still in favor of tiberium harvesting but how to improve is well currently beyond me to think of as of now.

As of now that is all i have to say, I'm afraid that if i elaborate i may destroy my chain of thought and it will become as Borreh had said: silly and off topic. . .

[Quadhelix]

Taking a place over takes time and it is not enough to just occupy a villiage with a military force (Though this will block any benefits your opponent will receive)

To take control of population centres:
If you are GDI, then deploy a Distribution Centre.
If you are a NOD player, then rally the oppressed with a NOD Church.

This reminds me of an idea that I had for a "control point" style system that would still work with the classic C&C-style economy. Under this system, you use some sort of expansion vehicle to place an outpost at the Control Point.

Instead of providing money, these control points/outposts serve as area-denial fortifications. For example, placing an outpost on a control point in an urban center/town could, e.g., provide free garrisons for Nod while providing free unit "police" patrols for GDI. An outpost in open terrain could produce a large minefield (e.g., for Nod) or protect the area with stealth detection and attack drones (e.g., for GDI).

Towns will send out trucks with people in them, back to your fixed location headquarters (Remove MCVs or make them very expensive). When the trucks arrive, you gain your pool.
Same goes for Supplies from steel mills or oil rigs. Supply trucks will drop off resources.
This means a well placed rocket trooper can cripple supply lines.

Truck movement is automatic, and towns will supply and replace them for free. (Replacing is slow though)

This seems like an interesting idea. Making truck replacements free might be something that should be balance-tested, as it makes raiding less effective (as the other person only loses the cargo rather than the cargo and the truck).

Defenders - Does less damage and has less range then basic infantry unless patrolling. Increases People output from occupied towns.

.
Salvager - Can jury-rig destroyed vehicles and take them back to HQ to be converted in to Supply. Increases Supply output from factories.

Many troops can be set to patrol towns, refineries or HQs and gain/provide bonuses while doing so. Some troops like the sniper, will be able to garrison instead. Some troops like the basic infantry, can do both.

Comm Van - Unarmed. Anti-Stealth. Increases takeover speed of towns and increases People output as well.

Overall this idea (units that increase resource output) seems rather interesting.

Aircraft ideas:
All aircraft have fuel, which needs replacing with Supply. Units will return to base to refuel automatically. Airbases can be switched off to save Supply. Aircraft will remain grounded in the meantime.

The potential problem with this is that it puts aircraft on a completely different cost effectiveness scale from other units. Other units, you are worried about their DPS and health for a given cost. For aircraft, you aren't worried about the DPS but rather the total damage for a given cost (i.e., how much damage it can do on, e.g., $100 worth of fuel).

Building Ideas:
All players have a fixed location headquarters. Destroy this to win. Power no longer a resource.
Buildings grow out from the centre like hexes. No cost to build a building, it just takes time and you can only build one at a time, though you can stack up building requests.

This one aspect looks radical enough to justify a topic/thread of its own. As it is here, however, here I shall address it:

I'm certain that a lot of C&C fans would dislike it. It does, after all, conjure unpleasant memories of the construction system from C&C4, where the only cost for units and structures was the time it took to build them and the population/power use of the item, except that this idea even cuts out the power requirement.

Nevertheless, it might be interesting for a specific faction/subfaction (almost the opposite of RA3's Imperial nanocores).

Most of what you said with the supply trucks I like, adds a very strategic element to the game (wasn’t there a GDI TS mission that tried this?) Anyways….

I think that you are referring to GDI mission 2, where you had to take out the Nod SAM Sites so that Orca transports could fly in to evacuate the civilians.

On a side note, when the mod MidEast Crisis 2 was first announced, I floated the idea of the two "local" sides being able to recruit civilians for cannon fodder while the UN could evacuate civilians for money.


That idea, combined with the Law System in the final release, gave me an idea for GDI/Allies/USA. This particular side cannot recruit civilians like Nod/Soviets(?)/GLA, but does have a number of high power/high blast radius support powers and units. The problem is that these units and powers cannot be aimed where they might hit civilians (e.g., GDI's Daisy-Cutter Catapult won't fire if there are civilians in the blast radius). The only way for these factions to deploy these high-powered weapons is to attack their enemy in the open (away from civilian settlements) or to evacuate the civilians.

[ACuteGirlWithHIV]

This entire idea for a new C&C game is a carbon copy of R.U.S.E. Supply trucks and all. If anyone has ever played R.U.S.E. it is clear that this idea plus a ton of other features = R.U.S.E.

[adamnelson]

I really like the idea...I will looking forward to it.

[Noodlesocks]

It could work for a new C&C universe. I had been thinking of ideas for a post apocalypse strategy game based around the construction and management of settlements and the resources required to maintain them, including the finding of survivors, trading with other settlements and of course, fighting bandits and other hostile factions that will eventually form.

If I knew how to code, model, animate and everything else required to mod a game, I would love to make something like that.

[GeneralSGJist]

@ Quadhelix,or something fr
no that wasn't the missrm days of olds of old
In the GDI mission you were at top left, and you had to escort tocin tanker trucks or something from across map to an area.

I'm relatively confused on how new members find these threads from days of old.

@Nodle, sounds interesting...

I'm going to pm you about if f you don't mind

[Polla12]

I'm sorry but i disagree with this resource or pop management thing. One of the things that makes CnC so fun is massive armies ! No pop caps for me. Its the only reason i dont play SC 2 anymore ( i did about 500 MP games then i got sick of it , it's kinda same ol same old for me) I played more skirmishes then that in RA alone , not counting RA 2 , RA 3 , Generals CnC 3 etc.

P.S. i didnt play CnC 4 very long , maybe 10 matches >.>

[SandPounder]

No, really serious no, pop caps are like that law passed in alaska where its illegal to taze a bear-we didnt want to do it until they made it forbidden