Jump to content

Titan

Tech Artist
  • Posts

    47
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Titan

  1. Arms are like spagetti, neck is too long, hips are too wide, ears need to be lowered, and her torso is very short. You should lightly sketch out an oval for the head size you're going for, make her (for anime sizing) 5 or 6 heads tall by drawing the same length oval directly underneath the last. Make sure the hips are only slightly larger than the stomach if you want larger hips and legs are twice as close as they are now. The front half of her hair should be half the head size with that style and breasts are higher than that. That's my constructive criticism by the way, sorry if it sounds harsh. You have a good start there.
  2. I never have either. Also, I play a fisting barbarian, since you were wondering if everyone played bow.
  3. Titan

    Kiwi Shipping

    As another one of the people who was present in chat while this happend ; I am not sorry at all.
  4. Excellent, it loads perfectly now. UVW's are wrong for 3DS Max, and need to be moved upward in UVW edit. Bones aren't imported, but that's fixable too. -par suffix images are for particles and glow if anyone is wondering.
  5. What programs are you using? I cannot seem to get 3DS Max 2012 to import them with the UVW correct.
  6. Looking them over, the SF2 .drs files are alot simpler to read, but they're mostly the same as Battleforge .drs. Why it can read the DE FA out of SF2 and not Battleforge, I don't know because it does have DE FA in the right location; And I'm not a Visual Basic person, so I don't really know what I can do with it. On the good side, the documentation is really nice on it, though a bit difficult to understand initially. I'll keep working on it and see what I can come up with. Thanks for all the info!
  7. Nothing yet really, my mind is in a stupid phase at the moment, next time it goes back to being smart, I'll post something
  8. Yeah, but it's a pure ice variant which is why I mentioned it. Same goes for this:
  9. Well if my math is correct, the root node is only 4 bytes, and the CGeoMesh is 1,588 bytes, and both numbers sound right, but I'm still unsure and my head isn't right today lol. Indeed would be a cool unit to add along with the multiple other unused units (like my avatar), maybe after we can figure out how to export them anyway.
  10. Thank you for all the info Onedaxter. Honestly I haven't looked at it long, but I am already a bit lost as to where I can find the files; But by guessing I'd say: root node = 0x00000020 - 0x00000023 CGeoMesh = 0x00000024 - 0x00000667 ;Unsure of this number though
  11. I've looked into those as well and the only program I can find is the one I linked, and while these are indeed the same DRS files used in Spellforce, the host is no longer available, so there is no program at the moment unless someone that used it and saved it could appear in this community (extremely unlikely); zlib compression is also not present as I searched for the headers and while 78 01 is there, it is not a header. Also an issue: These are taken from the file greenland_monument_module1_s0.drs and has the following header problems. Then again, these are for non-animated buildings of which Pesmontis had no documentation for anyway. 1EF17CC5 is -4047.06982 in a little endian float; 1EF17CC5 is 2.5578471e-20 in a big endian (normal) float. So I suppose the key to looking at this is using little endian, which now that I think of it is quite normal and explains 'srrd' and that the offsets are most likely little endian. EDIT: These files are also not compatible with any of the AoK/Age of Empires DRS file openers in case anyone is wondering.
  12. Well after hours of research I've still come to a dead end with no real experience in decoding the header for what file type it is supposed to be. Some discovery involves: http://forum.xentax.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=9124 where someone is nice enough to explain the header of .drs files that Battleforge uses, and has a decoder for it, but sadly the site the decoder is hosted is no longer available and is not saved on TheWaybackMachine. I'll continue researching this, hopefully someone better at this can take this knowledge and use it better.
  13. Well when this is actually playable, I can definitely recruit from the Command & Conquer community, as well as the Warcraft community, hopefully that should bring a good number of people to play, especially since it'll be free and both of those playerbases don't hate playing older strategy games. But again, it'll have to be playable first before I can hype it up...
  14. [quote='WatcherOfSky' pid='2089' dateline='1435268449'] Well, perhaps this rule could apply to cards such as Energy Parasite, which hold absolutely no purpose in PvE. Also not everyone has every card in the game. Some people may have certain cards, which would currently lack use in certain scenarios in the pve realm. I know this is an improbable occurance, but I still think it could happen. [/quote] Energy Parasite would be a great example of its usages and this is all what I'm trying to say.
  15. [quote='beijingguy' pid='2080' dateline='1435262089'] [quote='Aazrl' pid='2076' dateline='1435260907'] And it will come to a moment, where main pvp cards will be nerfed, because they were the strongest cards on PvE. Would you like to play fire and get nerfed few important fire cards because they were quite strong in PvE? Or would you rather have a possibility to say that it will not be cool for PvP players? [/quote] I think you misunderstand me, PvP balance should always trump PvE balance since it has a far greater impact on other peoples enjoyment of the game. My point was that if a card happens to becomes less viable in PvE due to a nerf aimed at a PvP problem why is that really a problem for PvE players ? It just gives you the opportunity to beat the game all over again without that specific card. [/quote] But why limit the player to not be ABLE to beat the game with that specific card when they can choose not to use it in the first place? You can do a map with only 2 cards if you so choose. I just don't understand why PvE should suffer when we could make PvP and PvE able to use ALL the cards that exist instead of a chosen few. As far as baffling a player because it needed ground presence, it would say so on the card. All cards could have 2 'sides' and have a filter when making a deck to show a card's PvE or PvP side and see it's abilities, then you would have no issues with players being unable to understand their cards. Not to mention, when you're using a card for the first time, who knows exactly its strengths or weaknesses aside from what's described? You don't know it's attack speed, selection size, etc. just from the description alone, it takes using it at least once to understand everything.
  16. [quote='ndclub' pid='2074' dateline='1435260678'] If the feature you speak of is PVE no one is suggesting its removal. If the feature is upgrades then in my mind its existence makes the game experience worse. If I can prove that it would be better without its inclusion than it should not be included. I will probably make a separate thread to discuss this specifically because it is being talked about in multiple threads now and not everyone currently agrees. [/quote] The feature I'm speaking of is the separation of PvE and PvP changes to cards. And as far as competing with people using the same cards in PvE, that's the kind of thing that we could change without harming PvP because you CAN nerf a card if it's too strong in PvE without making it useless in PvP, if you can see what I'm saying. But on the other hand, I also believe PvE's not entirely about "speedruns" only, and many people PvE just to have fun, and it's just not fun if a card is over-nerfed because of it's abilities in PvP. That and "speedruns" are all skill and micro IMHO. EDIT: Pretty much said the same thing as Aazrl
  17. But if there's no upgrade system, why play PvE at all? Honestly, it's a good part of the game that I really don't think should be removed, in fact why remove any part of the game when you can improve or add onto it? I'm not going to quote myself because well, it would be silly, but like I said, some cards just have entirely different functions in PvP and PvE despite being the same exact card, and while it's OP in PvP, that card might already not worth using often in PvE and any nerf would throw it out the window as a choice, as well as there's alot of cards you can use in PvE that are just unfeasible due to time and ability to be placed in PvP. Separating the stats between the two modes would just allow both types of players to be able to use a larger array of cards. Not having the same, boring decks that every player is using is what separation would help achieve. Staleness is what was killing the playerbase in the first place anyway. I'm just thinking, if we CAN have this feature, why shouldn't we have it?
  18. Well I remember a particular map needing a Mortar Tower for the longest time just because there was no way to beat it in time for most players, unless you took out the spawners from that 50m range. Of course that's OP on some maps, but on others it's almost necessary, not to mention it allowed other strategies that wouldn't normally work instead of using the same old strategy that one person figured out to work successfully. OP or not, it stops the game from being stale if you can use more than the same 10 cards on that map without failing over and over. And I'm not restricting this to mortar tower either, it's just a good example, heck, the 95% damage reduction aura that my avatar has is pretty much the definition of OP.
  19. It isn't that a map becomes unbeatable, but more that using that unbalanced card in a map would become [s]impossible[/s] disadvantageous. I'll stick with the example of Mortar Tower for now. Say you could take out a ranged enemy spawn camp with it originally because it was able to shoot within 30m - 50m at a cooldown of 20 secs. Then suddenly EA changed it for PvP because that was obviously very strong and made walls almost pointless. But the changes being that you could only shoot nearby your own troops within it's own 30m range made it completely useless in PvE as it would just fall before it's long cooldown (60 secs) of its only attacking ability could come back up, making it a 1 shot deal for very little progress, if any, even as a heavy micro defensive tower. This made it entirely pointless to own as a card if you PvE'd as there were just far better choices to spend your card slot AND points on. http://bit.ly/1TNt6yw That's the kind of balance destruction in PvE I mean, and my friends all agree, so I don't think I'm alone in that thinking, but maybe I am.
  20. I love this project and I loved Battleforge when it was around, but I was never able to get into the community side of it and actually be heard myself. Especially about balancing. And I really want to stress my biggest worry, which is the needs of PvP balancing destroying the balance of PvE, or even destroying cards for PvE like the Mortar Tower had done to it. (I'm sure I don't have to go into detail about it) I just hope that we do get a separation of PvP and PvE for cards, even different abilities depending on which mode. I 99% agree with Mental Omega's view, I just think separation of PvP and PvE is "one perfect solution". :) As far as Micro/Skill coming into play, I believe it does, since if everyone is having trouble with a level BUT the high-skill, high-micromanagement players, then it eventually needs to be thrown into it's own extra Challenge-tier and then changed for the regular difficulty. Thanks for hearing me out, I hope this project comes to fruition and everyone's ideas are heard (and PvE and PvP end up separated :P )
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Terms of Use