Home » Tiberian Technologies / Blackhand Studios » Tiberian Technologies Forum » Rotatable MRLS 'Turret'
| Rotatable MRLS 'Turret' [message #365652] |
Thu, 01 January 2009 16:20  |
 |
DutchNeon
Messages: 533
Registered: January 2007
Location: The Netherlands
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
I was thinking about it, and wouldn't it be more fair for GDI to have the MRLS getting a 'rotatable turret' like on the screenshot:
Screenshot from the map Field_TS, which also contains the beta Medium Tank.
-------------------
The Nod artillery can also rotate his turret, and the MRLS is the thing what GDI has, in place of Nod having the Artillery.
Would it be even possible to create/do this? And what are the thoughts about it in the public ? (therefor, I created the topic) 
[Updated on: Thu, 01 January 2009 16:20] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Rotatable MRLS 'Turret' [message #365657 is a reply to message #365654] |
Thu, 01 January 2009 16:53  |
|
DutchNeon
Messages: 533
Registered: January 2007
Location: The Netherlands
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
You can see it as a bug imo. If the GDI MRLS is the counterpart of the Nod Artillery, and the Nod artillery has a rotating turret, why doesn't the MRLS have one?
In TD itself, the MRLS also had a rotating turret, the counterpart for nod was the SSM Launcher, which was a MRLS like vehicle, but with two huge missiles on the 'turret'.
The Nod SSM Launcher also had a rotating 'turret', like the MRLS.
The artillery in TD though was of a different concept, and wasn't really the counterpart for the GDI MRLS. It was more like an extra unit next to the Light Tank, as the GDI had the Medium Tank.
Higher teched in TD, and you could build the MRLS for GDI, and the SSM Launcher for Nod, which were the counterparts of each other for both factions.
-------------------------------------------------------
GDI is more based on pure brute power, and Nod is more based on sneakiness and stealth.
The GDI humvee therefor costs more then the Nod buggy, but you can see the extra $ you used to buy the humvee in the extra HP and Armor. The Nod buggy costs less, but gets higher speed then the humvee, but less armor and HP (extra speed for the possible 'hit and run' tactics).
Then you got the Nod APC and GDI APC. There isn't much difference besides the Nod APC being slightly bigger, and having a real turret in the middle, whereas the GDI APC has the 'turret'(gun) on the right side of the APC. They got the exact same HP and Armor, and cost the same.
The Nod Artillery and the GDI MRLS. They got the same amount of HP and Armor. They cost the same (although before the patch, the GDI MRLS was $750, which was weird). The Nod artillery is slightly bigger. Then, you get the thing I don't understand. The Nod Artillery has a rotatable turret, but the GDI MRLS doesn't. If you look in the statistics, they are pretty much there counterparts, and the counterparts in Renegade have close to the same things, but the GDI MRLS is missing something, a rotatable 'turret'! but why?
Then going to the higher costing vehicles, we get to see the real difference in the factions. The Nod Light Tank is weaker then the GDI Medium Tank, but is faster, and has a lower profile then the the Medium Tank. The DPS of the Light Tank is lower then The Medium Tank, but the Light Tank is also cheaper.
The Flame tank, doesn't really have a counterpart, but is the thing Nod has for close combat. Huge amount of HP and Armor, but it doesn't really have a big range. It's really effective against tanks, in close combat ofcourse.
Then the Stealth Tank, the highest costing vehicle for nod. It is rather weak, faster then the Medium Tank. It has the Lazarus Shield (Stealth), and it does good amount of damage. It doesn't have a huge amount of range though, but it's ideal for possible 'hit and run' tactics.
Then the Mammoth Tank. The highest costing vehicle in Renegade. It shows why GDI is more based on Brute Force. It's huge, has regenerating HP, has a good amount of Armor and HP (the highest HP and Armor of any vehicle in Renegade), has two firering modes (its cannons, and the tusk missiles). The down things for the Mammoth Tank is that it's huge (!) It's hard to miss, and it's slow (and it's fast points for Jet whores who like to 'snipe' the Mammoth Tank, before/without the point fix ofcourse).
[Updated on: Thu, 01 January 2009 17:28] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Rotatable MRLS 'Turret' [message #365664 is a reply to message #365652] |
Thu, 01 January 2009 17:33 |
 |
R315r4z0r
Messages: 3836
Registered: March 2005
Location: New York
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
Because since the MRLS can't rotate it's turret, it allows users to curve their shots around corners without hitting the wall. If the turret turned, then you wouldn't be able to do that, unless you made it turn really slowly.
It isn't exactly needed for it to turn anyway because you can already steer the rockets. It is better for it to not turn that way you can fire the shots over obstacles. If you could rotate the turret, that means you would have to always stay in an open line of sight as you wouldn't be able to avoid possible obstructions.
[Updated on: Thu, 01 January 2009 17:38] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Rotatable MRLS 'Turret' [message #365667 is a reply to message #365664] |
Thu, 01 January 2009 17:39 |
|
DutchNeon
Messages: 533
Registered: January 2007
Location: The Netherlands
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| R315r4z0r wrote on Thu, 01 January 2009 18:33 |
Because since the MRLS can't rotate it's turret, it allows users to curve their shots around corners without hitting the wall. If the turret turned, then you wouldn't be able to do that, unless you made it turn really slowly.
|
True, I also do that sometimes, but I doubt it was intended (just a thing you can do because the 'turret' doesn't rotate).
Next to that, I forgot to mention that the missiles sometimes 'home', but it's still not the biggest advantage the Nod Artillery has, a rotatable turret.
The Arty splash is also huge, compared to splash of an MRLS, so the 'home' thing would be the thing GDI had for the MRLS, as the shots of the Nod Artillery got a huge damage splash.
Edit: You can still fire over 'obstacles' with a rotating turret, because the turret itself isn't that fast making a 360 (like the Artillery turret). Therefor, if the turret is still facing a different way then your 'aim', the missiles would make a turn towards your 'aim'.
[Updated on: Thu, 01 January 2009 17:58] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Rotatable MRLS 'Turret' [message #365677 is a reply to message #365652] |
Thu, 01 January 2009 18:07 |
 |
Chuck Norris
Messages: 312
Registered: July 2007
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
You have to remember that the MRLS and Artillery aren't meant to be used the same way. The MRLS is more of a support vehicle, whereas the Artillery can be used on it's own (though it works great as support for Light Tanks, or vice versa if you look at it as the Artillery doing the real damage, as it usually does).
I think the Artillery is more like a "tank", just with low armor and a long range.
The MRLS isn't so, and it will lose to most things that can get close to it, let alone behind it. With Nod's speed and stealth, an MRLS is much more easy to sneak up on than an Artillery, and the vehicle itself is more prone to damage for reasons listed above. It simply can't defend itself as well. I see it useful only for countering Artillery early game and for support of tank groups for sieges.
I think the Artillery was made to sort of fill the role of a tank because, besides the Light Tank, Nod lacks any real ones.
The Flame Tank can't fight as a tank really only useful for rushing), and a Stealth Tank can, but against a group of Mediums and Mammoths, they'll likely lose (and if they win, they won't be able to remain on and hold the field as good as GDI's remainder would).
I do think the Nod Artillery is "better", especially on server's with that crap where snipers do half damage and with starting credits. It almost makes them overpowered in that situation, you could say.
I don't understand why the MRLS was $750 before the patch, nor did I notice. It makes me think it was intended to be better than it ended up and/or that the Artillery ended up better than was intended?
This is just my random scattered thoughts on this, but I don't think the turret should be changed to rotate.
When the Boogeyman goes to sleep every night, he checks his closet for Chuck Norris.
Chuck Norris is the reason why Waldo is hiding.
When Chuck Norris does a pushup, he isn’t lifting himself up, he’s pushing the Earth down.
Chuck Norris can slam a revolving door.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Rotatable MRLS 'Turret' [message #365679 is a reply to message #365677] |
Thu, 01 January 2009 18:14 |
_SSnipe_
Messages: 4121
Registered: May 2007
Location: Riverside Southern Califo...
Karma: 0
|
General (4 Stars) |
|
|
| Chuck Norris wrote on Thu, 01 January 2009 17:07 |
You have to remember that the MRLS and Artillery aren't meant to be used the same way. The MRLS is more of a support vehicle, whereas the Artillery can be used on it's own
|
not always true, who says that this is its reason, u said the mrl is a support vech? just cause it is> but lets say an error or glitch or flaw in design made it into that when it would not have been?
what I mena is u can lable a type of vech unless we sure thats what it was made for if lets say mrl was meant to move the turret then the idea o it being a support vech would change
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Rotatable MRLS 'Turret' [message #365689 is a reply to message #365652] |
Thu, 01 January 2009 19:02 |
|
DutchNeon
Messages: 533
Registered: January 2007
Location: The Netherlands
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Explain me then, why there is a 'rotate' platform under the 'Missile Box'. Next to that, they based the MRLS of the real MRLS...
Also, I wouldn't find it strange if they actually forgot it, because they also fucked up the point system, the secondary fire glitch with the flame tank, certain flaws in maps, and to go on...
Next to that, I had my thoughts about the MRLS. It first costed $750. Wouldn't the $750 be worth it, for a rotatable 'turret' MRLS? The price might have been right for the MRLS, if it had a rotatable turret. They might have forgotten to add the rotate function of the 'turret', and therefor the MRLS wasn't worth the price (or they just fucked up the price, or damage/splash of the MRLS, who knows). GDI would have lacked starting vehicles then if the MRLS was $750, because they would have had Humvees and APCS vs Arties and (possible) Lights.
Also, I'm not whining, I'm wondering what the thoughts are of the public of this idea/change. You obviously find it a bad idea, and I can life with that...
[Updated on: Thu, 01 January 2009 19:07] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Rotatable MRLS 'Turret' [message #365690 is a reply to message #365667] |
Thu, 01 January 2009 19:40 |
|
R315r4z0r
Messages: 3836
Registered: March 2005
Location: New York
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| DutchNeon wrote on Thu, 01 January 2009 19:39 |
True, I also do that sometimes, but I doubt it was intended (just a thing you can do because the 'turret' doesn't rotate).
|
Then you would be wrong. It was 100% intended for it to not turn. In fact, the way the tank is modeled and rigged, leaves evidence that was originally intended to turn but was disabled before the game was shipped.
You can't just model a vehicle and it somehow magically know what its turret is and how it can rotate. You have to set up specific bones on the axis of the turret for it to even be able to spin. You are able to enable and disable the rotating turret in level editor, thus giving evidence that those rotation bones already exist on the MRLS model.
Therefore, we can conclude, Westwood originally modeled and rigged the MRLS to have a turning turret, but it was changed to a stationary turret before the game's release.
They obviously figured it was better for the user to simply be able to control the rockets rather than control the direction they were shot in. 100% intended. And I agree with that decision.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Rotatable MRLS 'Turret' [message #365701 is a reply to message #365652] |
Thu, 01 January 2009 21:55 |
KobraOps
Messages: 202
Registered: January 2007
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
They wont fix it for a reason, because it isnt broken. Its part of the game. If u want a rotatable turret play the map C&C Snow.
Like said earlier, fixing bugs - not changing gameplay
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Rotatable MRLS 'Turret' [message #365740 is a reply to message #365652] |
Fri, 02 January 2009 06:53 |
Reaver11
Messages: 888
Registered: April 2007
Karma: 1
|
Colonel |
|
|
There is go to the petrogylph forums. I did it before and if you are lucky you will get a reply of a former worker on renegade.
For the MRLS please leave it as it is. If it gets a turret then the price should be higher which alters renegade to much. (Nod will really pwn the first secs in a game)
Internaly the MRLS is setup for a rotatable turret. Only some parts are poorly done. The two poles under the launchingequipement and the turret bone is not in the middle.
As said before TT is for bug fixing not gameplay changing.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Rotatable MRLS 'Turret' [message #365742 is a reply to message #365652] |
Fri, 02 January 2009 07:21 |
 |
Ghostshaw
Messages: 709
Registered: September 2006
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
We won't touch the MRL. This is a balance change. As for enabling/disabling it server sided, I am not sure the normal MRL is capable of it, but if it is we would still need to transmit this to clients. Theoretically we already provide facilities for it, but I do not know how far we will extend it.
BlackIntel Administrator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Nov 14 06:52:24 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01180 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
(for example the nod base entrance on field) 
