Complete Annihilation News

[Licho]

Hello everyone. Unfortunately, real life strikes again, and so I probably will not be able to do much devving in the near future. Also I can't seem to access caspring.org by browser or by SVN; I suspect my firewall is going psycho, but I've not been able to figure out how to fix it.

We changed IP address..
make sure you dont have IP entry in your hosts (windows/system32/drivers/etc/hosts)

New IP is 72.14.177.217

[manored]

We'll be replacing it with negative-building in the next version of spring (when its possible).

IE you reclaim a friendly structure and it turns back into a nanoframe and goes back up the nanotube.

What about things that explode? Would be quite lame if you could prevent an enemy from detonating your adv fusion by starting to reclaim it on the last minute...

[Licho]

Yeah I prefer current scrap system..

Reverse building?

Code simple widget that makes nano or nearby con reclaim explosive stuff thats damaged and under attack.

[Crayfish]

Yer, not keen on reverse building. Scrap would be fine if you removed the option for commanders.

[Acidd_UK]

Reverse building would be ok if the revese building were to be independant of current unit/structure health. I vaguely remember I made a long post about it somewhere that dealt with some of the portential exploits and how to avoid them...

<rummages> Here it is: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=12518&p=292311&hilit=reclaim#p292311

[manored]

Perhaps builders could have a function similar to the old reclaim, that then used on an allied and controlled structure would trigger the scrap function of that structure and make the builder automatically reclaim it once scraped.

[Wolf-In-Exile]

Donut comparamise quality

NEIN:




JA:

[Argh]

Nice My only quibble is that I think that the preshading needs a bit more... oomph. May I have the meshes? I could just do a quickie retouch...

[Wolf-In-Exile]

Meshhere, I think.

Original tex had baked in shadows, don't have time to re-bake it and fix all the overlap errors on mirrored bits.

[Argh]

NP, I'm just going to do a wee bit of airbrush work anyhow, won't take very long...

[smoth]

please don't change them, they look fine to me argh.

[jK]

please note, the texture change doesn't mean the old one was bad, but it just didn't fit into our idea of how arm units should look like.

further cleaned (uncommited) version:

[smoth]

that looks great jk.

[manored]

I think the tubes look a bit weird, and they dont really make much sense, I mean, its a robot, why having tubes arcing from the gun to the back if they could run through the arm? They also seen quite fragile, not the kind of thing a battle robot would have... discouting that, the model is great :)

[Acidd_UK]

This model made me play arm again.

[Warlord Zsinj]

Very hot.

What are the chances of getting the big double pistol thing to fire sideways? >_>

I actually really like the clip tube thing, I think it looks great. How did you get it to not look strange in non-firing poses? (avoid clipping)

[smoth]

What are the chances of getting the big double pistol thing to fire sideways? >_>

please don't tell me you think that stupid garbage looks good.

[det]

Yeah I prefer current scrap system..

Reverse building?

Code simple widget that makes nano or nearby con reclaim explosive stuff thats damaged and under attack.

Maybe the solution to this it to make certain units not reclaimable. It kind of makes sense that certain units are too volatile to be reclaimed.

[Wolf-In-Exile]

jK: looks better than the currently committed tex indeed, though it looks like alot of the detail has been removed.
I don't think that the detailing has too bad of an effect on long-distance playview?
Anyway, if you want to keep the detail, overlay it on top and adjust the layer's opacity (using Photoshop).

[Crayfish]

Wolf's version looked best (at the distances shown at least). Is that too high res for a spam unit or something?