Warzone 2100 Forums

Greetings Warzone fans, today, we bring you the release of 3.1.1 RC2.

It was decided that we should fix the major bugs that have been reported for all those VTOL fans, and do a quick push to RC2.

We are also waiting to hear about the balance changes, and how you like them so far.
Please speak up!

As usual, you can find all our releases at our SourceForge hosting page located here: https://sourceforge.net/projects/warzon ... 3.1.1_rc2/
For those of you that are using our repo, the correct way to get it is, git pull then git checkout 3.1.1_rc2.

If all goes smoothly, we anticipate a final release in a few weeks.

We are also looking for mac developers and/or builders to help us make builds, and to fix anything mac related that may pop up with the migration to Qt 5.x, or any other mac related problem.
The mac builds will be available as soon as we can get someone to build them, sorry about that, but none of the developers have a mac to make builds with.

We also would like to thank all the donors who have donated to the site's operating costs, without which, we wouldn't be here, and all the contributors who have helped make Warzone a better game with improved textures, models, mods and maps.
If you would like to make a donation to help with the ongoing server cost, (the only thing we use the funds on) please visit http://donations.wz2100.net

Special note:
We now have Warzone 2100 portable builds available
What are portable releases? In simple terms, you can install them anywhere, and everything is self-contained.
That means that if you install it in f:\my_games\Warzone 2100 3.1.1/ (or a USB drive, or...) that it will ONLY write to that directory, and nothing else.
That directory will have the config file, and directories made for you.


Changelog:
2013-11-15: Version 3.1.1_rc2

• Multiplayer:
• Fix: Allow VTOL factories to produce SUPER_HEAVY units. (4458c8b2)
• Fix: VTOL's now can fly over ground units instead of flying around them. (75ede1da1)

*reserved for issues*

I am not sure, that players had enough time for testing new balance. But obviousli, all changes have done in right way. I've voted for "Good enough". It means in fact - "Better, than it was".

Please, meke some technologies playable in multyplayer:
1) Tank trap: more thermal armor, than walls. and players can shoot throght them.
2) Pepperpot.

Balance in low oil games becomes much better

dont fix: VTOL's now can fly over ground units instead of flying around them.
the error is not always, but it has progressed - vtol is hampered relief.
And ugly fly transporters: one ahead - the others are catching and quickly and ugly bump into him...

Today I played a multiplayer game, and unfortunately I experienced the "fixed" vtol bug. My vtols were stuck against ground units, and they behaved strange when flying above grounded vtols, moving in a zig-zag manner (it looked like they were trying not to fly above other vtols on the rearming pads, but the weren't blocked like when they colide with ground units).
I'm running Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, 16GB DDR3@1800MHz, Intel i7-3770K, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti.

As I said in the other thread, VTOLs bump into each other if the lead unit is slower than the ones behind it. That means they don't want to crash into them.
At this time, we have no formation code, so you need to either space them out yourself, or, have the faster VTOLs first.

Before, you could make it so you had 50+ VTOLs "disguised" as 1 unit blob, since they were all on top of each other.
The fix tries to prevent them from being on top of each other, while still being able to fly over other 'ground' units.

Will have to tweak the code for VTOLs on rearming pads to see what can be done, that didn't come up in testing.
*edit After some testing, had 20 rearming pads, and had 30 VTOLs, and it was working as it should...the ones sitting on the rearming pads moved away to make room for the 10 more that needed rearming at a later point in time.
*edit2, Made 100 VTOLs and had them patrolling all around the map, didn't notice a issue with that either...
Got any more details ?

Since there isn't a Mac build, I thought I'd cook one up... here's an unofficial build for Mac OS X of 3.1.1 rc2. It was built on Snow Leopard (x86 10.6), and briefly tested on Mavericks (x86_64 10.9), so I expect it will work on just about everything in between. That said, I don't really have time to actively support it, so caveat emptor but enjoy:

http://eisbox.net/downloads/wz2100_3.1.1_rc2.zip

Yeah. I corrected the hungarian OpenGL sentenses. Upload this.

vexed wrote:Before, you could make it so you had 50+ VTOLs "disguised" as 1 unit blob, since they were all on top of each other.

Thanks for the explanation! Are the units stacked in the "blob" receiving less damage than when they obey each others physical bounds?

vexed wrote:Got any more details ?

I will try to replicate what I have seen. Since it was multiplayer I don't have a saved game.

minirockets are strong at the initial stage of the game, I know that against them need are a borgs, but even in battle "tank vs. tank" should not dominate so much, next balance is aligned, but only because lancer too costly =/
And 3 crash in the day of the game, mainly accession to some maps, that 3.1.0 not cause the crash

blaze wrote:

vexed wrote:Before, you could make it so you had 50+ VTOLs "disguised" as 1 unit blob, since they were all on top of each other.

Thanks for the explanation! Are the units stacked in the "blob" receiving less damage than when they obey each others physical bounds?

The attacking unit/structure couldn't all "lock on" on a single droid in the blob, so it was basically a cheat.

legion_Lex wrote:minirockets are strong at the initial stage of the game, I know that against them need are a borgs, but even in battle "tank vs. tank" should not dominate so much, next balance is aligned, but only because lancer too costly =/
And 3 crash in the day of the game, mainly accession to some maps, that 3.1.0 not cause the crash

Need to see the crash reports, (Warzone2100.rpt file) then go to http://developer.wz2100.net/login, use your forum name & password, and then use http://developer.wz2100.net/newticket to make a report about your crash.

even in battle "tank vs. tank" should not dominate so much

Why shouldn't an anti tank weapon dominate against tanks?

Why shouldn't an anti tank weapon dominate against tanks?

because cyborgs are not anti antitanks weapon and they can not cope with the task...
especially if you add a little machine gun.

you should either increase the resistance of cyborgs for the machine guns, either increase the resistance of tanks for the rockets.
I hope, made clear...

may be on the low oil all is well, but on the meddle- and hi-oil - rockets it's cool.
that's how things are in balance in most of the games in multiplayer, not only for the low-oil maps:
rokets>cannon>machine gun>flame
as rightly said by other players: rockets wait for its hour

Need to see the crash reports, (Warzone2100.rpt file) then go to http://developer.wz2100.net/login, use your forum name & password, and then use http://developer.wz2100.net/newticket to make a report about your crash.

done http://developer.wz2100.net/ticket/4115

We need to play more games and do more tests cannons vs rockets.

I think rockets can be overpowered in certain cases. I think we can safely nerf rockets 5-10% DPS (reduce DPS of rockets).
I'm afraid if we nerf rockets then cannons can become overpowered.

NoQ wrote:

even in battle "tank vs. tank" should not dominate so much

Why shouldn't an anti tank weapon dominate against tanks?

I can say. We dont want to see too much cyborgs in game. I think good proportion is 30% cyborgs and 70% tanks.
I think anti-tank weapons should not be so strong agains tanks.

Anti-Tank is just alias for weapon modifier.....
e.g. why anti-tank has weaker damage to hover units? Hover = tank. why damage weaker?