The Man is back! 
(read Wyrm's sig for context ...) And with mighty fine work as always. 
Best,
Oz
(read Wyrm's sig for context ...) And with mighty fine work as always. Best,
Oz
Red Air Force, post-war
- Thread starter Wyrmshadow
- Start date
SoAB
Chieftain
(Beats Drums)
"Doom, doo, doo, doo, doom, The Champ is Here!" "Doom, doo, doo, doo, doom, The Champ is Here!" "Doom, doo, doo, doo, doom, The Champ is Here!"
Good work Wyrmshadow. Definately. The Mig 21K was a pleasant suprise.
The forger looks a bit bigger (dimensions) than it's real self... but that's good. The real Yak-38 was lacking, at best, especially compared to its counterparts in the west. This forger actually looks like it could do some damage.
And I'm not sure how I'm going to use the Yak 44 Myoptic but when a unit looks that good, you find a way. I'm just not sure how an AWACs aircraft would fit in Civ3, besides recon.
But an AWACs does so much more than recon. And the player allready has fighters for that mission. Hmmm...
This is first idea that comes to mind.
-Autoproduceable only by small wonder.
-Make the unit capable of air interception only, long range, with low-mediocre A/D values but with +4 or 5 hp. The idea being that the aircraft itself is weak but it's capabilities (vectoring friendlies onto the target) is it's real defense value.
-Also the game seems let the 'strongest' unit (as in most HP) take the first attack. So for a high priority target like an AWACs, it makes sense that it would get bombed first in an airstrike. Better rebase them at a secure area and use the AWAC's long range to an advantage.
Anyways, good work. I can't wait for the Flankers.
"Doom, doo, doo, doo, doom, The Champ is Here!" "Doom, doo, doo, doo, doom, The Champ is Here!" "Doom, doo, doo, doo, doom, The Champ is Here!"
Good work Wyrmshadow. Definately. The Mig 21K was a pleasant suprise.
The forger looks a bit bigger (dimensions) than it's real self... but that's good. The real Yak-38 was lacking, at best, especially compared to its counterparts in the west. This forger actually looks like it could do some damage.
And I'm not sure how I'm going to use the Yak 44 Myoptic but when a unit looks that good, you find a way. I'm just not sure how an AWACs aircraft would fit in Civ3, besides recon.
But an AWACs does so much more than recon. And the player allready has fighters for that mission. Hmmm...
This is first idea that comes to mind.
-Autoproduceable only by small wonder.
-Make the unit capable of air interception only, long range, with low-mediocre A/D values but with +4 or 5 hp. The idea being that the aircraft itself is weak but it's capabilities (vectoring friendlies onto the target) is it's real defense value.
-Also the game seems let the 'strongest' unit (as in most HP) take the first attack. So for a high priority target like an AWACs, it makes sense that it would get bombed first in an airstrike. Better rebase them at a secure area and use the AWAC's long range to an advantage.
Anyways, good work. I can't wait for the Flankers.
taube87
duck and cover!
i really don't want to pestering you wyrm, but i noticed that some aircrafts have the same problem as your older ones. furthermore i note that you have fixed the old problem by editing index 239. perhaps you can transfer it 
please note: this is only constructional criticism. your units are wonderful and better as all other modern aircraft units!
perhaps you can update your upcoming units
please note: this is only constructional criticism. your units are wonderful and better as all other modern aircraft units!
perhaps you can update your upcoming units
Attachments
Wyrmshadow
Deity
any other color screw ups I should know about?
taube87
duck and cover!
perhaps it's a problem with white (255red, 255green and 255blue) and black (0red, 0green and 0blue) because it's only in these complete white or black areas.
i'm afraid that all your new aircraft have this problem
with the exception of a few (yak-130, ...)
i'm afraid that all your new aircraft have this problem
with the exception of a few (yak-130, ...)
Wyrmshadow
Deity
There's goes my saturday. I just ran through all my planes in Civ3flcEdit and it seems the majority of them have this problem. The old ones I will have to reanimate because I had to erase the storyboards but the new ones can fix relatively easily.
crap
crap
Virote_Considon
The Great Dictator
Are you sure that it's like that in-game? From what I remember, sometimes units seem screwed in flcEdit, but actually work fine in-game.
96nn
Warlord
Congratulation for Wyrm's coming back. 
But, Wyrm, why the links of "Su-25 Frogfoot", "Yak-141 Freestyle", "Mig-28 Fidget", "Beriev P-42 Murky" and "Yak-44 Myopicis" are all invalid...
But, Wyrm, why the links of "Su-25 Frogfoot", "Yak-141 Freestyle", "Mig-28 Fidget", "Beriev P-42 Murky" and "Yak-44 Myopicis" are all invalid...
SoAB
Chieftain
Updates and problem fixes. Though, I didn't notice anything wrong with the Yak 141 and Mig 28 Fidget. I haven't downloaded the Frogfoot yet or put the Murky or Myopic in my game yet, so I'm not sure if there is a problem with those.
Taube posted some pictures of whats wrong with the frogfoot and murky, though.
Taube posted some pictures of whats wrong with the frogfoot and murky, though.
Lord Shadow
General
One little thing about the Su-60's name. Russians don't use even numbers to name their fighters, so it should be either Su-59 or Su-61 (should you want to stick around 60). Same deal with the MiG-28, but I guess that's a tribute to Top Gun? Those MiGs were actually "converted" American F-5 Tigers.
taube87
duck and cover!
One little thing about the Su-60's name. Russians don't use even numbers to name their fighters, so it should be either Su-59 or Su-61 (should you want to stick around 60). Same deal with the MiG-28, but I guess that's a tribute to Top Gun? Those MiGs were actually "converted" American F-5 Tigers.
you can use every name you want! some of these aircrafts are fictional
Not being a Red/Russian air force connisseur, would you indulge me in listing the fictional ones?
Thanks In Advance,
Oz
MatteLeDog
Warlord
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Messages
- 153
One little thing about the Su-60's name. Russians don't use even numbers to name their fighters, so it should be either Su-59 or Su-61 (should you want to stick around 60). Same deal with the MiG-28, but I guess that's a tribute to Top Gun? Those MiGs were actually "converted" American F-5 Tigers.
Uhm that goes for Mikoyan fighters yes, but you do know there are Su-24, Su-20, Su-22, Su-30, Su-34, Yak-28, Yak-38 and so on.
Anyway, nice to see that you are back at it again after the comp trouble Wyrmshadow.
MatteLeDog
Warlord
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Messages
- 153
Not that many, from what I can tell the MiG-28 and the Firefox, some of the others never entered service but nevertheless were technology demonstrators and useful for research. I think the U.S took an interest in the Yak-141 Freestyle when developing the JSF, and the MiG-35 and Su-47 have probably been useful for the Russian 5th gen jet fighter program. I think the naval/carrier version of the MiG-23 might be considered fictional as well.
Didn't the Soviets go with a VTOL for the Moskva & Kiev? - there's a treaty in place prohibiting the passage of aircraft carriers through the Dardanelles, so I know these were classified as helicopter carriers; maybe VTOLs also side-stepped the treaty?
-Oz
MatteLeDog
Warlord
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Messages
- 153
Yes it's true that the Soviet stuck to the awful example of VTOL aircraft
that is the Forger for their Kiev class carriers. I think the Dardanelles problem
was circumvented by classifying them as "cruisers", however I'm not sure that any of the larger Kievs were based in the Black Sea fleet or Mediterranean squadron. The MiG-23 carrier version might have been a reality if the Soviets had gone for a Larger carrier vessel (like the ones the U.S operates), a few such options were studied during the post war years but was never realised for various reasons. The Soviets actually started construction of a "super carrier" type, but it was scrapped when the U.S.S.R. was disolved. The closest thing to the U.S. counterparts is the Kuznetsov class. But what is easily forgotten when making cold war force comparisons, Soviet doctrine is not the same as U.S. or NATO, the intent was never to create a Soviet copy of the U.S. fleet.
Wyrmshadow
Deity
I erased the aircraft with the pallette issues. Turned out to be nearly half of them. I didnt see any problems in Flicster but it was painfully obvious in Civ3FlcEdit.
Lord Shadow: Your new title is now Master of the Bleeding Obvious.
Lord Shadow: Your new title is now Master of the Bleeding Obvious.
Virote_Considon
The Great Dictator
As I said a bit earlier, I think this is JUST a problem with Civ3FlcEdit. I've noticed it on many units, and I think it only effects pure white and pure black. In game (like in Flickster) this should be fine.#
EDIT: some examples that look bad in Civ3FlcEdit (which the images are from) that don't look invisible in game
Wyrmshadow
Deity
Thank you. But before I kill myself redoing all of the planes, Could someone that has already downloaded all of the planes check in game. It seems the E/W directions show the most problems, in civ3flcedit. Now, could someone do that and PM me their findings. I haven't modded civ3 in years, and I'm highly drunk at the moment (long day at work) so I'm in no shape to do any higher brain function work. Plus I just don't like clutter in my threads, so just PM your findings.
Similar threads
