Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Command & Conquer Generals... too fast!

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
October 20, 2004 9:11:00 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Is there any way (cheats, hacks, mods, etc) to adjust the game speed
during a single player campaign game?

I can't believe this game disabled that feature on single player
campaign, but enabled it for skirmishes. I prefer to play my strategy
games strategically --- y'know, slow and methodical. Mouse dexterity
and click speed should not be a factor in these games.
Anonymous
October 21, 2004 5:19:34 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

opticreep@yahoo.com (Opticreep) wrote:

>I can't believe this game disabled that feature on single player
>campaign, but enabled it for skirmishes. I prefer to play my strategy
>games strategically --- y'know, slow and methodical. Mouse dexterity
>and click speed should not be a factor in these games.

Welcome to real-time strategy. Makes me wonder how I could ever take time
to admire the look of chess pieces.
Anonymous
October 21, 2004 5:49:28 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"John Doe" <jdoe@usenet.is.the.real.thing> wrote in message
news:Xns9588CEC5CC542wisdomfolly@151.164.30.42...
> Welcome to real-time strategy. Makes me wonder how I could ever take time
> to admire the look of chess pieces.

Being able to adjust the speed wouldn't make it non real time.
I'm not sure if I am mis-interpeting your response, but the original
poster does have a point. If a game requires fast mouse speed and
clicking, it's not as much of a "strategy" game. Sure, thinking fast
is required. But making it such a clickfest will give an advantage
to the player who is more dexterous, over a player who may be
more strategic.

Slowing it down a bit is still real time combat. The idea that the
current speed is the "real, accurate" time/speed is ridiculous. These
games often have very unrealisitic build times, movements speeds,
etc.
Related resources
Anonymous
October 21, 2004 5:53:37 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

dunno about slow, C&C is that kind of game where it is a race to get the
most resources to build the most units, playing slow means you lose out,
besides there really isn't much to do other than get your resource
collection going, pumping out as many tanks as you can and destroying the
enemy.
"Opticreep" <opticreep@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9e1f277e.0410201611.45775fe5@posting.google.com...
> Is there any way (cheats, hacks, mods, etc) to adjust the game speed
> during a single player campaign game?
>
> I can't believe this game disabled that feature on single player
> campaign, but enabled it for skirmishes. I prefer to play my strategy
> games strategically --- y'know, slow and methodical. Mouse dexterity
> and click speed should not be a factor in these games.
Anonymous
October 21, 2004 7:15:38 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"Jim Vieira" <WhiplashrAT@wiDOT.rrDOT.com> wrote:

....

> but the original poster does have a point.

I think his (if I'm not mistaken) is expressed accurately/concisely like
a perceptive person who is new to the genre.

> Sure, thinking fast is required. But making it such a clickfest will
> give an advantage to the player who is more dexterous, over a player
> who may be more strategic.

And clicking fast is not to be confused with thinking fast.

> Slowing it down a bit is still real time combat. The idea that the
> current speed is the "real, accurate" time/speed is ridiculous. These
> games often have very unrealisitic build times, movements speeds,
> etc.

That's sounds like another good reason for user editable starting
terrain. Of course you don't want construction of a large building to
take years, but you want players to be able to build their own
environment. User editable starting terrain would help correct that
neatly, in my opinion.

Messing with the speed control is unrealistic also. Why would you want
lethargic moving units and long build times? Instead, why not use energy
like in the real world. A player should be allowed to move quickly if he
(or she) knows what he is doing. If he moves quickly and inefficiently,
he should be penalized. That's where energy bars come in. Each player
would have an energy bar which is filled at a predetermined rate. The
capacity of the energy bars is also predetermined. A slow rate of energy
flow into your energy bar and you're not going to do a whole lot and a
short amount of time unless you have a large quantity of energy stored
up. The total amount of energy which can be stored is determined by
energy bar capacity. You can save energy for some later flurry of
activity or you can use what you have to disrupt your opponent, long as
you do it efficiently. That concept was implemented to some extent in
Total Annihilation but it does not play enough of a role in the game, in
my opinion.
Anonymous
October 21, 2004 7:15:39 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 03:15:38 GMT, John Doe <jdoe@usenet.is.the.real.thing>
wrote:


>> Slowing it down a bit is still real time combat. The idea that the
>> current speed is the "real, accurate" time/speed is ridiculous. These
>> games often have very unrealisitic build times, movements speeds,
>> etc.
>
>That's sounds like another good reason for user editable starting
>terrain. Of course you don't want construction of a large building to
>take years, but you want players to be able to build their own
>environment. User editable starting terrain would help correct that
>neatly, in my opinion.

Editable terrain could be a bit too complex, and can lead to potential
problems (e.g. a player who plateaus his base to make it unreachable by
most common means.). However, a prebuild phase similar to Metal Fatigue
works...

>A player should be allowed to move quickly if he
>(or she) knows what he is doing. If he moves quickly and inefficiently,
>he should be penalized. That's where energy bars come in. Each player
>would have an energy bar which is filled at a predetermined rate. The
>capacity of the energy bars is also predetermined. A slow rate of energy
>flow into your energy bar and you're not going to do a whole lot and a
>short amount of time unless you have a large quantity of energy stored
>up. The total amount of energy which can be stored is determined by
>energy bar capacity. You can save energy for some later flurry of
>activity or you can use what you have to disrupt your opponent, long as
>you do it efficiently.

I wouldn't be comforatble with this concept for an RTS. While it might
work for individual units to simulate supply ranges and the like, it risks
causing the player to be rendered helpless when they receive a sudden
suprise attack.

I do know that a proper implementation of energy might not have these kinds
of problems - however, most developers don't know how to properly write an
RTS.

>That concept was implemented to some extent in
>Total Annihilation but it does not play enough of a role in the game, in
>my opinion.

Actually, energy played a different role in TA. It was used as a secondary
resource collected by solar/fusion plants rather than a limitation on what
the player could perform.
Anonymous
October 21, 2004 7:15:40 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"Raymond Martineau" <bk039@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote in message
news:fpben0tf5p5onf6p42na8rb4ue3fcodlbq@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 03:15:38 GMT, John Doe <jdoe@usenet.is.the.real.thing>
> wrote:
<snip>

I didn't see the response from John Doe before you quoted him
(damn news server). But I wonder, he sounded an awful lot
like Mark Bender/LShaping/Full Name. Is that you old friend? :) 
Anonymous
October 21, 2004 8:16:09 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

John Doe <jdoe@usenet.is.the.real.thing> wrote in message news:<Xns9588E273AFCAwisdomfolly@151.164.30.44>...
>
> I think his (if I'm not mistaken) is expressed accurately/concisely like
> a perceptive person who is new to the genre.
>


You are mistaken. The first real time strategic PC game I ever played
was "Ancient Art of War" on the gray-scale CGA monitor. If you don't
remember that game, then *you* are probably a little too new to the
genre.


>
> And clicking fast is not to be confused with thinking fast.
>

Ah, but thinking fast should not be confused with clicking fast. I
happen to think that mouse dexterity should have no impact on the
effectiveness of an RTS player. In C&C:Generals, mouse speed has more
to do with victory than strategy. It wouldn't matter if you had a
good strategy in mind if you're not fast enough to execute it. Your
opponent, who may have a simpler strategy (swarm! swarm! swarm!) will
overwhelm you while you are trying to issue orders to multiple, small
groups of units trying to make a simultaneous multi-sided assault on
different areas of the map. With the ridiculous pace of C&C:Generals,
a person could only concentrate on one area of the map at a time.
Frankly, that's a very dumb way of making a "strategy" game. This pace
of this game makes it practically a hybrid of arcade and strategy.

Take for example the incident that lead to my original post. I had a
dozen or so tanks and troop vehicles on their way to a waypoint. I
scrolled down to my base for ten or fifteen seconds, just to issue a
few maintenance commands (build power plants, build units, etc). When
I scrolled back to my tanks, they were all gone! Not a single units
left. I have no idea what happened because it happened so fast. It's
insane. Strategy games ought to give you enough time to manage units
and buildings effectively on more than one area of the map at a time.
Anonymous
October 21, 2004 9:24:02 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

opticreep@yahoo.com (Opticreep) wrote in message news:<9e1f277e.0410201611.45775fe5@posting.google.com>...
> Is there any way (cheats, hacks, mods, etc) to adjust the game speed
> during a single player campaign game?
>
> I can't believe this game disabled that feature on single player
> campaign, but enabled it for skirmishes. I prefer to play my strategy
> games strategically --- y'know, slow and methodical. Mouse dexterity
> and click speed should not be a factor in these games.

I couldn't say if there were any cheats to slow it down. But the
reasoon it is like that is because they wanted to make it easy to get
into and easy to complete in a single sitting, fun & fast. Not only
does it play faster but the super weapons are easier to build, and the
paper-rock-scissors unit balance is more extreme.

They may have gone a little too far -- some of the missions are over
in 20 minutes -- but it's a fun campaign nonetheless.
Anonymous
October 21, 2004 11:41:03 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Troll.

"Jim Vieira" <WhiplashrAT@wiDOT.rrDOT.com> wrote:

>Path: newssvr12.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm03.news.prodigy.com!newscon03.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01a.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!news.glorb.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!elnk-pas-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!cyclone.socal.rr.com!cyclone2.kc.rr.com!news2.kc.rr.com!twister.rdc-kc.rr.com.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail
>From: "Jim Vieira" <WhiplashrAT@wiDOT.rrDOT.com>
>Newsgroups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
>References: <9e1f277e.0410201611.45775fe5@posting.google.com> <Xns9588CEC5CC542wisdomfolly@151.164.30.42> <IAEdd.29927$PH6.21420@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com> <Xns9588E273AFCAwisdomfolly@151.164.30.44> <fpben0tf5p5onf6p42na8rb4ue3fcodlbq@4ax.com>
>Subject: Re: Command & Conquer Generals... too fast!
>Lines: 11
>X-Priority: 3
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
>Message-ID: <MVHdd.179278$nA6.121256@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>
>Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 00:38:16 -0500
>NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.26.204.57
>X-Complaints-To: abuse@rr.com
>X-Trace: twister.rdc-kc.rr.com 1098337004 65.26.204.57 (Thu, 21 Oct 2004 00:36:44 CDT)
>NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 00:36:44 CDT
>Xref: newsmst01a.news.prodigy.com alt.games.command-n-conq:41160 comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic:841000
>
>"Raymond Martineau" <bk039@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote in message
>news:fpben0tf5p5onf6p42na8rb4ue3fcodlbq@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 03:15:38 GMT, John Doe <jdoe@usenet.is.the.real.thing>
>> wrote:
><snip>
>
>I didn't see the response from John Doe before you quoted him
>(damn news server). But I wonder, he sounded an awful lot
>like Mark Bender/LShaping/Full Name. Is that you old friend? :) 
>
>
>
Anonymous
October 21, 2004 11:51:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

bk039@freenet.carleton.ca (Raymond Martineau) wrote:
> John Doe <jdoe@usenet.is.the.real.thing> wrote:

>> That's sounds like another good reason for user editable starting
>> terrain. Of course you don't want construction of a large building to
>> take years, but you want players to be able to build their own
>> environment. User editable starting terrain would help correct that
>> neatly, in my opinion.
>
> Editable terrain could be a bit too complex,

Besides what you wrote below, please name something you think might be
too complex.

> and can lead to potential problems (e.g. a player who plateaus his
> base to make it unreachable by most common means.).

The same player might have trouble expanding and getting to energy
sources, especially if the surrounding terrain is randomized.

> However, a prebuild phase similar to Metal Fatigue works...

I seem to recall downloading and trying the demo but did not play. How
would that be any different than allowing players to prebuild at their
leisure before the game starts?

>> A player should be allowed to move quickly if he
>> (or she) knows what he is doing. If he moves quickly and
>> inefficiently, he should be penalized. That's where energy bars come
>> in. Each player would have an energy bar which is filled at a
>> predetermined rate. The capacity of the energy bars is also
>> predetermined. A slow rate of energy flow into your energy bar and
>> you're not going to do a whole lot and a short amount of time unless
>> you have a large quantity of energy stored up. The total amount of
>> energy which can be stored is determined by energy bar capacity. You
>> can save energy for some later flurry of activity or you can use what
>> you have to disrupt your opponent, long as you do it efficiently.
>
> I wouldn't be comforatble with this concept for an RTS. While it
> might work for individual units to simulate supply ranges and the
> like,

I usually think of an army as being able to share resources. Dealing
with supply ranges probably will over complicate things. Seems to me
that is not as easy to understand as just looking at some of your units
and figuring out how much energy they're using or figuring out how much
energy you will need to build units or construct buildings.

> it risks causing the player to be rendered helpless when they receive
> a sudden suprise attack.

I don't understand why.

They would be more susceptible to counterattack after throwing a bunch
of units at their enemy. But that depends partly on energy bar rate of
fill and energy bar capacity.

I think energy bars just reward efficiency which apparently is a missing
component in real-time strategy.

> I do know that a proper implementation of energy might not have these
> kinds of problems - however, most developers don't know how to
> properly write an RTS.
>
>> That concept was implemented to some extent in
>> Total Annihilation but it does not play enough of a role in the game,
>> in my opinion.
>
> Actually, energy played a different role in TA. It was used as a
> secondary resource collected by solar/fusion plants rather than a
> limitation on what the player could perform.

Energy sources such as solar collectors and nuclear power plants fed the
energy bar. Building construction and units consumed a certain amount of
energy which drained the energy bar. When you ran out of energy, your
aircraft would land, and your unit production and building construction
would cease.

There are Total Annihilation players in here who can correct me if I'm
wrong. I can correct me if I'm wrong, since I still have the CDs.
Anonymous
October 21, 2004 1:38:10 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"John Doe" <jdoe@usenet.is.the.real.thing> wrote in message
news:Xns95891B4F876wisdomfolly@151.164.30.48...
> Troll.

Ahh, it is you after all. Damn shame you are still such a bitter
guy.

So why do you change your name so much anyhow?





>
> "Jim Vieira" <WhiplashrAT@wiDOT.rrDOT.com> wrote:
>
> >Path:
newssvr12.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm03.news.prodigy.com!newscon03.news.prodigy
..com!newsmst01a.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!news.glorb.com!newshub.sdsu.edu
!elnk-nf2-pas!elnk-pas-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!cyclone.socal.rr.com!cyclo
ne2.kc.rr.com!news2.kc.rr.com!twister.rdc-kc.rr.com.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-
mail
> >From: "Jim Vieira" <WhiplashrAT@wiDOT.rrDOT.com>
> >Newsgroups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
> >References: <9e1f277e.0410201611.45775fe5@posting.google.com>
<Xns9588CEC5CC542wisdomfolly@151.164.30.42>
<IAEdd.29927$PH6.21420@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>
<Xns9588E273AFCAwisdomfolly@151.164.30.44>
<fpben0tf5p5onf6p42na8rb4ue3fcodlbq@4ax.com>
> >Subject: Re: Command & Conquer Generals... too fast!
> >Lines: 11
> >X-Priority: 3
> >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> >X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
> >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
> >Message-ID: <MVHdd.179278$nA6.121256@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>
> >Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 00:38:16 -0500
> >NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.26.204.57
> >X-Complaints-To: abuse@rr.com
> >X-Trace: twister.rdc-kc.rr.com 1098337004 65.26.204.57 (Thu, 21 Oct 2004
00:36:44 CDT)
> >NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 00:36:44 CDT
> >Xref: newsmst01a.news.prodigy.com alt.games.command-n-conq:41160
comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic:841000
> >
> >"Raymond Martineau" <bk039@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote in message
> >news:fpben0tf5p5onf6p42na8rb4ue3fcodlbq@4ax.com...
> >> On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 03:15:38 GMT, John Doe
<jdoe@usenet.is.the.real.thing>
> >> wrote:
> ><snip>
> >
> >I didn't see the response from John Doe before you quoted him
> >(damn news server). But I wonder, he sounded an awful lot
> >like Mark Bender/LShaping/Full Name. Is that you old friend? :) 
> >
> >
> >
>
Anonymous
October 21, 2004 11:32:28 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

opticreep@yahoo.com (Opticreep) wrote:
>John Doe <jdoe@usenet.is.the.real.thing> wrote in message news:

>> I think his (if I'm not mistaken) is expressed accurately/concisely like
>> a perceptive person who is new to the genre.
>
>You are mistaken.

I should have said "hers"?
[kidding, but gender is what I was referring to]

>The first real time strategic PC game I ever played
>was "Ancient Art of War" on the gray-scale CGA monitor. If you don't
>remember that game, then *you* are probably a little too new to the
>genre.

Yes I did play that, but my display was amber FWIW.

>> And clicking fast is not to be confused with thinking fast.
>
>Ah, but thinking fast should not be confused with clicking fast. I
>happen to think that mouse dexterity should have no impact on the
>effectiveness of an RTS player.

Many players agree with you. What confuses me is why they don't speak up when I present ideas which will reduce the frantic clicking. Usually the best I get is a little counter argument (which I appreciate) and then dead silence. In fact, people who complain about fast clicking do not discuss ideas of their own either.

>In C&C:Generals, mouse speed has more to do with victory than strategy. It wouldn't matter if you had a
>good strategy in mind if you're not fast enough to execute it. Your
>opponent, who may have a simpler strategy (swarm! swarm! swarm!) will
>overwhelm you while you are trying to issue orders to multiple, small
>groups of units trying to make a simultaneous multi-sided assault on
>different areas of the map. With the ridiculous pace of C&C:Generals,
>a person could only concentrate on one area of the map at a time.
>Frankly, that's a very dumb way of making a "strategy" game. This pace
>of this game makes it practically a hybrid of arcade and strategy.

I think of it as arcade strategy.

Have fun anyway.







>Take for example the incident that lead to my original post. I had a
>dozen or so tanks and troop vehicles on their way to a waypoint. I
>scrolled down to my base for ten or fifteen seconds, just to issue a
>few maintenance commands (build power plants, build units, etc). When
>I scrolled back to my tanks, they were all gone! Not a single units
>left. I have no idea what happened because it happened so fast. It's
>insane. Strategy games ought to give you enough time to manage units
>and buildings effectively on more than one area of the map at a time.
Anonymous
October 22, 2004 2:00:40 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"Opticreep" <opticreep@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9e1f277e.0410201611.45775fe5@posting.google.com...
> Is there any way (cheats, hacks, mods, etc) to adjust the game speed
> during a single player campaign game?
>
> I can't believe this game disabled that feature on single player
> campaign, but enabled it for skirmishes. I prefer to play my strategy
> games strategically --- y'know, slow and methodical. Mouse dexterity
> and click speed should not be a factor in these games.

while this is not within the game, and it is very old (my files are dated
'97-98). it may suit your purposes:

"MO'SLO DELUXE is an enhanced version of Mo'Slo that allows slowdown
percentages from 0.1 to 99.9%, making it possible to run even the
oldest PC games and timing-sensitive programs on a fast Pentium PC.
Mo'Slo Deluxe also runs batch files transparently to the user, and
does not require you to enter the file extension of executables or
batch files. Includes a pause mode that allows changing speed percent
without exiting your program, and a quick-start option for loading
programs at full speed with slowdown after load.
For information regarding the latest versions of Mo'Slo,
Mo'Slo Deluxe, and other Dr.David's Utilities, please visit our
World Wide Web site at http://www.hpaa.com/moslo."

if the website is no longer valid, search on "moslo"


--
Fight Win Prevail
But Never Cheat
Anonymous
October 22, 2004 5:59:53 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 22:00:40 GMT, "TCipollina" <joesdad@stny.rr.com>
wrote:

>
>"Opticreep" <opticreep@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:9e1f277e.0410201611.45775fe5@posting.google.com...
>> Is there any way (cheats, hacks, mods, etc) to adjust the game speed
>> during a single player campaign game?
>>
>> I can't believe this game disabled that feature on single player
>> campaign, but enabled it for skirmishes. I prefer to play my strategy
>> games strategically --- y'know, slow and methodical. Mouse dexterity
>> and click speed should not be a factor in these games.
>
>while this is not within the game, and it is very old (my files are dated
>'97-98). it may suit your purposes:
>
>"MO'SLO DELUXE is an enhanced version of Mo'Slo that allows slowdown
[snip]

Won't work on windows games. If there isn't some kind of speed setting
in the options menu, I'm afraid there isn't much to do.

Of course, you could try to install some spyware, maybe that helps
slow the computer ;) 
Anonymous
October 23, 2004 3:39:39 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"AVH" <avhspamisbad@netti.fi> wrote in message
news:hmphn0d6hlgl9c2it9h8ipns5ke1gsf2jg@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 22:00:40 GMT, "TCipollina" <joesdad@stny.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Opticreep" <opticreep@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:9e1f277e.0410201611.45775fe5@posting.google.com...
> >> Is there any way (cheats, hacks, mods, etc) to adjust the game speed
> >> during a single player campaign game?
> >>
> >> I can't believe this game disabled that feature on single player
> >> campaign, but enabled it for skirmishes. I prefer to play my strategy
> >> games strategically --- y'know, slow and methodical. Mouse dexterity
> >> and click speed should not be a factor in these games.
> >
> >while this is not within the game, and it is very old (my files are dated
> >'97-98). it may suit your purposes:
> >
> >"MO'SLO DELUXE is an enhanced version of Mo'Slo that allows slowdown
> [snip]
>
> Won't work on windows games. If there isn't some kind of speed setting
> in the options menu, I'm afraid there isn't much to do.
>

the free version is for DOS only. The $25 version i mentioned above does
slow windows games. sorry, i didnt realize there was a charge


> Of course, you could try to install some spyware, maybe that helps
> slow the computer ;) 

cute, very cute


--
Fight Win Prevail
But Never Cheat
October 23, 2004 12:11:56 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 03:15:38 GMT, John Doe
<jdoe@usenet.is.the.real.thing> wrote:

>Messing with the speed control is unrealistic also. Why would you want
>lethargic moving units and long build times?

He didn't state he did. You wrongly assumed he did, and you know what
assumption is notoriously known for, ...don't you? :) 

Too fast, and the 'RTS' game is about nothing more than
'titillatainment' for the attention span deficient kiddie crowd, which
share nothing in common with either tactics or strategy.

To slow, and clearly, the proponents should be playing a turn based
game. There is an ideal speed range that suits the tenor of any RTS
game, and that is undoubtedly what the initial inquirer's question and
subsequent refers to.

In fact you're now being obtuse in attempting to uphold your initial
idiotic statement of the thread, whose purpose was clearly self
aggrandisement. One can only hope you play RTS better than you debate,
though witnessing this display of 'prowess', one can understand why
you relish the clickfest.

>That concept was implemented to some extent in
>Total Annihilation but it does not play enough of a role in the game, in
>my opinion.

This demonstrates only the level at which you play the game. Resource
management is what this game is all. Bugs and flaws included, Total
Annihilation is still THE best RTS game yet EVER to hit the
marketplace.
Anonymous
October 23, 2004 12:11:57 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

K <iguana_bwana@hotmail.com> wrote:
><jdoe@usenet.is.the.real.thing> wrote:

>>Messing with the speed control is unrealistic also. Why would you want
>>lethargic moving units and long build times?
>
>He didn't state he did. You wrongly assumed he did,

No I did not.

>Too fast, and the 'RTS' game is [too fast].
>
>To[o] slow, and clearly, the proponents should be playing a turn based
>game.

I doubt that turn based gamers would say that reducing real-time
strategy game speed produces nearly the equivalent of a turn based game.

Messing with the real-time strategy speed control is just a clumsy/crude
way of controlling game speed, in my opinion.

>There is an ideal speed range that suits the tenor of any RTS
>game, and that is undoubtedly what the initial inquirer's question and
>subsequent refers to.

The original poster (Opticreep) wrote:
Is there any way (cheats, hacks, mods, etc) to adjust the game speed
during a single player campaign game?

>In fact you're now being obtuse in attempting to uphold your initial
>idiotic statement of the thread, whose purpose was clearly self
>aggrandisement.

Something that makes USENET fun (for me) is posting in context so others
will know what I am talking about.

>One can only hope you play RTS better than you debate,

Let us debate ways to regulate the speed of real-time strategy. Since
you like total annihilation, let's talk about whether to Use Total
Annihilation's implementation of energy bars to help improve current
real-time strategy.

>though witnessing this display of 'prowess', one can understand why
>you relish the clickfest.

I have never written anything to that effect.

>>That concept was implemented to some extent in Total Annihilation but
>>it does not play enough of a role in the game, in my opinion.
>
>This demonstrates only the level at which you play the game.

Does my comment sound like a scathing critique of Total Annihilation to
anyone else? Heaven forbid.

>Resource management is what this game is all. Bugs and flaws included,
>Total Annihilation is still THE best RTS game yet EVER to hit the
>marketplace.

Maybe someone who isn't a fan of Total Annihilation will debate that
with you.














>
>Path: newssvr11.news.prodigy.com!newscon03.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01a.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newshosting.com!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail
>From: K <iguana_bwana@hotmail.com>
>Newsgroups: alt.games.command-n-conq,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
>Subject: Re: Command & Conquer Generals... too fast!
>Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 08:11:56 +1000
>Lines: 32
>Message-ID: <571jn017kt01029ts49d1dolf8qulrg4a6@4ax.com>
>References: <9e1f277e.0410201611.45775fe5@posting.google.com> <Xns9588CEC5CC542wisdomfolly@151.164.30.42> <IAEdd.29927$PH6.21420@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com> <Xns9588E273AFCAwisdomfolly@151.164.30.44>
>Reply-To: iguana_bwana@hotmail.com
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de R5eebxQGaATOiS0DHU3RKQXTZU9lrdIubXuF3MOHTOsL9Hn9to
>X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
>X-No-Archive: yes
>Xref: newsmst01a.news.prodigy.com alt.games.command-n-conq:41170 comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic:841199
>
!