New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Increase Iron Curtain's footprint #20832
Conversation
What was the shape in the original, wasn't that just 2x1 as well? I'm not sure if I agree with special casing this. #15880 seems to be about the more general case. |
We apply this solution to most structures |
We don't, see Refineries, Advanced Power Plants, Tesla Coils, Gap Generators... Since the competitive community already uses their own ruleset I don't see a reason for bandaiding this here. |
I do remember quite a lot of PR's changing the footprints of structures for this reason. Also why would this be just a competitive issue? There's also an option of using the move only cells behind the curtain. |
You mention it in the OP, vanilla has been like this forever. Using cells that can just be moved on sounds like a compromise. |
I dunno, just because it has been like that in RA for ages it doesn't mean it was good, or even desired. |
the tile behind should be then + not x. or if you want to keep it x do offset it upwards a bit so that it remains centred on the 2x2 |
I changed it into + |
The competitive community has been using this IC for years now, and I think we should implement it into vanilla. I've had mentioned it in #19792 but noone went forward to do the change.
Here's how the IC looks before this PR
Here's after
The reason why the IC footprint needs to be changed is that the IC can hide a lot of things behind it. The best example is a sam site
I did a search for IC in missions, but all I could find is the IC in shellmap. It's not close to anything so there's no need to adjust it
The upper to cells are transient