Quote: |
About the mystery of that ghostly see-thru Stavelot factory...you guys might want to take a closer look at the elements.txt file.
Eventhough Schrecken...err...Andrew pointed out that the factory has flimsy walls...it should still be a LOS/LOF obstruction but with low protection values. Look for "Factory Wall" (column A, row 234 - or 237 in the Workbook), check "Visibility Hindrance" columns (KLMN)...notice that they're set at low values of 100 (same hindrance value as doors, and even lower than windows). Change those values to basic "wall" values of 450...and you should still get flimsy Factory Walls but not see-thru anymore. |
RD_Oddball wrote: |
First off thank you for your offer to recode the maps.
Actually there is no right or wrong answer to this problem since with every solution any of us viewing this thread can possibly come up with there is a trade-off. I accept that your presentation is viewed as right in your mind because you are willing to accept the consequences of the trade-offs. Fair enough. We all have different standards. We too are concerned with the LOS issues you point out. That can be agreed upon. You make some good points that were considered early in the WaR development process hence the coding style guide Schrecken created for map coders. Which I'd mention his style guide is not that far off your proposed solution. As Schrecken said, yes some mistakes were made and that style guide was not always followed for whatever reason. And I'd add that no amount of testing would uncover every last bug in the game. Even seemingly obvious bugs. There'll always be some that slip by despite our best efforts. That's why patches are made. We'll definitely take your suggestions to heart and factor them into the decision making process as we go. To address your solution directly: First the problem with tiles meeting at corners allowing clear LOS between them is inherent to the game engine and has always been there. It's an issue with nearly every game system that utilizes a cell based system. Even hex based games have the same issues. Sure there are work arounds and we feel the style guide Schrecken made was an acceptable solution when it was followed. I'll react to your suggested workaround and why it's not ideal or pefect or even the only solution. The problem with coding walls double tile elements thick is that they now do not match up with the BGM graphics. Since the BGM is the only decent feedback the player gets about the coding environment in my mind that's a negative trade-off with your solution. Sure a player can right-click an element to see why they can't see through what looks like an unimpeded area but not reasonable to expect in the heat of battle. Agreed, it's just as much problem as being able to see through buildings. Yes maps can be drawn larger but that leads to my next point. Game scale. I'll admit it's less of a concern since it's aesthetic and not about game function but it does appear as a mistake when coding is done as you're suggesting. If walls are coded double element tiles wide they now 4m thick by game scale (5px/m if one is to draw an LOS line you'll recall the distance in meters is displayed next to it. If you do a test you'll see that is 5px/meter). So now instead of walls being closer to reality (8" thick is architectural standard nowdays back then it was likely wider. We can round up to 30.55cm) they are now out of scale with game engine scale. To accomodate the larger map scale to accomodate your thicker walls soldier animations would have to be redrawn so they are 18 element tiles tall, vehicles would have to be made to be the same scale (10px=13cm < that's centimeters not meters) and so on down the line. This would mean, if my math is correct, that a 4800px square map would represent an area 624m square. Far too small. Making larger maps would tax computer system resources on slower computers. Not to mention the game engine scale would have to be reprogrammed likely causing an entirely new set of problems that would take years to debug. Not a reasonable expectation within the scope of a rerelease project. So as you can see there are trade-offs to every issue, ones we thoughtfully considered and no perfect, absolute answers. If any of this needs further clarification I'll be glad to. Please ask. |
Quote: |
The problem with coding walls double tile elements thick is that they now do not match up with the BGM graphics. Since the BGM is the only decent feedback the player gets about the coding environment in my mind that's a negative trade-off with your solution. Sure a player can right-click an element to see why they can't see through what looks like an unimpeded area but not reasonable to expect in the heat of battle. Agreed, it's just as much problem as being able to see through buildings. Yes maps can be drawn larger but that leads to my next point. |
Quote: |
So as you can see there are trade-offs to every issue, ones we thoughtfully considered and no perfect, absolute answers.
If any of this needs further clarification I'll be glad to. Please ask. |
Pzt_Serk wrote: |
Hi Stalky,
keep up the good work with maps. Just had a good laugh at the invisible houses lol. I also just had a shreck team spotted right away in a forest while on ambush mode far from the ennemy...and my general feeling is that cover (concealment) is close to non-existent.so I was wondering if you could also take a look at it. Infantry is spotted as soon as it moves, even if its a crawl. It makes infantry movement and advance very difficult if not impossible. Maybe make a comparison with trsm data?? Cheers! |
RD_Oddball wrote: |
Sorry Stalky for not being more clear. I was agreeing with you that your suggestion was a legitimate solution. I was just saying that there were no perfect answers or one way to solve the problem as every conceiveable solution has drawbacks. I wasn't trying disprove what you're saying.
Our intent was to follow Schreckens coding style guide which is nearly identical to the solution you're outlining. We felt it was the lesser of all evils. We also agree we didn't always follow that style guide. Which was a mistake we're acknowledging. So we're agreeing with you and will graciously accept your offer to recode the maps or whatever you are interested in contributing. Also my apologies if I came across as glib. Wasn't my intention. I was being sincere in my reply and we're truly grateful to have such passionate, scrutinizing peers who love the same game we love. I hope this clears up my earlier points. Again my apologies for not being more careful in my last post. |
CCWAR_Stavelot-edit.jpg | ||
Description: |
|
|
Filesize: | 286.23 KB | |
Viewed: | 11286 Time(s) | |
squadleader_id wrote: |
Nice answer, Jim... Great to see members of the CCWAR development team starting to really look into this problem (Shrecken too at the Matrix forum)...and not just post bitter comments when people scrutinize their work |
squadleader_id wrote: |
Stalky already offered to re-code/fix 10 maps...I think it's only fair that the S3T team also re-check the coding glitches on the rest of the maps...and fix them too. The actual fix (map txt files) should be very small in size...and offering this as a small patch might be possible using Bernd's CCWARmodinstaller application. |
RD_Oddball wrote: |
Sorry Stalky for not being more clear. I was agreeing with you that your suggestion was a legitimate solution. I was just saying that there were no perfect answers or one way to solve the problem as every conceiveable solution has drawbacks. I wasn't trying disprove what you're saying.
Our intent was to follow Schreckens coding style guide which is nearly identical to the solution you're outlining. We felt it was the lesser of all evils. We also agree we didn't always follow that style guide. Which was a mistake we're acknowledging. So we're agreeing with you Also it is very generous of you to recode the maps you have and we appreciate any and all help you're willing to give. Also my apologies if I came across as glib. Wasn't my intention. I was being sincere in my reply and we're truly grateful to have such passionate, scrutinizing peers who love the same game we love. I hope this clears up my earlier points. Again my apologies for not being more careful in my last post. |
output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT