Hard Light Productions Forums

Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => FS2 Open Coding - The Source Code Project (SCP) => Topic started by: potterman28wxcv on July 16, 2010, 02:57:00 pm

Title: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: potterman28wxcv on July 16, 2010, 02:57:00 pm
Hi :) I have an idea to share to you (the idea is only for campaign mode I think) : sometimes in the mission, some wings already orders like "attack Gamma wing". But, it's impossible to order to a wing to attack a wing ; there is "destroy my target", "neutralize my target", "disarm my target", ... but no "destroy the wing of my targer".
I think it could be a good idea to put it.
What is your opinion about it ?

-----------------------------------------

"protect the wing of my target" could be added too.
Using alt + a number, or using PgDown and PgUp could be two solutions to add those options to the command menu.
Another solution could be to use the 2 keys at the right of the 1-0 keys

-----------------------------------------

Thanks to have moved it :)
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: FelixJim on July 16, 2010, 03:07:10 pm
That...would actually be quite nice. I'm not sure why you'd want to limit it to campaigns though.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: mjn.mixael on July 16, 2010, 03:11:06 pm
Hmmm... The idea has merit...
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: TopAce on July 16, 2010, 03:11:40 pm
And to which key will you map it? 0-9 is taken.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: General Battuta on July 16, 2010, 03:13:08 pm
I'd love to see this implemented but I'm not sure how to do it either. *sigh*
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Rodo on July 16, 2010, 03:23:03 pm
And to which key will you map it? 0-9 is taken.

Something can be arranged (I guess)... the hole idea is quite good actually.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: headdie on July 16, 2010, 03:24:07 pm
is there a way to implement a system where you hit attack my target once the ordered craft attack the target, then if you hit it a second time the craft switch to attack the target's wing?  

the drawback I see from a playability stance is that its a little long winded with having to navigate the menus twice dont know about the coding standpoint
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: -Norbert- on July 16, 2010, 03:44:12 pm
If there is a way to implement that, I'd also like to see something similar done for protection.
For example if you want a wing of interceptors to guard a wing of bombers.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Scourge of Ages on July 16, 2010, 04:47:21 pm
This sounds like it could be useful, but possibly more effort than it's worth.

The way it is now, as long as a wing stays mostly close together, a single attack order will carrry over onto all targets nearby; ie. "Attack Cancer 1:" When Cancer 1 is dead, the attackers shift to whatever threat is next-nearest to them. "Defend Gamma 1:" Defenders attack anything hostile within whatever radius of Gamma 1, thus covering all of Gamma wing (as long as they stick together). And if a wing happens to be spread out, you don't want your wing flying back and forth for 4 klicks each way.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Shivan Hunter on July 16, 2010, 06:38:29 pm
I've been thinking this feature is a good idea for a while now, but unless it was option 'a' or something I don't see how we'd get around the 1-0 limit thing. You'd need an unbound key, which would be a problem. I guess you caould also just use the 'pg up' and 'pg dn' keys as if you're selecting a ship from a huge list.

[EDIT]

This sounds like it could be useful, but possibly more effort than it's worth.

The way it is now, as long as a wing stays mostly close together, a single attack order will carrry over onto all targets nearby; ie. "Attack Cancer 1:" When Cancer 1 is dead, the attackers shift to whatever threat is next-nearest to them. "Defend Gamma 1:" Defenders attack anything hostile within whatever radius of Gamma 1, thus covering all of Gamma wing (as long as they stick together). And if a wing happens to be spread out, you don't want your wing flying back and forth for 4 klicks each way.

I see your point, but say you've got a wing of Maras and a wing of Seraphim, and you're trying to defend a destroyer or installation. You don't want your wing to go for the closest ship, which could be a fighter; you want your wing to go for the Seraphim wing and its future waves. (Then again, a "Defend my target" would work just as well- but that raises another question. What if your wing needs to defend an entire wing of, say, freighters? Would selecting the whole wing using hotkeys be enough?)

Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: NGTM-1R on July 16, 2010, 07:22:14 pm
I'm trying to decide if this would have made me do less micromanaging in Good Luck, or the same amount. Having to send wings after individual enemy fighters keeps you busy issuing commands, but it's effective even against Dragons.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Scotty on July 16, 2010, 09:06:19 pm
Would there be a way to script the comm interface to use keys that are already mapped, kind of like shift or alt do?  If possible, we could then use every letter of the alphabet for some hypothetical command, as well as numbers.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Dilmah G on July 16, 2010, 09:30:25 pm
Until a command option is introduced, it's fairly straightforward to sexp in the meantime.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Black Wolf on July 16, 2010, 09:42:18 pm
why not just use the shift key? C-3-Shift 1, C-3-Shift 5.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Woolie Wool on July 16, 2010, 10:22:23 pm
I also had the idea of a taunt menu, where below "Reinforcements" you get "Enemy target", which is available if a hostile is targeted and opens up a list of taunts defined in a a table. Taunting an enemy has a chance (defined in ai.tbl for each class, with a default of zero) of having them attack you with a priority of 255 or whatever the absolute maximum is right now.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Scotty on July 16, 2010, 10:35:33 pm
I have a feeling that would be an excellent feature for WC, but for FS it'd be meh.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: NGTM-1R on July 16, 2010, 10:37:17 pm
I also had the idea of a taunt menu, where below "Reinforcements" you get "Enemy target", which is available if a hostile is targeted and opens up a list of taunts defined in a a table. Taunting an enemy has a chance (defined in ai.tbl for each class, with a default of zero) of having them attack you with a priority of 255 or whatever the absolute maximum is right now.

We don't even speak the Shivan's langauge, and there are much more useful methods to use it that would be burned by alerting them to this fact if we did.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Droid803 on July 16, 2010, 11:42:06 pm
I also had the idea of a taunt menu, where below "Reinforcements" you get "Enemy target", which is available if a hostile is targeted and opens up a list of taunts defined in a a table. Taunting an enemy has a chance (defined in ai.tbl for each class, with a default of zero) of having them attack you with a priority of 255 or whatever the absolute maximum is right now.

We don't even speak the Shivan's langauge, and there are much more useful methods to use it that would be burned by alerting them to this fact if we did.

But what about the NTF? Or the Vasudans?
Also, doesn't have to be used with just the FS-verse.

Though admittedly, this should be in the SCP board, not general FS discussion!
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Woolie Wool on July 16, 2010, 11:56:51 pm
I also had the idea of a taunt menu, where below "Reinforcements" you get "Enemy target", which is available if a hostile is targeted and opens up a list of taunts defined in a a table. Taunting an enemy has a chance (defined in ai.tbl for each class, with a default of zero) of having them attack you with a priority of 255 or whatever the absolute maximum is right now.

We don't even speak the Shivan's langauge, and there are much more useful methods to use it that would be burned by alerting them to this fact if we did.

Well then obviously Shivan fighters could just use AI classes that don't react to taunts. They would perceive your taunt as nothing more than random noise.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Dilmah G on July 17, 2010, 12:50:43 am
I also had the idea of a taunt menu, where below "Reinforcements" you get "Enemy target", which is available if a hostile is targeted and opens up a list of taunts defined in a a table. Taunting an enemy has a chance (defined in ai.tbl for each class, with a default of zero) of having them attack you with a priority of 255 or whatever the absolute maximum is right now.
Well you'd think the GTVA employs pilots who possess the maturity to ignore taunts (can't say the same for the NTF however :P ).
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: SpardaSon21 on July 17, 2010, 12:51:33 am
What's wrong with taunting you pathetic descendant of monkeys?
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Mongoose on July 17, 2010, 12:53:58 am
Man, I would have loved this option way back in the day when I still couldn't tell which ship class was which properly. :p
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Woolie Wool on July 17, 2010, 11:44:48 am
What's wrong with taunting you pathetic descendant of monkeys?

We should feast upon his offspring and litter space with ape corpses. :P

Spoiler:
Those are taunts used by the Kilrathi in Wing Commander, in case you didn't get them.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: potterman28wxcv on July 17, 2010, 06:46:14 pm
For the implementation, I think (attack the wing of my target) it could be a sort of derivation from the Attack Enemies. If "Attack the wing of my target" is ordered, then fighters would attack the ships in order that each ship would have the same number of attackers.

For "Protect the wing of my target", I don't know how it works, but I'm sure I already saw an order like that in one of the FSport or STR mission (when I was targetting an ally, his order was "protect alpha wing" for example).

For the command option... a touch sequence like "alt + 1" for attack the wing of my target would be too long to push. Imagine you want to give an order like that when you are dogfighting...  :no:

But I think the best solution could be to integer a submenu. Example : push C (command orders appears), then 3 "All fighters", then 1 "Destroy...", then 1 ".. my target", or 2 ".. the wing of my target"

And, for the user who doesn't want to destroy the wing of his target : the difference between C 3 1 and C 3 1 1 isn't so great. 50 ms or 100 ms maybe ?


But the negative point would be to modify some dialogs of the training missions. Or modify the order "Push C, 3, 1" by "Push C, 3, 1, 1"
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: The E on July 17, 2010, 07:10:05 pm
Yeah, no.

Seriously, altering the ingrained commands is NOT a good idea.
Players like me, who have sequences like c31, c38 or c35 memorized will scream bloody murder at such a change.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: General Battuta on July 17, 2010, 07:12:59 pm
Yeah. I think something like c-3-alt1, maybe, but...not c-3-1-1.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: mjn.mixael on July 17, 2010, 09:18:56 pm
yeah.. don't mess with commands we all know...

The shift-1 or alt-1 seems like a good option.

Also, maybe we should move this to the SCP board?
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Droid803 on July 17, 2010, 10:16:24 pm
do the - and = keys serve any purpose?
i could see c3- amd c3= being the next two commands :P
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Trivial Psychic on July 17, 2010, 10:29:58 pm
Another way to do this, all be it something far less available for most users, is confine the advanced commands to voice-ONLY use.  That is, that the system which was set up (and I'm not sure if it is still enabled or if anyone is working on it or using it) to allow a player to give a voice command via microphone link to the computer, which would receive and interpret the command, and execute it.  Using that system (again, if it is functional) would bypass the need for change to the menu system.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: General Battuta on July 17, 2010, 10:34:19 pm
Voice recognition crashes the game right now.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Trivial Psychic on July 18, 2010, 01:10:56 am
Well, so much for that idea... for now. :drevil:
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: -Norbert- on July 18, 2010, 02:54:46 am
Quote
i could see c3- amd c3= being the next two commands
I don't know for english layout keyboards, but in the standard configuration of a german layout keyboard those two keys (ß and ´) are used for increasing/decreasing speed. Not the change while pushed (A/Z), but the permanent one.
Would the key left of the numbers work? That one isn't used on my keyboard (^ on german layout).
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: FelixJim on July 18, 2010, 03:15:31 am
Quote
i could see c3- amd c3= being the next two commands
I don't know for english layout keyboards, but in the standard configuration of a german layout keyboard those two keys (ß and ´) are used for increasing/decreasing speed. Not the change while pushed (A/Z), but the permanent one.
Would the key left of the numbers work? That one isn't used on my keyboard (^ on german layout).
This does hold true for English keyboards. Each tap is an increase or decrease of 5% throttle.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: QuantumDelta on July 18, 2010, 03:22:59 am
While the comms screen is open it takes p residence over the keys it offers you for options, this is only obvious on multi though.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: -Norbert- on July 18, 2010, 04:53:39 am
Oh. I didn't know that. In that case I'm all for the keys to the right of the numbers.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: potterman28wxcv on July 18, 2010, 09:55:29 am
Yeah, no.

Seriously, altering the ingrained commands is NOT a good idea.
Players like me, who have sequences like c31, c38 or c35 memorized will scream bloody murder at such a change.

Yeah, you're true, those sequences are deeply memorized in my head too, but the c311 is just a repetition of the last key (1). c38 wouldn't be changed, but for c35, it could become c355 for protect my target. Anyway, it could be switchable into an option...

I'm okay to post it into the SCP board (I think you mean "The Freespace Upgrade Project", I'm new here so I don't really know all the sections of the forum..), but maybe later, in something like one week ; before posting it, it could be good to accumulate several different ideas for this topic.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: -Norbert- on July 18, 2010, 10:42:57 am
Nope. FSU is for things like interface art, models, effects.... the visual kind of Upgrades.
SCP - The Source Code Project is for changing and adding functionality into the game. So this would be more of a SCP thing.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: The E on July 18, 2010, 11:18:45 am

Yeah, you're true, those sequences are deeply memorized in my head too, but the c311 is just a repetition of the last key (1). c38 wouldn't be changed, but for c35, it could become c355 for protect my target. Anyway, it could be switchable into an option...

I'm okay to post it into the SCP board (I think you mean "The Freespace Upgrade Project", I'm new here so I don't really know all the sections of the forum..), but maybe later, in something like one week ; before posting it, it could be good to accumulate several different ideas for this topic.

That's not the point, I think. The point is that I need to press only three keys to issue the command I want. Which goes for every squad command in the comm menu.
The c-3-alt+number thing that was proposed before doesn't alter this, which is good.

Another point is that after you issue a command like c31, the com menu is closed.

The easiest option would be to introduce new options that can be accessed via PgUp and PgDown.

Also, please keep in mind that if something like this is added to the engine, it will most likely be a tbl-activated extra.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: potterman28wxcv on July 19, 2010, 04:50:52 am
I've moved the topic into the SCP board : http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=70460.0

I hope it will be added  :)
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Dilmah G on July 19, 2010, 05:00:23 am
Oh, dude, you didn't need to repost to the SCP board.

1. The mods could've moved the entire topic as is to the board,

and  2. It's usually the mods' call as to whether the topic gets moved. I think.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Vasudan Admiral on July 19, 2010, 06:16:14 am
Also, you kinda...missed the SCP forum. :p

But yeah the moderators of Gen FS can move this full topic to the SCP forum. I'll lock the new almost empty one in the FSU forum.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: potterman28wxcv on July 19, 2010, 06:49:49 am
Sorry I didn't know the moderators were able to make it, they really are super-moderators, having as many power as superman or chuck norris  ;)

Edit : Ok, the moderators closed my topic in the SCP board. So, let's continue in the General Freespace Discussion, waiting for an entire move of the topic  :)
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: chief1983 on July 19, 2010, 05:20:18 pm
Interesting idea, but to get around the 1-0 issue, why not just use - ?  It's to the right of 0 and everything.  When in the context of the command menu, it should be ok to use it shouldn't it?  Otherwise it performs its normal behavior, just like 1-0 have other behavior outside of the comm menu.  Or did someone already suggest this?  It was somewhat TL;DR for me.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: potterman28wxcv on July 20, 2010, 09:01:31 am
I think you talk about qwerty keyboards  :) on azerty keyboards, there isn't any '-' at the right of the 0

yeah that's another way to add those options  ;)
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: NGTM-1R on July 20, 2010, 09:46:27 am
I've thought about it some more and I can't honestly support the decision as useful. The circumstances in which an AI-controlled player wing can rapidly overpower their opposite numbers are extremely few, as most missions typically place the enemy AI at a higher level. Giving a whole wing orders to engage and destroy a single enemy works, however. It may keep you busy directing your subordinates like that, but the proposed solution here is simply going to get them killed and offer no real advantage by its addition.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: General Battuta on July 20, 2010, 11:27:43 am
I've thought about it some more and I can't honestly support the decision as useful. The circumstances in which an AI-controlled player wing can rapidly overpower their opposite numbers are extremely few, as most missions typically place the enemy AI at a higher level.

True in retail, not in mods. There are also situations (even in retail) where the enemy wing is largely defenseless - for example NTF bombers.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: QuantumDelta on July 20, 2010, 12:10:11 pm
Hmmm?
I could make loads of use with that order.
Instead of having to use generic shift-p, 3 or shift-p 2-* or shift-p 1*, instead of using c31, or shift-e 3.


I'll tell you what the two pointless orders that get AI killed are;
Shift-c, 3, Shift-w, 3.
Unless they're used very specifically.

Most AI orders carry that risk, in fact, as any AI already engaged wont finish their fight if the player orders them to do something else, which means they'll just fly to their next objective.
Just because you can't think of a situation where you could implement it doesn't mean other people can't, and isn't a reason to skip it's inclusion.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: NGTM-1R on July 20, 2010, 02:13:45 pm
True in retail, not in mods. There are also situations (even in retail) where the enemy wing is largely defenseless - for example NTF bombers.

The only mods I can think of offhand which gave player wingmen higher AI classes than normal were my own campaigns, ITDOH, and Blaise Russel's SoL/Homesick set. None of them are particularly recent. WiH probably will too, I'm aware, but not many others.

It's totally dependent on how you divide up friendly/enemy fighters. Smaller numbers of player wingmen on the field means you give them a higher AI class. At that point wing orders aren't much of a point since you can just distribute them individually to targets for better control.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: potterman28wxcv on July 21, 2010, 04:32:45 am
Hmm.. fighters can be killed too by this technic. But, to do this, AI have to be approximatively 1500 meters or 1000 meters from the enemy wing to attack. Else, they would enter in "AI dogfighting mode" and that wouldn't be good. And if AI mates are already engaged, it's true that will make them die.

However, this order could be very useful in missions where there are more than 1 vessel to protect. For example, in Exodus, player have to defend Lambda 1, Lambda 2, plus two another ships to protect. How can the player know what is the target of the bombers ? Anyway, he can target one of the bombers and then "Target the target's target". But what if the bombers change their target ? And in the game, the player have something else to do. Then a single command like "destroy the wing of my target" could tell the AI to destroy the wing  :)
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Solatar on July 21, 2010, 01:58:06 pm
Give the player the ability to easily target entire wings (like when you hotkey a wing). Say you press a key to target a target's wing; the rest are in white brackets, just like a hotkeyed wing.

Make the 'destroy target' etc. recognize that the entire wing is targeted.

Problem solved.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: General Battuta on July 21, 2010, 02:24:00 pm
Give the player the ability to easily target entire wings (like when you hotkey a wing). Say you press a key to target a target's wing; the rest are in white brackets, just like a hotkeyed wing.

Make the 'destroy target' etc. recognize that the entire wing is targeted.

Problem solved.

That would not be an acceptable solution; sometimes the player wants to target specific ships in a wing.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Droid803 on July 21, 2010, 09:20:31 pm
Uh, he said the ability to target entire wings, not  "only be able to target entire wings".

I don't see an issue with a separate key to target the entire wing (or just "target my target's wing")
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: General Battuta on July 21, 2010, 09:34:03 pm
You are right, I am wrong. Whoops.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: QuantumDelta on July 22, 2010, 06:47:00 am
Target my targets wing sounds awesome to me!
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Nuke on July 22, 2010, 08:34:06 am
what about a select nearest non-targeted target control. i find it frustrating trying to find something to shoot that one of my wingmen aren't already shooting at.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: headdie on July 22, 2010, 11:41:21 am
how about ignore my target
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Dilmah G on July 23, 2010, 04:15:14 am
Yeah well, you never, ever, disengage if you're in guns range, because if he's in range of your lasers, that means when you turn around, you'll be in range for him to blast you to pieces. Same goes moreso for your wingmen. :P At least if one of my wingmen are going for guns, it means their target isn't on their six blasting them to ribbons.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: QuantumDelta on July 23, 2010, 05:20:08 am
And that's why my most used order is engage enemy.
Keeping the AI alive > Protecting a few percentage while moving to whatever it is you need to protect.
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: Sushi on July 23, 2010, 09:27:04 am
Give the player the ability to easily target entire wings (like when you hotkey a wing). Say you press a key to target a target's wing; the rest are in white brackets, just like a hotkeyed wing.

Make the 'destroy target' etc. recognize that the entire wing is targeted.

Problem solved.

That would not be an acceptable solution; sometimes the player wants to target specific ships in a wing.

Actually, Battuta's right about this, at least if we're using the white brackets for targeting "the rest." How could you tell if you targeted the wing or hit a hotkey with several ships attached? What if, instead of shooting the whole wing, you wanted to just give orders shoot the one you have targeted and keep an eye on the rest?

I actually like the idea of doubling/tripling the command menu size by allowing shift and other modifiers to be used for "new" commands. Heck, while we're dreaming, why not allow an arbitrary number of orders in the engine, and be able to select which ones appear as extras on either a per-mod or per-player-options basis? After the new pilot code, of course. :p
Title: Re: What do you think about an additionnal command option ?
Post by: General Battuta on July 23, 2010, 11:59:06 am
The problem with using shift or other modifiers is that they lock out the rest of the controls, which is pretty disastrous.