Author Topic: objecttypes.tbl  (Read 2222 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline IPAndrews

  • Disgruntled Customer
  • 212
  • This site stole my work
I just noticed something strange. When you add attack-any as an allowed order for a ship type, the turrets on that ship from that moment on will no longer attack enemy ships. unless you specifically give the ship an attack-any order. Can someone else confirm this is what is happening. i'm fairly sure but I don't trust myself 100%. I've known myself too long for that.
Be warned: This site's admins stole 100s of hours of my work. They will do it to you.

 

Offline Goober5000

  • HLP Loremaster
  • Moderator
  • 214
    • Goober5000 Productions
Hmm.  Mantis, and give it a high priority.  If this is an AI bug, it should be fixed for 3.6.9.

 

Offline IPAndrews

  • Disgruntled Customer
  • 212
  • This site stole my work
Ok done. You're the AI guy right? So I take it this isn't intentional behaviour? :) While your here do you forsee any problems (assuming this problem is human error or is fixed) with me giving attack-any as an allowable order for all ship types. Sure you may not think it appropriate to give attack-any to say, colossus. If though I were to make that a mission designer's decision. Is there any reason giving a type attack-any would change it's behaviour from that which it exhibited previously?
Be warned: This site's admins stole 100s of hours of my work. They will do it to you.

 

Offline IPAndrews

  • Disgruntled Customer
  • 212
  • This site stole my work
Oops. I forgot to give the mantis report a catagory. I suck  :nervous:
Be warned: This site's admins stole 100s of hours of my work. They will do it to you.

 

Offline Goober5000

  • HLP Loremaster
  • Moderator
  • 214
    • Goober5000 Productions
Ok done. You're the AI guy right? So I take it this isn't intentional behaviour? :) While your here do you forsee any problems (assuming this problem is human error or is fixed) with me giving attack-any as an allowable order for all ship types. Sure you may not think it appropriate to give attack-any to say, colossus. If though I were to make that a mission designer's decision. Is there any reason giving a type attack-any would change it's behaviour from that which it exhibited previously?

1) Not really. 2) I won't know until I look at it. :) 3) I don't think so, but you may not like the results. 4) Aside from the fact that it chooses from a wider pool of targets, I don't think so.

This is WMC's feature, but he's taking a coding break at the moment.  I assume all that's going on is that the flags are being applied in an inconsistent manner, but I'd have to study it to be sure.

Actually, I think I may already know what the problem is.  In bombers, your turret will only attack the ship you have targeted, and will not attack any other ships even if they're attacking you.  It's like the entire ship has a one-track (rather, one-target) mind.  The same thing may be happening for capital ships.  In this case, all that needs to be done is to add an option in objecttypes to enable/disable this.

 

Offline Wanderer

  • Wiki Warrior
  • 211
  • Mostly harmless
So it might actually be possible to get 'automated' defensive bomber turrets?  :eek2: :faints:
Do not meddle in the affairs of coders for they are soggy and hard to light

 

Offline taylor

  • Super SCP/Linux Guru
  • Moderator
  • 212
    • http://www.icculus.org/~taylor
Pretty sure that's been the plan for a while now though.  There is a thread somewhere around here about just that thing.  It's on my todo list to add the option for smart turrets, which will have target selection independant of the ship they are attached to (like capship turrets do).

The change would do two primary things: 1) allow a turret to fire at an attacker of your ship, or your target (if your target is friendly, or just in protection mode for AI), and 2) allow a turret target preference (ie, allow you to focus on a bomber, allow turret to focus on bombs).  And #2 would also go with capital ship targetting, where it would prefer to fire at enemy turrets targetting you, then turrets in general, then subsystems.  A turret would never fire at a target simply to fire at it (like they do now), but actually target subsystems of anything they shoot at and prioritize targets based on danger level (like capship turrets can/do).

This would make the turret into more of a true defensive weapon rather than just an extra gun.  You could effectively be following, and firing upon, a hostile ship while your turret(s) fire at any hostile ships following or firing upon you.  But the main point is that the turret will always be looking for something to shoot at and should never just be sitting there doing nothing if there is a hostile, any hostile, in range.

I looked into this at the time it was originally mentioned, but haven't really thought about it since.  When I actually get ready to start working on the code for this (unless someone else gets to it first), then I'll likely bring it back to the forums to be sure that everyone is in agreement about how it should work.  There will likely be more on the wishlist for this particular feature for mods by then anyway.

 

Offline IPAndrews

  • Disgruntled Customer
  • 212
  • This site stole my work
4) Aside from the fact that it chooses from a wider pool of targets, I don't think so./disable this.

Sure but it won't actually chase down fighters and insignificant threats since they're only on the actively pursues list.

Let's put this into perspective. It's not something I plan on making use of much. In BHX for example some missions might have 7 capships. Only you're allowed 5 default orders. So I use 4 of them to specify appropriate targets for each ship and the last is an attack-any (a catch all to make sure the ship does something useful when it's finished attacking appropriate targets, rather than sitting there like a lemon). I imagine this would be a useful approach for other mission designers too.
Be warned: This site's admins stole 100s of hours of my work. They will do it to you.

 

Offline Goober5000

  • HLP Loremaster
  • Moderator
  • 214
    • Goober5000 Productions
Well, as a stopgap, you could just use add-goal with a new order after the ships have been destroyed.  You have unlimited sexps now.

 

Offline IPAndrews

  • Disgruntled Customer
  • 212
  • This site stole my work
You have unlimited sexps now.

Really? We have a dynamically allocated SEXP tree? That's a major achievement you kept quiet. Is that in 3.6.9 RC 7? I could have sworn I got a crash out of FRED for using too many sexps in an event.
Be warned: This site's admins stole 100s of hours of my work. They will do it to you.

 

Offline karajorma

  • King Louie - Jungle VIP
  • Administrator
  • 214
    • Karajorma's Freespace FAQ
It was fixed a while back. I thought someone had told you.
Karajorma's Freespace FAQ. It's almost like asking me yourself.

[ Diaspora ] - [ Seeds Of Rebellion ] - [ Mind Games ]

 

Offline IPAndrews

  • Disgruntled Customer
  • 212
  • This site stole my work
Last I knew the limit had been bumped but still existed.
Be warned: This site's admins stole 100s of hours of my work. They will do it to you.

 

Offline Goober5000

  • HLP Loremaster
  • Moderator
  • 214
    • Goober5000 Productions
It's been done since the beginning of October.  Sorry, I thought I told you.

EDIT: Actually, look here. :)

  

Offline IPAndrews

  • Disgruntled Customer
  • 212
  • This site stole my work
What is it with this table and the "supercap" type? I can't seem to override it. When I try to give it more available orders (so I can drive my Vorlon Planet Killer around) I end up with no available orders? Looks like another enthralling visit to the wonderful world of Mantis.
Be warned: This site's admins stole 100s of hours of my work. They will do it to you.