Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

The projects speaking tube.
Add your two cents if you want to.

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Postby alfred007 » 12 Nov 2017, 11:19

@Berserk Cyborg

You obviously also misnamed two factory ID's in gamma 1. I started an old save from 3.2.3 to define new assemblies and in the labels.json file NXcybFac-b2 has the ID 187 (in the game ID 88) and NXcybFac-b3-1 has ID 88 (in the game ID 187). I will rename it, when I define the new assemblies.
Last edited by alfred007 on 12 Nov 2017, 13:07, edited 1 time in total.
alfred007
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 153
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Germany

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Postby alfred007 » 12 Nov 2017, 13:07

I defined new assemblies for gamma 1,2 and 3. I also fixed the exchanged ID's in gamma 1 and the misnamed detectMsg for Base 2 and 3. Due to that misnaming the NE cyborgs became the cybValleyPatrol and the cyborgs of NXcybFac-b3-2 in the SW base became the NEAttackerGroup. I exchanged that so please have a precise look at the file for gamma 1 if I did everything right.
Attachments
New assemblies.zip
(12.42 KiB) Downloaded 4 times
alfred007
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 153
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Germany

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Postby Berserk Cyborg » 12 Nov 2017, 15:46

Bethrezen, Alpha 5 should work again since eventAttacked was fixed. If you used the deity cheat, just know that anything radar blip related might not work correctly (base detection, removing them, etc...).

alfred007 wrote:I defined new assemblies for gamma 1,2 and 3. I also fixed the exchanged ID's in gamma 1 and the misnamed detectMsg for Base 2 and 3. Due to that misnaming the NE cyborgs became the cybValleyPatrol and the cyborgs of NXcybFac-b3-2 in the SW base became the NEAttackerGroup. I exchanged that so please have a precise look at the file for gamma 1 if I did everything right.
Will test these missions shortly. Going to attempt to reformat all of those labels files now.
User avatar
Berserk Cyborg
Code contributor
Code contributor
 
Posts: 305
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 19:56

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Postby alfred007 » 12 Nov 2017, 16:01

Berserk Cyborg wrote:Will test these missions shortly. Going to attempt to reformat all of those labels files now.


I deleted the tabs that set "pos" in a row with each other and substituted it by spaces for this three labels. We'll see if they will mixed up again after the commit is pushed to github.
alfred007
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 153
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Germany

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Postby Berserk Cyborg » 12 Nov 2017, 17:35

Pushed 6dc03614bf0ce33a30d506a562a42602fa760a3f, d55b38d0b20984d95b9624f2ec98d31dcc0925e1, and 43a380160b04bf41d38a8fdc931741b8ff664773.

I made Gamma 1 a little bit tougher and it turns out the SW base is base 2 and the NE base is base 3.

Edit:
If anyone is interested I use Atom for editing the scripts be it for campaign or my AI. Notepad++ is another good alternative.
User avatar
Berserk Cyborg
Code contributor
Code contributor
 
Posts: 305
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 19:56

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Postby alfred007 » 12 Nov 2017, 18:23

Berserk Cyborg wrote:I made Gamma 1 a little bit tougher and it turns out the SW base is base 2 and the NE base is base 3.


Because you exchanged base 2 and 3 and exchanged the ID's for the factories there is the same error like before. The SW factory (now NXcybFac-b2-1) must have ID 187 and the NE factory (now NXcybFac-b3) must have ID 88. Because you exchanged base 2 and 3 it was no longer necessary to exchange the ID's.

And if you think about to making gamma 1 a bit tougher I have another idea. At the moment we have four areas that activate one factory after the other. My idea is to use only two areas that activate all factories if you reach one of them. We should keep cybAttackers, remove the other three and make one new at the western exit of the LZ. Coordinates pos1 5312, 13632; pos 2 6080, 14656.

Gamma 1 was always a bit boring for me, because I never needed more than 30 minutes to finish the level. After that time I was using the timer for preparing for upcoming levels and to gain power.

I started a new gamma campaign to see, if my assemblies are working and found that the given power of 16000 for gamma is reduced to 12000 because of the power limit for insane difficulty. I release the following idea for discussion: to take account of the increased energy requirements for beta and gamma we should increase the power limit with the campaigns. For hard difficulty we have power limits of 20000 for alpha campaign, 25000 for beta campaign and 30000 for gamma campaign. For insane difficulty we have power limits of 12000 for alpha campaign, 14000 for beta campaign and 16000 for gamma campaign.
Just an idea, what do you think about?

Edit: I adjusted three assemblies for gamma 1 and exchanged the ID's for the two factories again. Due to the double exchange from Berserk Cyborg the SW factory is using the assembly of the NE factory and the NE factory is using the assembly of the SW factory. With the attached label for gamma 1 this should be fixed.
Attachments
labels gamma 1.json
(3.5 KiB) Downloaded 5 times
alfred007
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 153
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Germany

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Postby Berserk Cyborg » 12 Nov 2017, 20:28

Pushed 45abd912e08d0802edc5aaf6d591370ec95682ba.

alfred007 wrote:Because you exchanged base 2 and 3 and exchanged the ID's for the factories there is the same error like before. The SW factory (now NXcybFac-b2-1) must have ID 187 and the NE factory (now NXcybFac-b3) must have ID 88. Because you exchanged base 2 and 3 it was no longer necessary to exchange the ID's.
:oops: Should be correct now.


alfred007 wrote:And if you think about to making gamma 1 a bit tougher I have another idea. At the moment we have four areas that activate one factory after the other. My idea is to use only two areas that activate all factories if you reach one of them. We should keep cybAttackers, remove the other three and make one new at the western exit of the LZ. Coordinates pos1 5312, 13632; pos 2 6080, 14656.
Done. Not sure why I had it like that anyway.

alfred007 wrote:I started a new gamma campaign to see, if my assemblies are working and found that the given power of 16000 for gamma is reduced to 12000 because of the power limit for insane difficulty. I release the following idea for discussion: to take account of the increased energy requirements for beta and gamma we should increase the power limit with the campaigns. For hard difficulty we have power limits of 20000 for alpha campaign, 25000 for beta campaign and 30000 for gamma campaign. For insane difficulty we have power limits of 12000 for alpha campaign, 14000 for beta campaign and 16000 for gamma campaign.
Just an idea, what do you think about?
Makes sense since Beta and Gamma have higher power requirements. You can try it with the latest master.
User avatar
Berserk Cyborg
Code contributor
Code contributor
 
Posts: 305
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 19:56

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Postby Bethrezen » 12 Nov 2017, 21:15

Alpha 02

I get the following errors with the current master

Code: Select all
--- Starting log [C:\Documents and Settings\<user name>\Desktop\Warzone 2100_portable-master\Warzone 2100 master\logs\WZlog-1112_162233.txt]---
error   |04:33:26: [recvStructureInfo:349] Could not find structure 1256 to change production for
error   |06:46:35: [js_hackRemoveMessage:4044] cannot find message - C1B_BASE0

--- Starting log [C:\Documents and Settings\<user name>\Desktop\Warzone 2100_portable-master\Warzone 2100 master\logs\WZlog-1112_133053.txt]---
error   |04:07:05: [js_hackRemoveMessage:4044] cannot find message - C1B_BASE2
error   |04:11:32: [js_hackRemoveMessage:4044] cannot find message - C1B_BASE0


but otherwise everything else seems to be fine.
Bethrezen
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 320
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 02:05

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Postby alfred007 » 13 Nov 2017, 20:22

I started a new gamma campaign with master 45abd91 to see if my assemblies are now working. Gamma 1 looks good, but with gamma 2 I had problems. First the power limit for insane difficulty didn't work. After the end of gamma 1 I had over 30,000 power and in a second test I could also get more than the allowed 16,000 of power during gamma 1. Second I had the complete 2 hour for gamma 2 on the timer. Third the medium factory assembly worked, but both cyborg factories reacted like they have no assemblies. I add two saved games and the logs. When I have again the time for testing I will move on with beta 10 before I make another test with gamma.
Attachments
gamma.zip
(132.73 KiB) Downloaded 5 times
alfred007
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 153
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Germany

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Postby Berserk Cyborg » 13 Nov 2017, 20:55

Bethrezen wrote:Alpha 02
I get the following errors with the current master
Did you use the deity cheat? That is a cause for blip removal not working. Have not found a way to prevent factory production changing for a nonexistent factory. Happens somewhat frequently with the JS skirmish bots when their base is being destroyed.

alfred007 wrote:First the power limit for insane difficulty didn't work. After the end of gamma 1 I had over 30,000 power and in a second test I could also get more than the allowed 16,000 of power during gamma 1. Second I had the complete 2 hour for gamma 2 on the timer.
Weird... for me the power resets for both saves and the timer changes except for the second save, where it is already 2 hours. Wonder if it could be some kind of timing issue.
User avatar
Berserk Cyborg
Code contributor
Code contributor
 
Posts: 305
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 19:56

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Postby alfred007 » 13 Nov 2017, 21:23

Berserk Cyborg wrote:Weird... for me the power resets for both saves and the timer changes except for the second save, where it is already 2 hours. Wonder if it could be some kind of timing issue.

Yes, weird. After your post I reloaded the saved games and indeed the power resets. Warzone 2100 is a mystery ;-)
alfred007
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 153
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Germany

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Postby Bethrezen » 14 Nov 2017, 05:34

Did you use the deity cheat? That is a cause for blip removal not working. Have not found a way to prevent factory production changing for a nonexistent factory. Happens somewhat frequently with the JS skirmish bots when their base is being destroyed.


No, as a general rule i try not to use the cheats when testing, because I'm aware they can make odd things happen that are not supposed to happen so I'll only normally use the deity cheat when i need to screen shot something or if I need to observe something specific like is a given factory producing units, are damaged NPC units using repair bays etc.
Bethrezen
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 320
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 02:05

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Postby Berserk Cyborg » 16 Nov 2017, 00:27

Hmm... did not encounter base blip removal bug for Alpha 2. If it's not save related then it might be some obscure bug in the library.

Finished Alpha and I am at Beta 2 now. Quite a few of the Alpha missions seemed to be more challenging than last time especially now that more droids are repairing (Alpha 5, 6, 9, 12). Do not recall seeing mapTile asserts (ticket #4644) when loading a save for Alpha missions, but it sure does happen starting at Beta 2.

I did notice the transport causes a bright spot to stay around the location it leaves the map (Alpha 5 shows this quite well).

Does anyone think that we should try to balance the assault gun? I still think it is too powerful so much so that a small group of them can destroy tracked units and structures with ease. Thoughts?

Edit:
Pushed a small fix for Beta 3 in 27582e87bb1c7cc67904408c5d5cc91dd89bc1f2.
User avatar
Berserk Cyborg
Code contributor
Code contributor
 
Posts: 305
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 19:56

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Postby Hironaru » 17 Nov 2017, 07:58

I've decided I'm going to dedicate time to this project, due to its value both personally and academically. I have an amazing moustache. Unfortunately, despite its considerable influence over my face it seems that I simply lack the experience to test and report bugs. :3 Therefore, I would like to ask a few questions:

What are the tools were currently using (and their versions) to track bugs and consolidate our data?
Am I correct in assuming that the master file on buildbot will be the most recent push?
If we are testing fixes, how are they applied to the master files between pushes, and are they all in this topic or located somewhere else?

-----

It is likely that if an inconsistent bug is encountered, I would have the ability to replicate several instances simultaneously to attempt to recreate it. Also, there may be bugs that are unique, or become apparent with ultra wide resolutions, which I am able to test.
Heres a speccy:

Operating System
Windows 7 Professional 64-bit SP1
CPU
Intel Xeon E5 2620 v2 @ 2.10GHz
Ivy Bridge-EP/EX 22nm Technology
RAM
32.0GB DDR3 @ 667MHz (9-9-9-24)
Motherboard
ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. RAMPAGE IV BLACK EDITION (LGA2011)
Graphics
NV Surround (5760x1080@59Hz)
3071MB NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti (ASUStek Computer Inc)
3071MB NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti (ASUStek Computer Inc)
ForceWare version: 385.69
SLI Enabled
Do, or do not. There is no try.
-yoda
User avatar
Hironaru
Rookie
Rookie
 
Posts: 27
Joined: 11 Jun 2017, 10:10

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Postby Hironaru » 17 Nov 2017, 08:14

Berserk Cyborg wrote:Does anyone think that we should try to balance the assault gun? I still think it is too powerful so much so that a small group of them can destroy tracked units and structures with ease. Thoughts?

If you are able to change aspects such as this, I will play through the entire campaign with careful consideration of mechanics through all stages of it. I will use three generic methodologies in RTS playstyle:

- zerg (Constant early progression, scaling with resources)
- ultra defensive (high defensive structure/research count before any progression)
- and reactive offensive (Unit pooling for defense, progression after defeating attack)

I would like to know however, if the save game bug I ran into earlier is still prevalent in the current build. The save bug which, removes all of the upgrades from your units from the first section of the game if you save and exit, and then load the game within the second section; will have a definite impact on how and when I play the game. Consistency must be present to consider such factors.

If the issue is still prevalent, it should be apparent that any balancing done to mechanics cannot be changed reliably until a constant has been obtained.
Do, or do not. There is no try.
-yoda
User avatar
Hironaru
Rookie
Rookie
 
Posts: 27
Joined: 11 Jun 2017, 10:10

PreviousNext

Return to News and announcements