Petition to reinstate Guard, Persue and Hold orders!

Discuss the future of Warzone 2100 with us.

Should the Guard Position & Pursue Orders be brought back?

Yes
74
94%
No
5
6%
 
Total votes: 79

Per
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Posts: 3773
Joined: 03 Aug 2006, 19:39

Re: Petition to reinstate Guard, Persue and Hold orders!

Post by Per » 28 Jul 2015, 17:07

The Overlord wrote:I use the 'hold' command when using mortar tanks so I can re-position them, then hold so they fire, then move them again. Also when using a sensor on a tank body so it makes the artillery attack the nearest target, essentially clearing the area that the sensor is in.
And you cannot use the the 'hold' primary order + 'hold fire' to do this?

User avatar
Terminator
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1066
Joined: 05 Aug 2006, 13:46
Location: Ukraine
Contact:

Re: Petition to reinstate Guard, Persue and Hold orders!

Post by Terminator » 28 Jul 2015, 22:12

Per wrote:The problem with 'Pursue' is that it is an unsuccessful hybrid between giving units a mind of their own, and being under your control. There is no real intelligence in it. In this mode, they will almost invariably drive off on their own and get themselves killed. It is never a better idea to put a unit in this mode, than to control it yourself.
Completly agree with this. 'Pursue' - is the only order that may be removed.
Forget about primary or secondary, my suggestion is:
- add 'stop' button. the one we are use pressing 's" key;
- move 'guard' button from default unit's state (use 'stop' instead); // so if players didn't like new default they could use old one.
Attachments
unitmenu.png
unitmenu.png (12.96 KiB) Viewed 4826 times
Death is the only way out... sh*t Happens !

Russian-speaking Social network Group http://vk.com/warzone2100

User avatar
Octane
Greenhorn
Posts: 12
Joined: 16 Jun 2014, 21:47

Re: Petition to reinstate Guard, Persue and Hold orders!

Post by Octane » 28 Jul 2015, 22:41

ok I been away for quite a while, and since I'm not multiplaying I didn't feel the need to update to the latest version, so I wasn't aware of these changes.

to the point; I do use pursue option on a sensor tank to have it automatically cover a larger area than a sensor tower would, since the sensortank seems to see things that are outside of sensor range and moves in on it to get it targeted. ideally the sensortank is walled in to keep it from wandering around the map, though sometimes I actually want it to do that to have it autonomously clear out and breach enemy frontline from safe distance, in which case I have it not only set to pursue but also set to return for repair at minimal damage. the only thing I occasionally have to do is relocating the repair tower gathering point, works satisfactory for me.

ofcourse I would've hoped to have the sensortank gain rankpoints by having artillery units assigned to it, but here I encountered a bug. this setup lets the game crash and freeze up after a while. it does not crash if the sensortank is only backed with artillery buildings. (vexed must have chuckled when I told him about it a few days ago in the irc channel and mentioning among other things that the tank was set to pursue. he didn't tell me that option was no longer in use. evil... anyway lets park this report for now until it becomes relevant again)

otherwise I never use pursue stance, only because the option was there I developed some use for it.

this is my 2p thoughts. Ima gonna download the latest version and check it out before I put my vote on here.

User avatar
vexed
Inactive
Inactive
Posts: 2538
Joined: 27 Jul 2010, 02:07

Re: Petition to reinstate Guard, Persue and Hold orders!

Post by vexed » 29 Jul 2015, 03:35

Octane wrote: to the point; I do use pursue option on a sensor tank to have it automatically cover a larger area than a sensor tower would, since the sensortank seems to see things that are outside of sensor range and moves in on it to get it targeted. ideally the sensortank is walled in to keep it from wandering around the map, though sometimes I actually want it to do that to have it autonomously clear out and breach enemy frontline from safe distance, in which case I have it not only set to pursue but also set to return for repair at minimal damage. the only thing I occasionally have to do is relocating the repair tower gathering point, works satisfactory for me.
So, in your case, you use it as a scout.
this is my 2p thoughts. Ima gonna download the latest version and check it out before I put my vote on here.
What we are talking about here is the "master" version of the game, not the latest 3.1.2 version.
If you want to test the issue we are talking about here, you can get builds from: http://buildbot.wz2100.net/files/master/windows/ (for windows, or use the trarball or repo for linux)
Per wrote:The problem with 'Pursue' is that it is an unsuccessful hybrid between giving units a mind of their own, and being under your control. There is no real intelligence in it. In this mode, they will almost invariably drive off on their own and get themselves killed. It is never a better idea to put a unit in this mode, than to control it yourself. (I do not understand the example above - a unit parked by an oil well will kill the enemy truck trying to build on it even without 'Pursue'.)
You are assuming that the truck won't get out of doge so to speak, and that is where Pursue comes in handy. It will keep going after that unit until it is dead, do or die.
As I was saying above, in can be used for multiple things, and I still don't see a explicit reason for removal.
The suborders vs primary orders is over most peoples head here, let's just say that Pumpkin seemed to have decided to split orders up to give units more fine tuned control.
In that context, we could promote everything into primary orders, but, that doesn't allow us to fine tune aspects of each unit's behavior.
Doing a "mini AI" seems the way to go, but, that is far more complex than Pumpkin's attempt.
/facepalm ...Grinch stole Warzone🙈🙉🙊 contra principia negantem non est disputandum
Super busy, don't expect a timely reply back.

Per
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Posts: 3773
Joined: 03 Aug 2006, 19:39

Re: Petition to reinstate Guard, Persue and Hold orders!

Post by Per » 29 Jul 2015, 09:05

Octane wrote:to the point; I do use pursue option on a sensor tank to have it automatically cover a larger area than a sensor tower would, since the sensortank seems to see things that are outside of sensor range and moves in on it to get it targeted. ideally the sensortank is walled in to keep it from wandering around the map
So... you want us to reinstate 'Pursue' because sensor tanks used to have a bug that you used to exploit by walling it off and having it target stuff you shouldn't be able to target because they were out of sensor range?

That is not really a supported use case. :stressed:

Per
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Posts: 3773
Joined: 03 Aug 2006, 19:39

Re: Petition to reinstate Guard, Persue and Hold orders!

Post by Per » 29 Jul 2015, 09:29

vexed wrote:As I was saying above, in can be used for multiple things
Then please list these 'multiple things' so we can have a reasoned debate about how to cover these use cases.
vexed wrote:The suborders vs primary orders is over most peoples head here, let's just say that Pumpkin seemed to have decided to split orders up to give units more fine tuned control.
In that context, we could promote everything into primary orders, but, that doesn't allow us to fine tune aspects of each unit's behavior.
Doing a "mini AI" seems the way to go, but, that is far more complex than Pumpkin's attempt.
No, let's not start hand-waving things here. We need to be precise when making a design.

So to be clear: A primary order is an immediate order that you give to a unit and that is canceled the moment you give another primary order. A secondary order is stance or mode that you set on a unit that remains with that unit until you change that specific secondary order type to something else.

Secondary orders are in my opinion bad because they are less obvious and require more work by the player to maintain. When you are playing a hectic player-vs-player game, you have no time to be fine-tuning secondary orders. You need primary orders to work.
vexed wrote:You are assuming that the truck won't get out of doge so to speak, and that is where Pursue comes in handy. It will keep going after that unit until it is dead, do or die.
The way I remember it, it would continue pursuing the unit as long as it remained visible, the moment it vanished out of view it would cancel its pursuit and become stranded on some random area on the map. It had no cleverness like "hey, if I drive over there, I might be able to see it again and keep up the pursuit". The 'Pursue' secondary was always poorly implemented.

User avatar
Octane
Greenhorn
Posts: 12
Joined: 16 Jun 2014, 21:47

Re: Petition to reinstate Guard, Persue and Hold orders!

Post by Octane » 29 Jul 2015, 11:16

vexed wrote:So, in your case, you use it as a scout.
no, it was definitely intended for offensive use (or defensive in the walled-in case), since the sensortank has artillery backing it, which destroys everything it encounters. but yes, as autonomous scout could also be of use, didn't think of that, thnx. ;)
Per wrote:So... you want us to reinstate 'Pursue' because sensor tanks used to have a bug that you used to exploit by walling it off and having it target stuff you shouldn't be able to target because they were out of sensor range?
that's a bug?

cumandgetit
Trained
Trained
Posts: 103
Joined: 06 Feb 2009, 04:02

Re: Petition to reinstate Guard, Persue and Hold orders!

Post by cumandgetit » 29 Jul 2015, 12:04

vexed wrote: The suborders vs primary orders is over most peoples head here, let's just say that Pumpkin seemed to have decided to split orders up to give units more fine tuned control.

In that context, we could promote everything into primary orders, but, that doesn't allow us to fine tune aspects of each unit's behavior.

Doing a "mini AI" seems the way to go, but, that is far more complex than Pumpkin's attempt.
* this all goes back to Pumpkin's original design for commander ai before they painted themselves into an overly complex corner they couldn't see thier way through to elegant refinement (wz homebrew script lang was not up to it nor the command ui) so they cut back thier ambition as the retail release deadline preasures mounted.

* see pumpkin's ai guru alex lee's comments on this in july 2009 in these bbs.

Alex Lee, Pumpkin A.I. Guru, speaks to Original Commander Design

* and aubergine led discussion from 2012:

Idea: Mini-AI to automate player's commanders
:lecture:

"Almost all our faults are more pardonable than the methods we resort to, to hide them." - Duc de la Rochefoucauld

User avatar
montetank
Regular
Regular
Posts: 632
Joined: 14 Feb 2013, 00:05
Location: Montenegro

Re: Petition to reinstate Guard, Persue and Hold orders!

Post by montetank » 29 Jul 2015, 16:49

Wow-thanks for the links, cumandgetit. :)
In case the WZ-game ends in a draw , the game winner will be determined by penalty shoot-out.

Per
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Posts: 3773
Joined: 03 Aug 2006, 19:39

Re: Petition to reinstate Guard, Persue and Hold orders!

Post by Per » 29 Jul 2015, 19:28

My idea for mini-AI would be to simply allow players to load javascript snippets that register themselves to a particular unit type, and when that unit type is selected, add a button for that program that can be pressed to hand over control of it. We already have the beginnings of such UI control now that the reticule is script-controlled. (I don't see a role for commanders in all this, though.) So while I am against the old 'Pursue', it is just because it was such a bad design and implementation, not because I'm in principle opposed to automation. But in order to get to a better place we need to first untangle the current spaghetti code and make the core code implementation simpler. Then we can add real complexity in scripts.

User avatar
vexed
Inactive
Inactive
Posts: 2538
Joined: 27 Jul 2010, 02:07

Re: Petition to reinstate Guard, Persue and Hold orders!

Post by vexed » 30 Jul 2015, 03:25

Per wrote:
vexed wrote:You are assuming that the truck won't get out of doge so to speak, and that is where Pursue comes in handy. It will keep going after that unit until it is dead, do or die.
The way I remember it, it would continue pursuing the unit as long as it remained visible, the moment it vanished out of view it would cancel its pursuit and become stranded on some random area on the map. It had no cleverness like "hey, if I drive over there, I might be able to see it again and keep up the pursuit". The 'Pursue' secondary was always poorly implemented.
I am talking about the original 1.10 behavior, not our builds, which have things broken compared to that version.
I verified in a VM, unit goes after them, just as I described, and chased the unit all the way back to the base.
Per wrote: No, let's not start hand-waving things here. We need to be precise when making a design.

So to be clear: A primary order is an immediate order that you give to a unit and that is canceled the moment you give another primary order. A secondary order is stance or mode that you set on a unit that remains with that unit until you change that specific secondary order type to something else.

Secondary orders are in my opinion bad because they are less obvious and require more work by the player to maintain. When you are playing a hectic player-vs-player game, you have no time to be fine-tuning secondary orders. You need primary orders to work.
There are plenty of people who take meticulous time to set each unit exactly how they want it to act.
Why should we change that, just because it doesn't fit your playing style?
MP is a very, very small part of our community, more people play campaign & skirmish by a substantial number.

I do admit that lots of this is very complex, and should be wrangled into something that isn't so mammoth, but I don't think simply removing things is the way to go.
I hate removing things from the game, it just isn't the same.
/facepalm ...Grinch stole Warzone🙈🙉🙊 contra principia negantem non est disputandum
Super busy, don't expect a timely reply back.

stiv
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Posts: 876
Joined: 18 Jul 2008, 04:41
Location: 45N 86W

Re: Petition to reinstate Guard, Persue and Hold orders!

Post by stiv » 30 Jul 2015, 03:40

unit goes after them, ... and chased the unit all the way back to the base.
That pretty much sounds like the definition of 'Pursue'.

User avatar
Berg
Regular
Regular
Posts: 2199
Joined: 02 Sep 2007, 23:25
Location: Australia

Re: Petition to reinstate Guard, Persue and Hold orders!

Post by Berg » 30 Jul 2015, 05:15

I have refrained from further comment but from your posts its clear your not going to listen to the community .
So I state for the record this method of coding is not productive ..."If YOU cant fix it you delete it" that’s not how real world game enhancement works i know you called me a stick in the mud and scared of new things when i ranted about you deleting the HQ, and you didn’t so that was good but every time i look at the game lots more stuff is gone.
Please stand back and see all the things you have broken and rather then move on deleting all the broken bits you created Fix the bugs.
I see no way forward with these methods of deleting code soon you will have nothing left and you must admit you have removed many things over the years you call it brittle and fragile code the idea was add upon pumplkins fine work not delete it.
Sorry i have the need to say this.

Per
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Posts: 3773
Joined: 03 Aug 2006, 19:39

Re: Petition to reinstate Guard, Persue and Hold orders!

Post by Per » 30 Jul 2015, 09:26

vexed wrote:I am talking about the original 1.10 behavior, not our builds, which have things broken compared to that version.
I verified in a VM, unit goes after them, just as I described, and chased the unit all the way back to the base.
Did it ever go out of vision range of the pursuing unit? I am wondering whether the original code used an omniscience cheat for 'Pursue'. That could explain the difference.
vexed wrote:I hate removing things from the game, it just isn't the same.
If you want exactly the same game, then why not play 1.10?

User avatar
bendib
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1006
Joined: 29 Aug 2010, 05:22
Location: Imeuta
Contact:

Re: Petition to reinstate Guard, Persue and Hold orders!

Post by bendib » 31 Jul 2015, 01:42

I really hate the idea of removing these. Please reinstate them. That is all.

Of course, nobody cares what I think. :roll:
Image

Locked