Battle formation & Cyborg weapons

Discuss the future of Warzone 2100 with us.
aquila828
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 20
Joined: 15 Aug 2007, 19:25

Battle formation & Cyborg weapons

Post by aquila828 » 30 Aug 2007, 15:20

Here some crazy ideas:

1) Battle Formation. Would it be possible to add formation commands like for tanks, a square formation would help in facing hostiles. It would be like they're forming a large tank with multiple turrets. The square formation would line up assault heavy body track in front, while long range lighter bodies at the back. Another formation would be "Scramble", where in you can cover more of the area.

as for VTOL's a V formation would be nice and decrease air resistance.

2) Cyborg weapons, I was just thinking if cyborg were able to use light sabers???? I mean this weapon would be very effective in close range assault. Since cyborgs move faster than heavy tanks, using laser sabers while in a chase would devastate tanks.

How about having cyborg gliders or rocketeers?

User avatar
Watermelon
Code contributor
Code contributor
Posts: 551
Joined: 08 Oct 2006, 09:37

Re: Battle formation & Cyborg weapons

Post by Watermelon » 03 Sep 2007, 07:12

aquila828 wrote: Here some crazy ideas:

1) Battle Formation. Would it be possible to add formation commands like for tanks, a square formation would help in facing hostiles. It would be like they're forming a large tank with multiple turrets. The square formation would line up assault heavy body track in front, while long range lighter bodies at the back. Another formation would be "Scramble", where in you can cover more of the area.

as for VTOL's a V formation would be nice and decrease air resistance.

2) Cyborg weapons, I was just thinking if cyborg were able to use light sabers???? I mean this weapon would be very effective in close range assault. Since cyborgs move faster than heavy tanks, using laser sabers while in a chase would devastate tanks.

How about having cyborg gliders or rocketeers?
1.Currently wz only supports line and column,both are pretty much the same thing,though in large open area the AI is able to form sort of multi-column formation(a square/legion formation),I saw it few times on large flat maps.

The 'rank'(frontal or rear) replies on unit 'beefy weight'(fixed value,usually takes HP and range into consideration when defining those values) to work properly,but in wz the component combination is almost infinite,so it's hard to assign a 'beefy weight' for each possible combination.

2.starwars cyborgs are not possible unless you made us a fully animated cyborg model with bones and armatures...the code wise requires almost no change,since melee in game is just a ranged weapon with very very short range.
tasks postponed until the trunk is relatively stable again.

User avatar
lav_coyote25
Professional
Professional
Posts: 3434
Joined: 08 Aug 2006, 23:18

Re: Battle formation & Cyborg weapons

Post by lav_coyote25 » 03 Sep 2007, 07:15

actually someone did do a mod - using the walkers ( both large and small )  with laser weapons if i remember correctly... cant think of the name who did it right off hand... but it was a neat mod for the original 2 disk set. 
‎"to prepare for disaster is to invite it, to not prepare for disaster is a fools choice" -me (kim-lav_coyote25-metcalfe) - it used to be attributed to unknown - but adding the last bit , it now makes sense.

User avatar
Watermelon
Code contributor
Code contributor
Posts: 551
Joined: 08 Oct 2006, 09:37

Re: Battle formation & Cyborg weapons

Post by Watermelon » 03 Sep 2007, 07:26

lav_coyote25 wrote: actually someone did do a mod - using the walkers ( both large and small )  with laser weapons if i remember correctly... cant think of the name who did it right off hand... but it was a neat mod for the original 2 disk set. 

I think the problem is the arm animation of cyborg, warzone's animation system is very primitive,basically an animated pie needs one polygon for each frame for the animated arm/leg/whatever.Also the animation frame speed is very slow(8 frames per second currently),which makes the animation look very 'jumpy'
tasks postponed until the trunk is relatively stable again.

User avatar
kage
Regular
Regular
Posts: 751
Joined: 05 Dec 2006, 21:45

Re: Battle formation & Cyborg weapons

Post by kage » 03 Sep 2007, 20:11

this would be another place where connectors with 3 axes of rotation information would be useful: it would inherently support a bicep (upper arm) for vertical rotation around the shoulder, and the forearm for horizontal rotation.

User avatar
Watermelon
Code contributor
Code contributor
Posts: 551
Joined: 08 Oct 2006, 09:37

Re: Battle formation & Cyborg weapons

Post by Watermelon » 05 Sep 2007, 10:05

kage wrote: this would be another place where connectors with 3 axes of rotation information would be useful: it would inherently support a bicep (upper arm) for vertical rotation around the shoulder, and the forearm for horizontal rotation.
Implementing such thing is easy,just like any features that everyone is suggesting...but it's hard to make everyone agree to something,the project has virtually no coordination and consolidation,developers' opinions differ and efforts diversified,plus subjective goals,which obsoletes/ignores many user contributed suggestions,features,patches and thus making all source wise changes become a waste of time.
tasks postponed until the trunk is relatively stable again.

User avatar
kage
Regular
Regular
Posts: 751
Joined: 05 Dec 2006, 21:45

Re: Battle formation & Cyborg weapons

Post by kage » 05 Sep 2007, 17:16

then departmentalize it -- find someone who excels in each area (modelling, mapping, scripting, etc) who is very familiar with warzone modding as it used to be and as it is now (and so can see where it needs to improve) and have them be the official coordinators for all coding in that area -- they propose a standard, and any developer can simply say "no, it won't work".

User avatar
Watermelon
Code contributor
Code contributor
Posts: 551
Joined: 08 Oct 2006, 09:37

Re: Battle formation & Cyborg weapons

Post by Watermelon » 07 Sep 2007, 16:06

kage wrote: then departmentalize it -- find someone who excels in each area (modelling, mapping, scripting, etc) who is very familiar with warzone modding as it used to be and as it is now (and so can see where it needs to improve) and have them be the official coordinators for all coding in that area -- they propose a standard, and any developer can simply say "no, it won't work".
the problem is there is no visible goals and progresses source wise,and noone is actually working on a relatively complex mod or whatever that requires fundamental changes to the source aka 'core',the mods floating around in the forums are just few data mods(modifying txt's only or graphics' only).Perhaps there has to be an official modding project which evaluates what kind of features are required to be added to 'core' to make gameplay more intuitive/to add more diversities to the game.
tasks postponed until the trunk is relatively stable again.

User avatar
Rman Virgil
Professional
Professional
Posts: 3812
Joined: 25 Sep 2006, 01:06
Location: USA

Re: Battle formation & Cyborg weapons

Post by Rman Virgil » 07 Sep 2007, 21:03

Watermelon wrote:
the problem is there is no visible goals and progresses source wise,and noone is actually working on a relatively complex mod or whatever that requires fundamental changes to the source aka 'core',

the mods floating around in the forums are just few data mods(modifying txt's only or graphics' only).

Perhaps there has to be an official modding project which evaluates what kind of features are required to be added to 'core' to make gameplay more intuitive/to add more diversities to the game.
--------------->

* Perhaps to look ahead we can look back....

* Way back in 09/04 (when we were still in our little insulated WZ-Win world & knew the source was coming but hadn't been liberated just yet.... and were also totally clueless at the time about the GPL or the immense future interest by coders from the Linux & Mac Communities)

* We had a thingie called "The WZ List of Proposed Changes" that included the following key goals:

Complete externalization of all internal components save the Kernel, and all aspects of the game engine (Sound Core, Graphics Core, DirectPlay Core, etc).

- Externals:

? Enhanced mod support

? Externalization and better organization of all of Warzone's resource files

- Editing:

? Edit World 3.0-- Complete with WZCK functionality, PIE Slicer, and an AI script editor, debugger, and Campaign Editor

? WZ campaign editor allows for new, custom campaigns

? Modular AI script designer allows the creator to build their AI using numerous different pre-programmed AI modules.
* There was more (& you can find the complete doc @ RTS.net) but just the above leverage-points indicate the immense possibilities that would flow as a consequence of this Mod friendly Modularity - for years and years  of continuous new content creation & WZ GPM revitalization.

* Now that cross-platform portability has been made a reality perhaps it is time to re-examine the viability of those earlier ambitions.

* Giel's recent post in these bbs has given me a ray of hope:
..............

Also trying to define behaviour in scripts (or other data/resource files) rather than the code itself.

- Cheers, /R\m/a\n/ \V/i\r/g\i/l\? 8)
.

Impact = C x (R + E + A + T + E)

Contrast
Reach
Exposure
Articulation
Trust
Echo
.

User avatar
Watermelon
Code contributor
Code contributor
Posts: 551
Joined: 08 Oct 2006, 09:37

Re: Battle formation & Cyborg weapons

Post by Watermelon » 08 Sep 2007, 10:04

Rman Virgil wrote: --------------->

* Perhaps to look ahead we can look back....

* Way back in 09/04 (when we were still in our little insulated WZ-Win world & knew the source was coming but hadn't been liberated just yet.... and were also totally clueless at the time about the GPL or the immense future interest by coders from the Linux & Mac Communities)

* We had a thingie called "The WZ List of Proposed Changes" that included the following key goals:

* There was more (& you can find the complete doc @ RTS.net) but just the above leverage-points indicate the immense possibilities that would flow as a consequence of this Mod friendly Modularity - for years and years  of continuous new content creation & WZ GPM revitalization.
thanks for the info,guess I'll need to register an account @ RTS.net to re-read the articles/discussions on it.
* Now that cross-platform portability has been made a reality perhaps it is time to re-examine the viability of those earlier ambitions.

* Giel's recent post in these bbs has given me a ray of hope:


- Cheers, /R\m/a\n/ \V/i\r/g\i/l\? 8)
The script engine needs to integrated into editworld,to generate slo/vlo that is requested by editworld gui/campaign editor/trigger editor or whatever,but it will be really hard for obvious reasons:

1.only very few ppl know how the script engine works
2.script engine is in C and it's a stack machine while editworld is in C++
3.potential map format changes may break script engine's essential functions like grid iteration.
tasks postponed until the trunk is relatively stable again.

Troman
Trained
Trained
Posts: 424
Joined: 12 Aug 2006, 15:40
Contact:

Re: Battle formation & Cyborg weapons

Post by Troman » 08 Sep 2007, 12:45

Watermelon wrote: The script engine needs to integrated into editworld,to generate slo/vlo that is requested by editworld gui/campaign editor/trigger editor or whatever,but it will be really hard for obvious reasons:

1.only very few ppl know how the script engine works
2.script engine is in C and it's a stack machine while editworld is in C++
3.potential map format changes may break script engine's essential functions like grid iteration.
There would be no need to integrate the scripting engine into EW or to access it from EW, even if we were to implement scripting capabilities into EW. But still personally I don't see this happening any soon.

Such capabilities would allow maps/MODs with some custom events, but it is not realistic to have enough functionality for a full-blown campaign, unless it is real simplistic. The conclusion is there is no way around good old notepad and a scripting manual.
Sign Up for Beta-Testing:
?topic=1617.0

User avatar
Rman Virgil
Professional
Professional
Posts: 3812
Joined: 25 Sep 2006, 01:06
Location: USA

Re: Battle formation & Cyborg weapons

Post by Rman Virgil » 08 Sep 2007, 14:00

Troman wrote: The conclusion is there is no way around good old notepad and a scripting manual.
* I found learning the Linden Scripting Language for "Second Life" relatively painless and even quite enjoyable and I think it had everything to do with the Wiki presentation-organization-documentation: See for yourself..

- RV  8)
.

Impact = C x (R + E + A + T + E)

Contrast
Reach
Exposure
Articulation
Trust
Echo
.

Troman
Trained
Trained
Posts: 424
Joined: 12 Aug 2006, 15:40
Contact:

Re: Battle formation & Cyborg weapons

Post by Troman » 08 Sep 2007, 15:13

Rman Virgil wrote: * I found learning the Linden Scripting Language for "Second Life" relatively painless and even quite enjoyable and I think it had everything to do with the Wiki presentation-organization-documentation: See for yourself..

- RV  8)
My point is a scripting manual or a wiki, you have to use some reference. You can't visually represent all scripting functionality in a map editor. And I don't think any of the active developers will try this in the near future.

As for the wiki, sure it is easier to use. But I have a feeling they had more than 7 members contributing to it, considering the number of accounts the game has (9.000.000+).
Sign Up for Beta-Testing:
?topic=1617.0

2_Late
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 29
Joined: 06 Sep 2007, 23:21

Re: Battle formation & Cyborg weapons

Post by 2_Late » 08 Sep 2007, 15:31

> . >

< . <

The most painless scripting language I ever had to learn was C++ :P . Neverwinter Nights map editor uses a simplified C++ language to script.

User avatar
Rman Virgil
Professional
Professional
Posts: 3812
Joined: 25 Sep 2006, 01:06
Location: USA

Re: Battle formation & Cyborg weapons

Post by Rman Virgil » 08 Sep 2007, 15:53

Troman wrote: My point is a scripting manual or a wiki, you have to use some reference. You can't visually represent all scripting functionality in a map editor. And I don't think any of the active developers will try this in the near future.
* True and it's kwel to work-it out the old fashioned way. :)

As for the wiki, sure it is easier to use. But I have a feeling they had more than 7 members contributing to it, considering the number of accounts the game has (9.000.000+).
* Ahhh.... therein is a an interesting, even amazing story.

* The "LSL" Wiki was actually co-founded by one kwel gal by the name of Catherine Omega. When she started building in "SL" she was actually homeless, living on the streets, having put her rig together from parts she found in a dumpster outside a comp store - later, while squatting in a funky apt bldg she used a coffee can to get a wireless Internet signal..... So .... yes, over the years many have contributed but it was only 2 who started it and got it rolling into the indispensable tool it is today.

- RV :)
.

Impact = C x (R + E + A + T + E)

Contrast
Reach
Exposure
Articulation
Trust
Echo
.

Post Reply