|
|
Post by Pilot on Aug 14, 2011 20:09:19 GMT -5
Question: (j)Meatbag... I mean human... (/joke)
Will AI's be more inclined to fly like they are in racing in jets or will they act like they are flying in a bi-plane race? And will their be any other modifications to there path-finding (or avoidance) behavior, example, if I where headed toward a AI at full speed from head-on would they try to avoid me or sit there waiting for tunnel alignment or re-alignment.
|
|
|
|
Post by rotary on Aug 15, 2011 13:54:04 GMT -5
Question: (j)Meatbag... I mean human... (/joke) Will AI's be more inclined to fly like they are in racing in jets or will they act like they are flying in a bi-plane race? And will their be any other modifications to there path-finding (or avoidance) behavior, example, if I where headed toward a AI at full speed from head-on would they try to avoid me or sit there waiting for tunnel alignment or re-alignment. Well, what I recognize with the current AI is that it changes modes when it hits an obstacle (like in your avatar). It stops motion, stops shooting properly, and tries to recover its circling behaviour on a really slow and procedural way. That's something that can be changed (eg.: it can change position by drifting, while aiming at you). Besides this, the physics of the current engine will make moths bounce more, since currently ending up in an almost full stop when scratching a tunnel floor is rather... weird? Damage it will do, but it won't put you to a stop. I would even rather see it would make you topple or spin, to end up like a fireball if not corrected properly. Another way is that it can try to 'evade' (turn away from) obstacles with simple ray-cast sensors, but this (I advise) should only be used in combat situations, since it can be a heavy strain on the logic. Ofcourse it will never fly like a human can, unless you get a pc with the calculation capacity of just as many human brains as AI's, which, until they find a decent brain-plug, is not here to be soon  At last there is the tunnel-behaviour, which clearly shows the mode-system having difficulties. It first lines up with the tunnel, and only once done it will decide to shoot into the tunnel. It should rather use drifting (if you're not moving above a certain speed), while shooting as soon as you are in range & line-of-fire. Or get some distance, and use missiles instead. It does this already partly when it attacks in the open. It will hang there, shooting at you, until you start shooting back. Then it will start circling. I'm still doubting however if I should include full rotational control. I can include it, and give it a standard control mode which keeps you upside-up. It will however severly increase the workload of in-sight piloting scripts. For players though it can become much more fun/rewarding to have full control over the moth  |
|
cobra
New Member
Been awhile.
Posts: 38
|
Post by cobra on Aug 15, 2011 14:17:17 GMT -5
As a player's perspective, part of the quaint charm of Hardwar is the 2.5D lack of ability to invert your moth.
I've also sold it as a legitimately fun and not *too* overwhelming game to a few friends on that basis (they all know I'm a flight nut, and basically the group's pilot)
|
|
|
|
Post by rotary on Aug 15, 2011 15:16:07 GMT -5
As a player's perspective, part of the quaint charm of Hardwar is the 2.5D lack of ability to invert your moth. I've also sold it as a legitimately fun and not *too* overwhelming game to a few friends on that basis (they all know I'm a flight nut, and basically the group's pilot) I can include this module for you, to install on your moth. This will auto-correct unwanted toppling. ;D (No seriously now ) I could include such a module maybe, as installable software. Either make it default, and give the possibility to 'up/downgrade' it to become fully controllable. Attachments:
|
|
cobra
New Member
Been awhile.
Posts: 38
|
Post by cobra on Aug 15, 2011 17:05:40 GMT -5
Oh it's not me that dislikes full maneuverability.
Ohhhh no. My dear Viper, the Fighting Falcon, has no such restrictions... like I said, I'm the group's pilot. I'd be doing all sorts of crazy things if I could bank more than sixty degrees.
But I'm saying, it's part of the mystique of the game. Part of what keeps it from being medium-realistic flight simulator #5.
|
|
|
|
Post by rotary on Aug 17, 2011 5:51:40 GMT -5
I understand  I wish it would be easy to copy this Hardwar system. But it is because they have this strange setup (half pseudo-aerodynamic-steering, half thrust-steering) it is difficult to simulate effectively. The aerodynamic part makes the turning-behaviour, while thrust-steering takes care of the gravity and static movement. Imagine; - it uses pseudo-aerodynamics for turning once flying - it can turn&hover when static - it can stall (aerodynamic event) when rising statically - it doesn't use power when static (free anti-gravity device?) It really has 2 different ways, static and dynamic. I have to make several choices on how to copy this behaviour realistically, without giving it awkward behaviour.. Some of these things are simply not logic/realistic, and therefore difficult to shape in an existing (realistic) physics engine. If you guys have any ideas or opinion about this, please tell me! Personally I think using a thruster-system will get close to the old engine, and is most realistic (and fun to drift around corners with)! |
|
|
|
Post by Pilot on Aug 17, 2011 8:23:58 GMT -5
Well it does have the thrust up and thrust down maneuvers too, And since you are on a moon you do have less over all gravity, making the hovering less energy consuming than in Earth's gravity.
A ?illegal? device or software upgrade that would allow for additional maneuvers would be interesting.
It would be interesting that when the afterburner, or maybe a Afterburner MKII, was triggered if the moth had a little more "play" in the flying, and some kind of multi-surface landing gear.
Imagine this, your losing a fight and there is no where to dock, hit the special afterburner and fly at a small overhang and landing on the wall like a "Moth" and all systems go silent (except radar), while you hide and they fire off starshells or random laser blasts trying to locate you.
|
|
|
|
Post by rotary on Aug 26, 2011 6:43:10 GMT -5
Ok, I decided to stick with the 'thruster-way' for now. Later on I can always add in extra features, however thruster-steering doesn't add behaviour which isn't included in the original physics engine yet. This way I don't have to add a script which simulates aerodynamics realtime next to the original engine. The banking principle will be thought about. The 'sticking to walls' should be possible with thruster-steering, since your thrusters have to defy gravity anyway when hovering/flying. Only thing is; is your upward thruster as strong as your downward one. If not, its not possible to stick on the ceiling, and second, if you drop topside down on the crater floor, you're like a turtle.. this can of course be upgraded (better engine/thrusters, Cells). To do this however, you still use your thrusters, so it will give of a 'heat signature', so full stealth.. maybe against most radars except the best? These features should however be documented properly inside the game, since several of these features I found out on this forum, which would be worth considering if confronted with it in-game. Your moth could have a 'stealth'-attribute which decides how fast a normal radar picks you up. This could simply be influenced/upgraded by installing hardware (increases weight), giving you more possibilities to customize your moth, complicating some battles. These radars/stealth units can be mounted, but will take up that mounting-spot, so playing with different combinations and positions becomes a must when wanting to get every last bit of use out of your moth. In my engine, moths do already have mounting-spots (internal and external) of which each allows certain (one or more) categories of hardware/software ('weapons', 'cargopod', 'shield', 'software', 'misc', etc). Therefore every moth will only allow certain combinations, depending on its design.. So far for the thrusters.. I'm rambling again |
|
|
|
Post by rotary on Aug 26, 2011 7:02:53 GMT -5
Talking about thrusters.. Question: (j)Meatbag... I mean human... (/joke) Will AI's be more inclined to fly like they are in racing in jets or will they act like they are flying in a bi-plane race? And will their be any other modifications to there path-finding (or avoidance) behavior, example, if I where headed toward a AI at full speed from head-on would they try to avoid me or sit there waiting for tunnel alignment or re-alignment. I cannot make all the AI's actively evade eachother and you to prevent collision. Ofcourse it is possible but it is quite a strain on the CPU. Second, what if you plan to brake? Or what if you already plan to turn a few meters before? What if he is waiting in a line? Also, I could make it calculate its chance on collision with every other moth, but the only moth flying like a over-confident drunken teenager is the player ;D The rest obeys the 'rules of the road'. About the tunnel-alignment-stuff, I don't like it anyway.. I want them to fly more smoothly and not come to a full stop to enter a tunnel, it's a waste of time. They could use drifting for example to already have the proper heading, brake sideways, and hit the throttle once they slide into alignment. |
|
|
|
Post by riedquat on Aug 26, 2011 13:00:03 GMT -5
Definitely I want to drift with my moth... drift without wheels is a new mental concept to me... really cool! |
|
|
|
Post by Pilot on Aug 27, 2011 15:52:46 GMT -5
Ok, I decided to stick with the 'thruster-way' for now. Later on I can always add in extra features, however thruster-steering doesn't add behaviour which isn't included in the original physics engine yet. This way I don't have to add a script which simulates aerodynamics realtime next to the original engine. The banking principle will be thought about. The 'sticking to walls' should be possible with thruster-steering, since your thrusters have to defy gravity anyway when hovering/flying. Only thing is; is your upward thruster as strong as your downward one. If not, its not possible to stick on the ceiling, and second, if you drop topside down on the crater floor, you're like a turtle.. this can of course be upgraded (better engine/thrusters, Cells). To do this however, you still use your thrusters, so it will give of a 'heat signature', so full stealth.. maybe against most radars except the best? These features should however be documented properly inside the game, since several of these features I found out on this forum, which would be worth considering if confronted with it in-game. Your moth could have a 'stealth'-attribute which decides how fast a normal radar picks you up. This could simply be influenced/upgraded by installing hardware (increases weight), giving you more possibilities to customize your moth, complicating some battles. These radars/stealth units can be mounted, but will take up that mounting-spot, so playing with different combinations and positions becomes a must when wanting to get every last bit of use out of your moth. In my engine, moths do already have mounting-spots (internal and external) of which each allows certain (one or more) categories of hardware/software ('weapons', 'cargopod', 'shield', 'software', 'misc', etc). Therefore every moth will only allow certain combinations, depending on its design.. So far for the thrusters.. I'm rambling again A thruster about the size of the small pod would be an interesting exchange. You said thrusters enough for me to think of the NASA thruster design. |
|
|
|
Post by rotary on Aug 29, 2011 5:27:18 GMT -5
Definitely I want to drift with my moth... drift without wheels is a new mental concept to me... really cool! Drifting will in that case only be available for people with the training wheels attached that prevent banking further than 60 degrees ;D PilotDon't worry, you can't leave the craters with these thrusters. Unless I include that and extend the world outs... No, it won't be possible Unless you make a world/map that allows it.. Adding extra 'high'ways for high-powered moths.. But if you don't mind, i'll stick with the simple thrusters first.  |
|
|
|
Post by riedquat on Aug 29, 2011 10:34:48 GMT -5
Definitely I want to drift with my moth... drift without wheels is a new mental concept to me... really cool! Drifting will in that case only be available for people with the training wheels attached that prevent banking further than 60 degrees ;D Put whatever you want to the moth, I will drift it!! ;D Imagining a very bad-ass moth with those wheels attached... ;D |
|
|
|
Post by rotary on Aug 31, 2011 10:00:24 GMT -5
Drifting will in that case only be available for people with the training wheels attached that prevent banking further than 60 degrees ;D Put whatever you want to the moth, I will drift it!! ;D Imagining a very bad-ass moth with those wheels attached... ;D Special for you; there will be a NFSU-like drifting competition. The reward is either a new set of wheels, or a wrecked moth Back on the updates: Currently making hangars-entrances operating (opening/closing, accepting moths, including transfer-procedures, etc). The opening/closing already works. Good news: doors can be made manually, including ways of opening (double sliding, flapping upwards, turning, you name it). Until now, entrances have a standard size, however, different buildings can have different entrances, so customization is possible. I'm imagining a tall building with 10 private hangars (capacity 1 or 2 per hangar), which you buy for a starter. This way you don't buy a building, but a part (includes 1 or several connected hangars) of a building. You can't for example build a factory or have repair-droids in those small hangars (it has no rooms for that). Only store some goods. Idea's enough.. Back to the programming! |
|
|
|
Post by rotary on Sept 20, 2011 7:09:29 GMT -5
Ok, I got a question guys, what you think is the best way?
A building has apartments. Each apartment works individually, so not sharing any goods. You can buy/rent these apartments from the building owner.
Now the question is... Should I make apartments give the ability to have several hangars? This way you can have an apartment with 2 or more internal hangars, where 1 is private for you only, and the second one is public with restricted trade options. (ps. internal hangar is the one you park in. It can have more than 1 entrances).
I could also give apartments only 1 internal hangar maximum, and give different entrances different properties as to who to let in. Like default entry (for everyone), VIP entry (restricted to you), crew entry (restricted to you or your thugs). These entries can then point to their reserved parking spots in the hangar, or use the public ones.
pss. an apartment has rooms (for upgrades like repair-droids, factories, warehouse, etc), not the internal hangar. I'm still thinking about whether there should be communication between apartments in the case of a common owner.. Like 1-way access, only from your private hangar access to all other apartments. Or 2-way, like sharing. Or none at all.. It can for example be nice to buy an extra apartment in the building to expand your ammount rooms, but if apartments don't communicate, it can be a pain transfer goods if factories need eachother, but can't, even when in the same building.
|
|
