|
|
Post by Kyzrati on Nov 18, 2012 11:17:55 GMT -5
For some reason I didn't think X@COM gave you any indication when your guys returned to your command, and now I realised that it does I don't think it really matters. It does? That's news to me. Obviously you'll then be able to control the entity again, but there's no message or anything like that. Sorcerers have identical races.xt entries to humans except for their anatomy but they cannot kneel, while humans can (I've made some minor edits to human entry so I had to check if I had broken kneeling). It's irrelevant for me since I'm not giving out any mind control, and any player controlled magics will be via special abilities rather than natural weapons You are absolutely correct. This is a case of me not knowing what the hell I'm talking about. I haven't messed with kneeling before, and just discovered I HARD-CODED it to only work for the race named "Human"... There's a little note next to it saying I need to fix that. I need to fix that  Apparently I did that as a quick hack to keep tanks from kneeling in the original demo. I'll change it so that a kneeling height of 0 prevents kneeling, and anyone else can kneel. (Shoulda done it before, but I was trying to preserve X-COM data, which for some reason has unique kneeling heights for all units, even tanks--really kinda pointless.) The placeholder AI does not use knowledge of enemies outside FOV (though their faction does have it). GUARD, even with melee, should work fine though. Not sure what you're referring to here.  I suspect it might be because it was two tile or something but I was able to sit there and end turn over and over without it doing anything. And it was definitely hostile and capable of attacking, moving 1 tile forward and ending the turn resulted in death. Hm, strange. There are quite a few factors that could be involved there. I just spent about 10 minutes trying to guess through this and couldn't come up with anything obvious. If you can repeat it reliably and send me a test map, I'll look at what the AI is doing, though I don't think its size is the problem. You didn't teleport there in debug mode, did you? The RMB teleport doesn't properly update the map data until you move the entity, so an entity won't see another until it moves in that case. (Debug mode has several oddities like this; I'll be replacing a lot of the functionality later and making it much more useful, as it's just a bunch of hacks I included last year to push the first version.) |
|
|
|
Post by strangeguy on Nov 18, 2012 11:55:58 GMT -5
It does? That's news to me. Obviously you'll then be able to control the entity again, but there's no message or anything like that.  Looks like a message to me, and isn't something I did myself. Hm, strange. There are quite a few factors that could be involved there. I just spent about 10 minutes trying to guess through this and couldn't come up with anything obvious. If you can repeat it reliably and send me a test map, I'll look at what the AI is doing, though I don't think its size is the problem. You didn't teleport there in debug mode, did you? The RMB teleport doesn't properly update the map data until you move the entity, so an entity won't see another until it moves in that case. (Debug mode has several oddities like this; I'll be replacing a lot of the functionality later and making it much more useful, as it's just a bunch of hacks I included last year to push the first version.) I haven't even been using the debug (probably should have though). [POS] spawning for 2x2 gives them a slightly random placement, it seems to randomise what part of them goes on that specific tile (if you do want to precisely place a 2x2- or bigger- could you do it with a cube their size or is it not possible?) so I've been able so see what happens if you are one tile further away instead of closer. Still get attacked. Not perfectly reliable at 3 tiles either, but it often works. |
|
|
|
Post by Kyzrati on Nov 18, 2012 12:13:10 GMT -5
It does? That's news to me. Obviously you'll then be able to control the entity again, but there's no message or anything like that. Looks like a message to me, and isn't something I did myself. As you can see, I have a horrible memory (not a good combination with the vast amount of code and data I'm working with here, but I combat it the best I can with copious documentation). I remember specifically not wanting to add that message, but it's somewhat important, so it got thrown in to combat.xt as an exception to the system. Normally special abilities should control their own messages. Hm, strange. There are quite a few factors that could be involved there. I just spent about 10 minutes trying to guess through this and couldn't come up with anything obvious. If you can repeat it reliably and send me a test map, I'll look at what the AI is doing, though I don't think its size is the problem. You didn't teleport there in debug mode, did you? The RMB teleport doesn't properly update the map data until you move the entity, so an entity won't see another until it moves in that case. (Debug mode has several oddities like this; I'll be replacing a lot of the functionality later and making it much more useful, as it's just a bunch of hacks I included last year to push the first version.) I haven't even been using the debug (probably should have though). [POS] spawning for 2x2 gives them a slightly random placement, it seems to randomise what part of them goes on that specific tile (if you do want to precisely place a 2x2- or bigger- could you do it with a cube their size or is it not possible?) You've found a bug there. I never tried to place a 2x2 explicitly that way, so I didn't realize that when an area is rotated, while it rotates unit facings, it doesn't move large entities properly. I think you'll notice that as long as an area isn't rotated, large units will always appear with their upper left corner at the [POS] you specify. When an area rotates, it actually needs to shift the reference position for large units. I'll fix that for 8.3. |
|
|
|
Post by strangeguy on Nov 18, 2012 18:26:56 GMT -5
New issue. I get this
whenever trying to spawn anyone on a roof. I really didn't think there would be an issue there so thought maybe it was something with roof tiles, but changing it to floor doesn't help. I can just start them at the roof access and let [WANDER] get them on the roof, but it seems a weird limitation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kyzrati on Nov 18, 2012 19:34:10 GMT -5
Great job, you found another bug! Damn.
Miscoded the vertical offset for support checks on spawning, so it's always checking the cell *above* the target (which for roofs will be empty and have no support). With that mistake, I'm not quite sure how spawning works anywhere without a roof above it at all...
Fixed for R8.3, but you'll have to use the [WANDER] method until then.
|
|
|
|
Post by 10101 on Dec 4, 2012 14:27:04 GMT -5
I made a small 1X1 Magetower for Aggression just for the fun of it. The Firemage in there throws classical Fireballs (Projectile = AC-IN, Explosion = Molotov). It works nice and he sometimes shoots those orcs out of the Windows. But if I get upstairs he seems to get paniced and trying to kill the intruder he sets the whole tower on flame.
So the Question rises: Is there any possibility for alternate Firemodes on weapons?
Think of M16 with mounted grenadelauncher. (Or a 'Wand of Fire' shooting Fireballs and Firebolts.)
I Think i could split the Wand into two wands, but would he choose wich one is better?
(aka Fireballs out of the window, Firebolts downstairs as there are too much obstacles for using explosives)
Oh, that's another thing: Are there actually STAIRS? I can't find anything in the props.xt (What we use immo are rather the UFO-Lifts. And i think there is already something that somehow can be used as hill-slope(?) )
PS: Oh er.. Hi everyone -.-
And: should i have posted the first question in the 'items.xt'- and the last one in the 'props.xt'-Thread?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kyzrati on Dec 4, 2012 21:10:47 GMT -5
Hi 10101, and welcome! But if I get upstairs he seems to get paniced and trying to kill the intruder he sets the whole tower on flame. Had me laughing there. So the Question rises: Is there any possibility for alternate Firemodes on weapons? Think of M16 with mounted grenadelauncher. (Or a 'Wand of Fire' shooting Fireballs and Firebolts.) I Think i could split the Wand into two wands, but would he choose wich one is better? (aka Fireballs out of the window, Firebolts downstairs as there are too much obstacles for using explosives) Right now the AI will just randomly choose from whatever weapons it has equipped, and a random fire mode, without consideration for which is "better." So they'll have a chance to use everything you give them. If you tried that he still might shoot a fireball at the tower. (I was thinking you could separate it into two weapons and put a minimum range on the fireball attack under which attacks are not possible, but I haven't added that feature to items yet, only special ability attacks.) I don't see any way to avoid this besides perhaps a bit of a hack which could achieve the same result: Split it into two weapons, and put an ammo limit on the fireball so he'd fire only a few when first seeing enemies, which are more likely to be further away, then he'll be out of ammo and rely on the remaining weapon when they're close. I think it's kinda funny that when you get close he burns down his own tower though  For alternate fire modes the special ability system is the most flexible option, since you can make items that have all kinds of different attacks outside the normal S/B/A system. You could use that to give the M16 a grenade launcher, for example. I imagine the future AI should be able to use at least some manual special abilities, but for now only the player can do that. Oh, that's another thing: Are there actually STAIRS? I can't find anything in the props.xt (What we use immo are rather the UFO-Lifts. And i think there is already something that somehow can be used as hill-slope(?) ) Stairs are actually cells, rather than props. Check cells.xt. It's true the look more like they work as lifts, since they go strait up/down, but that's partially because it makes their interface work a little more intuitively given the map appearance/interface, and to fit stairs in a reasonably small area. Slopes are also cells with a certain setting, but generally for creating sloped ground in exterior areas, not stairs (I suppose you could try that, and it actually sounds like a neat idea, but it would take up more space and may not look as intuitive--not sure). I haven't been using slopes much myself yet, but you'll be seeing lots more of them in the next mod I put out. Currently there are some example uses in the sandbox map. PS: Oh er.. Hi everyone -.- And: should i have posted the first question in the 'items.xt'- and the last one in the 'props.xt'-Thread? Well, it's better if you split up questions that are targeted at specific topics so that others can reference them based on the topic. The forum then becomes kind of like a makeshift "manual" of sorts before I write the actual manual that explains all these files (once the formats are complete). As a bunch of random questions, and your first post, it's cool ;p |
|
|
|
Post by 10101 on Dec 5, 2012 2:06:17 GMT -5
cells.xt ... argh, i didn't even notice that file, yet.
Ok, i'll move those points to the proper threads.
But about that mage burning down his Tower:
That might not be such a problem if that Tower would be more.. spaciously. But a bigger Tower would only feel like a Tower if id was taller. Need a map with [CUBE](0,0,0)(9,9,9) ><. Don't know why, but now i have to think at XCom:Apocalypse.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kyzrati on Dec 5, 2012 4:06:23 GMT -5
True, more height would definitely be appropriate for some maps, which is why the game does support arbitrary map depth. I was imagining doing a giant, tall Apocalypse style map myself one day. Currently mods only support a height of 4 levels, since that's what Cataclysm uses, though you can see in Exodus (z=6) that the engine does do more levels. I'll look into enabling greater depth for mods, but I don't think it'll make it in until I do the actual map system later. For now you'll have to limit your towers to 4 levels  |
|
|
|
Post by 10101 on Dec 28, 2012 11:25:28 GMT -5
Don't know where to put it. (scenario.xt, entity.xt or cataclysm)
If i rescue familymembers through EVAC_A they seem to count as killed and it looks like if they are in EVAC_B when you end game there they count as rescued. (Not sure about the last one, but definitly about the first)
|
|
|
|
Post by Kyzrati on Dec 28, 2012 11:50:51 GMT -5
Ah, this thread is fine for something general like this. (It's a bit vague.)
Thanks for pointing this out. I'll have to look into it, since you may be right. I did mess with how that system worked in order to make it moddable, so maybe I screwed it up. I never go for EVAC_A anyway, so I wouldn't have encountered it before ;p I'll check it out before releasing the next version.
|
|
|
|
Post by 10101 on Dec 29, 2012 3:28:58 GMT -5
Is it possible that dying to fire or critical wounds doesn't trigger missionscore? At the end of this log there are the rows where the Knight takes fire and dies to critical wounds but the mission didn't score any heros. (no Tavern by the way, so he would have been the only one) Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by Kyzrati on Dec 29, 2012 4:03:43 GMT -5
Wow, good catch, at least from what I see in your file that's exactly what's happening. Then of course I look in the source and see absolutely no sign of that being the case... It should be working normally (score counted on crit/fire deaths), so there's perhaps something else at work? In any case, every single line of the current score system will be erased a few versions from now, so I have to say since it's not easy to spot I'm going to let this one go. Really it SHOULD be working, but apparently isn't in all cases... Pretend you got more points for now ;p Note: You guys may notice I say that a lot, that something was "a quick hack, to be replaced later," but the code isn't quite as hackish as the frequency of these comments might suggest. It's just that to have a working playable game I need some filler systems while I do the serious work on other areas. Once those are done I'll be back to refactoring any of the temporary stuff and we can finally have a solid complete game (well, battlescape at least--then to start the process over with the geoscape). |
|
|
|
Post by strangeguy on Dec 30, 2012 12:56:29 GMT -5
Does the DYNAMIC_KILLED scoring only work with aliens? I wanted to give scoring for killing a third faction (using GANG faction for them) but it isn't showing up in the score from my tests. DYNAMIC_DEATH seems to work for both civilians and XCOM so perhaps isn't faction limited, but I don't really want to reward the player in the likely event of the gang members dying to the main hostile faction.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kyzrati on Dec 30, 2012 13:03:36 GMT -5
Sheesh, is everything about scoring broken? ;p
No, it should work with anyone. It's really an incredibly simple check in the source, so it's odd that things aren't working normally. I haven't messed with that since I put it in back in, specifically for modding purposes--I didn't actually use it myself, just converted the original internally-implemented Cataclysm stuff. I wonder if I somehow broke it in the process?
I'll get back to you on this soon, because one of the remaining things I have to do for my own mod is scoring--haven't touched it yet, so I'm not really sure.
|
|
Apparently I did that as a quick hack to keep tanks from kneeling in the original demo. I'll change it so that a kneeling height of 0 prevents kneeling, and anyone else can kneel. (Shoulda done it before, but I was trying to preserve X-COM data, which for some reason has unique kneeling heights for all units, even tanks--really kinda pointless.)
