I'm about a year and three months late I think on noticing that a 1.3 public beta patch came out, so I thought I might like to ask about a few things:
New Bugs:
---
1. SP Campaign AI is really really hard, compared to 1.0 - 1.2!
2. Able to build everything in SP campaign from the beginning!
3. When in Relay Bunker, sometimes I can't target things on the ground properly; makes things hard for me to do base-building via RTS style.
4. My controlled AI sometimes have trouble hitting things (read: suck).
5. In SP campaigns, if too many units are built the game has a chance of freezing/crashing the system (lots of HDD activity).
Existing Bugs:
---
1. For vehicles such as Warriors and the like, if they're angled in a way I can see through the vehicle (and objects in the distance seen through the vehicle are messed up). (Geforce FX 5200)
2. If I'm in a Relay Bunker and an empty tank accidentally hits me while I'm logged in, I get automatically logged out and sent into the tank.
3. Sometimes in Sniper mode, some targets do not show the red/green blip. As a result, targets become invulnerable to getting pilot sniped (read: tested against turrets).
Suggestions:
---
1. Should be able to queue actions for all units, by using the Shift key. Also to note, holding Shift when selecting the unit(s) will show their queue path.
2. Scavengers should have an auto-scavenge option, and should scavenge automatically when part of the resource bar is not full.
3. Green bar should be able to regenerate on its own, though being really slow compared to yellow and green; maybe this exists for MPI maps, but it doesn't for defaults.
4. Should be able to configure Recycler, Factory, etc. from the Relay Bunker.
5. Split resource bar into several bars, one for the Recycler and others for Extractors. Whenever Scavengers get scrap, it gets added to the bars in this priority: green, yellow, red. Also, on this note, if scrap is used for construction, it's used from the bars in this priority: red, yellow, green. If this will affect BZ2's gameplay too much, forget it.
6. Update GFX engine (really hard, leave this as the very last thing) for hardware T&L, etc.
If any of this was covered in previous threads, please let me know. Thanks!
P.S. This was all tested on a Windows XP SP2 system.
Some of those are not bugs in the least, like existing:number 2, yea, that is supposed to happen, what else happens when an empty ship hits you, and how would an empty ship hit you *inside* the bunker? Number 3 in existing, well duh, turrets cannot be sniped when deployed. 1 in existing, that is just because you clipped a unit, can happen in any game.
(Also note, I havn't played 1.3pb1 in a *very* long time so most of these will be relating to the recent)
In new bugs: 1) Uh, how? Seems identical to me, sans the fact that bored units in an AI base are sent to you on occasion, still quite easy.
2) Er, can't comment, didn't notice.
3) The game isn't made to be played that way, ergo it is not perfect, but I do not recall having issues selecting things.
4) They seem pretty accurate to me, more so then in 1.2.
5) Never heard of such a thing, is your system under-powered. Sounds like that is what happens when you have a too-low psu. Also, when does it access the hard drive when it creates new units, mine stays quite unused except when loading, perhaps you have very little ram, I have 1 gig.
In the suggestions: 1) You truly have no clue how difficult something like that is to impliment, notta chance.
2) Don't they already? They do for me.
3) That is configurable in odf, and that is the way that unit is designed.
4) Why? And again no. The point of having to go into the building to do it is part of the strategy in forcing you to think about your actions, go play Starcraft if you want the normal god-view game, if you are always in your relay bunker, then you aren't fighting, and humans are by *far* more effective then AI.
5) Why on earth would you want that? They fill up from the fastest to the slowest, any other way and you'd be waiting forever, and it is a combined tank, not individual, so how could it pick and choose to add things if it all goes into one thing?
6) This is absolutely halarious, as if GSH could whip up a new graphics engine soon, something that a team of ten programmers spends two years to make. The way it is designed is for DX6, changing the graphics to use DX7+ is not possible without redesigning it near from scratch. Think about what you say before you say it...
QuoteNumber 3 in existing, well duh, turrets cannot be sniped when deployed.
They can. I've done it many many times back in 1.0 - 1.2, and all the turrets were snipeable 99% of the time.
Quote1) Uh, how? Seems identical to me, sans the fact that bored units in an AI base are sent to you on occasion, still quite easy.
Because they have access to units they're not supposed to have early in the game. (#2)
Quote4) They seem pretty accurate to me, more so then in 1.2.
Only if they're SP enemy AI, or multiplayer configured AI set at one of the higher settings. Friendly SP AI don't know what they're doing. :(
Quote2) Don't they already? They do for me.
They don't. They just stay still and get themselves blown to bits. I have to tell them to Scavenge every five minutes to get them to do anything.
In regards to #4 and #5, I was not expecting them to be taken seriously, as they were very RTS-biased *suggestions*, not *demands*. And as for #6, I'm damn well aware of how hard and difficult it is, which is why I said to leave it to the backburner.
QuoteThink about what you say before you say it...
I already have. Don't get all hostile there...
If I knew people were going to be this bitter and brutal around these forums towards my suggestions, I would have PMed GSH myself instead of checking on the report with the lot of you.
QuoteThey can. I've done it many many times back in 1.0 - 1.2, and all the turrets were snipeable 99% of the time
Why would you want turrents to be snipeable when they are deployed?
How about if you had some turrents guarding a pool, and i came along and sniped them, and took your pool. Wouldnt you be thinking, well why did i suggest the turrents to be snipeable?
QuoteThey don't. They just stay still and get themselves blown to bits. I have to tell them to Scavenge every five minutes to get them to do anything.
They do for me also..
The only thing i hate about 1.3 PB1 is the stupid auto adjust graphics. At leaste enable a function that will allow you to turn the auto-adjust graphics. Althouggh with the auto adjust it does improve preformance. But I record parts of the game, i dont want the terrain to look like crap... If it wasnt auto-adjust I would turn a few graphics off it they were lagging up my game.
squirrel-Cmd: Hmm. I'll have to look at the Scavenger thing I think... and I know about the turrets being snipeable thing, but I'm able to do it in 1.3 90-99% of the time. I'm serious.
OvermindDL1: In regards to your rebuttal to suggestion #1: If it were so hard to implement, why is it that I can also queue up construction of tanks? (e.g., set the Factory to build like say, 10 Sabre Tanks)
Turrents are snipeable in 1.3 when the turrent is not deployed..
However, They are not snipable when they are deployed
Though, in some of the SP missions they are snipeable. I noticed it on that sea battle map mission thingy...
In multi I know for sure you cant snipe them when they are deployed..
Oh. Guess I'll have to check on that then...
See, heres the turrent snipeable in that Sea Battle
[attachment deleted by admin]
Only SP Campaign turrets are snipable, IA and MP turrets are only snipable when they aren't deployed. Heavy units (Treaded/Walking) are NOT snipable, period. :-D
As for the scavengers sitting around doing nothing, they only do that if there is no scrap around or if there is absolutely no room for any more scrap. If there is scrap around, and you do have room for more, then they are probably 'thinking' about where they should go next. You can just push "Scavenge" again to give them a swift kick in the head and get them moving again. (Or do what I do and hop in a Mauler and bite them in the ass....)
I don't think Overmind was trying to upset you, relax.
Quote from: velocity7 on December 31, 2005, 06:17:15 PM
OvermindDL1: In regards to your rebuttal to suggestion #1: If it were so hard to implement, why is it that I can also queue up construction of tanks? (e.g., set the Factory to build like say, 10 Sabre Tanks)
I am not Overmind, but I will answer it anyway.
Making a queue of one kind of unit is much easier, you just have to keep a count of the number to be built and remember what you are building.
Allowing you to select multiple kinds of units is considerably harder due to the fact you have to keep multiple counts and multiple types, in addition to the order of the types and the counts associated with them. Changing the code to allow that would be MUCH harder.
Not really. If you consider Java coding (though not the same, it is similar to C/C++ in many ways in terms of object-oriented programming), you can have a List (ArrayList?) of Objects, maybe call them ActionObjects, and its property is simply the action to take. When you tell something to perform an action, in BZ2 by default it will just follow that order (and in a Factory's case, repeat the order a number of times). If that's all that's really happening, it's just a matter of rewriting a little piece of code here and there to get such a system working.
That may be true, but I get the feeling the build code is two variables. One is what is being built, the other is how many times it is supposed to be built. Converting that to a LIST of things to build is a lot harder then you make it out to be. Not only do you have to change the build code, but the interface code to allow a second item to be selected and to show the various items being built, including more F slots, as well as adding a way to display the order they are going to be built in.
Lets add to the complication. Say you want to build 3 turrets and 2 scouts. Then you change your mind, and either want to build 4 turrets or no scouts at all. How do you cancel JUST the scouts, or add something BEFORE them, without canceling EVERYTHING?
What you want is much more work then it will EVER be worth.
Or maybe the problem is more like something like that would be left to a BZ3. I'm thinking clickable interface in that regard (e.g., Total Annihilation queuing).
Go download the Freespace 2 source, look through it, it is probobly quite similier to the BZ2 source. That is not java, it is nothing like java, you can't program a fast game in java, and yes, I hate java, too many bad experiences...
Quote from: OvermindDL1 on January 01, 2006, 04:52:09 AM
Go download the Freespace 2 source, look through it, it is probobly quite similier to the BZ2 source. That is not java, it is nothing like java, you can't program a fast game in java, and yes, I hate java, too many bad experiences...
what do you mean by fast game OM ?
I'm playing a game called Chrome at the moment which was written in java and I must say I'm really impressed with it.
With regard to autoadjust graphics, I understand some of the complaints about this, but as someone who likes to keep a long MPI game going, I can also see the advantage of making sure that people in my game aren't pulling the game into a situation where the lag will kill it. Autoadjust only affects multiplayer, unless you configure it to also work in single player. You also can tweak all the settings so that it has less impact on your game, or at least affects the settings more in a manner that you would like, through the configuration file. I guess I'm just saying that while it does mean giving up control over something that I'm use to being able to manage completely myself, I've found it is something that I can live with and even appreciate at times.
Chrome was not programmed in java, Chrome had the game logic programmed in java, just like Unreal has its logic programmed in UScript (that is slower then java). Java is completely incapable of performing engine level calculations and still have it be quick.
I would love a framerate auto-adjust, would be wonderful. I'd set it to 100, if you drop below that, set your auto-adjust better or get a better comp. I rarely drop below 300, so should you'll. :P
I was kidding about the 100 if you cannot tell, not kidding about my average framerate though, that is at high quality, at low I can exceed a thousand.
Quote from: OvermindDL1 on January 01, 2006, 01:43:57 PM
Chrome was not programmed in java, Chrome had the game logic programmed in java, just like Unreal has its logic programmed in UScript (that is slower then java). Java is completely incapable of performing engine level calculations and still have it be quick.
ah that makes sense, I saw on the Chrome site that the team had won some java award and I assumed the entire game had been written in java.
Factory/Recycler build queues are an actual list, not a config & count. It's the UI that's the main issues behind firing off a lot of builds. And please don't ask to make this game like TA.
-- GSH
Alright, if that's what you wish. Don't take it too hard. :)
velocity, this game is also action. if you want a stratergy game go play starcraft, warcraft, red alert or w/e...
from reading your post all it seems your doing is sitting in the bunker almost all game and doing nothing that invovles action...
and if thats the case I realy cant understand why you chose to play this game over stratergy games