Battlezone Universe

I remember a week or so ago, Greenheart told me he was playing around with the new Comm. Vehicle and was having trouble with it when he added a turret with a weapon. I'm curious if a solution was found. I need to know because it will dramatically affect a model I’m about to start on.

I was looking around at command and Sat. Comm. vehicles around the net, and realized something important about them. They are usually a large vehicle that cannot quickly turn, so a turret is usually needed if you expect them to be able to take care of themselves against light to moderate threats. I think that’s why Greenheart was so quick to put a turret on one. So I really need to know if a turret can be used with a weapon on a Comm. vehicle. If not, what’s the problem, and can it be fixed?

The communication vehicle is designed for one purpose and one purpose only, so I'd say no unless they've figured out something.

You do know that it supports a weapon right?

Which is utterly useless when the communication vehicle is deployed. :)

but com buildings(antennamound) support taps right? so you could attatch the turret to that.

It is not a building though, it is a movable object, which cannot have taps. :)

Took me a few days to get my thoughts organized after my trip to NY last week, but after thinking about it I'm pretty sure I remember Greenheart telling me that the Comm. Unit doesn't have to be deployable. I think he said you can make it one way or the other. Im not sure how the vehicle works yet, I haven't had the chance to really play with it yet. I don't remember any vehicle ever being used for a function like this before... so Im not even sure how to imagine how it would work. Im guessing that it would work in the same way as the Sat Comm. worked in BZ1, where you just press a key that takes you into overhead view. Im not sure why deploying would be required for that kind of function, since it isn't related, unless it works like a weapon and the vehicle functions like a turret having to deploy in order to use it.

Im sure I remember Greenheart getting the Comm. Vehicle to shoot weapons fine, without the turret, then it messed up when he added one.

You need to be in the com vehicle, then press your deploy key, you go into the top down view, in which mode you cannot shoot or move.  The purpose is to be like a linkup, not to have some mobile fort which can take down a base while you build your own.  You could be able to do a tesla coil like weapon with an insta hit poper, anything else could look funny (shooting guns backwards).  A scav can shoot weapons too, doesn't mean you should give it chain and vir :-D

I'd never create a mobile fortress... that’s just lame. I do however want it to be able to defend it self with lighter weapons, like a chaingun, but no specials... like the real ones. Units of this type should have a turret because they are usually a slow lumbering unit that isn't meant for fast maneuvers. But don't confuse this with a combat or siege tank. I’m talking about vehicles like the ones below:

http://www.jaguarmodels.com/pics/hf022.jpg

http://www.defense-update.com/images/BradleyCV.jpg

http://www.armyrecognition.com/Asie/Japon/vehicules_legers/Type73/Type73_Command_car/Type_73_3_command_car.jpg

http://www.armyrecognition.com/Asie/Japon/vehicules_legers/Type73/Type73_Command_car/Type_73_2_command_car.jpg

http://www.soldf.com/images/s_piranhaiii_acv_2.jpg

WWII Comm. Vehicles:

http://www.leadwarrior.com/Photos/L35018f1.jpg

http://www.granddadshobbyshop.com/DML6206.JPG

http://www.aviapress.com/engl/est/est35128.jpg

Yeah, all of those are either not comm vehicles or have no top down view ability.  If you want to make somehting that you can get into and use the top down view from anywhere, then use a commvehicle, if you want something that can defend itself, use an ass tank, and if you want something safe with the top down view, put said comvehicle near a number of said ass tanks, or use a bunker in base.

I had assumed that the com vehicle was deploying to a building, If you did it that way, the vehicle could have a turret when mobile and the building a tap mounted turret that just happens to look the same and still function on the building.

Quote from: mrtwosheds on April 08, 2006, 06:26:29 AM
Im sure I remember Greenheart getting the Comm. Vehicle to shoot weapons fine, without the turret, then it messed up when he added one.

The CommVehicle class doesn't have any turret simulation (which only the TurretTank & AssaultTank have).
Which means adding weapons to this unit is completly useless since the unit cannot turn fast enough to use them effectly.  I never said it messed up,but i did say that the turret stuff had no effect on the unit because the game engine simply ignored the turret.

You could put a static field like weapon to kill pilots, or maybe force, or a dumbfire rocket, maybe something good against just buildings, and then there are always popers.

It's a COMM vehicle.

Stop trying to make it an attacker...

Give it shields, or RED, or VIR, or Shields, Red AND Vir...   You can make it such that it's invulnerable when deployed, or undetectable, etc..  Give it a weapon that hides it in a giant rock image  (mine with rock geometry, no collision, limited lifespan)...

Be creative!

I wish Ken had made it such that it was actually 'morphing' when active, so you could add the full cloak that Nathan added...

-Av-

Sorry to disagree Avatar, but I believe that a communications vehicle has too much in common with a Command vehicle and the similar functions they both serve, communicating orders to units and protecting the personel they carry, gives them the need to defend them selves. They also both may or may not be carrying high level personnel, and destroying a command or communications vehicle can damage an army's ability to function effectively, making both vehicles a military target. This means they should at LEAST be able to defend them selves with a machine gun or something similar. You act like I'm putting an SP Stabber on it. Putting a weapon on a unit does not make it an attacker; it just means that you’re smart enough not to go running around without some protection in the middle of a war zone, with or without an escort. Even medics carry side arms and sometimes assault rifles. If we were talking about a utility class vehicle, that would be different, but we're not. We're talking about a vehicle that serves a military based battle related function, carries high level personnel, roams around out in the field, and serves a vital need that allows the coordination and organization of an entire army. Not giving such a vehicle even the smallest ability to defend it self is totally absurd.

Yes, it should be weak enough so that it needs an escort. Yes, it should not be able to repel the attack of a tank by it self. Yes, it should not be able to attack a base by it self. But no, in my opinion it should not be totally defenseless. It should at least be able to kill pilots and defend it self against a lone scout, and suffer a good amount damage as a result.

Don't use real life examples, if this was real life then the "commander" you talk about so much would be far back behind the front lines, more or less invunerable beause he is so out of reach with the battle.  You want it to be effective against scouts, then put a few turrets next to it, or give it a few weaponmines.  The position of the com vehicle doesn't mater in bz2, you can see everywhere with equal clarity regardless of where you are, so why are you putting this vehicle with incredible precious cargo so far out where it can be damaged?  There are plenty of ways to make a weapon which can do what you want, givint the unit a turret to defend itself isn't the only way to make it shoot things anywhere.  Don't demand a feature when you don't need one.  If you can actually give a reason for a turret besides "defending itself" then go ahead, but don't fall back to a reason which can be solved in so many ways so simply.

"Don't use real life examples; if this was real life then the "commander" you talk about so much would be far back behind the front lines, more or less invulnerable because he is so out of reach with the battle."

Well... what am I supposed to use then? Isn't that where a lot of people get their ideas for war vehicles, even if it is in their rawest form, or if its only a small part of an idea for the entire design of a unit or what sparks it? I never said that I wanted it to be EXACTLY like the examples I used. I was using multiple examples, because each had a unique look or feature I liked. Also, there are different styles of play; you should keep this in mind. Not everyone plays the way you do. If they did, the game would be pretty boring. Sometimes I stay behind the lines as a commander, sometimes I don’t. Staying “far back behind the front lines” can get boring, not that I’m talking about right up in the enemy’s face or in plain sight either. That’s why this vehicle is so incredibly useful.

"You want it to be effective against scouts, then put a few turrets next to it, or give it a few weapon mines."

Turrets are useless if you're moving around too much, in which case they become targets themselves, not to mention a waste of time. Scout class units and Sabers are better, since they don't need to be deployed in order to attack. Adding turrets would be like adding another weakness... What if you are using turrets, and retreat in the comm. vehicle from an area under attack and you run into an ambush, or you're attacked while in transport? The turrets are either behind you, where they can't help you, or they are swarming around behind you, unable to help defend you since they arn't deployed. You could deploy them head, at different points like stepping stones, but thats still not a very good defense and is too much effort when you could just use hover units like what I suggested.

"The position of the com vehicle doesn't mater in bz2, you can see everywhere with equal clarity regardless of where you are, so why are you putting this vehicle with incredible precious cargo so far out where it can be damaged?" 

I never said anything about where exactly I would travel in it, you assumed that. I only said "the field". Please don't put words in my mouth. Straying too far away would be stupid with or without an escort would be irresponsible. I never suggested that.

"There are plenty of ways to make a weapon which can do what you want, giving the unit a turret to defend itself isn't the only way to make it shoot things anywhere."

Um… excuse me but duhhh… I know that. I never gave any indication that I didn’t. Hello… the scout? The freakin saber? The Thunderbolt!? I have actually played this game a few times you know (hundreds if not thousands). You must think I’m pretty stupid. :x

"Don't demand a feature when you don't need one. If you can actually give a reason for a turret besides "defending itself" then go ahead, but don't fall back to a reason which can be solved in so many ways so simply.”

Um... "demand"? What the hell are you talking about? AGAIN you're putting words in my mouth. I never asked anyone to include a turret for the comm. vehicle in the next patch, and I certainly didn't demand anything either. I only stated that this type of vehicle should have one. I wasn’t referring to its need to defend it self as a reason for it needing a turret either, I was reinforcing my first post, giving my reasons for wanting to use a turret on a model I’m working on. That reason was as I clearly stated, “Units of this type should have a turret because they are usually a slow lumbering unit that isn't meant for fast maneuvers”. If I had asked for it to be included in the next patch, I would have been very direct and specific in the way I said it. Please don’t just assume I’m saying something, and please don’t put words in my mouth.

It’s ok that a turret doesn’t work on the comm. vehicle. That’s why I started this post, to find out so I knew what direction to go in. Know I know that it can’t use a turret, so the dinky little weapon I wanted will be stationary to the vehicle.

Another thing, I don’t like your attitude Spawn. It’s almost like you just skimmed through all my posts assuming I’m some inexperienced newbie with no idea of anything I'm talking about. Are you trying to piss me off? Keep it up, cause you’re doin a great job! And yes, if you haven’t guessed I am insulted. [sarcasm] I’m sorry we can't all be as smart as you.[/sarcasm]

From now on Spawn, it would be a good idea if you actually read posts before making replies like that.

I'm done with this. It's pissing me off and you guys need a freakin chill pill.

Ok, evereyone stop for a minute.

General Hoohah: Cool down for a minute.

Spawn, Avatar: The point is, he quite obviously wants his vehicle to have weapons.  I'm pretty sure he heard both of you, but I don't think he wants a defenceless vehicle relying on an entourage.

I got the gist of it, but was just suggesting "thinking outside the box" since there's no way for US to add a working turret to this class.  It's almost unfortunate that Ken chose the Assault Tank for this class instead of a Scavenger, since the turret just gave rise to thinking along these lines.

Basically it made people think "It's got a turret with a big honking gun on it, it should be able to use it!" 

Um, well, nope.  Not in BZ2 land.  It's got what Ken gave it, now it's up to us to make it work for whatever you want it to work for.  That's the challenge in modding BZ2...   :)

I'll dare another suggestion, then, if a gun is imperative:  Make the turret generically symmetrical and give it an Arc style weapon that'll jump to the nearest attacker regardless of which way it's pointed.  The arc effect could be replaced with something that looks more like machine gun fire, like a sortof flak cannon, and only the physical appearance would have to be generic (looking the same from all directions to hide the fact that it's firing up and 'arcing' to the enemy).  The arc delay could be next to nothing, so nobody would ever see it 'snap to' the enemy.

It wouldn't be a true turret, but since there's no actual turret in that class, just an unfortunate choice of geometry, it might be close enough...

Honestly, I'm trying to help, not piss off...  it's necessary in modding BZ2 to have a firm grasp of what's available for each class, and this one just doesn't have a real turret...

-Av-

It is defined as a utility vehicle though. :)

Yeah, well, Ken could have made it slither like a snake if he'd wanted to, but he set up the class as was specifically requested for some mod so it is what he made it...

Personally I'd have rather seen it retain Assault Tank capabilities as now it's pretty useless in the hands of the AI.  No reason to make it brain dead just to add comm access.

-Av-

I kinda suspected that it was actually impossible, just based on the fact you said it was.  However the comflict seemed to be approaching from a design persepective, rather than a techinal one.

Overmind just explained to me that the concept of the comm. vehicle is supposed to be like that of an awac... but an awac is an aircraft unit... Is that where you guys stand? This is supposed to be a tracked vehicle class.... I've never heard of a tracked command vehicle that didn't have at least SOME form of self defense, even if it's just an anti-infantry mg., or even a few soldiers who could clime out with some assault rifles if some enemy infantry attacked it and climb back in when the coast is clear. (which really doesn't apply to BZ2 since about 95% of the tactics in this game usually involve non-infantry units) The reason there isn't as much pressure for self defense in the design of the awac is that it spends most of its time up in the sky, far above ground based threats, not to mention that an awac is used for the detection of air threats… not ground threats. This is like basing the concept of a new genetically designed orange on a banana. There's no way anyone is going to convince me that this makes any rational sense, even when applied to this game. If you want a stationary bunker, just go out and build one for gawd sake. There’s not that much of a freakin difference. What’s wrong with a mobile sat. comm. vehicle that works on the same concept of… oh I don’t know… the ones that are used all over the world?!

I did the rational thing when confronted with the phrase “comm. vehicle”. I looked around the internet, did some research, and found a bunch of different vehicles around the world, used for military communication through satellite uplink and radio. I found a lot of APC like units, trucks, car-shaped armor plated vehicles, mini tanks, and some Hummers, either outfitted with the proper equipment, or designed for this specific task. I found that today, they don't use big whopping satellite dishes anymore or big lumbering units with all kinds of gear all over them like in they did years ago. Instead, they just attach a newer device that looks like a small dome that is installed on the top of any vehicle. To be honest, a big lumbering unit that has to park, then be transformed into a stationary sat. comm. unit... is pretty obsolete. Today, they just attach this little device to any vehicle they want. It doesn't look much more complicated than installing radio equipment. This type of vehicle usually travels with armored units surrounding it for protection, and stays back far enough away from the action to avoid fire, but close enough to observe what’s going on.

Stop insisting that your version of reality be inflicted on BZ2. It will only be painful for you.

-- GSH

This is a game.  And I specifically stated "tracked awacs"(sp?).  I have a few other strat games where the main comm unit is tracked and has no weapons, so it is not uncommon.

Okay, I think I understand what the problem is here. You don't know what I want.

Simple. :) I want to understand. I want to understand how this increases the fun of game play for the gamer (not someone with modding experience), in a way that either solves a problem or adds a needed element, solves more problems than it creates, and appeals to broad styles of play, not just how a few people think the game should be played. That’s what I'm thinking of when I'm working on this mod, not just how I think it should be played. I think of how I can make the game more fun and enjoyable, and how to immerse people deeper into the game. When the mod is released, I want to enjoy watching people having fun, and enjoying themselves. I’m not here for the selfish reason of arguing everyone into the grave, desperately holding on to an opinion that no one understands.

But nevermind, I think I figured something out. :)

Understand Ken? Or why he does what he does?

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Code Elves are not to be understood.  They are to be appreciated at times, and guarded against at other times.

They bring joy and pain.  Light and dark.  Understanding and confusion.

They don't always bring reality...

The Commvehicle unit was created in response to a request by a modder, for a specific mod.  If it doesn't fit what you want in a Comm vehicle then ask for what YOU want...  and try to realize things are near an end and many such requests won't be granted.

-Av-