I’ve decided to start a new topic, since the last one didn’t go so well, to avoid confusion and attract the right posters.
Tracked vehicles have some serious problems with their driving physics. Go drive a scavenger for a while through a complex base, or on a map with lots of sharp turns, cliffs, and water hazards. They are nearly impossible to control.
These problems extend to other tracked vehicles, since they all use the same physics values. This severely limits what you can do with them, and makes them aggravating to drive. It also causes scavengers and other tracked units to disrupt games by plowing into objects and vehicles, getting stuck, falling off cliffs, and falling into water. Here are the problems I have been experimenting with for a while:
1. Doesn't stop fast enough, drifts for too long after you take away your finger from the throttle button/key. This can’t be fixed with the values in the current public beta, because there is no equivalent value to the hover class value, “accelDragStopâ€, which controls how quick the a hover vehicle stops when you take you’re hands away from the controls.
2. While continuing in a forward or reverse motion, a tracked vehicle takes to long to stop turning after you take you're finger off the turn key. This causes a scav to go in circles with speeds over 20-25, depending on other values.
3. Rocks forward and back too much when accelerating, decelerating, and stopping. The equivalent value to the hover class value, “pitchThrustâ€, has been added but doesn’t appear to work.
4. While driving in a forward or reverse motion and turning, there is almost no traction, and it slides around too much like you’re driving on ice. The newer values recently added, don’t seem to have much effect at all on this problem.
5. While sliding in the middle of a turn as mentioned in 4, the unit catches or snags on terrain, and hops sideways. It should only do this if it is sliding over a jump, or over the side of a ledge. However, the vehicle seems to do this constantly.
6. Leans too much while turning. The equivalent value to the hover class value, “rollSteerâ€, has been added but doesn’t appear to work.
7. Unit appears to weigh nothing, and feels like driving a balloon filled with helium. I’m uncertain if this is effecting the traction or not, or if it has to do with it hopping over places where it gets snagged on terrain while sliding around while turning. If you drive off a cliff, it floats slowly down to the ground, like a feather. A vehicle weighing over 50 tons shouldn't do this. The new "Mass" value added recently does not work.
The falling off a cliff part cannot be fixed in bz2, and has always been there. The best theory relating to this is Avatar's idea that biometal has a certain amount of anti-gravitational force, but once the mass gets too high the ships can no longer stay in the air and need to be supported on the ground, the first example of this being the bz1 walkers and their reaction to thumper. A few of the issues might be fixable via increasing the friction to something (absurdly) high.
Also, which physics constants have you tested and at what values?
People are whining already that scav "pathing" is broken, which I highly doubt is the cause, but is more likely physics changes making things different from 1.2. Any changes to your laundry list would probably cause more subtle bugs elsewhere, and ramp up the whines to jet engine level.
-- GSH
It is a problem with the fly code, but in Avatar's theory it works out. Kind of a bug turned feature, just like bz2 falling.
The reason they go off cliffs is because they can't stop or turn in time before they reach the edge. They plow into gun towers and other objects because of the same reason, because they can't turn or stop in time to avoid stationary objects or react in time to moving hazards that cross their path. I made a complex base with lots of obstacles for a scavenger, then placed a piece of bio metal on one side of the base and a scav on the other and ordered it to get the scrap. First it tried to go around the Recycler, but it couldn't turn it time so it got caught on a corner. It had to stop, and try to go around, but I had to get it unstuck first. Then it headed right toward a gun tower and then tried to go around it, but again it couldn't turn in time, so it tried to stop. But of course, it couldn't stop in time, so it rammed right into it and got stuck for several minutes until I finally helped it.
I've also seen them try to turn to avoid water, but since they can't turn, they end up driving through a shallow area. They have to stop in the water, then turn to get out, since they can't turn while in motion. And why don't they stop before they hit the water? Because they can't!
Tracked vehicles have some serious problems. I've sat here and watched them do stuff like this countless times, so I doubt its the pathing or any of that other stuff.
Fixing these problems shouldn't cause people to whine.... Why would someone whine if scavengers aren't getting stuck, driving off cliffs and into water, plowing through units you just organized into an attack formation, or ramming into commanders while their trying to tell their constructor where to build?
Lol I definitely could go for some ragdoll physics in BZII.
Pilot ejects from sabre, lands on mountain side, and tumbles all the way down, into an extractor, and gets chopped up in the spinning blades.
Quote from: General_Hoohah on June 24, 2006, 07:09:31 PM
The reason they go off cliffs is because they can't stop or turn in time before they reach the edge. They plow into gun towers and other objects because of the same reason, because they can't turn or stop in time to avoid stationary objects or react in time to moving hazards that cross their path. I made a complex base with lots of obstacles for a scavenger, then placed a piece of bio metal on one side of the base and a scav on the other and ordered it to get the scrap. First it tried to go around the Recycler, but it couldn't turn it time so it got caught on a corner. It had to stop, and try to go around, but I had to get it unstuck first. Then it headed right toward a gun tower and then tried to go around it, but again it couldn't turn in time, so it tried to stop. But of course, it couldn't stop in time, so it rammed right into it and got stuck for several minutes until I finally helped it.
I've also seen them try to turn to avoid water, but since they can't turn, they end up driving through a shallow area. They have to stop in the water, then turn to get out, since they can't turn while in motion. And why don't they stop before they hit the water? Because they can't!
Tracked vehicles have some serious problems. I've sat here and watched them do stuff like this countless times, so I doubt its the pathing or any of that other stuff.
Fixing these problems shouldn't cause people to whine.... Why would someone whine if scavengers aren't getting stuck, driving off cliffs and into water, plowing through units you just organized into an attack formation, or ramming into commanders while their trying to tell their constructor where to build?
I think you're talking about performance of AI driven units? They've never been all that bright at maneuvering, and tracked units just show off their stupidity more since they're restricted in moving certain ways.
I've had a lot of success tweaking alphaSteer for AI craft, it helps them respond in time when coupled with good brakes and enough acceleration thrust.
-Av-
What you say is true Avatar. However, there lies the problem. There are no breaks! Also, they can't stop turning while in motion, even though they are trying to or. Sit in a scav and go forward, then turn hard. Take your finger off the turn key and see what I mean. The problem gets worse and worse as you add speed. Also as you add speed, it starts to slide more and more while turning, like you're driving on ice.
bz tracked vehicles cannot handle speed at all, it is best to make them slow, very slow, big helps too, small and fast means they will behave like service trucks.......Its the low gravity...... :-D
The fact that they can't handle any speed is exactly one of the problems. Kind of stating the obvious, but a very good point none the less. :) The mass value really needs to be fixed, and who knows? That may actually fix a lot of things like sliding around, floating through the air after a jump, and maybe increase traction.
This actually remindes me of something I forgot to mention. I noticed that when a scav slides around while turning, while driving forward, the outer most tracks (wheels) in relation to which direction you're turning seem to sink slightly farther and farther as you continue to turn, until they catch on the terrain. I think this is why they do that. I don't know why, but I think this is a bug.
Mass does not affect physics. Never has. Never will. It only affects collisions and possibly bumps due to explosions.
You can state the "obvious" all day: BZ2's physics aren't perfect. However, they never will be. And especially because lots of people whined like crazy the last time some physics fixes were implemented, I'd rather not bother.
-- GSH
Did they even give you a chance, or did they just bitch, gripe, and complain before you got anywhere with it? If they never gave you a chance in the first place, then tell them where they can stick it and fix it anyway. That's what I'd do. And I wouldn't listen to any of their griping until I had actually gotten somewhere with it. I won't bitch at you GSH. I'd even stick it out and work with you and take some of the flack for it, and I'm sure a lot of other people would to. Go on, give it a try. I'm behind you. I'd love to put in the time, and work to assist in any way I can help with the physics. :)
*Signs*
Non-Bitcher # 2
Two people versus a cabal of people organized by certain types who want everything identical. Not too appealing.
Go mess with ODF parameters yourself. Especially those with things like friction in the name.
-- GSH
Red is/was/should be fixing the physics anyway. I didn't play either BZII enough to care if the physics were off, the only thing I missed was being able to blast Maulers miles away with MAG.
That was fun :-D
But somewhat pointless, and no, I'm not complaining. I couldnt' 'fly' anyway, and personally I think flying should be reserved for vehicles that actually can fly.
Don't wait for others to do work. Especially don't insist that I do any work if you're unwilling to do anything. Prove you're willing to help out the game. This is where a lot of arrogant jerks (not going to call them by their preferred names) fall further down on my mental evaluations of them.
-- GSH
Well, sign me up and I will. :)
My interest in BZII is returning. I wouldn't mind doing a little beta testing myself.
I'd really love to help resolve the scavenger issues, in any way I can. After all, they're the backbone of every game. The efficiancy at which they do their job directly impacts the entire game in just about every way. Bug free, efficiantly working scavs would be a blessing. I'm guessing that working mostly with scavs probably doesn't appeal to most beta testers.
Well, if there's nothing to be done about treaded physics, there's always the new scavengerH (that's what it's called, right?) class. At least for mods.
Did you try ALL the physics constants yet?
I don't have them yet. What ever Ken has added, if he has added anything new, thats only in the current unreleased beta. I haven't been added to the beta team yet, though every day I hope!
I think he is referring to the following. Mainly the top two.
[TrackedVehicleClass]
COLLISION_RAISE = 0.5
SUSPENSION_MIN = -0.2
SUSPENSION_MAX = 0.3
SPRING_FACTOR = 2.0 // minimum value: 0.01
DAMPING_FACTOR = 2.0 // 2.0 = critical damped, minimum value: 0.01
TREAD_STATIC_FRICTION = 1.5
Most of the above compiles, but isn't tested. Messing with physics
constants may cause really weird behavior. [NM]
[TrackedVehicleClass]
NormalTrackFactor = 0.0 // may need to be > 0 for some of the other params to take effect
pitchThrust = 0.0
rollSteer = 0.0
alphaTrack = 0.0
With code borrowed from Hovercraft.cpp. Note that these constants
may be need to be scaled by *3.0 or /3.0 compared to what you're used
to in hovercraft. This compiled and got about 20 seconds of testing to
ensure that the default values of 0.0 didn't break anything too
horribly in the default physics. [NM]
[TrackedVehicleClass]
alphaDampX = 0.0
alphaDampZ = 0.0
These TrackedVehicleClass params don't need 'NormalTrackFactor'
(see above) to be >0 to take effect. This is some more stay-level code
borrowed from hovercraft.cpp. Note that these constants may be need to
be scaled by *3.0 or *0.33333 compared to what you're used to in
hovercraft. [NM]
[TrackedVehicleClass]
AIomegaSpin = <non-AI form>
AIomegaTurn = <non-AI form>
AIalphaSteer = <non-AI form>
AIvelocForward = <non-AI form>
AIvelocReverse = <non-AI form>
AIaccelThrust = <non-AI form>
I've been trying playing around with them. First using the stock values, then experimenting with high, low, and negative numbers to understand what effect they each create. I have most of them figured out, but many of them produce secondary effects like bouncing, decreased traction, decreased weight, or they act unstable. I’m sure what ever has been done since the last beta release, has improved them.
Using positive values for “COLLISION_RAISE†seems to lowers the stiffness of shock absorbers which reduces the dampening effect against the springs, causing softer and softer suspension and even bouncing as you increase the value. Using negative values seems to increase the stiffness so they do not respond at all. Positive values seem to also decrease the traction and lighten the vehicle as you increase them, exaggerating the bouncing effect.
“TREAD_STATIC_FRICTION†increases traction beautifully, but unfortunately the improvement is spoiled by the vehicles weightlessness and unadjustable center of gravity. It tips over, pops wheelies, and tumbles around like the center of gravity is way too high.
The suspension values are pretty easy to figure out, it’s just the maximum distance at which the suspension can raise or lower.
The spring value acts extremely sensitive, and can cause the vehicle to go bouncing out of control, so I’ve kept it at the lowest setting.
So far the aphaDamp effect seems to be a bit unstable. Even at value 3, I sometimes see the tracks vibrating around.
While the traction issue has been greatly reduced, the weightlessness and center of gravity of the vehicle remain the largest problem.
The reason I don't post anything, is because I havn't found any value settings I'm happy with. Though, Im anxious to experiment with what ever has been changed.
No parameters have been added since pb2. There's no need to get access to builds.
-- GSH
Get access to what? What is he talking about?
No new tracked physics constants have been added since pb2, so you don't need access to the private version.
I never asked for access to the private version in this thread.... What are you talking about? Are you talking about the suggestion by Greenheart? If you're basing this thread as the sole reasoning behind that request, you are very sorely mistaken.
You guys must think very little of me to think I would actually ask that... :-(
That really hurts... especially since it came from GSH. Did I do something to offend him? :-(
I think he only said that to let you know there haven't been any changes to the tracked physics in the latest beta.
Aren't there a lot of beta testers anyway? I think that's what I heard some time ago.
I've run into exactly the same thing Hoohah discusses. While the new values give you some control over things like the grade of slope the vehicle can climb, and the amount of roll during higher speed turns, there's still nothing that will 'stick' a tread to the ground. The darn things loft at the smallest hill, float down steep slopes, and turn into balloons when jostled or bumped at the right time.
It seems that treaded units are doomed to remain a very narrow vehicle class, with extreme limitations. I've found keeping them square, not HUGELY oversized, slow, and on flat terrain seems to be the best for them.
-Av-
Thank you. :)
This is a very noticeable bug in the game and it plays a major role in how the game plays, decreasing the enjoyability of the game and the efficiency in which it plays, and severely limits what you can do with the game. All those factors make this a very practical problem that deserves attention. A tracked vehicle that stays firmly planted on the ground is not an irrational thing to ask for, so I don't understand why its so easily dismissed.
Specifically speaking, what have you guys been working on recently, and what do you guys plan to work on after the next release? What's more important than this issue and why doesn't it deserve any attention?
It would be more the fact that GSH just wants this out of his life, the issue doesn't affect the stock units (besides service trucks, but they are drunk) so it isn't seen as a major problem.
Dosen't affect stock units?
I've done a short test on the isdf assault tank. EDIT: (and a scavenger, same results)
It doesn't slow down very much, even when I'm pressing reverse, there's no change in how fast it slows down. It can barely steer while moving, which is a problem when I can't slow down. When I drove it off a cliff in hi-lo, I thought I was in one of those "falling dreams" "rocking in a cradle", gliding down like a feather to the bottom. I bet if I farted in the tank it would fly upwards (or whichever way the tank was,! BLASTOFF!
I guess it's understandable to try to not be on your head in a treaded unit, so it tries to "self right" itself. Causes the "rock a bye baby in the cradle" effect when falling.
Slow falling also causes problems when climbing steep terrain, since if you hit a bump, you lose control for longer than you should, because you're bouncing all over the place trying to land, you lose momentum, and start rolling back down the hill. It's not just very difficult to stop forward motion, it's just very difficult to reach a speed of 0.
I don't like using treaded units because of this, and when I do, I suffer for it because it takes a lot of time to micro manage them. I can have the choice of treaded units making chaos in my base or not have their strength when I really need them, which is a really hootty choice to have to make. This really is a large problem in the game. Its nothing to take lightly.
I actually saw an assault tank trying to get up the first ramp at the beginning of a bridge, and this enemy saber rammed right into it, sending it flying about 500 meters! No joke, it actually landed on top of a cliff behind my base and it took me a while to get it down. When a medium hover tank sends a 40 ton tank, flying 500 meters through the air.... you know something is very, very wrong. Did I mention it couldn't even get up onto the bridge? It had been trying for about five minutes. It was funny to watch. First it took a running shot at the bridge and bounced off, then managed to get on the ramp but couldn't drive all the way up, so it tried rocking back and forth in a zig zag pattern, but to no avail.
Remember Golems in BZ1 when exposed to the Thumper? Biometal is strange stuff... :)
Treaded units aren't meant to be the focus of the game, and as such I can understand their limitations. I also ask for changes and features, and when told NO I accept it and move on. There's plenty of other fish in the BZ2 sea...
IOW if Nathan could do something I'm sure he would... harping on it won't change that. I also think this is more of a "Kencodeâ,,¢" thing, but he's gone missing again...
Like I said, keep them decent sized, slow, and squarish and use them on flat ground...
-Av-
Well, I know Nathan can't do it, I'm just really disapointed that Ken disapeared.... what happened to him? In the last change log, he said he was going to continue working on the tracked physics. I was really looking forward to his work! If he finishes it, it would make BZ2 so much more fun to play, and there would be so much more we could do with it. :-)
So no, Im not talking to Nathan, everyone knows thats not his area. But I also get the feeling that some people don't care if the treaded physics aren't fixed, and thats insane! I don't think they realize how much that would impact the game, and what we could do with it! Imagine all the cool new stuff we could come up with, and how much more fun the game would be!
Actually...
Some very exciting things have just happened in the private concerning tracked vehicle physics. I can't say just what and it's still being tweaked but Nathan has done some very cool things to unlock the physics.
As I've been saying, Nathan is doing all he can, and has a great methodology concerning physics. By that I mean rather than try to change it himself into something everyone will like (impossible) he's moving many of the constants to variables we can set in the ODF.
Awesome. :)
-Av-
The less that's hard-coded, and the more that's in the odf, the better! (Just imagine everything being hard-coded, eugh!).
LOL, that actually sounds like something I'd do.... if I knew anything about programming.
It's actually harder to do then you'd think, without a good setup. In my app, all little object definitions are little python scripts like this:
class SimpleCube(PhysicsObject):
Name = "Simple Cube"
Mesh = "SimpleCube"
Description = "The basic cube"
Collision = CollProx.Cube((-1,-1,-1),(1,1,1))
Mass = 8
# etc...
PhysicsObject.registerClass(SimpleCube)
And they can even inherit from each other too. :)
The system is setup so that it loads all the python code at program start, compiles it, stores the compiled code, and executes it to add it to the listings. (Also do the same with level definitions and so forth, also python scripts, was interesting to hook python to store and serialize the compiled code). When networked, it sends the current level compiled code and all of the modules the player does not already have or the hash does not match, and they execute it. Etc... Complex system (took about two hours to write in all honesty, python is so rediculously simple, even on the C binding side :) ), and very powerful, just what I was needing.
Note: there are new options. Not new defaults. And don't expect everything to be 100% the way you want it with a "DoWhatIMean = true" flag in the ODF.
-- GSH
What I meant by that was that I can solve problems with alternative methods, using existing resources. Thats what he did, and thats why I said it sounds like something I'd do. I didn't realize he was the "thinking out of the box" type. Good job! :) *gives GSH a thumbs up* Can't wait to see what you've done! :D
I'm just a little sick of people saying in any way/shape/form that Nathan doesn't care... he's given us months worth of hours of caring, or there wouldn't be a 1.3... He's very cautious to say even with the changes treaded units are not made of gold, don't do your homework for you, won't mow your lawn... IOW like every other unit they'll have their good and their bad.
For modders working on their own treaded units I recommend using boxCollide, keeping them square in shape, and keeping them fairly slow. If you want to push the enevelope there are a lot of other physics tweaks you can do, but YOU will have to do the work to find what works for you. You can't just toss a mesh into the game and expect it to dance for you unless you're willing to put the time into balancing/tweaking it.
-Av-
Where did that come from?
Quote from: Avatar on July 09, 2006, 06:53:13 PM
I'm just a little sick of people saying in any way/shape/form that Nathan doesn't care... he's given us months worth of hours of caring, or there wouldn't be a 1.3... He's very cautious to say even with the changes treaded units are not made of gold, don't do your homework for you, won't mow your lawn... IOW like every other unit they'll have their good and their bad.
-Av-
WERD!!
Quote from: General_Hoohah on July 09, 2006, 07:51:04 PM
Where did that come from?
Deep in my 1.3 psyche... :)
-Av-
Just throwing that out there.