Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Patch 3641 Pre Release Discussion thread

2015-07-05T16:15:41+02:00

ckitching wrote:
It's definitely not possible to render only part of a beam without native code changes.

As I explained, it's a compromise. We can either render the whole beam, or none of it. Invisible beams aren't really acceptable, so I mitigated the intel leak by clearing out the blip when the firing stops.
It's definitely consistent with realism now, too: massive glowy lines have a tendency to give away your position

Dunno if you saw my post earlier, but if we could hear the beam, I think it would be fine. Right now it's silent as well as the beam being invisible. That way we still wouldn't get free intel on where exactly the pd is.

Statistics: Posted by JaggedAppliance — 05 Jul 2015, 16:15

Re: Patch 3641 Pre Release Discussion thread

2015-07-05T10:11:21+02:00

MutantGenepool wrote:
ckitching wrote:We're maintaining a list of issues that would benefit from the attention of a modeller on GitHub here:

https://github.com/FAForever/fa/labels/need%20modeller

OK. I've stuck my hand up for the 2x1 map borders. I'll do those and export the models without removing any verts.

That is excellent.

Statistics: Posted by bamboofats — 05 Jul 2015, 10:11

Re: Patch 3641 Pre Release Discussion thread

2015-07-05T07:18:28+02:00

ckitching wrote:
We're maintaining a list of issues that would benefit from the attention of a modeller on GitHub here:

https://github.com/FAForever/fa/labels/need%20modeller

OK. I've stuck my hand up for the 2x1 map borders. I'll do those and export the models without removing any verts.

Removing the doubled verts will not reduce the poly count in most instances. This should still have a great impact on render times, as far as I understand it. The game engine reads the verts first and then the polys to render the materials. I've done a quick look at a couple of models and the materials don't seem to be affected. 2000 + verts removed from one model without any difference to the materials.

Will do testing later. I really hope this works out.

Statistics: Posted by MutantGenepool — 05 Jul 2015, 07:18

Re: Patch 3641 Pre Release Discussion thread

2015-07-05T05:37:04+02:00

It's definitely not possible to render only part of a beam without native code changes.

As I explained, it's a compromise. We can either render the whole beam, or none of it. Invisible beams aren't really acceptable, so I mitigated the intel leak by clearing out the blip when the firing stops.
It's definitely consistent with realism now, too: massive glowy lines have a tendency to give away your position

Statistics: Posted by ckitching — 05 Jul 2015, 05:37

Re: Patch 3641 Pre Release Discussion thread

2015-07-05T04:51:39+02:00

CodingSquirrel wrote:
ckitching wrote:Anyhoo, just showing the beam, or showing only the part of the beam not under the fog, are both impossible without native code changes.

Are we sure this is true? Somehow civilians are able to see the beam without the attached unit. Is that something we could possibly leverage for player armies too?

Just caught up; I'm almost positive for a short while we had the game like this. What it led to was the same thing I described earlier; free intel on unit and PD positions.
If you look closely, when it switches to the civilians view, you can see the beam not only where you have line of sight, but all the way right back to its point of origin; and a note - this was true for the scouted few(the T2PD that could be seen under fog of war), and also the PDs that were invisible(not scouted).

VoiceofReason wrote:
Free intel! FAF went down this path before. It didn't work because people got free intel and could destroy things that they shouldn't be able to even see because they have 0 intel on it... Making the lazer visible all the way to the unit was also bad for the same very reason. No intel on unit = shouldn't have its position.
This also ruins stealth'ed PD for the same reason. Oh, theres the PD - everything Fire at that blip!... Who needs intel right?

edited a bajillion times for gammer, punctuation, and explation

Statistics: Posted by VoiceofReason — 05 Jul 2015, 04:51

Re: Patch 3641 Pre Release Discussion thread

2015-07-04T18:19:00+02:00

I'd make the name for the mod consistent, so not "3641 Testing" for creating the game and "balancetesting" with the hosted game.

Statistics: Posted by ax0lotl — 04 Jul 2015, 18:19

Re: Patch 3641 Pre Release Discussion thread

2015-07-04T11:36:02+02:00

We're maintaining a list of issues that would benefit from the attention of a modeller on GitHub here:

https://github.com/FAForever/fa/labels/need%20modeller

Statistics: Posted by ckitching — 04 Jul 2015, 11:36

Re: Patch 3641 Pre Release Discussion thread

2015-07-04T11:22:16+02:00

Reducing poly count with certainly improve performance if you can do it without hurting appearance.

On the other hand, you might want to go the other way and increase poly count and prettiness.

Statistics: Posted by ckitching — 04 Jul 2015, 11:22

Re: Patch 3641 Pre Release Discussion thread

2015-07-04T07:33:14+02:00

MutantGenepool wrote:
I've got the addons in Blender for these files.
I'd be more than happy to have a look at this. If I can find the right mesh. Adjusting a bone is no problem.
I'm just wondering if the amount of vertices in the models would have an affect on game speed. Pretty sure it would. There are a lot of doubles in the meshes. If so, would getting rid of them affect the materials.

There is a risk of messing the textures if the UV map is affected. Other than that, it's worth a try.

As for finding the meshes of the torp launchers, just go to your FA install folder, Gamedata, extract the units.scd with winrar somewhere and locate : uab2109, uab2205, urb2109, urb2205, ueb2109, ueb2205, xsb2109, xsb2205

Statistics: Posted by pip — 04 Jul 2015, 07:33

Re: Patch 3641 Pre Release Discussion thread

2015-07-04T04:55:35+02:00

Wrt t2 pd, if we could hear the sera t2 pd it wouldn't matter as much that it's beam is invisible. I wouldn't like to see units redesigned.

Statistics: Posted by JaggedAppliance — 04 Jul 2015, 04:55

Re: Patch 3641 Pre Release Discussion thread

2015-07-04T02:37:39+02:00

ckitching wrote:
Sheeo wrote:
Mad`Mozart wrote:What i dont get is why there are changes to SCU hitbox but no torpedo def hitbox?

We're going to adjust the torpedo defenses, but it's more than just their hitboxes -- ideally they need adjustments to their bones, requiring someone with 3d modelling skills.

Which we don't appear to have, unless ResinSmoker comes out of retirement, hence we're stuck with our amusing hack (of making them float *very slightly* above the waterline)

I've got the addons in Blender for these files.
I'd be more than happy to have a look at this. If I can find the right mesh. Adjusting a bone is no problem.
I'm just wondering if the amount of vertices in the models would have an affect on game speed. Pretty sure it would. There are a lot of doubles in the meshes. If so, would getting rid of them affect the materials.

Statistics: Posted by MutantGenepool — 04 Jul 2015, 02:37

Re: Patch 3641 Pre Release Discussion thread

2015-07-03T13:53:02+02:00

CodingSquirrel wrote:
ckitching wrote:Anyhoo, just showing the beam, or showing only the part of the beam not under the fog, are both impossible without native code changes.

Are we sure this is true? Somehow civilians are able to see the beam without the attached unit. Is that something we could possibly leverage for player armies too?

Attempting to reproduce this, I found the exact opposite thing happening:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/llxdsupftu915 ... 9.png?dl=0

When the player was the focus army, both lasers render. As civilians, only the friendly one does.

This seems to be sensitive to ordering of laser initiation, which suggests a funky native-code bug. Always happy to be proved wrong.

Statistics: Posted by ckitching — 03 Jul 2015, 13:53

Re: Patch 3641 Pre Release Discussion thread

2015-07-03T10:30:13+02:00

Interesting. I wonder if it's anything to do with https://github.com/FAForever/fa/issues/720

Statistics: Posted by ckitching — 03 Jul 2015, 10:30

Re: Patch 3641 Pre Release Discussion thread

2015-07-03T07:33:56+02:00

CodingSquirrel wrote:
ckitching wrote:Anyhoo, just showing the beam, or showing only the part of the beam not under the fog, are both impossible without native code changes.

Are we sure this is true? Somehow civilians are able to see the beam without the attached unit. Is that something we could possibly leverage for player armies too?

Would be perfect if it could be coded like that.

Statistics: Posted by pip — 03 Jul 2015, 07:33

Re: Patch 3641 Pre Release Discussion thread

2015-07-03T06:25:28+02:00

ckitching wrote:
Anyhoo, just showing the beam, or showing only the part of the beam not under the fog, are both impossible without native code changes.

Are we sure this is true? Somehow civilians are able to see the beam without the attached unit. Is that something we could possibly leverage for player armies too?

Statistics: Posted by CodingSquirrel — 03 Jul 2015, 06:25