Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Moving and producing carriers/Tempest

2016-09-16T01:22:50+02:00

Huh? I was talking about carriers (dunno about fatties and tempests, and that would look pretty stupid anyway) building as they move. Not pathfinding.

Statistics: Posted by Mycen — 16 Sep 2016, 01:22

Re: Moving and producing carriers/Tempest

2016-09-15T22:52:37+02:00

Mycen wrote:
TheKoopa wrote:It's an engine limitation. There's no way around it iirc

There are ways to do it. They just aren't pretty, and no one who is able to do it wants to do it.

glad to hear there are ways, I sadly don't have these skills but I seriously think this would be a tremendously great addition to forged alliance if the pathfinding became good.

Statistics: Posted by Um ZiniZini — 15 Sep 2016, 22:52

Re: Moving and producing carriers/Tempest

2016-09-15T22:51:27+02:00

AFGHAN PSYCHO wrote:
As much crap as SupCom 2 gets (a lot of it rightfully so) it still was a fun game. What made it fun despite all its setbacks was that you knew your units were reliable. If you gave them a move order, they would move there, not endlessly bump into each other. If you told your acu to do something while it was in a swarm of units, the units would move out of its way, no bumping around. The movement felt smooth. It could have been such a great game if Chris Taylor had graduated kindergarten so he could have the simplest of money managing skills and not have to release cash grabs.

Yes I totally agree on the units bumping in to each other part. In forged alliance the pathfinding hurts the mass to mass ratios of t1 vs t3 because t1 scores of units will not move easily due to pathfinding. It literally plays a role in balance this bad pathfinding. Building more powerful units is always better since if you mass trash the pathfinding is totally against you.

Statistics: Posted by Um ZiniZini — 15 Sep 2016, 22:51

Re: Moving and producing carriers/Tempest

2016-09-15T19:58:34+02:00

TheKoopa wrote:
It's an engine limitation. There's no way around it iirc

There are ways to do it. They just aren't pretty, and no one who is able to do it wants to do it.

Statistics: Posted by Mycen — 15 Sep 2016, 19:58

Re: Moving and producing carriers/Tempest

2016-09-15T07:04:06+02:00

As much crap as SupCom 2 gets (a lot of it rightfully so) it still was a fun game. What made it fun despite all its setbacks was that you knew your units were reliable. If you gave them a move order, they would move there, not endlessly bump into each other. If you told your acu to do something while it was in a swarm of units, the units would move out of its way, no bumping around. The movement felt smooth. It could have been such a great game if Chris Taylor had graduated kindergarten so he could have the simplest of money managing skills and not have to release cash grabs.

Statistics: Posted by AFGHAN PSYCHO — 15 Sep 2016, 07:04

Re: Moving and producing carriers/Tempest

2016-09-14T12:32:32+02:00

Ok well what I basically meant was:

*They make good pathfinding making T1 armies better and preventing your t1 engies from bashing you comm and very good naval pathfinding not tempests getting blocked from movement from the littlest of things. Pathfinding which doesn't hurt you when you have a big army basically thats what i want.
* Improved balance as near as possible to the point of optimal which cannot be reach.
* maybe more improved graphics for such an already great looking game

ive never wished for supcom 2 only max improvement upon forged alliance.

Statistics: Posted by Um ZiniZini — 14 Sep 2016, 12:32

Re: Moving and producing carriers/Tempest

2016-09-14T06:56:10+02:00

zeroAPM wrote:
TheKoopa wrote:It's an engine limitation. There's no way around it iirc

I'm 99% sure that Resin_Smoker did find a way to do something similar. Or that was having the fatboy take attack orders while building.

Hunt the code down and share with us. I remember seeing this on git and so far we havent managed to get it working

Statistics: Posted by speed2 — 14 Sep 2016, 06:56

Re: Moving and producing carriers/Tempest

2016-09-14T01:54:10+02:00

TheKoopa wrote:
It's an engine limitation. There's no way around it iirc

I'm 99% sure that Resin_Smoker did find a way to do something similar. Or that was having the fatboy take attack orders while building.

Statistics: Posted by zeroAPM — 14 Sep 2016, 01:54

Re: Moving and producing carriers/Tempest

2016-09-14T01:28:39+02:00

No, speed2. I fucking HATED it. Tracked tanks are not meant to glide around like hovercraft!

There are better ways, people!

Statistics: Posted by IceDreamer — 14 Sep 2016, 01:28

Re: Moving and producing carriers/Tempest

2016-09-13T18:16:11+02:00

Statistics: Posted by speed2 — 13 Sep 2016, 18:16

Re: Moving and producing carriers/Tempest

2016-09-13T18:13:05+02:00

TheKoopa wrote:
It's an engine limitation. There's no way around it iirc

That really sucks, I never wanted a new game like supcom 2, I just wanted a total patched version of faf forever.
something like forged alliance forever with:
supcom 2's pathfinding
and improved all round coding and balance not a new game only these things.

Statistics: Posted by Um ZiniZini — 13 Sep 2016, 18:13

Re: Moving and producing carriers/Tempest

2016-09-13T14:02:27+02:00

It's an engine limitation. There's no way around it iirc

Statistics: Posted by TheKoopa — 13 Sep 2016, 14:02

Re: Moving and producing carriers/Tempest

2016-09-13T11:08:24+02:00

OMG GIEV

Statistics: Posted by snuffles — 13 Sep 2016, 11:08

Moving and producing carriers/Tempest

2016-09-12T14:46:47+02:00

Is it possible in the programming state the game is currently in to implement the 2 suggestions in the title? It sucks to have stationary aircraft carriers producing air units. Why can't they move with your battleships and destroyers to provide air cover whilst they produce air units in the heat of battle with the rest of your navy? can't they use the same code they used for submarines, that whilst it is moving it still produces the nuke and have capacity for it? Also when you deploy all the air units your aircraft carrier produced, the units which was currently producing when the button was pressed are lost and you lose that economy as well.

so any fix?
yes/no?

Statistics: Posted by Um ZiniZini — 12 Sep 2016, 14:46