Someone please document depthModParams!

[Forboding Angel]

Code: Select all

depthModParams = {
         minHeight      = number,
         maxHeight      = number,
         maxScale       = number,
         quadraticCoeff = number,
         linearCoeff    = number, -- deprecates "depthMod"
         constantCoeff  = number,
       }

Would someone kindly document this and add it to the changelog? Thanks!

[knorke]

i just added that to the changelog!

new formula is given by
if h < depthModParams.minHeight: 1.0
if h > depthModParams.maxHeight: 0.0
else:
depthScale = MAX(0.01, MIN(depthModParams.maxScale, (a * h * h) + (b * h) + c))
depthMod = 1 / depthScale
where
h = unit's absolute height below water surface
a = depthModParams.quadraticCoeff
b = depthModParams.linearCoeff
c = depthModParams.constantCoeff

[Kloot]

It IS in the changelog.

[knorke]

yes, it is now. before it was not obviously.

[Forboding Angel]

Please document the tags if you would

[smoth]

http://springrts.com/wiki/Movedefs.lua
you could start the process forb by updating the wiki page.

[FLOZi]

Updating the movedefs wiki page with the changes for 87 is on my todo list.

edit: updating the rest of the wiki to 83 and beyond is also on the todo list.

[Pxtl]

Fed the wiki. Enjoy.

I hope you like math.

[Forboding Angel]

If I understood the equation, I would. As it is, I don't understand why such a complicated equation is even necessary.

Pxtl, I love you. Thanks!

[Pxtl]

If I understood the equation, I would. As it is, I don't understand why such a complicated equation is even necessary.

Pxtl, I love you. Thanks!

AFAIK, this was *always* the equation. Nothing has actually changed except that everything that used to be constant is now a parameter. That's all the patch did - "Congratulations, you can now fiddle with all the knobs!".

I agree it's overcomplicated, but it always was and I suppose there's no need to fix it if it ain't broke.

I admit the quadratic term is probably unnecessary and just having the linear and offset coeffs would be plenty... plus the fact that there's no way to control the over-max multiplier or provide a minimum divisor means you can't do quite as much with crazy-reverse "higher is faster" or "faster underwater" stuff as is potentially possible.

But either way, 'sall good.

[Forboding Angel]

Honestly, as long as it is documented (like you did), I don't have a problem with it. What does bug me is these wtf moments that happen when you're looking at tags and values, but if they are documented, you can read up, fix it, and move on. Works for me!

Thanks to both you, pxtl, and knorke!

[Pxtl]

I can't take any credit, I just fed the wiki and read the formula.

Seriously, don't fear the math.