Better warning system

[Jools]

Is the warning when unit is attacked handled engineside or modside?

It is a bit annoying: when for example one scout is attacking your windmills or tidals outside your screen, the warning will repeat for a long time. It would be nice if the system could be made 'adaptive' so that it doesn't repeat stupid warnigns like that. Maybe only alert once per unit type in vicinity.

[knorke]

"%s is being attacked" in Sim\Units\Unit.cpp
so it is engine side.

if/which warning is given is decided on when last warning was given and if the event was in view of the player and if unit was a commander.

imo could be something game side...

/edit
seems my local copy was old.
It is no longer in engine? At least not in DoDamage function and searching for "being attacked" does not find results.

[Jools]

if/which warning is given is decided on when last warning was given and if the event was in view of the player and if unit was a commander.

Vous êtez content avec ca? (Are we happy with this?)

I would say no, it needs to be better than that. Maybe one warning per type of unit per 5 mins or something, even that would be much better.

[smoth]

move it to a gadget and get it out of spring.

any reason this alert has to be part of the engine?

[Jools]

Well, one reason is that the engine handles unit motion so why not handle also warning.

[zwzsg]

I know there are movewarnings and buildwarnings settings, so I tried to put AttackWarnings=0 in my springsettings.cfg but it appeared to be without effect.

[smoth]

The unit under attack is much easier to luaify that the entire unit behavior code.. That is why I suggested it, i didn't think about that annoy unit is stuck spam .

[Jools]

Werll, i don't really care where it is handled, I just thought it easier to correct it once in the engine than many times for each mod.

[knorke]

Werll, i don't really care where it is handled, I just thought it easier to correct it once in the engine than many times for each mod.

if it is modside, eventually somebody will make a wudget and everybody else can c&p it, like healthbars etc.
And if a game needs something special it is easier to adjust.
(doesnt zeroK already have attack-warning/voices widget)

[smoth]

Honestly dunno knorke.

Mostly it is like the scoring stuff on a long list of shit I plan on replacing.

[hoijui]

i though, Lua-ifying an engine C++ thing generally means, you remove it in the engine C++ code, rewrite it as lua, and ship that lua with the engine (with the option for games to override it). if nobody objects, which would probably be the case here, then the default behavior can be changed in the engine supplied Lua already.

[smoth]

I don't object but who would code it?

[AF]

Is this not a blatantly trivial thing to do? The only C++ knowledge necessary being the delete key on a keyboard, and a 3 line lua widget/gadget, ( one line to print to console, 2 for the function handling the unitdamaged )

[knorke]

this is the commit where the warning got removed:
https://github.com/spring/spring/commit ... 58f02b0ecf
That also shows the excact formula used, if somebody wants to replicate it with Lua.
Quick, somebody do it! (i wont) It is easy and might be included in the engine with means epic epenoid++

[CarRepairer]

I object to any more widgets being included with the engine and the existing ones should be removed. AIs too.

[smoth]

I object to any more widgets being included with the engine and the existing ones should be removed. AIs too.

But I said gadget.

[knorke]

widgets are already moved to some examples folder:
http://springrts.com/mantis/view.php?id=2537
but yes, dont want more default widgets/gadgets in engine.

[smoth]

I think saying that is bad.

Gadgets may be needed to extend functionality or supplant engine functionality.

By taking a hard stance that you want 0 new widgets and gadgets you create a situation where games become mor and more divergent.

You create a situation where engine devs may begin to freely strip out features offering no replacement.

[AF]

"Want 0 widgets" is not the same as "there will be 0 widgets". The engine should only contain the common denominating features needed for every game, and those that are only possible in the engine or better served being placed in the engine. Ofcourse this happens when there is demand for control by someone or a development need, rather than just for the sake of it.

For example I would be fine with nanospray being separated out, so long as a lua alternative was offered for those still wanting it.

[Jools]

I think OTA has a logic where only the first unit of similar type trigers a warning when attacked, so if you send 15 stumpies or build 150 windmills, you only get the warning once when they are under attack.

My experience is that people just press F5 when this happens in spring, and that's not good. But I also think that there will be some variation among people's preferences, so maybe this should be an UI option.

It's interesting to see how the discussion centers on the coding of this function instead of the user experience. You are such nerds. This is why Nokia went badly and Apple went well. It's always about people!