Advanced/Customiseable Radar System

Advanced/Customiseable Radar System

Requests for features in the spring code.

Moderator: Moderators

Warlord Zsinj
Imperial Winter Developer
Posts: 3742
Joined: 24 Aug 2004, 08:59

Advanced/Customiseable Radar System

Post by Warlord Zsinj »

I think it is important that Spring's radar system be abstracted to the level which weapons, and shields, and other things are. I think this would be simple to do and would allow a lot of versatility. Currently I feel it is quite limited, and doesn't allow players any leighweigh to have radar systems that vary from the standard OTA one.

Basically, what I am suggesting is an armor.txt style parser, for radars.

So, you would have a sensors.tdf file containing sensor[1], sensor[2], etc. You would then specify either the individual units (ie: unit1=corcom; unit2=armcom;), or designate entire unit classes (ie, for SWS: class1=infantry;). It is important to have both, so that you can have the ease of designating an entire class, and the precision to specify exact units.

For example (framework done by Gnome):

Code: Select all

[sensors]
{
	[sensor0] //by default, radar. if a mod doesn't define this, have it behave as normal
	{
		[classes] //as defined by armor.txt
		{
			infantry=99; //number is irrelevant, like armor.txt
			droids=99;
		}
		[units] //specific unitnames
		{
			impatst=99;
			rebxwing=99;
		}
		[ignore]
		{
			imptief=99;
			rebywing=99;
		}
		[deftags]
		{
			distance=Radardistance;
			jam=Radardistancejam;
			stealth=stealth;
		}
	}
	[sensor1] //by default, sonar. Again, if mod lacks it, treat it as normal
	{
		[units]
		{
			armsubk=99;
		}
		[ignore]
		{
			armfib=99;
		}
		[deftags]
		{
			distance=Sonardistance;
			jam=Sonardistancejam;
			stealth=stealth;
		}
	}
	[sensor2] //my own arbitrary sensor system. let's call it thermal detection, it doesn't matter
	{
		[classes]
		{
			droids=99;
		}
		[ignore]
		{
			infantry=99;
		}
		[deftags]
		{
			distance=Thermaldistance; //tags arbitrarily defined by this. The tags would be skipped if they aren't defined here
			jam=Thermaldistancejam;
			stealth=Thermalstealth;
		}
	}
}

(ignore would override any armourclass stuff, so that you could include "infantry" but ignore "stormtrooper". This would allow players to even allow everything, and remove certain units, etc)

(It might also be nice to tie this in with the new custom radar dots, so that you can specify which radars can detect only generic dots, and require LOS before the custom dot is presented, and you can have advanced radars which give you specific readings, that is, showing the custom dot without direct LOS. Useful for the 'representative LOS' system I talk about later)

Thus, we have the ability to set far more advanced radars, which can only detect certain types of units, etc. You can have large-air only radars, which don't detect ground units, and thus don't imbalance ground radars, etc

- This would be particularly helpful for Spring 1944, where they have had to make every unit stealth except aircraft, because they wanted to have aircraft specific radar. They can't have any other form of radar at all, because their long range radar would detect it, which would be extremely unbalanced, given the long ranges of artillery etc.
- It was also considered that small radars could be given to individual units to represent the distance at which they can "see" a unit (a radar dot appears), but can't quite make out what that unit is. Which means they know a unit is there, but can't quite make it out, can't fire on it accurately and can't accurately identify it. You couldn't do this with the current system, for example in 1944, because the air-radar would detect all the units at a long distance, which it isn't intended for. (this is the 'representative LOS system I mentioned earlier')
- For a mod Secure and a few of us are dabbling on privately, we considered having a 'predator' type side with an LOS system for units using the previous point's line of thought, where they have little to no actual LOS, but all have individual radars. This would only really be feasible with the more advanced radar systems, because of the limitations of the current system.

Thoughts?
Crampman
Posts: 117
Joined: 22 Dec 2005, 12:17

Post by Crampman »

Let's do more : we could add some tags :
-autotargetable : units detected can be targeted or not
-autotargetfacility : to add the possibility to use a 'targetting facility'
-accuracy : how the unit detection is accurate
-dottexture : to use custom 'pictures' dots
Last edited by Crampman on 21 Jul 2006, 11:42, edited 1 time in total.
Gnomre
Imperial Winter Developer
Posts: 1754
Joined: 06 Feb 2005, 13:42

Post by Gnomre »

Yeah, naturally. He asked me to write that prototype up at like 6 in the morning, so some tags slipped my mind :P
Warlord Zsinj
Imperial Winter Developer
Posts: 3742
Joined: 24 Aug 2004, 08:59

Post by Warlord Zsinj »

No further interest in this system? It would be quite helpful, and I shouldn't expect too difficult to implement...
User avatar
jcnossen
Former Engine Dev
Posts: 2440
Joined: 05 Jun 2005, 19:13

Post by jcnossen »

Sounds like a good idea indeed. I could say I put it on my todo, but I have way too much other stuff to do. I'll bring it up as soon as somebody is wondering what to do though ;)
Warlord Zsinj
Imperial Winter Developer
Posts: 3742
Joined: 24 Aug 2004, 08:59

Post by Warlord Zsinj »

I suppose that's about as close as you'll get to an affirmative answer 'round here these days... ;)
User avatar
Caydr
Omnidouche
Posts: 7179
Joined: 16 Oct 2004, 19:40

Post by Caydr »

Well, the latest build crashes if there's no sensors.tdf file, so I guess you got your wish?
User avatar
Argh
Posts: 10920
Joined: 21 Feb 2005, 03:38

Post by Argh »

Actually, I'm not sure, but I thought that sensors.tdf was read by the new seismic thingie... or something...
Gnomre
Imperial Winter Developer
Posts: 1754
Joined: 06 Feb 2005, 13:42

Post by Gnomre »

https://spring.clan-sy.com/wsvn/filedet ... rev=0&sc=0

Doesn't look like what we suggested, so I'm guessing Argh's assumption is reasonable. Not finding any documentation on it yet, though...
Warlord Zsinj
Imperial Winter Developer
Posts: 3742
Joined: 24 Aug 2004, 08:59

Post by Warlord Zsinj »

Damn, got our hopes up ;)
User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Actually....

Post by Pxtl »

It looks even more uninteresting than that - just configuring the resolution of the LOS calculations. Probably necessary for support of larger maps, since calculating LOS on a large space is probably a herculean effort with a high LOS-map-resolution. Perhaps at a later date this file will be used for radars, but in that sample one it looks like it's just taking some constants out of the engine into config files.
User avatar
KDR_11k
Game Developer
Posts: 8293
Joined: 25 Jun 2006, 08:44

Post by KDR_11k »

It's not in the devrelease you can download, only the SVN.
User avatar
Argh
Posts: 10920
Joined: 21 Feb 2005, 03:38

Post by Argh »

ZOMG!

I've just gone through the implications of this!

With the proper scaling and constraints, it will almost certainly possible to make mods with much faster LOS calculation... or LOS that isn't impinged by terrain at all.
User avatar
BvDorp
Posts: 439
Joined: 14 Oct 2005, 12:09

Post by BvDorp »

Argh wrote:ZOMG!

I've just gone through the implications of this!

With the proper scaling and constraints, it will almost certainly possible to make mods with much faster LOS calculation... or LOS that isn't impinged by terrain at all.
That would rock! :o
User avatar
Gota
Posts: 7151
Joined: 11 Jan 2008, 16:55

Re: Advanced/Customiseable Radar System

Post by Gota »

Epic Rez.
Has there been any progress on this front at all?Is anyone working on it ATM?
Google_Frog
Moderator
Posts: 2464
Joined: 12 Oct 2007, 09:24

Re: Advanced/Customiseable Radar System

Post by Google_Frog »

Wow. Epic rez. If it has been implemented it must be very obscure as I've never seen it.

A better way of implementing this may be to give each unit a detectability bitfield which can be changed on the fly by scripts and gadgets for cloaking/stealth. Each sensor type would be defined in gamedata with options like ignore terrain, unit auto firing, what is drawn (generic dot, specific dot or unit model). The system could even replace LOS.
Umbra
Posts: 46
Joined: 29 Jul 2009, 14:23

Re: Advanced/Customiseable Radar System

Post by Umbra »

Google_Frog wrote:The system could even replace LOS.
No.
User avatar
aegis
Posts: 2456
Joined: 11 Jul 2007, 17:47

Re: Advanced/Customiseable Radar System

Post by aegis »

a visual sensor type really could replace LOS :/
User avatar
Argh
Posts: 10920
Joined: 21 Feb 2005, 03:38

Re: Advanced/Customiseable Radar System

Post by Argh »

I wrote at least one Gadget that more-or-less implemented this at a rudimentary level, and released the source, IIRC. Problem was speed, in the end, due to the strategy I used at the time.

I certainly think it's entirely possible to write a fast LOS system using Lua atm. I use one that's fast for P.O.P.S., for example, although it's very crude. I've been thinking about extending it to LUPS and to the other shader systems, though, to provide one-stop-shopping for whether things get drawn, since other than CEG and the maps, I'm not using native Spring to draw any more.

Spring supports a bitmask for visibility per Team already, so it's quite possible to play with classical LOS- non-classical systems, where each Unit might have a different LOS treatment... that would be another thing entirely.
User avatar
skzedd
Posts: 10
Joined: 06 Feb 2010, 14:28

Re: Advanced/Customiseable Radar System

Post by skzedd »

Hello I am working on the System. But I have a problem I can't understand the tdf reader. How does it work? I mean where do we declare read the tdf (e.g. sound.tdf, mod info)files and how to get the info from them. Please help. I have done the sructure to keep the information.
Post Reply

Return to “Feature Requests”