Spring / game feature status?

[Fri13]

Fri13, are you suggesting these things for an existing game or are you looking for feature support so you can design your own game?

Just asking does Spring support such thing so game developers could start using them. I believe there are many who would like to see such feature to be implented.

If what you are talking about is purely visual in nature than there is no reason that these types of visual "tricks" (fading units and smooth los) couldn't be implemented using the LuaGL interface already in place.

That is the trick. It would be just pure visual effect. There is no need to tie the FOW/LOS effect to unit LOS calculations. The LOS would get calculated just like now. The unit enters/leaves the LOS. Only that information is used to draw a graphical representation of FOW/LOS. And that graphical thing would be moved to get handled by GPU.

The whole "Unscouted" area thing would be something that game designers for the Spring RTS Engine could implement, but none of them have bothered because, as has been mentioned... the maps are static so all it would do would annoy veterans and make life difficult on noobs.

It adds a layer of gameplay, even that if you would know the map where every spot is. You just can not order units there blindly to build something. You could not see metalspots without scouting.

Games using Spring are usually a war games (well, I do not know any game using it what would be about farming or fishing ).

If the FOV can make effect to gameplay making it harder, it should be possible to get enabled. But idea is not that it is forced to be always. Just a feature what players could enable.
Just like now we can give some players a handicap bonus or slow down the game speed, units movement etc.

And the FOW even adds the knowledge where you have not be in the game. Many new players would like it when they are hunting the last enemy unit thinking where they have not been. They build just massive amount peepers and send them to anywhere just to find out that one corner where they never went because they though they has be there because it is visible.

Even so many "pro" does not like it because it demands more strategies and advancement. The game is not anymore so fast click and slash gameplay but richer and harder.
And many feels that harder gameplay is terrible because it is not so nice to loose because you did not use basic strategies wisely.

I can recall few my friends who always played TA with LOS only. Sometimes they played together without LOS. I always wanted the FOW/LOS. I was totally n00b on the game on that time and I always lost games because they know all the maps totally. For them it was just a speedball, for who can run first to enemy base.

But when they turned FOW+LOS on (with cursing), I could won them as easily as they did me first. I know strategies better than them but I did not know the units balanced so well. The strategy was the most important thing in the game, not that who build biggest or strongest army.

Many are afraid the dark because monsters. But they do not understand that the monster can not see them either in the dark.

And PC platform is dying for games because so many games are designed to game consoles. They are designed to be easy and simple.

Even the SupCom II sucks because it is nerfed down for consoles. There is no strategies, there is no micromanagement, there is no fun at all. Smaller maps, simpler maps, faster gameplay and all the times you can see what is happening.

Who really wants to play RTS game, (Real-time Strategy last time I checked. Not for Real-time Simple) what does not need strategies and thinking like Chess? (There are even games blind game for chess, where players do not see pieces but they need to remember opponents and own movements).

[Beherith]

edit:
Do you happen to remember why noone liked Brainy Smurf from The Smurfs?

[SinbadEV]

I am beginning to understand your motivation... a bit.

So essentially the "hidden" portions of the map would not be build-able, and metal spot locations would be hidden so you couldn't just blindly order units to the metal spot outside of scouted area... okay cool...

if it's a "gameplay" feature, then just rendering the map as solid black in unscouted areas makes some sense.

The "You can see everything" gameplay also has it's merits in certain circumstances (chess metaphor... though removing radar, target accuracy and scouting as gameplay elements would radically alter the balance of the game and as such would need to be worked out on a case by case basis)

The "need to scout an area and then it becomes part of perma-visible area" also makes sense if the other two options were implemented mod side.

Though really, there is something about both your posting style, attitude and even the content of your suggestions that is pissing everyone off and making even me angry at you... I'm not sure exactly what it is but please don't take the fact that we are being openly hostile to you to mean that we are elitist jerks... I mean, we are Elitist Jerks, but really, we tend to be a lot more understanding when people don't piss us off in their first post and then keep heaping fuel on the fire with each subsequent post.

[Forboding Angel]

edit:
Do you happen to remember why noone liked Brainy Smurf from The Smurfs?

What got your panties in a twist?

I'd like to apply that I want this badly as well (the dithering of where you can't see, not total fog of war or anything), but it just got a few degrees warmer in here for no reason that I could tell, so...

[SinbadEV]

It might help you if you knew what we are hearing you say:

"Hi, I'm smarter then all of you and you should do a whole bunch of work so that my awesome ideas can be implemented in your engine because it sucks and will continue to suck if you don't."

[Regret]

edit:
Do you happen to remember why noone liked Brainy Smurf from The Smurfs?

Because they felt threatened by his intellect.

It's ok to be scared in your case I guess.

[Fri13]

Fri the real problem with something like the standard fog of war is how do you render it for the multiple camera angles?

Same way as on other 3D games that stuff what is front of you, does not get drawn. If the FOW would be a new layer top of the map and have a smooth edges and you do not draw the heights on FOW area it could work as well. And when the "invisible" area is black, you can even draw a half of the hill and look it from otherside and it would look like empty but black. Main problem would be how to allow the camera to move then to ground level then and when it is a scouted area, camera would follow it height.

More than anything else that's your problem. If the system is just some 2d sprite placed at some height above the terrain, then certain cameras can get around that. You could have the black unrevealed area conform to the terrain but then that just defeats the purpose of having it at all since you can still make out terrain features.

There would be no need to draw the map from those points when looking in ground level. From the air, the ground would be totally black. And there are different pixelshaders ways to make FOW work. Long time on 90's there was problem on different gametypes (like Tomb Raider) that the camera got stuck to wall where next you were standing or the object came in front of you. Until someone invented that "hey, we actually do not need to draw the thing what is between camera and the world and let the camera be collisioning to objects there."

Same kind function when you are spectator in FPS game and you can go through walls and then you can watch the happening trough the wall?

I suppose you could do some giant 3D fog bank but frankly that would be pretty damn ugly in my opinion.

If it is simple, it is better. That would allow someway the heights as well.

The actual technical part of what you want -besides the changes to radar dots- is already in game its just not represented visually. So the real question is do you want this as something you can add to a game your making or do just want this for one of your favorite mods.

Currently more checkin the possibility of the Spring engine. Currently not any special demands but for future there would be need if wanted to extend Spring engine features for different kind games.

If its the former well then your gonna have to figure out all the kinks to this idea and then get a dev to help you or DIY. If it's the latter then you should really talk to the mod devs as to whether they would even implement a old school fog of war system and the do the things i mention previously.

I think that if it is possible to do with Spring engine, then it really is up the game makers. But I believe this feature should be on Spring engine itself to get enabled by game makers.

Also this really should be moved to somewhere more appropriate once Fri makes his intentions clear

I tought this was good sub-forum because it is more about gameplay and needs of different games. Although it touch mapping as well.

[zwzsg]

Almost every TA units had los shorter than range, and it was unpleasant to fight in the dark, to not know what your units were firing upon until you saw a wreck appearing in the dark.

So you must then set big berthas and all long range units to have the LOS to same range as their max range?

Big berthas, nukes, and even lowly arty must of course be able to fire further than they see. Or else one nuke silo would be a map wide watch tower! But when every unit shoot farther than it sees, like in TA, then the game is unpleasant, at least for newbie just playing the campaign. I'd rather have the los/fog of war used for hiding what's going on in the enemy base, than for limiting the range of your units. But then it's a little irrelevant here, and anyone a mod issue and not an engine issue.

That is the idea of SCOUTTING.

Yell harder. You must understand the idea of scouting is very novel here, none of our veteran ever talked about that.

TA had that in all the missions, but none of the multiplayer games (bar n00bs). Maybe there is a lesson to learn there, a lesson such as how terrain black until you scout is a bad annoyance that prevents you from queuing mexxes, or some other moral story.

Those who did want easier gameplay without suprsises did disable that feature. They did not like that they had no strategies, they had no idea how to scout and now idea what the enemy was doing because they wanted only simple realtime action game.

That's a bit too old school. A throw back to the ages of Dune2. Plus, it gives you all the annoyance of having to clear a view before enqueuing buildings, without any of the fun of playing the information war with your enemies.

What information war when you have all the information right in front of you? You see the terrain, you can slap just right away all the buildings there and just play very simple game. No need to advance and actually FIND what enemy has doing. in the dark areas.

That'd really change gameplay. You would know if your opponent goes for a rush the moment he drops the first nano particle of his weasel. Any air assault or long range artillery would immediatly be locked on the commander.

That is the information war. If you know everything, it is damn easy to do. If you can not see enemy, you can not expect. If you can not see the terrain, you can not plan your strategies until you scout. And that what you suggest, would not be case on games where they limit (amount of) units. Many liked to play TA by that way you could see enemy all the time. It was just so damn easy then when compared to LOS gameplay or LOS+FOW gameplay what was much harder first.

You got me there. I can't counter because I can't even follow the logical connection between the quotes and your replies.

And I have seen RTS games where you saved, the FOW areas were stored as well

Orly? U sure?

because they were simple vectors what could with very simple infos to be stored.

Whoah, genious! Vectors are still too complicated for us, but if you do know what they are, you should really consider a career as a game developper!

[Fri13]

It might help you if you knew what we are hearing you say:

"Hi, I'm smarter then all of you and you should do a whole bunch of work so that my awesome ideas can be implemented in your engine because it sucks and will continue to suck if you don't."

If I am suggesting different approaches and giving a different point of view how different games could use such feature, it does not mean that it must be implemented right now and it is a must.

There are many different things what are needed to think to get this kind feature implented. But as I said, I believe there are many who would like to get it. And certain thing is that it is possible.

If I bring up the reasons why such FOV/LOS generates strategic gameplay more important position than what it is on currently, it does not mean that Spring sucks.

If I would be here suggesting that Spring gets changed to FPS engine or car simulation engine so we could make Farcry III (II sucked totally) or next Grand Turismo. I would understand that spring community members disagree totally and would just say "piss off" without even considering the ideas.

But FOW/LOS has be basic elements of RTS games since RTS was started. Only because it brings a strategic element to games.

As the topic itself ask, what is the status of this kind feature. How fast such visual masks could be drawn etc.

You are the people who know the Spring. I dont. Thats why I am asking and not implementing. And if some kind RTS game feature is not supported in Spring. It is fine. But I think everyone agree on that there are always a change/need to discussion if some kind feature for Spring engine is such that it would help game/mod makers life?

In the end, it is about technology. There are games what has the technology in use. There are reasons why many RTS games have used such feature and why many new RTS have left away such feature.

It is not a personal thing. But if some people just shoot down every idea and suggestion just because they do not like to play games by that way or because they have not tough it could be done. It is more their personal problem. And because it is Open Source project, they do not need to spend a second to do anything for it.

It is said that children's are best inventors because they do not know the limits. They can dream about stuff what every adult would be commenting "That is impossible because...".

I am not pleased to hear that some people call me jerk, idiot, dumb etc, when I have not called them by names or I do not have negative ideas about them. But I do not get offended by the people when discussion is by text (and I am not trying to offend anyone, if I do, it is very clear and flammable then). Because everything can start flame on other end without the real reason. 90% information gets always thrown away when discussion happends in text-format and not in real life where the 90% information is got by body language. But that is the another story.

By the knowledge what I have gathered from Spring forums, about hitting spheres and boxes, targeting spheres etc. Seen drawings only with spheres explaining the sensors, shooting, targeting almost in all axes (X,Y) and the limited functionality how many games work. I can not say anything else than I am always open to learn but I ask lots of things then because I do not know. If questions are two hard or difficult, then the other person needs to think is he/her right person to answer to them.

[CarRepairer]

This thread hurts to read, but I will try to address some of Fri13's stuff.

have you tried pressing the L key ingame?

Does it work like the mockup? No.
Is it smooth when moving? No.
Is it colored ugly way? Yes.

Does it work like the mockup? No.

Try pressing "L" and you might need to press ";" also. You'll see all sorts of venn diagrams of no LoS, LoS without radar coverage, LoS with radar coverage, and so on.

What is not addressed is your desire for unscouted areas are all black. This is a bad idea. It's only good if the map is randomly generated (a possible future feature) so that no player knows what the map looks like before playing. But right now, players DO know what the map looks like before playing so it's annoying to make it all black.

Is it smooth when moving? No.

zwz answered this but I will clarify in case you didn't understand. The graphic is not smooth when a unit is moving because the engine's LoS calculation is slow. It is possible to make the graphic smooth but it would update faster than the engine's LoS calculations, so we prefer not-smooth-graphic because it's correct.

Is it colored ugly way? Yes.

You can change it with a small file.

[Google_Frog]

This thread hurts to read, but I will try to address some of Fri13's stuff.

Agreed.

It looks like a failure to communicate properly. There are 3 different visibility states important to this thread and it looks like they are getting confused.

1. In view. All units, terrain etc... can be seen here. It is created in a circle around units.
2. The 'grey area'. In Spring the entire map starts grey. It is where units cannot be seen but terrain and mexes can (depending on the game wrecks can be seen here but that's irrelevant to the thread)
3. The 'black area'. Nothing can be seen in this area. Currently not in spring.

Fri13 you seem to be saying that games which do not use the black area view state have no intel warfare element. Correct me if I am wrong.

Just to clarify Spring's current los system does not show units when they are not in view.

It adds a layer of gameplay, even that if you would know the map where every spot is. You just can not order units there blindly to build something. You could not see metalspots without scouting.

If you know where the mex spot is you can send a unit to it and give the mex order when they see the spot. All you have added is micro.

[Teutooni]

I never understood the concept of FOW. You think army commanders went on a new battleground without a map? Well maybe some spaniards exploring South-America, but other than that, maps and pre-battle scouting were used to give a detailed description of the battlefield since culture developed. You think huge robots waging interstellar wars would be more primitive than ancient Mesopotamia?

From a gameplay point of view, I find FOW utterly annoying. You can't queue shit, have to remember/guess where the mountain pass was etc. In some strategy games it's fine, like civilization or something, but not in an RTS.

[luckywaldo7]

The graphic is not smooth when a unit is moving because the engine's LoS calculation is slow. It is possible to make the graphic smooth but it would update faster than the engine's LoS calculations, so we prefer not-smooth-graphic because it's correct.

Actually its still not correct, it lags behind the actual los, unless of course you pause and then the graphic gets updated but your actual los does not.

It would be really nice to have an accurate visualization, but I guess if its too cpu heavy it can't be helped .




Ah also, +1 to Teu


Also also, do many people play games with los activated? I do and I think CarRepairer does too. Just for curiosity's sake...

[SeanHeron]

Not that we have much scenarios/campaigns knocking around, but for them alone blacked out areas of the map would be nice. As has been said, that could probably be done with a gadget though (I've not used the GL part much, so can't really say).

Also, I'd all out speak in favor of a prettier fow representation than the one you get with "l" - even if that is at the cost of precision. Dithering, or removing colors/turning black and white (as was an option in TA) seem nicest to me (and yes, smoothing the visuals for los-updates would look far better as well).
Again, I guess that could be done via a gadget if someone really wanted to, but I'd wager doing it that way would be quite a performance hit.

[zwzsg]

Not that we have much scenarios/campaigns knocking around, but for them alone blacked out areas of the map would be nice. As has been said, that could probably be done with a gadget though (I've not used the GL part much, so can't really say).

From what I've tried, the performance penalty from using Lua to black out unexplored part of the map would be large, but then I had a naive approach of using 32x32 tiles that need periodic refresh, and maybe there's some better optimised methods.

[CarRepairer]

Not that we have much scenarios/campaigns knocking around, but for them alone blacked out areas of the map would be nice. As has been said, that could probably be done with a gadget though (I've not used the GL part much, so can't really say).

From what I've tried, the performance penalty from using Lua to black out unexplored part of the map would be large, but then I had a naive approach of using 32x32 tiles that need periodic refresh, and maybe there's some better optimised methods.

It would have to be engineside, since anyone can write a widget to draw themselves a heightmap on the blacked out areas.

[zwzsg]

For single player, cheating is less of a concern.

[SinbadEV]

I don't see a reason to hide the height-details, just the texture details, metal map etc... it would need to be supported engine side in a game that didn't overtly disable custom Lua because the metal-map details etc are right there in the map definition, there's no way to stop people from displaying it... (aka, use an external app to created some kind of overlay that could be applied by Lua or whatever)... really, without a lot of really smart and talented people thinking about it a bunch the only thing that could really be applied would be for build orders to be prevented on unscouted parts of the map and then, like y'all have said, it just adds micro, not strategy.

Meanwhile, I would guess with very little work one could just disable LOS entirely and have everything see everything like in his other suggestion.

[CarRepairer]

I don't see a reason to hide the height-details, just the texture details, metal map etc... it would need to be supported engine side in a game that didn't overtly disable custom Lua because the metal-map details etc are right there in the map definition, there's no way to stop people from displaying it... (aka, use an external app to created some kind of overlay that could be applied by Lua or whatever)... really, without a lot of really smart and talented people thinking about it a bunch the only thing that could really be applied would be for build orders to be prevented on unscouted parts of the map and then, like y'all have said, it just adds micro, not strategy.

Meanwhile, I would guess with very little work one could just disable LOS entirely and have everything see everything like in his other suggestion.

This is a bad idea. It's only good if the map is randomly generated (a possible future feature) so that no player knows what the map looks like before playing.

[JohannesH]

Obviously if you change micro you change strategies too. But it mostly just promotes map memorization, which kinda sucks.