Air transport fix.

AF · Post by AF » 30 Jun 2006, 17:07

That reply is the sort of thign I'm talking about. It's unnecessary, and it's the sort of reply that instigates a flamewar.

Post by **det** » 30 Jun 2006, 17:10

What are you talking about? My original reply explained what I thought to be the best solution to this problem. Then you criticized me and I explained my intentions.

Forboding Angel · Post by **Forboding Angel** » 30 Jun 2006, 17:31

You know det, it would be all fine and good if anyone that was saying "Do it this way" was actually a modder BUT THEY AREN'T!!! (with the exception of AF who is a coder, and a damn good one at that, and BTW AF got on TS and him and smoth worked out what they were discussing so he is not included in this statement) That's why it's so frustrating. You add something that needs to be done BADLY and instead of thanks you get a bunch of fucktards that have no idea what they are talking about saying that you "Should have done it this way".

It's irritating when people are smacktards just for the sake of being smacktards. Who gives a flying fuck whether it's backwards compatable or not? Stuff from ota cannot be directly ported from TA as it is now and work right off the bat, which means they would have to do some RESEARCH anyway.

Damnit this community can be extremely thick headed.

In the future, why don't you guys just say THANK YOU as opposed to being a retard to someone who is trying to help spring and the spring community. /rant

Post by **det** » 30 Jun 2006, 17:39

I don't think anyone was saying "Do it this way". People were making suggestions. I think some good points were raised. Why can only "modders" contribute to this discussion? What do you expect when you post on a message board? Do you really expect that people are going to not give their input on a patch which changes the behavior of the engine? Why are you cursing? Why are you insulting?

AF · Post by AF » 30 Jun 2006, 17:56

det, theres a time and a palce to post. But most importantly you should know when to stop.

By responding to foreboding you've changed how you would be percieved in thsi thread and put yourself in an even more negative light.

The thing was we already had input, input that was pretty much identical to yours but in another persons words.

So please, dont turn it into a flamethread with you vs whoever. This isnt a race for whoever gets the last laugh/word

SinbadEV · Post by **SinbadEV** » 30 Jun 2006, 18:17

First of all I would like to thank smoth for finding the spot in the code that was causing a long bemoaned bug and comeing up with a solution to the problem. Second I would like to point out that most people are complete idiots and don't know what they are talking about no matter who they are or what they do. Third I would like to ask smoth to be less confrontational when reacting to critisism... I know everyone picks on everything you do, and no one ever thanks you for your hard work. But if you feel that everything you do is perfect and immune to discussion you need to go eat a bunch of chocolate... it always makes me feel a lot less cranky and it might help.

Finally, I would like to point out that backwards compatibility that prevents people from having to make changes to there mods, no matter how trivial, is valuable.

Here's how I think it should work.
Psudocode Follows:

Code: Select all

If ((isRepairPlatform==0)&&(isRepairPlatform==0)&&(isRapairPad==1) && (Builder==1)) {
isRepairPlatform=1;
isFirePlatform=0;
};
If ((isRepairPlatform==0)&&(isRepairPlatform==0)&&(isRapairPad==1) && (Builder==0)) {
isRepairPlatform=0;
isFirePlatform=1;
};

but that's just my opinion.

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 30 Jun 2006, 19:52

you know what guys, do what you want. I stopped fucking caring. enjoy the patch because I am not bothering with another one if this is the way it is going to go. I have other things to worry about and things I can do that a far more rewarding.

Do what you want. I wrote the patch to help.

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 30 Jun 2006, 19:54

det wrote:I don't think anyone was saying "Do it this way". People were making suggestions. I think some good points were raised. Why can only "modders" contribute to this discussion? What do you expect when you post on a message board? Do you really expect that people are going to not give their input on a patch which changes the behavior of the engine? Why are you cursing? Why are you insulting?

People didn't bitch about the other patches. It is because it is me. Enjoy yourself because you have one less patcher now.

*edit oh, and modders count more because they know what the fuck they are talking about. They actually use the tag you jackasses are just firing from the rear.

all this over 2 lines of well placed code.

PLZ

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 30 Jun 2006, 20:28

SinbadEV wrote: but that's just my opinion.

You know, I have a reason and frankly I am tired of explaining it. This breaks the old units to fix them. As odd as that sounds you could just freaking believe me or you guys can keep second guessing me. Either way enjoy having one less willing patcher.

NOiZE · Post by **NOiZE** » 30 Jun 2006, 20:32

I didn't read this entire thread, but does the patch work correctly?

Do all mods work correctly after this patch?

IF both can be answered with yes, then i don't see the problem?

AF · Post by AF » 30 Jun 2006, 20:35

The problem is that the whole reaction has been sour and unnappreciative

Nemo · Post by **Nemo** » 01 Jul 2006, 00:25

Caydr made the best point concerning backwards compatibility. There are no mods (to my knowledge) that use isairbase=1; on any significant number of units. maybe 3-4 units per mod, TOPS. The backwards compatibility point is completely moot, capiche?

I can't comment on the quality of the code, but its *two lines*. Who cares?

The name of the tag is fine, and self documenting - way moreso than a bunch of current ones.

Smoth made a very helpful tweak. The rest of you in this thread did not. Comment how you will, but in the end he made a useful contribution, while the folks who attacked did not.

Gragh. That was angry.

Anyways, I can't wait to mess around with this in the next version. Its going to make for some very cool units (bunkers, gunpits, units firing from jeep passenger seats, halftracks, ect)

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 01 Jul 2006, 00:26

OOOH units shooting from trucks :)

SinbadEV · Post by **SinbadEV** » 01 Jul 2006, 00:29

I was thinking that you could have a special con unit that built special static defences and then loaded them onto itself would be pretty awsome... well now I have to make another mod again I guess...

Tobi · Post by **Tobi** » 01 Jul 2006, 00:34

Good work smoth!

Can you upload your patch to mantis so it doesn't get forgotten. (neglect this if you already did so.)

(I don't have much time next week [plus there are 3 other patches in queue] and after that I go on holidays, plus JC is still without proper internet, and others don't really apply patches.)

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 01 Jul 2006, 00:51

no problem tobi, where on mantis does it go?

Tobi · Post by **Tobi** » 01 Jul 2006, 00:53

Report a new bug then add the patch as an attachment. For clarity put [patch] in front of the title/summary of the bug so it's easy to see which bugs have a patch attached.

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 01 Jul 2006, 00:58

Gotcha, I will do that tonight. please lock/delete this thread.

Spring RTS Engine

Air transport fix.