Spring RTS Engine

Check PM when you get online.

You do realize PM's are set to 'Popup notification' by default? So when he logs on, he'll get a nice box popup telling him he has an annoying message from you. You wouldn't know this because nobody PM's you.

JKKKKKKKKSSS I <3 you.







Ban him.

Saw it thanks, will have to fix tomorrow tho, have fun in the meantime

Alright, this can be deleted then.

Sweet, an exploit. My bet is he's got a script that causes a unit to fire faster than it's supposed to.

nah, that's me.
he's probably talking about a different exploit.

Invloves scouts and transports most likely.

The nap moving coms exploits? Don't you dare -_-

I shouldn't give ETA's, wrote a fix but you can still sploit it rarely so need to make it more elegant, will prob be tomorrow now :p

A simple solution would be to make it so you can't even give a load order against a moving unit; does anyone have any arguments against this? (it would make it harder to pin a com with transports to disable dgun, dunno if that's a bad thing tho)

Oh, is there an exploit? The transports accelerate faster when given rapid orders or something?

Because if you're complaining about being able to convince a transport to move half as intelligently as they did in OTA, matching speed, then I suggest you shift your focus.

And yes I see the issue in that it's braindead micro, unintended, but that doesn't reach 'exploit'.

lurker wrote:Oh, is there an exploit? The transports accelerate faster when given rapid orders or something?

Because if you're complaining about being able to convince a transport to move half as intelligently as they did in OTA, matching speed, then I suggest you shift your focus.

And yes I see the issue in that it's braindead micro, unintended, but that doesn't reach 'exploit'.

napping a moving com is what this is about. with a widget.

And no, dont disallow load orders on moving units, i do that even to my own units too all the time.

TheFatController wrote:A simple solution would be to make it so you can't even give a load order against a moving unit; does anyone have any arguments against this?

No. Terrible idea. It would put in abstract limits on order queuing.

Being unable to nap a com that's moving in a straight line as a regression from TA is a bug. So I ask again, does this behavior give the transports an agility boost or something?

lurker wrote:Being unable to nap a com that's moving in a straight line as a regression from TA is a bug. So I ask again, does this behavior give the transports an agility boost or something?

A moving unit was always an unnappable unit. This new behavior that allows to nap a moving unit is considered an exploit due to it breaking this habit and with it the whole gameplay (FFA games f.e. are ruined).

It may be a bug that moving units can't be napped, but it became a feature, just like strafejumping in certain FPS games.

No picking up of moving units needs to be a mod option anyway, not a defacto engine feature. I'll look at adding one for the next release.

See this is what you get when you report an exploit to the wrong people. They make it a mod option instead.

Kloot wrote:No

Nobody said it didn't, this is BA subforum and about BA, not about engine features.

Except that this issue now exists in all *A's because of engine changes, this just happens to be the first forum topic about it. They can either all come up with the same custom Lua prevention gadget, or the engine can do it for them generically. I'm not here to babysit BA in particular, so you can leave your humorous misquotations at the door.

In any case, have fun fixing.

I haz solution. We remove air transports!

Kloot wrote:Except that this issue now exists in all *A's because of engine changes, this just happens to be the first forum topic about it. They can either all come up with the same custom Lua prevention gadget, or the engine can do it for them generically. I'm not here to babysit BA in particular, so you can leave your humorous misquotations at the door.

In any case, have fun fixing.

I was merely pointing out your 'No' had no meaning.