264 replies to this topic

[Gambit]

There is one global var already, the problem is (of course) that it has to have the same value for both players...

And for the player that his PC controls the AI, this is easy with the Cpu_GetDifficulty( EnemyAI_PlayerID ) function you posted above...

 

But the other player cannot use it.

 

I am already using Cpu_Enable( playerID, enable ) as well as some variations of it, to enable (or not) AI components.

It does not transfer control to another PC though.

 

Dammit.

 

I am expecting to get really amazed if the dummy thing works (the one scar ONLY will destroy or create entities, so desyncing is just around the corner)

[Gambit]

Nada.

Just as as thought - spawning entities via SCaR from ONLY one PC results a sync error. The other PC counts zero, since its own scar spawned nothing...

It seems there is NO way.

 

... I hate setting difficulty via a manually-put global constant, and NOT through the game options

 

Brother K, is there any other AI function that can re-initiate the AI from a different PC?

Something like Cpu_ControlLocalPlayer(), but instead of local, to get an IDX? This one does not work from SCaR, of course, but I am searching for something similar.

[Kasrkin84]

Nothing that I can find, unless something was maybe introduced in Soulstorm that wasn't documented - this is extremely unlikely though.

[Gambit]

OK, so I give up.

No way I can discern the maps difficulty - we only have the pre-existing, non-consistent version.

So far:

1] For single-player games difficulty is defined 100% accuratelly. This is also true for local games with 2vsAI player, where you have an AI ally.

2] For the specific case of games, where you play with a HUMAN ally in 2pVsAI maps... we use the non-consistent method.

... I will also use a global switch on the code, in case player would like to edit the file for pre-defined difficulty.

 

OK, it's no big deal... 

I only wasted too much time on this dammit!!!

 

By the way, brother K, any progress on the maps???

Just asking, nothing more!

[Roderick]

I am looking at the maps and wondering why is support for not all races in the player 1 side. I can understand thenecessity of a proper AI code for every race but what are the requirements for the player races?  

[Gambit]

I am looking at the maps and wondering why is support for not all races in the player 1 side. I can understand thenecessity of a proper AI code for every race but what are the requirements for the player races?

Nice note!

The requirements are there mainly because of the additional winconditions: For example the assassinate and the critical location capturing ones are directly related to the player race.

Also, the unlimited turrets are player-related.

 

But yes, it is quite simple to add FULL support for ALL Unification player races

Will start today - I am done with Craftwords for now, so my schedule is light.

 

Good call brother Roderick!

Edited by Gambit, 21 January 2018 - 11:35 AM.

[Roderick]

Imagine a Praetorian defense against orks

[Kekoulis]

Or an Eldar Craftworlds defense against the all mighty Emperor's Children?

[Gambit]

Well, coding a NEW AI Enemy race (like Emperor's Children), is more complicated. Much more!

If I have time to do that, I will recode THE WHOLE THING

... So that adding new races to be much easier.

 

See, as it is now, Enemy races are ... impeded to the core code

 

But I got it - frankly, it is easy to code it from scratch. "Time" is the forbidding factor.

For example, I would prefer to code the Assault mode, if time presents itself!

 

So for now, I will add Survival support for ALL PLAYER races.

Enemies (AI), will still be chosen from the 9 vanilla + 4, as it is now.

[Kekoulis]

 

Well, coding a NEW AI Enemy race (like Emperor's Children), is more complicated. Much more!

If I have time to do that, I will recode THE WHOLE THING

Thank you very much my friend,but if you need my build for your work,I will send it to you once I have finished two models that I want(you will see them in due time. )

So,concentrate on other races first. Unless,you can code this without my build,then do whatever you want.

[Roderick]

Were the extra four enemy races added by Argonaut?

[Gambit]

Well, first let me say that even adding a new player race is MUCH!!!

There are so many instances, that it is practically ... silly.

 

I was under the impression that it would be a week's job - it is more.

And given the chance, I will definitely recode many parts

 

Brother Kekoulis, there is no need or your new build, in the case of EC being a player race.

But at some point (in the future...), I will add support for more Enemy AI attacking races, and then I WILL need it !

 

Were the extra four enemy races added by Argonaut?

I do not know, I suppose so.

As it is now, there are MANY parts to consider, when adding races, so I guess YES, the 4 races were part of the initial coding.

[Gambit]

OK, so this whole time, I am recoding

 

But things got... Messy. I started updating (as opposed to re-writing) the code.

And thus, there are additions upon additions upon additions (no from scratch designing).

 

Everything will be operational and MUCH more consistent and fast.

But if anyone else (other than me) ever ties to update it... OUCH!

To be honest, even I am looking at parts of the code I have written in the past, and need some time to understand what the hell I was doing!

 

Anyway, it is UNLIKELY someone else to take over the coding at this pint, so we are OK.

 

 

PROGRESS

I have updated the core survival + 3 (of the five) wincons.

Once everything is ready, I will start adding more PLAYER races.

 

It is now easy to add a race. You only need to follow the format, and enter the proper stats (HQ name, Tiers, Commanders names...).

Will be done by the end of the week, then testing, then addin' races!

[Roderick]

Don't you get the habit of writing comments on the code?

Edited by Roderick, 23 January 2018 - 05:59 PM.

[Gambit]

Yes, sometimes extensive.

But there are many "control" variables that get in the way.

 

... So I just finished with ALL the code parts and ALL winconditions

Many parts are simplified and optimised (in some case, the code got up to 15 times smaller!!!)

Also, all "current" 14 race stats are imported, and there is an easy method to add anyone OTHER race for players.

- I only need to render the code "global" for the turrets (disable normal, enable no-limit).

- And... test some more.

- And then add a NEW race to see how it goes!

 

Now, there are 2 small "issues" when adding a new race:

1] It MUST have a copy of its turret, with NO limit. If none, create one.

2] It must have 5 squads for the Strategic Location Capture wincodition (the reinforcements you get when have it captured).

 

1] and 2] need some basic AE work...

[Gambit]

OK, I am a real "geek"...   I am coding 2 days str8, but I am done!!!

 

Everything works OK so far.

Importing a new player race is quite modular, but you will need the new turret and the 5 new reinforcements squads.

 

First new race to import was Dark Angels.

Import time... 1 hour

Anyway, my first test was flawless!

Question1: I will perfect it, and import one more race for now. Any suggestions???

 

 

Question2

I think that Survival is up to ONE more Defending player. That is, 3p vs enemy attacking AI.

I am planning to make the code support up to (theoretically) 7 defending players, of course, but 4 human players will be TOO much!

Brother Kasrkin, can you create a map with 3 players + 1 Enemy, and add the appropriate markers???

If I am to update it, I WILL need one such map!!!!

 

Question3

Here is an alternative, for adding FOUR Defending players: We use the 3p scheme, BUT:

1] Add one more normal ENEMY AI player, assisting the TRUE enemy player. This way, the 4 defending players will be facing 2 opponents, one "normal" AI and the "survival" attacker.

2] The survival attacker will be sending THREE waves (not 4), so 1 (random) player will NOT be attacked per turn, and will have more time to assist his friends or strengthen his defences.

What say you?

[Kekoulis]

 

What say you?

THAT GREEKS ARE THE TRUE PREDECESSORS OF THE IMPERIUM OF MAN! (Scratch that,the majority of us are not that open-minded to come up with the Dark Age of technology,unless more of you take the scene).

 

Jokes aside,I really like this approach.Makes survival more challenging and fair.

 

Your Apothecary approves.

Edited by Kekoulis, 24 January 2018 - 12:24 AM.

[Kasrkin84]

Brother Kasrkin, can you create a map with 3 players + 1 Enemy, and add the appropriate markers???

If I am to update it, I WILL need one such map!!!!

 

No problem. Same markers as before, except with "mk_P3_pos" and "mk_bonus_P3", I'm assuming?

Edited by Kasrkin84, 24 January 2018 - 03:01 AM.

[Gambit]

@Brother Kekoulis: ... (I like the way Slaanesh approves!)

 

 

No problem. Same markers as before, except with "mk_P3_pos" and "mk_bonus_P3", I'm assuming?

Yes!!! Just like the other maps, with  the proper marker indexing, just as you said (1,2, and now 3 as well).

By the way, please add all the markers we have for player 3 as well, so that to add turrets, get reinforcements, etc!

No need to hurry, I am still perfecting the open-player-race approach, I guess I will have finished by week's end.

Seems excellent so far!

[fuggles]

Not 2/3 enemies?