Marine-Centric Commanding
microcosm
Join Date: 2003-12-06 Member: 24059Members, Constellation, NS2 Playtester
Join Date: 2003-12-06 Member: 24059Members, Constellation, NS2 Playtester
<div class="IPBDescription">and a solution to the mapping depth problem</div>I propose allowing tabbing to highlight marines, making them active. Tabbing can work either with a squad modifier, screen modifier, or team modifier. So if you just want to tab through your cap team, or only what you see in your active camera you can. With only this implemented, there is little benefit, except maybe allowing to center the screen if you set a variable in your config.
However, allowing the camera to follow the active marine could provide a solution for multi-depth map architecture.
The camera code is theoretically simple - you only calculate a straight line path from the marine to the current camera angle and stop at z when there is a collision. This also makes sure your camera is never in the way of a hanging box or other obstruction.
This has a cool side effect of only allowing the commander to see lower than the top level of rooms if marines are in it. This can add another dimension (PUN) to the gameplay by knowing the commander can only drop stuff while marines are present in certain rooms, and all sorts of other fun things.
Im sure there are more neat ideas that could piggyback on the idea of having an active marine.
However, allowing the camera to follow the active marine could provide a solution for multi-depth map architecture.
The camera code is theoretically simple - you only calculate a straight line path from the marine to the current camera angle and stop at z when there is a collision. This also makes sure your camera is never in the way of a hanging box or other obstruction.
This has a cool side effect of only allowing the commander to see lower than the top level of rooms if marines are in it. This can add another dimension (PUN) to the gameplay by knowing the commander can only drop stuff while marines are present in certain rooms, and all sorts of other fun things.
Im sure there are more neat ideas that could piggyback on the idea of having an active marine.
Comments
Vote no.
It doesn't seem like a bad thing, but it was mentioned that Flayra is trying to keep the commander's experience "epic" or something, even in competitive play (which means he does care about it, which is nice <i>and</i> unusual for a developer). Do you think this would give the commander the best gameplay experience possible?
heh. well, it does extend the game's life, gives the developer a good reputation, generally means it gets good reviews for gameplay depth, and acts as a sort of promotion/advertising. theoretically.
config variables:
cl_active 0 - do nothing when highlighting a new active marine
cl_active 1 - center the screen on a new active marine
cl_active 2 - camera follows active marine # <-- i don't think this is a good idea for anything except maybe hltv
cl_cycle all - cycle through all marines
cl_cycle squad - only cycle through the currently selected squad
cl_cycle view - only cycle through marines currently within your x-y
Being able to cycle through marines as an additional interface might be useful though. I would support this as an addition to regular minimap control, but not as a replacement.
Except that solves none of the 'height issues'. Those issues *are* solved by the map entity implementation - if all goes well.
And what happens when there's a marine in a vent?
<!--quoteo(post=1674782:date=Apr 1 2008, 03:09 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(locallyunscene @ Apr 1 2008, 03:09 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1674782"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Being able to cycle through marines as an additional interface might be useful though. I would support this as an addition to regular minimap control, but not as a replacement.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed.
but: "And what happens when there's a marine in a vent?"
though I suppose with the map entity thing, it'd just mean you gave it a set of coordinates, but the height is still determined by the map entities. (Rather than height above the active marine.)
though I suppose with the map entity thing, it'd just mean you gave it a set of coordinates, but the height is still determined by the map entities. (Rather than height above the active marine.)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Same thing that happens when there's a skulk in the vent(kharaa kommander remember), the height is adjusted to be the right height above the vent. AFAIK the height is only determined by where the "map height" nodes are so if there's a "vent height" node, then you'll be at the correct height. If there's not, well that's a flaw in the map, not the game.
Vote no.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There's no reason you couldn't have a toggle.
And yes this I think topic should be part of the commander experience thread.
(Also, the devs did say that the alien commander didnt necessarily have to have a marine-esque view, but that the key purpose was to unify the team's resources, though that's a debate for another time and place..)
<!--quoteo(post=1674811:date=Apr 2 2008, 01:08 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(locallyunscene @ Apr 2 2008, 01:08 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1674811"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->AFAIK the height is only determined by where the "map height" entities are<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->From what I understood, mappers would place map height nodes as 'guides' at certain locations (top of an incline, bottom of it, etc.), and that the area in between entities would be extrapolated from those guides. Likely (or hopefully) they'd get a 'height map' that they could possibly customise by adding/removing/tweaking points.
<!--quoteo(post=1674848:date=Apr 2 2008, 05:48 AM:name=the_x5)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(the_x5 @ Apr 2 2008, 05:48 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1674848"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There's no reason you couldn't have a toggle.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Sigh.
<!--quoteo(post=1674678:date=Mar 30 2008, 08:06 PM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Harimau @ Mar 30 2008, 08:06 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1674678"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Basically: <b>Restrict</b> your field of view to individual field marines **!!<b>only</b>!!**.
Vote no.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->The key word is ONLY.
From what I understood, mappers would place map height nodes as 'guides' at certain locations (top of an incline, bottom of it, etc.), and that the area in between entities would be extrapolated from those guides. Likely (or hopefully) they'd get a 'height map' that they could possibly customise by adding/removing/tweaking points.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So you asked a question and answered it in the same post. Maybe using the "edit" feature next time would be helpful to avoid confusion because that wasn't clear to me.
<!--quoteo(post=1674892:date=Apr 2 2008, 01:46 AM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Harimau @ Apr 2 2008, 01:46 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1674892"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The key word is ONLY.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He's saying you could still have a marine centric command style, but also make it toggleable. So it would be a marine only view when the commander toggles it on. Your orig post oversimplifies the idea and then rejects it. <b>x5</b> is showing you a way the idea could work instead of "voting no" on it and ending discussion.
<!--quoteo(post=1674660:date=Mar 30 2008, 10:34 AM:name=microcosm)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(microcosm @ Mar 30 2008, 10:34 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1674660"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->However, allowing the camera to follow the active marine could provide a solution for multi-depth map architecture.
The camera code is theoretically simple - you only calculate a straight line path from the marine to the current camera angle and stop at z when there is a collision. This also makes sure your camera is never in the way of a hanging box or other obstruction.
This has a cool side effect of only allowing the commander to see lower than the top level of rooms if marines are in it. This can add another dimension (PUN) to the gameplay by knowing the commander can only drop stuff while marines are present in certain rooms, and all sorts of other fun things.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
edit: ohhhh, so i re-read it yet again; but so the idea is that, separate to the usual camera implementation (a single 'map'), for areas above or below that usual map (determined by the map height entities), you could have the commander look into those areas - but restrict him to the vicinity of field marines; and it would allow for a limited implementation of multiple levels. well, i take that back then; now i kinda like the idea. it seems i didn't understand it properly.
still, what about the vent thing? i'd rather the commander didn't really have the ability to see into vents, really.
The key word is ONLY.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Easy there, I <i>did</i> read what you wrote. Think about what I wrote. (key word = compromise)
<!--quoteo(post=1674913:date=Apr 3 2008, 09:05 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(locallyunscene @ Apr 3 2008, 09:05 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1674913"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->He's saying you could still have a marine centric command style, but also make it toggleable. So it would be a marine only view when the commander toggles it on. Your orig post oversimplifies the idea and then rejects it. <b>x5</b> is showing you a way the idea could work instead of "voting no" on it and ending discussion.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly, thank you locallyunscene.
I like this idea, It would cut down on alot of easy ways to abuse as a commander if you could only build where a marine is present.
(Examples. Building on Aliens RT spots at the start of the game to slow down their building speed, building CC's in vents to block, spamming CC's behind an Onos to block its escape.. ect)
It would also be logical, the fact that buildings appear from no where is already quite illogical but that they appear in the middle of no where takes it to a new level of, "illogical logic".
And yes this I think topic should be part of the commander experience thread.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'd say this is one of the features the dev team shouldn't prioritize much. Of course if you can create a piece of code that works nicely and fits in the polished look of a well developed game in a short matter of time, go and implement it. Otherwise I don't think its worth the time and work.
Well, you can always BS your way around it. Like say, in my original buildpack//buildbot idea, I had the 'ghost structure' being a (holographic?) 'blueprint' visible to marines, and then you place the buildpack, and it takes the data of the location and structure and turns it into something physical and tangible.