Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
DFD-R3: 741 vs. 1009, 510 vs. 488
#18
Fight 1
The proposed bodyguard logic is not complete. What should happen if the leader dies? Why are bodyguards unselectable? Even if they aren't controllable it's good to know their health status. Clicking a bodyguard may automatically select the leader unit. And the request is mixed up with another request, the IsBodyguardControlled= logic. If this is tidied up, this logic is well worth being implemented.

Helicopter tilt is a fun optical change. It's not something affecting the game at all, but rather nice eye candy. Even if this isn't Generals it would still look cool. Nonetheless, save the bodyguards.

Fight 2
I don't know how the game can correctly infer to which extent turret, barrell or chassis are hidden by one of the other parts. They are all flat sprites. They have no depth information. Reversing drawing order if the turret is pointing away from the viewport is not a real option, as the chassis would hide the turret, then. Adding some new drawing tags instead of inferring the drawing order would not help, because the tank's chassis would still be drawn above the turret. Supporting non-turret units only would not be the smartest thing, though.

Multi-turret units would be as widely used as cliff sequences. Mods without naval forces wouldn't have battleships but could still have epic units and mods without shp tanks wouldn't profit from slope climbing sequences. So the multi-turret units would benefit more. Having an additional tag defining whether all turrets are firing together or alternating or whether they are split primary and secondary weapons should be relatively easy. What it takes to get the logic itself working I don't know, but that feature would be awesome.

Having to chose between something I can't estimate and something that is impossible – just to be on the safe side – I'd chose the impossible one. But for this, I'm going with the multi-turret battleships.


Messages In This Thread
DFD-R3: 741 vs. 1009, 510 vs. 488 - by Renegade - 11.08.2010, 01:40:27
RE: DFD-R3: 741 vs. 1009, 510 vs. 488 - by Blade - 11.08.2010, 13:34:47
RE: DFD-R3: 741 vs. 1009, 510 vs. 488 - by Blade - 11.08.2010, 16:42:35
RE: DFD-R3: 741 vs. 1009, 510 vs. 488 - by mt. - 11.08.2010, 17:58:57
RE: DFD-R3: 741 vs. 1009, 510 vs. 488 - by AlexB - 18.09.2010, 17:38:43



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)