Renegade
04.10.2010, 13:02:25
Since this is the second time this has been claimed¹, let me interject here and say: #957 is not a subset of #376.
957: custom storms is about temporary, on-the-map, direct-effect events like TS's Ion Storms, randomly or periodically changing the map conditions from normal either locally or globally.
376: Weather Effects is about the general environment of the map. It may, potentially, slightly affect map conditions, but it's primarily a graphical effect to help set the mood of a map. The fact that insane workarounds by the community use similar (cell-based) techniques as storms would use is founded in the fact that they have no other choice, not that that is the best way to go about it, and is absolutely not binding to me.
To make this perfectly clear: Unless I hit an implementational brick wall or something else convinces me to do it differently, #376 will be implemented very simply, drastically different from #957, and will not support the vast, vast, vast majority of what is requested in #957.
#376 will be similar in terms of usage to things like ambient light or day and night cycles.
#957 will be similar to TS's Ion Storms.
And quite frankly, given the extreme difference in what is being requested in both issues, it surprises me that anyone would think they're the same.
I'm guessing it's yet another case of judging the requests by their names.
¹At least I assume that was the claim, since Blade's issue number makes no sense.
957: custom storms is about temporary, on-the-map, direct-effect events like TS's Ion Storms, randomly or periodically changing the map conditions from normal either locally or globally.
376: Weather Effects is about the general environment of the map. It may, potentially, slightly affect map conditions, but it's primarily a graphical effect to help set the mood of a map. The fact that insane workarounds by the community use similar (cell-based) techniques as storms would use is founded in the fact that they have no other choice, not that that is the best way to go about it, and is absolutely not binding to me.
To make this perfectly clear: Unless I hit an implementational brick wall or something else convinces me to do it differently, #376 will be implemented very simply, drastically different from #957, and will not support the vast, vast, vast majority of what is requested in #957.
#376 will be similar in terms of usage to things like ambient light or day and night cycles.
#957 will be similar to TS's Ion Storms.
And quite frankly, given the extreme difference in what is being requested in both issues, it surprises me that anyone would think they're the same.
I'm guessing it's yet another case of judging the requests by their names.
¹At least I assume that was the claim, since Blade's issue number makes no sense.
Forum Rules
(01.06.2011, 05:43:25)kenosis Wrote: Oh damn don't be disgraced again!
(25.06.2011, 20:42:59)Nighthawk Wrote: The proverbial bearded omni-bug may be dead, but the containment campaign is still being waged in the desert.