Renegade
08.07.2010, 21:33:23
Fight 1
As far as I could see, reaperrr is, indeed, correct - overlays can't currently have an owner. That, of course, leads to dependencies, where implementing #925 also requires implementing some kind of ownership system for overlays. Not impossible, but most certainly not speaking for the issue.
However, as much as he'll hate to hear this, I found Nighthawk's support of #428 rather damning:
Where #925 has a rather straightforward and simple usage case (remapped walls), whose merit has already been demonstrated in pre-release screenshots, NH's example of #428's usage required two additional new logics, one of which isn't even implemented yet, and a convoluted, hackish system of double-killing and sending home, only to achieve...nothing?
Seriously, mind-controlling enemy soldiers and then killing them doesn't even remotely look like taking prisoners in the first place, but having a convoluted, multi-level, dependency-laden example and no idea what to do with the result is just ridiculous.
I mean, let's be honest here - what kind of effect could the "prison" get? ElitePrimary? Upgraded armor? "Our prison now has a stronger cannon because it houses so many prisoners". Doesn't quite make sense to me.
I'm sorry, I appreciate the thought put into this example, but if the very submitter of the issue can't come up with a simple, straightforward usage case for the issue, and the one example they can come up with depends on multiple other features, essentially implying that the request can't stand on its own, then it just doesn't look like a good way to spend coding time.
Investing time into #925, we at least know what we get: Remappable walls. A clear, simple request with a simple, obvious goal.
Kill #428
Support #925
(Sidenote at this point: This does not mean I consider #925 to be the best use of our time in general. I just think that, out of these two issues, #925 would be the better use of our time.)
Fight 2
Mr. m666 should read the issue before suggesting overly complicated workarounds that wouldn't even be a good argument even if they were applicable to the issue.
Beyond that, I agree with the overall sentiment that #596 will open up more opportunities for modders to add depth and strategy to the game.
While #604 is appealing in its simplicity, it simply doesn't do much for the game. Seriously - even if the players stopped everything they're doing and enjoyed the oh-so-shiny parachutes of each country the first time they're seeing them, that'd be it. After that, even if they saw them going down, they'd care more for the question "friend or foe?" than what logo is on their 'chutes. (Color is enough of an indicator there...or automatic defense fire.)
That, and I think Blade's comment "I don't see anyone jumping up to make them" highlights an inherent problem with SHP-enhancements.
Sure, one can argue the walls would suffer the same problem, but let's be realistic here: Even if resurrecting pre-release buildings weren't a long-standing tradition in the community, the probability that someone sits down and creates a static wall once for use by a large number of countries in a large number of mods which will be visible throughout the game in multiple bases is vastly higher than that somebody sits down and generates animations which can only be used by a select sub-set of countries the logo fits for, most likely only in one mod, visible only in a few cases in specific situations in the game.
Quite frankly, the probability remappable overlays would find an SHP artist to make use of them is way, way, way higher than that country-specific parachutes would.
In fact, I know that to be true. Because Angelfuck released the pre-release Allied walls years ago.
Kill #604
Support #596
As far as I could see, reaperrr is, indeed, correct - overlays can't currently have an owner. That, of course, leads to dependencies, where implementing #925 also requires implementing some kind of ownership system for overlays. Not impossible, but most certainly not speaking for the issue.
However, as much as he'll hate to hear this, I found Nighthawk's support of #428 rather damning:
Where #925 has a rather straightforward and simple usage case (remapped walls), whose merit has already been demonstrated in pre-release screenshots, NH's example of #428's usage required two additional new logics, one of which isn't even implemented yet, and a convoluted, hackish system of double-killing and sending home, only to achieve...nothing?
Seriously, mind-controlling enemy soldiers and then killing them doesn't even remotely look like taking prisoners in the first place, but having a convoluted, multi-level, dependency-laden example and no idea what to do with the result is just ridiculous.
I mean, let's be honest here - what kind of effect could the "prison" get? ElitePrimary? Upgraded armor? "Our prison now has a stronger cannon because it houses so many prisoners". Doesn't quite make sense to me.
I'm sorry, I appreciate the thought put into this example, but if the very submitter of the issue can't come up with a simple, straightforward usage case for the issue, and the one example they can come up with depends on multiple other features, essentially implying that the request can't stand on its own, then it just doesn't look like a good way to spend coding time.
Investing time into #925, we at least know what we get: Remappable walls. A clear, simple request with a simple, obvious goal.
Kill #428
Support #925
(Sidenote at this point: This does not mean I consider #925 to be the best use of our time in general. I just think that, out of these two issues, #925 would be the better use of our time.)
Fight 2
Mr. m666 should read the issue before suggesting overly complicated workarounds that wouldn't even be a good argument even if they were applicable to the issue.
Beyond that, I agree with the overall sentiment that #596 will open up more opportunities for modders to add depth and strategy to the game.
While #604 is appealing in its simplicity, it simply doesn't do much for the game. Seriously - even if the players stopped everything they're doing and enjoyed the oh-so-shiny parachutes of each country the first time they're seeing them, that'd be it. After that, even if they saw them going down, they'd care more for the question "friend or foe?" than what logo is on their 'chutes. (Color is enough of an indicator there...or automatic defense fire.)
That, and I think Blade's comment "I don't see anyone jumping up to make them" highlights an inherent problem with SHP-enhancements.
Sure, one can argue the walls would suffer the same problem, but let's be realistic here: Even if resurrecting pre-release buildings weren't a long-standing tradition in the community, the probability that someone sits down and creates a static wall once for use by a large number of countries in a large number of mods which will be visible throughout the game in multiple bases is vastly higher than that somebody sits down and generates animations which can only be used by a select sub-set of countries the logo fits for, most likely only in one mod, visible only in a few cases in specific situations in the game.
Quite frankly, the probability remappable overlays would find an SHP artist to make use of them is way, way, way higher than that country-specific parachutes would.
In fact, I know that to be true. Because Angelfuck released the pre-release Allied walls years ago.
Kill #604
Support #596
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.
AlexB