This topic contains 50 replies, has 0 voices, and was last updated by  Deathstryker 12 years, 11 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #2547

    Bobirov
    Participant

    At gcamp’s suggestion, I’m starting this thread to post ideas for new weapons definitions or changes to the current ones for the next major release. It sounded like a good idea so here are some things I have come up with.

    1. More control over . Instead of true/false some sort of value system would be nice. Say 0 is false and 1.0 does what true does now. Setting it to 2.0 would cause it to spread twice as much or something along those lines.

    2. Control over . Along the same lines as the previous idea, 0 would be like false is, 1.0 would be like true is now. 2.0 would cause the weapon to do twice the damage as the current formula. 0.5 would do half the damage.

    3. Control over . Here the value is between 0 and 1. Setting it to 0.5 would achieve the current (max height) collision. Setting it to say 0.75 would cause a collision at 75% of the arc, setting to 0.25 would cause a collision at 25% of the arc.

    4. Ability to draw no texture when useing a WeaponExplosion event.

    Thats all I can think of at the moment but I may come up with something else later. Anyone else have any ideas?

    #11387

    kennywood
    Participant

    I am with you, bobirov.

    Like I said before, I was trying to create a leaping frog based weapon called the grim leaper, but it did not turn out the way I wanted because it did not jump the way I thought it would.

    if we could have some control over it, it will be much better than the current version I have.

    in addition, I had to limit some value or else the textures will go on forever and all players got booted from the server…

    #11388

    Anonymous
    Participant

    I could just be doing something wrong, but it doesn’t seem like you can define more than two subweapons under a WeaponMulti event. You can get around it by making another projectile but that still isn’t quite the same.

    I would like to see the ability to define at least 3 subweapons if not an unlimited number. I never can get as many explosions as I want in more complex weapons as I’m using the two subweapons for other things half of the time.

    If you already can do this and I am just doing something wrong, could someone post a short outline of how to go about doing it? I really think being able to define more subweapons under a WeaponMulti event would open up the doors to more complex and devastating weaponry (something I love.. ;)).

    #11389

    Bobirov
    Participant

    I hate when I forget to log in, and the auto-login doesn’t work for me hehe. Anyways, I forgot to add something else I thought about yesterday.

    A new value for the of none. This way you could do damage without blowing up land to simulate say gas attacks or something like that. This would really be nice if there was a way to make explosions do damage over time (like napalm) instead of all at once.

    I suppose instead of changing Deform/WeaponExplosion it would require a new event like WeaponGas that does not deform and has values like: GasTime, GasHurtPerSecond, GasSpreadTime, GasSpreadRate, GasHeight. Even so, I still think adding in a none value for deform would be handy.

    GasTime = Total time the gas cloud lasts (like NapalmTime)
    GasHurtPerSecond = Damage the gas does per second (like NapalmHurtPerSecond)
    GasSpreadTime = Total time to increase radius of the gas cloud
    GasSpreadRate = Rate at which the gas radius expands
    GasHeight = Height of the gas cloud

    The explosion for either none or the WeaponGas event could be the same as the one for down and it would look just fine I think.

    This could then lead to the possibility of a “Bio Suit” or something that would block one chemical attack per Suit (like a chute). But, I may be asking for a bit much here… 😉

    #11390

    Pi
    Participant

    I was thinking that if someone had a couple hours to kill, they could make a new shield like that in the latest versions of Scorched Earth where the projectile would actually be pushed away from the tank’s sheild without ever touching it. I remember that I would be nearly invensable if I was at the bottom of a hill with the Mag sheild (or whatever it was called) and the missiles would come close to me, but the shield would push the missile just beyond me, often hurting another tank.

    So a sheild that will bend the projectile path of the missiles without ever touching it, is my not so humble request. A new property of or something could be included. However I doubt many ever played that version of Scorched Earth… I remember that someone added a lazer as well, but it was worthless.

    #11391

    Anonymous
    Participant

    Nah, the laser is definitely not a worthless weapon, you just have to know how to use it. It’s very useful for taking out shields of nearby tanks if they have any, unless it is a SuperMag shield (the shield request mentioned above). As long as the enemy is at your level or above, you can just aim straight at the tank and fire away at full power. And it can go right through small mountains 🙂

    I’ve heard that the laser was supposed to use batteries to charge eventually, but scorch never went past version 1.5. Oh well, that’s why we have Scorched 3D 🙂

    Lomgren

    #11392

    Bobirov
    Participant

    @anonymous wrote:

    I could just be doing something wrong, but it doesn’t seem like you can define more than two subweapons under a WeaponMulti event. You can get around it by making another projectile but that still isn’t quite the same.

    Dunno why it took me so long to think of this, but I figured out how to get around this heh.

    Basically to get more than 2 subweapons, you just make one of the subweapons a “WeaponMulti” type. You can then stack on multiple effects in the same time. Maybe someone else will find this useful as well 🙂

    Short Example:





    code


    code


    code
    #11393

    ruinzV2.0
    Participant

    hadnt you allready been doing that, or something similar to that? or did you just post this a little while after figuring it out?

    #11394

    imported_gcamp
    Participant

    I could just be doing something wrong, but it doesn’t seem like you can define more than two subweapons under a WeaponMulti event. You can get around it by making another projectile but that still isn’t quite the same.

    I’ve had a look at the code, and I think you should be able to define more than two subweapons.





    etc…

    What happens if you try this?

    #11395

    Bobirov
    Participant

    Well I must have been correct when I said “I may be doing something wrong.” Before I posted that I had tried in two seperate weapons to put a third subweapon under a WeaponMulti and both times I kept getting the “Type Mismatch” error on the line. I assumed that the the problem was that WeaponMulti would only accept 2 subweapons.

    However, Gavin, after you mentioned that you should be able to put more than 2, I went back and carefully constructed a very basic test weapon with 3 subweapons under the first collisionaction. Naturally, after fixing one small syntax error, the weapon fired right up and worked exactly like it was supposed to. I guess I should have investigated my errors more thoroughly in my original trials and I could have avoided this embarrassment. 🙄

    Thank you for clarifying the fact that what I was talking about was possible and pointing me in the right direction. Sorry for any inconvieniance here and I’ll try not to jump the gun next time..

    Rob

    #11396

    imported_gcamp
    Participant

    @bobirov wrote:

    Well I must have been correct when I said “I may be doing something wrong.” Before I posted that I had tried in two seperate weapons to put a third subweapon under a WeaponMulti and both times I kept getting the “Type Mismatch” error on the line. I assumed that the the problem was that WeaponMulti would only accept 2 subweapons.

    However, Gavin, after you mentioned that you should be able to put more than 2, I went back and carefully constructed a very basic test weapon with 3 subweapons under the first collisionaction. Naturally, after fixing one small syntax error, the weapon fired right up and worked exactly like it was supposed to. I guess I should have investigated my errors more thoroughly in my original trials and I could have avoided this embarrassment. 🙄

    Thank you for clarifying the fact that what I was talking about was possible and pointing me in the right direction. Sorry for any inconvieniance here and I’ll try not to jump the gun next time..

    Rob

    Don’t even mention it, I didnt want to say anything until I had re-checked the code, just in case I said it should work and didn’t.

    #11397

    Bobirov
    Participant

    Well I’ve been collecting some more of my ideas and I figured I’d go ahead and post them. Some of these are probably a bit too much (accuracy and mirv aiming), but they would be cool.. 😉 Anyways, let me get right to it.

    1) Ability to aim a weapon like the following vertically just like any other weapon when shot. Oddly enough, it seems like one projectile does aim properly but the rest do not. This combined with the new control over spread would effectively open up the door for shotgun type weapons.



    2) An optional # primitive that can be placed under a WeaponExplosion action. The value is a number of seconds to delay before the explosion occurs. The explosion still occurs in the same spot as normal, just on a timed delay. If this primitive is omitted, the default time of 0 seconds is used. I mainly thought of this because I wanted to let some napalm burn for a few seconds and then do an explosion but couldn't figure out a way to do it.

    3) An xxxx primitive for use under a WeaponAimedOver/Under action. I was thinking 3 values would be nice, if not a numerical value. Also again here if the primitive is omitted the current method is used by default.

    None:  Completely random directions/velocities (like old scorched earth)

    Low: Like it is now, aimed at tanks but only so accurately

    High: Projectiles with high accuracy would be aimed much more precisely at nearby tanks. In addition, they are more efficient (if there are 2 nearby tanks and 4 new projectiles, each tank will have 2 projectiles aimed at it.

    4) A primitive that causes projectiles to not produce smoke.

    5) A primitive that causes projectiles to not be affected by wind. Might want to make this one have no affect under the initial shot, only on subsequent projectiles. Although as long as it is used in the proper spot it wouldn't be a problem. This is mainly for projectiles that are supposed to be devoid of mass (energy weapons).

    Note: 3, 4 and 5 were ideas I while playing around with making chain and forked lighting type weapons hehe. They work fairly well currently but those three additions would make it much more proper :D.

    Just my thoughts,
    Rob

    #11398

    Bobirov
    Participant

    Can the new primitive be applied to pretty much any part of a weapon or is it confined to only explosions like in my previous post? 😛

    #11399

    imported_gcamp
    Participant

    @bobirov wrote:

    Can the new primitive be applied to pretty much any part of a weapon or is it confined to only explosions like in my previous post? 😛

    Any part of a weapon that takes a weapon primative.

    #11400

    Bobirov
    Participant

    I’ve noticed that the new option only affects the amount of horizontal spread of a Mirv. It would be nice if we had control over the vertical spread as well. Like maybe convert the current tag into or or something and then add in another tag for or . So then we could set horizontal spread to 0 and still adjust how far the mirv spreads along the original projectile’s path. This would give total control over how wide an area any Mirv covers.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 52 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.