View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0000118FSSCPgameplaypublic2005-09-16 03:26
Reporterdiamondgeezer Assigned Totaylor  
PrioritynormalSeveritymajorReproducibilityalways
Status resolvedResolutionfixed 
Summary0000118: Alpha Wing doesn't depart in to fighterbay properly
Descriptionhttp://dynamic4.gamespy.com/~freespace/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21138

I can only imagine this occours because the other fighters are waiting for Alpha 1 to depart first or something:

When the departure SEXP fires, the reast of Alph aWing race off towards the destroyer, but then stop dead a few km from the ship and from each other. A purely AI wing will simply fly in to the fighterbay and disappear as you'd expect. I've tried setting Alpha to be lead by Alpha 2 instead of me, but it doesn't make a difference.
TagsNo tags attached.

Activities

RandomTiger

2004-03-03 20:52

developer   ~0000259

Does this happen in retail FS2?

RandomTiger

2004-03-04 20:30

developer   ~0000273

Also could you upload a mission that allows us to see this bug ourselves.

2004-03-05 19:47

 

Untitled.fs2 (7,614 bytes)

diamondgeezer

2004-03-05 19:47

reporter   ~0000309

Yes, it does happen in retail FS2 and yes, I can upload a smaple mission.

Lightspeed

2004-03-07 13:02

reporter   ~0000361

Same here.

RandomTiger

2004-03-15 20:12

developer   ~0000461

Are there any FS2 standard missions that fixing this might affect?

diamondgeezer

2004-03-15 20:58

reporter   ~0000462

Well no, cos in the V campaign Alpha never departs in to the hanger bay - they always jump out

Goober5000

2004-03-21 22:17

administrator   ~0000524

Ugh. Bug in my fighterbay code, prolly. I'll take a look.

phreak

2005-04-14 03:24

developer   ~0002134

resolution?

can a workaround be using the end-mission sexp?

Goober5000

2005-04-14 05:18

administrator   ~0002135

I still haven't had time to look at this. Be patient. ;)

Goober5000

2005-08-31 05:56

administrator   ~0003230

Interesting. This doesn't exclusively affect Alpha wing. It affects whichever wing is the first in the squadron, whether or not the player is in it.

Goober5000

2005-08-31 07:29

administrator   ~0003231

Last edited: 2005-08-31 07:46

Okay, that particular bug has been fixed. A rare instance of a very helpful bug... it allowed the cause of this bug to be identified. ;) This bug is triggered when a wing which has "form on wing" as an active goal is cued to depart. The wing leader will depart properly, but the rest of the wing will go and hide behind the capital ship.

The question of how to fix it is: Should the "form on wing" goal be removed when a ship is cued to depart, or should the formation code be modified to allow for departure? I'm leaning toward the first option, but before I change anything I want to know why "form on wing" causes the ships to behave in this way.

edited on: 08-31-05 03:46

Goober5000

2005-09-16 01:42

administrator   ~0003378

Taylor, you bring up an interesting point: I hadn't thought about just making the entire wing depart "in formation". It sounds like that would require more effort than it's worth, though, and the quick fix is better in this case.

taylor

2005-09-16 02:07

administrator   ~0003379

Yeah the formation thing does seem a bit much. It would need extra testing too in order to make sure that the orders to keep in formation don't adversely affect the path needed to depart or the break-and-attack senario.

I'll go ahead and make them just break out of formation when told to depart as a wing. Give it a look when it hits CVS just to make sure it's still in line with what you were thinking.

Goober5000

2005-09-16 02:52

administrator   ~0003381

Hm. It wasn't what I was thinking*, but it looks like it'll work the same way and handle the same set of circumstances.

If this works then we can resolve this. :)

*I was thinking about putting a statement at the beginning of mission_do_departure to always exit formation mode, but it looks like the statement in ai_formation is where :v: intended it to go; and it looks like that statement accounts for all possibilities anyway.

taylor

2005-09-16 03:26

administrator   ~0003382

I hadn't done it this way at first but it just seemed to work better and it's a pretty small change. And like you said, it just fits well there with how :v: had it all set up.

It handled all of my tests to I'll go ahead and resolved it but I'm sure someone will reopen if it comes back.

taylor

2005-09-16 03:26

administrator   ~0003383

Fixered.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2004-03-01 00:03 diamondgeezer New Issue
2004-03-03 20:52 RandomTiger Note Added: 0000259
2004-03-04 20:30 RandomTiger Note Added: 0000273
2004-03-05 19:47 diamondgeezer File Added: Untitled.fs2
2004-03-05 19:47 diamondgeezer Note Added: 0000309
2004-03-07 13:02 Lightspeed Note Added: 0000361
2004-03-15 20:12 RandomTiger Note Added: 0000461
2004-03-15 20:58 diamondgeezer Note Added: 0000462
2004-03-21 22:17 Goober5000 Note Added: 0000524
2004-03-21 22:17 Goober5000 Assigned To => Goober5000
2004-03-21 22:17 Goober5000 Status new => assigned
2005-04-14 03:24 phreak Note Added: 0002134
2005-04-14 05:18 Goober5000 Note Added: 0002135
2005-05-25 02:52 Goober5000 Description Updated
2005-08-31 05:56 Goober5000 Note Added: 0003230
2005-08-31 07:29 Goober5000 Note Added: 0003231
2005-08-31 07:32 Goober5000 Note Edited: 0003231
2005-08-31 07:44 Goober5000 Note Edited: 0003231
2005-08-31 07:44 Goober5000 Note Edited: 0003231
2005-08-31 07:44 Goober5000 Note Edited: 0003231
2005-08-31 07:45 Goober5000 Note Edited: 0003231
2005-08-31 07:46 Goober5000 Note Edited: 0003231
2005-09-16 01:42 Goober5000 Note Added: 0003378
2005-09-16 02:07 taylor Note Added: 0003379
2005-09-16 02:52 Goober5000 Note Added: 0003381
2005-09-16 03:26 taylor Note Added: 0003382
2005-09-16 03:26 taylor Status assigned => resolved
2005-09-16 03:26 taylor Resolution open => fixed
2005-09-16 03:26 taylor Assigned To Goober5000 => taylor
2005-09-16 03:26 taylor Note Added: 0003383