View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0000146 | FSSCP | gameplay | public | 2004-03-19 11:37 | 2006-02-20 06:57 |
| Reporter | kasperl | Assigned To | Goober5000 | ||
| Priority | normal | Severity | major | Reproducibility | always |
| Status | resolved | Resolution | fixed | ||
| Platform | PC | OS | Windows | OS Version | 98SE |
| Summary | 0000146: Ordering all fighters to ignore target will cause caps to do the same | ||||
| Description | pressing C-3-1 will order all fighters and bombers to disengage your current target. unfortunately, capitol ships will do the same. this will cause the player to order the Collusus to stand down, and ergo, to break quite a few missions. For example: http://dynamic4.gamespy.com/~freespace/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22224 | ||||
| Steps To Reproduce | press C-3-1 with friendly capitol ships engaging your current target | ||||
| Additional Information | has been present from FS2 Retail on, it might even be from FS1 | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
|
|
I've seen this a lot in the FS2 campaign and its messed up my gameplay a lot. |
|
|
cans someone please hurt me really bad? it's C-3-5, not C-3-1. But aside from this minor detail, what is the possibility of this getting fixed? |
|
|
I think I know what's going on. I'll try to fix it. |
|
|
Is there a fix for this yet? |
|
|
actually, its C-3-6, and it has been there since FS1... IF you fix it though, can you make it a command line? I know of some missions where its actually required to be like that... |
|
|
Noted, is that FS1 or FS2 retail missions or MOD mission? edited on: 03-20-05 07:59 |
|
|
these were from mods, in fs1 and 2, even though fs2 is the only relevent one... |
|
|
Command line, or mission flag? Both seems most appropriate. |
|
|
I've already got a partial fix in for this; I just need to finish it and apply it. I figured I'll leave the existing sexp as-is but make an "ai-ignore-new" sexp using the new code. Then I'll link the C-3-6 command to the ignore-new code. |
|
|
Any progress on this one Goob? |
|
|
Nope. Still busy. Be patient. |
|
|
WMC's fixed it. It looks like the ai-ignore sexp has nothing to do with the hud messaging, so maybe I was on the wrong track. I'll take another look at the sexp and resolve this ASAP. |
|
|
Nope, WMC's fix didn't solve it. It only removed one half of a two-part redundant system. The other half happens when the goal is actually assigned. Look at ai_ignore_object in aicode.cpp. This is what gets executed for any ship that receives the "ignore" goal, whether through a sexp or through messaging: aip->ignore_objnum = OBJ_INDEX(ignored); aip->ignore_signature = ignored->signature; aip->ai_flags &= ~AIF_TEMPORARY_IGNORE; ignored->flags |= OF_PROTECTED; Any ship that gets ignored will have its "protected" flag set. Thus *no* other ship will be allowed to attack it. Looks like I'll have to dig up my old ignore-new code. |
|
|
Ick, this be a messy bug. Hippo, can you give me some example missions where you supposedly need this command? |
|
|
there was one i downlaoded from VW that said something along the lines of, 'in order to facilitate the capture of the target, the hull must be slightly damaged. The amount of time to capture is proportional to the hull integrity. Order your wingmen to cease fire when you are ready to have the transport arrive' The whole point that the longer you waited, the shorter the docking was, but the weaker the ship was, and the whole time, there was wave after wave of shivans... Ordering them to ignore the target also stopped a deimos from firing at it (it was an ntf corvette IIRC that was being captured...)... |
|
|
Hm... Considering that: A) It says "All fighters" B) It doesn't do what it says I'm thinking that the best COA is to fix it once CVS is working again. In the case that you presented, it sounds like you could disable the Deimos' turrets, and because of A and B, I'm inclined to view any mission that uses it as exploiting a bug. Plus it causes problems with more missions than missions that need it. Just the other day, I wanted my fighters to stay the hell away from a cruiser, but ordering them to ignore it also caused my capships to ignore it. edited on: 11-06-05 20:13 |
|
|
*grabs the bug back from WMC* I very much agree that it should be fixed, but I already have some code partially complete to fix this. It's on my to-do list. :D |
|
|
Shouldn't you just need to remove the protect_ship flag? Although, actually, it might take an ignore list if the original behavior was to leave the protect_ship flag set. (So fighters could be ordered to ignore multiple targets at once.) Regardless, the protect_ship flag really shouldn't be used for this, it has so many other implications. |
|
|
Okay, I think I've fixed this. :) Can some obliging testers have a look and make sure this works as expected? Basically I've kept ai-ignore and added another goal, ai-ignore-new, that should work as you would think ignore should work in the first place. And I've coupled the squad messaging to ignore-new instead of ignore. So backwards compatibility should be fully supported... I just need to know if the new stuff works. :) |
|
|
Ugh. That code had about eight different places where the ignore behavior had to be changed. I think I've gotten them all, though. Tested and hopefully fixed. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2004-03-19 11:37 | kasperl | New Issue | |
| 2004-03-20 01:37 | RandomTiger | Note Added: 0000509 | |
| 2004-03-20 01:37 | RandomTiger | Status | new => acknowledged |
| 2004-03-20 15:04 | kasperl | Note Added: 0000510 | |
| 2004-03-21 22:25 | Goober5000 | Note Added: 0000525 | |
| 2004-03-21 22:25 | Goober5000 | Status | acknowledged => assigned |
| 2004-03-21 22:25 | Goober5000 | Assigned To | => Goober5000 |
| 2005-03-20 12:26 | kasperl | Note Added: 0002008 | |
| 2005-03-20 12:54 | Hippo | Note Added: 0002009 | |
| 2005-03-20 12:58 | RandomTiger | Note Added: 0002010 | |
| 2005-03-20 12:59 | RandomTiger | Note Edited: 0002010 | |
| 2005-03-20 13:00 | Hippo | Note Added: 0002011 | |
| 2005-03-20 13:09 | kasperl | Note Added: 0002013 | |
| 2005-03-20 22:02 | Goober5000 | Note Added: 0002020 | |
| 2005-04-04 17:02 | kasperl | Note Added: 0002091 | |
| 2005-04-04 22:55 | Goober5000 | Note Added: 0002103 | |
| 2005-07-11 15:10 | Goober5000 | Note Added: 0002744 | |
| 2005-07-12 06:15 | Goober5000 | Note Added: 0002755 | |
| 2005-07-17 20:53 | WMCoolmon | Note Added: 0002797 | |
| 2005-07-17 20:59 | Hippo | Note Added: 0002801 | |
| 2005-11-07 01:05 | WMCoolmon | Note Added: 0003775 | |
| 2005-11-07 01:05 | WMCoolmon | Assigned To | Goober5000 => WMCoolmon |
| 2005-11-07 01:13 | WMCoolmon | Note Edited: 0003775 | |
| 2005-11-07 03:00 | Goober5000 | Assigned To | WMCoolmon => Goober5000 |
| 2005-11-07 03:00 | Goober5000 | Note Added: 0003778 | |
| 2005-11-13 09:32 | WMCoolmon | Note Added: 0003815 | |
| 2006-02-20 01:16 | Goober5000 | Note Added: 0004841 | |
| 2006-02-20 06:57 | Goober5000 | Status | assigned => resolved |
| 2006-02-20 06:57 | Goober5000 | Resolution | open => fixed |
| 2006-02-20 06:57 | Goober5000 | Note Added: 0004844 |
