91 replies to this topic

[Whatzituyah]

Quote

#Clan LBX v UAC ammo swap


* Dead, former programmer code makes it neigh impossible to do in the near future

So its impossible officially? Any idea why? Discuss about this and please answer those questions on how you think it is impossible because I don't think it is not impossible.

Why cant both weapons be the same weapon and once you fire one its on the global cool down for the lbx and ac in the same slot as the weapon problem solved. At least that's how I would solve it.

[FupDup]

I personally wonder if the technical issue is more about just multiple ammo types used by a single gun rather than just firing mode switching (i.e. ECM can already toggle modes?). What I'm saying is that maybe, if I'm not a total derp, we could fudge this by having a mode switch button but without creating more than 1 ammo type?

So, for the LB 10-X, you could fire 15 slugs, or 15 clusters, or 7 clusters and 8 slugs, or 1 cluster and 14 slugs, or any other possible combination with 1 ton of LB 10-X ammo. There wouldn't be cluster ammo or slug ammo, just LB-X ammo that can be used for either equally.


Regardless of how it gets done, the important thing here is to MAKE SURE THE CLUSTER ROUNDS ARE ACTUALLY VIABLE. Otherwise, people will just load up on slugs all day and completely ignore clusters, because clusters are bad.

Edited by FupDup, 20 April 2015 - 07:59 PM.

[Ragtag soldier]

it's impossible to them currently because they fired a programmer they apparently needed (or bought code they didn't make to get the game working which is just as bad) and now have nobody who knows how to tell the game "gun X can use ammo X1 and X2, and each ammo uses different properties".

short version, my sig.

[One Medic Army]

Because coding isn't that straightforward.

This is for all the poor software experts out there:
https://www.youtube....bed/BKorP55Aqvg

[bad arcade kitty]

Ragtag soldier, on 20 April 2015 - 07:59 PM, said:

it's impossible to them currently because they fired a programmer they apparently needed (or bought code they didn't make to get the game working which is just as bad) and now have nobody who knows how to tell the game "gun X can use ammo X1 and X2, and each ammo uses different properties".

short version, my sig.

i see why they fired that coder

[Whatzituyah]

One Medic Army, on 20 April 2015 - 08:02 PM, said:

Because coding isn't that straightforward.

This is for all the poor software experts out there:
https://www.youtube....bed/BKorP55Aqvg

Oh man I stopped watching the moment I heard drawing 7 red lines I knew I would die laughing I see what you did there. But I understand coding isn't that straight forward but if they can't code this in whats the hope of them coding any new tech in?

[One Medic Army]

Whatzituyah, on 20 April 2015 - 08:06 PM, said:

Oh man I stopped watching the moment I heard drawing 7 red lines I knew I would die laughing I see what you did there. But I understand coding isn't that straight forward but if they can't code this in whats the hope of them coding any new tech in?

From what I understand, CryEngine doesn't actually support multiple ammo types. Instead it uses a work around where multiple weapons are defined, and the "ammo toggle" switches between those multiple weapons that all look identical, possibly queueing reload animations instead of weapon switch animations.

Now, there's any number of reasons this could be an issue with PGI's code, and how they defined the weapon "object" with regards to the mech "object", and various ammo/cooldown/valid build code checks.

[cSand]

Ragtag soldier, on 20 April 2015 - 07:59 PM, said:

it's impossible to them currently because they fired a programmer they apparently needed (or bought code they didn't make to get the game working which is just as bad) and now have nobody who knows how to tell the game "gun X can use ammo X1 and X2, and each ammo uses different properties".

short version, my sig.

can you take a pic of your programming diploma/degree/PHD and post it here please and also a fully detailed technical explanation of why this job is actually so simple to implement?



oh... you can't?

Edited by cSand, 20 April 2015 - 08:21 PM.

[LordNothing]

thing i learned about cs is that nothing is impossible, only lazy. you can code yourself into a corner but you can also code yourself out of it. it could be that they dont have any actual programmers on staff, just people writing xml and lua. i wouldn't be surprised at all if that were the case. does cry engine even let you get at the low level stuff? do they even have access to engine source or is it all just a binary blob?

i presume its because they couldn't make ammo switch that makes sense. its kind of a tough nut to crack, but its solvable. i would have just had multiple instances of the weapon in the panel. one for each kind of ammo. so you can set group one to fire scatter and group 2 to fire burst. an alternative might have an ammo select for that weapon show up as if it was another item in the list, assign it to a group and you could cycle ammo for that weapon by triggering that group (you could even do cool things like have it alternate ammo types with each shot). that panel could use a few tweaks, like assigning things like ecm mode or ams toggle and have them operable with the weapon groups, i think that was the general idea but never implemented.

[cSand]

LordNothing, on 20 April 2015 - 08:21 PM, said:

thing i learned about cs is that nothing is impossible, only lazy. you can code yourself into a corner but you can also code yourself out of it. it could be that they dont have any actual programmers on staff, just people writing xml and lua. i wouldn't be surprised at all if that were the case. does cry engine even let you get at the low level stuff? do they even have access to engine source or is it all just a binary blob?

nothing is impossible, but it is this simple:

time/money investment > return

Edited by cSand, 20 April 2015 - 08:22 PM.

[Whatzituyah]

cSand, on 20 April 2015 - 08:22 PM, said:

nothing is impossible, but it is this simple:

time/money investment > return

If that was the case all they would be doing is making more mechs not maps. Then they actually get return for mechs people like.

Edited by Whatzituyah, 20 April 2015 - 08:24 PM.

[LordNothing]

you dont need programmers for maps. just mappers and maybe a little script that any 9 year old with a linux terminal could write. what they are doing, making mechs and maps, is the same thing modders do to games on a regular basis. this is really data entry when it comes right down to it. i dont even think they have someone on staff who could write a hello world in basic.

those days of in house engine wizards and asm level optimization are long dead. buy an engine, work around its limitations, and release a half assed product. and sad to say pgi aint the only ones doing it.

cSand, on 20 April 2015 - 08:22 PM, said:

time/money investment > return

true but if they had somone who can code they would have it done in 2 days. how many of you have spent more than a thousand bucks when historically $50 from everybody was enough to pay for the development of a full featured game. are they that inefficient?

Edited by LordNothing, 20 April 2015 - 08:40 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

FupDup, on 20 April 2015 - 07:58 PM, said:

I personally wonder if the technical issue is more about just multiple ammo types used by a single gun rather than just firing mode switching (i.e. ECM can already toggle modes?). What I'm saying is that maybe, if I'm not a total derp, we could fudge this by having a mode switch button but without creating more than 1 ammo type?

So, for the LB 10-X, you could fire 15 slugs, or 15 clusters, or 7 clusters and 8 slugs, or 1 cluster and 14 slugs, or any other possible combination with 1 ton of LB 10-X ammo. There wouldn't be cluster ammo or slug ammo, just LB-X ammo that can be used for either equally.


Regardless of how it gets done, the important thing here is to MAKE SURE THE CLUSTER ROUNDS ARE ACTUALLY VIABLE. Otherwise, people will just load up on slugs all day and completely ignore clusters, because clusters are bad.

one thing I wondered if is if could be toggled, like you say with the ecm, but that toggle basically just chokes the spread on the LB-X to the point of being "one projectile". The spread is a fully adjustable line of html. The real question is if it could be toggled? thus you don't really touch the ammo at all, just toggle back and forth. True it's not "1 ton of each" like in TT, but IDK.


Bit thing is, IMO, you'd have to also adjust the range or damage and such for the "tight" pattern down so that it didn't simply obsolete the AC10. IMO, if they could fudge a "solid slug" it should probably be 8-8.5 dmg, and and maybe with a lower velocity, to compensate...or everyone would just buy LB-X and go "slug".

[FupDup]

Bishop Steiner, on 20 April 2015 - 08:42 PM, said:

one thing I wondered if is if could be toggled, like you say with the ecm, but that toggle basically just chokes the spread on the LB-X to the point of being "one projectile". The spread is a fully adjustable line of html. The real question is if it could be toggled? thus you don't really touch the ammo at all, just toggle back and forth. True it's not "1 ton of each" like in TT, but IDK.


Bit thing is, IMO, you'd have to also adjust the range or damage and such for the "tight" pattern down so that it didn't simply obsolete the AC10. IMO, if they could fudge a "solid slug" it should probably be 8-8.5 dmg, and and maybe with a lower velocity, to compensate...or everyone would just buy LB-X and go "slug".

I know you'll probably disagree with this, but I honestly find the regular AC/10 mediocre as it is... Usable, serviceable, but it doesn't seem to do any particular thing well. If you want to brawl better you can get an AC/20, if you want to midrange poke better you can go AC/5 or UAC/5. It doesn't seem to have the punch to be a primary weapon, and yet its somewhat high opportunity costs make it hard to use as a secondary weapon.

I think that, if PGI somehow got firing modes to work, this would be a good opportunity to improve the plain-jane AC/10. Using the "tier" system I would place an unquirked AC/10 around Tier 3 or so.

I think that with the current stats, the IS LB 10-X would make a decently balanced gun with slugs (ignoring the poopy clusters for now), it's just that it "looks" OP when we compare it to the "meh" AC/10.

Edited by FupDup, 20 April 2015 - 08:50 PM.

[cSand]

LordNothing, on 20 April 2015 - 08:30 PM, said:

true but if they had somone who can code they would have it done in 2 days. how many of you have spent more than a thousand bucks when historically $50 from everybody was enough to pay for the development of a full featured game. are they that inefficient?

Sorry man, but all I'm reading here is "I have no idea how a real business, especially in the software industry, actually works"

[LordNothing]

yea buisness aint my thing i admit. but you have to wonder where the money is going (mediocre staff).

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The major problem is figuring out how you want it to "change modes."

Do you want the gun to have inherent weapon modes that require different ammo, or does the gun inherit properties from the ammo itself (such as burst or projectiles per shot).

It isn't impossible but it can be a difficult implementation to figure out at this point in time since the code was done with that in mind.

[Bishop Steiner]

FupDup, on 20 April 2015 - 08:48 PM, said:

I know you'll probably disagree with this, but I honestly find the regular AC/10 mediocre as it is... Usable, serviceable, but it doesn't seem to do any particular thing well. If you want to brawl better you can get an AC/20, if you want to midrange poke better you can go AC/5 or UAC/5. It doesn't seem to have the punch to be a primary weapon, and yet its somewhat high opportunity costs make it hard to use as a secondary weapon.

I think that, if PGI somehow got firing modes to work, this would be a good opportunity to improve the plain-jane AC/10. Using the "tier" system I would place an unquirked AC/10 around Tier 3 or so.

I think that with the current stats, the IS LB 10-X would make a decently balanced gun with slugs (ignoring the poopy clusters for now), it's just that it "looks" OP when we compare it to the "meh" AC/10.

I do disagree. It's a little heavy, but it's got low heat, solid 10 pt punch, decent velocity and a good RoF. Quirks have made some ac20s just as fast, but that doesn't take away from the ac20 to ac10 comparison, weapon to weapon. iT ALREADY OUTPERFORMS THE ppc AND er ppc IN PAIRS, (stupid caplock) pretty quickly comparing stats and HPD vs DPS. The weight and ammo is quickly balanced by the issues of DHS.

Mind you, I would not complain about an extra 2-300m/s on them, but they are one of the most underrated guns, still, in the game-

[FupDup]

Bishop Steiner, on 20 April 2015 - 08:56 PM, said:

I do disagree. It's a little heavy, but it's got low heat, solid 10 pt punch, decent velocity and a good RoF. Quirks have made some ac20s just as fast, but that doesn't take away from the ac20 to ac10 comparison, weapon to weapon. iT ALREADY OUTPERFORMS THE ppc AND er ppc IN PAIRS, (stupid caplock) pretty quickly comparing stats and HPD vs DPS. The weight and ammo is quickly balanced by the issues of DHS.

Mind you, I would not complain about an extra 2-300m/s on them, but they are one of the most underrated guns, still, in the game-

Current PPCs don't make a great baseline. :\

[Bishop Steiner]

FupDup, on 20 April 2015 - 08:57 PM, said:

Current PPCs don't make a great baseline. :\

if 10 pt PPFLD is not a good baseline, I guess that bespeaks to even deeper issues in the game.