optimally use d-gun to attack for merlin and firewalker

Just use a default state of "Hold fire".

change selection priority for merlin.

Amnykon so what I do is assign a number to my formations.

For example, I select my main fighting force and go CTRL-1. That gives my main fighting force the number 1.

CTRL-3 is my artillery and it becomes a simple matter to press 3 and tell them to engage an objective.

So if you set them to hold fire and assign them a special group it will be easy to engage at will.

Command group formations work when your pushing for on one front, but how do you use them when you need to push on multiple fronts? It’s not uncommon to have a north, south, and center front. With 3 fronts, I get 3 command groups per front. This does work, but is it the best solution? My formation rank PR has a lower APM tax, allowing for more fronts. My goal is to lower the APM tax. Making some units attack a manual fire does increase APM tax, but other ways to control them have an even higher APM tax.

Amnykon I guess we play differently. If I spread myself too thinly I tend to start missing opportunities and getting caught off guard. Even 1v1 I tend to porc on one flank and push on the other.

I got it working. Hardest part was finding out how lobster works, particularly with function script.BlockShot(). Next hardest part was to move CMD_DISABLE_ATTACK out of the unit_thrower gadget and into it's own gadget. Since it's mainly gadget changes, I can't mock using it until it is build into an update. I'll create a PR for this soon.

I use 3 types of builders

• Part of army. Used for reclaim/repairs. These are selected with my army.
• Global build command controlled. Global build command allows me to retreat with them without destroying my build queue. I created a selection rank override for this category, so they are not selected with my army. There is an active PR for this change, though it is only a widget change, so I am currently use it. I would also like to add the GBC state to factories, so I can more easily select what type of con I want to make.
• Manual controlled builders. I would like to create a constructing override selection rank override for this group of builders. Frequently they are selected with my main army and It destroys their build queue that normally consists of pork. They are usually supported with my army and surrounding pork, so I don't need to retreat with them as often.

Builders flex between these three types, though it is harder to move them out of Global build command due to them spreading out and lower selection rank.

Yes, I am trying to lower APM taxes so I can more easily push on 2 fronts while slowing down their push on a third. Oddly, changing the weapons on merlin and firewalker to manual fire will lower the APM tax.

It is interesting that people are shocked when I tell them that Starcraft is too slow for me. I think they refer to the high APM requirements of the game, while I am referring to the interaction of the players.

quote: I do use hold fire, however when I tell my army to attack, they also fire. I want to control large area long reload attack as a d-gun.

How are you telling your army to attack? If you're doing it with Attack Move and that causes a hold fire Firewalker to fire, then you've found a bug.

quote: Right clicking on an enemy unit issues an attack command, so it’s not entirely bug.

Yes, right clicking on an enemy issues an Force Fire command. That isn't a bug. The bug would be if units on Hold Fire attacked on Attack Move. There is either a bug here or there isn't.

Stepping back to talk about the feedback more as a developer, right clicking on a unit in an enemy army to tell your army to attack the enemy army is a discouraged form of control. Players 'should' be using Attack Move or Move, in a line, as otherwise their units will clump up. So the most impactful fix would be to fix whatever is causing players to right click on enemy units to tell their army to attack. But if this only affects 0.1% of players, then maybe any fix would impose too much cost elsewhere to be worthwhile.

See https://github.com/ZeroK-RTS/Zero-K/pull/4646 for my technical comments.

To make a widget implementation of this, I would need an equivalent to gadget:AllowCommand() which is executed per unit.

widget:UnitCommandNotify() is the closest hook; however, widgets need to specifically call it, and most commands do not call it. Most do not. It is also called after, which would make widget drawing include the units that should have their command blocked in their drawing.

widget:CommandNotify() is global and ran once for all units. These functions receive the list of units to command with Spring.GetSelectedUnits() and iterate over them.

I am considering replacing all 108 instances of Spring.GetSelectedUnits() with widgetHandler:GetSelected(cmdID, cmdParams, cmdOpts) that calls widget:ModifySelected(units, cmdId, cmdParams, cmdOpts) -> units?

Note: At a later time, I would like to add the ability to select units before they become wireframes, so they can receive orders such as modify a build queue for a factory, morph a shield or cloak structure, set build priority, or give the unit to a team member. This way I don't need to wait for a con to get to the site before giving these orders. In theory, a select ghost units widget could add ghost units (probably negative id's) with a widget:ModifySelected function.