Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Feature idea: Fire exclusion zone / Non shoot zone

3 posts, 160 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
sort
41 days ago
Quick idea that I had:
If friendly artillery is set to fire it will likely fire into friendly troops / buildings if a fast unit such as a raider gets too close.
This causes often more damage by friendly fire than the enemy unit would have caused.

I had two ideas how this behaviour could be avoided, so please let me know what you think:

1. (Artillery)-Units can be set to avoid firing at enemy units that are too close to own units. This could be set with a distance variable to account for different explosion radius.

2. Artillery non-target zones. The player could set zones that artillery would not target, e.g. back or close to sensitive buildings (fusion etc.).

The behaviour could be manually triggered if wanted by the player.
So please let me know what you think.
+3 / -0


41 days ago
I'm not sure. I wouldn't reject the features if they were free. The first would probably be Level 2, the second sounds more like Level 3: https://zero-k.info/Forum/Thread/31189?postID=226780#226780

There is an engine feature for the first feature. If it is dynamic then the feature is free. If it isn't dynamic, then the next-best implementation I know of is O(NM) in the number of artillery units and targets in range. The engine feature would also be the only decent way to handle leading shots, and it feels like a lot of the point of the idea is to deal with leading, so perhaps the best beet is engine work.

The second feature is also O(NM) but would have an additional step where positions have to be looked up as well. It also sounds like a hassle to use as a player, I'm not sure that very many people would use it at all.
+2 / -0
40 days ago
is there already a way to set artilery to target newly apearing enemies in a whitelisted area?

eg. repeat + drag attack comand over an area you do want it to target (shift key ~ repeat the command to cover a whitelisted fire zone)

it may be possible to kindof already achieve this to a lesser extent?
+1 / -0