| 1 |
Now for some miscellaneous things.
|
1 |
Now for some miscellaneous things.
|
| 2 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
| 3 |
[q]How does one get started helping out with development? As in, if I had ideas for a way to improve unit AI (Lance targeting based on unit value, for instance), where can I find the code to make a fork that does just that? I'm assuming that's how you'd prefer someone help out with development. [/q]
|
3 |
[q]How does one get started helping out with development? As in, if I had ideas for a way to improve unit AI (Lance targeting based on unit value, for instance), where can I find the code to make a fork that does just that? I'm assuming that's how you'd prefer someone help out with development. [/q]
|
| 4 |
@Niarteloc
http://zero-k.
info/mediawiki/index.
php?title=Zero-K:Developing#Getting_sources
and
join
Discord
to
ask
questions.
Look
in
luarules
and
be
careful
with
reinventing
the
wheel.
|
4 |
@Niarteloc
http://zero-k.
info/mediawiki/index.
php?title=Zero-K:Developing#Getting_sources
and
join
Discord
to
ask
questions.
Look
in
luarules
and
be
careful
with
reinventing
the
wheel.
I'd
love
to
have
you
poking
around
to
see
what
you
can
improve.
There
are
gadgets
to
extend
(
overkill
prevention
could
deal
with
Lance
Fleas)
,
gadgets
to
configure
(
Tactical
AI
and
Target
Priority
have
scope
for
a
massive
amount
of
configuration,
but
are
filled
in
fairly
crudely
at
the
moment)
,
and
probably
even
some
new
gadgets
to
write.
|
| 5 |
\n
|
5 |
\n
|
| 6 |
[q]Don't useful widgets eventually get incorporated into the framework of the game proper? [/q][q]If you like a new and unauthorized widget enough, then you can seek to get it added to the authorized set for the benefit and use of everybody or have it integrated in the game. [/q][q]I would advise that the developers make up a little committee or panel and decide what is and what is not acceptable and make the widgets they deem acceptable part of the base game. People should have free and easy access to tools that provide advantages such as those offered by widgets.[/q]
|
6 |
[q]Don't useful widgets eventually get incorporated into the framework of the game proper? [/q][q]If you like a new and unauthorized widget enough, then you can seek to get it added to the authorized set for the benefit and use of everybody or have it integrated in the game. [/q][q]I would advise that the developers make up a little committee or panel and decide what is and what is not acceptable and make the widgets they deem acceptable part of the base game. People should have free and easy access to tools that provide advantages such as those offered by widgets.[/q]
|
| 7 |
@Lynx, @Astran and @Tarkin see the top of http://zero-k.info/Forum/Post/219329#219329 and the bottom of http://zero-k.info/Forum/Post/219357#219357 . Simply including player-widgets in the game is not a viable solution. There are solutions in the vicinity of what you are suggesting but they are hardly 'simple'.
|
7 |
@Lynx, @Astran and @Tarkin see the top of http://zero-k.info/Forum/Post/219329#219329 and the bottom of http://zero-k.info/Forum/Post/219357#219357 . Simply including player-widgets in the game is not a viable solution. There are solutions in the vicinity of what you are suggesting but they are hardly 'simple'.
|
| 8 |
\n
|
8 |
\n
|
| 9 |
The automation philosophy behind Istrolid sounds completely different to that of Zero-K. Automation should not make units uncontrollable, it should give players more control. Automation implementations seem to commonly stray into the territory of taking control away by making units do too much on their own (another problem with simply including player-widgets, since other users did not decide to lose that much manual control). This is why I don't even like the non-economic state toggles, they are fiddly to use in combat. Choosing commands to issue out of Move, Attack Move, Set Target and Force Fire is a much more fluid way to communicate a large range of desires to units. State toggles mostly exist as a cop-out for not solving the rare edge cases in various bits of unit AI and I don't want to force people to interact with them.
|
9 |
The automation philosophy behind Istrolid sounds completely different to that of Zero-K. Automation should not make units uncontrollable, it should give players more control. Automation implementations seem to commonly stray into the territory of taking control away by making units do too much on their own (another problem with simply including player-widgets, since other users did not decide to lose that much manual control). This is why I don't even like the non-economic state toggles, they are fiddly to use in combat. Choosing commands to issue out of Move, Attack Move, Set Target and Force Fire is a much more fluid way to communicate a large range of desires to units. State toggles mostly exist as a cop-out for not solving the rare edge cases in various bits of unit AI and I don't want to force people to interact with them.
|
| 10 |
\n
|
10 |
\n
|
| 11 |
@esainane
|
11 |
@esainane
|
| 12 |
* You seem to be suggesting a set of technically-implemented regulations to keep the widget sandbox alive without breaking anything. This is akin to banning an expensive new material from Battle Bots because it would price too many people out of the competition. I feel like this will be the eventual solution, but who is going to write it? If the widget sandbox gets too full then I would like the authors of this competition to do a bit of work regulating it.
|
12 |
* You seem to be suggesting a set of technically-implemented regulations to keep the widget sandbox alive without breaking anything. This is akin to banning an expensive new material from Battle Bots because it would price too many people out of the competition. I feel like this will be the eventual solution, but who is going to write it? If the widget sandbox gets too full then I would like the authors of this competition to do a bit of work regulating it.
|
| 13 |
* Disabling widgets in the lobsterpot would make too many people sad for it to happen unless some big failure occurs somewhere.
|
13 |
* Disabling widgets in the lobsterpot would make too many people sad for it to happen unless some big failure occurs somewhere.
|
| 14 |
* Pushing upstream and getting into the default UI somehow, at least as an easy to find setting, is the benchmark. Global Build Command existed back in the wild west of widget development when the UI was a lot more broken. I dealt with those holdover widgets by disabling rather than deleting them. The current standard is to be more stable and less hard to control than GBC.
|
14 |
* Pushing upstream and getting into the default UI somehow, at least as an easy to find setting, is the benchmark. Global Build Command existed back in the wild west of widget development when the UI was a lot more broken. I dealt with those holdover widgets by disabling rather than deleting them. The current standard is to be more stable and less hard to control than GBC.
|
| 15 |
* Widgets are not "very much available" in a meaningful sense.
|
15 |
* Widgets are not "very much available" in a meaningful sense.
|
Widgets vs Cheating