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

Post edit history

Next Gen Bombers

To display differences between versions, select one or more edits in the list using checkboxes and click "diff selected"
Post edit history
Date Editor Before After
11/5/2022 3:36:42 AMAUrankAdminGoogleFrog before revert after revert
11/5/2022 3:35:59 AMAUrankAdminGoogleFrog before revert after revert
Before After
1 [q]I'm not sure what you mean by "how": "how good" or "in what way"?[/q] 1 [q]I'm not sure what you mean by "how": "how good" or "in what way"?[/q]
2 As in does it account for latency? Does latency make it noticeably less effective? Latency of 500ms is not uncommon and a unit can move 30 elmos in this time. This seems like enough to make a manually targeted Raven miss. 2 As in does it account for latency? Does latency make it noticeably less effective? Latency of 500ms is not uncommon and a unit can move 30 elmos in this time. This seems like enough to make a manually targeted Raven miss.
3 \n 3 \n
4 Anyway, I played around and it looks fairly solid so I've added it: https://github.com/ZeroK-RTS/Zero-K/commit/17c674fcace32d2c1d795882d8446b06ebfc7c7c 4 Anyway, I played around and it looks fairly solid so I've added it: https://github.com/ZeroK-RTS/Zero-K/commit/17c674fcace32d2c1d795882d8446b06ebfc7c7c
5 \n 5 \n
6 I renamed it to be a bit more descriptive, and most importantly, to start with the word "Bomber" for searchability. I have found a few things that could be tweaked though. 6 I renamed it to be a bit more descriptive, and most importantly, to start with the word "Bomber" for searchability. I have found a few things that could be tweaked though.
7 \n 7 \n
8 To me the main value of the widget is that bombers reacquire momentarily lost targets, rather than just fly idly towards their target without attacking. A close second is how it lets bombers drop their bombs against targets that cloaked a split second ago. The long range behaviour doesn't seem to useful though, and can be detrimental. 8 To me the main value of the widget is that bombers reacquire momentarily lost targets, rather than just fly idly towards their target without attacking. A close second is how it lets bombers drop their bombs against targets that cloaked a split second ago. The long range behaviour doesn't seem to useful though, and can be detrimental.
9 \n 9 \n
10 https://i.imgur.com/ABY8sBv.png 10 https://i.imgur.com/ABY8sBv.png
11 Here is a case where an enemy was visible in the middle of the dam, then moved south east. What I would want is for the bombers to move to approximately where the enemy was, then sight the target, then bomb it. Instead the bombers fly over the lowlands and bomb empty ground. I would limit prediction to a second or two. It is rare to want a bomber to shoot somewhere based on information more than a second or two old, and for Raven this window shrinks to a split second. If a Raven's target was lost more than half a second ago then firing at the ground is probably pointless, at least if the target was moving. 11 Here is a case where an enemy was visible in the middle of the dam, then moved south east. What I would want is for the bombers to move to approximately where the enemy was, then sight the target, then bomb it. Instead the bombers fly over the lowlands and bomb empty ground. I would limit prediction to a second or two. It is rare to want a bomber to shoot somewhere based on information more than a second or two old, and for Raven this window shrinks to a split second. If a Raven's target was lost more than half a second ago then firing at the ground is probably pointless, at least if the target was moving.
12 \n 12 \n
13 I also noticed some weirdness with radar and sonar. Radar dots that disappear don't seem to be handled by the widget at all. Surely they should be handled, as target reacquisition is a big feature of the widget. I was also able to get a Raven stuck attacking a point on the sea after it lost sight of a Seawolf. The Seawolf entered sonar range later but the Raven did not update its target. 13 I also noticed some weirdness with radar and sonar. Radar dots that disappear don't seem to be handled by the widget at all. Surely they should be handled, as target reacquisition is a big feature of the widget. I was also able to get a Raven stuck attacking a point on the sea after it lost sight of a Seawolf. The Seawolf entered sonar range later but the Raven did not update its target.
14 \n 14 \n
15 The underwater behaviour also seems dodgy. Raven isn't any better vs Seawolf with this widget, and arguably it is worse. A Raven targeting a Seawolf tends to hit unless the Seawolf moves approximately forwards for the duration of the bomb. With the widget the Raven hits only if the Seawolf maintains a perfectly straight course. The widget is quite easy to exploit with a bit of micro. For example a circling Seawolf can cause a Raven to drop its bomb about 300 elmos away. 15 The underwater behaviour also seems dodgy. Raven isn't any better vs Seawolf with this widget, and arguably it is worse. A Raven targeting a Seawolf tends to hit unless the Seawolf moves approximately forwards for the duration of the bomb. With the widget the Raven hits only if the Seawolf maintains a perfectly straight course. The widget is quite easy to exploit with a bit of micro. For example a circling Seawolf can cause a Raven to drop its bomb about 300 elmos away.
16 * Old situation: Raven attack forces Seawolf to move forwards while the bomb drops. Raven is hard to bait. Decisions involved require low APM. 16 * Old situation: Raven attack forces Seawolf to move forwards while the bomb drops. Raven is hard to bait. Decisions involved require low APM.
17 * New situation: Raven attack forces Seawolf to make any minor adjustment to its trajectory. Raven is easy to bait with APM expenditure, and there are few decisions but implementation requires more APM in all cases. 17 * New situation: Raven attack forces Seawolf to make any minor adjustment to its trajectory. Raven is easy to bait with APM expenditure, and there are few decisions but implementation requires more APM in all cases.
18 So basically Raven is worse [i]except[/i] against people with moving Seawolves that don't spend the APM. 18 So basically Raven is worse [i]except[/i] against people with moving Seawolves that don't spend the APM.
19 \n 19 \n
20 The situation for commanders strictly worse. A Raven without the widget cannot miss a basic Strike Chassis in the north of Folsom Dam. With the widget, the commander just needs to jink a little and the Raven will fire wildly at the ground. Other bombers waste their shots against deep underwater targets, so there at least needs to be a height check. I'd say the only UI problem being solved here is the fiddliness of using non-Raven bombers to damage shallow targets. In the case of Seawolf we'd probably just have to make it travel deeper though. 20 The situation for commanders strictly worse. A Raven without the widget cannot miss a basic Strike Chassis in the north of Folsom Dam. With the widget, the commander just needs to jink a little and the Raven will fire wildly at the ground. Other bombers waste their shots against deep underwater targets, so there at least needs to be a height check. I'd say the only UI problem being solved here is the fiddliness of using non-Raven bombers to damage shallow targets. In the case of Seawolf we'd probably just have to make it travel deeper though.
21 \n 21 \n
22 https://i.imgur.com/wCJ36ul.png 22 https://i.imgur.com/wCJ36ul.png
23 There might be a problem with memory usage when 200 bombers attack something in the fog. Performance otherwise seems good. 23 There might be a problem with memory usage when 200 bombers attack something in the fog. Performance otherwise seems good.
24 \n 24 \n
25 https://i.imgur.com/L7MBZXc.png 25 https://i.imgur.com/L7MBZXc.png
26 Your water check is too permissive. This Ravager was able to juke because the Raven shot predictively rather than with its guided bomb. 26 Your water check is too permissive. This Ravager was able to juke because the Raven shot predictively rather than with its guided bomb.
27 \n 27 \n
28 Here is a summary: 28 Here is a summary:
29 * Radar dots leaving vision should be handled. 29 * Radar dots leaving coverage should be handled.
30 * Bombers fly too far off target when they are far away. 30 * Bombers fly too far off target when they are far away.
31 * Firing blind at a target that has been invisible for more than a few seconds seems useless. 31 * Firing blind at a target that has been invisible for more than a few seconds seems useless.
32 * This is even worse for Raven, and probably shouldn't happen after more than a split second, or maybe ever. 32 * This is even worse for Raven, and probably shouldn't happen after more than a split second, or maybe ever.
33 * Most of the water handling behaviour is bad. In particular, Raven gets worse and other bombers waste shots against deep targets. 33 * Most of the water handling behaviour is bad. In particular, Raven gets worse and other bombers waste shots against deep targets.
34 * Take a look at memory pressure. 34 * Take a look at memory pressure.