|
Dreadwroth posted:I would have totally bought a HALO that was all just Saber mission stuff in a heartbeat. That was probably the best HALO thing ever, especially in coop.
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 05:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 04:08 |
|
|
...I wonder how hard it would be to mod an interceptor into Arma.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 12:08
|
|
|
TheCosmicMuffet posted:In the future continuity of the halo universe, it's explained that all combat spacecraft have a wireless access point as part of their inter-ship communications and guidance systems. Self-guided munitions, then, have given up all attempts at tracking their prey in any way, instead, after lock on, they're provided an endpoint address and network credentials that allow them to ping a wcf service on the target vessel for position and velocity information. They do this every 200ms or so, until contact is made. ECM systems make this a very dumb concept to base your weapons on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 17:38
|
|
|
It's a joke  I do like the idea that the go-to countermeasure to defeat Twitter-seeking weapons is 'massive broad-spectrum jamming', though. 'vampire! vampire! we have to tweet HARDER'
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 17:49
|
|
|
PleasingFungus posted:Pretty sure it was a joke. Yes. (A weapon system like that wouldn't work even today.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 18:45
|
|
|
General Battuta posted:It's a joke Well actually... "vampire" is the code word for anti-ship cruise missiles (ASuW), not AAW.  e: it'd be 'spike' iirc HiroProtagonist fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Feb 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
Orv posted:Yes. (A weapon system like that wouldn't work even today.) Are you sure? Drones, right? And radio chatter? If you can hear your own side over the radio/whatever and you can maintain control of a remote thing like a cruise missile or drone, then in principle you've got the ability to connect to a network. It is just a joke, but the idea that the AIs on board Halo and Marathon ships can actually invade an enemy network while they're fighting in other ways is part of the fiction of the universe. That part, at least isn't satire. I think the idea that at the end of the day it'd be easier to ask an enemy ship where it is than track it by other means is pretty funny, but it's also not so crazy. That'd be something I'd like to see in this game. The active vs passive radar concept. Where you might have very limited situational awareness, generally, but if you want to take the risk, you could reveal one of your ships and get a brief picture of what's happening across the system and attempt to attack the enemy's network. Seems like it could be an extension of that weapon-jamming idea with the green rings. I guess speed of light being what it is, you'd have to do some 'hyperspace radar' hand waving for it to make sense. Assuming anybody but me cares.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 19:50
|
|
|
Simply put, it's way easier to blanket an entire network/wavelength than it is to punch through that blanket. I'm not up on ultra-current ECM tech, but we've been able to obscure IR for a while, and jamming radio is even older. I mean, don't get me wrong, with Halo AI and whatever tech that universe has that I don't know about (haven't read any of the books for instance), it's not necessarily far-fetched. There are several sci-fi universes out there that never developed certain tech because of reasons A or B.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 20:04
|
|
|
HiroProtagonist posted:Well actually... "vampire" is the code word for anti-ship cruise missiles (ASuW), not AAW. Yeah, I know - the implication is that you're aboard a warship with a dedicated Twitter crew that posts a lot about #jamming when it gets shot at.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 20:13
|
|
|
Orv posted:Simply put, it's way easier to blanket an entire network/wavelength than it is to punch through that blanket. I'm not up on ultra-current ECM tech, but we've been able to obscure IR for a while, and jamming radio is even older. I mean, don't get me wrong, with Halo AI and whatever tech that universe has that I don't know about (haven't read any of the books for instance), it's not necessarily far-fetched. There are several sci-fi universes out there that never developed certain tech because of reasons A or B. Sure, but the same argument could be made for nuclear weapons--it's much easier to completely destroy everything in an area than it is to protect it. But the thing is, that option is often not exercised, because you don't get to choose where techniques like that go--it's a blanket. So sure, you can shut down the enemy's remote control and communications, but you will also shut it down for yourself. There's plenty of examples where that kind of technique wasn't useful in history. For instance, during Rommel's campaign to push the british back in africa, he put together a plan for an offensive meant to cut off their supplies and overwhelm them that involved radio silence among all the attacking units--to maximize confusion and prevent the british from having time to react. For the german forces, this worked out alright, because the German military structure encouraged lower ranking commanders to use their own discretion and develop their own plans. The orders they were given were typically broad and let them understand what their goal was, rather than a rote set of instructions and a time table. However, the Italians that comprised much of the force they needed to carry out the attack were in a military which had a rigid structure and expected strict orders to come from the top down. The ultimate result was that, while they were successful in some places, the British were able to fall back in some kind of order, and blah blah blah, spoiler; allies win in the end. The other thing is that it's simpler to blanket a wavelength, but the range on doing that, vs the range on communicating (maliciously or among friendlies) is much greater. Because with the blanket, it has the problem of how quickly the amount of static drops off with distance--but with communication, you only need a little bit to make it a great distance and effectively get the message across. For instance, we can point a big dish at distant space objects like pulsars, and hear them pulsing. But none of those pulsars going on around us right now are preventing us from making cellphone calls. Even though, if you were much closer, they probably could. I don't know what the range on stuff is like, but my guess is that as you start flying around in space with hand-waving techniques like hyperdrive that go faster than light, the ability to completely disrupt all communication is going to be much more onerous for the jammer than the jammees. I suppose you could shoot jamming pod things at enemy fleets and have them hum along, but if something is emitting a tremendous signal designed to do that, then it's easy to track and destroy. You just wave a passive detector around until you find the bright spot that's emitting all the junk that's ruining your communication. This kind of tradeoff goes all the way back to black powder rifles, when a literal fog of war from your own weapons certainly concealed your lines from enemy artillery, but also blinded you to incoming charges or enemy maneuvers. And another thing! Nothing can stop the internet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 20:34
|
|
|
TheCosmicMuffet posted:And another thing! Nothing can stop the internet. Except a couple 16 year old kids with a botnet.  Yeah, once you get to the hyperdrive it's all basically out the window. As for the communication disruption range on pulsars, depending on the size and how many there are, it can be pretty extreme.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 21:27
|
|
|
@tipul posted:#screenshotsaturday Tactical mode UI experience is getting iterated on along with the fleet battle work. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 20:28
|
|
|
Alehkhs posted:[url=https://twitter.com/tipul/status/437303735845277696] Gah, minus.com. It's poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 20:44
|
|
|
When I was a li'l kid, my mom would take us to Pizza Hut, we'd have a pizza, then I'd stare out at the small cluster of arcade games in the corner. I'd walk over to Pole Position, and steer the race car through the pre-recorded demo mode. Sometimes I'd get a quarter or two and be able to play it, but mostly my mom saw these games as a waste of money and I'd have to be happy just watching, and pretending to play, the demo of Pole Position. So I open this GIF in a new tab, zoom it in, hit F11, and pretend for a moment I am playing Enemy Starfighter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 20:56
|
|
|
doctorfrog posted:When I was a li'l kid, my mom would take us to Pizza Hut, we'd have a pizza, then I'd stare out at the small cluster of arcade games in the corner. I'd walk over to Pole Position, and steer the race car through the pre-recorded demo mode. Sometimes I'd get a quarter or two and be able to play it, but mostly my mom saw these games as a waste of money and I'd have to be happy just watching, and pretending to play, the demo of Pole Position. PAchew PAchew zzzzzzwwWWWWWooommm zitzitzitzit EDIT: Sound effects for you
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 21:43
|
|
|
Alehkhs posted:[url=https://twitter.com/tipul/status/437303735845277696] Holy poo poo that is great. I only checked out this thread initially because of the Flotilla reference and this is looking like Flotilla x 100.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
doctorfrog posted:When I was a li'l kid, my mom would take us to Pizza Hut, we'd have a pizza, then I'd stare out at the small cluster of arcade games in the corner. I'd walk over to Pole Position, and steer the race car through the pre-recorded demo mode. Sometimes I'd get a quarter or two and be able to play it, but mostly my mom saw these games as a waste of money and I'd have to be happy just watching, and pretending to play, the demo of Pole Position. You can zoom in gifs  This is awesome!
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 02:48
|
|
|
Alehkhs posted:[url=https://twitter.com/tipul/status/437303735845277696] I love comparing the latest gifs to the screenshots posted in the OP. This poo poo is looking mad.radhu fucked around with this message at 22:43 on Feb 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
I am so glad that Kairo doesn't stream regularly because as it stands right now I'm already super hyped for this game and If we got to see more gameplay every day or two as it is I've watched the clips he has up a couple times each, and sometimes just play them to listen to the music and sound effects.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 00:14
|
|
|
Sphrin posted:I am so glad that Kairo doesn't stream regularly because as it stands right now I'm already super hyped for this game and If we got to see more gameplay every day or two as it is I've watched the clips he has up a couple times each, and sometimes just play them to listen to the music and sound effects. I did one today! I don't really advertise it unless there's something super new, but sometimes cool poo poo happens (to be fair, Sabotage does that to everything). http://www.twitch.tv/marauderinteractive/c/3805142 The magenta icons are because some of those dudes have no idea that they're part of the harbinger fleet faction. 
Kairo fucked around with this message at 04:37 on Mar 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 04:29
|
|
|
Kairo posted:I did one today! I don't really advertise it unless there's something super new, but sometimes cool poo poo happens (to be fair, Sabotage does that to everything). I gotta say, every time Sabotage comes up while you're in the game, I get super-hyped. Also I'll be sending that email about your trail implementation once I'm a bit more awake. I'd say unless you want to talk about it here, but I doubt that many people in here are that interested in code details.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 05:25
|
|
|
Kairo posted:I did one today! I don't really advertise it unless there's something super new, but sometimes cool poo poo happens (to be fair, Sabotage does that to everything). Did you bounce off that ship when you jumped in the beginning of that? The idea of losing hours of progress because you splattered yourself across the side of a destroyer on a poorly timed jump sounds both hilarious and infuriating.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 05:46
|
|
|
Zizi posted:I gotta say, every time Sabotage comes up while you're in the game, I get super-hyped. Also I'll be sending that email about your trail implementation once I'm a bit more awake. I'd say unless you want to talk about it here, but I doubt that many people in here are that interested in code details.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 05:49
|
|
|
TychoCelchuuu posted:Trail as in the Homeworld engine trail? There are some details about it posted in the comments on this blog post in case anyone is interested. I suppose you could consider them 'Homeworld-style' engine trails, but not really those specifically. I'm interested in seeing how Kairo's chosen to implement his in Unity in particular(I know the general algorithm pretty well since I've done it from scratch in other environments before). I was asking about it because Unity's built-in option is kinda... iffy. I'll probably end up tackling this myself at some point, so I was curious about his choice of approach-- particularly performance strategies since ES has quite a lot of trails.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 06:20
|
|
|
Bolow posted:Did you bounce off that ship when you jumped in the beginning of that? The idea of losing hours of progress because you splattered yourself across the side of a destroyer on a poorly timed jump sounds both hilarious and infuriating. I didn't! If I did, it would have indeed killed me. You can slightly steer the gap jump around the target depending on where you are aiming when the drive activates, so getting clipped and having it not be your fault is pretty rare. I sort of like how dangerous every other ship is, especially when they are exiting warp right on top of you. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 19:29
|
|
|
Obligatory DIVE, DIVE DIVE!
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 19:50
|
|
|
Zizi posted:I gotta say, every time Sabotage comes up while you're in the game, I get super-hyped. Also I'll be sending that email about your trail implementation once I'm a bit more awake. I'd say unless you want to talk about it here, but I doubt that many people in here are that interested in code details. Here are the basics. It's pretty similar to the article that Tycho linked, but here's the Unity-specific stuff. Remember, I only masquerade as a programmer so this is probably wrong/bad: Trails are geometry that need to get generated every frame. There's not really any way around that, so I create a gameobject with a TrailMesh (custom), MeshRenderer, and MeshFilter that stays at 0,0,0 and builds itself out from there. Since the world is constantly shifting everything to keep the player around 0,0,0, this works out OK and if there is any jitter/floating point error in the geometry, it's happening pretty far away from the camera. Trails themselves are scripts attached to objects like engines, missiles, etc. Every X amount of time, they request a point from the main mesh object and drop it like a bread crumb. These bread crumbs aren't game objects. They are just points in space with properties like time, scale, etc attached to them. When trails are enabled (and call Unity's OnEnable) they add themselves to a static LinkedList of all active trails. OnDisable() removes itself from that list and pools any points it might be using. I use this pattern A LOT. It's super useful. Every frame, the TrailMesh trolls through all active trails and creates the vertices/triangles/etc and applies them to the mesh when it finishes, like they do here: http://docs.unity3d.com/Documentation/ScriptReference/Mesh.html Every trail can have one of four different textures, which are just UV offsets that are applied when the trail geometry is getting built. Since everything is pooled or created ahead of time, there's zero impact on the garbage collector. It can probably be improved by using straight GL.X calls and not even dealing with a mesh, but I'd have to benchmark it. I may end up spending more time to optimize this. As battles get bigger, it's not BAD on perf, but there may be some easy fixes/changes to get some big gains. Kairo fucked around with this message at 21:06 on Mar 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
Oh, cool. That's roughly the approach I'd expect, yeah. The only thing I'd probably add into that is some sort of camera frustum culling so you don't bother drawing triangles if they're not at least partially in view. You might be right about GL calls making a difference, though I'm not sure it'd be worth the effort involved. Texture atlasing to allow different textures on trails without extra draw calls is a good idea, too. No idea why I hadn't thought of that myself.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 22:25
|
|
|
Came to the thread looking if there were dev comments on Unity 5, didn't find any yet
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
mad.radhu posted:Came to the thread looking if there were dev comments on Unity 5, didn't find any yet
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 07:01
|
|
|
TychoCelchuuu posted:Switching horses midstream sounds like it would be tough. Then again I know nothing about Unity development or Unity 5. I dunno man being on top of a peeing horse would be weird
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 15:52
|
|
|
mad.radhu posted:I dunno man being on top of a peeing horse would be weird Being on its back might be the safest place at that moment, though. Do you really want to attempt a difficult maneuver on top of a peeing horse? edit: this is what happens when you don't feed the beast.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 15:54
|
|
|
I am probably going to switch to 5.0 at some point. They have done a pretty good job with making the upgrade seamless and the editor improvements alone are generally worth the trouble. If I were switching to another engine altogether, it would be brutal! Their store isn't showing me a spec sheet for 5.0 yet, but their audio stuff sounds like it will help. Their lighting, not so much (but that's just my game). I REALLY REALLY want to have stencil shadows (like Doom3) in the game, but for now the lighting works well enough. Edit: Spec sheet is live. The audio improvements will be the most useful. "Unity Homescreen" is a listed feature? 
Kairo fucked around with this message at 18:23 on Mar 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
I just sat through lunch near GDC and realised as I was leaving that the guy I was with had an Enemy Starfighter shirt on - are the devs in attendance?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 22:06
|
|
ROCKET SCIENCE
|
illectro posted:I just sat through lunch near GDC and realised as I was leaving that the guy I was with had an Enemy Starfighter shirt on - are the devs in attendance? Dev, singular, isn't it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 22:20
|
|
|
illectro posted:I just sat through lunch near GDC and realised as I was leaving that the guy I was with had an Enemy Starfighter shirt on - are the devs in attendance? Hi! Nope, I wasn't there this year (have never been, actually). That might have been Colin from Celsius with the ES shirt. That's awesome ES was there in spirit!
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 03:32
|
|
|
I am totally looking forward to your game, so how close to an alpha test are you? If you don't mind me asking. I would love to test the crap out of your game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 04:00
|
|
|
Dreadwroth posted:I am totally looking forward to your game, so how close to an alpha test are you? If you don't mind me asking. I would love to test the crap out of your game. I'm not comfortable charging money for it yet, but it's getting there. I have a group of awesome testers that regularly deal with me breaking the build, but we are cranking through things. Today, I allowed all capitals to use their main weapons on fighters. It ends up feeling like this:  But that opened up a whole slew of bugs that had to be fixed, things like target priority. Now they only shoot sub-capitals when there are no enemy capitals in range, but the Benny Hill theme wouldn't have been out of the question earlier.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 08:02
|
|
|
How does that work for capitals firing on fighters? Obviously you don't want super accuracy, do you code in a random variable or just have it shoot at a certain location that the fighter was at? I'd imagine the technology and sight of a capital ship-sized shotgun weapon would be terrorizing against snub fighters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 04:08 |
|
|
Ringo Star Get posted:How does that work for capitals firing on fighters? Obviously you don't want super accuracy, do you code in a random variable or just have it shoot at a certain location that the fighter was at? I assume they have tracking values, and that the capital ship ones don't track so well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 18:53
|
|
