RocketX-9_01 Beta on RX Server

[SC]-[WARTZ_{HoF}]

I know have have multiple projects I’m working on but this is one of them. As it is we have RX6T5 hosted on the server right now. I’ve decided to go a step further in changing things that means new RX9 version is needed. Here is a preview of the new jet model I’m going with.

ABBB3BB2-B385-40FA-B2C2-92241AD42CCB.png (118.34 KiB) Viewed 13626 times

EC4EE45A-2997-47F2-A363-58B9DF3196EC.png (113.04 KiB) Viewed 13626 times

[D13GO_{HoF}]

the jet looks more like a space race vehicle more than a jet.

Still good preview, however i will be looking forward to changes in the handling, rocket projectile speed and if it has the glitch of the HUD not refreshing after a crash(mostly offline, in online looks different)

[SC]-[WARTZ_{HoF}]

the jet looks more like a space race vehicle more than a jet.

That is true it does indeed look more like a spacecraft than a jet but I like the look of it.

[Nelsona]

This is my last problem.
Priority is to stop looking at moron Bot trying forever to collect an already loaded weapon.
Biography base code recommended class UT_ShieldBelt.uc

Code: Select all

event float BotDesireability( pawn Bot )
{
	local inventory Inv;

	for ( Inv=Bot.inventory; Inv!=None; Inv=Inv.inventory )
		if ( Inv.IsA('RelicDefenseInventory') )
			return -1; //can't pickup up shieldbelt if have defense relic

	return Super.BotDesireability(Bot);
}

Do you have something like this in these uber duber RX jets ?
This is poorly coded but can be developed as I did in MH2 with armors - everyone should have armor not a Bot collecting ALL of them.

Sample... Here I had spelling errors in comment but I got mad at some map at how much crap was loaded in a single spot.

Code: Select all

class MHArmor2 expands Armor2;

event float BotDesireability( pawn Bot )
{
	local inventory Inv;

	for ( Inv=Bot.inventory; Inv!=None; Inv=Inv.inventory )
		if ( Inv.IsA('RelicDefenseInventory') || Inv.IsA('Armor2'))
			return -2; //DONE !
	return Super.BotDesireability(Bot);
//Bug me with trash and I'll turn of desirability for shit.
}

Probably we can get rid of "Super" call and assign a desire for this in case of not having this item as inventory.

[SC]-[WARTZ_{HoF}]

I could add this to the next build.

[Nelsona]

Keep in mind that Function is called for Pawn nominated as Bot but this variable called Bot it's pawn all day long. So BotyMan3 mutator can figure what's the desire deal. For weapon I would recommend Ammo check if item is empty but loaded as inventory.

[BluEyedBitch_{HoF}]

Oh , yah ! I love jets ! Is rocketx strictly jets only then ?? If so , I am excited to try it !

[medor]

Priority is to stop looking at moron Bot trying forever to collect an already loaded weapon.

I'm not coder so i'll probably say some bullshit here:
Maybe you can try do this in NoSLPickup110 ... like that that work foe all RX and SLV ?

[Nelsona]

If Bot has a positive "desire" value for item ignoring the fact that already has one, he will stay/run into weapon spot all day long. MOD needs to be coded properly and that's all, it's not a rocket science for coders making weapons. This problem must be solved before FLY navigation because PickDestination has a priority for nearby items query before to call attraction function where navigation is fired up. Here I believe RX will need it's own CTF controller not default one, taking in account default weapon as being RX and loading in map AMMO, not weapons. Weapon/Jet should be defaulted like enforcer in plain UT. It's needed a specific timing between Mod, Bot, Human, navigation codes, items. Bot out of a good Weapon/Jet for flying, if has no load for flight should quickly rush for getting ammo, original CTF controller has nothing here, Bot attempting to run in sky and back when "gamethreat" is bigger, another thing which has to be rewritten and all scene will be changed. Here if we are coming with some RX Bots - fliers by default, we can have other advantages for not adding a lot of codes to the mod.
Bot capable to fly has no issues in tracking enemy, ground Bot should move to fly ONLY if JET has a charge else it moves nowhere looping between HighNode and ground PathNode - I dare to predict these before to see anything because I know Bot and CTF controller, I rewrote some stuff in there... and I will never have plans in using game-type "BotPack.CTFGame" but another CTFGame - visible in player browser. Perhaps future version of my CTFGame will have support for trash Flags, read this well, that's trash not design, where Flags are in a higher spot, placing Flag reachable, or finding a nearby good node, or whatever stunt, but maybe I won't encourage sh!t mapping because my CTFGame should fix dumb stuff. It's mapper duty to learn doing things as they should.
Why this way ? Because I wrote my own team monsters NsMonster recognizing player teams and original CTF controller has ZERO codes for these being completely out of monsters. It's why a new mod usually means a new controller - like Chaos had (of course, that was a mess happily credited by EPIC, poorly coding lovers).

We can have a wider discussion with regard to these triangles: Bot Item GameCode - they are not a separate thing they are linked, Assault is a sample here, without a good weapon it's hard to destroy a Fort, priority is weapon after spawn not attacking and not attacking alone.

[Nelsona]

Bumping time:
To clarify the topic with navigation in CTF RX maps, I think we now have everything we need to set up a navigation network as we want, specifically those parameters in the navigation specification that we can handle as we want, so much as long as the map can be opened in the Unreal Gold Editor 227. There are some classes with exact dependencies only in UT, those need to be temporarily removed, and then set back after we solve what we need.
For example Gold adds natural R_FLY. If we need a R_JUMP | R_FLY ie type 3 specification, we can handle these flags. All I have to do is create a friendly working interface in a Builder in the Editor.
Now it's up on designer if wants A.I. company in these games, because... we can have navigation network as we want.

One thing that is unclear to me is the ability to delete a navigation specification and rearrange the rest. This causes a major corruption that needs to be relocated - we are talking about dangerous iterations here. I prefer not to use this function because I do not find it useful, more than that, the specification seems to still exist on the map, found at the rudimentary level of UScript not at C++ level. Let's say we can remove all network and creating a new one more simple... because we can.

AdvEditingSample.PNG (1.06 MiB) Viewed 13494 times

Distance between two manually connected navigation points is computed automatically, the rest of data it's COMPLETELY your option - fat monster or not, player or not, I think I can map paths for Big Titans as well... for flying units, ect ect.