[Suggestion] Alternative "Wait" mode

Chat about anything and everything Frozen Synapse

Moderator: Admins

User avatar
Lu-Tze
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 1:12 pm

[Suggestion] Alternative "Wait" mode

Post by Lu-Tze » Wed Apr 21, 2010 9:03 am

I'd like to be able to put the "Wait" line into an alternate mode whereby it counts down regardless of whether you are standing on it or not. Make it Ctrl+Click or the Right mouse button or something.

The most common usage I have for Waits is to make a unit only pop his head out of cover a split second before the end of a turn, so I have the best chance of doing something effective with him. However, if he encounters someone along the way, even for a fraction of a second, it is enough to throw out the timing. By making it count down from the moment I click Play, regardless of whether I am on it or not, setting it to 4.9 will always mean he pops his head out at the correct time if he manages to make it to the position.

Similar usage would be done when you are planning on responding to rockets destroying walls, or when you want two units to enter a room at the same time from different angles. Currently there is no way of ensuring your timing is perfect, if anything interrupts your units on route the sequence will be thrown out of whack.
Image
coywolf
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 4:04 pm

Re: [Suggestion] Alternative "Wait" mode

Post by coywolf » Wed Apr 21, 2010 2:24 pm

I think I understand what you're saying, and you can set it to ignore specific enemies, or continue on sight. Pretty sure the wait thing can be applied anywhere along the line (don't use it much myself), even where you're starting from, so you can tell your guy to ignore enemies, wait x seconds, then move
Logo
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 3:55 am

Re: [Suggestion] Alternative "Wait" mode

Post by Logo » Wed Apr 21, 2010 3:09 pm

If your guy was interrupted yet was still able to continue to his destination then one of two things happened.

1. You saw an enemy, dispatched him, then continued on
2. You saw an enemy, aimed, then continued on because the enemy moved out of sight or was killed by another one of your units.


In the 1st case, I'd consider it a small consolation for the loss of his unit. In almost all cases the dead unit is worth more than the intel.
In the 2nd case, I'd consider it your fault for not issuing ignore or continue on sight orders correctly. You should know that the unit would not score a kill if the enemy was at a given location or that the enemy was going to die anyways.

Chances are in planning you're looking at this decision:
You know that the enemy was likely at a location covering an area, if you move and engage you'd definitely kill him if he was stationary. He could instead also move out of the way to avoid dieing causing your guy to aim and continue on.

In situation, it's a limiting factor. You can still pretty much do what you want though. All you need to do is order a look + retreat at a given time that would be near the end of the turn if the unit is delayed by killing the enemy. If you kill the enemy, you end the turn peaking around the corner. If you don't kill the enemy, you take a quick look mid turn and retreat so you still get some intel, it's just not at the end of the turn.

Really I don't think it's enough of an issue, and the limitation forces you to adapt as it allows the enemy to throw a wrench in your plan.
Simulate: the answer to all of your problems.
User avatar
Lu-Tze
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 1:12 pm

Re: [Suggestion] Alternative "Wait" mode

Post by Lu-Tze » Wed Apr 21, 2010 4:01 pm

As a simple example of what I want to be able to do...

Code: Select all

  |
  |______=____
            O
I want to move my guy along the wall, peek in the window and if there's anyone in the room kill them, and then continue along to the end, and poke my head around the corner just as the timer hits 5.

There's plenty of time to do this in the turn, but no easy way to make it happen.

If I set it up with no guy in the room, then if I do encounter a guy it will mean i'm still waiting at the end of the turn, and won't end up sticking my head out. If I set it up with a guy in the room, then my wait time at the end will be too short and i'll end up sticking my head out too soon and if there's anyone there, losing it. It feels like it SHOULD be possible, but it isn't, and I think that making Wait nodes have 2 different modes would be a not insurmountable addition. Just iterate along every node in the chain and take the deltatime off the wait period of all ones that are set to "Absolute" mode rather than "Relative".
Image
Logo
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 3:55 am

Re: [Suggestion] Alternative "Wait" mode

Post by Logo » Wed Apr 21, 2010 4:12 pm

It's not really clear to me why you can't stick your head out then immediately pull it back in; time it so that if you kill a guy in the room it happens right at the end of the turn and you have your head sticking out for next turn. If you DON'T kill a guy in the room you'll pop out, then take cover, which is what you'd do anyways if there was an enemy there.

Allowing for absolute times just means there's more emphasis on timing things to happen RIGHT at the end of a turn. Having the times be relative puts less emphasis on this sort of thing.
Simulate: the answer to all of your problems.
schwal
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 4:09 pm

Re: [Suggestion] Alternative "Wait" mode

Post by schwal » Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:25 pm

This is absolutely necessary. Say I've got a shotgunner and an MG that I want to turn a corner at the same time. With absolute timing it is much easier to let the shotgun guard his back and then turn the corner at the right time, whether or not he kills someone beforehand. It would also make it much easier to time ducking to distract an opponent while another guy lines up a shot. Making it harder to be somewhere at the end of a turn to limit intel gathering is counterproductive, especially considering intel is not vital enough to justify taking that ability away.
User avatar
Lu-Tze
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 1:12 pm

Re: [Suggestion] Alternative "Wait" mode

Post by Lu-Tze » Wed Apr 21, 2010 9:01 pm

I can think of many other examples, entering a room from two different angles at the same time knowing someone can't cover both, for example.
Or pretty much anything involving intricate timing with rocket explosions.
Image
User avatar
TheBeefiest
Posts: 214
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 9:48 pm

Re: [Suggestion] Alternative "Wait" mode

Post by TheBeefiest » Thu Apr 22, 2010 12:10 am

I can see where you are coming from, you wanted to be able to be at that corner, but still kill a guy in the window "Just if you have enough time" but i think that one single situation might not be worth all the effort to implement it.

Think about it from a programming standpiont, he has to put in all these extra checks to see if taking a few more shots will overrun your future time restraints. Not trivial.
User avatar
Lu-Tze
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 1:12 pm

Re: [Suggestion] Alternative "Wait" mode

Post by Lu-Tze » Thu Apr 22, 2010 9:33 am

Code: Select all

for (waypoint = currentWaypoint.Next; waypoint != Null; waypoint = waypoint.Next)
  if (waypoint.waypointWaitMode == Alternative)
    waypoint.waitTime -= deltaTime
Seems pretty trivial to me.

I'm assuming that the waypoint progression code works on something like...

Code: Select all

if (currentWaypoint.waitTime <= 0)
  currentWaypoint = currentWaypoint.Next
else
  currentWaypoint.waitTime -= deltaTime
Image
ovno
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 10:39 am

Re: [Suggestion] Alternative "Wait" mode

Post by ovno » Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:22 pm

No he doesn't he just needs a

if (timeSinceStartOfTurn <= timeToWaitTill)
{
wait(timeToWaitTill - timeSinceStartOfTurn);
}

Those two lines and the addition of a small UI element would do the job easily.

*Edit* Or the way the guy above said pretty much the same thing anyway...
User avatar
Omroth
Site Admin
Posts: 1825
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:07 pm

Re: [Suggestion] Alternative "Wait" mode

Post by Omroth » Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:28 pm

Hey guys.

I don't want to weigh in on this issue too hard, but I thought I'd give a quick "official stance".

I understand totally what Lu-Tze is asking for and why. However, I believe that giving people the ability to engage for a set amount of time and then break off (which would be the side-effect of this) would end up allowing exploiting of the engagement system, and would lead to a lot of "safe but boring to use and play against" tactics for bullet based units.

I don't really think that explains it very well... I'll try and synthesize a better response.

Ian
schwal
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 4:09 pm

Re: [Suggestion] Alternative "Wait" mode

Post by schwal » Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:40 pm

I was not suggesting that you be allowed to break off engagements. For instance in my example above, if the shotgunner kills someone before the timer ends, he will still round the corner at the same time. if he starts the engagement such that it would delay his move, so be it. I would probably have to add a continue on sight order about a second from the turn, but that will still leave him vulnerable for a little while. So it wouldn't allow for "perfect strategies" but would still make it easier to pull off coordinated moves.
User avatar
Faxmachinen
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 7:27 pm
Location: Norway

Re: [Suggestion] Alternative "Wait" mode

Post by Faxmachinen » Thu Apr 29, 2010 3:47 am

I agree with Omroth. Part of the fun of FS, to me, is making hard decisions. As it is now, you have a choice to make: Do you kill the guy in the room at the cost of not being able to look around the corner? Or do you just look to see if anyone's there, and hope that that someone doesn't pop out the door and kill you? Perhaps you should only engage if it's a shotgunner?
If your idea was implemented, you wouldn't be forced to make that choice anymore; everything would go according to plan. But wouldn't that be a bit boring?
User avatar
Blindsight
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 7:29 pm

Re: [Suggestion] Alternative "Wait" mode

Post by Blindsight » Thu Apr 29, 2010 4:10 am

Omroth wrote:Hey guys.

I don't want to weigh in on this issue too hard, but I thought I'd give a quick "official stance".

I understand totally what Lu-Tze is asking for and why. However, I believe that giving people the ability to engage for a set amount of time and then break off (which would be the side-effect of this) would end up allowing exploiting of the engagement system, and would lead to a lot of "safe but boring to use and play against" tactics for bullet based units.

I don't really think that explains it very well... I'll try and synthesize a better response.

Ian
My issue with this is that, this is already something you can do. It is currently just harder to do it because it can only be done between turns. If I continue on sight to get to my window and duck, then stand and engage just before the end of the turn, then at the beginning of the next turn, should you be the one that will lose, you can simply continue on sight and duck again -- waiting until the end of the turn to pop your head up again to re-engage.

So basically, it's a tactic people want to use, and are using. The inability to do it in the middle of a turn only lengthens the time between actions and doesn't disallow the use of the tactic at all.
User avatar
Lu-Tze
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 1:12 pm

Re: [Suggestion] Alternative "Wait" mode

Post by Lu-Tze » Thu Apr 29, 2010 9:59 am

Omroth wrote:Hey guys.

I don't want to weigh in on this issue too hard, but I thought I'd give a quick "official stance".

I understand totally what Lu-Tze is asking for and why. However, I believe that giving people the ability to engage for a set amount of time and then break off (which would be the side-effect of this) would end up allowing exploiting of the engagement system, and would lead to a lot of "safe but boring to use and play against" tactics for bullet based units.

I don't really think that explains it very well... I'll try and synthesize a better response.

Ian
Thanks for the response Ian, it's great to get feedback on such things. I assume the reason for people being able to break engagement is that if they were sat waiting on a waypoint as a timer counted down and then got involved in combat, any instructions along the timeline that was counting down would still be executed?

I think the only thing that would allow it to work would be if the timeline only shortened as far as the last instruction on it, cutting off any excess "wait" time, rather than disturbing the timing of any orders along the way. At that point though, it becomes less intuitive as to exactly how it works, and it would require a much more complex explanation to people. I'd still welcome the change, but equally it's something I can live without. It will remain the single in-game command/tool that makes feel I am missing the functionality to express my orders correctly though.
Image
Post Reply