PDA

View Full Version : Super Protector Limit



SilverWing
02-26-2012, 11:33 AM
Vote:- if yes please tell me how many and why

|uK|MiniWick
02-26-2012, 11:38 AM
Yes, by all means this could mean nothing since I don't play the game , but

By reducing the numbers of any object in the game , here bieng the super protector's . Wouldn't that make the game and matches more strategic and a better game . as for making people defend allot more often and focus more on killing then leaching . But I think if you where do to so , I would adjust the armor the sp a little tougher , therefor equalizing the quantity of super protector's there would normally be in a normal Siege game . .. just my thought !

|uK|kenneth
02-26-2012, 12:26 PM
2 sp's per player

UT-Sniper-SJA94
02-26-2012, 12:33 PM
2 to 3 per player. Maybe with a restricted radius so you can't place them so close to each other.

ChanClan
02-26-2012, 12:59 PM
Might be more complicated to code, but the DISTANCE between them should be the limit. Only like 2 per "zone"

|uK|Rays
02-26-2012, 04:39 PM
2-3 per player would not change much, just like with the mine limit that nobody ever runs into (i need 13+ mines on d reli?). If you're going to limit something like spros make it like, 4-5 total for each team. Siege is undoubtedly more of a defensive game because of super protectors and mines. Try sitting in a base with 3 well placed super pros & pulse, you will get sprees easy, so 4-5 is still pretty generous. From a competitive standpoint limiting spros would make defense a more valuable position to play. If this would only apply to pubs then I could care less, 10v10 pubs could probably use the extra spros to help the noobs out lol. If you added this, would the spro become removable?

|uK|fleecey
02-26-2012, 05:08 PM
I think a limit is bad, like when you leech, you can only make like 2 sp's.

I know you guys don't leech, but it do happens at times at the server.

terminator
02-26-2012, 05:35 PM
1 per player or NONE! :)

ChanClan
02-26-2012, 05:48 PM
I think a limit is bad, like when you leech, you can only make like 2 sp's.

I know you guys don't leech, but it do happens at times at the server.

I think you mean Super Containers, which we could up to 3 just for giggles....

ChanClan
02-26-2012, 05:50 PM
Yes, by all means this could mean nothing since I don't play the game , but

By reducing the numbers of any object in the game , here bieng the super protector's . Wouldn't that make the game and matches more strategic and a better game . as for making people defend allot more often and focus more on killing then leaching . But I think if you where do to so , I would adjust the armor the sp a little tougher , therefor equalizing the quantity of super protector's there would normally be in a normal Siege game . .. just my thought !

This is a good point... if the SP's were to be limited (to whatever) the strength of the SP's should be adjusted accordingly (increased).

A^3
02-26-2012, 06:02 PM
Voted not to add sp limit. Alote of the time the public server is filled with players who don't build. I usually have to build the base up with multiple sp. I would just leave as is.

SAM
02-26-2012, 06:15 PM
Super pro limit is stupid. You will fuck siege. Regardless of whether or not I play it. I know what will and won't work

ChanClan
02-26-2012, 06:38 PM
Super pro limit is stupid. You will fuck siege. Regardless of whether or not I play it. I know what will and won't work

I must concur, but I thought you played as Anabelle? or was it Suzy?

Moskva
02-26-2012, 07:26 PM
Though you get more lag with a lot of super protectors, I vote for no limit because theres enough tools for the offense to nuke, make teles, leech from buildings, etc.
While an important part of defense are the super protectors. If you put a limit on them half siege goes down with it

SilverWing
02-26-2012, 07:34 PM
imma let the votes go till friday 11:59 pm EST

if you want the limit i need a 65% of the community to say yes... or its not going to happen

|uK|Rays
02-26-2012, 10:16 PM
I posted something earlier but it isn't showing. Mod approve it?

|uK|chiseller
02-27-2012, 02:50 AM
Super pro limit is stupid. You will fuck siege. Regardless of whether or not I play it. I know what will and won't work
This.


Though you get more lag with a lot of super protectors, I vote for no limit because theres enough tools for the offense to nuke, make teles, leech from buildings, etc.
While an important part of defense are the super protectors. If you put a limit on them half siege goes down with it
This.
Though, siege lags after a while anyway thus I don't really see the point in putting a limit on the super protectors.


I posted something earlier but it isn't showing. Mod approve it?
Apart from this (http://www.unrealkillers.com/showthread.php/1739-Super-Protector-Limit?p=23929&viewfull=1#post23929)? No. Lay off the juice.


I think you mean Super Containers, which we could up to 3 just for giggles....
Nope, she meant super protectors which is true. Not that many care though.

HIGH[+]AdRiaN
02-27-2012, 06:41 AM
no

in some maps it's good, but in bigs maps will ruin the game

HIGH+CAMILO
02-27-2012, 07:15 AM
10 SPs per map and thats it. Removalble of course.

Feralidragon
02-27-2012, 07:19 AM
No.

You can add limits on "in x radius cannot build" which should be applied to containers as well to avoid leeches, but a hard limit no, Siege has a lot of freedom on what you can build and where, so starting to add limits like those will kill it (and frustrate regulars when they cannot build what the other noob player was supposed to, like A^3 said).

And btw, all the sugestions given in most topics about this are easy to code, you guys don't need to worry about that, Siege is quite simple.

As for lag, the mod just needs to be refactored some day with that in mind, by applying LOD and proper replication statements so certain things don't get replicated everytime in each tick (normally several times a second, which kills bandwidth, and UT has a hard limit for it (and for polys as well), so it doesn't depend much on either or not you have a good PC or a good connection anymore).

SAM
02-27-2012, 08:38 PM
I think it's time already that you optimised siege....

Also, this limit and removable malarky is stupid. You think we have a problem with container removers? You just wait until super pros are removable.

ChanClan
02-28-2012, 12:50 AM
I think it's time already that you optimised siege....

Also, this limit and removable malarky is stupid. You think we have a problem with container removers? You just wait until super pros are removable.

Indeed. Optimize the non-lagability too..

|uK|kenneth
02-28-2012, 02:05 AM
I think it's time already that you optimised siege....

Also, this limit and removable malarky is stupid. You think we have a problem with container removers? You just wait until super pros are removable.

doesnt need to be removable if people doesnt place it on stupid places also i vote yes fot the mini shield as removable

Feralidragon
02-28-2012, 06:10 AM
I think it's time already that you optimised siege....
That's WildCard's job imo, I don't want to step in anyone's toes and afaik he's still active on doing it, I have a huge respect for developers in that aspect, so I always attempt to not "invade" other coders "territory" of sort to speak.

However, that doesn't mean I won't do a new version soon, actually I was thinking to do my own version of siege but completely new from scratch in my own way, and not building it from an existing one (and yeah, it would be extremely optimized). But the point of this siege would never be to replace the current one, it will be slightly different one (not much in gameplay, but on visuals and new buildings).

But before I do any of that, I have to finish and release another mod first...

HIGH+CAMILO
02-28-2012, 06:27 AM
I think it's time already that you optimised siege....

Also, this limit and removable malarky is stupid. You think we have a problem with container removers? You just wait until super pros are removable.

Sam got a point...

|uK|fleecey
02-28-2012, 08:18 AM
I think you mean Super Containers, which we could up to 3 just for giggles....

No, I meant super pro obviously. :p

SAM
02-28-2012, 01:26 PM
That's WildCard's job imo, I don't want to step in anyone's toes and afaik he's still active on doing it, I have a huge respect for developers in that aspect, so I always attempt to not "invade" other coders "territory" of sort to speak.

However, that doesn't mean I won't do a new version soon, actually I was thinking to do my own version of siege but completely new from scratch in my own way, and not building it from an existing one (and yeah, it would be extremely optimized). But the point of this siege would never be to replace the current one, it will be slightly different one (not much in gameplay, but on visuals and new buildings).

But before I do any of that, I have to finish and release another mod first...

I haven't spoke to WC lately but I don't think he is actively dev'ing anymore..

Feralidragon
02-28-2012, 03:05 PM
Well, at least from what I have seen so far some weeks ago he released a new version of his Gauntlet gametype, and before that some screens relative his own new version of siege here in this forum.... idk how he's progressing as of now, but I am assuming that he's still on it.

I have been hesitant in making anything for siege exactly because of that.

But anyway, either he releases a new one or not, I will do my own from scratch. I play siege a lot, and there are a lot of things there that annoy me and that I personally miss and want implemented and fixed.
After I release the mod I am doing now I "may" start on it.

But prepare though, this time containers should "look" like containers, protectors like protectors, etc (the nuke fx should be different as well, etc), but everything low poly and most of them opaque rather than translucent so you can see many at once (reducing visual lag some people get), yet detailed enough and distinguishable.
I have some quite ambitious ideas for siege that should make it fair, far more interesting and noob-friendly (in a good way for everyone), but you will have to wait though.

The Cybernator
03-30-2012, 10:44 PM
As far as I understand, this would be the only build that is limited in the game. I think one of the most attractive principles of siege is the flexibility involved in how you build your base. I think that when lots of SP's are around it is fun. It makes you think strategically. Perhaps, if you feel they are dominating the game, just up the RU requirement for SP's.

|uK|Grimreaper
03-31-2012, 01:10 AM
what about minishields?

Shiro
03-31-2012, 11:28 AM
10 max for teams this morons lag all the server with the spros went u enter their base feel like starwars *pium pium*x1000000 lag all the other day that noob danfield put 16 spros ,the noob lag BathroomsEQ1 an almost get down the server -.-

SAM
03-31-2012, 11:40 AM
Ok so say a noob comes in and builds all 10 super pros, what then? Your team is fucked because you can't build more? Don't put a limit on spros, it's an idea doomed to fail.

If you want to implement it in anything, do it on PUG. not the pub version

ChanClan
03-31-2012, 12:28 PM
I can't remember if I voted yes or no, but I would vote yes now.

The Super Protectors, Mines, Rocket Cannon's and Hyper Leecher are all weapons that are "Technically" supposed to be CARRIED on your person. If you put a limit on these item's it would make the game more like Real WarFare.

Each Soldier has only his allowed space to "carry" his weapons in inventory, and provide only what he can carry for his team. It is kind of "ODD" that the once the supplier if max, all players are capable of carrying all weapons. Maybe add the FlakCannon and the Ripper to the rotation in the middle and eliminate those weapons from the supplier. Would reduce spam also.

The Cybernator
03-31-2012, 05:23 PM
I think that the lag is mostly due to the new host or someone hacking us as of late...

As long as your internet is decent you won't have lag problems even with all the spros. At least, I don't and I don't have super fast internet by any means. I think it is super fucking cool to have these spros, these mullet-like guns. And hell, it's not like it's entirely a winning strategy. The other team can leach off of them with rockets and then with nukes.

If I were to ever make a suggestion for siege, of course bearing in mind that I have only been here so long and I fully recognize I hold no weight or authority here and rightfully so (nor do I want the responsibility!), I would suggest that you increase the air control to whatever it is set on the HighSpeed Face CTF server. It makes the game more intense when, if jumping, you have that extra control. I think it further epitomizes what Unreal Tournament really is. Sure, it would make the game less realistic but that is, as far as I understand, not what we are trying to achieve here. Usually strategy-dense games are more realistic (America's Army, the Rainbow Six series, Red River, etc) but it doesn't necessarily follow that a game that is less realistic has to have less strategy. Plus, the translocator isn't nearly as fun in siege as it is on the High Speed server because it feels so heavy and bulky... if that makes any sense.

|uK|Grimreaper
04-01-2012, 12:55 AM
yet again what about minishields..
make them removable

Shiro
04-01-2012, 03:56 AM
u can win with 10 or less superpros -.- the super pros are over in certain maps like bathrooms ... the leechers build like 20 spros -.- u enter to base and get 10 of life in 1 sec how u can win to that...

ChanClan
04-01-2012, 08:22 AM
If any limit would be imposed, perhaps it could be a variable limit based on the number of players on your team when the request is being processed [can I build a super pro]. I also agree with TC on the air control change. One thing I know for sure, is something MUST be done about the random and frequent Lag problems. Seem's to have certain point's on each map that always lag, and then there's the hic'cup and burp when player's connect to the server. A total analysis and recompile of the elemental core code is eminantly due.

|uK|B|aZe//.
04-01-2012, 10:25 AM
shut up and stop complaining.

|uK|Grimreaper
04-01-2012, 11:29 AM
btw fleece upload the screenshot u made about the protector and me..

ChanClan
04-01-2012, 01:47 PM
btw fleece upload the screenshot u made about the protector and me..

Ya, that was neat... I think that sgSuperProt really had it in for you. I didn't notice anyone else getting KILLED by a sgSuperProt... did you?

ChanClan
04-01-2012, 01:49 PM
shut up and stop complaining.

...Ok... ok.. OK. but who is complaining?

|uK|Grimreaper
04-01-2012, 05:35 PM
Ya, that was neat... I think that sgSuperProt really had it in for you. I didn't notice anyone else getting KILLED down by a sgSuperProt... did you?

nope never saw it

Moskva
04-01-2012, 09:03 PM
Well I've seen sp's killing nukes so theres a revolution incoming

ChanClan
04-01-2012, 09:35 PM
Well I've seen sp's killing nukes so theres a revolution incoming

So, your saying we have a ROGUE Super Protector that is randomly taking out Players AND Nukes? OMG what ever will be do... or maybe it's just after GRIM?

|uK|Dem`
04-02-2012, 04:47 AM
4-5 per TEAM will be enough

|uK|fleecey
04-02-2012, 05:14 AM
btw fleece upload the screenshot u made about the protector and me..

Sure, need to find it first and then I will upload for ya!

|uK|fleecey
04-02-2012, 05:28 AM
http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/2601/shot0212k.png

|uK|Grimreaper
04-02-2012, 01:19 PM
and blaze wouldnt believe me..

Feralidragon
04-02-2012, 05:24 PM
Just checked the super protector code, and yeah, it's possible to get killed by them, but it needs a few rare conditions to be so.

Basically, when you get damaged by a super protector, the actual damage you receive in the end is decided by the following (in this exact order):
- gametype
- armor
- mutators

The super protector in particular is processed by the gametype only, and it has the following condition to avoid you to get killed: if (your_health - damage) <= 10, then the damage is 0 and your health is set to 10.

However, the damage is still processed by inventory and subsequent mutators.

Now, think in this situation (and try to reproduce it in-game to try to confirm this out): imagine you have 31 of health, and you get damaged by a super protector which tries to give you 20 of damage.
Once it gets checked: 31-20 = 11, which is bigger than 10, so the damage stays at 20.

Now if there's any inventory or any mutator running at that moment that highers any or this particular damage for it to go to 31 at least in the end of the processing, the super protector kills you.

There's a way to prevent this though, by adding a check in preventdeath, which could check the damage type/instigator and in case it's the damage of a super protector, avoid the kill altogether and set the health back to 10 as it should. Actually this is the right way it should have been implemented since the very beginning, as it is now this kind of thing is possible.

As for it to kill nukes, that's pretty much impossible unless the current siege warhead is not a "sgWarShell" class or if the current class auto-destroys or explodes upon hitting these.

audiosonic
04-02-2012, 05:44 PM
Ferali professor, super protectors do take out nukes, if you run in line with super protector and fire it, it will go down. Also if you have 3hp and for some reason you get in the line of fire of a super protector, you're hp goes up to 10.

Feralidragon
04-02-2012, 06:07 PM
Ferali professor, super protectors do take out nukes, if you run in line with super protector and fire it, it will go down.
I am not excluding completely that possibility:


As for it to kill nukes, that's pretty much impossible unless the current siege warhead is not a "sgWarShell" class or if the current class auto-destroys or explodes upon hitting these.
Which means, super protectors never kill sgWarShell warheads by themselves, unless this was changed in the latest versions (the code I am looking at is older), but the warheads may be exploding or killing themselves upon hitting them.
PS: Just checked, the nukes explode upon hitting anything that is not the player who launched, but even so it shouldn't happen with protector projectiles.
Can you present any logs or screenshots of this phenomenon? No doubting you btw, I just need more material to check this better.


Also if you have 3hp and for some reason you get in the line of fire of a super protector, you're hp goes up to 10.
Yeah, I know, I just stated that up there ;)

if (your_health - damage) <= 10, then the damage is 0 and your health is set to 10.

ChanClan
04-02-2012, 08:14 PM
4-5 per TEAM will be enough

NOT EVEN! more like 5-6, and if you limit it... it should be removeable.

Moskva
04-02-2012, 10:02 PM
Removable = candy for removers = NOT GOOD
Just leave it...

SAM
04-02-2012, 10:40 PM
This protector idea is for PUG only. Don't make such a drastic change for PUB. You will turn people away in doing so. Mark my words ;)

SilverWing
04-02-2012, 11:02 PM
idk why this topic is open... i swear i already said this isnt happening

Feralidragon
04-03-2012, 06:02 AM
idk why this topic is open... i swear i already said this isnt happening
About the warhead kill, that's what I see in the code (the protector has a check to not kill it, and the warhead shouldn't even process the touch with the protector projectile either since that touch would only be processed if the protector projectile had bProjTarget=True or if it had "block able" collision).

But about it killing players, it may be rare, but it's indeed possible as I explained above, the code as it is is error prone which is clear as crystal since the damage is processed by subsequent inventory and mutators after that protector check, so under certain conditions it may indeed happen.
However, I repeat: the solution is simple and is the way it should have been implemented from the start: a preventdeath within a mutator autoloaded by the gametype, since it's processed in the very end unlike reducedamage from the gametype, which is the first one.

audiosonic
04-03-2012, 06:57 AM
Even though I'm pretty sure nobody was around when I fired my nuke at a super protector I think it was something else that took it down. Some very thricky timing with a mine explosion could also be the case.

Moskva
04-03-2012, 08:00 AM
Well I still remember JD's nuke getting killed by a sp in a pug, as we checked and nobody had that nuke kill

Feralidragon
04-03-2012, 08:56 AM
Well, there's only 1 way to check these bugs, but it's you, the players/clan members who have to test this up properly:
- Player kill: try to get your health down to 31, and let a sp hit you;
- Nuke kill: build a nuke, and shoot towards a sp from some distance.

Test this in the main server while there's nobody else there or in a test server with the *current* siege version, demorec the whole thing, and if you can reproduce it show the demo and/or video (preferably video), and some screens and/or logs.

As my experience goes, I have seen players complaining about things that were simply impossible to happen at all (the most obvious one was when I modified a certain mod a long time ago, where I changed the explosion fx but not the radius nor damage, yet a few players were complaining it was bigger, when in fact it was the very same and it could be proven to be that way).

|uK|Grimreaper
04-03-2012, 04:36 PM
ferali prof i love ur long posts lol

ChanClan
04-03-2012, 11:18 PM
Even though I'm pretty sure nobody was around when I fired my nuke at a super protector I think it was something else that took it down. Some very thricky timing with a mine explosion could also be the case.

That may be the case, and I've seen some thricky timing moves with Mines, Impact Hammers and even the TRANS. But, this was during freebuild. conditions are different when freebuild it enabled. Perhaps it's in the free build code we must inspect.

Feralidragon
04-04-2012, 05:33 AM
^ Nope. In free build the conditions are the same protectors and warheads wise, so it doesn't really make a difference other than as you stated: be able to build certain things regularly you wouldn't be able to in a real game.

And yeah, it's possible to kill the warhead with impact hammer or mines, and with the translocator you don't really kill it, rather the warhead just explodes normally at the spot it was hit by the trans.

|uK|fleecey
04-04-2012, 05:47 AM
That may be the case, and I've seen some thricky timing moves with Mines, Impact Hammers and even the TRANS. But, this was during freebuild. conditions are different when freebuild it enabled. Perhaps it's in the free build code we must inspect.

Grim died before the freebuild chanclan.

TDNConvict
04-04-2012, 11:29 AM
i'm not in support of limits on anything except maybe how many containers can be built next too each other or mini shields

one thing thought is i think you should take away the sp's ability to see through doors like in simplex... you open the door and heath is instantly gone in public game.. end up killing yourself half the time

Feralidragon
04-04-2012, 01:07 PM
The ability to "see" through doors is an online bug related to the way protectors "see", in offline it doesn't happen (or theoretically shouldn't, didn't test it).
It uses a "FastTrace", the fastest trace there is to check if there's no walls or anything between one point and another (in this case between itself and the player). If there's something between, it doesn't attack.

It seems that for some reason though, in online play the fasttrace bugs out with thin movers and therefore in certain maps it aparently sees "through doors".
The only potential solution (not proven yet, didn't try) is making a slightly slower trace (basically a regular trace) to check if something is between, but this means that instead or besides the fast one, we add more processing with a further trace to check this.

But in practice, if we make a fasttrace and some faster checks first and then a normal trace to check more accurately, the odds of making the server slower are very low since it's more likely something valid to attack is not in view rather than in view.

|uK|fleecey
04-04-2012, 01:09 PM
Why can't we leave everything as it is? it's good as it is.