Catapults fire infinitely.

[borg-]

Hello everyone.
Maybe this problem is known, I don't know.
When catapults are firing at a building, and you have no view of that building anymore, then catapults fire infinitely.

[hyperion]

Expected behavior. Why do you think it's a problem?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

3 hours ago, borg- said:

Hello everyone.
Maybe this problem is known, I don't know.
When catapults are firing at a building, and you have no view of that building anymore, then catapults fire infinitely.

I agree this is pretty annoying. Perhaps something for A28 community mod.

[borg-]

2 hours ago, hyperion said:

Expected behavior. Why do you think it's a problem?

Because Its shoots infinitely at the target even already destroyed, the correct behavior is stop shooting as soon as the target is destroyed and then look for a new target in vision range.

Edited January 18, 2023 by borg-

[hyperion]

1 minute ago, borg- said:

Because Its shoots infinitely at the target even If Its already destroyer, the correct behavior is shoot another building after the target is destroyed even If you dont have vision.

But if you don't have vision you don't know that it's already destroyed. You can just guess it but maybe your opponent snuck a few dozen repairers there in the meantime so you really can't be sure unless you check in which case the cata will stop firing.

If it does stop firing without vision then it's a case of leaking info that the shroud of darkness is supposed to hide.

Btw, this is not limited to catas but applies to all ranged units, it's just not as obvious for others due to relatively large vision range compared to shooting range.

[borg-]

Logic understood, so Its not a bug, behavior issue, but If you have enough catapults, there's no way to repair a building, even If you put all Men there, so we also have a problem i think.

[hyperion]

Then what is your solution? Make SoD leaky (which IMHO is against it's purpose) or increase vision range of catapult to make it less obvious?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

18 minutes ago, hyperion said:

or increase vision range of catapult to make it less obvious?

I mean, this is the obvious solution, isn't it?

[hyperion]

Just now, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

I mean, this is the obvious solution, isn't it?

Imagine a map with height set to minimum everywhere except a column in the center with height set to max, now every ranged unit if placed on top the column can reach any point on map. So how much to increase the vision range to call it good enough?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

19 minutes ago, hyperion said:

Imagine a map with height set to minimum everywhere except a column in the center with height set to max, now every ranged unit if placed on top the column can reach any point on map. So how much to increase the vision range to call it good enough?

Such a ridiculous outlier will have to be dealt with if it occurs. Design for what is likely.

[hyperion]

16 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Such a ridiculous outlier will have to be dealt with if it occurs. Design for what is likely.

Sure, just mentioned it to show it's not _that_ obvious.

So minimum vision range  is "horizontal shooting range" + "largest building size" / 2 + "some 30 meters for elevation to make it unlikely" for all units?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Add enough vision to cover most scenarios.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

I have had this happen too, what are the scenarios where siege can shoot farther than its vision range? (100 meters range vs 110 meters vision range)

Perhaps it has to do with whether or not a large building is considered fully in view? I would think even seeing the corner of a fortress should allow the status of the building to be unveiled.

Since large buildings like forts are a lot larger than 10 meters on one side, I think it would not be ideal to just increase vision range to like 140.

[chrstgtr]

This was previously known. At the time there was concern about cata becoming roaming lighthouses. Expanding vision would make them easier to protect, but I don't have a big problem with that. 

https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4511

2 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

I mean, this is the obvious solution, isn't it?

Or decrease attack range. I personally think cata deserve a slight nerf so decreasing attacking range would serve a dual purpose. 

I don't really care which of these options the team proceeds on. 

Just now, real_tabasco_sauce said:

Perhaps it has to do with whether or not a large building is considered fully in view? I would think even seeing the corner of a fortress should allow the status of the building to be unveiled.

 

It's this. https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4511

I also suppose it would happen when you are firing from a higher elevation. 

[real_tabasco_sauce]

Ah yes, I remember this patch.

In theory, the best solution would be to allow buildings to be considered visible with a smaller portion of their area in vision range.

However, the most practical solution would be to increase vision range a little and decrease range a little as well.

[chrstgtr]

24 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

Ah yes, I remember this patch.

In theory, the best solution would be to allow buildings to be considered visible with a smaller portion of their area in vision range.

However, the most practical solution would be to increase vision range a little and decrease range a little as well.

Fine with me

[borg-]

3 hours ago, hyperion said:

Then what is your solution? Make SoD leaky (which IMHO is against it's purpose) or increase vision range of catapult to make it less obvious?

Building attacked by catapults, become visible to the attacker.

[hyperion]

11 minutes ago, borg- said:

Building attacked by catapults, become visible to the attacker.

There is also a patch by @wraitii making attackers temporary visible so this would make a reasonable combo, probably attacked units should become visible as well.

Compared to attack_range + ~70m  vision_range which would only reasonably solve the issue this would be full solution.