Loading/Unloading range/footprint

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Should unloading range be the same as loading range? Look like the unloading of units is at footprint size while loading of units use loading range. Should probably use loading range for both or some other fix.

Also, it is weird that footprint is use for both selection ring size and hitbox for projectile. There are many case where you would want the select ring/lines to show up bigger than the object, so now the projectile hitbox is oversize (and units unload at large range).

Edited July 18, 2015 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[FeXoR]

IMO the amount of properties per entity type should be kept as small as possible.

Reusing the footprint (size and shape) for the selection rings makes perfect sense to me (and actually tells the player somthing about how easy the units are to be hit). How far they extend beyond the footprint should be the same for all units (with the same shape, and there should only be square and round shapes for movable units - actually IMO there only should be round shapes so units don't get wedged).

It also makes sense to use the footprint size and shape for the unload distance IMO.

Could you give an example and reason why you would want a selection ring not fitting the footprint size?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

IMO the amount of properties per entity type should be kept as small as possible.

Reusing the footprint (size and shape) for the selection rings makes perfect sense to me (and actually tells the player somthing about how easy the units are to be hit). How far they extend beyond the footprint should be the same for all units (with the same shape, and there should only be square and round shapes for movable units - actually IMO there only should be round shapes so units don't get wedged).

It also makes sense to use the footprint size and shape for the unload distance IMO.

Could you give an example and reason why you would want a selection ring not fitting the footprint size?

All footprints are currently larger than the object. If you want to reduce entity components then reuse Obstruction size for unloading, since Obstruction size more closely resemble the actualy size of the object.

And why should an arrow register a hit on a unit when the arrow actually falls far from the unit's feet or falls within a building's selection ring but doesn't actually hit the biulding?

Edited July 21, 2015 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[FeXoR]

I don't mind if the obstruction or the footprint is used. I just wanted to point out my opinion that reusing properties for things that might only be related to but not exactly matching is a good thing e.g. less stats to change for modders and less data to parse.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

I disagree. It is making it inflexible for modders. Cannot change one without it affecting something else unrelated. Another issue like this is repair rate being hardcoded to builder/rate (a base rate). This limit modding capacity and just does not make sense (maybe was a mistake somewhere).

[FeXoR]

I agree reusing unit properties for multiple different cases makes the modability of just changing the units properties less flexible.

But IMO that fits the case quite well: Only changing the unit properties is and should be easy but you don't have as much controll as e.g. writing code for how things are handled.

If you want to have more control you might want to change some code as well.

However, if you can clearly point out what you want to have changed and why exactly and what is improved by it in general you may find someone agreeing, adding a patch and get it into the main game.

However, untill now at least I am not convinced and don't even know what exactly you whant to have changed... so I threw in my general opinion