===[COMMITTED]=== Order move indicator[Visual]

[leper]

Fix your editor (take a look at the diff if you want to know why); handle interpolation (mostly just needed for the current (or first) line, unless some waypoint is actually another unit that is moving); figure out in what ways the code for UnitAI is broken now (there are some 5 years of changes to account for), figure out in what ways it was broken back then (though just figuring out in what ways it is broken now should suffice); remove that ugly duplication with the RallyPointRenderer; reconsider using std::list there (as in not using it); think about formations again (just because they are somewhat broken doesn't mean we should break them even more); possibly some more, also read the ticket that might have some insight.

[Stan`]

Oh god all those brackets...

[Lion.Kanzen]

So what we neeed? Is necessary open a ticket?

[Stan`]

@Lion.Kanzen I'm somewhat on it. 

See #657 and D557

I mostly fixed the duplicate code. @vladislavbelov raised concerns about STD deque and STD lists though Im not sure performance is would be really different.

About unitai Im not sure what is broken. About formations I think I will get the center of it and draw a line to the target no formation either multiple lines or no lines at all over three units. Still remains the question of the animated arrows. I need to make them disappear with no hack at the end of the anim and clearly have no idea on how to do that.

And last but not least I think it could be done for A23 But I clearly will need some help :/

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

  On 29/05/2017 at 5:47 PM, stanislas69 said:

And last but not least I think it could be done for A23 But I clearly will need some help :/

Expand  

For A23 there should be a roadmap of desired features hashed out by the core team members. I can't imagine why this wouldn't be one of them.

[Itms]

Personally I'd rather have a move order visual indicator as you proposed at the beginning of the thread than waypoint flags. It looks cleaner to me (and it would certainly be easier to implement, as the pathfinder or interpolation wouldn't be involved in any way).

[Stan`]

@Itms If someone tells me how I can make object appear and disappear in unit action.js could be done quickly.

[Itms]

  On 30/05/2017 at 10:51 AM, stanislas69 said:

@Itms If someone tells me how I can make object appear and disappear in unit action.js could be done quickly.

Expand  

Well that's the code you need to write actually The job is figuring out how to implement that. But if you don't know, you can create a ticket describing the feature, explaining that it's different from the waypoint flags thing, and attaching your art to it. Then you push a contributor into writing the code while the team members are busy with the release

[Imarok]

  On 30/05/2017 at 7:36 AM, Itms said:

Personally I'd rather have a move order visual indicator as you proposed at the beginning of the thread than waypoint flags. It looks cleaner to me (and it would certainly be easier to implement, as the pathfinder or interpolation wouldn't be involved in any way).

Expand  

Sure, it's easier to implement, but imho waypoints for units are also an important feature, especially for queued orders.

[Radagast.]

  On 30/05/2017 at 12:55 PM, Imarok said:

Sure, it's easier to implement, but imho waypoints for units are also an important feature, especially for queued orders.

Expand  

Surely nice to have. Usefulness could be questionable if one considers all the lines crossing all over if you give more queued orders for multiple units|groups.

  On 30/05/2017 at 10:51 AM, stanislas69 said:

@Itms If someone tells me how I can make object appear and disappear in unit action.js could be done quickly.

Expand  

Stan, you are in the GUI, this means you have to use GuiInterface to interact with the simulation (if you want to add a simulation entity). There are other graphics only ways of course but I'm of no help as I am overwhelmed with thousands of code issues myself. That's the thing with virtual world - it adds to the real world issues. haha. Which is why I wish to reward all those altruistic open source contributors.

[Radagast.]

OK. IMO duplicate waypoint (rally point) XML. Allows to create variants as needed e.g. when interacting with the mouse with walls or if supplement info like context (e.g. rotating exclamation|question mark 3D model should be shown [as prop to be explicit as we both like :)]).

This then'd only be a matter of selecting the correct variant using a GuiInterface call.

It may be wise to allow more such graphical-only (unselectable, non-interactive) quasi entities per player at the same time for the case that the animation has not finished playing all frames when the knightly player already clicked other units to its target positions|interaction points.
Else one could simply add one such entity per faction,player with position set to -1 by default and on demand moving it to the correct place, showing it via GuiInterface call, selecting the correct variant depending on GUI interaction context. (Maybe my friend to make it easier this single entity approach is a good start?)

Edit: May be even better to always keep the quasi entities ingame, but the non-looping (!) animation's rest position being far below ground level. This way no timeout is required to hide the entity|move out of world. Neither is moving into world required then (saves 2 of 3 engine calls, good for performance). So no show,hide and instead:

1. Move to cmd.target coordinates.
2. Select animation which triggers it to play once (making it show and disappear like in your great model and animation, @stanislas69. High quality works. Thanks man!)

  Reveal hidden contents

If this is overkill, then simply exchange cursor to an animated one on successful click event. Should provide the same desired feedback, i.e. that the click was successful. (But I think the discussion already settled on the 3D model because it does not move with the mouse and prolongs the time the event's target position can be seen - though that's subjective and depends on the animation duration.)

If the purpose were to show that the order was received well, then this is way trickier and it'd no longer be a GUI thing, but directly in the simulation. More complicated because there is no way to ensure the order will really be executed. Should be enough to know the order is queued though.

 

Edited May 30, 2017 by Radagast.

[Radagast.]

  On 30/05/2017 at 3:34 PM, Radagast. said:

Stan, you are in the GUI, this means you have to use GuiInterface to interact with the simulation (if you want to add a simulation entity). There are other graphics only ways of course but I'm of no help as I am overwhelmed with thousands of code issues myself. That's the thing with virtual world - it adds to the real world issues. haha. Which is why I wish to reward all those altruistic open source contributors.

Expand  

@stanislas69 Please excuse the wording which sounds little friendly! I am aware of the fact you know GuiInterface as shown in the Diff you took over. My proposal serves to show that no hide,show is required and targets specially the target click thingy as "project leader" now prefers - which is different to waypoint of your https://code.wildfiregames.com/D557.

[Stan`]

  On 30/05/2017 at 4:31 PM, Radagast. said:

OK. IMO duplicate waypoint (rally point) XML. Allows to create variants as needed e.g. when interacting with the mouse with walls or if supplement info like context (e.g. rotating exclamation|question mark 3D model should be shown [as prop to be explicit as we both like :)]).

This then'd only be a matter of selecting the correct variant using a GuiInterface call.

It may be wise to allow more such graphical-only (unselectable, non-interactive) quasi entities per player at the same time for the case that the animation has not finished playing all frames when the knightly player already clicked other units to its target positions|interaction points.
Else one could simply add one such entity per faction,player with position set to -1 by default and on demand moving it to the correct place, showing it via GuiInterface call, selecting the correct variant depending on GUI interaction context. (Maybe my friend to make it easier this single entity approach is a good start?)

Edit: May be even better to always keep the quasi entities ingame, but the non-looping (!) animation's rest position being far below ground level. This way no timeout is required to hide the entity|move out of world. Neither is moving into world required then (saves 2 of 3 engine calls, good for performance). So no show,hide and instead:

1. Move to cmd.target coordinates.
2. Select animation which triggers it to play once (making it show and disappear like in your great model and animation, @stanislas69. High quality works. Thanks man!)

  Reveal hidden contents

If this is overkill, then simply exchange cursor to an animated one on successful click event. Should provide the same desired feedback, i.e. that the click was successful. (But I think the discussion already settled on the 3D model because it does not move with the mouse and prolongs the time the event's target position can be seen - though that's subjective and depends on the animation duration.)

If the purpose were to show that the order was received well, then this is way trickier and it'd no longer be a GUI thing, but directly in the simulation. More complicated because there is no way to ensure the order will really be executed. Should be enough to know the order is queued though.

 

Expand  

Yeah but the issue is the number of entitites that would represent at the end of the game. I'm pretty sure 5000 per person clicks is not a big number for a game.

  On 30/05/2017 at 6:04 PM, Radagast. said:

@stanislas69 Please excuse the wording which sounds little friendly! I am aware of the fact you know GuiInterface as shown in the Diff you took over. My proposal serves to show that no hide,show is required and targets specially the target click thingy as "project leader" now prefers - which is different to waypoint of your https://code.wildfiregames.com/D557.

Expand  

Different yes, unrelated not so much, If I can do D557 arrow thing should be piece of cake, at least so I hope.

 

  Quote

Stan, you are in the GUI, this means you have to use GuiInterface to interact with the simulation (if you want to add a simulation entity). There are other graphics only ways of course but I'm of no help as I am overwhelmed with thousands of code issues myself. That's the thing with virtual world - it adds to the real world issues. haha. Which is why I wish to reward all those altruistic open source contributors.

Expand  

I just don't know how to get the component manager to add an entity.

  On 30/05/2017 at 12:55 PM, Imarok said:

Sure, it's easier to implement, but imho waypoints for units are also an important feature, especially for queued orders.

Expand  

Not giving up. Got interpolation working rest is on ticket.

 

 

  On 30/05/2017 at 12:09 PM, Itms said:

Well that's the code you need to write actually The job is figuring out how to implement that. But if you don't know, you can create a ticket describing the feature, explaining that it's different from the waypoint flags thing, and attaching your art to it. Then you push a contributor into writing the code while the team members are busy with the release

Expand  

Yeah will do. Well that could be a solution, but the only way I found in the past to get stuff I wanted done was to learn it and do it myself eventually ^^

 

I noticed I get warnings popups when using atlas in debug mode, and AFAICS click selection is still broken in atlas, making it really annoying to select a single unit. Maybe that something that should be fixed in FF ? Or @vladislavbelov may have an idea for this kind of bugs

 

[Itms]

  On 30/05/2017 at 11:36 PM, stanislas69 said:

I just don't know how to get the component manager to add an entity.

Expand  

Hint: The thing you are trying to do is very similar to the preview when placing a building.

[Stan`]

I submitted a patch https://code.wildfiregames.com/D606 for the visual move order indicator. If someone could test it'd be nice

[Lion.Kanzen]

Needs auto Build? I want to test.

[Stan`]

Shouldn't need one no

[Lion.Kanzen]

I get this.

  Reveal hidden contents

ERROR: CCacheLoader failed to find archived or source file for: "simulation/templates/other/target_arrow.xml"

ERROR: Failed to load entity template 'other/target_arrow'

 

Edited June 5, 2017 by Lion.Kanzen

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

  On 05/06/2017 at 9:44 PM, Lion.Kanzen said:

I get this.

  Reveal hidden contents

ERROR: CCacheLoader failed to find archived or source file for: "simulation/templates/other/target_arrow.xml"

ERROR: Failed to load entity template 'other/target_arrow'

 

Expand  

Yep, looks like the diff has all the art files, but no template.

[Lion.Kanzen]

But in public archive provide by Stan, is there.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

  On 06/06/2017 at 5:29 AM, Lion.Kanzen said:

But in public archive provide by Stan, is there.

Expand  

public archive?

[Lion.Kanzen]

  Here he attached a zip file.

 

[Stan`]

Whoops. I'll fix it tonight

[Stan`]

Actually it's fixed now ill have to clean the patch but that'll wait for tonight

[Lion.Kanzen]

The animation have some problem, why  the loop are 2.5 almost 3 times? And the movement must be completed. I feel the arrow don't borrow inside the ground.