|
Post by midnightdreary on Jul 8, 2017 0:11:08 GMT
I don't know if this has been brought up before, so ignore me if it has, but does anyone think that the addition of logic gates or something similar into the remote controls (which could be linked to specific systems) would be very useful?
I just envisioned a ship that could adapt, automatically, to suddenly losing a large amount of power, turning off/on certain weapons or their capacitors, switching off some resistojets to compensate, or other possibilities.
Maybe some good if/then logic to control certain countermeasure priorities? Maybe if the incoming missile count is less than 20, use lasers, if more then use 5 anti-missile nukes unless within a certain distance, then launch flares instead?
Obviously, I'm sure you clever folks could come up with a lot more to do with that ability.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by lorentz99 on Jul 9, 2017 10:51:55 GMT
Not bad idea. But off-topic, since it is a suggestion.
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Jul 10, 2017 4:57:24 GMT
This would be useful, as seen in various other games where the mechanic exists. But it would take a lot of effort to implement and probably wouldn't be a huge game-changer for combat capability. (And most of what you could do is already doable by a human controller, if present.)
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Jul 10, 2017 8:41:51 GMT
This would be useful, as seen in various other games where the mechanic exists. But it would take a lot of effort to implement and probably wouldn't be a huge game-changer for combat capability. (And most of what you could do is already doable by a human controller, if present.) But computers don't have a reaction time as slow as humans. And it would change gameplay massively for tournaments and missions. This would allow for a slightly smarter AI, which seems one of the main issues in this game as it has no multiplayer.
|
|
|
Post by shiolle on Jul 10, 2017 9:05:04 GMT
That wouldn't end at logic gates, right? You also need inputs/outputs and in time people will ask for some basic math operations and storing variables too because recalculating values all the time isn't efficient. At which point it will turn into this: In other words, visual AI scripting. And why limit this feature to remote controls? It is extremely useful for capital ships as well. That would be an awesome addition, but it is neither simple nor very fast. Interpreters are slow even when the scripts are converted into CIL. Using them for missiles may not be that feasible. That said, I can't keep thinking that AI scripting and multiplayer basically solve similar problems, though given choice I may have preferred the former. Blasphemy, I know.
|
|
|
Post by Argopeilacos on Jul 10, 2017 9:25:21 GMT
If the AI doesn't require player input, its real time performance doesn't matter anymore, we could just let it compute and record everything and play the result afterwards.
|
|
|
Post by shiolle on Jul 10, 2017 9:43:07 GMT
If the AI doesn't require player input, its real time performance doesn't matter anymore, we could just let it compute and record everything and play the result afterwards. If you propose to remove the ability for players to control fleets and leave only AI on AI battles, I'm not very fond of that idea. It worked in Gratuitous Space Battles because there was no scripting and tactics were relatively simple to setup, and even there they implemented player control in one of the patches.
|
|
|
Post by Argopeilacos on Jul 10, 2017 11:47:10 GMT
If you propose to remove the ability for players to control fleets and leave only AI on AI battles, I'm not very fond of that idea. It worked in Gratuitous Space Battles because there was no scripting and tactics were relatively simple to setup, and even there they implemented player control in one of the patches. No, I am thinking of an alternative. Given that: - Advanced AI/scripting is likely to induce (even more) lag, and
- People don't like playing a slideshow,
it would make sense to have two modes: - Direct player control with simplistic AI (current scheme), performance-optimized, and
- Advanced AI-only with event recording and replay functionality.
|
|
|
Post by vegemeister on Jul 10, 2017 13:09:38 GMT
Logic gates, visual scripting... why not just embed a lua interpreter? It's pretty common for game scripting. People could use standard tools (text editors and version control) to develop their AI, guidance, and gunnery systems. There's a high performance implementation available with a non-copyleft open source license.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Jul 10, 2017 13:48:11 GMT
The idea to run a battle and record the outcome is an interesting proposition. It would allow for a much higher fidelity in simulation over all. It might be worth implementing it as an option.
|
|
|
Post by shiolle on Jul 10, 2017 16:13:11 GMT
Logic gates, visual scripting... why not just embed a lua interpreter? It's pretty common for game scripting. People could use standard tools (text editors and version control) to develop their AI, guidance, and gunnery systems. There's a high performance implementation available with a non-copyleft open source license. Visual scripting is popular because people think that it is easier than regular scripting, especially people that don't don't know how to program. For some reason many people consider those blocks less intimidating than text. I spoke about visual scripts because it was the natural evolution of OP's idea. We don't have to stop at LUA or any interpreter or JIT compiler either. The ultimate solution would be to be able to write mods in C++ and have them loaded at runtime, pretty much how KSP mods are written in C#. It would work faster than JIT too.
|
|
|
Post by midnightdreary on Jul 24, 2017 11:58:14 GMT
It just seemed like we could already piggyback some sort of customization into the command modules. The base AI is good at doing basic AI stuff, but player-made logic would make more sense for micro-management.
For example, I would want all my drones to switch to homing immediately after they run out of ammo.
Or making a hard maneuver to dodge missiles AND turn off radiators and launch flares seconds before impact.
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on Jul 26, 2017 8:21:51 GMT
And option to select a preferred nose orientation vs. the enemy would be nice.
Nose on..broadside on.
|
|
|
Post by the_Demongod on Aug 7, 2017 23:17:04 GMT
Definitely a good idea, I was thinking of this exact thing earlier when testing a capital ship with a large spinal cannon that used resistojet RCS for precise aiming. I prefer to use those when only in broadside mode for fine control (since they're RP-1 fueled and I only care a small amount since my main fuel is Methane), and shut them off the rest of the time. I would be perfectly fine with an embedded script interpreter but then again I code and I know not everyone will be interested in that. I'd like to be able to use it for things like the aforementioned logic gates or to create macro buttons and assign them to higher level controls, so that I can have a button to switch from one combat mode (say, enable lasers and shutdown railguns) to another (the opposite), or to change maneuver modes (such as the ones I described earlier). At some point it would indeed be great to have a system like KSP where we can modify the game to our hearts' content.
|
|