Author |
Message |
numgun
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2007 11:04 pm Posts: 2932
|
Re: Mini-mod feasability?
The idea of this mod would work very well.
However, just to mention, you should note that CC is capable of supporting 256 MOIDs*. An actor is made out of 6 MOIDs usually (limbs, torso + jetpack) and if you divide that by 256, you get... about 42 actors. Also take in account weapons, crafts and turrets so the number maybe as low as 30 units ingame at the same time.
*MOID = Movable Object Identity (?) Everything that is higher than MOSParticle, like MOSRotating, Actor limbs, attachables, guns, craft parts, emitters and such.
If youre gonna make small actors, you either use some existing small actor mods like the marsian scout actor or try making yourself by first deciding how small will he be and then work your way with offsets from there. (So if go to make a actor with 50% size of a coalition soldier, you'll respectively half every offset and so on.)
|
Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:37 am |
|
|
mpsingleton
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 10:42 pm Posts: 8
|
Re: Mini-mod feasability?
numgun - more good info, and I thank you for it.
Is there any way to up that limit via coding?
Assuming not, it still wouldn't cripple the idea. Worst case, it would play exactly as it does now, only with 4 to 8x "larger" maps, which would be just fine.
On the other hand, tiny actors might be made simpler, too, possibly down to 2-3 MOIDs for a standard soldier (leg/body or leg/body/arm?). That's getting pretty damn tiny, though. I think the first goal will simply be to make 1/8 scale dummies that work exactly as they do now, and see where it goes from there. I kinda like the idea of super-tiny infantry "squads" done as a single actor, but that's probably too small. Maybe a second, even smaller mod, after the first one?
I've been writing papers all weekend and have tests all week, though, so first I gotta find time to educate myself. I really appreciate the info you guys have been offering; now I just have to find time to do something with it.
|
Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:50 am |
|
|
vagyr
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 10:54 am Posts: 365
|
Re: Mini-mod feasability?
i think than this is a hard coded limit... so no you cannot change it unless you find a way to mess with it via the base.rte(which is the file you should not mess with). besites i guess than it would be just too much for the engine to handle your idea is funny(in a good way). it would be extremly fun to use theese guys since it would be more like a huge battlefield! if you make the apropriate maps/activities/actors it would be epic!
|
Mon Apr 20, 2009 3:05 pm |
|
|
piipu
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 9:13 pm Posts: 499 Location: Finland
|
Re: Mini-mod feasability?
Does an actor have to have a head? Dunno if they die, but at least headless actors are loaded. Also, an actor could just have a single leg and an arm. Hands and foots may also be necessary, but propably not.
|
Mon Apr 20, 2009 6:08 pm |
|
|
Flammablezombie
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:12 pm Posts: 1525 Location: In between your sister's legs, showing her how to use a... PS3 controller!
|
Re: Mini-mod feasability?
The actor will die in seconds without limbs.
|
Mon Apr 20, 2009 6:15 pm |
|
|
Duh102
happy carebear mom
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 1:40 am Posts: 7096 Location: b8bbd5
|
Re: Mini-mod feasability?
Flammablezombie wrote: The actor will die in seconds without limbs. Uhh... If they're broken off and the breakwound works like that. If you define it without, say, a leg, then the actor will simply not have a leg. If you could remove an arm and two legs, you could halve the number of MOIDs per actor without losing too much mobility (since you've already said the mini actors will mostly rely on their jetpacks).
|
Mon Apr 20, 2009 6:23 pm |
|
|
Solace
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 2:05 am Posts: 426
|
Re: Mini-mod feasability?
I still think rolly robots would be the best for such a small thing... both for the physics (a leg made of a pixel trying to climb a pixel-or-two piece of debris might encounter trouble), and for the actual visual (easier to represent a wheel using so few pixels then a leg). Plus, if you can cut down on the MOIDs it would give you the minimum amount (wheel/leg, body/head, arm, gun) without making your troops ride pogo sticks.
|
Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:02 pm |
|
|
mpsingleton
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 10:42 pm Posts: 8
|
Re: Mini-mod feasability?
Solace wrote: I still think rolly robots would be the best for such a small thing... I'm leaning that way myself. Does CC work with wheels? I've never really seen a wheeled actor. Haven't gotten around to figuring out the offsets or any of the nitty-gritty yet, but I got my swatches imported and tried some simple re-spriting after getting home this evening, messing around with mini-dummies. I'd guessed badly at the scale of the actual sprites; 1/4 scale works out to 4 pixels for a head, which is really not much to work with. I think I'm gonna aim that low, though, and yeah, I'll probably be aiming for a 2-3 MOID actor for infantry units. I was thinking wheel and arm only. Arm is the body, head, arms, and weapon in one. That might not be possible, though, or it might sacrifice the ability to pick up weapons, so maybe just wheel, arm, and gun. For the record? Dummies are WAY more survivable when their body and head are six pixels tall, with a sizable gap between them.
|
Tue Apr 21, 2009 5:54 am |
|
|
411570N3
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 10:26 am Posts: 4074 Location: That quaint little British colony down south
|
Re: Mini-mod feasability?
No, CC does not as of yet work in any capacity with wheels. All wheeled objects existing are in fact crabs with invisible legs.
|
Tue Apr 21, 2009 8:05 am |
|
|
Grif
REAL AMERICAN HERO
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 10:25 pm Posts: 5655
|
Re: Mini-mod feasability?
numgun wrote: However, just to mention, you should note that CC is capable of supporting 256 MOIDs*. An actor is made out of 6 MOIDs usually (limbs, torso + jetpack) and if you divide that by 256, you get... about 42 actors. Also take in account weapons, crafts and turrets so the number maybe as low as 30 units ingame at the same time. waaaaaaaaaaaat maybe the rest of the forum will take you at face value but the fact that I just spawned 500+ MOIDs without significant lag is disagreeing with you
|
Tue Apr 21, 2009 3:26 pm |
|
|
Kallemort
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:55 pm Posts: 948
|
Re: Mini-mod feasability?
Grif wrote: numgun wrote: However, just to mention, you should note that CC is capable of supporting 256 MOIDs*. An actor is made out of 6 MOIDs usually (limbs, torso + jetpack) and if you divide that by 256, you get... about 42 actors. Also take in account weapons, crafts and turrets so the number maybe as low as 30 units ingame at the same time. waaaaaaaaaaaat maybe the rest of the forum will take you at face value but the fact that I just spawned 500+ MOIDs without significant lag is disagreeing with you img Still, at that point my actors start exploding. That's why, when playing on some lolrush activities, the MOID count is always at 255, since over that someone explodes.
|
Tue Apr 21, 2009 3:30 pm |
|
|
Grif
REAL AMERICAN HERO
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 10:25 pm Posts: 5655
|
Re: Mini-mod feasability?
?????????
|
Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:33 am |
|
|
Areku
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:46 pm Posts: 5212 Location: The Grills Locker.
|
Re: Mini-mod feasability?
Grif wrote: < Insert big image with insane amount of MOID's here>
????????? Ok, now that's an undeniable proof. Grif won the discussion this time.
|
Wed Apr 22, 2009 1:07 am |
|
|
Duh102
happy carebear mom
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 1:40 am Posts: 7096 Location: b8bbd5
|
Re: Mini-mod feasability?
Areku wrote: Grif won the discussion this time. Grif wins because he always thinks before he posts.
|
Wed Apr 22, 2009 1:25 am |
|
|
zalo
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 7:11 pm Posts: 1496
|
Re: Mini-mod feasability?
Just so you know, 1/8th Dummies are absurdly small. But the modification is simple. Code: AddEffect = Attachable CopyOf = Dummy Head A PresetName = Mini Dummy Head Scale = 0.125 Mass = 2.37875 SpriteOffset = Vector X = -0.625 Y = -0.625 JointOffset = Vector X = 0 Y = 0.75 All I did was change the mass and the offsets and the scale. I used the scale variable since I'm assuming you're like me, you don't want to re-size every dummy sprite there is. All that code is valid by the way, I tested it on a full size dummy. You could hardly even see it is was so small. Perfect.
|
Wed Apr 22, 2009 3:22 am |
|
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|