View Single Post
  #10  
Old April 7th, 2018, 04:33 AM
DRG's Avatar

DRG DRG is offline
National Security Advisor
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: GWN
Posts: 9,397
Thanks: 1,631
Thanked 2,454 Times in 1,297 Posts
DRG will become famous soon enough
Exclamation Re: Any Wreck Limit to Vision?

The original Test game we ran, the one the screenshots used to illustrate the change were created from, were ( we realize now...) misleading as to the overall effect of the change. They show a lessening of obscuring smoke but the actual effect on the game is much greater. We needed a consistent example to see how the new code worked compared to the old so I built a test scenario on flat ground with high visibility and let the AI slug it out with itself for a few turns using the old code and then I made a screenshot showing the LOS through the wrecks and then saved the test game.

Then I loaded the same test game with the new code and checked the LOS and made the second screenshot I posted and as a " before and after" it was instructive but the logic was flawed. Andy's code change affected not only the overall effect of reducing the effect of wreak smoke but also ( the important bit...)..... the NUMBER of wrecks that created obscuring smoke.

The old code...the one the screenshots were based on ...generated more "flammers" than the new code so although the second screenshot was accurate for showing the overall reduction in wreck smoke effect it didn't show that there were now far fewer wrecks being generated that produced obscuring smoke.....BECAUSE it used the old code to produce the original test example.

Further tests on normal maps with varying terrain seemed to support the overall effect we were after and then we moved on. It was only after you mentioned multiple wrecks not obscuring LOS that I recreated the first test on a dead flat map with high visibility and let the AI slug it out with itself again did I realize how few wrecks actually obscured LOS now.

That said I still think this is better now than the way SP handled it in the past
__________________
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DRG For This Useful Post: