Difference between revisions of "Talk:Glacier/GlacialHawk"
(reply to Nat) |
m (Cool!) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
:: Nah. I've considered that, but decided that that becomes far too specific to a particularly antigrav implementation and also doesn't robustly handle enemy bots at angles other than the specific tested one. I might give it a try anyway though. It is based on the looking out of the bot from specific angles though :) --[[User:Rednaxela|Rednaxela]] 16:03, 10 September 2009 (UTC) | :: Nah. I've considered that, but decided that that becomes far too specific to a particularly antigrav implementation and also doesn't robustly handle enemy bots at angles other than the specific tested one. I might give it a try anyway though. It is based on the looking out of the bot from specific angles though :) --[[User:Rednaxela|Rednaxela]] 16:03, 10 September 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | : Amazing! I can't wait to see the whole Glacier. :) --[[User:Positive|Positive]] 21:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 22:52, 11 September 2009
Congrats! Isn't bad for first run, is it? You make me laugh out loud when I saw your gun debugging graphics. Not open sourced this time, eh? » Nat | Talk » 13:26, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. It's indeed not bad, and might be able surpass Shadow's gun with some good bulletpower tuning alone I suspect. What's so funny about the debugging graphics? It's just a radial graph of how attractive angles look for targeting :). GlacialHawk isn't open source right now, as I don't want to give away my top-secret melee-targeting-dimensions just yet, but it'll probably be open source when I'm ready to make the full release of Glacier. --Rednaxela 13:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- For it is really hard to see where gun is actually aiming with that radial graph =) Even I know you use flat polygon-based graph in RougeDC, this type of graph is really unexpected by me when I turned the debugging graphics on. =) » Nat | Talk » 14:19, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
Really nice work! I've had a bunch of ideas for melee-specific targeting attributes, as well, but only implemented (and usually reverted) a handful of them. I'll be curious to find out some day how yours compare. Also, my ego demands I point out that DiamondHawk 1.0 was still targeting specific opponents (pre-Shadow/Melee Gun), and I've gained at least another 1% APS in Diamond via gun improvements since then. =) When can we expect Glacier? --Voidious 13:44, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
I'll give one hint about my melee-specific targeting attributes for now: It's designed specifically for making PIF accurate against the common anti-grav/min-risk bots. Glacier can be expected... after I do a few iterations of GlacialHawk to tweak the bulletpower and other issues on my mind, and then have time experiment with the movement just a little more. My estimate is... 1 to 3 weeks. :) --Rednaxela 14:14, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- Let me guess, the gravity/risk value for chosen angles from enemy robot? » Nat | Talk » 14:19, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- Nah. I've considered that, but decided that that becomes far too specific to a particularly antigrav implementation and also doesn't robustly handle enemy bots at angles other than the specific tested one. I might give it a try anyway though. It is based on the looking out of the bot from specific angles though :) --Rednaxela 16:03, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- Amazing! I can't wait to see the whole Glacier. :) --Positive 21:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
