Can we fix TWW?
-
in the current engine, there is a bug with carriers that breaks battles. basically, one hit carriers act like two-hit carriers in that they don't die until all the other units have been killed so they can score hit even after they have been killed.
-
@ubernaut This raises copyright issues. Does one need the consent of whom (@Hepps only, someone else only, multiple persons?) in order to change TWW (as fixing a problem is still changing something, property wise)?
-
@ubernaut I took a brief look at the 3.0 game file, and I believe what you describe is not really what is generally going to happen (unless there are some user-enforced rules you are assuming).
How it works is that carriers are 1 hit-point units which turn into damaged 2 hit-points units when destroyed which turn into the aforementioned units when repaired.
I may be missing something, but I'm not seeing how it is possible that "they don't die until all the other units have been killed". The game doesn't appear to be coded to behave as such.
They just cannot definitely die on the same phase in which they are taken as casualties or removed, but only in a phase subsequent to the one in which they would be removed but are actually changed (so, with only normal fire, you need at least two rounds of combat to kill the carriers, whereas all other units may die on the first round of combat).If someone can clearly state how carriers should behave in any cases in which they receive hits and in any cases in which they are repaired, it should be easy to change the game to behave accordingly.
For example, should they just behave similarly to battleships for damage, repair and removal? That is what I would assume, but it feels wrong carriers being as tough as battleships, and actually relatively even tougher because the carrier unit costs less than the battleship unit. -
@cernel there is bug under the current engine they behave properly under 2.5. once you have the 2 hit tech they are supposed to have 2 hits but are currently under 2.6 they sort of turn into zombies after the first hit without the tech because of the bug, until you get the tech then they work normally.
-
@ubernaut I believe the "zombie" behaviour you are experiencing is the same with 2.5 and 2.6. Can you please test if there are indeed differences between 2.5 and 2.6 in this matter? I don't think there can be. Not to have it in a released version of TripleA, I think you'd need to go back to 1.9.
Anyway, am I correct to understand that carriers should be 1 hit-point without a tech and 2 hit-points and behaving similarly to battleships for damaging and repairing with the tech. If so, this should be a rather simple fix if only I would be allowed to change TWW, which I assume I am not.
-
@cernel said in Can we fix TWW?:
Anyway, am I correct to understand that carriers should be 1 hit-point without a tech and 2 hit-points and behaving similarly to battleships for damaging and repairing with the tech. If so, this should be a rather simple fix if only I would be allowed to change TWW, which I assume I am not.
yes that's correct, aren't any maps submitted to the repository derivative works and thus under the GPL? i doubt @redrum or @hepps would mind someone patching their map if they don't have the time in any event.
-
@ubernaut I'm sure @redrum would be able to do it in little time, or I can do it if anyone assures me he/she can and will then review and merge it if correctly made. I just don't want to do it for a chance to remain there open waiting for whom I'm not sure.
What's needed is to remove the "change into" things from the unit attachments of the undamaged carriers and have them added when the tech triggers.
-
@cernel that's awesome i'm not really sure how that all works who all can approve merge? i am a map admin over on github so maybe i can? willing to take any flak if either of them protest the patch but i can't imagine why they would
-
@cernel said in Can we fix TWW?:
would be able to do it in little time, or I can do it if anyone assures me he/she can and will then review and merge it if correctly made. I just don't want to do it for a chance to remain there open waiting for whom I'm not sure.
yea my guess is you'd have to fork TWW and then send a PR to have it merged by either hepps or redrum or whoever owns the main repo and they would have to approve your changes before it could get merged into triplea.
Just a formality I would think but neither are very active these days. i do see redrum pop in from time to time.What might work for a temporary fix, is doing the change and sending it to ubernaut and he can upload it and share it with his playing partner. Just won't be available on Maps Download.
-
@beelee yeah more than happy to test it for our game we are trying to get going
-
Very few maps have an official owner. TWW updates can be merged in by most any map admin.
It sounds like there is a fix for this problem that can be done by updating the XML. @ubernaut , you are on it?
-
@lafayette i don't really understand how the xml works well enough to understand the thing @Cernel said like i kind of get it but not really. i've never tried to modify a triplea xml file before, i have edited other xml things before tho
-
@lafayette also i don't really know much about how github works either
-
@ubernaut The github thing shows you a listing of files, like the file directory on your computer. Click through to the XML file and click the 'pencil' icon to edit the file, the rest it will guide you through. The tough part is knowing what text to modify.
-
@Cernel sounds like you have a really good handle of what needs to be updated, would you be able to try your hand at this?
-
@lafayette said in Can we fix TWW?:
@Cernel sounds like you have a really good handle of what needs to be updated, would you be able to try your hand at this?
I really don't like that this game has two game files in it without actually offering two different scenarios, as far as I can tell.
I think the best would be that @redrum does it since I believe that he was the latest one working on the TWW game . However, if he's done with it, I guess I can fix it. In this case, however, I would also need permission to eliminate the 2.8 version of TWW if that would need to be fixed too (keeping only the 3.0): I certainly don't want to work (and test) on two game files! I guess the existence of both was meant to be something temporary, right?
Can someone give some information on why there are two games and which one is better to save if we want to keep only one? -
There were two game files because the 3.0 version had some significant gameplay changes which some disliked; also because 2.8 was quite well balanced iirc and in a very stable place, or something like that, so a bunch of people wanted to stick with it. 3.0 made some things better, but others less balanced.
I'm not sure the 3.0 line ever got played thoroughly enough for proper balancing before the mapmaker disappeared; and the bugs preventing it from being played in lobby bots have been around for so long now, I'm not sure how much they disrupted testing.
-
So, who's in favour and who's against of deleting 2.8 and keeping 3.0 as the sole TWW game?
Git-Hub keeps the history, so, anytime a map owner is back, he/she can get it back.
Are there other TWW problems to fix in the map other than the one at this topic? -
@cernel You can delete 2.8 at this point. I don't think anyone plays it anymore.
-
As long as github keeps the history so it can be restored, I guess it's ok. Ideally I'd check with panzer first (is he still around and unbanned?) since to my knowledge he's one of the people who still plays tww the most.
I thought there was another bug in the tww xml, that was discussed in the tww forum thread, but its' been many months, so I don't remember for sure.
