Baddcog's Bots

[Baddcog]

well, if that script is already there and we can add a one liner or something easy to disable ai:type... or whatever

 

that might be best, from what I understand scripts are always the best way to go. Act/react (source/receptron, whatever) is a great tool to have for authors, especially since so many authors are used to T2. On top of that it is easier than learning to script (especially with a game like T2 which only a few people ever managed to do).

 

The drawbacks from what I know are that a source will continually have to be checked (probably like a script). So actualy I have no idea what the benifit of script over A/R is.

But I think this is something that if we decide that is how this particular ai is disabled, why not? It's not like the authors need to change it to water disable. Mainly I can't see any reason why authors would need to change it.

 

My main issue with disable by water for this guy is that even if I added a grill to shoot at, it would be like 3x3 inches across. Hard to hit with an arrow, that would just frustrate a player. And if they could hit the foot and disable it wouldn't seem right. With a big bot you can have a 2x2 foot target.

 

I do think that you are right that not too many things should be hard coded,

but this is kindof like a rope. You can climb a rope. Might as well hard code it if performance is better.

Or like a crate, it's small, wood, square... it's better to have a wood material that allows arrows to stick than to give it a receptron or source that allows arrows to stick.

 

If i could think of a good reason for this to not be a set feature of this bot I would probably say leave it more open ended and use a/r, but I like the idea and think it's a great way to disable him so I say script it.

[New Horizon]

My main issue with disable by water for this guy is that even if I added a grill to shoot at, it would be like 3x3 inches across. Hard to hit with an arrow, that would just frustrate a player.

 

That shouldn't be too much of a problem, we would just have to make the target area slightly larger than the grill. We already do this for the torches. We can make the target 'slightly' more forgiving, but that's just a gameplay tweak for afterwards. I would say staying with the water arrow convention of T2 would be ok, makes sense for a steam powered bot, and it will make players weigh the pros/cons of using up another valuable water arrow.

[Baddcog]

But then I gotta do all the rigging all over, along with adding to a model I thought was OKed. and adding another texture on top of that.

In addition to the fact that there is really nowhere on the model to put a grill or have a furnace. The box below the tank is a gear box. The back has a piston...

 

I think moss is fine, it'll give players another reason to use moss, the other bots can be stopped by water, although the idea of lockpicking a bot has been brought up too.

 

I think it makes for better gameplay, it's not just a bot is coming, get the water ready. It's "what kindof of bot is coming, am I prepared? What do I need, should I look?"

[Crispy]

I'm OK with moss as well. The only caveat is that moss arrows are traditionally (read: in Thief) more expensive than water arrows. Doesn't make a lot of sense to make a weaker bot only vulnerable to expensive moss while stronger bots are only vulnerable to cheap water.

 

Then again, maybe it would encourage players to be sneaky and avoid the bot (since it's easier to avoid this bot than a sighted combat bot) rather than disable it, since disabling it would be expensive.

[sparhawk]

The expensiveness is not much of a problem IMO. After all, the bot itself is no threat on it's own, so the player can avoid it. It just becomes a nuisance, because he probably will follow you as long as possible and make noise which in turn attracts other AI. So using a moss arrow might be ok, because the player doesn't has to in many cases.

 

What I wonder though is, the moss only makes sense if the player hits the earphone. Anywhere else, the moss would be pretty useless, because the earphone is the primary source of information for the bot.

[Springheel]

The only caveat is that moss arrows are traditionally (read: in Thief) more expensive than water arrows

 

Hopefully we won't be making metal and tile floors be so ridiculously loud, thus making moss arrows a little less necessary, and hence, cheaper.

[Crispy]

Yeah, I guess that's not a problem.

 

What I wonder though is, the moss only makes sense if the player hits the earphone. Anywhere else, the moss would be pretty useless, because the earphone is the primary source of information for the bot.

The way I see it is that the moss spores get into the joints of the bot, and the hot water tank that powers it (since the moss grows rapidly in water), and jam up the workings.

[sparhawk]

In that case we would expect to see the moss exploding somehow.

[Crispy]

I guess so. Some kind of mossy particle effect centred around the bot could look cool. I'll leave that one to the artists...

 

So are we agreed then? Lantern bots are to be disabled by moss arrows?

[greebo]

I can live with that too, although it feels a bit strange - and I somehow have the feeling that this will disturb quite some people (at TTLG). A good rationale is needed here.

[sparhawk]

Yeah. Why not? Maybe we can write some Inventor note, that these bots have a problem because they only run for about one day at most, and they can easily be dispensed with when stuff is getting in the mechanics, so they need some rework. This should explain why they work through the whole night and can be disabled with moss arrows.

[Baddcog]

I was thinking also along with the gears being jammed by the moss, the moss pads are pretty thick. He's pretty small and his legs probably won't come too high off the ground, so grass should probably have the same effect.

Or at least implied, it's kindof a smooth surface bot.

 

I'm actually thinking it might be limited by stairs too, that I think depends on how D3 handles the IK. The 'hip' joints only rotate side/side, it's the other 2 joints in the leg that fold the leg up/down. I don't know if this will limit stair movement. I haven't compared him side to side with a small spider, haven't seen those do stairs...

 

About cost of moss too. I don't think that'll be that big of a concern, usually the authors are pretty good about including the needed equip in game, along with putting it in the store, if they even make a store. So it would be like making a mission with alot of tile, the author is going to include some 'freebie' moss.

 

I think these are the gameplay issues that will need addressed so people understand em, like the tips that are in T2 during instal. We need something like that, maybe something on the web page around release time that has a pic of each AI group and their story, much like the wiki articles on them. Although I think it would be better to have that up on the website with good renders of the ai (probably in game shots once we get that far) cool headers, maybe pics of their building types, and the full descriptions of them, their weaknesses, strengths...

A tool section for descrips of lanterns, ect...

If one bot ends up lockpickable that would need described. I think players will enjoy doing things somewhat differently than T2. While they want the same basic gameplay, after 10 years of playing it doesn't hurt to change it up just a little ya know.

That's how the lockpick system is. It's not going to be the same as T2, or even T3 but I think everyone is gonna like it, maybe more just for the fact that it's fresh, they gotta work on their skills again, it'll bring back a little of that newbie challange that's been gone for so long.

[Springheel]

So are we agreed then? Lantern bots are to be disabled by moss arrows?

 

The only tricky part is consistancy. If moss arrows can junk up the works of this guy, why not the larger bots? It also has ever-so-slight comparisons to the way moss arrows were used in TDS.

 

Another option is some kind of 'switch' or something that the player could hit on the bot, by getting close enough to hit it. We could just say that one hit is enough to 'break' the piston that drives it, or whatever. So if a player gets in behind it, he can essentially BJ it like a normal guard, without a lot of noise. This wouldn't work on larger bots because they're bigger and more durable.

 

A mapper could make this extremely difficult to do by putting a regular AI on patrol with the bot (which seems reasonable).

 

Additionally, shooting a water arrow at the bot's head could put out the lantern (which is the biggest obstacle it presents).

[SneaksieDave]

Way back on the previous page: what's wrong with it having self shadows? Without them it'd look pretty artificial and would be different from every other AI that also has them.

[Springheel]

Actually, many of our AI have selfshadows off for certain textures, because it otherwise creates a lot of harsh black triangles that doesn't look very good. However, they should general use it unless it looks bad, and I haven't noticed any problems with the appearance of the bot.

[New Horizon]

Way back on the previous page: what's wrong with it having self shadows? Without them it'd look pretty artificial and would be different from every other AI that also has them.

 

Self shadowing should actually be turned off on all AI, and I think also the models and props(not 100% certain on that), that one comes down from Id themselves. As Spring stated, they cause things to look harsh and jagged. I would imagine also that there is a pretty good savings in performance with self shadowing turned off. It doesn't stop the model from casting a shadow elsewhere, or a shadow from falling across it from another model...it's just an optimization and it eliminates a case of the uglies.

[oDDity]

Except in cases where no self shadowing looks weird, like the hood of a character should cast a shadow across his face, or the inside of the sleeves a shadow on his hands, or the underside of armour etc.

What I did was make selected surfaces like those a separate material and turn on self shadowing for them.

[Springheel]

I've been applying the guideline that self-shadow should stay on unless it causes the model to look bad (which it sometimes does, but not always). A side effect of noselfshadow is that other objects with noselfshadow won't case a shadow on the object either, which isn't desirable. It can also make some objects look weird to have it off.

[SneaksieDave]

Open any of our maps with AI in them and take a look. Unless maybe I'm misunderstanding the point being referred to? (textures versus model versus instance, or...?) The walk IK map for instance shows that every one of those AI have (at least) arms casting shadows on their bodies.

 

Edit: anyway to cut to the point, I definitely think this bot would be a case where shutting them off would have undesirable results, due to how many attachments and concave surfaces it has which should be casting self shadows. It would reduce the realistic and 'spatially present' look of it.

[Baddcog]

Ah, I hate when I write a long post and the forums doesn't take it. So this'll be much shorter...

 

small gears would gunk up easier than big ones. So I don't think small bot disabled by moss and big bots not a problem.

 

Don't remember what moss did in T3 other than the pagan stones, what comparision are you thinking of Springheel?

 

Um... lantern being put out. The lantern glass IS a different material NOW. So it can be illuminated, so that material can have a seperate prop for stims.

water, would be hard to extinguish lantern thru glass

broadhead, maybe a little noisy, but well placed could break glass, put out lantern.

 

selfshadows, what ever looks best, is mtr file prop so easy to change/test at any time.

[Crispy]

Don't remember what moss did in T3 other than the pagan stones, what comparision are you thinking of Springheel?

Shooting moss at a T3 guard would cause him to choke and splutter, making him temporarily blind and deaf. It would put him temporarily out of action, allowing you to easily run past him. It was rather... comical.

[Baddcog]

Ah, I gotta play again just to make a guard sputter I never knew that. It does sound comical, you'd think he'd get pissed.

 

EDIT--Update--

 

I uploaded new steambot mesh (Think i need to work the smoothing groups a little bit, one thing or another)

Resized, rotated, 2 materials, one for lantern glow.

 

New Idle and Walk anims.

 

test_baddcog.map updated as well. Use NoTarget and shoot a noise arrow in the corner to watch him change anims/patrol

 

I'm gonna take a good look at spider anims again before I make anymore, decide what he should do...

 

Currently NO af.

[Darkness_Falls]

can image of lantern bot be posted? i have svn issues

[Springheel]

Check our website.

[Baddcog]

Been awhile since I posted here. Just to update the lantern bot tex is being worked on, AF almost done.

Anims seem to work pretty good with current Dm. He alerts, ect...

 

On a new note I got a little inspiration on a combat bot so started blocking it out. Kindof pieced together alot of the concept ideas

 

That's a rough first concept anim. I think I really like how it moves. For a big awkward bot it's realistic I think, lot's of room for moving gears.

Still, the chassis needs a piston from the boiler to the gear box, ect... steampipes and whatnot.

 

Anyway, this is a closer version of what I imagine the legs to look like

 

 

Concept possibilities, still unsure:

The head isn't attached 'cause I was playing with an attack. Was thinking along the lines of 'see no, hear no, speak no evil' for the 3 heads. Was thinking it would be cool to have hands in the appropriate places.

For a hand to hand the hands on mouth would reach out.

For ranged the hands would uncover eyes and the eyes would be barrels. Maybe a double shot instead of mine?

The other head would have hands on ears that open and let out steam every once in awhile.