View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0021276 | AI War 2 | Bug - Other | Jun 6, 2019 1:37 am | Jun 6, 2019 9:31 am | |
| Reporter | wm46 | Assigned To | Chris_McElligottPark | ||
| Status | resolved | Resolution | fixed | ||
| Product Version | BETA 0.866 Hotfix | ||||
| Fixed in Version | BETA 0.867 Smarter AI, Better Mark Spread, Player Economic Boom | ||||
| Summary | 0021276: Non-Reinforcement Locations don't deploy AIReinforcementPointContents | ||||
| Description | Related to the warden fleet sometimes sapping guard units from command stations. If the above is intended, then it currently has no function. The function to deploy AIReinforcementPointContents only runs for EntityRollupType.ReinforcementLocations when enemy ships are within a certain distance of the unit with Contents. So while there might be a guardian with 80 ships stored inside of it from sapping the AI Overlord, they just get destroyed when the parent ship dies. Two fixes: 1. Add/Modify a method in PlanetFaction specifically for when non-Reinforcement Point ships that take aggro (when they take damage? when within a certain range?) to deploy contents. 2. Add a check in the methods TransferAIReinforcementPointContentsTo and AddToAIReinforcementPointContents to make sure that the receiving entity is actually a Reinforcement Point (Probably going to do 0000002 if I get the go-ahead) | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| related to | 0021275 | resolved | Chris_McElligottPark | The warden fleet steals ships from the entity they spawn at |
| child of | 0021274 | resolved | Chris_McElligottPark | GameEntity_Squad.AIReinforcementPointContents Issues Parent |
|
|
Thank you! *The game now checks all units (just once per second) to see if they are aggro'd and have any units stored in them to set free, not just the "reinforcement points" that are preordained. ** That way if there are any reinforcements hiding in a unit that was not initially supposed to have them, but that got transferred them by whatever arcane methods (it's okay, really), they will behave properly. There are some cases where this might be desirable behavior, and having the extra flexibility here doesn't cost us much in terms of the CPU usage, so that's good. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 6, 2019 1:37 am | wm46 | New Issue | |
| Jun 6, 2019 2:30 am | wm46 | Relationship added | child of 0021274 |
| Jun 6, 2019 2:31 am | wm46 | Relationship added | related to 0021275 |
| Jun 6, 2019 9:31 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Assigned To | => Chris_McElligottPark |
| Jun 6, 2019 9:31 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Status | new => resolved |
| Jun 6, 2019 9:31 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Resolution | open => fixed |
| Jun 6, 2019 9:31 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Fixed in Version | => BETA 0.867 Smarter AI, Better Mark Spread, Player Economic Boom |
| Jun 6, 2019 9:31 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Note Added: 0051861 |
