Tweaks and improvement to declutter defense-ranges #3732
Conversation
And removal/integration of old defense-ranges + anti-ranges into new gl4 defense-ranges
|
Old widgets can be deleted, no? |
|
delete the old ones and rename the new ones so they have the same name as the old ones. Do this so they get enabled right away, currently only the defaults change and there wouldnt be a change for everyone except completely new players |
Well only if Floris or Beherith can add the anti-ranges functionalities inside the new defense-ranges-gl4. |
Hmm that sucks a little, but indeed I strongly prefer this gets auto enabled over the old widgets. |
|
After this is merged and we're happy with it working, we should delete the old widgets and rename the new widget files to the old names |
back to red for cannons + yellow for antinuke
|
There are some remaining issues with correct ranges and weapon types. |
…ce rendering a circle on attack range isntead of the limited fire arc cone.
…amera, but the distance from the circle to the camera float distToCam = length(circleWorldPos.xyz - camPos.xyz); //dist from cam
And additionally removed engine attack-ranges, which showed up on hover-attack. These practically are not needed anymore as attack-ranges should show/take care of all attack ranges now.
|
@Ruwetuin One question. |
|
@Ruwetuin second question - does the cmdcolors_icexuickt.txt still get used? |
|
yes, it's gui_cursors widget that looks for and loads the cmdcolors cursorset name.... which is icexuick! |
no, but isnt 2000-2250 some max range set in the widget somewhere? |
Including some fade/distance and try-out to get melee weapons shown up.
AA weapons on coraak / armaak with bogus seem to be ignored and all weapons show up.
Reset of cmdcolor rangeAttack back to red - unfortunately - this is/should be removed as it clutters a lot. But placement of defenses still uses this engine ring, and also when using the "Attack" command - which still is useful.
I have tried to find it, but no luck at all. |
|
For now keeping the old defense_ranges - since that one seems to be more accurate/in-line with the new attack_ranges_gl4. |
Known issues: - GetUnitWeaponVectors(unitID, weaponID).y must be passed in for both! - Which can unfortunately change for popups But we are much closer to ground truth now
|
Latest update is that it will be very hard to unify both attack/defense ranges. We can 'solve' this by not showing attack-ranges on enemy-defenses - only display these on mobile units f.e. If @Ruwetuin or @Beherith could help me with f.e. disabling showing attack-range rings on enemy defenses, then I think it's good to go! |
… also implement hacky way of identifying a units true turret Y position, greatly increasing accuracy.
…in the clipspace depth for nicer occlusion calcs
|
@icexuick What is the status of this? Is it ready for review? Ready for merging? |
WatchTheFort
deleted the
New-Defense-Ranges-GL4-/-Removal-of-old-&-anti-ranges
branch
This reverts commit 00678b7.
WatchTheFort
restored the
New-Defense-Ranges-GL4-/-Removal-of-old-&-anti-ranges
branch
And removal/integration of old defense-ranges + anti-ranges into new gl4 defense-ranges.
This is a new and tweaked version of the Defense-Ranges Widget.
It is meant to replace the old Defense Ranges.
What needs to be checked but also fixed/added is this:
gui_defenserange_gl4
gui_anti_ranges.luashould probably be merged intogui_defenseranges_gl4.luagui_attackrange_gl4
armmanniorcormart) visually explain their firing-arc very well, and not too cluttering)New zoomed out view with added LRPC cannons (yellow/orange) and anti-nukes (light-blue)
New zoomed in view on defense ranges with much less clutter:
PS. Also added as much Legion defenses as possible - but needs checking.