PDA

View Full Version : How hard would triggers be really....



Bearcat99
11-03-2004, 08:18 PM
Even if there were say 3 paths..... where If X then Y If not X then Z.. (X1,Y1,Z1,X2,Y2,Z2 etc)with X, Y and Z being a complete set of mission parametwers programmed in by the builder. Say with X being the first objective. Am I just dreamin here? Is this actually something doable in this sim.. or will I have to wait for BoB.

LEXX_Luthor
11-03-2004, 08:30 PM
Oleg said "triggers for BoB."

...also...AI that can't see through clouds http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

hope for BoB and Beyond...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
"Stunning view from Spitfire cockpit at 25,000 feet altitude."

http://www.chitambo.com/clouds/cloudsimages/low/cb_cap_moscow_russia_jul01.jpg
~ http://www.chitambo.com/clouds/cloudshtml/capillatus.html
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Actually the REAL pic caption is...
"Two massive formations with very clear horizontal extensions in all directions."
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

And its labeled as Moscow, Russia, July 2001

See what we have been missing all this time?

Zen--
11-04-2004, 04:09 PM
What are you babbling about Lexx?

Those aren't clouds, those are the generators for the Spitfire's antigravity engine, disguised as clouds. Alien technology is amazing, just like the spitfire. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif



Sheesh, some people http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

WUAF_Badsight
11-05-2004, 12:49 AM
i didnt play CFS or Red Baron . . . . . just IL2 & now FB / PF

sooooo . . . . .

what are triggers ?

Jettexas
11-09-2004, 10:21 PM
Triggers are simple "if"/"then" loops that would allow mission builders to construct missions in such a way that "if" event X occurs "then" event Y occurs, leads to much more variability in mission building. Would also provide a work-around for the "as far as the game engine is concerned only ONE side really wins " type mission logic we have now that extends the vic requirement to only one side of a mission. This leads to very linear missions. And makes mulitple objective missions with widely separated targets unfair to the team (granted this is known in advance only to the mission buider..but still)that carries the vic assignment.
In a real world example I constructed a coop for two teams of human players, Team A carried the vic requirement-and had to damage three ground targets to a level of 25%
Team B had to defend. We flew the mission it was cool.
Later a member of Team A, looked a teh misison in mission builder and protested that the mission had been unfair since team B on the defensive had only to sucessfully defend 1 target to win the match, and Team A had to hit all three to win, the protest being that its unfair that one side had three goals and the other only one, now if you think about it , no one knew in advance which side carried the mission vic requirement,or the exact requiremnets needed to get the "XXXX has won" message so it was really a moot point but logically he was right , and all of this could be avoided and more "logically proper" missions constructed if this were implemented. Simply put it would enable you to "fake in" conflicting mission objectives for each team.

Jettexas