|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Flame War split from Win32 Forum - started by Teh-Pwnerer [message #236326 is a reply to message #236209] |
Fri, 29 December 2006 09:44   |
fl00d3d
Messages: 1107
Registered: August 2003
Location: Iowa, USA
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star)
Viva la Resistance! |
|
|
| DodgeThis wrote on Thu, 28 December 2006 17:54 |
| Crimson wrote on Thu, 28 December 2006 21:03 |
There would have to be a command to give ownership to another player, and there would be no points awarded to a player if they blow up an empty vehicle. I don't see any way around needing a command if you wish to give your vehicle to someone else and I think the way I have planned is as graceful as it can get. But you shouldn't have to type a command just to say you own a vehicle that you purchased.
|
I never use !bl though, if I use a command like that, I prefer to just !bind my vehicle. If you are out of your vehicle for example to repair it or to defend the base from people who entered a building to destroy it, a teammate could rescue the vehicle by keeping it out of the hands of the enemy, but if an annoying "This vehicle is locked and belongs to <player>" pops up, both the brave teammate and the vehicle are lost 
|
It's just not practical. If you're dumb enough to let your vehicle get stolen, then it shouldn't matter how its bound. I agree that automatic binding would be nice - but my whole argument was centered on the fact that if it is bound to a person and you bail out (still bound to you) and then destroyed, the enemy gets points. Basically !bl is used in pub servers where you're worried about n00b gta's. But since they can't steal it right away after purchase, and !bind, !lock, !bl are all options thereafter ... I don't see how its a big deal or sloppy. It gives the player options and control. Using your own argument against you, if someone's vehicle is auto-bound and you try to rescue it ... its the same effect as if they had typed !bl. So why force the option on someone when they could easily just type !bl. Also, !eject never seems to be effective - it almost always preceeds a !qkick 
|
|
|
|
| Re: Flame War split from Win32 Forum - started by Teh-Pwnerer [message #236335 is a reply to message #235791] |
Fri, 29 December 2006 11:34 |
 |
Crimson
Messages: 7428
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
That's why my system is more effective. The owner of the tank decides whether or not to eject an occupant. So if you lose your tank out in the field, your teammate can bring it home without penalty. And if you eject just before destruction, no points are awarded to the opposite team, just as it should be. I don't know how the SSAOW feature works exactly, but the whole "locking" thing is just dumb in my opinion. Knowing who owns each vehicle and allowing them to maintain control of it if it's stolen by a teammate is all I'm after.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Flame War split from Win32 Forum - started by Teh-Pwnerer [message #236417 is a reply to message #235791] |
Sat, 30 December 2006 04:27 |
 |
Goztow
Messages: 9728
Registered: March 2005
Location: Belgium
Karma: 13
|
General (5 Stars)
Goztoe |
|
|
Considering that BI is a part of BHS, I'm pretty convinced you could just ask them for the code and you'd get it. What's this thing with "I want to be the one who made it first"? Just spread the loadwork, you have enough other things to do, right?
You can find me in The KOSs2 (TK2) discord while I'm playing. Feel free to come and say hi! TK2 discord
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Flame War split from Win32 Forum - started by Teh-Pwnerer [message #236508 is a reply to message #236469] |
Sun, 31 December 2006 04:13 |
dead6re
Messages: 602
Registered: September 2003
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| EvilWhiteDragon wrote on Sat, 30 December 2006 20:19 |
| Crimson wrote on Sat, 30 December 2006 23:46 |
I started my vehicle autobind on March 5th of this year. Unfortunately this also helps me realize how little time I get to work on my bot. :\
|
well you didnt posted it, and still, it is / was a trivial idea.
But to do it properly I would say you needed a assembly hack (we do anyway) for it, so SK would need to make it for you then.
|
You don't need an ASM hack. You can log the vehicle creation from the RenegadeFDS with gamelog or something along those lines.
Let all your wishes be granted except one, so you will still have something to strieve for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
