ThrustFactor

Post a reply

Smilies
:D :) :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :wink: :geek: :ugeek: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen: :3: :wub: >:( :blergh:
View more smilies

BBCode is OFF
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: ThrustFactor

Re: ThrustFactor

by Major Cooke » Thu Feb 04, 2016 12:54 am

Considering it probably isn't that far off anymore, I'm not overly concerned.

Re: ThrustFactor

by Blzut3 » Wed Feb 03, 2016 9:24 pm

So between Graf not liking the feature and me seeing ever more flaws as I re-review the change, I think it's best to WFDS this thread.

Re: ThrustFactor

by Major Cooke » Wed Jan 27, 2016 11:25 am

Agreed. I'm not even sure where to go with this.

Re: ThrustFactor

by Graf Zahl » Wed Jan 27, 2016 11:24 am

Please put this on hold for now.

Re: ThrustFactor

by Major Cooke » Wed Jan 27, 2016 11:03 am

Well, alright. I'll look into rebuilding the thrustfactors as static then. Or is that not what you meant?

Re: ThrustFactor

by Graf Zahl » Wed Jan 27, 2016 10:37 am

As a matter of fact, this feature injects itself so deep into the engine that DoomScript is hardly an issue.

Re: ThrustFactor

by Gez » Wed Jan 27, 2016 10:05 am

If you want Doomscript modularity, you'll have to wait for Doomscript.

Re: ThrustFactor

by Major Cooke » Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:18 am

There are times where I would want a monster that takes no damage from a certain damagefactor to always be thrust around, and then sometimes I would want it to change.

If there are better ways to go about handling this, I'm more than willing to try them out.

Also, in Doomscript, it would become modular at any rate wouldn't it?

Re: ThrustFactor

by Graf Zahl » Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:14 am

I'll be honest here:

While I see the appeal with this feature, it's far too widespread throughout the code for something so specialized.
Does this really need this kind of ultimate flexibility that makes it a major drag?

Re: ThrustFactor

by Major Cooke » Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:16 am

I'll take waiting over turning it static any day. :P

Re: ThrustFactor

by Graf Zahl » Wed Jan 20, 2016 5:51 pm

This will have to wait for Randi's approval since it introduces a dynamic structure into AActor and I have no idea what the impact on the scripting branch will be.

Re: ThrustFactor

by Blzut3 » Wed Jan 20, 2016 5:20 pm

Still looks fine to me. Graf the ball's back in your court to glance over the corrected version and merge.

Re: ThrustFactor

by Major Cooke » Wed Jan 20, 2016 1:41 pm

Now with Graf's refactoring complete, I have updated ThrustFactor to follow suit.
New vs old for quick comparison if you'd like.
The only important thing changed from the old pull request to this new one was the save version bump.

Re: ThrustFactor

by Major Cooke » Mon Jan 18, 2016 2:26 pm

Yeah, NOIMPACTDMG is meant to work one way. An actor with this flag can still receive -- but cannot give -- impact damage, as long as this flag is not present on the actor being thrust around.

Re: ThrustFactor

by Blzut3 » Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:13 pm

Looks fine. Only thing I can think of is that the NOIMPACTDAMAGE flag doesn't quite do what it says. That is as far as I can tell the actors are still susceptible to impact damage from other blasted actors. That said I suppose it's consistent with the action parameter flags that it's trying to supplement and DONTBLAST is already taken (with a slightly different meaning).

Top