choose the floor

[popllt]

It is so good if can choose the floor when go into the house.
Can this elements be added?

[Manu]

it's not possible : your soldiers will always occupy the upper floor. Only the artillery units will stay at the ground floor. It's a game engine restriction but it would be interesting in a future version... Yes I know I dream...[;)]

[Platoon_Michael]

Better yet would be different Interior views for each floor as well.

[Q.M]

ORIGINAL: Platoon_Michael

Better yet would be different Interior views for each floor as well.

That would mean that for every level you would need another TGA file to do that. Would be a huge map file series thats for sure. Combined that could possibly get top approx max) 100mb. Exporting the txt and the bgm files in 5CC would be a huge task as well given the possible size of the files now created.

Would it be possible and what would trigger the change in floor view?

You couldn't even code elements into something like that, not on levels anyway.

Would be a good effect though I must admit and has been though of somewhere before IIRC.

[RD Oddball]

How do you tell which floor the soldiers are on? How do you switch (easily) which floor you are viewing? It's definitely a great idea that's been mulled over for years. No workable solutions have been proffered.

[Southernland]

i had an idea years ago but i doubt it'd work in the current cc engine.

Upon giving the order to enter a multi floor building a popup would open on the destination point allowing the user to select the destination floor.

Once the unit was in place an enhanced rfm would indicate the floor while a damage type element change would alter the elevation.

As i said doubful it could be made to work in the current cc[:(]

[Manu]

another problem is what if 2 ennemy squads are in the same building?

[Platoon_Michael]

Why not have the choose floor option added to the right click we use now for moving soldiers?
I assume something like having it shaded out when Not in a building and then once inside you could right click 1st Floor,2nd Floor etc.etc.
Maybe not even have it viewable until one's squad enters a house.

Most buildings aren't that big so I don't see why the .TGA would be that huge.
Also I would assume that during that time period most upper levels in houses built were just hardwood floors so it wouldn't have to be that complicated of a graphic to make.

Multiple squads in a Building?
That would be cool,especially if I could Lob a grenade downstairs.
But I would like to think I have seen the enemy coming and would be firing at them keeping them out of the House.

[RD Oddball]

ORIGINAL: Manu

another problem is what if 2 ennemy squads are in the same building?

Or more than two. You'd need a way to issue fire orders, which floor do you want to be viewing up or down, creating rules for which ones you can view and on and on. There are lots of possible solutions. None that we've considered would be practical once you're in the game using it. And that's the deceiving part. They all sound good until you think about actually using a given solution in context of a game with everything else going on.

In general it's a great idea there just hasn't been a practical solution yet.

[popllt]

I hope this elements could be added in the future version.
What is the next for CC?  It there any news about the future game engine upgrading?[:)]

[davidss]

I can only think of a few reasons why game play would benefit from having multiple floors; and one or more of them may not be possible to achieve.
I'll list the reasons below, but first mention that I think there is no need for more than two floors to be available to use ... ground floor and upper most floor.

Reasons for having multiple floors:

1. Different Line of Sight (LOS) for each floor. Therefore, infantry can enter a building on ground level and only acquire ground Level LOS. Moving to the top floor provides optimal LOS ... offensive/defensive advantages for each floor depending on the situation.

2. No exit from building on the top floor ... infantry must return to the ground floor to exit the building. This would be a more realistic way to portray urban combat.

3. Different door/window configuration on each floor, and doors on the ground level floor only.

4. Potentially two layers of simultaneous infantry movement and action. For example: A player could be viewing and controlling the actions of an infantry unit/units on the top floor, while at the same time other units (friendly/enemy) could be moving through and/or engaging each other on the ground level floor.

The problem for #2 and #3 is if CC can handle two layers of elements. For example: a ground floor wall that infantry can pass through, and the same element space/area on the top floor that infantry can't pass through ... as well as the ground floor being a door and the top floor being a solid wall.
Even if it isn't possible to have two layers of coding; and all floors still have the same exterior wall attributes ... there would still be an advantage to having two layers of LOS and two levels of infantry movement and action.

Controls for multiple floors:
I think the game would need two added controls to make this work ...

1. Right click the building to select which floor a player wants to view.
The default could be ground level view; so when a unit gets close enough to activate the roof graphic to be removed ... the player will see the ground level interior. Then a player could right click the building and select "top floor view" to see the interior of the top floor (and if any infantry units are within).

2. Also, infantry units would need extra tabs in their right click movement/state control menu. Along with the regular move/move fast/defend/etc commands ... there could be a move to ground floor and top floor commands (simply written ... ground floor or top floor)
New default for infantry would be ground level floor (when entering a building), and a move to top floor command required to get to the top floor.

If CC can handle infantry on two levels ... then multiple floors should be possible using a combination of these two controls.

Movement up and down:
Another thing to consider would be how infantry would move up or down after given a move to a different floor command. Perhaps a small area inside the building (the same location of each floor) could be coded as a stair well. Infantry would move to the stair well location after given the move to new floor command.

Practically speaking, getting infantry to appear on a specific floor would probably be something less elaborate though. Most likely infantry would just magically appear on the floor they were just given the command to be on ... and in the same positions they were previously in ... which is still OK. Or, after an infantry unit was given a move to new floor command ... all soldiers of the team would appear together at the stair well location on the new floor ... this would probably be the best solution. I guess it would require a special stair well element to be coded into maps/game for this purpose.

I don't think any combat game has figured out a reasonable way to portray multiple floor movement/action ... but I think this could work well.
I wonder if it's possible and/or if Matrix can/will make it work?

david

[xe5]

ORIGINAL: davidss

Practically speaking, getting infantry to appear on a specific floor would probably be something less elaborate though. Most likely infantry would just magically appear on the floor they were just given the command to be on ... and in the same positions they were previously in ... which is still OK.

The game already handles multiple levels in a building - guns always on L1, infantry always on the top level except. The interiors on both levels are identical. The game display doesnt differentiate between infantry and guns on different levels of the same building. These units appear to occupy the same level.

A simplistic solution would be to give infantry in buildings an additional, context-sensitive "Up/Down" command on its Orders menu - displaying "Up" when the infantry unit is on L1 and "Down" when the unit is on the top level. When entering a building infantry would always be on L1. The unit would then need to be issued an "Up" order to move to the top level. Close combat between opposing infantry on different levels would occur automatically just as it does now between infantry (top level) and an enemy gun (L1).

A "Down" command would need to be issued before any unit on the top level could move out of that building.

Some indicator, eg. a blue box, would be useful to show a unit on a top level.

[davidss]

ORIGINAL: xe5

ORIGINAL: davidss

Practically speaking, getting infantry to appear on a specific floor would probably be something less elaborate though. Most likely infantry would just magically appear on the floor they were just given the command to be on ... and in the same positions they were previously in ... which is still OK.

The game already handles multiple levels in a building - guns always on L1, infantry always on the top level except. The interiors on both levels are identical. The game display doesnt differentiate between infantry and guns on different levels of the same building. These units appear to occupy the same level.

A simplistic solution would be to give infantry in buildings an additional, context-sensitive "Up/Down" command on its Orders menu - displaying "Up" when the infantry unit is on L1 and "Down" when the unit is on the top level. When entering a building infantry would always be on L1. The unit would then need to be issued an "Up" order to move to the top level. Close combat between opposing infantry on different levels would occur automatically just as it does now between infantry (top level) and an enemy gun (L1).

A "Down" command would need to be issued before any unit on the top level could move out of that building.

Some indicator, eg. a blue box, would be useful to show a unit on a top level.

Hi xe5,
Thanks for your excellent response.
If what you've written takes into account some immovable (non negotiable) limitation of CC ... then it would still be a better method of simulating different floors than what is available now. Although it only really achieves one extra benefit ... that being, two layers of Line of Sight for Infantry. It would also be a plus if infantry could only exit buildings from the ground level (L1), and enter by default to L1.

Before I continue though, I'll mention that I realized before posting here ... that by default guns in buildings are on ground level (L1), that infantry by default are on the top floor, and both occupy the same single visual space.

I believe the main purpose of having multiple floors would be to have two separate layers of infantry movement/action.
This would not only provide two different levels of Line of Sight and create separate areas (layers) of movement/action ... but would also solve CC's inherent misuse of basic logic and reasoning .
If this cannot be achieved in CC, then the rest of what I'm about to say means nothing ... but I'll continue, in case there is a chance.

The three laws of thought (which kind of say the same thing in different ways) basically say that everything in existence has an identity.
Examples relating this discussion: The top floor of a building can't (at the same time) be the ground floor, and a soldier on the top floor can't be (at the same time) on the ground floor. Soldier A is on the ground level or Soldier A is on the top level ... Soldier A can't be in both places at the same time. One or the other has to be true.
There is also no space a soldier can be other than on one floor or the other ... without a 3D engine for a staircase.
Therefore, it would be great if CC could represent two separate floors that are not linked to each other in any way ... meaning, soldiers can't get Line of Sight or engage enemy soldiers on a different floor (from within the same building). Soldiers on different floors of the same buildings can not logically engage each other.

links to laws of thought:
http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/M ... ntity.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_thought

I know liberties are taken when moving from reality to the game world, but the model I've talked about using two new commands (previously posted) would be more realistic and logical ... if possible to work in CC.
[:)]

[xe5]

My outline accounts only for a primary limitation in software development - the simpler and easier any requested functionality is, the more probable it will be implemented. When I quoted your excerpt I failed to emphasize the phrase "practically speaking". Since the chief player complaint about this issue has been the inability to specify a unit's LOS/LOF in a multi-level building, I believe the main purpose in revising the game mechanics of buildings should address that concern. The other benefit would be item #2 on your list - no exit from the top floor.

Agreed, ideally the CC engine should treat all levels of a building separately. However, the development effort required to achieve that admirable objective is far less feasible than to code my imperfect abstraction. My player "identity" seems to involve floating quasi-omniciently above the battlefield, rather than realistically only being shown only what's in my avatar's LOS, and knowing about the larger battle only via fragmentary voice and text messages. So I am not troubled by the "identity" paradox, where, in addition to various other insults to logic, a unit might operate as if it simultaneously occupied different bldg levels.

Did the metaphysicians of classical identity ever account for the quantum absurdities implied by the double slit? As we're being informed and entertained by CC photons, the question of what bldg level Soldier A currently occupies only requires some miniscule wave function to collapse. And much like Schrödinger's Cat, it seems like half the time Soldier A is dead whenever we look in his box [:)]

[davidss]

ORIGINAL: xe5

My replies in italics

My outline accounts only for a primary limitation in software development - the simpler and easier any requested functionality is, the more probable it will be implemented. When I quoted your excerpt I failed to emphasize the phrase "practically speaking". Since the chief player complaint about this issue has been the inability to specify a unit's LOS/LOF in a multi-level building, I believe the main purpose in revising the game mechanics of buildings should address that concern. The other benefit would be item #2 on your list - no exit from the top floor.

This all makes sense ... if that's all that can be done, so be it

Agreed, ideally the CC engine should treat all levels of a building separately. However, the development effort required to achieve that admirable objective is far less feasible than to code my imperfect abstraction. My player "identity" seems to involve floating quasi-omniciently above the battlefield, rather than realistically only being shown only what's in my avatar's LOS, and knowing about the larger battle only via fragmentary voice and text messages. So I am not troubled by the "identity" paradox, where, in addition to various other insults to logic, a unit might operate as if it simultaneously occupied different bldg levels.

Simply described ... we as CC players can observe Soldier A within a building. Soldier A is shooting out a 3rd floor window over a single story (single level) building into a field. Behind Soldier A is a friendly 57mm ATG firing out a ground level window. Then enters an enemy infantry unit that enters the building on the upper most floor (3rd floor) and fires upon the ground level 57mm ATG. Soldier A responds by turning and firing at the enemy unit (both on the 3rd floor).
CC may be representing some kind of multiple floor simulation ... but it isn't something that can be logically described without purposely omitting some aspect of what is taking place. We mostly think of the ATG and infantry units engaged in battle with each other as if they were on the same floor.

Nevertheless, by moving the identity of Soldier A into your personal identity "(My player "identity")" ... I believe you have actually become Wigner's Friend ... and are now subject to the following rules:
[:)]
"Consciousness causes collapse"
The involvement of consciousness in the collapse of the wave function has been summarized thus:

The rules of quantum mechanics are correct but there is only one system which may be treated with quantum mechanics, namely the entire material world. There exist external observers which cannot be treated within quantum mechanics, namely human (and perhaps animal) minds, which perform measurements on the brain causing wave function collapse.[18]

This interpretation attributes the process of wave function collapse (directly, indirectly, or even partially) to consciousness itself. Specifically, a non-physical mind is postulated to be the only true measurement apparatus.[18]

The consciousness causes collapse interpretation was Wigner's motivation for introducing the "Wigner's friend" thought experiment by asserting that collapse occurs at the first "conscious" observer. Wigner believed that consciousness is necessary for the quantum mechanical process.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wigner%27s_friend


Did the metaphysicians of classical identity ever account for the quantum absurdities implied by the double slit? As we're being informed and entertained by CC photons, the question of what bldg level Soldier A currently occupies only requires some miniscule wave function to collapse. And much like Schrödinger's Cat, it seems like half the time Soldier A is dead whenever we look in his box [:)]

I believe if Schrödinger, Einstein, or any of their colleagues took the roof off a CC box (building), and saw what was going on inside ... they would all be crushed by the weight of so much illogical interaction within such a small space [:)]

[xe5]

Wigner is no friend of mine unless he brings me back a sandwich. If consciousness causes collapse, H2H CC becomes strictly a contest between competing wills. Which also explains why 10 player CCMT sessions are unstable --- they're adversely impacted by an excess of consciousness. And one can only imagine what Aristotle would make of broadband aethernet connections [:)]

[davidss]

ORIGINAL: xe5

Wigner is no friend of mine unless he brings me back a sandwich. If consciousness causes collapse, H2H CC becomes strictly a contest between competing wills. Which also explains why 10 player CCMT sessions are unstable --- they're adversely impacted by an excess of consciousness. And one can only imagine what Aristotle would make of broadband aethernet connections [:)]

lol ... [:)]

[RD Oddball]

Thanks for the entertaining read and input guys. As you suggest it might make more sense to go for something in between a perfectly literal representation of multiple levels and the abstraction we have now.

ORIGINAL: popllt

I hope this elements could be added in the future version.
What is the next for CC?  It there any news about the future game engine upgrading?[:)]

Nothing that's ready to be announced.

[davidss]

ORIGINAL: RD_Oddball

it might make more sense to go for something in between a perfectly literal representation of multiple levels and the abstraction we have now.

Thanks ... looking forward to seeing what you guys come up with [:)]

[xe5]

On a more serious note, if multi-level bldg functionality were to be revised, maintaining existing map compatibility is a compelling argument for avoiding new features like stairwells, and levels with unique interiors.

ORIGINAL: RD_Oddball
Nothing that's ready to be announced.

= something that's not ready to be announced?