Does this belong in Mir3?

[CheekyVimto]

Flying Mounts Proof of Concept..

 

[Jambo]

Yeah don't see why not but my first concern would be a crowded safezone

 

[mir2pion]

We want in mir2 too

 

[Alecs]

We've got drone wars in Mir before GTA 6.

 

[Jev]

I think they're great, reminds me of WOW.

I feel like they should be able to fly over the gap with water but no say over cave walls. I wonder if you could add a new tile layer or some flag for tiles to mark them as "flyable".

 

[Slipmatt]

Pretty cool idea tbf +1 for this in Mir 2

 

[SmavidDavid]

I think they're great, reminds me of WOW.

I feel like they should be able to fly over the gap with water but no say over cave walls. I wonder if you could add a new tile layer or some flag for tiles to mark them as "flyable".

Mir2 has this already with Yellow/Red attributes, not sure about mir 3 though.. this is what stops taos SFB'ing thru walls ususlly

 

[Jev]

Mir2 has this already with Yellow/Red attributes, not sure about mir 3 though.. this is what stops taos SFB'ing thru walls ususlly

Even better.

 

[KingCobra92]

Anything that makes Mir innovative and positives changes is a +

 

[BlackWizz]

why got 2 shadow the small one under the pheonix look like a flying witch)))

 

[mir2pion]

Should be able to allow flying only outdoors, mir2 doesn't allow mounts in caves already (I believe it can be disallowed for the map in settings)?

Otherwise you could fly over mobs of which only the long range ones could hit you. Flying over cave walls would be OTT in any case.

Overflying buildings, town walls, river would be amazing but would need to fix the red tile markups. Both yellow and red are currently no-walking and I suppose that would block flying too?

Red is so called 'low wall' markup that was meant to be 'no-walk' but could be shot over (eg. wiz fireball or archer arrows would pass over red tiles and hit target). Currently it works the same as yellow no-walk markup - so called 'high wall' - 'no-walk' and 'no shoot over' markup.

The red was meant for low obstacles, like brush or a bench or other such obstacles, not for high objects like buildings which should be marked up yellow.

Possibly the red markup not accompanied by yellow could be made to work for 'shoot over' and red would always allow fly over even when it would be accompanied by yellow.

Yellow by itself would not allow fly over, only red or yellow/red markup would allow that. This way flying over water of beyond map cliff edge could be limited, costal waters and cliffs would be marked yellow/red (or just red) to allow flying out over water and areas past cliffs but you couldn't land on water or on no-man's land beyond cliffs - if you did, you would spawn on the nearest walkable land.
You wouldn't want to fly too close to map edge to see black area past map tiles.

Flying could also be limited by its high use of MP and not to give wizes advantage here, mana would be expended by percentage. For example, flying across a given map would use the same percentage of your max MP regardless what your max MP count was.

 

[CheekyVimto]

Should be able to allow flying only outdoors, mir2 doesn't allow mounts in caves already (I believe it can be disallowed for the map in settings)?

Otherwise you could fly over mobs of which only the long range ones could hit you. Flying over cave walls would be OTT in any case.

Overflying buildings, town walls, river would be amazing but would need to fix the red tile markups. Both yellow and red are currently no-walking and I suppose that would block flying too?

Red is so called 'low wall' markup that was meant to be 'no-walk' but could be shot over (eg. wiz fireball or archer arrows would pass over red tiles and hit target). Currently it works the same as yellow no-walk markup - so called 'high wall' - 'no-walk' and 'no shoot over' markup.

The red was meant for low obstacles, like brush or a bench or other such obstacles, not for high objects like buildings which should be marked up yellow.

Possibly the red markup not accompanied by yellow could be made to work for 'shoot over' and red would always allow fly over even when it would be accompanied by yellow.

Yellow by itself would not allow fly over, only red or yellow/red markup would allow that. This way flying over water of beyond map cliff edge could be limited, costal waters and cliffs would be marked yellow/red (or just red) to allow flying out over water and areas past cliffs but you couldn't land on water or on no-man's land beyond cliffs - if you did, you would spawn on the nearest walkable land.
You wouldn't want to fly too close to map edge to see black area past map tiles.

Flying could also be limited by its high use of MP and not to give wizes advantage here, mana would be expended by percentage. For example, flying across a given map would use the same percentage of your max MP regardless what your max MP count was.

Some great ideas there, at the moment I have it so take off and landing can only be done in safe zones.
The movement conditions are currently set to allow movement over Map file level 'red' zones (I will need to add a check to prevent flying past the boundaries). Maybe also flight-specific 'movement' options between maps could open up exploration in a new way and allow 'hidden' dungeons and quests.

I have also since added skill usage whilst mounted.

 

[SmavidDavid]

Should be able to allow flying only outdoors, mir2 doesn't allow mounts in caves already (I believe it can be disallowed for the map in settings)?

Otherwise you could fly over mobs of which only the long range ones could hit you. Flying over cave walls would be OTT in any case.

Overflying buildings, town walls, river would be amazing but would need to fix the red tile markups. Both yellow and red are currently no-walking and I suppose that would block flying too?

Red is so called 'low wall' markup that was meant to be 'no-walk' but could be shot over (eg. wiz fireball or archer arrows would pass over red tiles and hit target). Currently it works the same as yellow no-walk markup - so called 'high wall' - 'no-walk' and 'no shoot over' markup.

The red was meant for low obstacles, like brush or a bench or other such obstacles, not for high objects like buildings which should be marked up yellow.

Possibly the red markup not accompanied by yellow could be made to work for 'shoot over' and red would always allow fly over even when it would be accompanied by yellow.

Yellow by itself would not allow fly over, only red or yellow/red markup would allow that. This way flying over water of beyond map cliff edge could be limited, costal waters and cliffs would be marked yellow/red (or just red) to allow flying out over water and areas past cliffs but you couldn't land on water or on no-man's land beyond cliffs - if you did, you would spawn on the nearest walkable land.
You wouldn't want to fly too close to map edge to see black area past map tiles.

Flying could also be limited by its high use of MP and not to give wizes advantage here, mana would be expended by percentage. For example, flying across a given map would use the same percentage of your max MP regardless what your max MP count was.

isnt it the otherway around? I thought Yellow was low and Red was high.

 

[Tyraes]

isnt it the otherway around? I thought Yellow was low and Red was high.

Correct, and also, not all maps are built properly with those attributes in mind

 

[mir2pion]

isnt it the otherway around? I thought Yellow was low and Red was high.

I explored the logic of this markup when I worked on Crystal map editor and came to the conclusion that Yellow was High Wall and Red was Low Wall.

Projectiles flying over yellow markup would not hit the target behind it, would just fly on past it, but If the markup was red, the target would be hit.
So red would be used for low height obstacles, like small rocks, bushes, various house furniture and yellow for high, solid objects like houses, tree trunks, large rocks

I argued this some years ago with Akaras and Far and I believe my argument was accepted. Don't remember now if that was because I came up with some positive, logical proof or if (at the time I recall I also did some testing in game) or if I only made an argument that it made sense for the colors to be working that way.

The argument might have been that maps were marked up primarily with Yellow tiles and if there was some Red markup, it was in minority only and didn't make sense the way it was used since mostly it was added over Yellow markups (in which case if both were used, HighWall would be the result whatever the color logic).

The idea of Yellow being LowWall and Red HighWall came from the map editor code comment left there by somebody who worked on the code in China before the code came to us in 2016.

Currently, whatever the argument is, both markups work the same way - both are High Wall. You can send fireball through walls but they just fly on even if you aimed at the target behind the wall.
A neat way would be to code it so projectiles would hit the yellow markup objects (building, tree trunk, cliffs) and make a hit animation and not continue flying through, past the object. But exception would need to be made for water or all shores would need to be markup with red far enough out so you would not see silly explosion animation over water....

Red markup would pass the projectile and hit target behind it but only if the distance to it would normally allow it to hit (you would a message 'target is too far').

-0-

Flying restrictions would obviously need some logic worked out before it is opened for use by players but it could be used by GMs before that as you would expect them to use some sense when flying about. It would be terrific way to monitor gameplay on maps, much better and more fun than teleporting around.

 

[SmavidDavid]

Correct, and also, not all maps are built properly with those attributes in mind

Thankyou for your quick to the point agreement,

I explored the logic of this markup when I worked on Crystal map editor and came to the conclusion that Yellow was High Wall and Red was Low Wall.

Projectiles flying over yellow markup would not hit the target behind it, would just fly on past it, but If the markup was red, the target would be hit.
So red would be used for low height obstacles, like small rocks, bushes, various house furniture and yellow for high, solid objects like houses, tree trunks, large rocks

I argued this some years ago with Akaras and Far and I believe my argument was accepted. Don't remember now if that was because I came up with some positive, logical proof or if (at the time I recall I also did some testing in game) or if I only made an argument that it made sense for the colors to be working that way.

The argument might have been that maps were marked up primarily with Yellow tiles and if there was some Red markup, it was in minority only and didn't make sense the way it was used since mostly it was added over Yellow markups (in which case if both were used, HighWall would be the result whatever the color logic).

The idea of Yellow being LowWall and Red HighWall came from the map editor code comment left there by somebody who worked on the code in China before the code came to us in 2016.

Currently, whatever the argument is, both markups work the same way - both are High Wall. You can send fireball through walls but they just fly on even if you aimed at the target behind the wall.
A neat way would be to code it so projectiles would hit the yellow markup objects (building, tree trunk, cliffs) and make a hit animation and not continue flying through, past the object. But exception would need to be made for water or all shores would need to be markup with red far enough out so you would not see silly explosion animation over water....

Red markup would pass the projectile and hit target behind it but only if the distance to it would normally allow it to hit (you would a message 'target is too far').

-0-

Flying restrictions would obviously need some logic worked out before it is opened for use by players but it could be used by GMs before that as you would expect them to use some sense when flying about. It would be terrific way to monitor gameplay on maps, much better and more fun than teleporting around.

Yellow attributes allow spells to be cast through them, its why on older maps like WT a Tao can SFB through corners allowing taos to solo kill WT, this includes spells such as SFB, FB, GFB, etc.. Spells like T Bolt are "from above" therefore are not effected by the attribute colour. Whether or not Crystal or current files are based off that, this is how i remember it working.

Red attributes do not allow spells to be cast through them, so its why the same logic of a tao SFB'ing an IWT cannot be applied on newer maps like BDD.

Without going all geeky and nerdy, i imagine the Red attributes were a later addition which is why older maps and objects do not feature much red. IF you look at RMV and Crystal /Fox cave you'll see the lower parts of walls with rocks are yellow where as the upper parts are red.

 

[mir2pion]

Yellow attributes allow spells to be cast through them...

You are right.

I looked up the old posts from 2016 where Akaras posted this:

I'm going to refer to HighWall and LowWall as BackLimit and FrontLimit from now on... when looking at the code for the new editor for some reason the names switched around in my head and I associated LowWall with the BackImage (BackLimit) which is wrong... doesn't really matter as it is just names (I still saved the data to the correct locations) but it gets confusing when I've explained something using the attribute names the wrong way around LOL

even the title on this thread is wrong oops lol

anyway... (I checked this in the server map.cs file)

HighWall = BackLimit = Saved in BackImage using bitwise = Can Fire Over. = Yellow
LowWall = FrontLimit = Saved in FrontImage using bitwise = Can't Fire Over. = Red

always seemed weird you cant shoot over a lowwall but you can shoot over a highwall lol... but thats what it says in the code hehe

This was discussed back in 2018

Originally Posted by mir2pion View Post
I tested on mobs for the difference between front and back limits and found there to be none

wiz can shoot fireball through both limits but in either case it doesn't hit the mob behind the limit, the fireball just flies on past the mob
tbolt does hit behind both limits and it is logical since bolt comes from the sky

----
Quote Originally Posted by Far View Post
You should still be using front and back limits as they were designed - this feature is simply currently disabled on crystal so they both act the same.

----
Quote Originally Posted by mir2pion View Post
you are right, in case it is enabled in the future, maps will be ready for it

I take it, that means using Yellow, Back limit, on Back tiles and Red, Front limit, on Front layer objects

on Middle layer it depends on use, I guess Front limit if used for objects, Back limit if used for ground tiles

Tree trunks should really be marked with Red limit, same as walls, but shrubs or rocks should be Yellow limit

basically tall objects red limit and ground (including low objects) yellow limit

tall objects with Red limit since you shouldn't be able to shoot (fireball or arrow) through them, low objects with Yellow limit since you should be able to shoot over them.

Weird but that's what I tested in game at the time back in 2018, maybe it was changed since the official mir2 days and in 2018 neither limit would allow wiz fireball etc. make damage after passing over it. Maybe Crystal files fixed it for the yellow limit as well to make them both work the same way?

As Akaras said, the High & Low Wall don't make sense as used for Yellow and Red limit respectively, these limit names came from a comment in the code where a mistake was likely made.

At the time, back in 2016, the two limits were discussed in relation to map layers, it seems that the yellow back limit didn't save with objects which are always on front or middle layers. Not sure if they do save with them now, I think they do but would have to check, can't rely on memory as you have seen LOL