Jump to content
drfreee

why we cant destory trees ?

Recommended Posts

On 7/9/2019 at 1:43 PM, SpecialAgentJohnson said:

Why do we need 100 player servers? Did anyone even ask for that? 50 and destructible assets would be so much better. Just a silly number they put up. 

Everyone who backed the game came to it with the expectation of 100 player servers, so, you could say literally thousands of people asked for that. =)

 

We've also been building the game on that concept for years. It's one of our foundations. Changing that now would make Squad into a different game and would, as some folks have alluded to, require going back to the drawing board for a lot of issues. The most pressing one with destruction, as I understand it, is replication which taxes an already busy server. Because of the technical requirements and gameplay implications, a team really does need to set out with destruction in mind for a meaningful, functional, performant experience.

 

Fortunately, as time goes on, technology improves. We've seen it more than once with Unreal Engine updates... but those have a downside too. They take a lot of work, break a lot of things, and mean we can't work on more exciting things like content. There's always trade-offs in any major project and in this case, full destruction is one we've opted not to chase in favor of having a better game overall. It's not a never, but it's a "not for now."

 

All that said, the team is looking into ways to make trees a little more fun to play around, though there's a lot of manual tweaking required. We'll continue to eke out gains where we can. =)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, rincewind said:

I see you still don't get it. Lets look back at your first post, you proposed that every tree has to be it's own actor to be destructible. Do you see where are you wrong now?

He said it's possible (requires work) = just like I did

You said it's impossible for a reason that does not exists

Learn to admit your mistakes

More deflection using semantics and circular logic puzzles don't negate the fact the foliage instances technically are actors. Plus now you're twisting and putting words in Dubs mouth. You made the proclamation "And you can take any single tree out of that chunk and do whatever." so now the burden of proof is on you. Make a mod where every tree on Goro or Yeho is destructible with full 80 player replication.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Zylfrax791 said:

More deflection using semantics and circular logic puzzles don't negate the fact the foliage instances technically are actors. Plus now you're twisting and putting words in Dubs mouth. You made the proclamation "And you can take any single tree out of that chunk and do whatever." so now the burden of proof is on you. Make a mod where every tree on Goro or Yeho is destructible with full 80 player replication.

Just wow :D It is a single actor, specifically instanced mesh component

Yeah you can, like, bring down the tree with Update Instance Transform (add rotation to it) while never taking it out of a single actor that contains all other trees.

Or you can Get Instance Transform, then Remove Instance then spawn some cool destructible actor with that transform, that will disappear in like 5 seconds, while all other trees stay inside the instanced mesh component

http://api.unrealengine.com/INT/BlueprintAPI/Components/InstancedStaticMesh/

Proving that is saying air contains oxygen. 

There's ue4 api 101 for you, but you can keep on rejecting, flat earthers do just fine, you can too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 7/11/2019 at 6:27 PM, Zylfrax791 said:

Hilarious. Dubs offers a parallel description to mine of why its virtually impossible to implement such a system in the game and instead of degrading as "thick" & "ignorant" you instead go passive aggressive.

 

I get it though. Since day one I've always understood that this is essentially a post PR members only club so as a lower tier non-founder Steam drone my opinions have always had very little value and any feedback I offer is irrelevant as such.

 

That's ok though, because the game itself has taken on a life of its own and evolved into something exceedingly unique and creative far beyond the PR clone you all thought you were getting and thankfully all my shitposting had nothing to do with it so I'm off the hook and you can't blame me! :)

Dude, you often make good and interesting points on a lot of things (regardless if i agree or disagree with them), but your near constant hard-on against anything related to a more milsim experience or PR (you know, the game the developers came from, and the community that initially funded Squad), makes it hard to engage with your opinion sometimes. It's detracting from getting your point across and makes people want to argue with you just because you come right off the starting line as having an axe to grind.

 

Squad is a game that was touted as a successor to PR from the get go and that's how it secured funding to even become something in the first place. Like it or not, that's how it is. Sure, there's a wider community now and that's good, but these founder guys are still around and they made the game possible in the first place, so their opinions matter just like the rest of the guys. I'd say they matter just a little bit more actually, because without them we'd have neither a game nor a community (who do you think taught the first influx of players how to play the game, and we went from there?).

 

You don't have to agree with certain opinions, but they don't have to agree with you either. We're all just throwing ideas out here and seeing what the developers will do with them, we're not actually in the studio making design decisions with them. Well, let them ex-PR guys throw around some ideas too.

 

P.S. Nothing personal, just making an observation. In fact, i've had quite a few discussions with you and you bring interesting stuff to the table a lot of times. It's just the nature of the medium (written speech through an anonymous venue) that can make it easy to come off as more aggressive than we intend to a lot of times (which is why i'm adding this edit as well). o7

Edited by Burningbeard80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2019-07-11 at 4:46 PM, rincewind said:

It's not an easy task for a tank (depending on a size of a tree), if you impose limitations like instant slowdown then the count of these events will be low. (whatever happens for JIP during loading is not really a concern)

Tho the amount of tanks flying into the skies will go up 

It is an easy task for a tank to knock down a tree though... Even big ones. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think you guys focus too much on the high cost advanced destruction. As a first step could we please add destructible windows to this sterile world. Windows that don't interact with the environment and are basically eye candy? That would bring a lot of joy to pop a few hundred windows with your saw in a firefight and wouldnt impact performance more than client wise. Like a boolean on the server or something. Window broken or not. This should be doable mid development I certainly believe. Currently the game is so sterile. No windows no nothing. Also one or two interactible propane tanks would be nice too, though that could come later... 

Edited by SpecialAgentJohnson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will Chaos make a big change to Sqaud

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×