Re: For Austin... and all others, of course!
 

Yes, and I usally don't forgot things, even months later...
I changed this from 256 units to 400 and it is in the code I sent PM.
I forgot to mention this in the doc file.

Actually I was going to put in a new command to allow the setting of this distance. (I didn't see any reason not to allow large distances between connections, if you knew what you were doing.)

Check out
bool WaypointNodeReachable(Vector v_src, Vector v_dest, edict_t *pEntity)
{
.
.
.
// is the destination close enough?
if (distance < 400) //ABS was 256

I would vote for a new comamnd awpDistance
(autowaypoint distance)
where you can set ths distance.

This was so simple to change it took 5 minutes and I never had seen the code before. We need more feedback from the WP communitity telling us what are the biggest headaches and what are the most wanted features!

Some can be just a few minutes for us developers to implement.

Re: For Austin... and all others, of course!
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoUlFaThEr just curious again (starting to believe ill grow wiskers soon) : didnt i make all those official map waypoints for you once Mark? i think most of them are still running on the server.......so far that i can see anyway.....maybe with the new A path bots.....i could redo the T start of de_dust since i hear they navigate cool now........ i spent a great deal of time doing that......if they suck id be glad to talk about whats wrong with em......cuz id like to keep my name on them:P

The problem is me. I never got organized with my waypoints so I don't even know what I am using, who did them or where the ones you sent me may be!

Nice! But I do know ONE thing. I am using your de_aztec waypoints and THEY ARE AWSOME. My admins voted to take this map out of the rotation because it was so boring with the original wps. After changing over to your waypoints it is now in the top 3 played maps. We do a 4 man team RUSH to the bomb site against 28 bots who get there about the same time, awesome fun!!!!

You have been there I think you know what I am talking about.)



Perhaps now that you are back on the server you can help us get organized? You would be perfect since you actually play on the server and can make fine tuned tweaks to the wps after seeing exactly how things work out. Help!

(PM going to have time to work on the installer TONIGHT.)
After this I am going to setup a second server with the new bots so we can see how the newbots/oldbots compare and have a place to test things and also run the new bots under the debugger on a DS with several humans connected..

Re: For Austin... and all others, of course!
 

Ok - feedback you want, feedback you get! ;)

1. I second this bit here:
This would really be perfect; you could adapt the autoconnection settings to your situation.
Only enlarging the radius of automatic connections will increase the PITA with jump connections and ladders tremendously, since in both cases automatic connections -many of them wrong or undesired ones- are drawn. A bigger radius would result in more of those connections, which moreover would be harder to trace & eliminate, because you'd have to run around more WPs to check.
As I said, a command would be greatly appreciated. However, we shouldn't get autowaypointing and autoconnections mixed up here. There's a difference between setting WPs automatically each x units and drawing connections automatically if the waypoints are x units or less from each other. How about this:
autocon[nect] setradius xxx

2. In some cases, automatic connections are highly undesired. For example, when I'm placing a single row of WPs along a ledge, all I want is each waypoint connected with the one that came in front of it and the one that's to come next. However, the WP editor will automatically draw connections e.g. down to the street under the ledge, resulting in bots falling down.
And in some cases, even one-way connections from the ground up to the ledge will appear, resulting in bots running into the wall and trying to get up forever. To make matters worse, in the process of waypointing that ledge, those wrong connections are invisible because they lead TO the nodes you're just placing.
Therefore, it would be great to have a command that would trigger automatic connection of WPs in general. In concordance with the above mentioned suggestion, it might look like this:
autocon[nect] on/off

Btw: I've almost finished the first part of my high-definition waypoint pack (50-60 hq waypoints). Unfortunately my PC keeps locking up when I try to upload larger files here(large - oh well, even with more than 150 kB I'm running into trouble), so I was wondering if I could send the pack to you by mail. Maybe you could even host it on your server and PM me with the link so that I can post a thread with the link and some descriptions on BU? TIA!

Re: For Austin... and all others, of course!
 

It's done. The new command is "autopath setradius N" (since I already recently added the "autopath on/off" commands). It will be in the next release of the bot, as soon as a major bug is found and fixed.

Re: For Austin... and all others, of course!
 

Great! I'm already thinking about an updated waypointing documentation, since Count Floyd's original "WaypointsHowToDo.html" is now hopelessly outdated...
First of all, the new commands (and the new short spellings like "pwp" for "pathwaypoint") must be added. Then it might be ok to disable some - think of the "wayzone calcall" that was already obsolete when PB 2.5 was released! And the "waypoint delflags" command...- no, wait. That one can stay. You don't need it if you use the menu, but for people who want to bind it directly it's quite ok, I guess.
Maybe it would be the best idea to leave the html as it is, except for the list of commands. The rest of the file is still a great introduction to waypointing. Further information could be added in a separate file, some sort of "guide to advanced waypointing" for those who are interested. I bet that, for example, SoUlFaTheR and me would be able to show some of our tricks & methods... ;)

Re: For Austin... and all others, of course!
 

@T Wrecks:
You could upload your waypoints to my website if you like: http://www.cs4us.de
You have to register to upload but not for downloads...

Re: For Austin... and all others, of course!
 

My brain is whirling8o

autopath setradius (long Integer !!)!!!!!!! now the ledge problem no longer exists !!!!!!
HELL YEAH !!!!!!!!

ok next thing :

did we ever figure out how to get my other phat idea working :

that we could stand on a waypoint......point the x-hairs directly at a specific waypoint...and be able to add,delete(1 or 2 way) pwp connections?

the other thing i remembered in this area was that we would have different colored connections added........a new color for those connections TO the waypoint you are standing on......EXample: yer up on the ledge T-Wrecks was talking about.....and you CAN see that 1-way connection coming UP to the ledge waypoint your standing on. sure we can fly around noclip as usual ......but with the point and delete as mentioned above in combination with the new colored TO connection.......we wont need to noclip anymore :) OMG !!

Re: For Austin... and all others, of course!
 

I believe I see what you mean. Doable. Both your ideas. I'll think about it as soon as I must get my hands inside the bot again :)

Re: For Austin... and all others, of course!
 

i am imagining these 3 colored connections :

white = one-way
yellow = two-way
Brown = to-connection (one-way connection only please)

all these connections come "into" or "leave" the waypoint at the same height....directly in the middle.......

if we have brown and yellow, or brown and white coming to and from the same waypoints.....will the optic be difficult to understand?

or can we have the to-connections come "into" the waypoint we are standing on.......up top only? possible? or dumb thought?

if its a 2-way connection anyway......the brown to-connection should not show up.......because it should only appear when if its a one-way connection to the waypoint we are standing on :)

hope that wasnt me just thinking-aloud-babble-in-the-forum crap8)

Re: For Austin... and all others, of course!
 

sorry to double post but i need to separate these thoughts.

another hot idea......i think more for Austin than for PMB.

we need 2 jump waypoints.

one normal jump waypoint as it is.

and a special jump waypoint where a bot MUST(or is forced to) take out his knife to take the jump.

this will support the de_dust problems with jumping on various crates with ease.....there are so many maps with DUCK-JUMPS that can only be done with a knife out.......this would entirely solve this bot-nav problem :))))))

/me pats himself on the back(only if i can be done)