Some un-wanted connections

[KWo]

Sometimes we have to add some connections only for take from WP Editor checking the warranty all is OK. Here is some example from cs_assault map. At this first screenshot you can see some WP with incoming connection from some roof's camp WP. This WP (nr 340) and these near are only for the situation if bots fall down from roof after some combat - if you don't put here these WP's , they don't know they have to go. But we don't want bot go this way from roof to down - this connection is only for WP editor checking and probably for A* pathinfinder code (no path found). So how to prevent bots take this way as normal and after fall down by them? They are thinking- it's a good way - so they go. OK - if they die after falling down - maybe they don't choose this way in the future according to the A* algorythm. But maybe there is a possibility to add some flag to this WP 340 (go by this WP only if You don't have another choice - only if You falled down at this WP)?

BTW - this is from original SF pwf file. I changed this pwf a little bit because I like if Terrorist go to the roof , too , from inside. SF made only one way connection from roof to inside the building - probably to prevent them to fall down.
It can be a good idea to make separate author's name and last saved waypointer name too, to see the first author (creator) of pwf , too. Now I can't distribute this my pwf file, becase the license and author's lows of SF to this pwf could be losed...

[SoUlFaThEr]

whats wrong with those connections in the thumbnails?

many people do that....so why not the bots too?

about the airvent leading into the building from the roof:

if you have 2-way connections there........many CT will go back out when they are halfway in...and get STUCK on CT's trying to go through.....so to avoid killing the last 6 CT as a T in the vent who are stuck and wasting your time.....i waypointed 1-way here.

[KWo]

Originally Posted by SoUlFaThEr

whats wrong with those connections in the thumbnails?

Are You menaing about this WP number 340 at my first screenshot? Wrong is only this - bot are thinking this is a good way. If they have about 30HP they fall down and they die. Human-players - if they have 30 HP don't choose this way...Me - normally I don't go this way from roof to this WP number 340. I don't like so big decrase of my HP...So I want to pevent bots go there, too. Only if after some combat they fall down - they should now where they should go , so this WP 340 is in correct place. But this connection from roof to this WP I don't like. But this connection needs WP editor during checking file and after Bot code (path not found...). This is what I' dont like.
I never said "You made a bad conection" . You made exactly this what is wanted by WP editor, not what is wanted by the normal logic. There isn't another way to solve this problem in current WP editor and I know this/ All You made it's OK - according to the limitations of current WP editor. I showed only an example - I want to break this connection, becasue me - in my preferences - I don't like normally fall down, and I want to prevent bots of this,too - but now I don't have a possibility to do this with this WP editor.

Originally Posted by SoUlFaThEr

about the airvent leading into the building from the roof:
if you have 2-way connections there........many CT will go back out when they are halfway in

Why? They should go for hostages and if You put "no_hostage" flag at the ladder down WP, they shouldn't go outside there. Normally - I see there is a good way for Terrorists - they can attack CT from roof. You never did this as T? Now we are talking about some preferences. Everyone wants to see bots like him-self is playing. Once again - it's not WRONG - but simply I prefer two directions way there...

Originally Posted by SoUlFaThEr

...and get STUCK on CT's trying to go through.....so to avoid killing the last 6 CT as a T in the vent who are stuck and wasting your time.....i waypointed 1-way here.

Don't worry about this - for this A* pathfinder code should prevent this situation and only sometimes I'll wast my time. Normally I play 4 on 4 or 5 on 5, so maybe becasue of this the situation You described above I don't see so often...If somebody play 10 on 10 - this can happen more often.

[>BKA< T Wrecks]

I don't think it's a big problem either way. There are basically 2 possibilities:
1) Leave those WPs out. Chances that a bot will fall down there are near to 0%, and chances that it will drop down from the ledge and fall into the waypointed area below are very high.
2) Leave them in, but unconnected. First leave the connection down, try to save your WP file. As soon as you don't get any errors, remove that connection. Save now, and you will be prompted with an error message. However, now you can be sure that it's the "error" you made on purpose and nothing else. Save, and you're ready. There'll be waypoints on the ledge (for the case of emergency), but no bot will go there normally.
One of these 2 (or both) ought to work on any map with a similar situation. I wouldn't know how to implement a kind of "damage calculation" or "emergency only" flag without giving up original PB waypoint compatibility.