Aircraft is not loosing any single ammo if it staying still in air

Bug #895446 reported by SovietWarrior on 2010-04-16
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone

Bug Description

Aircraft is not loosing any single ammo if it staying still in air. This makes it fire ammo over and over again untill you order it move away.



SovietWarrior (sovietwarrior) wrote :
Renegade (renegade) wrote :

Can anybody confirm this?

I've updated the questionably-filled data fields, but the selection of Version: 0.1.unlisted is weird. What version did this happen on?

AlexB (alexander-b) wrote :

I can partly confirm this for RC7. Using a fresh rulesmd with none or only one of the flags set, the harriers will fire only one missile. Setting both flags causes the harriers to fire two missiles each. Increasing Ammo to 2 causes four missiles to be fired (two salvos of two missiles), setting it to 4 fires eight missiles.

SovietWarrior (sovietwarrior) wrote :

Just to be sure, i have reinstall YR and Ares RC7. Also, i've attached a screenshot.

DCoder DCoder (dcoder1337) wrote :

Does this problem exist in YR without Ares?

AlexB (alexander-b) wrote :

I rechecked with RC8 (from the \releases\unstable\binary folder), and the harrier always fires two missiles. Tested by firing on ground, vehicles and buildings. I can't reproduce the indefinitely ammo case. Using Win7 64bit.

In vanilla TFD-YR with both flags set as described two missiles are fired, too.

SovietWarrior (sovietwarrior) wrote :

issue happen in vanilla YR as well. x86 xp sp2

WoRmINaToR (worminator) wrote :

the two-missile-firing logic is a relic of the old TS orca fighter attack code. Adding fighter=yes to the plane (I think) resolves this.

In the TS code, Ammo is depleted after the aircraft performs a "Curley Shuffle" or moves, which occurs after the aircraft fires 2 rounds. Disabling CurleyShuffle= means that the ammo will never be depleted until it moves by direct order.

Of course, Ares is here to fix bugs like this, but since this can be avoided by modder coding, I don't see this as a huge issue.

*EDIT* I just looked up and noticed he put fighter=no, so I guess he didn't like fighter movement logic... If he wants an aircraft that stands still in the air while firing, why doesn't he just make a jumpjet helicopter?

SovietWarrior (sovietwarrior) wrote :

jumpjet locomotor will make aircraft no longer be able land on buildins to rearm and repair. it also cause a visual glitch with shadow. And yes, i have turned off fighter logic fix ballance, aircraft that fly around ususally takes more fire and less effectively fire back.

WoRmINaToR (worminator) wrote :

That's not the jumpjet locomotor that prevents it from landing... that's the tag BalloonHover=yes. Turn that off and then land it at a service depot with UnitRearm=yes (or whatever that tag is) and it will refill ammo.

SovietWarrior (sovietwarrior) wrote :

Mate, all i want is to learn my VTOL Harrier to do an attak on full stop. Just old good Harrier, wich is AircraftType and takes Aircraft queue while it been build, that could land\rearm\repair at Airforce HQ. If there is workarownd, then i have to admit i dont know it.

WoRmINaToR (worminator) wrote :

I'm presenting a workaround right now....

Anyways the workaround doesn't matter, this ammo problem should still probably be fixed, because if you fix it a certain way it will improve the performance of aircraft that rapid fire their weapons at high rates of fire (and have high stocks of ammo).

Make it so 1) the aircraft turns around quicker (for cases of Fighter=yes) and 2) Depletes ammo regardless of whether it moves or not (for cases like this).

If it performs its "curley shuffle" quicker then it can fire quicker, because westwood idiocy seems to prevent the aircraft from firing when it's performing such movements (I don't know what it's called when Fighter=yes aircraft do their dance, but it's a similar thing).

So, better yet, perhaps you can circumvent this, and make the aircraft able to fire at full ROF at any enemy in range? I think this would be best kept limited to aircraft that are Fighter=yes, because with non-fighter aircraft this system I'm proposing would be illogical.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.