More options for Map Lua

[GoogleCodeExporter]

boring things first:
for the (unlikely) case there is again a new system or whatever:
something like mapluaversion="1" or mapluaversion="return res table nov 2010"
could be displayed at gamestart or logged or just to provide contact
config_author = "name" (also you can just add this as --comment already)

more interessting:
What else do is wanted by mappers or players?
What I can think of:
Some maps have features with lots of metal. This can alter balance:
features= "leave" / "remove" / "replace with rocks"

More options where/when/how many meteors drop:
meteorstorms_area = "everywhere" / "on metal map" / defined by some coordinates
meteorstorm_intervall = <seconds between meteor storms, currently 120>
meteorstorm_firsttime = <delay in seconds until the first meteor storm>
or to make meteor storms more fair?
meteorstorm_symmetric = "none" / "horizontal" / "vertical"
something to change the start resource maybe? ie snowy rocks on a ice map.
would need models of course.
startresource = "default" / "snowy" / "shiny"

Not sure how much I can actually implent or how long it will take.
Just post your ideas.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by anmeldek...@web.de on 17 Nov 2010 at 2:21

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Occasional storm to place resources across the map, instead of a single point 
on the map.

Original comment by sanadauj...@gmail.com on 18 Nov 2010 at 3:32

[GoogleCodeExporter]

not so easy unless done hackish, imo also useless from a gameplay perspective.

Original comment by anmeldek...@web.de on 18 Nov 2010 at 3:42

[GoogleCodeExporter]

10 rocks, set to spread across the width of the map.  Is that doable?

Original comment by sanadauj...@gmail.com on 18 Nov 2010 at 4:22

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Idea: Respawn Starting rocks

Basically a wave that falls on the starting rocks  positions. 

Why: Give's people a chance to rebound if they are stuck in "their spawn".

Original comment by Oksnoop2@gmail.com on 18 Nov 2010 at 3:31

[GoogleCodeExporter]

imo defeats the point of the eco system if you try to artificially help losing 
players that much.
if players are "stuck in their spawn" in a game that is all about being mobile, 
dont they deserve to lose? usually players would not be "in their spawn" 
anyway, maybe they have completly switched sides on the map: then the rocks go 
to the wrong player.

Original comment by anmeldek...@web.de on 18 Nov 2010 at 6:11

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Well it's not just for the losing team. The wining team get's the rocks as 
well. It's just would be nice if at least some income could be predictable so 
why not the starting spots. Take that game we played on LLT. Way more metal 
fell into your base than ours. So it was like we needed To get the metal needed 
to build an army to storm your base to get the metal needed to get the army to 
storm your base..I kind of wrote myself into a loop there but I think my point 
is clear-ish.

Original comment by Oksnoop2@gmail.com on 18 Nov 2010 at 6:17

[GoogleCodeExporter]

"Take that game we played on LLT."
game was lolgame anyway, too many newbs, not enough start resources on map, map 
too "left vs right" style.

"So it was like we needed To get the metal needed to build an army to storm 
your base to get the metal needed to get the army to storm your base"
right teams only attack was some ~5 tanks driving to the middle, getting killed 
by a T2 beam turret thing.
In the same, I had already raided the right teams eco twice with a few basic 
mechs, killing their miners.

Original comment by anmeldek...@web.de on 18 Nov 2010 at 7:12

[GoogleCodeExporter]

"Way more metal fell into your base than ours."
also this is not even true:

http://www.abload.de/img/3v3_lltacomplexv2_ct_1tgvs.png
white triangles on last image are metorites.
dots are miner movement.

in the beginning of the games, the metorites even "favored" your team.
storm #1: right side very near start
storm #2: left side, actually in middle, i got it
storm #3: right side, in start area again, at top.
(until 10min i have raided it 2 times bespite it being in enemy land)
storm #4: left side, easiy mineable
storm #5: right side, near the third storm

you needed more metal? well, how about using it for usefull stuff:
oksnoop2: 10 powerplants before 5 minutes to power nothing
metal value: 915

sanada made 9 turrets at the ramp (5x cannon, 4x aa) that protected nothing and 
killed nothing (only in the "cleaning up" phase)
metal value: 2415

but ofc left team had their stupid spendings too:
master_bates on left team morphs 2 cruisers to t2 at 6min without using them

left team just played way better. when a storm arrived, it was mined very 
quickly by all 3 players.
ie at 7min30: left time has completly mined their last drop.
right team still has 2 rocks left of their meteorites that fell 2 minutes 
earlier

watch the replay and do not balance on such a lolgame.

Original comment by anmeldek...@web.de on 18 Nov 2010 at 7:39

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I worked on a set of modoptions that would let you choose the rate at which 
meteors will fall. For some reason they don't work. Basically if I understood 
it right the selecting a mod option would turn on one of the gadgets and off 
the rest.

Original comment by Oksnoop2@gmail.com on 26 Nov 2010 at 1:52

Attachments:

• ModOptions.lua
• spacerocks30sec.lua
• spacerocks60sec.lua
• spacerocks120sec.lua

[GoogleCodeExporter]

gzz! no you! use Spring.GetModOptions() and numbers! that's what it's meant for!

These work.

Original comment by skas...@gmx.at on 26 Nov 2010 at 2:08

Attachments:

• spacerocks.patch
• ModOptions.patch

[GoogleCodeExporter]

yea that is pretty fail lol...

Anyways, I have added some new tags in mapconfigs:
meteorstorm_interval=120
meteorstorm_firsttime=600
if the mapper wants, he could of course make them as a mapoption.
will also add a modoption (will overpower mapoption) similiar to what dansski 
posted.

also added:
featurehandling = "remove" | "replace"
"remove" delete all features with metal
"replace" replaces all features with metal with a bminerals

will commit when i get home.

Original comment by anmeldek...@web.de on 26 Nov 2010 at 2:27