Allow DeployToLand= to work on Jumpjets (esp Infantry like the Rocketeer)

I like the idea.

Yes please.

Hell yeah.

Yes. Definitely. This would be awesome.

Gamemate said that this was possible already, but didnt share the information for some reson.

I love the idea anyway

/signed as well.

This one is very important for my mod-in-progress.

I tried holding back, but, "Fund it!".

So when a rocketeer exits the transport will they automatically take off, or still run?

Either way it's still a good idea.

@Jeffman12

Normally, it should exit the same way it enters a transport; That is, the rocketeer should land first,
then enter; and exit first while on the ground, then fly, if the user wants it to.

should that tag work on Chrono Legionaries, too

when playing YR, i sometimes thought that it would be useful to tell those guys to just walk some steps instead of teleporting everywhere

Up with this.

Hi TAG! How's it going?

Not too bad, you? I work for Xerox now :)

God, we need this.

That sounds fun, congrats :) I'm working webdev, it's really limiting my free time (read: time I can spend on hacking Ares) though.

I'll be looking into this, the basic idea should be doable.

Code related to this issue has just been checked in!
Author: DCoder
Location: branches/issue-380-deploy-to-land/, r658
Revision comment:
Related to issue #380 - DeployToLand= mostly works on infantry, but it doesn't respond to the Deploy kbd command, only direct mouse click. Also bound to have some missed edge cases...
Related to issue 380 .
SVN: http://svn.renegadeprojects.com/Ares/658

This should be tested now, as it mostly works.

Tick tock, tick tock... I thought at least one supporter would have bothered by now :-)

A few issues with it...
- A Rocketeer with this tag will land fine once deployed, but then won't run along the ground when given a move order, instead taking off and flying to its destination, then landing.
- Deploying it again won't make it take off there and then. Instead, it just won't land after you give it its next move order.
- I couldn't get a Rocketeer with this tag to go in any vehicles when landed. The enter cursor just didn't show up at all on an IFV or a Nighthawk Transport.

A LOT better than my suggestion.

Okey dokey, thanks.

That's a good idea if the DeployToLand=yes and BalloonHover=yes works too with a voxel unit (an example, for a aerial MCV).

Code related to this issue has just been checked in!
Author: DCoder
Location: issue-380-deploy-to-land, r859
Commit contains DLL: Yes
Revision comment:
Related to issue #380 - merged latest trunk into branch.
Related to issue 380 .
SVN: http://svn.renegadeprojects.com/Ares/859

It's just as Nighthawk says, The tag doesn't work as intended.
I wonder if the locomotor had something to do with it...

anybody else having a problem with getting the R859 download page above this post to function correctly? I can sucessfully get to other svn pages, but when this one gets to the process of /image/page_white_delete.png it freezes up my com. Any insight to this?

Uh, guys, the latest revision just merged the latest trunk changes into this branch, it didn't change any ingame logic from when Nighthawk tested. Thanks for testing though :P

@cranium: The insight is: That is not a "download page".

so then your saying that I cant get the R859 .dll even though it says Commit contains DLL: Yes?

Though really, I was just wondering why the page wouldnt load all the way for me thats all.

the link works perfectly fine for me.

@cranium: If you are a tester, you will know how to obtain the DLL, or have access to the information to look it up.

If you are not a tester, then a tester-DLL wasn't designed for your consumption in the first place.

eh, not a big deal. I just wanted to see this feature in action. I'll wait till it's ready.

I think my problem is with InternetExplorer, I had to revert to using it because when I try to log in here using FireFox it always gives me a cookie error saying that my browser either does not know how to handle cookies, or refuses to handle them. and I have it set to accept cookies from all sites, so I dont know. Like I said not a big deal, I'll just wait till its ready for us modders.

Code related to this issue has just been checked in!
Author: DCoder
Location: issue-380-deploy-to-land, r862
Commit contains DLL: No
Revision comment:
Related to issue #380 - small changes that don't work right.
Related to issue 380 .
SVN: http://svn.renegadeprojects.com/Ares/862

I'm suspending this indeterminately since it turns out that making it work requires more voodoo that I can figure out at the moment.

awww crap! my mod was depending on this. Not a problem though, i'll just put it on the backburner for now.

Keep up the good work guy's, all you developers are doing a fantastic job.

Just a thought, but how hard would it be to allow these tags to be used on the units code like the JumpJet tags? This would allow you to adjust the hover hieght individually without messing up other units that depend on it. I know its not logical to have a hover vehicle with hieght=1200 to load infantry or vehicles, but it's the next best thing I can think of.

;*********************************************
; ********hover vehicle characteristics*******
;*********************************************

HoverHeight=120 ; height of hovering vehicles
HoverDampen=40% ; dampening effect on hover vehicle bounciness
HoverBob=.04 ; time between hover 'bobs'
HoverBoost=150% ; hover speed when traveling on straight away
HoverAcceleration=.02 ; time to accelerate to full speed
HoverBrake=.03 ; time to decelerate to full stop

That is seriously unrelated to the issue at hand and hovers have other stupid problems... but deglobalizing as many values like that as we can is a goal for 0.3 , so if you file a separate issue for that, we'll most likely make that happen.

high-flying hovering vehicles have a very strange bug that causes any tile they cross over to be considered impassible and unsuitable for building, as if every cell it passes is occupied by the hovering vehicle.

and besides, a hovering vehicle using a modified hovering logic is no better than a jumpjet vehicle using BalloonHover.

"and besides, a hovering vehicle using a modified hovering logic is no better than a jumpjet vehicle using BalloonHover."

The difference is that infantry can still be loaded into a high flying hover unit without having to "DeployToLand". BalloonHover craft dont allow such actions. And since DCoder said he was suspending this operation I just thought this would be a good alternative if it wasnt hard to implement.

everyone comes up with stupid ideas once in awhile:)

I have a thought, though it might not work:

Jumpjet units and ground units have their own locomotors. So is it possible to swap locomotors upon using the deploy command?

For example:
Deploy.Locomotor = Locomotor ;Changes locomotor of the unit upon deployment. Defaults to the locomotor it was originally assigned to.

IMO, I think a good thing "if possible" is to give the SiegeChopper logic the ability to handle Passengers=
Course, that wouldnt benefit the BallonHover units though.