Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Feature: Force rearming plane to leave airpad #3971

Open
ghost opened this issue Jun 12, 2020 · 15 comments · May be fixed by #4474
Open

Feature: Force rearming plane to leave airpad #3971

ghost opened this issue Jun 12, 2020 · 15 comments · May be fixed by #4474
Labels

Comments

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jun 12, 2020

The feature allows a plane to move off the airpad it is rearming itself at, without waitting for the rearm to complete.
Issued as a modified move command alt+right click.
The plane takes of, relocates to the end of the move command and does not queue a rearm after the move command.
Issued with space+move, the plane takes takes off moves away from the pad to the end of the move command and returns to the same pad.
Issued with ctrl+alt+move, the plane moves away from the pad to the end of the move command and queues a rearm command to the nearest available pad.

@GoogleFrog
Copy link
Contributor

All of these modkey combinations are already in use. I don't think I would want to use them for this even if they were not in use. I prefer units to be stuck to the rearm pad rather than them requiring an obscure UI to remove. If there is no way to remove them then no player is missing out by not knowing the UI.

How about something like selection rank. If you give an order and your selection consists entirely of planes on rearm pads, then the planes are told to leave the pad. Technically this could be implemented as a 'leave pad' parameter-less command that is automatically issued by the UI in the appropriate situation (as well as being bindable in hotkeys).

I believe my suggestion to be superior because it should automatically do what people want, i.e. when they tell a single rearming bomber to move off the pad it will do so without the player requiring any special knowledge. Requiring a modkey for a basic function is terrible.

@Gyslain
Copy link

Gyslain commented Jul 27, 2020

I lost 4 lichos stuck on airpad. I resigned after that.

@ghost ghost closed this as completed Oct 19, 2020
@sprunk sprunk reopened this Oct 19, 2020
@Sharkgamedev
Copy link
Contributor

#4136 With what I'm currently working on it wouldn't be too much for me to have an exclude airpad command issued if you move the plane off of an airpad so they will not go back to there, the question is should it be temporary and for all bombers or just the ones you moved?

@mojjj
Copy link
Contributor

mojjj commented Jun 15, 2021

lost so many lichos to skythes killing them while rearming. should not be require to self-d the pad.
give the pad a d-gun button to send all planes away?

@GoogleFrog
Copy link
Contributor

A D sounds ok too.

@Sharkgamedev
Copy link
Contributor

But with a dgun is there a set time that it takes effect? Would it simply get the planes currently on there off but leave others to be able to land immediately? What if this was a modification/expansion of airpad exclusion where planes in an airpad when excluded would skedaddle instead of waiting. Or would a simple dgun burst like you talked about be better for the uses you imagine?

@sprunk
Copy link
Member

sprunk commented Jun 18, 2021

Maybe bombers could avoid landing on pads on Wait (and possibly D would also toggle Wait)?

@Sharkgamedev
Copy link
Contributor

Sharkgamedev commented Jun 18, 2021

Maybe bombers could avoid landing on pads on Wait (and possibly D would also toggle Wait)?

That's what exclude airpads does which is why I'm mentioning it. I think it should probably go one way or the other with d pad command/wait inheriting exclude airpads functionality and get rid of the current command or just keep the current airpad exclude command. (And expand it to make currently onboard planes leave rather than leaving after they finish)

@sprunk
Copy link
Member

sprunk commented Jun 18, 2021

Right, I forgot that exists. In that case how about doing what GF suggested above (when all selected planes are reloading, they can leave via any regular order, otherwise they ignore it) and marking pads vacated this way as excluded?

@Sharkgamedev
Copy link
Contributor

That sounds good! Perhaps we should wait and see if googlefrog has anything to add.

@GoogleFrog
Copy link
Contributor

I think I have said everything. I'll remind everyone that unit selection information has no place in the sim. So

Technically this could be implemented as a 'leave pad' parameter-less command that is automatically issued by the UI in the appropriate situation (as well as being bindable in hotkeys).

Now that we have command hiding it could even be a full command, but not visible on the base UI by default.

@Sharkgamedev Sharkgamedev linked a pull request Aug 15, 2021 that will close this issue
@mojjj
Copy link
Contributor

mojjj commented Apr 12, 2023

@Sharkgamedev
Copy link
Contributor

Ah, yeah I'll take another look at this and that old PR in another month or so if nobody else wants to

@mojjj
Copy link
Contributor

mojjj commented Apr 14, 2023

could this solution be applied to all plane rearming platforms? reef, air factory, airpad.

thank you for your effort!

@Sharkgamedev
Copy link
Contributor

Right, I forgot that exists. In that case how about doing what GF suggested above (when all selected planes are reloading, they can leave via any regular order, otherwise they ignore it) and marking pads vacated this way as excluded?

One question here, is it really wise to 'mark pads vacated this way as excluded' since the exclusion command is not enabled by default, how would players know how to un-exclude it in the future? Perhaps that's an argument to transitioning exclusion functionality to the wait command?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants