MiniSpring not to be standard?

Warlord Zsinj · Post by **Warlord Zsinj** » 01 Jul 2005, 15:35

Well, the community wants it, and the code is there, so I thought it was simply a matter of time before it was released as a standard with Spring. (that it has to be a standard has been proven repeatedly)

But in the modding forum, I was greeted with this in Buggi's post.

Originally posted by Buggi
don't even bother with minispring because they [the SY's] don't like it, don't support it, and don't play it. So we're on our own @_@;;

To the Swedish Yankspanker team: Why have you made this decision?
I'm able to deal with things such as auto-targetting and ghosted buildings (grudgingly) because there are opposing arguments, and the arguments have been made (if not convincingly); but with this I just don't understand. I can't see any negative effects of MiniSpring, and there are certainly numerous advantages which it offers. So why have you decided not to include it, especially after the community gave it the thumbs up?

This is directed at the SY's. I am not inviting critics of MiniSpring to come and yell about why Spring "sucks". There are other threads for you to voice your opinion, and I don't want this thread needlessly derailed. I just want to get some answers from they SY's, and perhaps have the opportunity of engaging them in discussion to try and convince them of miniSpring's worth.

Min3mat · Post by **Min3mat** » 01 Jul 2005, 16:06

YES! Have that Zsinj! :p SYs 4EVER! :D

Masse · Post by **Masse** » 01 Jul 2005, 16:18

mini spring is crappy shiiiiaaat... OK !!!
and SY's ppl have made great things... OK !!!
so no no to mini's
------------------------------------------------
da mini spring has too many bugs many working thing becomes non working when u use it... the units are too fast try to drop SMALL FAST ASS SCOUT FROM DA SKY... NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE with flak and who needs gigantic maps I DONT...

Min3mat · Post by **Min3mat** » 01 Jul 2005, 16:19

WOOT! 2 ppl against minispring! i'm not alone! :D

Lindir The Green · Post by **Lindir The Green** » 01 Jul 2005, 16:23

I think there should be a checkbox when creating a game for minispring. That way everybody will be happy (including the SYs, because it should be easy to code.)

Warlord Zsinj · Post by **Warlord Zsinj** » 01 Jul 2005, 16:34

This is directed at the SY's. I am not inviting critics of MiniSpring to come and yell about why Spring "sucks".

Go away min3mat. You have not actually presented any arguments against minispring, yuo have just jumped and screamed about how it "sucks" in your usual incomprehensible English.

And Masse, what the hell are you on about?

Please, if you have actual issues with MiniSpring, take it up in the thread. And actual issues means real problems and logical arguments, not inane babble.

Min3mat · Post by **Min3mat** » 01 Jul 2005, 17:01

hmm what to say... :p

Zoombie · Post by **Zoombie** » 01 Jul 2005, 17:14

I├óÔé¼Ôäóm for Mini-spring! Also I├óÔé¼Ôäóm not sure why we need to keep saying why it needs to be standardized!

Kixxe · Post by **Kixxe** » 01 Jul 2005, 17:41

Well, guess some pepole worst fear is about to come true. A spilt community of minispring and megaspring (should i start calling it''normal'' spring aging?:P).

I think the SY's have said what they wanted to say. (even thou i dont know what they said, except ''minispring=bad'' or smilar.

You can atleast mirror minispring in the download section, right?

Oh, and about the the majority of pepole on the forum, i saw 45 wotes but only about 24 pepole that posted. odd?

Min3mat · Post by **Min3mat** » 01 Jul 2005, 17:45

hmmm i think that someone manipulated the statistics *glares*

Post by SJ » 01 Jul 2005, 17:57

What I said to Buggi was that we would never make it the default but if someone added an option in the battleroom for it we would add it. There is a few reasons that we dont like it.

1: It breaks pathfinding and there is no easy fix other than to double the resolution of the pathfinding data and then you can as well double the map size.

2: We feel the current size gives a nice balance between ground texture quality and unit quality. When higher res units start comming out the ground quality would rather need to increase rather than decrease.

3: Many other sizes are balanced for the current size of units.

4: We dont really feel the need for the huge maps. Personally i think 12x12 - 16x16 is optimal for a 4 player game and 16x16 - 20x20 for 6 player games. Its seldom that you need larger maps than that and if you do most of the resource usage will come from the units not the map anyway.

5: For those wanting large mountains etc, well scale them up you can make mountains a lot higher in spring than you could in TA.

Zoombie · Post by **Zoombie** » 01 Jul 2005, 18:03

I never really considered the pathfinding...

Ace07 · Post by **Ace07** » 01 Jul 2005, 23:15

If minispring can become a mod....then I can add support for it.

Whenever I get around to making a mod-loading system that is...

zwzsg · Post by **zwzsg** » 01 Jul 2005, 23:21

Ok, I understand that you don't want minispring.

But please can you:
- Make the three x2 bigger. Keep the footprint the same, or even shrink it. So units could go through foliage and be partialy hidden from view. Because in TA most units could be hidden by trees, while in Spring trees looks tiny and units stay far from them.
- Fix the bug that make the graphic engine bugs like that on maps that have a max height of about 1000.

mongus · Post by **mongus** » 02 Jul 2005, 00:20

there is zjin making noices again...

i think buggui is guessing.

you dont have to be so noisy, and also i think you have a wrong perception.

NOT everybody agrees on minispring.
i have seen only 1 or 2 games of minispring in the server yet.
or you use to play it there?

its nice as a test for some already proposed changes, but its not the way it should be.

Doomweaver · Post by **Doomweaver** » 02 Jul 2005, 03:02

You know what i'd really like? The simple option to make trees bigger.

Warlord Zsinj · Post by **Warlord Zsinj** » 02 Jul 2005, 07:56

*Sigh*

I'm afraid this will kill MiniSpring. There just can't be two sizes hanging around.

I think if you are absolutely set on not setting it as default, then I think some of the things which it fixes need to be taken note of in further releases of Spring; from the gameplay changes (encouraging territoriality, greater battles in a smaller area, etc), to the more technical changes such as reducing terrain deformation, and making trees and other features larger.

Note that Spring cannot handle particularly high mountains, so no, we can't just make them higher. That is where the visual errors kicked in; gameplay errors (with aircraft in particular) occur at much lower altitudes.

(map attempt by zwzsg)

Atleast I'll be able to put miniSpring in with SWTASpring.

I think that you are making the wrong decision and missing out, but I don't have any power to change it.

[rant]
To those who are jumping for joy: how big of you. You are the blight on Spring which subdues these forums to idiocy, and strips progression of any intelligence.
[/rant]

smokingwreckage · Post by **smokingwreckage** » 02 Jul 2005, 13:26

I very, very much like the increased Line of Sight in minispring, but nothing else strikes me as hugely beneficial yet; I'll play a few more games first before I pass further judgement.

"Crappy shiaaaaaaaat" doesn't even count as an opinion Masse. Please try present a reasoned statement. You'll just get ignored otherwise.

Buggi · Post by **Buggi** » 02 Jul 2005, 21:09

I don't think Masse has the ability to post intelligent and comprehensible statements. I've never read one anyway.

I'd like to see solid and well thought-out arguments for Doubling the OTA sizes of units. Because that's what Spring does... it doubles the sizes. MiniSpring should be considered OTASpring as it returns the sizes to what people are used to.

It doesn't half the sizes at all, just doesn't double them.

-Buggi

Post by SJ » 02 Jul 2005, 23:34

Spring doesnt double the sizes of units. It just requires all footprints to be an even size so it doubles the footpring number but each "footprint square" is half the size instead.

Spring RTS Engine

MiniSpring not to be standard?

MiniSpring not to be standard?