Leaderboard

Do I really need to expound on this for you? Unfortunately over the span of 2015 the dev team has dwindled down to just me and a couple others who just don't have the time to do much, and everyone else at W3D Hub is either too busy with their own projects which are in development and actually have teams, or are again too busy with real life. "Version 4" is a pipe dream, stop thinking about it. Before you pitch any more grand ideas for APB in future, you should really ask yourself how long you think it would take one person to do it, if you would like to spend that much time doing it, if the game ABSOLUTELY needs this change, and if it would be worth all the time you spend on it. I'm just here to do bug fixes, minor balance adjustments, fix up another couple of AOW maps, and maybe include a couple of features that we already have most of the framework for, because anything bigger is a massive timesink for one person working on a free game.

When i see all those people either specially saying it or ignoring what has been said, i think that Pushwall is doing this with ya all in his mind

Oi, relax mate. You know what you should do? Add cruisers!

On that subject, you could shape an "AI world" within a level by having an AI-only collision (since special collision groups can now be made) and script zone mesh to funnel AI into specific parts of a map, say for example, only bases and on roads between said bases. The script zone part of this mesh would be a flare-or-no-flare script, so any spawned AI would always land within the "AI world" area. This should theoretically, allow for an AI that can navigate to key objectives, while ignoring vast map backdrop areas, and not requiring map-wide pathfind generation. Alternatively the collision part of this could be handled like water used to be handled pre-light solve fix; Place it during pathfind generation, remove it afterwards. The flare-or-no-flare script zone should be a little smaller to fit within the "AI world" region of the map, so that the AI isn't likely to spawn just outside the edge of where they should be, although this particular issue completely depends on how the AI is spawned via cinematic effects. Edit: That said, I don't think you want the AI to attack an enemy base on it's own. Any AI units that could be spawned should probably more serve a guard duty role, so a team can use them to build up security in their own base, or spawn some on a map objective, or inside the enemy base as a distraction (they should probably be set to ignore AI Ore Trucks otherwise they will basically do nothing useful). Good example; You captured an Oil Derrick on Pipeline, you spawn a flare calling in ~2 AI bots to then protect it from lone enemy Engineers.

Never less, always MOre #shamelessadvertisement Also: >me in moment when someone does recognize my "skill"

>see first page of additional units for apb >see response against that >

(Insert generic please add dogs request to be denied here)

I wouldn't push Pushy too far guys.

Oi, relax mate. You know what you should do? Add cruisers! Dude! Thats the best idea I've heard all day! He totally should!

I do believe I defeated you the other day though, with my epic demo truck dodge on Camos Canyon. At least, I'm pretty sure it was you, since you vaporized another demo truck in front of me, so I knew what to expect...after which I drove behind War Factory to hit all four of your main buildings

I think the TLDR version of this can be seen as: W3D AI capacity is very limited, and to even get basic things working, major development time-intensive workarounds would need to be created (see my firing line theory). Weigh the pros and cons against the development time required and you will probably have to conclude it to be... Not worthwhile.

just put all the bots on the allied side and all the players on the soviet side and make it a coop under then

Well hey there's something that's within reach; it doesn't involve the use of Renegade's flaky AI, there's already some scripts that would work just fine to implement it with a few minor alterations, there's a relatively small amount of balance concerns for it compared to all the other stuff that's popped up in here, it shouldn't require us to completely redefine the game, and there's only one required asset that's missing this time: a texture. The model also has a few rigging issues but that's better than no model.

Disclaimer: This following idea will most likely not work. We could have the Construction Yard build base defenses.

Read the reasons why we can't put the cruiser in a little harder.

player influenced in gathering ore but only the AI builds so it will still end up the same way on a map. Though it would be funny when players buy MCVs and spam construction yards lol. I still think the cruiser should go into the game but make it a 2 player vehicle so 1 player per turret. perhaps have strike options for bombers and fighters.

base building as something AI controlled that can be influenced by the player such as by getting more ore. The buildings would obviously be built into the same location and unless the construction yard is destroyed than it will rebuild destroyed buildings. i think this should be a gameplay mode that can be enabled/disabled. For the cruiser the 2nd turret can just follow the first turret so it doesnt have to be player controlled but the player fires it with right click. Or the 2nd turret could be manned by another player

Lets cool it with the name calling please, keep it civil.