Suggested commands?
 

Anyone here who has suggestions on future commands, then let your ideas flow freely. I have some myself.

Commands:

NPC Code:

---

addweapon2 account,weapon;

removeweapon2 account,weapon;

removeweapon3 weaponindex;

setrotateeffect degrees;  //Rotates the level npc

setrotateeffect2 degrees,centerx,centery; //Rotates the level npc

rotateimg index,degrees;

rotateimg2 index,derees,centerx,centery;

with (weapons[index]) {..}

---

I would like these to be added sometime. :\

The three weapon commands at the top can easily be achieved.

With the exception of the rotate commands, all of them are just reasons to promote laziness

The commands I'd really like are the rotateimg commands, thost would be awesome.

I know the way to do it, just use sine and cosine in a for loop, making each pixel of an image be it's own image. So far though, I have only gotten horizontal flips and vertical flips to work correctly... x.x

Why would you need sin and cos for a horizontal and verticle flip?

I've done experiments involving lots of showpolys, and they lag horribly, even on my PC. Doing it like that would be highly inefficient, although there currently IS no other way, but still.....

I've thought of a few things, but most of them definitely promotes laziness.

NPC Code:

---

setheart var; // for setting the players full hearts number

drop(index,x,y,image); // dropping a weapon with the specified index and image at x,y coordinates

disablesword; // disables the sword from being used

isnotsparringzone; // opposite of issparringzone

indexofweapon(str); // to get the index of a weapon the player has

pctpart(min,max,var); // same as myvar = (min/max) * width

setprop str,text; 

/* for working with message codes that involve editing the players look so we don't have to type out each one for each part, and instead use a string list and do other stuff. make sense? */

setview index; // similar to setfocus except it sets your view to the x,y coordinates of the player in the level with the index



setplayerspar type; // 0 = default rate 1 = win-loss record

some vars

playerlogtime		// the amount of time the player has been on for the entire day

playersparwins		// for type 1 sparring. gives the amount of wins the player has

playersparlosses		// for type 1 sparring. gives the amount of losses the player has

---

Even if most of your commands promote laziness, what is the point of isnotsparringzone? Why would you even want that? How is not putting in isnotsparringzone different from putting in nothing? Does this promote people to put in extra commands that arent needed?

A new flag to enablefeatures wich will disable the sword or disablesword as DarkShadows_Legend said.

To disable the level from being a spar area. For example lets say someone is laming and there is staff in there and they want to kill the spar straight away so nobody will lose rate.

Another thing is having a script that checks to see how many people are in the spar room. If there is say 3 people, 1 e.t. and 2 others and then a 4th person comes in to disrupt the spar then have a npc that disables the level from being a sparringzone.

#v(playerscount)..?

Maybe he means checking how many players are in a certain area of a level, but that can be currently achieved rather easily x.x.

Commands should not be created merely to promote scripter laziness.

Most eficients commands are always better.

Except, when efficiency is not the issue, but a command is requested merely to promote laziness (they do not want to code a simple effect for themselves, e.g. the 'players in spar area'), said requester should not be indulged.

I was giving an example of what could be done with the other command. That is why both descriptions is in a paragraph so to give a basic explanation and example. :)

I have another idea:

Have the string commands that we take for granted (replacestring, insertstring, deletestring, removestring) be usable for arrays. Like, have a 'replacearray' command, or 'insertarray' or 'deletearray' etc...

in the new engine... and why would you need replacearray? oO var[index]=

Some commands that would be nice would be

NPC Code:

---

setplayercomments account,"comments";

message #s(getcomments(account));

message #s(getban(account));

---

This would be so we wold not have to give our GPs RC, so they can set the comments of a player via script, and resd them too.

I believe, since the new engine allows the RC to be scripted, that, along with ban and such, is all possible.

oo yes! scriptable rc interface!!!! thought I supose that makes my ingame-rc gui idea obsol33t.... oh well...

Anyhow, I don't think commands that 'support lazyness' are a bad thing, since it would make it alot faster to create stuff. Less to type sounds more like 'efficiency' to me, than 'lazyness'.

A command that would compleatly suport lazyness would be something like...

NPC Code:

---

putnpc player[index].idea;

---

Graal needs a mind reading variable.

Less doesn't mean more efficient

Hi, you're not listening.

I could write a three-line script and an eighteen+ line script to do the same thing. The three-line script'd be preferable for conveniences's sake - it's not like it's any more efficient. If you want to make a complicated script into a single command, turn it into a function, and use it in your scripts. There's no sense in adding commands for simply-doable scripts, just because some scripters are too lazy to script it for themselves.

Efficient Laziness. ;)

replacearray var?? X.x

I was thinking of something like
myvar = {0,1,2,3,4};
deletearrvar 2;
then have myvar = {0,1,3,4};
... buuuuuut there's another way to do this I think. I haven't tested it out yet though so I'm not completely sure.

It's not really advisable to use things that you don't understand in your scripts.

There is a way to do that though isn't there?

Naturally. My best advice for any scripting problem is to think about just how such a command would work, and then script it.

o.o a lazy method. and its not to efficient on helping him get the command learned. oh, and fyi, thats sarcasm.

a command I'd like to see would be one to forcedownload files from remote servers.

forexample, lets say I have a cool mp3, thats just a *tad* to big to put on the ftp, or a pwa says we can't have it on the ftp, because graal doesn't want to be resposible for it being on thier ftp if it turns out to be copyrighted, or whatever reason you want that it would not be on the server's main ftp........

anyways, but its nice to have the file on the person's computer or in cache or something so it can be used.

so, one could script the npc to open a browser pointed at the url of the download... and hope that the player has the compitence to know where to put it, even after being told (wich most lack)...

or you could have it invisibly download behind the scenes, and come to the right place O.O

and if such a command does exist, then YATTA!

Making sense is rather underrated these days, isn't it? When scripters speak of efficiency, they speak of script efficiency - how stupid the wannabe-scripter is has nothing to do with it.

wow, scripters seem to have thier own solcial clicks, too.
just a small point you guys seem to neglect though...

Just because a potentual comand could make what would be a more complex script into a simple script, doesn't garentee that the command would be ineficient for the game to process, etc.

What you guys make it seem like, weather its your own thickheadedness or the inability to effectivly make a point, is that because there is a chance the new command in question could be taxing on the game, the command should be rule out of all consideration altogether.

Or are you afriad it would make your scripts seem mundane and have to think of new stuff?

I think the amount of content for the server you can make with one's methods should also be calculated somehow into what makes it efficient: not just how well it runs.

Stop putting words into our mouths, then maybe you can propose a better arguement =/ we NEVER said that a scripted alternative is more efficient than a command all the time, I don't think we're the ones who have thick heads, stop trying to mock us when you are completely misunderstanding us and putting words into our mouths.

Oh sorry, it didn't sound like you and lance were listening.

Lets put this another way then.

Lets say Xnew command has been added, and is basicly a shortcut to making a gui ingame and can somehow be tuned to even generate its own unique graphics.

And it does it all with out using any processing time.


What it looks like to me, is you guys would be 100%, whole heartedly against it because it "Promotes Lazyness".

Now, my point is, that if a command can reduce the time it takes to script something, wouldn't that be worthy of the word "efficient" than "lazy"?

You're still not getting it. When people want a new built-in command just so they can be lazy, I object. When people have a valid reason for a new command, I support it. It's that simple.

And, just in case you STILL do not understand, MrGannondorf, any command that can be done with the current level of GScript is a command that will promote lazyness. The shoot command, and the enablefeatures commands are not to promote lazyness, they are to enable a new ability not previously endowed to the scripters. However, commands like showtext, allthough necessary, were just added to promote lazyness. I hope you understand now. (Do not remove 'showtext'! I use it all the time!)

Actually, shoot can be scripted. ;)

The enablefeatures command (self-explanatorially) enables certain features of the client, and disables others. This obviously cannot be rescripted (in the current way of doing things) because it directly affects the client.

ah, I guess how 'it promotes lazyness' said earlier on in the thread seemed rather blunt to deliver the point right.

"However, commands like showtext, allthough necessary, were just added to promote lazyness." Necessity, yes. Lazy? You can't realy call 'showtext' lazyness, because having text merged into showimg was lazy on its own. Showtext is by no means lazy in compairison to showimg showing text.

but I guess thats a ways besides the point.

Calling the actions and all? Nice. Allthough I have no idea how to get actionprojectile2 to work, is it serverside? Does it need to be in the same NPC that shot the projectile?

actionprojectile2 works serverside and clientside as far as I know.
It can be in any npc. It is called when the NPC lands.

#p(0) = x of landing
#p(1) = y of landing

Indeed. In the projectile-destruction code, you'd make your own triggeractions.

I would like to see the code, Lance, so I can see how you guys do it. Is it the same code you used on the old Graal 2002 bows? Where you click and the arrow lands where you clicked?