Yes, every object has a Name property (defined in Core.Object); when placing an actor into a map the editor just appends a number to the class name, like 'WeaponLocker14'.

No, I don't think there are any hashtable-like structures in unrealscript, however I think you could just use Core.Object.FindObject() to get references to the actors you want, e.g.:

local UTWeaponLocker Locker;
local string ActorName;
Locker = UTWeaponLocker(FindObject(ActorName, class'UTWeaponLocker'));

Even if that doesn't work for whatever reason, fortunately these type of spot edits and replacements only have to be done once at the start of a map, so it doesn't matter a whole lot if you just do a lazy foreach loop with

if (string(A.Name) == ActorName)

or something.

That does leave out how to get the ActorName loaded, and there's all sorts of ways to do that of course. PerObjectConfig might be something to look into here, as you could set up a fairly elegant solution using a data class such as:

class MapPostProcessData PerObjectConfig;

struct WeaponLockerData
{
	var string Locker;
	var array<string> Add;
	var array<string> Remove;
}
var array<WeaponLockerData> WeaponLocker;

Which would allow you to use a nice straightforward .ini file like:

[WAR-Torlan MapPostProcessData]
WeaponLocker=(Locker="WeaponLocker0",Add=("ONS2.ONS2Weap_BioGrenadeLauncher"))
WeaponLocker=(Locker="WeaponLocker12",Add=("ONS2.ONS2Weap_BioGrenadeLauncher","UTGameContent.UTWeap_Avril_Content"),Remove=("UTGame.UTWeap_RocketLauncher"))

[WAR-Dusk MapPostProcessData]
WeaponLocker=... etc.

Then to load the data objects you just retrieve their names and instantiate the one you want:

local array<string> Names;
local int NameIndex;
local MapPostProcessData PPData;
GetPerObjectConfigSections(class'MapPostProcessData', Names, None);
NameIndex = Names.Find(WorldInfo.Name);
if (NameIndex == -1) return; // or whatever
PPData = new (None, Names.NameIndex) class'MapPostProcessData';

And once you've got the PPData structure in hand it should be no trouble to get the actor reference with FindObject and go to work on it however you want.

Btw that last line of code especially was hard to understand at first for me. The not-so-obvious trick to it apparently is that when you're using the 'new' keyword to instantiate a PerObjectConfig class, by declaring a Name for the new object that matches one of the config entries (the level name e.g. "WAR-Torlan" from the example above), the engine automatically loads all the values for the associated config properties as recorded in the .ini file into the new object. See the comments in Core.Object.GetPerObjectConfigSections and the old UT2004 page on PerObjectConfig for more about how this works.

I'm not sure all the details are fleshed out there and I may have a thing or two a bit wrong, but it's not far off. Anyway that's what I'd suggest ... it's a mindbender at first but the end result is VERY powerful ... depending on how intense you get with the structures you define in the data class, you can make all kinds of very specific edits to any map that would otherwise require republishing the whole thing and all the buttpain of downloads, new map packs, etc. involved with that.
 

And nice repo browser setup pacer! Very handy tool for admiring all your masterpieces

oh and for the record I vote for exploding a few bits of "bio shrapnel" if the grenade is big enough -- that would be cool looking and complement the theme nicely. Glad you got the bio effects to show too, also very cool.

Thanks for the code hints Poker! I'll give it a shot.

Oh and can I make one more suggestion about bio grenades -- I think that in addition to making the weapon chargeable so you can "grow" your grenade, it might make the gameplay most compelling if, when the grenade is exploded, there's an initial shot of moderate damage (say ~40) but then most of the charged-up damage is applied using a slow drawn-out health drain. Similar to normal UT3 bio, but about 3X slower; vehicles could sustain damage even slower maybe.

Again part of this is just in keeping with the character of bio goop or whatever, but gameplay wise this would work great imo because:

(1) simply speaking it offers something more than just another "boom" type of damage;

(2) after getting stuck by a big grenade and having it detonated, the victim gets a thrilling few seconds of "OMG CRAP" to realize he's screwed and do his darnedest to take something down with him;

(3) most compelling of all, this design offers the attacker more options: suppose you're trying to take out something big like a tank—basically there would be two general strategies available at all times: (a) stick it with several small grenades, or (b) charge up just one large grenade. The firing sequence of (a) might take longer to execute than the charge-up sequence of (b), but (a) would do damage all at once whereas (b) would drain health slowly, giving the tank time to nail a few more things. (Smart attackers who happen to use the big grenade approach will of course fire it and then compound the ensuing bio attack with some other type of fire as well.)

Anyway ... more and more potential every time I think about it ... great idea fellas :)

btw in the code from last post the last line should of course have Names[NameIndex] not .NameIndex - duh

I've uploaded and installed an update which includes the new scorpion projectiles, the "low-rider" scorpion, and the bio grenade launcher.

The bio grenade launcher's primary fire fires a grenade that bounces off walls but sticks to players, vehicles and nodes. The weapon's secondary fire remotely detonates all live grenades. When grenades explode, they release a spray of bio goo and several secondary bio globs. When the grenade is stuck to an enemy, it does 65 points of direct damage plus whatever damage occurs from secondary globules. When the grenade is stuck to a friend or resting on the floor, the damage is dispersed via slash damage. Any live grenades will explode when you die or 60 seconds after launch. You can damage nodes and cores very effectively using bio grenades.

Thanks again for the suggestions Poker. Before diving into "charged and enlarged" grenades I want to first let people try "normal, dumb, spray-n-pray" grenades for a while.

Charging grenades might be a cool option but, if required, it may be get too complicated: Hold down primary fire to charge it up, release to fire, then click secondary fire to trigger the explosion. A three step process may be too much in the heat of battle.

We discovered a couple of bugs last night. One is to coat your viper or scorpion with grenades, drive into enemy territory, eject, then watch the grenades float in mid air after the vehicle self destructs.

if you can solve the "then watch the grenades float in mid air" problem that may be able to be applied to the spidermines too which get funky if you put them on the wings of a manta.

What I was envisioning hopefully wouldn't box a person in or complicate anything or slow things down by much -- you could either click-click-click as many "normal" grenades as desired, or click-hoooold-release for a charged grenade, or you know, even click-click-hooold-release-click-click-click ... whatever the situation calls for. I guess if a player is expecting the click-hold sequence to cause the weapon to fire repeatedly then this idea would force them to do a distinct click for each grenade ... so there's that.

wrt implementation, one thing I've done before with such a design is to essentially use the user setting for double-click time (default 0.25 sec) as a guide, then when measuring the click/release times, if the button was held for less than that interval, treat it as the default fire type (normal grenade in this case), and if it's held longer, go into the charge-up sequence and calculations. The only difference between this and plain old click-click is that the fire would be on "mouse up" rather than "mouse down", so, I guess this would be delaying things by the duration of a mouse click, whatever that is.

Anyway, in my head at least this didn't compromise much in terms of gameplay complexity. The code on the other hand certainly would have another layer added though lol ... but not too bad hopefully, and nothing that can't be cobbled together from existing UT code. Maybe i'll have a crack at it if I get time later.

lol that sucks... and same with the spiders apparently eh, and you see it with stock bio normally every so often too ... so hmm what's happening I wonder. First I guess, are the floating grenades live, and second are they really where they appear to be (i.e., are they not client tear-off residue after the server's already done something else with them) ... if they are actually there, I'm not sure why they'd be kicked off the vehicle like that, but in any case when they're attached they'd have to have their physics set to PHYS_None, which is obviously persisting inappropriately and should be set to Falling when they lose their base.

I suppose at worst you could add a dumb check for the base actor inside the Tick function and a 'Stuck' state if you have one, and if the ship has sailed then change the state and physics, or explode the thing, whatever.

Hmm well interesting, maybe to the code for awhile tonight :)

For the LOve of UT3 please post here about TTF and patch 2.0 - soory off topic - but had very little time to spread the news

I'm liking the continued updates to ONS, the low rider scorp, and its new projectile, the bio nade gun, and seems like vehicle speed has been upped since a few months ago.  nice work!

the low rider scorp was unintentional. The scorp will have the stock suspension height back with improved handling which was the intention.

What are some thoughts on a name change for this project? maybe to something like WAR Plus, Warfare Expanded (WarfareX for short) or something? The reason I am bringing this up is for consideration is that maybe people think, "oh thats too much like 2k4" when really all it is is a combination of features requested by the community. Maybe this project will be better received using a name people know, "Warfare" since many of the newcomers have no idea what ONS is anyways.

Obviously with the revealing of the contents of the titan pack, ONS will not be a consideration of Epics ever again. Maybe its time to let that term be laid to rest? I guess, thinking of it now, ONS 2.0 sounds like we are clinging to an old gametype. As much as I dislike the "WAR" that Epic is pushing I think a name like WAR Expanded sounds like we are expanding a current gametype rather than reverting to the past...

thoughts and suggestions?

Is this change we can believe in? Hehe... just messing with you.

Yes, I think a name with War or Warfare makes sense. I like "WarfareX". It sounds like a tuned-up version of Warfare which is what I think we have.

your kidding me right? you like names with an X on the end Ok lets change the name but keep the ONS 2.0 party as advertised. I'm fine with WarfareX and agree that what we have is a tuned up version of WAR.

What will that involve script wise as far as the naming convention? I know we will have to change the weapon/vehicle pickup names. Let me know exactly what you want me to do, I dont mind going through and changing names around.

ONS 2.0 is dead?  I quit.  I mean come on, destroying the ultimate game type for the sake of PS3 noobs who don't know the history of ONS because they were still sucking on their thumbs instead of twiddling them on some dual joystick game pad controller?  Ok I jest.  WarfareX is cool with me. :-)  Just as long as you still plan on including my maps in your big release. ;-)

of course your maps are still in BD ONS was killed and buried in 2k4 by Epic. I think people will be more responsive if we use a current gametype to base this project off of, even though it is heavily influenced by ONS..

I changed my mind. I want to stick with "Onslaught 2.0" as the name because that pays homage to the maps from 2K4.

"Its the maps, dummy".

The collection of 2k4-remakes produced by Sanch3z & Big Dog are the real meat of the project. Also, the updated custom maps by DaKilla, Noot, and Sos help bring the fun back.

The Onslaught 2.0 name has become somewhat familiar to people... yes there are critics but they're just searching for reasons to hate. Changing the name I think will just lose momentum.

I also have second thoughts on the name change. Why should we pay homage to "Warfare" when it failed to draw the people in?

how can i get ONS manta to work with vehicle boosts? i'm using boosts in TheHouse so mantas can ride up the walls.. but only works with stock manta :(   

I dont think it will work but I may be wrong. Maybe load ONS2 in the generic browser actor tab, that should then give you the choice to select the ONS2manta in the boost pad properties. I'm not sure if that will "break" the map though and only make it work with the ONS2 mutator?

i'll give it i try. im hoping both will work.. gonna keep my finger crossed.   i'm having other minor issues with this map so i think we should hold off on this one 

maybe pacer can help! i remember he did something to get kamakazi boards to work with vehicle boosts a while back. maybe it can be added to the mod so they work on all maps???

i'm gonna have to check containment too

it may be that Pacer wrote a script for the vehicle boosts that allow custom vehicles to work. I guess he is the best one to talk to.

no luck :(

its up to the evil genius now...

i'll fix it... just need to tweak the mod.

thanks pacer! u dA MAN!! if its not too much trouble add the hellbender and scorpion ;)

OK I updated the mod to replace entries in vehicle boost pads just like it replaces them in vehicle factories.

So Killa, you still need to add stock vehicle classes to your boost pads just like normal so the mod will know which types of vehicles you want to boost.

I don't know where the boost pads in House are but I tested with Containment. It does ONS mantas, vipers, and scorpions now but it still won't do Hellbenders... not sure if stock benders are in the boost pad list or if they're just broken always.

I also tweaked the TossZ of bio grenades... not as much as flak shells... about the same as transporters.

I also reduced the node damage scaling of bio grendaes but they're still your most effective node killers. You can still take down a node with a full clip.

thanks again

boost pads are on every wall.. except the outer walls and for some reason they dont work on diagonal walls. :(

anyway...   yeah we had problems with the stock hellbender. they're on the same pad as the tank  i dont know why they wont work. you would think if it could lift a tank it could lift a hellbender... wtf?!?

lovin the bio grenades btw!!

You guys Better finish ONS 2.0 so we can play it on the FN ladder.

FN ONS 2.0 Ladder 5v5 in the works.

Posted the ONS 2.0 and Map pack link on FraggedNation UT3 section.

You Guys Rock

FN UT3 PC ONS2 5v5 Ladder Online

http://www.fraggednation.com/forum.php?action=showPosts&topicID=8695&startPos=0

Thank you guys for all the hard work.