MVM nav_avoid

Discussion in 'Mapping Questions & Discussion' started by GreenLemon, Apr 20, 2017.

  1. GreenLemon

    GreenLemon L1: Registered

    Messages:
    30
    Positive Ratings:
    3
    everyone know about that mvm contest,
    and i read, watch, and listen to a lot of media to create mvm map,

    but the only problem i got now, is that the bots give no f*** to any of the func_nav_avoid

    i activate them manually, automatically, they are covering the nav mesh below them, i debug them, and even when they are active, bots don't care

    maybe i failled something with something else as i don't learn all yet.

    someone can help ?
     
  2. iiboharz

    aa iiboharz Meme Queen

    Messages:
    693
    Positive Ratings:
    1,012
  3. Yabayabayaba

    Yabayabayaba L5: Dapper Member

    Messages:
    240
    Positive Ratings:
    66
    also you MUST generate a new nav mesh for ANY changes to take affect. I spent several hours trying to fix a problem, before i realized none of my changes affected anything because I never updated the nav mesh
     
  4. GreenLemon

    GreenLemon L1: Registered

    Messages:
    30
    Positive Ratings:
    3
    ok, i regenerate nav, analyze it, split nave face, still dont work

    i tried this and that still not work
    this time the nav_avoid are te same size of the nav face below it ...
    nav.png
     
  5. Freyja

    aa Freyja ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    Messages:
    2,790
    Positive Ratings:
    4,530
    I would make it slightly bigger than it needs to be maybe by 8 or 16 units in every direction and sink it into the ground a bit just to make sure it covers the cells
     
  6. Yabayabayaba

    Yabayabayaba L5: Dapper Member

    Messages:
    240
    Positive Ratings:
    66
    yes, cover the entire path you want to block, all the way to its end, that way you can't airblast bots past the nav avoid, where they would ignore it. you want avoids like these if possible help3.PNG
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  7. GreenLemon

    GreenLemon L1: Registered

    Messages:
    30
    Positive Ratings:
    3
    i have no clue what i done wrong ...
    someone test it plz ??
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Apr 21, 2017
  8. Yabayabayaba

    Yabayabayaba L5: Dapper Member

    Messages:
    240
    Positive Ratings:
    66
    I can't fix your problem, but you have a few other issues. 1) robots can access player spawn 2)players spawn at hatch 3) Your first wave seems HUGE until i realized the entire wave spawns at once, no players could ever with 4) several consecutive right angles in same direction+small path clumps robots together 5) there are so many robots they would clump anyway 5) consider upping starting cash, 600 is basically nothing
     
  9. GreenLemon

    GreenLemon L1: Registered

    Messages:
    30
    Positive Ratings:
    3
    this map and popfile is only for me to test faster, i use "tf_damage_multiplier_blue 100" and "budha"
    i build this because its faster to open compile ...

    its basically a test template

    and the nav_avoid still not work
     
  10. GreenLemon

    GreenLemon L1: Registered

    Messages:
    30
    Positive Ratings:
    3
    this is realy pissing me out ... 20170421171927_1.jpg 20170421171918_2.jpg 20170421171931_1.jpg 20170421171914_1.jpg 20170421171921_1.jpg
     
  11. UKCS-Alias

    aa UKCS-Alias Mann vs Machine... or... Mapper vs Meta?

    Messages:
    1,263
    Positive Ratings:
    747
    3 and 5: There is a limit where only 22 bots can spawn at once. This forces certain wavespawns in a delay.
    6: 600 start cash is fine. Its that the bigrock and 2cities missions made people lazy into thinking about upgrading only the essential. Lower start cash also makes missions harder and more interesting (you cant survive any hit so the bots that spawn matter more). Upping the cash (or reducing it) is at most a last resort of tweaking. When designing a mission, low starting cash is better. And anything between 400 and 800 is fine depending on the map lenght (longer maps often want some extra cash like 600 to allow you to take 2 damage reducing upgrades). Anything above 800 is starting to reach the 2 cities state where players start out too strong. Higher cash also tends to aim to making a wave 'spammy', they can survive nearly everything at the end, and most wont have any clue on how to counter it except spamming.

    But i found the problem in the map:
    func_nav_avoid works by checking the tags on bots. When not supplying any tag they will never even look at the avoid. Empty does not mean a wildcard. To make the bomber listen you need to put in the 'bomb_carrier' tag in the avoid entity. For common bots the 'common' tag is required. If you click on the entity it gives some hints on which tags are accepted by default. And you can even make up your own tags which can be provided in the popfile themselve.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  12. GreenLemon

    GreenLemon L1: Registered

    Messages:
    30
    Positive Ratings:
    3
    first thaks you so much !!! i'll give you sandwich if i can

    and i saied earlier that this map is only for fast testing an is not serious at all
    when testing this i use "buha" "tf_damage_multiplier_blue 100" "addcond 66" and other cheat

    and when something work i use this map as a template
     
  13. LeSwordfish

    aa LeSwordfish semi-trained quasi-professional

    Messages:
    4,087
    Positive Ratings:
    5,936
    What tags should I use if I want to make all bots avoid it? Would "common" do?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. GreenLemon

    GreenLemon L1: Registered

    Messages:
    30
    Positive Ratings:
    3
    in most of valve map they used "common bomb_carrier" maybe common is all bot that don't carry , and bom_carrier is a bot that carry

    that way i think this tags target all bot
     
  15. UKCS-Alias

    aa UKCS-Alias Mann vs Machine... or... Mapper vs Meta?

    Messages:
    1,263
    Positive Ratings:
    747
    common combined with bomb_carrier ensures no bots will go there. But do keep in mind that rejecting common bots can in some cases allow for an exploit when a player can stand in a region a bot never will try to move to. (i would keep it to deathpits only).

    I have never tested the common tag seperately in a way that i know a bomber will be able to take that path. But it sounds very logical for valve to also deny a bomber there since otherwise a dropped bomb would become unreachable. Doing both is simply the safest way.