Jump to content
Posted 02 September 2012 - 06:52 AM
Posted 02 September 2012 - 07:52 AM
Posted 02 September 2012 - 08:33 AM
Are you saying I should make each object update on its own (either by making it runnable or using a while loop)? I guess I'm not understanding how this would work where the object would still be able to interact with everything else that is updating on a different cycle.
Acc to the current situation that goes without any doubt that you code will get more and more complex with the increase in the number of the units there will be more loops more array and so on insted of using loops for ur job why dont u give a try to a time class makin and independet method for each class or making a sinlge one and adjusting all the elements acc to that single timer results way easier then that for loops
Posted 02 September 2012 - 10:40 AM
Posted 02 September 2012 - 11:27 AM
This is what I was looking for. I've never dealt with hashtables or maps in Java so I'm gonna go ahead and look at some references on those now. I appreciate the help!
I think you need something like this. While an array might not be the best choice, you need a place where all you game objects are put in so you can do things with all of them like your move() or a general gamelogicupdate() or a render() etc.
I prefer to have a hashtable to store my game objects in. This comes with some handy features:
- you can still iterate over all your objects
- every object you create can get a unique id and you can store it in the hastable by that unique id. With an array you could use the index for that, but as the game continues, you get higher and higher ids while old objects get removed and you get holes in your array. OR you could put new objects at the places of removed objects, but then, your index-ids aren't unique anymore.
- each object having a unique id allows objects to reference each other without tricky sideeffects. For eaxmple imagine a unit A chase another unit B. You could add a reference of B in A and that way A can check B's location in the gamelogicupdate() and knows where to move. However, what if B gets destroyed? It get removed from the scene, but it keeps existing because A has a reference to it. If A only knew B's id, it can do the same as above by checking the hashtable of B and get B's position. When B gets destroyed, A will notice because the hashtable lookup will fail. Also note that references/pointers are only valid locally. When you add network play, you absolutely need some kind of unique ids.
Instead of a hashtable one could use a map. Besides that, you probably want a spatial datastructure as well to put your game objects in so you can do queries like "give me alle objects within a radius of 5m of point p.". One might be able to combine these datastructures somehow, I don't know thought. I always used those two next to each other.
Edited by Froyo, 02 September 2012 - 11:31 AM.
Posted 02 September 2012 - 12:14 PM
Posted 02 September 2012 - 08:57 PM
Posted 03 September 2012 - 06:07 AM