Safezone compatible specifications

Hi.

I do scripting since some months and now I want to build safe-zone compatible weapons. Safe-zone means, that the weapons don't harm the avatar at all, but interact with an attachment, showing a health meter and blocking (capturing) your Av when it reaches 0%. So you can roleplay safe at non-health-enabled sims.

I assume, the weapon or projectile (such as an arrow or so) communicate with the health-meter on a channel, telling them a collision with the avatar, so that it can count a hit.
There are many weapons using safe-zone compatible technologies already, thus I assume, there have to be open specifications, although I could not find some. It doesn't matter, if it is an example script or just an exact explaination what parameters (channels, ranges and so on) they use.

Thank you for any hints.
Aaron

I've seen a lot of threads on this subject, the gist being it's a closed system and nobody is willing to discuss how it works, for fear of someone making an 'uber' weapon that would do one shot kills or the like. It's rather sad IMHO. However i do recall there is somone who sells premade scripts to put in your weapons, seach for ACME SafeZone I believe.

I have looked at Aura, Laura, Acme, and so many others I can't even remember them all now.

Finally, I decided that a closed source system that was so inflexible (I couldn't create the type of weapon that I wanted) simply wasn't worth supporting.

Good luck to you, and if you find the information you seek, please post it back here and do the next guy on this quest a favor

Actually...I have a notecard I picked up like a year ago on the SafeZone protocols...there are also plenty of 'free' SafeZone scripts...just drop into a weapon and go.

I am not a fan of SafeZone at all honestly...it is very inflexible and very basic.

The following is a copy/paste from a notecard I picked up regarding SafeZone. It is not guaranteed to work...but it very easily could:


Secret to safezone:

an object must say the following:
{
llSay(20, "sword,attacker name,attacked name";
}
e.g.

llSay(20, "sword,John Doe,Jane Doe"; would have an object owned by John doe, attack Jane doe.



---The notecard I acquired was written by James Argonaut, who claims it was a friend of his (Kato) that created the SafeZone system.

Yes the basis of most "Safezone" melee systems rely on the plain text chat on channel 20.

And it generally means that those systems are about as usefull as a wet noodle at a gun fight.

Standard safezone basically relies on 5 attacks:

sword
punch
kick
double punch
a flip attack

NOTE: those names aren't exact for the protocol, just make a sniffer that listens on channel 20 and you can find the commands.

The problem with this being such an open system is that it has been expanded by some to include more attacks and features then the base "Safezone" yet still retains "compatability" which means it is easy to cheat the system using scripts that send out false hit information, or result in a hit on every swing.

Thank you for the hint about channel 20. I already made a sniffer as a hud-attachment but I didn't know the correct channel and I didnt want to scann 4 million possible... I will try with setting it to chan 20.

As for the "superweapon": I think there is no fear. This is a roleplay system and such a weapon would soon be forbidden in the RP. You can easily reset each combatmeter with a single command, if you feel, that someone is cheating (i.e. with an arrow what kills instantly). That is also what I like about the SafeZone-System at all: You as a "victim" have to agree to be the victim. It is not real, it is roleplay. You throw the dice or you leave the table... The rules of the sim tell you, when you have to agree, and a one-shot-kill weapon would not be within the rules of any sim I know of. Yes, it is a little like a blank cartridge, however in a RP you are a actor like in a movie. You join the plot and follow it or you don't.
So, I don't see why it should be a closed system just for the security. The only reason I can see is, that someone don't want you to build a weapon in competition to the one this guy sells. So he or she won't tell about the specs. But that is just cheap commercial in my opinion - don't sell, because you got the best looking and useable weapon but because you know specs someone else doesn't.

I think, the SafeZone idea is nice for roleplay, as you can't grief with it, you just can reset and ignore the attacker when he or she doesn't follow the rules of the RP.
What it needs is rather a standard spec finally, so that you can go with one meter with every weapon into every compatible sim. Nowadays you have sims using different meters with different specs and you need to change the meter as soon as you TP...

Greets
Aaron

Aaron...I'd suggest going around to all of those sims and looking at the different sorts of combat meters that are available...there are a lot of very cool ones that are a lot more versatile than SafeZone.

As far as 'SafeZone security'...it's a laugh really. SafeZone is probably the most insecure system of the bunch

Most of the Roleplay sims are moving away from Safezone simpley because of the fact that it is so insecure and there are tons of jacked up weapons.

Yes I have written a combat system, yes it is closed, no I do not sell it... it was made specifically to be used on for one group of people.

And yes you can grief with the safezone combat system. How would you like a scripted object that kills everyone in a sim that comes within range of it, regardless of if they leave that range? Yes you can reset your health meter, but that goes against the roleplay rules of the sim usually.

And alot of the "cheats" aren't as visible as that. Maybe a larger attack area, maybe a sword that swings just a bit faster... a health meter that regenerates, or regenerates faster then the standard, or takes less damage.

My point was just, that you have to agree to the roleplay. You don't need to attach/reattach a toy when misused, you don't need to reset scripts in a complicated way, just because someone has "stolen" a "key" to your bonds or such.
And if you reset the meter because someone cheats a weapon, no rules of any sim can have something against. But rules can simply forbit such weapons, and if you use them, you break the rules first and your victim is free to reset the meter. And a bomb what kills all characters on a sim instandly would be such a weapon.

There was already a pedition in the Gor-world but it was more because of weapons, which just don't look real - like almost all bows whose have a unreal firerate (firing and reload within one second).

Yes, there are disadvantages in this system, but the main idea behind it is still good. Maybe there will be the day, when the sims decide for one standard and someone will find a way to make the system less insecure for cheats.
But all have to deal with SL, as no one in SL can really force you to do something, with safezone or not. It's just a question how much afford it needs to fight griefings.

I don't know about other systems yet but would like to know about them also...

However, the listener on channel 20 works and it seems to be still the way of communication as it was mentioned here. What I don't see yet still, is how a weapon can make more or less damage as the message contains only the type (sword in most cases, even with arrows) and the names. When your weapons says such a message in the range, the meter counts down but I don't know yet, how much damage will be done on each single hit.

Greets
Aaron

PS: Is it true, as it seems, that the meter as a llDetectedOwner(0) or such in the collision_start event so that your own arrow won't hit you, when you accidentally run into it?

With this, you are correct. SafeZone is habitually insecure by all design constraints, but not by much more insecure than a mega-prim for attacking other people with a collision-only based combat system. The insecurities are more based on how it's utilized and /allowed/ within the combat system itself, just as much as how the weapon makers make their weapons.

With this said. That is one of many reasons I made the Alternative to SafeZone combat called BattleZone. Much more 'secure' by helping to eliminate 'uber' weapons, by initially, limiting the speed of which they are allowed to strike. BCS (BattleZone Combat System) 2.0 is taking the step further by hijacking the old SafeZone Protocol for melee weapons and re-piping it through a more secured, and encrypted communication channel, while for projectiles and thrown weapons, requiring physical collision to accept the SafeZone-sent attack commands.

Just wanted to fill some more people in on this. Also for flexability, BattleZone has a lot more attack types, such as axes, blunt weapons, great weapons, dagger, arrows, various trap types, etc. Right now standing at 16 attack types, and going on 20-24 for BCS 2.0 coming, to help offer more flexability of weapon designs, beyond just base sensor usage.

Mykael Goodman

So, Mykael, what you're telling me is that you're blatantly advertising your own combat system in the Scripting Tips forum?

I've got my own system as well (alive and well in a sim called Karamoon...oh...and MCS2.0 in Midian City)...but didn't bother to advertise it, as this forum is for helping each other with scripting tips, not advertising systems.

That said, I am happy that people are coming up with alternate systems.

It took me 5 minutes to crack SafeZone.

It took me 15 minutes to create a gun for DCS (version 2.03) that would do 100% damage every shot. Since DCS/CCS/RCS all work in the same manner, it could be inferred that this gun would work for CCS and RCS as well. (And no, I don't sell it...I just wanted to see how easy it was to crack...and...wow...easy)

The evolution of SecondLife combat will be interesting...and the market is currently flooding with systems from every Tom, Dick, and Jane in the universe. It's a fun process to see.

Which brings me about to a design philsophy question that I ran into when designing my own combat system for vehicles that would also work with avatar combat:


Do I allow for other people to design weapons that work with my system, and if so, how do I prevent uber weapons from being created? I choose yes, and came up with what I think is an elegant solution. I control the ammo scripts (given out for free) and the hitpoint device, you create the gun/vehicle.

I have 100% secure lockdown on the hitpoint device. what is "insecure" is the weapons. And this is where the constraints come in for the users.

When a munition strikes it's target (or an object) it does one of two things: hits, or explodes.

in the case of a hit the object broadcasts it's name, velocity, and mass. using a logarithmic function, damage assessment is based on munition type (bullet vs, flechettes, vs, arrows), and just how fast/massive it is, with the logarithimic function being applied to the mass/velocity calculation. theoretically even a massive 10mx10mx10m cube labelled "bullet" traveling at 1,000m/s will only have an increase of 5% damage as opposed to a small .1x.1x.1m traveling at 40m/s will have an increase of 1% damage. I built in checks for very slow moving munitions, and there is a negative impact at around 10m/s so that on an exponential decreasing scale anything moving slower than that will lose damage, up to -100% damage at speeds of 5m/s or less. I suppose I could have just had it broadcast it's location, but I did want some variety in flavor of damage for people, hence the mass/velocity.

If an object explodes it rezzes an explosion prim and the prim broadcasts out it's center. if the damage meter determines it's in the radius of the explosion, which is based on the name of the explosion, it will subtract damage for the appropriate distance away. once again since I'm basing the damage taken away on the name of the explosion, the limit becomes what people can call their explosion prims that are rezzed ("mortar explode", "rocket explode" etc.)

what does this mean to the end-user? create a gun. any gun, any firing mechanism, you can even rez multiple bullets at once like a shot-gun if you wanted to. create a bullet, any shape/size, and drop in a script that I give out for free within the bullet. name your bullet with the appropriate munition type (bullet, arrow, flechette) and fire away. want exploding bullets? that's allowed drop in an explosion prim of about .5m size and any texture you want with my "exploding bullet" script and name it "bullet explosion", and then put my "explosive bullet" script in your munitions. But since I control the muntions scripts, it will be impossible for explosive bullets rezzing rocket explosions to have their damage calculated, and there are even further checks within the damage meter to prevent explosion spam from the person who decides to make a machine gun that fires rockets.

If my system ever becomes more popular than the small beta testing group that's using it for weekly events, I may market out the munitions scripts to established weapons creators who have shown a history of obeying set rules for combat sims in their creations.

I'd be willing to bet my next month's land rent that my system is incompatable with any other system currently designed due to channel usage and the fairly unique way damage is calculated and controlled.

As was mentioned above me other proprietary systems such as MCS (just joined that sim last night BTW, great group, you'll probably from me in-game once I get RP established about working on some additional flavor for the system, RP and/or combat wise) are locked down fairly tightly as far as who has access to the tools to create weapons for these systems in the name of balance and game-play. While creating a weapon to be sold that works with every combat system would be nice, as my own combat system shows, some of the methods for these will vary vastly from others.

ALso, I've had an idea for a bulletless system floating around for a while, where there is no rezzing, just broadcasting of origin points and velocity vectors. anyone within a certain range (determined by gun type) will have their damage meter calculate if they were in the line of fire. I think MCS uses this system, as the area for MCS systems is no-build and thus munitions cannot be rezzed.

Advertising? Not really. SafeZone has been undeveloped for a long time now. The original developers don't even work on it anymore. Since BattleZone is based on the methods of SafeZone, but continued beyond the original development, I offered the tip to help let it be known, SafeZone is not the only 'SafeZone' oriented system people had all been talking about.

Simple really.

Mykael Goodman

An interesting method Senuka. I'm wondering how you handle melee-type weapons in a velocity-based system like yours? I would assume you could go with the bullet-melee, but getting a high velocity while retaining a tight 'range' could be problematic...

The no-bullet method you mention is actually quite interesting as well. The biggest problems in a bullet-less system would be determining targets and whether or not you actually 'hit' with your weapon. I think most people appreciate the skill involved in 'dodging' blows/bullets and having a system without a needed prim-collision or similar event would most likely negate that type of skill development.

As a matter of clarification...Midian City actually does use rezzed bullets...and persons who are a member of the Midian City group are able to rezz things in the sim (it's just persons who are not members of the group that cannot). This situation actually works out perfect for the sim-owner, as she wanted to restrict combat to group members anyway.

I just brought a DCS gun oof the shelf and found amazingingly enough as a noob I was knocking down seasoned players with 3 or 4 shots, till I actually said /DCSmodeon

melee was a unique problem when it involved avatars. for vehicle/vehicle and vehicle/avatar melee (read: demolition derby style playing/mowing down pedestrians) it's a simple case of mass and velocity again, but it's more open since the limits are within the physics engine itself. Very basic, when a vehicle hits something, it shouts out it's velocity, mass, and the key of what it hit. Using a logarithmic scale again, the victim's hud first determines if what it heard is a key for itself (meaning vehicle key or avatar key), and then calculates the appropriate damage to subtract. I have a collision/health script (no-mod) that gets dropped in any vehicle to make it compatable with my system.

for avatar/avatar I have a "temporary" system that's more or less a much more secure form of safe-zone melee, where the melee weapon whispers it's location and weapon type and any targets that hear the whisper will calculate if it's within range, with various ranges/damage depending on weapon type (daggers have a shorter range, but tend to do more damage than great swords, which have a larger range)

[edit]
I have a half-finished chunk of code for determining if the avatar swinging the weapon is actually facing the target (or within a 120 degree arc of facing the target, based on the rotation of the attacker, and calculated by the victim's health display), which should allow for some interesting fighting since it's no longer a case of "I need to be within 3m of my target and I'll always hit them" to one where you need to also be facing the target more or less so that you can now truely dodge melee while attacking at the same time.
[/edit]



It's actually a very simple 3 variable linear equation to solve. when a health script hears a bullet has been fired it plugs in that bullet's origin and vector and then checks to see if the line passes within the bounding box of what it's in. I currently have this implemented in an incomplete mechwarrior combat system for the PPC and gauss weapons allowing for instant shot-to-closure time.

dodging bullets would be possible, as you'd then have to stick a timestamp on the origin/vector broadcast, and from there solve a 3 point differential equation to figure out if the person who might get hit's velocity vector is moving fast enough and in the right direction to avoid getting hit by the bullet. Some nasty math, but it's doable.




ah, I was not aware of that. I have not actually participated in combat there yet, but the no-build flag is visible even when flagged as a member of the group. in fact, my HUD still registers the sim as no-build via script when flagged as a group. my be interesting to figure out if you're allowed to build somewhere with group permissions via script... *mind wanders*

While the scripting of SL combat systems may be diverting, really, at a *system* level it's all pretty pointless. A "fair" weapon can be readily defeated by an opponent's use of client-side lag inducers (attachments with transparent flexis, particles, llTargetOmega(), and animated textures) unless the combatant's viewer renders nearly nothing. But that's all in the happy case of one-on-one sparring; in actual combat there are usually enough avatars around to load Havoc such that victory is just "luck of the lag" anyway.

So while SafeZone is a pretty frail lily, and its various gildings may be interesting to observe, the actual results are of doubtful significance.

Simple Damage is about as sophisticated as makes any difference to actual "play" in a populated sim, aside from the RP inconvenience of casualties inexplicably vanishing from the field of battle.

Well, one thing to note in all these velocity-based combat systems. Take a seat. Have someone shoot you. Will you be hurt? Not with velocity-only based combat systems. When you sit on something, you become linked TO the object, not the object becomes linked to you. Therefore, sensors are the only way to go about that situation.

That's why combining the best of both worlds makes a huge difference. Secure protocol chat plus a minor fraction of collision for projectile handling mostly, and you got what we call a hybrid glory that just plain works.

[Edit]
On the reverse side.. While you're sitting, you can attack someone standing but they can't hurt you.

Mykael

Yes, that is a downside to having a collision based combat system. But since the over-all architecture for the system I created was for a group to have both avatar and vehicle combat be compatable and not have to create entirely new weapons from scratch (90% of the weapons in SL that avatars can weild will work with the vehicles since it's based on collisions), but only switch out the ammo that's being fired (very easy to do with any gun), it made a huge plethera of weapons already compatable and or were able to be made compatable with abotu a minute of creating and changing object inventories.

[edit]
as an aside, I've been asked on several occasions if I was able to "crack" a certain combat system, and there are some ethical questions to be had with just how much should you have to go through to make a weapon compatable with a particular system. DCS is easy to crack since it's collision base for projectiles and uses the safe zone's channel 20 chat for melee.Other systems require a much more intensive scanning of all possible comms channels and to do so in an effective manner requires running a series of scripts that is as detrimental to a sim as the infamous land scanners. unless of course you're lucky enough to own your own sim, or are friends with a sim owner who will let you gobble up close to 90% of the sim's resources for about a day.


On the other hand some of the more "secure" systems like MCS (don't know if it exists for this system, just the first one that came to mind) usually have a developer's kit available that you can buy which will let you know the information that needs to be broadcast to make your weapons compatable for the system. I know the system used for most of the starwars RPers sells for $800L, and I'm sure others are in a similar price range.

MCS has a developer kit, but it is not widely available.

'Cracking' a system is largely an academic exercise, as doing so against a proprietary system and then attempting to sell items compatible with it would be as illegal as creating copies of your CDs and selling them out of the back of your van. People who do not buy the rights to the intellectual property are, in effect, breaking the law

Of course, saying that and enforcing it (or even wanting to bother enforcing it) are two completely different things. It is, however, an interesting lead into a discussion on the complete lack of business ethics involved in SL and how it reflects what people would try to do in RL if there weren't laws they feared.

BACK ON TOPIC THOUGH...

...if you want a system that is immediately compatible with most other systems, velocity is definitely the way to go. I don't so much mind that a person sitting on something isn't hittable--while it does provide the opportunity for some people to 'game' the system by constantly flying around while sitting on prims...it also protects people from 'griefers' who would like to run around killing everyone they see.

A role-play environment is just that--a role-play environment. It relies heavily on the attitudes and actions of the players no matter the system. It is impossible to stop griefing, impossible to stop 'cheating', etc. One can only create a stable and relatively secure platform to assist in the role-play. SL is not a MMORPG...if it was, I'd demand the 7,000,000 generally needed to build a MMORPG system and make one that rivals WoW (or, if I wanted a true standard of quality, one that rivals ShadowBane). The really NICE thing about SL is it practically forces persons away from 'gaming' and into role-playing by virtue of the environment AND allows 'gaming' to an extent that is not available in RP chatrooms.

Wait...I said I was gonna get back on topic, didn't I?

Anyway...I would much prefer to avoid the 'sensor' of some combat systems than guarantee that I can hit someone sitting down. It's quite likely that someone sitting down is 1--in a vehicle, on a horse (and that vehicle/horse may very well be scripted to have a health rating that unsits the avatar after expended) or 2--not wanting to be involved in combat. It is my feeling that combat should be voluntary in an RP setting and...if I provide a little safety for that while reducing the lagginess of a script...I'm happy.