#160932 - 08 October, 2007 02:16 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: Tyco]
|
Merc
Posts: 81
Loc: Hannover, N-Germany
|
Oh yeah, and totaly remove all the useless items from BRay, like the unfirms and barrets and crap. You dind't found out all McGuyver tasks, if you feel that stuff useless ;-) A silver plate, a platinum watch and cigars have their value as items to sell, but a shovel?! In my early ages, I used such a shovel to hit some school mate, who was not that big friend of mine (he had knuckle dusters). Did you really tried this in your game? And please, think about the 1.13 based MODs. A lot of items are not planned for using in arulco scenario but should be presented to make them public to modders... To summerize: externelize new weapon features and keep the attachment selection simplified. Not everyone are gun experts here, and if you are then you can use the externelized options to reflect your discerning tatses. Yeah, this is right. I suggested a while back to link this to the tons-of-guns option (startup screen), so one could select between - "Vanilla-JA2.1.12 simple Catalogue"
- "Vanilla-JA2.1.12 complex Catalogue"
- "JA2.1.13 maximum Catalogue"
in the first choice, there would be only one 4x Scope which fits onto almost all, but only on original JA2.1.12 weapons. But this needs some code changes and therefore it is off-topic here  with best regards, Sergeant_Kolja
Edited by Sergeant_Kolja (08 October, 2007 02:18 AM)
_________________________
new JA2 1.13 coder, listening  music
|
 - OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#161552 - 14 October, 2007 04:42 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: wolf00]
|
Major
Posts: 2404
|
Forget it.
Dunno if it's of use / good.
There was a post about faster-repairs without the experience-increase.
There's been a request for fast-degradation (?rusting) of unused weapons (on the ground).
I remember something about faster degradation during rain.
Mashing it all up:
What if a map-tile could be made to auto-repair things / or at least conserve-them at 100%.
Like a dedicated weapons-locker, I'd be willing to deal with rust then.
Edit: I'd hate to have to manually -in sector- have to put items in this weapon-locker.
(forget it)
Edited by DNA from the Lowlands (14 October, 2007 04:43 AM)
Edit Reason: silly really
_________________________
Look behind you, a threeheaded monkey !!!
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#161556 - 14 October, 2007 05:13 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: DNA from the Lowlands]
|
General
Posts: 6343
Loc: Australia :D
______
Slideways through life
Original 1.13 SCI Creator *Updated*
|
Adding realism at the cost of gameplay there I think! Don't worry mate it probably sounded good at the time.
_________________________
"The bank hath benefit of interest on all moneys which it creates out of nothing." Sir William Paterson - Founder of the Bank of England Replacement UI Project Beta
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#161588 - 14 October, 2007 03:44 PM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: Sergeant_Kolja]
|
Captain
Posts: 1033
|
allright, any response from any coder/developer?
anyone? ANYONE?
RoWA21, Overhaul, Kaiden, Starwalker, SpaceViking, ChrisL, anyone?
I am not a coder, and internally I did not hear anything about this topic...  You didn't? I am curious about that! IIRC, we discussed it in the "1.13 direction" email thread, end of July. let me search my mails... yes, on 24th of July, 18:00 CEST I wrote: ...
No doubt, we release to often and to worse tested code. I my ideas, we should rethink the way we release "Releases" to the public. How about having only 2 times the year for "Major Releases", say a "Summer Release" and a "Xmas Release"?
This Releases should be SVN-tagged with such a name ("Xmas2007") and Modder shall be directed to only use that tagged versions. Bugfixing should concentrate to this versions, too.
...
Ooopps! Sorry!!! This mail was only directed to the C-Coders. Sorry for bothering you, Starwalker! You really didn't hear anything about it. -> To the community: If we C-Coders would do the job as good as Starwalker & Marlboro do (in graphics and XML), it would shurely be better in your eyes. But the other aspect is, Starwalker and Marlboro now have a very stable interface for their work. So, they have only to be careful (it's a matter of fact, the doing their job very carefully!). The C-Coders have a much more diffucult situation here: often a simple change in the code opens up a sleeping bug from original SirTech code. There are a lot of stack overruns, wild pointers, wrong but coincidently harmless values in variables and constants and such crap. This is doing sometimes a CTD, but most times it only hurts memory which is not used until you leave the game. Inserting / changing code sometimes shifts the position in RAM, where the bad access occurs - voila, a "new" bug is reborn. I am not the only one, who is involved in pure bughunting. But please, let me more tell about my current part in the 1.13 Team:In late spring '07, I completely stopped the development of a flexible common syslogd logging module for JA2, as well as for my "JA2 Smokeless Mod" (a melee weapon mod). I started to port the whole C-Code to another compiler which has the automatic bug-hunting tool CodeGuard. This task is still far beyound completion and it eats up all my spare time. The SirTech Code was made for MicroSoft Visual C++ 6 and MicroSoft allows things that are forbidden in Borland (and vvs.). Thus, something must be reworked to run under both compilers. My intention was to only improve code quality. At the end of this process I (hope I will) be able to find a lot of stack corrumption, wild pointers and so on. But it will be based on an 9xx release of the code. And CodeGuard is not able to find bugs when compiling the code, but when running it. So I have to append in intensive testing phase, playing the whole game with almost all sectors, dialoges, weapons, item combos and so on. Another approach is the use of a better lexical scanner. Such a tool will find bugs before the compilation process. I use pc-lint sometimes, but lint gives tons of warnings. The main problems of my CodeGuard approach are: - it eats up a lot of time each weekend
- it will last very long until any result
- I have to touch each single .CPP and .H file, with no support from further C-Coders
- results will not be available before completing the job by 100%
- I will find a lot of hidden errors which didn't any harm yet, so I have to bother the other with fixing things that are completely unknown until now
- I will find errors in a 9xx release, so I have to generate a lot of patches which must interworked into the recent code
- Somebody should to merge all my Borland adaptions to the then actual 18xx release, so we can use CodeGuard in the future again
The main problems of my PC-Lint approach are: - It gives an immediate result, but is a Sisyphus like job to find only the really harmful ones out.
- PC-Lint warns about every dangerous style, potential (but possibly not actual) errorneous code and so on. The SirTech code is (in means of PC-Lint) full of such crap.
- Making such a big project being "lint clean" is a too big job for a single programmer. In fact, it is wrong to try so. Lint shall be used from the beginning on. Only then it can develop its real power.
So you can see, all we need is: man power. Every programmer, who can use a Borland Developer Studio 2006 and has a little bit of experience in adopting Win32-MSC programs to Win32-BorlandC programs, can support us. Finally, Starwalker's slogan fits perfect... with best regards, Sergeant_Kolja I'm amazed that the code had so much sloppy stuff in it. I now feel better for having been the second stupidest person years ago in my high school coding class.   Incidentally, I like the "useless items", such as the beret, the Marine Corps dress uniform, and so on. I have fun playing dress up with my support crew who do not see combat.
_________________________
“nobody shoots anybody in the face unless you’re a hit man or a video gamer.” - Jack Thompson, as quoted on Wikipedia
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#161884 - 18 October, 2007 04:11 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: T_ Spectre]
|
Major
Posts: 2404
|
Merc likes-dislikes for I.M.P.s ?
6 IMPs is a bargain but they lack 'commitment'.
I'm thinking that if my IMPs (dis)like AIM/Merc/Local personnel, it might make my choice of squads easier.
I mean, I like Dr.Q (and Len and Vicky) but these last two, I can't afford (unless I change the start-cash).
If I could have an IMP like Dr.Q, the doctor might get a job offer.
_________________________
Look behind you, a threeheaded monkey !!!
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#161886 - 18 October, 2007 04:25 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: wolf00]
|
General
Posts: 5581
Loc: Hannover, Germany
|
new type of armor-face items: esg-eye safety googles or balistic face shield ?
New items are probably not really needed for a 'stable milestone release', this should better be in the relevant section, rather than here.
_________________________
Do not ask what the game can do for you, ask what you can do for the game
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
Badges: 
|
|
|
|
|
|
#163333 - 01 November, 2007 08:59 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: wolf00]
|
Major
Posts: 2404
|
Yesterday, I pro-edited (lol as if I'm a pro haha), I proedit.exe-ed prof.dat and renamed it to Prof_difficulty_guns.dat, it worked. Thank youz for making it so easy.
Since then two ideas related to this tread came up.
The first one, I really like, consider it a request.
When I hire an AIM-merc.
I specify length of contract and equipment.
I'd love a third option for equipment, besides yes/no.
One that takes me to a purchase equipment-screen.
(it would render the equipment-section of prof.dat/proedit obsolete, (sorry)
but I think it would still need some logfile in the data/temp directory,
(like the equipment-section of prof.dat, thanks)
Can it be done ?
---
The other idea was to swap items, like the silverplatter/redbaret for a gun like Abakan.
But it would require several other xml-edits by me, the Abakan-attachments.
I'm reading now that it resembles the codeguard/pc-lint, I'll read up on those and then I might be back.
I was requesting for on a xml-editor that would keep track of interdepandencies.
I'm thinking that it should be one, that <copies what I edit> like undo.
And that <reads the whole data-1.13> and pops-up all the similar(even irrelevant)-characters from all other xmls.
But now I think that, that is what you're using.
(perhaps the term should be hierarchy, normal programs/webpages have this more clearly defined than Jagged.
Items(all), Weapons(lol, most) Armour(many) and then some attachment-files.
LoL, I'm not sure what I'm asking for anymore...
Yesterday I daydreamed of an editor, that would auto-show me the other xml-entries tied the one I wanted to change.
Today that seems oversimplified.
_________________________
Look behind you, a threeheaded monkey !!!
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#163340 - 01 November, 2007 10:02 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: DNA from the Lowlands]
|
General
Posts: 5581
Loc: Hannover, Germany
|
When I hire an AIM-merc.
I specify length of contract and equipment.
I'd love a third option for equipment, besides yes/no.
Well, if you do not like what the AIM mercs come with, wait for the New Inventory. We use a XML-file with it to define starting equipment for all characters in the game (and we already gave them other guns than they normally have), and you can edit that to get your favorite merc to come with what you want him/her to pack. Needs to be done before you start a new game, though, it does not work in-game and it does not work after you started a game already. But you can use all items, not just those below item-number 350, so there's no item-swapping needed anymore. ChrisL even wanted to make this XML available with the old inventory as well, but I do not know at the moment if it works that way.
_________________________
Do not ask what the game can do for you, ask what you can do for the game
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
Badges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#163382 - 01 November, 2007 06:22 PM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: Mauser]
|
Sargeant
Posts: 116
|
Some things I can think of off the top of my head:
1. I'll throw my hat in the ring here and say that YES, the cammo skill should be removed entirely because the 1.13 system more or less broke it. Reading this board this DOES seem to be the majority opinion of the 1.13 users. I don't know if stealth can go expert or not. If not, the "fight" will then be over what secondary skill to give Shadow. Maybe run a poll or something.
I would be careful about giving him a default Gillie Suit though. I've noticed some mercs consider it to be a crap piece of equipment. I gave one to Lynx once and he bitched and moaned constantly (something about a cardboard shield and a blowgun being better). If his equipment tolerance is low, you'd be right back in the same boat. He should have all three cammo kits to start with though so as to remain somewhat consistent with the character description.
2. Fix the difficulty in Expert. There's WAY too much of a divide between it and Experienced. You're supposed to have a 25% elite conversion, but it reality, it's MUCH higher. It's like Insane but without the unlimited troop pool. If people like the current Expert, they can go in the .ini and add more elites.
3. Effective immediately, put a moratorium on new firearms. There's already enough to make any arm-chair general to scream in delight regardless of their nationality, and it's going to sap time away from fixing other things and adding other features down the road. Plus, some additional research needs to be done as to what firearms can and should take what attachments.
4. While this may be extremely controversial, I'm wondering if AET ammo should be a Sci-Fi item. I personally wouldn't complain too much if it remained, but given the properties in the game it seems to be a VERY rare real-world item (the term AET usually applies to glassier ammo anyways).
Other than that, fix all the CTD stuff using Beta 17 as a starting point. 1.0 should be as stable as possible. New features can be added with 1.1 and so on.
- John
Edited by Kensuke (01 November, 2007 06:43 PM)
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#163390 - 01 November, 2007 10:26 PM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: Kensuke]
|
General
Posts: 6343
Loc: Australia :D
______
Slideways through life
Original 1.13 SCI Creator *Updated*
|
The final part of your request will be beta 23.
As to the AET ammo it is overly powerful as the AI doesn't get hold of it very much. BUT it is also a low quantity item. So I think it balances except for drop all and long games where you can stockpile AET.
With the firearms I think that very few should be added now as there are too many already. Also they need a little more balancing work with the amount they drop. Things like the G11 should be one off's. They should not be useable by the enemy army or elites or purchaseable from BR's.
Also more moddability to guns. The SCAR's started the trend and I believe its a good one. Upgrade kits for MP5's to change stocks and barrels as an example. Theres nothing more fun than prepping for a NO into a SAM and having to tailor equipment to the environment.
_________________________
"The bank hath benefit of interest on all moneys which it creates out of nothing." Sir William Paterson - Founder of the Bank of England Replacement UI Project Beta
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#163453 - 02 November, 2007 05:08 PM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: coolberg]
|
Lieutenant
Posts: 522
Loc: Poland
|
4. While this may be extremely controversial, I'm wondering if AET ammo should be a Sci-Fi item. I personally wouldn't complain too much if it remained, but given the properties in the game it seems to be a VERY rare real-world item (the term AET usually applies to glassier ammo anyways). Just up the price of AET ammo to say, 1-5K per clip? If it's so rare, it should be bloody expensive. I always change that in xmls, and add a HUGE penalty to gun reliability too - pistols degrade so fast, that they become useless after just 2-3 clips fired. As for balancing guns - don't forget the prices. Gun prices are pretty clueless right now, AN94 is CHEAPER than any crappy AK clone (!), and high-end guns (game-wisely) should cost like 10x the price they cost now.
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#163471 - 03 November, 2007 02:40 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: Biernath_J]
|
Sargeant
Posts: 116
|
Just up the price of AET ammo to say, 1-5K per clip? If it's so rare, it should be bloody expensive. I always change that in xmls, and add a HUGE penalty to gun reliability too - pistols degrade so fast, that they become useless after just 2-3 clips fired.
That's workable. But I dunno. I just think some weapons like the G11 and some ammo types like AET should be ubber-rare. Bobby Rays's will get a shipment every once and awhile, but not often. For those that like current system they can switch to Sci-Fi mode (with or without the bugs). With my night ops guys, using AET ammo in silenced fully upgraded 9mm subguns (I prefer the silenced FAMAE) makes the game extremely easy. Even against elites. It's almost cheating. I'm using straight ball ammo now in order to spice things up. I have been wondering about a "Hague Convention" option that would turn off AET, JHP, and Mustard Gas (everything else including CS Gas, Smoke, stun grenades, and AP ammo are fine). Would make the game potentially more interesting as force people to rethink their strategies and load outs.
As for balancing guns - don't forget the prices. Gun prices are pretty clueless right now, AN94 is CHEAPER than any crappy AK clone (!), and high-end guns (game-wisely) should cost like 10x the price they cost now.
I would make gun prices proportional to their coolness factor. The cooler the gun the later it shows up and the more expensive it is. That way, you'd have to decide whether you want to hire more mercs with lesser equipment, or less mercs with better equipment. Or, work for more money so you can get both. I think this is what the 1.13 coders were going for, but it needs some more work. Another reason why adding MORE guns would be a bad idea at this juncture. - John
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#163524 - 03 November, 2007 12:31 PM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: Starwalker]
|
Sargeant
Posts: 116
|
Price in game is derived from gun data, so more expensive should mean better. Of course this depends on what data the price is derived from (I have not fully analyzed Mugsy's work here). It is, and it isn't. Like Biernath_J said, there's some issues. Like the fact that the AN-94 is a much better rifle in-game and real world, but is cheaper than a straight AK-clone. It's also newer. So by all rights, it should either be more expensive or the AKs should be cheaper (Most older Kalashnikov rifles can be had for a song nowadays). Which kinda brings up the point how "coolness" might need to be rethought. It wouldn't hurt to lower the coolness factor on some weapons like the plane-jane AK-47.
BTW, the 5.7x28mm and 4.6x30mm AET rounds /do/ conform to the Landwarfare Charter of The Hague, they were developed that way.
There's no 5.7x28mm AET ammo on the market that I'm aware of. The military spec 5.7x28mm rounds are FMJ, although it is said to have some excellent AP characteristics while sacrificing performance against soft tissue. In-game, they should actually be classed as AP, similar to most of the standard (red) assault rifle ammunition in the game (5.56, 7.62, etc). FN does make a JHP round, but for the civilian market. - John
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#163561 - 04 November, 2007 01:46 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: Kensuke]
|
General
Posts: 5581
Loc: Hannover, Germany
|
BTW, the 5.7x28mm and 4.6x30mm AET rounds /do/ conform to the Landwarfare Charter of The Hague, they were developed that way.
There's no 5.7x28mm AET ammo on the market that I'm aware of. The military spec 5.7x28mm rounds are FMJ, although it is said to have some excellent AP characteristics while sacrificing performance against soft tissue. In-game, they should actually be classed as AP, similar to most of the standard (red) assault rifle ammunition in the game (5.56, 7.62, etc). FN does make a JHP round, but for the civilian market. John The SS190 round is what we consider AET. Of course it is a FMJ round, it has to be to conform to the Landwarfare Charter of The Hague, but it's inner structure gives it AET capabilities. The subsonic ammo in this caliber is more standard (a slow lead-core FMJ), but the standard ammo is aluminum with a steel tip and a steel jacket (so the designation FMJ would not be false technically) and does have a high velocity. Actually I tried to get rid of the red 5.7x28mm ammo so that only AET and HP exist, but Madd Mugsy told me that red and grey are always needed as standard ammo, thus I cannot delete it.
_________________________
Do not ask what the game can do for you, ask what you can do for the game
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
Badges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#163603 - 04 November, 2007 09:42 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: Starwalker]
|
Captain
Posts: 1075
|
Why not create 6 types of FMJ rifle bullet types - High speed lead bullet(5.56 M193), medium speed Lead bullet (7.62x51 M80, Yugo 7.62x39 M67), High Speed Lead+Steel core(5.56mmM855), medium speed L+S core, HS Steel bullet(5.45mm M74) and Medium Steel Bullet(7.62x39 M43). Lead bullets have a litlebit worse penetration, but higher damage effect, Steel bullets otherwise - good penetration, weaker stopping effect. High speed projectiles have a worse cover penetration, Medium speed better cover penetration.
With this you get a M855 round that will have armor penetration better than 7.62x51 M80 Ball round (5.56x45 M855 is able to penetrate steel helmet at 630m, 7.62X51 M80 Ball at 600m), 7.62 M43 will have good cover penetration, but will not deal much damage (7.62x39 is not a good stopper - (In one tragic incident in Sweden a killer used AK-47 with M43 rounds in kindergarden. He shot 35 kids, but only 5 kids died. 7.62x39 produce clean penetration of the body, projectile tumble only after 40cm, which means that most of time projectile is already out from body. This was a main reason why Russians are using 5.45 ammo with hollow nondeforming tip - it produce tumbling effect after a 20cm penetration, therefore 5.45 bullet has a much better stopping effect than 7.62x39, but it is still weak against 5.56x45 if projectile ideally fragments. Fragmenting effect is a quite big problem, because today most of US soldiers use short barrel(14") M4A1, so M855 have fragmenting effect only at distance below 75m, standard issue M16A4 with 20" barrell is able to fragment out to 250m, thatts why US Marines still use M16A4...)
Edited by JmX (04 November, 2007 09:42 AM)
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#163655 - 04 November, 2007 11:49 PM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: JmX]
|
General
Posts: 5581
Loc: Hannover, Germany
|
Why not create 6 types of FMJ rifle bullet types - High speed lead bullet(5.56 M193), medium speed Lead bullet (7.62x51 M80, Yugo 7.62x39 M67), High Speed Lead+Steel core(5.56mmM855), medium speed L+S core, HS Steel bullet(5.45mm M74) and Medium Steel Bullet(7.62x39 M43). Lead bullets have a litlebit worse penetration, but higher damage effect, Steel bullets otherwise - good penetration, weaker stopping effect. High speed projectiles have a worse cover penetration, Medium speed better cover penetration. I'll look into it, though I will probably not be able to simulate the poor performance of the 5.56x45m from short barrels (we do not have any range dependent effects on damage in JA2).
_________________________
Do not ask what the game can do for you, ask what you can do for the game
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
Badges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#163673 - 05 November, 2007 03:36 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: Starwalker]
|
Sargeant
Posts: 116
|
BTW, can we move the ammo discussion elsewhere, this is more of an item question than something about a stable release.
Okay, but along those lines, here's another request... It would be ever so wonderful if you could figure out a way to make it so that the game will tell you what weapons attachments fit on what weapon. Like when you mouse-over or something. There's been a couple of times where I've wasted money at BRs by buying stuff that isn't compatible. Also, it might not be such a bad idea to do the same for certain items. Like I only found out tonight that you can built a molotav cocktail out of a bottle of alcohol and a rag (which BTW, is awsome). If you think about it, it would also eliminate a lot of redundant questions here on the board. - John
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#164407 - 13 November, 2007 12:09 PM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: Kensuke]
|
Officer
Posts: 448
Loc: Moscow, Russia
|
Also, it might not be such a bad idea to do the same for certain items. Like I only found out tonight that you can built a molotav cocktail out of a bottle of alcohol and a rag (which BTW, is awsome). This is exactly why we love this game. Newer know, what else game is hiding from you I have one little feature, well, vice versa... unfeature  In JA2 we have ability to steal guns not only from collapsed enemy, but from standing enemy too It's quite difficult but possible. All you need is to do the same instructions, CTRL+LMB. Best chance to steal (well, "whip away" ) gun is on injured soldier. But now, when we can steal the whole equipment from enemy, it looks ridiculous when you can fully undress standing soldier My suggestion is to restore original feature: make it possible to steal item only from main slot when hijacking standing (conscious) enemy. While thinkin deeper, it's possible to go even more realistic way. For example, while hijacking standing enemy, pull-down menu could show only items that we are able to steal (everything except armor), and give us opportunity to steal only one item at a moment. So, what do you think? I just like to play JA2 in "Splinter Cell" style, and i often kill enemies in close fights. It's just looks cool when your merc sneaks to enemy, whips away combat knife from enemy's leg-holster and packs him down to rest in peace
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
Badges:  
|
|
|
|
|
|
#166926 - 07 December, 2007 04:30 PM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: coolberg]
|
General
Posts: 5954
Loc: Pleasantville, NJ
|
This thread was a great idea when it was started but like so many other things in the 1.13 it has degenerated into a endless weapon wishlist.
A stable .exe and a lot of the things scorpion mentioned would be a great thing for modders. Every time I have to update my mod it takes anywhere from two to six weeks of almost no other progress. It is really getting to the point where I am going to stick with an older exe just so my mod gets released some day.
We need more externalisations and a stable exe from the coders. The gun porn we can usually pull off ourselves.
_________________________
Dan Watson
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#166995 - 08 December, 2007 10:33 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: Khor1255]
|
General
Posts: 5581
Loc: Hannover, Germany
|
This thread was a great idea when it was started but like so many other things in the 1.13 it has degenerated into a endless weapon wishlist. Yes, unfortunately I told them that they should ask for features, not items, but I guess that`s just not enough. A stable .exe and a lot of the things scorpion mentioned would be a great thing for modders. Every time I have to update my mod it takes anywhere from two to six weeks of almost no other progress. It is really getting to the point where I am going to stick with an older exe just so my mod gets released some day. I think Overhaul is nearly there (stable exe), and when the New Inventory is ready for release, the exe should be stable. But using your mod with an older exe is indeed an option. Version 1.13 was thought of as a modding platform, but that does not mean that every mod needs to be based on the newest version of it. Scorpion's mod, for example, uses older XML-data with a newer exe, but as long as the stuff /works/ with it, there's nothing wrong with using an 'old' version. You'll probably have the exe for download with your mod anyway, don't you? We need more externalisations and a stable exe from the coders. The gun porn we can usually pull off ourselves. I agree with you nearly 100%, but the problem is: there's not that many coders around at the moment, and of those there are, none seems to be interested in externalizing prof.dat (which should have top priority), which is a hard task to do, AFAIK. And I am no coder, I am the 1.13 team's armorer, and thus items are the only thing I can do (apart from theoretical design work, as for the New Inventory), so I throw out a few items/guns now and then, because there's nothing else I can do. If I /stop/ doing that, I may lose interest in the work altogether and vanish from here.
_________________________
Do not ask what the game can do for you, ask what you can do for the game
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
Badges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#167000 - 08 December, 2007 10:58 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: Starwalker]
|
General
Posts: 5954
Loc: Pleasantville, NJ
|
I understand and greatly apreciate what your role in this project has been. You have handled your task with a steadfastness and professionalism that is almost nonexistant in an unpayed passed time. I was not intending to level any criticism at you but rather general frustration with the community's myopic fascination with mere item requests.
In the past we needed the new features that were being presented to be loudly and repeatedly explained by the developers. While not doing so was certainly noones fault (I for one should have been acutely aware of features I had been lobbying for for months when they first appeared but am only recently being aquainted with them) I believe this to be the reason that interest in new features dropped off both among coders and the community in general.
This is sad.
We still need a more exacting difference in weapon reliability so that experimental and generally sketchy weapons can be offered but also depicted with all their weaknesses next to their strengths. We also need at least one more .xml to be in the child directory of ammo, weapons and or attachments. This might give us the ability to assign different values to the same attachment (for instance) when used on different weapons. The same would be nice for ammo.
I don't think the Items.xml should be again bothered (if for no other reason than the fact that it causes you to have to completely rewrite the biggest .xml when there is a structure change) but rather new 'child' directories be added perhaps even 'grandchild' directories if such a term is permissible.
Getting to the bottom of my armour issue seems to be the only thing holding my own .xmls up but every new release seems to cause another unwanted mystery. If it was anything other than absolutely necessary to arrange the .xmls in the clumped up manner they currently are I say restore them to a more easily editable structure, at least until the xml editor is 100%.
_________________________
Dan Watson
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#167004 - 08 December, 2007 11:25 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: Starwalker]
|
General
Posts: 5492
Loc: CH
______
BANNED
|
i disagree on prof.dat having any priority. proedit is the most useful modding utility there is, basicly anything that is neither in prof.dat nor in the xml's would have priority. Typically the things i mentioned in my first posting.
see, irregular NPC placements shemes limit the use of proedit massivly, but that's not an issue of proedit/ prof.dat, it's a lack of externalisation.
In fact beta17 can be worked with. there's little complains from a modmaking point of view and little complaints from a stability point of view. The tragedy is that there's no code of beta17 anymore to base a stable exe on it. ;-/
oh, and we can't blame these people here. Years of experience show that their understanding of "feature" includes pretty much anything. And neither nice words and explanations nor rude aggressions help much. I know that. Excessivly tried either approach.
The sad thing is that people have simply given up in the last couple of months. No progress, no development, nothing. I can only hope it's one of those seasonal effects and it may get better at some point. The project is highly unlikely to ever gain the creative level again that it used to have, but from a modmaker's perspective, it's just what we have to work with. it's not much, but with a little support and good will from a certain couple of guys, a lot could still be done regardless of the apparently disintegrating project itself.
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#167052 - 09 December, 2007 02:58 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: dzeller]
|
General
Posts: 5581
Loc: Hannover, Germany
|
Just for info: are we still shooting for a Christmas release?
PS: I'm talking about the 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release" date here... Was Christmas ever mentioned for the "stable milestone release"? I myself mentioned Christmas for the New Inventory only...
_________________________
Do not ask what the game can do for you, ask what you can do for the game
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
Badges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#167067 - 09 December, 2007 03:37 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: Starwalker]
|
Lieutenant
Posts: 582
Loc: USA
|
Just for info: are we still shooting for a Christmas release?
PS: I'm talking about the 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release" date here... Was Christmas ever mentioned for the "stable milestone release"? I myself mentioned Christmas for the New Inventory only... Yep, see Mauser's first post: as for now, i would recommend a aimed release date for "stable milestone release v1.0" of christmas 2007. I was just asking because I'm waiting for the release of v1.0 to start my next playthrough...
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#167152 - 10 December, 2007 12:48 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: dextertt]
|
General
Posts: 5581
Loc: Hannover, Germany
|
I do not know if this is the place to ask but would it be possible to add in the option.ini a global accuracy variable like what we have now for melee damage, gun damage, and explosive damage. But with less than 100%. For example, if accuracy = 50, then all range fire weapon suffers a 50% accuracy penalty. It may sound extreme, but I find range fire in game too accurate because the engine does not take into consideration for covert and evasive movement. Thanks. But if you make it /global/, then there's no difference between moving and non-moving targets as well (i.e. non-moving targets are harder to hit as they should be). So that would only be an interim 'solution', until someone really takes movement into account.
_________________________
Do not ask what the game can do for you, ask what you can do for the game
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
Badges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#174512 - 03 February, 2008 11:30 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: Thor]
|
Major
Posts: 2233
Loc: Bavaria - Germany
|
so people, i thought i give this thread a little bump and bring it back up for the new year.
how´s it looking dear developement and coding team, are you pursuing this suggested goal?
And if yes, how´s the status? have you agreed upon the modalities?
and if no, why the hell not?
the pros of making this happen should be quite clearly and obvious now for everyone.
there isn´t much left to be said about it. it all comes down to three words: just do it!
so, whoever feels responsible, please give us a little update on the matter if you can.
also, i´d like to propose giving the first release a better name than "1.13 project", something more catchy that better communicates the massive scope and archievements of this project.
something that can be advertized better and raises more interest.
something like:
JA2 Reloaded,
JA2.5,
JA2 Ultimate,
JA2 combat value upgrade project,
JA2 never quite finished Business or something like that.
mind you, i don´t want to rename 1.13 project, but rather give the first milestone release a own name. a new brand name if you want.
_________________________
though I walk thru the valley of the shadow of death, I shall fear no evil, 'cause I'm the meanest s.o.b. in the valley.
Semi official Ambassador, Consultant (and errand boy) of the SMP Project
|
 - ONLINE
Top
|
Badges:  
|
|
|
|
|
|
#174654 - 04 February, 2008 01:16 PM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: afp]
|
Major
Posts: 2404
|
(I have to do a SVN again) Few nights back, my mercs hauled heim an RPK/RPD. When they got to Tony's shop, I removed the folding buttstock. The weapon greyed out, wouldn't fit in the <slot>. Took the gun out, reattached the folding stock, ..et voila it fitted again, marvelous. 
_________________________
Look behind you, a threeheaded monkey !!!
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#174676 - 04 February, 2008 04:00 PM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: DNA from the Lowlands]
|
N.C.O.
Posts: 332
Loc: Finland
|
Some issues with the weapons
-F2000's 40mm launcher should be the FN EGLM
-RPK:s should have semi-auto capability
-FAMAS doesn't seem to accept a bipod, although it says so in the description
-G41 doesn't seem to accept a retractable stock
-I've never seen a folding stock on an FN MAG or M60E3
-MG4 isn't supposed to have semi auto capability
-RPK's share the same receiver with AK's so they should accept the same optics
-M60E3 should have an integrated foregrip and bipod
And some suggestions:
Could a folding stock be given zero or negative weight values, since it is a replacement of the solid stock rather than addition, and usually (probably) is lighter?
Could the properties of a foregrip be given to the AG36 launcher, since it has a pistol grip on it?
More limitations on what can be added on older weapons (maybe rail kits to convert the weapons to rail interface versions... I know... requires a lot of work :P)
_________________________
"It is a good thing for an uneducated man to read a book of quotations." - Winston Churchill
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#174694 - 05 February, 2008 12:19 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: Hairysteed]
|
General
Posts: 5581
Loc: Hannover, Germany
|
Some issues with the weapons
-F2000's 40mm launcher should be the FN EGLM The F2000's launcher was developed before the EGLM. And the EGLM has that part behind it that goes over the SCAR rifle's magazine housing, this would do no good on the F2000. -RPK:s should have semi-auto capability Not to my knowledge. -FAMAS doesn't seem to accept a bipod, although it says so in the description Sorry, the description is misleading. The bipod-effect is already included, so it does not need an attached one. I'll change the description. -G41 doesn't seem to accept a retractable stock Maybe it attaches a folding stock? -I've never seen a folding stock on an FN MAG or M60E3 I've found information that these exist. -MG4 isn't supposed to have semi auto capability Right. Will be corrected. -RPK's share the same receiver with AK's so they should accept the same optics Well, the AK-47 has that receiver, too, and I've been told even that one should /not/ have optics. Besides, optics are for aimed shooting, which is not possible in JA2 with fullauto-only guns. -M60E3 should have an integrated foregrip and bipod It usually comes with a foregrip, but not a bipod. If you mount a bipod, you would probably not be able to fold it when the foregrip is in place, that's why these attachments are incompatible. But if I make the foregrip built-in, you could circumvent that incompatibility, which is not what I want. And some suggestions:
Could a folding stock be given zero or negative weight values, since it is a replacement of the solid stock rather than addition, and usually (probably) is lighter? Fixed stocks are often made from plastics or wood, whereas folding stocks most often contain metal. If you care to compare standard AK rifles to their AKS versions, you'll find that most AKS are heavier by 300g (that's why the folding stock weighs 300g, that's /not/ its full weight, it's the difference from fixed to folded stock). Could the properties of a foregrip be given to the AG36 launcher, since it has a pistol grip on it? That's already in since the AG36 showed up in 1.13. All of this is not really anything that has to do with a milestone release, though, it should have been in the bug-threads area or features-wanted area.
_________________________
Do not ask what the game can do for you, ask what you can do for the game
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
Badges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#174708 - 05 February, 2008 01:31 AM
Re: suggestions and feature list for 1.13 "V 1.0 stable milestone release"
[Re: the scorpion]
|
General
Posts: 5581
Loc: Hannover, Germany
|
of course all RPK's have selective fire. Like AK's do.
O.K.
_________________________
Do not ask what the game can do for you, ask what you can do for the game
|
- OFFLINE
Top
|
|
Badges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[/offtopic]
Previous Topic
Index