[den5]

I already played around with this too without results, so it looks to me as if the muzzleglow was disabled in first person view in the latest FSO releases!

And I noticed a new problem: you can see the Explorer Cortez in the distance in the mission "A distant star" which you couldn't with older FSO versions.
I might be able to fix that though by making it spawn later or making it invisible at first, but maybe there is an easier and basic solution to that problem?
P.S.: I found out that the problem is the FSO setting Deferred Lighting. With that disabled the Cortez is gone again! So what is this and do we need it?

Forgot about it. Muzzleglow is disabled by default in the hud. Open game _settings.tbl and paste these lines after
#CAMPAIGN SETTINGS
$Default Campaign File Name: Io Training Wing.fc2

Code: [Select]

#GRAPHICS SETTINGS

$Render player muzzle flashes in cockpit: True
I think this is a deferred lighting for cockpits problem. You need to ask about it in the SCP thread or SCP Discord channel.

FS2 Open 22.0.0
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1F__psjl_4JFURO-ovplT8HqbfHS_sGfB/view?usp=share_link

FS2 Open 23.0.0 with deferred lighting for cockpits
https://drive.google.com/file/d/10Fy1XG29cWanyVZCbcn6Zkxa43j87u28/view?usp=share_link

FS2 Open 23.0.0 without deferred lighting for cockpits
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hKWzW3tU7gAC7NU2rVTX8GCF9OxP_Xp7/view?usp=share_link

[wesp5]

Forgot about it. Muzzleglow is disabled by default in the hud. Open game _settings.tbl and paste these lines after

Wonderful, it's looking great again! I will later update the patch, but at the moment you can't download it from ModDB anyway as the have problems.

I think this is a deferred lighting for cockpits problem. You need to ask about it in the SCP thread or SCP Discord channel.

I just disabled it and when searching for it on Google, it seems that deferred lighting is just a simpler method for more performance we don't need .

[den5]

Maybe. But simply disabling deferred lighting in the launcher will not solve the problem.

[wesp5]

Maybe. But simply disabling deferred lighting in the launcher will not solve the problem.

It does right now, the same as disabling post-processing, which causes everything to look very bland, and emissive lighting, which causes everything to look much too bright!
I don't know if those are common FSO problems or connected to the TBP assets which are not compatible. In case the later is true, how should these be fixed if it is possible?

P.S.: I just reported all these issues in the FSO 23.0.0 release thread. Let's see what happens ...

[wesp5]

Now for something completely different: den5, it seems you know a lot more about FSO than I. Do you know a way to have capital ships attack each other from a distance only? Because in missions like "Shadow Dancing" sooner or later the capital ships will be clustered very near to each other which doesn't look good!

[EatThePath]

I just disabled it and when searching for it on Google, it seems that deferred lighting is just a simpler method for more performance we don't need .

Deferred lighting for cockpits specifically makes it so that the dynamic lights from weapons fire, explosions, glowpoints and other similar things are able to light up the cockpit model, without it they are only lit by the main static lights of the level

[Trivial Psychic]

Now for something completely different: den5, it seems you know a lot more about FSO than I. Do you know a way to have capital ships attack each other from a distance only? Because in missions like "Shadow Dancing" sooner or later the capital ships will be clustered very near to each other which doesn't look good!

Waypoints is usually the best way to go when doing cap-ship engagements, but 'In The Beginning' DOES use cap-ship attack orders.  I just have a sequence of orders in place to have ships clear their goals when the get within a certain distance of ships they are attacking.  When that target is destroyed, it is given new orders to attack another ship, ALSO with a distance check.  I think I might have used repeating argument-based events with nested conditionals to keep things from sprawling out of control.  BTW, in case you don't know, 'In The Beginning' is Den5's original campaign.

[wesp5]

I just have a sequence of orders in place to have ships clear their goals when the get within a certain distance of ships they are attacking.

But won't they stop attacking the target ship then? I might take a look at the distance thing although especially the Whitestars stick too near to the Battlecrabs.

BTW, in case you don't know, 'In The Beginning' is Den5's original campaign.

Yeah, I think I read this here. I believe there are two Earth/Minbari War missions in the Star Fury Pilot series, maybe you can use them to finish the war campaign?

[Trivial Psychic]

I just have a sequence of orders in place to have ships clear their goals when the get within a certain distance of ships they are attacking.

But won't they stop attacking the target ship then? I might take a look at the distance thing although especially the Whitestars stick too near to the Battlecrabs.

BTW, in case you don't know, 'In The Beginning' is Den5's original campaign.

Yeah, I think I read this here. I believe there are two Earth/Minbari War missions in the Star Fury Pilot series, maybe you can use them to finish the war campaign?

Even with cleared orders, turrets will still fire at all available enemies within range, as long as the target hasn't been protected.

As for the Earth/Minbari War Demo Campaign, there are already a few of its missions included in ITB, in somewhat modified states to fit in with the ITB story-line.

[wesp5]

Even with cleared orders, turrets will still fire at all available enemies within range, as long as the target hasn't been protected.

If these include the major beam weapons I will try it out!

As for the Earth/Minbari War Demo Campaign, there are already a few of its missions included in ITB, in somewhat modified states to fit in with the ITB story-line.

Do you think you can replace the Demo Campaign with the complete In the Beginning campaign? Because I don't think the demo campaign will be finished ever .

[Trivial Psychic]

ITB is not. has not, and never will be a replacement for the Demo campaign.  Imagine as if the Demo was the FS2 main campaign, and Den5 made a fan campaign, which happened to cross paths with the main story, so he borrowed a few missions from it and then added in his own story ships to make it fit.

BTW, I tried to fly the Demo campaign recently to see if there were any further story events I could borrow, as I hadn't played it in a LONG while.  Unfortunately, I wasn't able to get past the first mission, because some key event didn't fire.  When I EVENTUALLY get ITB ready for re-release, I may have to take a closer look at EMW Demo and give it a face-lift.

[wesp5]

ITB is not. has not, and never will be a replacement for the Demo campaign.  Imagine as if the Demo was the FS2 main campaign, and Den5 made a fan campaign, which happened to cross paths with the main story, so he borrowed a few missions from it and then added in his own story ships to make it fit.

Okay, so I guess the pilot you play is somebody else and the ship you are with as well. But does it include Sheridan's defeat of the Black Star and The Battle of the Line? Because these two are already included in the Star Fury Missions and it makes little sense to have multiple version of these events.

BTW, I tried to fly the Demo campaign recently to see if there were any further story events I could borrow, as I hadn't played it in a LONG while.  Unfortunately, I wasn't able to get past the first mission, because some key event didn't fire.

I might take a look at that as this is what the patch was all about when I started fixing the Star Fury Missions...

P.S.: I just replayed the first Earth/Minbari War mission and I could finish it just fine. What didn't fire for you there?

[Trivial Psychic]

Don't recall.  It was a few months ago.  I recall that I was defending a ship from Minbari attackers, but nothing seemed to happen.  No further fighters spawned, and the mission didn't end.

As for ITB containing a Black Star mission, YES it does, and no I won't be replacing it.  This is a restoration and enhancement of a classic campaign, so Den5's version will be staying in.... along with a few changes, both subtle and less so.... that I introduced. 

[wesp5]

I recall that I was defending a ship from Minbari attackers, but nothing seemed to happen.  No further fighters spawned, and the mission didn't end.

You just need to jump out once the quest log lists this as a goal. After the Sharlin has left, the mission does indeed not end on its own if you don't do it yourself...

[Vidmaster]

I wanted to post here to show my appreciation.  

So much hard work to improve the utter technical mess that is The Babylon Project, including the weird missions I wrote half a life ago.
This is exactly what the few remaining people here dreamed of when we put the mod into "public development".

[wesp5]

I wanted to post here to show my appreciation.  

Thanks, fixing great games that are not exactly mainstream is kind of a hobby of mine .

So much hard work to improve the utter technical mess that his The Babylon Project, including the weird missions I wrote half a life ago.

I don't know what other missions you have done, but I really love your Dark Children !

P.S.: Maybe one of you knows this, I always wondered if the Earth Minbari War demo was
supposed to be expanded into a full campaign one day, which will never happen now, or
if it actually was intended just as a demo to show off the possibilities of modding in TBP?

[kmunoz]

Just another stranger coming in to express appreciation for this patch! I've been recording TBP on YouTube and recently got a new computer, and I was sad to discover that TBP didn't run, since it's a newer install than the one on my old machine. Found this patch with the recent changes and now it all works again! Many, many thanks.

[den5]

Another bug with the model. Two ISA Victory turrets, turret10-base and turret11-base, have the wrong subobject name. Turret10-base is turret10-destroyed but correctly turret10-base-destroyed, same for turret11-base otherwise you see these turrets with Debris_EA texture in game.

[wesp5]

Turret10-base is turret10-destroyed but correctly turret10-base-destroyed, same for turret11-base otherwise you see these turrets with Debris_EA texture in game.

So turret10/11-destroyed should be renamed turret10/11-base-destroyed, yes? Done with pof-tools! Anything else or can I upload a hotfix tomorrow?

[den5]

Yes. And one more thing. In the game, pay attention to the shooting from the bottom rotating turrets of all ships that have them. Seems that their barrels rotate in the other direction not where the turret base is directed.