Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => FS2 Open Coding - The Source Code Project (SCP) => Topic started by: Sticks on January 07, 2004, 01:12:50 pm
-
I'm so tired of banging my head against 3.6 that I've decided to rest for a minute and start looking toward what will be implemented after 3.6.
Here's what I know for sure I'm going to be doing:
- Bumpmapping
- Dynamic Shadows
- 3D (or 2D) Cockpit Model
- Overexposure and Glare Effects
RT has said he will be cleaning up the texturing system to make it more resource friendly. Goober's got a couple of additions I think, like loading background templates in FRED.
Any suggestions are welcome. Just don't expect a whole lot of explanation if they get a "Nay" vote, I'm sure this thread will get cluttered enough very quickly.
I'll insert comments as-needed for the requests that can be answered by a yes, no, or elaborate. The others will need more discussion by one or more other coders. // Goober5000
-
Allow the escort list display to show possibly as much as 6 entries, rather than the current 3.
Would require new HUD art... probably nay.
Allow FRED to assign non-pilot personae heads. I'm tired of giving an order to a cap ship and having a pilot's head replying to me.
This is already possible. Take a closer look at the messages editor.
Get cloaking usable.
Talk to Phreak.
SEXPs
change-alt-name, including an option to disable and revert to standard name.
Post it on the sexp thread.
Include a sexp so that any object listed in it will have a series of changes applied to them, but individually. Like mines, which detonate when any friendly ship gets within a certain range. Giving each mine its own event, realy sucks up the events.
What? :wtf: Can you elaborate?
[Edit]
Alright, here's how I got to this idea. I was FREDing a mission where fellow pilots are fighting against each other as part of a training mission, using simulated weapons. When any ship is damaged below 5%, it is restored to full strength, made invulnerable, changed IFF to friendly, given a protect-ship sexp flag, and ordered to depart. The mission had a total of 17 fighters, a science cruiser, and a Fenris, and I had to have events for the neutralizing of each and every ship in the mission, which realy ate up my events. I'd like a way to have a single event for all the hostile fighters, that will apply the above changes to each, but separately. If I just use a bunch of "or" branches to it, it will apply the changes to all the fighters at the same time, when only one of them has been damaged below 5%. While I'm on the subject, it'd also smooth out the repair process if there was a sexp that says repair-all-damage, that will restore the hull and all subsystems, rather than having to identify every subsystem and the hull. This would help when coupled with the previously proposed sexp, since I found that not all ships have the same subsystem (I found the Athena doesn't have an engine subsystem), and it could confuse FS2. That was a bit long but I hope it clarified things a bit.[/Edit]
subsystem-invulnerable, subsystem-guardian and their opposites.
Post it on the sexp thread.
allow-hull-repairs, assigns a specific support ship to be able to repair hulls. Such support ships would need to either have scripted arrival times and a name other than "Support x", or select say "Support 3" so that the 3rd support ship used in mission, can repair hulls.
Already possible. Read the readme.
[Edit]
I just looked through the readme, but it only allows hull repairing support ships to be enabled with a mission flag. That will make all support ships repair hulls. I'd like a way to make it so only specific ones will be capable of this, not all of them.
As far as most of my sexps, I've already posted them in the sexp thread, I'm just bumping them so to speak.[/edit]
Later!
-
If it's possible stuff _avgr posted if the code is still availible.
- Armor plate simulation - it was suggested before, but if there's a way (there could be since we saw stuff like this in the whole MW and other mecha games) then it would be worth the effort
- Extended damage system using plate simulation - get rid of the hull and let use make cheesecake out of capship - they may barely function, but those ships should be able to take quite a beating.
-
recoil and other turret options
Not feasible at this stage of the game.
Haha Goober, thought I would try but I still think the trails need work. I guess this is more of a visual bug than anything but when missles are initially fired I see the beginning of a trail go at a sharp angle.
-
My own choices would be......
Definable explosions for subsystems.
Subsystem Ambient sounds.
Distance Fogging
These would all be great for TI ;)
Edit : Not Distance Fogging, sorry, area fogging, though the odds of it happening are Zilch, but what the hell ;)
-
Would adding support for triple displays be possible?
Elaborate, please.
Edit: Never mind :)
-
Originally posted by Trivial Psychic
Include a sexp so that any object listed in it will have a series of changes applied to them, but individually. Like mines, which detonate when any friendly ship gets within a certain range. Giving each mine its own event, realy sucks up the events.
What? :wtf: Can you elaborate?
Is it so hard to understand Goober? ;)
What he's asking for is brilliant.
You would have a SEXP that would be called something like "apply-to-all":
apply-to-all
+Alpha1
+Alpha2
+Alpha3
when
hits-left
+$Ship
<
50
--> set-shield strength
+$Ship
0
This would have the following effect: Once Alpha 1, 2 or 3 have less than 50 hits, they will have shield strength 0. You can set a ship list, then specify a normal SEXP which applies with placeholders for any ship in the list above. You could do it without the SEXP but you would have to do one event for EACH alpha 1, 2 and 3; however, by using "apply-to-all" you can all whack it together in one SEXP.
-
Just a quick thought, but was AI being able to use Dumbfire implemented, or maybe have a 'AI_Dumbfire' tag on weapons.tbl so the AI will only use specific dumbfire missiles?
-
Originally posted by Lightspeed
Is it so hard to understand Goober? ;)
What he's asking for is brilliant.
You would have a SEXP that would be called something like "apply-to-all":
Thanks Lighty. Actually some of the idea behind that goes to _argv or whatever his name was. I listed my problem and request in the sexp thread, and he refined it to that. His idea kinda helps out people in more than just situations like mine. I decided to edit my above message with elaborations, so you can see why I wanted it.
Later!
-
Allow the escort list display to show possibly as much as 6 entries, rather than the current 3.
Would require new HUD art... probably nay.
Are you sure about that? I just looked at the escort list graphics in the vp files and it looks like the top, middle and bottom parts of that escort window are separate files. Copies of the middle section could just be placed next to each other to get a larger escort window. You'll see what I mean if you look at these anis; they are in the hud subdirectory of the sparky and sparky_hi vps and are named escort1 through escort4.
The only other thing, aside from the cloaking feature, that I would really like to see are a few adjustments to the AI. Namely, something to prevent the AI from shooting at passive asteroids (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,17508.0.html), and making the AI ships capable of firing Tempests (already mentioned) and Trebuchets, neither of which they ever seem to launch for some reason.
Of course, it would also be great to fix up the whole memory usage issue, but that would probably be difficult.
I also found a few minor bugs in the last few days; will submit to Mantis in a little while.
-
Since I cant play until I get a new comp, how about throwing out the HUD graphics and rendering it in-game.
-
Urgh. I know I'm going to forget cool stuff, but...
Table defined Hud Guage positions - ala mainhall.tbl, the ability to define where a certain guage is displayed on the hud through its pixel coordinates. The ability to have multiple configurations (perhaps even defined through ships.tbl) would be a major bonus too
Custom guages - Probably controlled by sexps, these would be able to flash up either PCXs (for warning messages) or counters indicating information that could be returned by a sexp (Hitpoints, distance, time etc. etc.). Sexps could also allow them to flash, flick on or off etc. They would probably have to be set up previously in the HUD positions table, and may also need some sort of numerical or size limits, and would of course need new artwork (though this could be provided by the campaign designers who want to use the feature.
Import background button.
"Big Guns at Front" tag.
There's a lot more I'd like to see, but I can't think of it all right now :)
EDIT - Tractor beams :)
Oh, and
Originally posted by CP5670
and making the AI ships capable of firing Tempests (already mentioned) and Trebuchets, neither of which they ever seem to launch for some reason.
I can get my AI to fire trebs by using a good-secondary-time sexp - one of the TI missions I'm doing depends on this.
-
For tractor beams use a beam with no damage and a negative mass. ;7
-
I can get my AI to fire trebs by using a good-secondary-time sexp - one of the TI missions I'm doing depends on this.
That works nicely under certain conditions, but it applies to the entire "team" and only allows firing upon one ship. It would have been better if they made that sexp the other way around. :p
-
Originally posted by Deepblue
For tractor beams use a beam with no damage and a negative mass. ;7
Be my guest. Test it, then send me a working Table file. The TI team will thank you from the bottom of our hearts. ;)
-
Originally posted by CP5670
That works nicely under certain conditions, but it applies to the entire "team" and only allows firing upon one ship. It would have been better if they made that sexp the other way around. :p
Now there's a good one. Change the good-secondary-time sexp so that you can have it only apply to wings or even to specific ships, as the FREDer may require.
Later!
-
I like the Apply-to-All idea a lot.
The other thing I'd like to see was my idea about having the Loadout using persistant variables so that you could set a campaign on a destroyer and slowly have it run out of fighters.
-
what's the status of persistent variables on ship loadout? (edit: missed kara's post)
mod specific request:
after viewing episode1 I noticed that in the films there isn't an "energetic" shield hit effect, you just see small explosions at close distance to the hull, when shields are down you see instead explosions ON the hull.
I don't know if this would be easyer to be implemented than shield hit effect on the hull polys, but it coul be very very useful for the SW conversion, in addition to _argv's virtual shields.
the rotate subsystem sexp working in both directions (to open/close xwing's foils).
A very very secondary thing would be to have a subsystem rotating randomly (forward and backward) for a random amount of time at a defined speed. I'd use this to have R2 rotating left and right randomly, but it could also used by others to simulate a damaged rotating subsystem
AI behaviour. But I don't have time to elaborate this now, maybe it's stuff for another thread.
custom ship sexps?
This came out in a thread in the modding forum, the point is that there are ships (like xwing) that will need specific sexps whenever they will be used. It could be useful to have the possibility ot define a certain number of ship specific sexps into a table (or something else), with the game loading those sexps whenever this ship will be putted in a mission, whoever will create this mission. It will make it easyer when you release to public single ships that needs specific sexps
-
I wouldn't do that as ship specific SEXP's personally.
I think having a SEXP called Ship-Action-1 and then adding the info on what that does to the standard ships table makes more sense.
That way you can replace a ship with another one very easily (If you decide that gold wing should be Y-wings rather than X-wings for example). If the ship had no action defined the SEXP could just be ignored.
-
Get Spec-lighting to work in HT&L mode on a Radeon 9000
then ill be happy
-
Originally posted by CP5670
...Namely, something to prevent the AI from shooting at passive asteroids (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,17508.0.html), and making the AI ships capable of firing Tempests (already mentioned) and Trebuchets, neither of which they ever seem to launch for some reason.
The first one shouldn't be that difficult.
The second one has been completed
* Revision 2.39 2003/08/03 23:38:08 phreak
* ai now properly uses rapid fire dumbfires
* Revision 2.36 2003/07/02 03:31:27 phreak
* ai now properly fires bomber+ missiles at capital ships.
aicode.cpp
-
don't know if it's beem mentioned before but how about a Rianbow Six stylee "apply load out to team" affair, on the load out screen.
It's on the to-do list.
FS menu screens run a little sloppy on my PC at the higher res. and all that draggin' and droppin' is a pain in the ass.
-
Hmmmm... That's odd Phreak, cos mine don't seem to do it, and believe me, in this situation, I would notice if they did! Maybe I'll try turning up the AI level a tad and see if that helps :)
-
ive seen AI plinking Mentus with trebs after i changed it. They won't use them if they have bombs however
-
I'm sure this is a silly question, but I gotta know... will they work with missiles that are supposed to be Dumbfire, like the Tempest because that's the setup I'm using?
Ok, I cranked up the AI to General and they started using them, so that's solved that problem, but at Captain, they still won't.
-
Well, I guess I would like:
- much cooler explosions/fireworks, with lots of particles spewed... also, it would be cool if we could define this stuff in a ships tbl...
- Rotating barrels...
Already implemented.
Can't think of anything else right now... I'll post when I come with something up...
-
Oh, also:
- muzzleflashes like in Starlancer... I gusee this could be quite easy if you use the thruster render code...
- being able to choose the type of thruster and thruster glow in the tbl of a ship... that would make easy to create new races with new glows, and most importantly, make the capships without high speed fighter thrusters...
-
I'd like to see an I-War style ORB for the radar, and an option to switch between it and the 'classic' FS2 radar.
-
"being able to choose the type of thruster and thruster glow in the tbl of a ship"
you _can_ do that
-
Told you I'd forget stuff. :)
"Rapidfire" weapons flag. This would give the weapons it's applied to the ability to override the AIs default accuracy setting, so that only factor influencing the ROF for that weapon is the firewait setting.
-
i'm still waiting for a T&L Fred2.
oh ****. im a coder and requesting features. looks like ill have to do it :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Sticks
Here's what I know for sure I'm going to be doing:
- Bumpmapping
- Dynamic Shadows
- 3D (or 2D) Cockpit Model
- Overexposure and Glare Effects
Ah! You've picked all the fun stuff!
I would be interested in helping out with shadows.
-
!
-
Originally posted by RandomTiger
Ah! You've picked all the fun stuff!
I guess he got sick of bob taking all the credit :D
-
Oh yes, if possible, could someone try that scaling function that Phreak suggested for HT&L? If it is just one line, it would be awesome :D
-
The first one shouldn't be that difficult.
The second one has been completed
* Revision 2.39 2003/08/03 23:38:08 phreak
* ai now properly uses rapid fire dumbfires
* Revision 2.36 2003/07/02 03:31:27 phreak
* ai now properly fires bomber+ missiles at capital ships.
aicode.cpp [/size]
Great, I need to try this out. Can they use the Trebuchets against fighters and bombers, though? (the Trebuchet is after all an anti-bomber missile that just works particularly well against subsystems)
-
Sorry, didn't read your post right first time :)
Not sure about fighters, but I think they would use the against bombers :)
Flipside :D
-
lol RT
Yes, of course you can help with whatever you want, you know the DX8 code better than any of us. Besides, this is all a group effort anyway. I don't really care about credit so much as coding the stuff that I'd like to see myself. ;)
-
I think using Bob's fast ship trail as an after burner/boost effect would be real cool.
-
I'd like to see the effect scaled by speed myself.
-
trails slow my pc down more than high poly models...
-
Really? Hmm, that's kinda good to know, I'm surprised no one brought that up before...
-
Oh, another one, asked already befor methinks:
- ambient light RGB Bars in FRED (not: abmient lightning MUST NOT be shiny...)
-
Hmmmm... Well, I've not had that problem to be honest. But it may be graphic card specific or something.
Also, to my already extensive request list, if possible, I'd love to see .ogg support or the like :)
Flipside :D
-
Continuing the trend of cool stuff forgotten - "Flip Icon" button for the briefing editor - the ability to flip the icons horizontally would mean that we'd never again have to have briefings where your nice, shiny deimos Icon is pointing away from you big, nasty ravanna icon.
-
Originally posted by Sticks
Really? Hmm, that's kinda good to know, I'm surprised no one brought that up before...
i was testing KARMAs high poly fenris in game... i had about 60 fps till i swiched to 3rd person mode and saw Bobs nifty little engin trails. My fps dropped by like %50.
Even in softwere mode, i get %50 losses when i face trails... nothing elses slows it down by that much exept explosion animations.
-
That a texture issue IIRC - I have it with most of the really high resolution stuff LS introduced a while ago.
RT is onto the rewritting of the texture handling in SCP so you can expect developments soon.
The solutions right now are the following:
-Buy a new videocard (this is especially true for those with vidcards around TNT-Geforce2 like myself) since it's the VRAM that can't handle the strain
-Don't use the trails or high res. stuff
-Get lower res. version like the planets LS made
-
It'll get better when I can switch over to DDS.
-
unfortunatly, you cant load anis into DDS
-
Originally posted by Black Wolf
Continuing the trend of cool stuff forgotten - "Flip Icon" button for the briefing editor - the ability to flip the icons horizontally would mean that we'd never again have to have briefings where your nice, shiny deimos Icon is pointing away from you big, nasty ravanna icon.
Good idea, and I don't remember hearing that before. :) Bump this as soon as 3.6 is out.
-
That idea is around for ages Goober :)
And i'm still hopeful someone will do a good animation format that'll bring us a) more performance and b) 32-bit animations :D
-
As said elsewhere. I'd like to see 3.6 include the ability that Wing Commander had to allow you to restart any campaign from any mission you played previously (this would allow you to play a different branch of a campaign without having to go back and play the whole thing again).
-
I had an idea for skyboxes... could it be possible for, rather than having several skyboxes each with a different texture, how about the option for FS to just change the texture on one pof file. And still have the option to have multiple skyboxes?
If this hasn't ben asked already, ofcourse...
-
Seconds that, maybe make them both defineable, with it using default it no texture name is used?
-
If you want a new background but don't have a clue about how to uvmap the background model, just replace the textures using modelview and save with a different name. It's a 2 minutes job, no need to have coders doing it, and surely if it has to be done, don't scratch the actual system.
most background images do need some uv work, you may want to use more than one, you may want a different uvscaling to have the same background image looking like if it is more far or closer in different missions, or you may have an image on top instead of on the left, etc etc.
Not always the background textures are interchangble, and specific pof models give to modders higher power in adapting the thing for their specific needs.
-
That's not the problem Karma, it's having 3 different backgrounds, and three identical POF's for each one, when you only need one sphere with standard UV mapping, and to be able to apply different textures.
That's why it would be good to specify both, and use default if texture is blank ;) That way, people can use 'different' skyboxes if they wish, but don't have to make different 'normal' ones for every single sky in their campaign :)
-
I want shell ejection.
-
for us lazy FREDders, how about the ability to add background and dragging them around as objects rather than specifying co-ordinates? The current system is confusing, to say the least!! o_O
-
Just thought of another one and had to post while I remembered ;)
Proximity activated mines :D
And to avoid any confusion I mean a 'bomb' with zero speed that will automatically detonate when a Hostile IFF comes within it's defined range, I know you can Sexp range into level-based mines.
Flipside
-
And i'm still hopeful someone will do a good animation format that'll bring us a) more performance and b) 32-bit animations
You can bet on this, eventually.
As said elsewhere. I'd like to see 3.6 include the ability that Wing Commander had to allow you to restart any campaign from any mission you played previously (this would allow you to play a different branch of a campaign without having to go back and play the whole thing again).
I'm not sure how plausible this is with the current system.
I want shell ejection.
No.
for us lazy FREDders, how about the ability to add background and dragging them around as objects rather than specifying co-ordinates?
This would be quite a lot of work for something that already works fine once you get used to it.
Proximity activated mines
Excellent idea.
(not [sic]: abmient lightning MUST NOT be shiny...)
Ambient lighting cannot be shiny. Specular highlighting (shininess) takes the direction of the light and the viewer into account when calulating the highlights. Ambient lighting has no direction, and thus creates no solution in a specular equation.
Before people say that they've seen shiny ambient lighting, let me just say that what you saw was shiny directional lighting, which is not the same.
-
maybe give it a very low speed and make them moving to the nearest enemy within a targeting range, trying to get enough close to explode
-
Why no?
-
I can't think of any good way to do ejecting shells at all, aside from maybe hacking something ugly in that's not part of the engine really. The game just isn't built for it.
This falls under the geomod type request.
-
Ejecting shells is essentially just a particle spew, Sticks. I think you'd have to have a place on a POF that is essentially a "shell_spew_origin".
Of course, personally, I think its a dumbass idea, and one hardly worth the effort to discuss, let alone implement. Get to work on more useful things, like a revamped POF setup that allows for proper animation channels, or a scripting layer. :D
-
Originally posted by Sticks
This would be quite a lot of work for something that already works fine once you get used to it.
Dang....ok.
How about the options to turn shinemaps off on certain ships? I mentioned this before, that shinemaps on certian ships like the Hecate or others just suck. I have no clue how to remove 'em from the directory, as i dont know which files to delete (not to mention they are in the .vp as well). Will there be a way to turn off shinemaps alltogether in the launcher, while leaving specular lighting on?
-
Ejecting shells is essentially just a particle spew, Sticks. I think you'd have to have a place on a POF that is essentially a "shell_spew_origin".
That would work. The only thing is that they'd be kinda cheezy. Particles only have one viewing angle, and they'd dissapear really quick. If I were to do it I'd want 3d shells myself.
How about the options to turn shinemaps off on certain ships?
Absolutely. Actually I think I could get this into 3.6, it's probably only a couple lines of code. A temporary workaround is to create a shinemap that is a 1x1 bitmap consisting of a single white pixel for the ships you don't want to have the other maps for.
-
Originally posted by Sticks
That would work. The only thing is that they'd be kinda cheezy. Particles only have one viewing angle, and they'd dissapear really quick. If I were to do it I'd want 3d shells myself.
So code up an object spewer. Like I said though, its a useless addition that doesn't even add interesting eye-candy. Where are you going to see the shells? Ejecting from your ship? Only for a split second, because you should leave them behind. On a wingman or an enemy? Not likely, unless we're talking huge huge huge shells. From more than 5-10m away, they're invisible. What's the point?
-
This "object spewer" of which you speak is what I was saying is not feaseable, which brings us, I believe, full circle. No ejecting shells.
-
Why isn't it feasable? It sounds like a reimplementation of the missile launching code to me. If I were implementing it in Iwar2, that's exactly how I'd do it.
-
About the light issues:
-Directional light from nearby planets/nebulas
IMHO the current star code could be used, maybe its just a FRED thing.
-
If I was so inclined I could probly add in shell ejection easily, just add two data entries into the particle data type (orientation matrix and model number) if the particle has a valid model number (ie, it isn't -1) render the model.
that would be the quick way, slightly more effort would be seperateing the rendering steps for the model so that in loads the vertex buffer and texture, then calls to draw primitive and seting the world matrix to the position and orientation of the specifyed particle, further particles should be sorted by model number
that said I have no desire to do that
-
Originally posted by Sticks
Originally posted by karajorma
As said elsewhere. I'd like to see 3.6 include the ability that Wing Commander had to allow you to restart any campaign from any mission you played previously (this would allow you to play a different branch of a campaign without having to go back and play the whole thing again).
I'm not sure how plausible this is with the current system. [/B]
I posted it cause Goober thought he could do it and wanted it as a reminder :) We'll see if he can later I guess :)
-
Originally posted by Sticks
Actually I think I could get this into 3.6, it's probably only a couple lines of code.
Really? Could it be included in the next version? Please? Pretty please Mr. Ub3r SCP Coder-Admin-type-person :nod: ;) :)
-
Shinemapping is on by default, isn't it? It should have a command-line option, just like the rest of the stuff.
-
Specular in general has a command line, I put in -nospec right after 3.5.5. Shinemapping does not, however.
-
...theres a difference between shinemapping and specular highlights? (In the FS2 sense atleast?)
-
Not that I know of.
It depends on the shine-map the ship uses - the ones GE did are pretty much specular highlighting 'cause they only allow little parts of a ship to shine - Lightspeed's map are generally more shiny.
Some FS1 ship can even go without shinemaps.
-
The brightness defines shine, the colour defines specular if I remember rightly?
-
The color defines the color of reflected light from a pure white color source - so a red star will reflect as red from a shiny metalic surface.
The brigtness defines the intensity.
-
Got it :)
I've had one thought about those proximity activated mines I mentioned earlier (though I think an idea like this has been suggested before). I was wondering how easy/hard it would be to get the AI to use it? I'm thinking of assault ships carrying a small 'anti-interceptor' version (possibly even have a choice between them and countermeasures, though this might be a bad idea) It would make chasing bombers so much more fun ;)
-
Visible cockpit! :cool: I was thinking more like Wing Commander 3 or Prophecy. Plus-points if it moves around like in Starlancer. Come on, get to work now! :D
Ejection. Surely the GTVA will have invented space-parachutes by now? A credible retrieval-process, and you could possibly just use one o' them Hygeias or something. The escape-pods don't have to be big or anything. Ha, imagine the missions we could script with that!
DirectX 9 bells and whistles. Badassness.
A measure of motion blur would be nice, if it didn't eat all my resources and then some (Babylon 5: I've Found Her is REALLY nasty with motion blur enabled to my machine, which has no problem running, well, anything - so far). Snazzy, innit?
If the nebula could be made out of some kind of fog instead of these... 'poofs', I bet it would look prrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrretty. If ships passing through could cause turbulence... *Continues to making completely impossible fog-related suggestions which WOULD without a doubt look awesome*
Someone spoke about perspective some time ago, hinting that ships in FS2 could look even more to scale. Well? What're you waiting for? ;)
Also, I think the asteroids look a little funny... I can't point out anything precise, they just feel... strange. I guess I should just leave that one for Lightspeed. That's all for me for now.
-
Persistent values at campaign level?
They would allow a new degree of continuity and logistic...
Basically it involves saving values like ship status and ammunition loadout on a file, and having FRED reading it...
Placing the ship's name as primary key will do most of the work imho...
Also, what about software trueform applied on loading (have mercy of the slow machine owners)?
Also, distance fogging may be useful in order to increase fps... just make it optional with a value... (maybe we will need a new launcher in order to support all the optional stuff).
-
Originally posted by Zarax
Persistent values at campaign level?
They would allow a new degree of continuity and logistic...
Basically it involves saving values like ship status and ammunition loadout on a file, and having FRED reading it...
already there, althought with some limitations
-
Karma, are you italian?
-
Oh, can you also make fred display only the compatible weapons when you change them from ship settings?
-
Originally posted by Silent Warrior
If the nebula could be made out of some kind of fog instead of these... 'poofs', I bet it would look prrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrretty. If ships passing through could cause turbulence... *Continues to making completely impossible fog-related suggestions which WOULD without a doubt look awesome*
MMMMMMmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Tachyon: The Fringe style nebula fogging. Make the nebulas look really thick and soupy and hard to see in. :D
-
Originally posted by Zarax
Karma, are you italian?
direi di si:)
-
Bene, fa piacere trovare italiani nei forum internazionali...
Da dove più di preciso?
-
Originally posted by mikhael
MMMMMMmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Tachyon: The Fringe style nebula fogging. Make the nebulas look really thick and soupy and hard to see in. :D
Yup. Tachyon was a good game- had some of the best nebulas i've seen :)
Never knew anyone else actually played it tho :nervous:
*wonders if he cant convert the claymore bomber or the warhammer into FS2* hmm... :drevil:
-
I've got a half finished Battleaxe here some where, as well as the first Bora ship you get. I've really got to finish those one day. I'd love to see them used in Freespace. Wasn't too fond of the Galspan designs though. They were lovely to look at and great to fly but you just feel kinda... you know... unmanly flying them. They're so... pretty. ;)
As I recall, Phreak likes Tachyon too, and I think Thorn does too.
-
i never played Tachyon. I think i was too busy with IW2 or something. Not to mention i didn't have much money.
-
Tachyon was so unfulfilling for me I took it back to EB the next day... too short, the missions were verging on the ridiculous in some cases (stealing the roof of the Sistine Chapel???), it was buggy and the endings were very, very poor.
-
idea, a command line option to break multi and increase the tbl limit of 130 ships. this way, mod's could go OTT and multi would still work for some stuff.
-
Originally posted by kasperl
idea, a command line option to break multi and increase the tbl limit of 130 ships. this way, mod's could go OTT and multi would still work for some stuff.
:yes: This is an absolutely brilliant Idea.
-
You can't do it that way. ;) You have to completely recompile the code whichever way you do it.
-
Well...err...poo. How about a system where major releases from here on in are done in both standard 130 limit and multiplayer broken 255 limit? The Inferno build's an OK temporary measure, but it's updated infrequently compared to the standard build, and if Woo decides inferno doesn;t need a feature, it gets left out, which represents a bit of a problem for any of us others trying to use all the FS features and high numbers of ships.
-
actually the inferno build is a mirror of the SCP build with more limits
-
Oh... I seem to recall discussions previously where things were being remopved and suchlike. Still, I'm more than happy to be wrong :D
-
This is a concept for overhauling the damage calculation I've already posted several posts about the issue - I try to simplyfy and evolve it.
Multistage Developed - Improoved Damage Simulation[/size]
Stage I - Improoved Damage Formulae
Damage Treshold / Damage Resistance - Damage calculation system
A basic overhaul of the current damage system and instead the exiting - and somewhat hackish- flag system.
It will use a separate armor.tbl which either contains a variety of armors or is an addenda to ships.tbl.
Damage calculation is now: (Weapon Damage - Armor Treshold)*(100% - Armor Resistance(%))
The treshold simulates the deflection power of the armor - this will put an end to all the HUGE, BIG SHIP and ect. flag frenzy that never seemed to offer a perfect solution.
Armor Resistance is not really necessary at this point since you can simply assign higher hit points to bigger capships, but if you wish you can already simulate hevier armor plating and stuff like that.
Stage II - Armor Strengh Simulation
Penetrating Damage = (WeaponDamage - Damage Treshold*ArmorHp(%)) (100% - Damage Resistance(%)*ArmorHp(%))
Armor Damage = (WeaponDamage - Damage Treshold * ArmorHp(%))*Damage Resistance(%) / Armor Endurance
Penetrating Damage = the old damage value aplied to the ship as usual
Armor HP = pretty self explanatory - the status of the armor
Armor Damage = this will be substracted from the ArmorHp
Armor Endurace - think of it as the armor resistance to falling apart. It simulates that even if the armor takes damage (absorbing it) it's stucture is less deformed than the interior of a ship, since the armor was designed to do so.
This advanced model introduces the wear of the armor - so the ammount of damage will gradually increase. That way a tiny fighter will be able to deal the last shot to a destroyer if the bombers already ravaged it with their heavy bombs.
This is the point where armor resistance becomes necessary - it actually simulates the ammount of damage the armor absorbs when a shot goes through it.
Stage III - Localised Armor Stats
Self Explanatory title - segments of the ship have their own armor simulation - prelude to true armor plate simulation
Stage IV - Segmented Damage Model
Once Segments are defined in Stage III - they can be used for simulating damage to individual parts of a warship.
Stage IV-2 - Complex Segmented Damage model
Segments have key components(subsystems) that dictate the segments performance.
Stage V - True Surface Damage Simulation
Development of true armorplate simulation on the surface of the ship.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stage VI-A - True Geometric Armor Plate Simulation
Armor plates have a thickness - may be impossible due computing needs
They take damage accordingly
Stage VI-B - True Geometric Damage Model
Ship sections take damage based on the penetration of projectiles into the ship's interior.
Requires advanced ship parts with varied components - uses the already suggested Reliability/Performance/Repair system with key/secondary systems in a subsystem or a ship section.
-
Erm. Good concept, but we'd have to completely redesign the engine to implement it. You'd probably see multiple docking before this.
-
and what about just a "critical subobject" system?
By default all the ships will have "hull", with the standard assigned hitpoints, as critical subobject (for backward compatibility).
When a critical subobject (or group of subobjects) will be destroyed, set "hull" hitpoints=0
Critical subobjects will be added in the tables, with (possibly
) some operators, examples:
-critical ("engines" "bridge" "powercore")
the ship will be destroyed when hull or any of the above subobjects will be destroyed
-critical (["engines" "bridge"] "powercore")
the ship will be destroyed when hull or powercore or bridge AND engines will be destroyed
Also a localized damage factor would be very very cool.
To do this I think you should assign a different damage factor to different trextures.
This would be obviously problematic when the ship is unwrapped.
Another solution would be to use some other discriminant factor.
For example, if kazan could add it to pcs, the system could assign different damage factors to different Truespace reflectance values(or maybe luminosity or any other poly-specific variable)
-
In the case of things like 'Bridge' and 'engines' you don't really want the ship to blow up. You want it to be turned into a derelict or something.
-
Originally posted by Flaser
Not that I know of.
It depends on the shine-map the ship uses - the ones GE did are pretty much specular highlighting 'cause they only allow little parts of a ship to shine - Lightspeed's map are generally more shiny.
Some FS1 ship can even go without shinemaps.
Where can I get the ones GE did?? I'd like to take a look at them
-
Well, what about setting threshold + resistance only to non subsystem points?
It would be far simpler to implement.
-
Originally posted by Raven2001
Where can I get the ones GE did?? I'd like to take a look at them
It's not really about which ones he did or I did.
They're not the same maps.
He did the FS1 ships, and I did the ships in FS2 (excluding the FS1 ships) - so only combining both shinemap zips you'll have shinemaps for every ship.
His shinemaps are in the mediaVPs.
-
Originally posted by mikhael
In the case of things like 'Bridge' and 'engines' you don't really want the ship to blow up. You want it to be turned into a derelict or something.
well it was just an example, this way you can specify any subsystem you want.
And I was thinking at WC prophecy, where the capships don't exactly blow, they are dead after you destroy bridge+engines but they remain there as derelicts.
BTW with this system you may add specific flaws to a ship, like the deathstar's end of the trench, or the nascelles on a startrek ship, etc.
mmm
I was thinking...what about making a derelict version of a capship as debris????? is still there a polylimit on the debris? because this could be a very very cool thing to do.......
-
I'd like to see WC-style between-mission 'interactive movie' interaction. :)
-
Originally posted by Lightspeed
It's not really about which ones he did or I did.
They're not the same maps.
He did the FS1 ships, and I did the ships in FS2 (excluding the FS1 ships) - so only combining both shinemap zips you'll have shinemaps for every ship.
His shinemaps are in the mediaVPs.
I really wish you'd do the FS1 ships. GE didn't make shine maps. He made specular highlighted maps which looked like poo.
-
Originally posted by Lightspeed
I'd like to see WC-style between-mission 'interactive movie' interaction. :)
That always annoyed me in WC. It's not like you were ever going to not click on the characters and chat with them so they might as well have done all the "interaction" in a cutscene and saved me the bother of clicking :D
-
about the critical subobject thing, I was thinking..
a subobject to be critical also has to be destroyable, so it already has a table entry.
instead of creating a new string "critical", just add for example a letter (-a,-b..) to the string with the hitpoints.... this way the impact on the file size will be minimal.
The letters will identify critical groups, so if all the critical subobjects have a different letter, each of them will make the ship die if destroyed.
If two or more subobjects will have the same letter, the ship will die only if all the subobjects with the same letter will be destroyed.
-
(just another suggestion, sorry if mentioned elsewhere)
what about having the option to replace the particle trails with a sort of 'fire effect' - i.e. like there's a large breach and the oxygen is burning off into space. Not sure how this would look, granted.....
-
KARMA, isn't there already something like critical subsystems, such as with the Lucifer. Regardless of what the hull strenght is, as soon as all 5 reactors go down, the ship blows up. However, I do think opening this feature up would be good, since it might help with some Star Trek conversions. Omni said that when he linked (like with the 3-barrel cannons on the Orion) all the firepoints on a phaser strip (ring, arc, whatever), it would solve the multiple shots problem, but suddenly the entire ring would be targetted with a large box. I thought that if the firepoints on an arc were made to be untargetable subsystems but still linked, and then have a single, unarmed turret or subsystem behind the main arc that could be targetted, it might solve those problems. When this subsystem (or turret) is destroyed, all the firepoints on it would self destruct, simulating the phaser arc's destruction. Does this idea hold water?
Later!
-
Looks like people didn't really get the core of it.
I called it multiple stage development, because I wanted to break the whole concept down to implementable improovements.
Goober I know it would need the massive rewritting of the code therefore I proposed several stages for a development should anyone try.
Right now I would be happy with the implementation of STAGE I alone, since it will end the big ship/big gun flag frenzy and offer modders a more handy system to take care of the issue.
STAGE II could be harder - and it would definitly need more work - but it still won't change too much of the graphical system. All it does is simulate a wear of the armor.
It adds one more stat to the ship than STAGE I and makes the earlier developed armor system a function of the stat.
I know it is a lot more complicated to code - but so far it didn't involve any localisation of damage or simulation of different armors, only a ship by ship armor simulation.
So yes, this is would need extensive coding - but so far no change of the graphical engine as far as I see.
-
Brainless comment: Lower / more efficient memory usage = good.
-
Oh yes, and theres one more, this one has certainly been asked before, but I can't remember if anything came of it....
Would it be possible to have the ability to define charge up/down on any turret regardless of whether it is a beam or not?
:D
-
Ooh That'd rawk! It'd be hella cool for large ass pulse weaponry! :D:D:D
-
And maybe having a loopsound for fighter beams, so they will be more "realistic"
-
I'd love to see a point-camera-at-object sexp for the purposes of in-engine cutscenes that takes 3 arguments - distance from object, angle of view from x axis, and angle of view from y axis. Or something similar, anyway.
-
...request for when the code isn't in frozen status anymore.
I figured having a good glass effect could be done much more simply w/o all the hassle of greyscale maps, etc:
the idea would have a second invisible map ( invis2.pcx ), to which you could link a specular map. So you'd just see the reflections, but no map under it. Instant, easy glass cockpits for you.
-
Originally posted by SadisticSid
I'd love to see a point-camera-at-object sexp for the purposes of in-engine cutscenes that takes 3 arguments - distance from object, angle of view from x axis, and angle of view from y axis. Or something similar, anyway.
You can do that by hiding the hud and using point-object-at-location to turn the player's ship.
-
Nico, couldn't this be done by just having a pure green 1 x 1 PCX texture for colour and a shine map, and using that for your cockpit, or have I misunderstood?
-
Originally posted by karajorma
That always annoyed me in WC. It's not like you were ever going to not click on the characters and chat with them so they might as well have done all the "interaction" in a cutscene and saved me the bother of clicking :D
in a cutscene, you cannot decide what to say or how to act.
-
Maybe they did it differently in the others but in Prophecy I always felt railroaded around by the plot into saying stupid things.
Of course if this was done properly it would be cool :D
-
Originally posted by Goober5000
You can do that by hiding the hud and using point-object-at-location to turn the player's ship.
Yes and it's completely inadequate because using this method would only ever alter the camera every second.
-
How about a Lock-Camera-On-Object where you'd set it to always follow an object as it moves, but only the camera. The camera wouldn't actually follow the ship (ie. it wouldn't speed up to keep the same distance with it) but only keep the camera locked on it. Or a Lock-Player-Ship-Facing-Object which would do the same thing.
or set it up as if you put 0 distance that the camera wouldn't move from its position but only keep its lens locked on the movement of the object, but if you put any number in, it would keep that distance always from the object.
I don't know.
-
Originally posted by SadisticSid
Yes and it's completely inadequate because using this method would only ever alter the camera every second.
So use _argv's feature of having the sexp operate every frame.
(I actually don't know if this is still implemented... we may have to put it back in.)
-
AUTO ETS - from _avgr - it made the AI a lot better IIRC.
-
cogpits this would be a awsome thing to have, the current hud could be kept like its on the pilots visor, but a full 3d cogpit like seen in the fs1 intro movie with panning comparable to x2 - the thread il2 sturmovik etc. That is what i like to see, working instruments would be a plus to, a cogpit can add alot to the immersion.
-
Originally posted by Goober5000
So use _argv's feature of having the sexp operate every frame.
(I actually don't know if this is still implemented... we may have to put it back in.)
This sounds helpful but I made a quick search of the forums and couldn't find any mention of it. Nor is there any obvious means of making this work in FRED 3.5.5, although that may be an old version. Can you link me to where this was discussed?
-
Originally posted by Flipside
Nico, couldn't this be done by just having a pure green 1 x 1 PCX texture for colour and a shine map, and using that for your cockpit, or have I misunderstood?
Is the occlusion bug fixed for this, though? Because last time I tested, the engine didn't realise the true green was invisible and didn't render anything behind it.
There is the invisible texture, but that also seems to disable collision detection.
-
IIRC there's a sexp to enable/disable collisions with invisible textured polys, or something like that, used for energy fields on/off
-
Originally posted by KARMA
IIRC there's a sexp to enable/disable collisions with invisible textured polys, or something like that, used for energy fields on/off
Neat. Not much use to me, unfortunately - is there any support of partial transparency yet (either through true-green regions or TGA alpha)?
-
any TGA textures used on models with an alpha channel will be transparent according to their alpha channel.
I once made a 50% transparent fighter ;)
-
Originally posted by karajorma
Maybe they did it differently in the others but in Prophecy I always felt railroaded around by the plot into saying stupid things.
Of course if this was done properly it would be cool :D
Prophecy sucked, compared to WC 3 & 4.
It was really, really well done in WC3 & 4 :D
-
Originally posted by KARMA
IIRC there's a sexp to enable/disable collisions with invisible textured polys, or something like that, used for energy fields on/off
Neat. Not much use to me, unfortunately - is there any support of partial transparency yet (either through true-green regions or TGA alpha)?
-
tga with alpha are already possible, but they have been designed mainly for planets, nebulaes etc, not textures.
They should work on models too, but result may be a little odd and may be different on different systems.
Don't know if the old bob's trans system already work or if they have been eliminated (trans maps like glowmaps, but transparency was relative and not absolute, depending by light)
pure green is still poss, I think
-
Originally posted by Lightspeed
any TGA textures used on models with an alpha channel will be transparent according to their alpha channel.
I once made a 50% transparent fighter ;)
-
Originally posted by KARMA
tga with alpha are already possible, but they have been designed mainly for planets, nebulaes etc, not textures.
... And they do NOT work on planets. :blah:
-
Yes, but does the partially/fully transparent polygon still occlude those behind it?
-
Originally posted by Lightspeed
... And they do NOT work on planets. :blah:
lol, really?:lol:
-
I vote for the decal code to be fixed and put back in :)