Hard Light Productions Forums

Community Projects => The FreeSpace Campaign Restoration Project => Topic started by: Admiral Nelson on March 24, 2007, 01:39:22 pm

Title: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on March 24, 2007, 01:39:22 pm
Opening a thread for Warzone discussion here.  Still no sign of any activation mail for me at Lt Gen Mobius' other forum.

Overall:

Warzone often seems to have trouble with failure debriefings.  For instance, in the mission "Dusk Hour", the Warlock was destroyed in one of my run throughs.  I was taken to a debriefing congratulating me on successfully protecting Warlock.  Similarly in the mission"Northwest Passage"  one of the four convoy ships was destroyed, but I received a success briefing but could not progress.  Additionally, quite a few missions give you a return to base directive, which is then followed by plot critical dialogue.  I missed a good bit of this dialogue until I opened the missions themselves and saw it there.  The RTB directive should come only after such dialogue is over.

Misc.

In mission "Mystery of the Deep" you are directed to investigate an "unknown ship."  The unknown ship shows up in the escort list and your HUD quite clearly as the "GTE Vidar."

In mission "Northwest Passage"  you get messages that the Shivan frigate is "right behind" the GTC Nicholas, yet the Nicholas itself never appears in the mission.  Sometimes the Shivan frigate can pass out of the Vasudan destroyer's firing arcs and escape destruction.

In mission "Myths and Legends" you are told to fly to a nav buoy, but the buoy is not added to your escort list and can only be targeted by cycling through all friendly targets.

In mission"Stacking the Deck" Terran fighters are available in the ship selection screen.

I have added LS backgrounds now to all missions, and m2258734a's stars to Kaus Borealis, Gienah Cygni and Naos.  That leaves Sirius and Regulus to be done.  I have to add his stars to the Mintaka nebula missions.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Bob-san on March 24, 2007, 07:27:29 pm
I activated you. It's actually my forum; Mobius is only a mod... he didn't know how to properly use Admin CP so I disabled it so he didnt f*** up the forum. (sorry Mobius; you said you had no idea before)

Anyways... I haven't even played Warzone yet, so I don't know too much about it.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on March 26, 2007, 12:32:39 pm
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/FS2/kitchener.jpg)

Please help test this WIP release, and/or pick up one of the to do items below! :)

WIP Download (http://files.filefront.com//;7137128;;/)

TO DO:
Locate any missions with plot critical messages that come after a RTB directive is issued and move them to come before said directive.  The player can easily miss out on important information, as one tends to jump out immediately after the RTB notification is given.
Create GTC Nicolas nameplate
Create high rez custom planets to replace the low res ones supplied with the campaign
Adjust backgrounds to make use of said new planets properly
Create high rez textures and shine/glow maps for the GTE Vidar (the model isn't too bad but its textures are terribly small and blurry)
Test all missions to ensure that failure notifications and AWOL debriefings work properly. 
General testing.  Play all missions and report anything strange.

Change Log (26/03/07):

Warzone is a pretty solid campaign overall (with the exception of one mission); below are the things I have changed to date:

I have added LS backgrounds / skybox to all non nebular missions, and m2258734a's stars to Kaus Borealis, Gienah Cygni, Naos and Mintaka. (Sirius and Regulus stars are not yet available).

Grammar fixes (primarily its vs. it's and Incorrect Use Of Capital Letters)

A handful of spelling errors / typos

Added some text to explain how Mintaka is now a supernova remnant when it isn't in reality.

In mission "Mystery of the Deep" you are directed to investigate an "unknown ship."  The "unknown ship" shows up in the escort list and your HUD quite clearly as the "GTE Vidar." Changed to "Unknown Vessel."

In mission "Myths and Legends" you are told to fly to a nav buoy, but the buoy is not added to your escort list and can only be targeted by cycling through all friendly targets. Added buoy to escort list. Buoy disappears when no longer needed.

In mission "Stacking the Deck", the team loadout was not customized, meaning that any fighter with any weapon can be selected.  Choices restricted to be the same as in the previous mission.

Mission "Northwest Passage" had many issues:
   Primary and secondary goals conflicted with one another. If any one convoy ship was destroyed, the primary goal would remain true and a secondary goal false.  Result was a success briefing, but mission failure.  Now all convoy ships must survive to get the success briefing (which matches the campaign file).
   No abort mission directive was present.  Now if the player fails the mission, he is notified of the fact in mission and told to RTB.
   Aries wing had an incorrect destroy directive; has-arrived-delay was used instead of is-destroyed-delay
   Some messages in the mission were never used.
   The Remehas is supposed to be "right behind the GTC Nicolas", yet the Nicolas never appears in mission even though it has messages.  Added the Nicolas; keeping it alive is now a bonus goal.  the Nicolas will fly in a straight line away from the Remehas and then jump out.  It is just close enough to get one blast from the corvette which reduces it to around 25% hull integrity.  The player needs to help it survive the Manticores until it can jump.
   The Remehas will always make a hard turn to starboard when the Tatenen arrives.  This often resulted in the corvette passing behind the destroyer and thus out of its firing arcs.  Turned the Tatenen to starboard so that the Remehas is always destroyed.


Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Sarafan on March 26, 2007, 03:31:28 pm
 :lol: :lol: :lol:

Can someone write Hard Light or GTVA on that image?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Raven2001 on March 26, 2007, 05:16:15 pm
Added some text to explain how Mintaka is now a supernova remnant when it isn't in reality.

You mean in a briefing? Please dont do it, if the original makers didnt feel the need to say that, then you shouldnt either

As far as im aware, thi is meant to make the campaign FSO level and fix bugs. If im getting that sentence right, that isnt any of them
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on March 26, 2007, 05:21:46 pm
Well, Mintaka is a real star, and it clearly isn't a supernova remnant.  Therefore something must have happened to the star relatively recently.

The original read
Quote
If we were to return to Capella the view outside would be very much the same.  Perhaps this nebula is the result of the destruction of yet another sun by the Shivan Sathanas fleet hundreds of years ago.

the revised reads:

Quote
If we were to return to Capella the view outside would be very much the same.  Terran scientists were puzzled by the supernova of Mintaka Ab some 700 years ago, long before the star was expected to perish.  Perhaps this nebula is the result of the destruction of yet another sun by the Shivan Sathanas fleet hundreds of years ago.

This doesn't really change anything of any consequence.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Herra Tohtori on March 26, 2007, 05:27:49 pm
Is the small star supposed to have completely blinding glare spot on it in the first missions (don't remember which system)?

Otherwise, lookin' good. Up till the first transfer to bomber unit, only one small bug encountered - in one briefing text there was some "XTRS(" stuff in the front, or something similar. HAven't played further yet.

The only thing that disturbs me now is something entirely unrelated to Warzone but instead to FS2_Open in general (and I hope it'll be fixed soon): the way some things move differently in relation to other things on the background. Retail stars, subspace nodes and stars for example have a tendency to move in relation to other things when you change your attitude. And they move a lot, especially if you're using something like -fov 0.60 or -fov 0.55.

Does the coder department know about this issue? Is it/should it be posted to Mantis?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on March 26, 2007, 05:57:26 pm
Yeah, the XSTRs are my fault, they come from grammar fixes in which I placed a semicolon into mission dialogue.  I have to go back and remove any of these.  Please just note any mission in which you find them.

Regulus and Sirius; the systems in the first missions, don't have custom stars made by m2258734a, just the retail ones.  Therefore luminosity for every star in those missions is 1.0.  This will be changed when he finishes those stars.

The background problem sounds like something for Mantis.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on March 26, 2007, 06:20:21 pm
I'm not too sure if the issue has been reported to Mantis, either way I hope it gets fixed.

Yeah, Admiral Nelson and I were discussing the inconsistencies with Mintaka being a supernova remnant in the "Stellar enhancements" thread. It's just a way to make the causes of the events sound reasonable.

TO DO:

Create high rez custom planets to replace the low res ones supplied with the campaign

Let's see, I attacked Terran1 not to long ago.

Before:
(http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r21/m22587a/Freespace%20SCP/p_terran1.jpg)                                                       

After:
(http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r21/m22587a/Freespace%20SCP/p_terran1I.jpg)

What do you think? If something needs to be done just let me know. Also, what size should these planets be? I currently have them saved as 512x512.

Also, sorry about the hold up on the main sequence stars. I'm busy every week with coursework so I try to fit in time for FSSCP when I have an opportunity.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on March 26, 2007, 06:42:07 pm
Looking a lot better.  Let's see what Herra has to say.

No worries on the star timeline.... :)

Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Herra Tohtori on March 26, 2007, 06:54:54 pm
Well... since you asked... :drevil:

-> m2258734a:
If you're interested in making planets as well as stars, there was a thread (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,41939.0.html) in Hard Light Art (since renamed Fan Fiction and Art forum) which gathered some interesting links to different techniques involved in making 2D planets.

Regarding the re-worked Terran1 planet: Good work, but I would use much higher resolution to begin with and the nreduce the resolution to preferred size... that is, if your computer has enough memory. I usually work at 4096x4096 and since I only have 1GB of memory, it tends to cause some problems sometimes. Regarding techniques...

...in both those planets the terminator (line of shadow and light) is b0rked. There's much more than half of that planet illuminated. Also, I could suggest using less radiant green (reduce the saturation of green colour perhaps) and perhaps apply some kind of filter to cloud layer to make it more... cloudy. IWarp tends to work fine in GIMP for making relatively good looking clouds. Currently they look more like ice caps thrown everywhere around the planet, no offense. Also, atmospheric blur generally is bluish, not grey for planets that are habitable.

Don't get me wrong here. It looks good, but I'm just a perfectionist about planets... you can ask Adm. Nelson about different coloured stars reflecting from ocean, for example. If you want any advice on the planets, give me a shout... I might not have time to make any, but I'll gladly offer help.

But, I think that's beyond the actual topic at hand in this thread. We can continue here on this thread if you deem it all right, or at the thread I linked, or via PM's (though they tend to go unnoticed...). Your call. :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on March 26, 2007, 07:10:25 pm
As I've probably illustrated elsewhere, I'm a bit of a grammar/spelling nazi.  I'm not much when it comes to technical aspects, but I'd be happy to play through the missions and identify any bugs in them as well as identify and correct grammar/spelling/writing issues.

Provided, of course, that we are willing to go beyond merely fixing these campaigns and instead work towards improving them as well.

This is similar to what I mentioned in the TLM thread; which, I might add, has not been commented on  :doubt:
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on March 26, 2007, 08:13:28 pm
Grammar nazis are certainly welcome. :)

The real issue here, I suppose, is what exactly constitutes "improvement."  Warzone, for instance, is a pretty solid, classic campaign.  It could stand minor bugfixing, voice acting, bringing its graphics up to date, and a few tweaks here and there.  Not too much extra improving, really.  Now the early Lightning Marshal campaigns are a different matter.  There is quite a bit of improvement that could be done.  Given where community interest seems to lie, perhaps the best thing to do is to play through the WIP Warzone and note down any and all issues / grammar problems or any other suggestions you might have. I am especially interested in the integrity of the failure / AWOL debriefings in this campaign.  These suggestions will in turn produce some steps to fix, some of which can be assigned to you.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Goober5000 on March 26, 2007, 08:21:14 pm
Yeah, the XSTRs are my fault, they come from grammar fixes in which I placed a semicolon into mission dialogue.
Are you aware of the $semicolon feature in SCP?  Or are we keeping this retail compatible?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on March 26, 2007, 08:26:06 pm
It remains retail compatible for now, though that isn't really necessary since a retail user can always play the original Warzone.

What is the $semicolon feature?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: jr2 on March 26, 2007, 08:30:02 pm
It inserts a semicolon into the text, so you can use a semicolon in a briefing or whatever; like so.
If you tried that without using $semicolon, it would comment out the rest of the text.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on March 26, 2007, 09:04:52 pm
Grammar nazis are certainly welcome. :)

The real issue here, I suppose, is what exactly constitutes "improvement."  Warzone, for instance, is a pretty solid, classic campaign.  It could stand minor bugfixing, voice acting, bringing its graphics up to date, and a few tweaks here and there.  Not too much extra improving, really.  Now the early Lightning Marshal campaigns are a different matter.  There is quite a bit of improvement that could be done.  Given where community interest seems to lie, perhaps the best thing to do is to play through the WIP Warzone and note down any and all issues / grammar problems or any other suggestions you might have. I am especially interested in the integrity of the failure / AWOL debriefings in this campaign.  These suggestions will in turn produce some steps to fix, some of which can be assigned to you.

Sounds like I have a project for Friday =)

I'll wanr you, I'll have bursts of productivity... between papers and midterms, mostly :P
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on March 26, 2007, 09:33:41 pm
No offense taken whatsoever, Herra.

Since our comments are related to a planet that is in this campaign, I would guess that it is fine to talk about it in this thread. I do think that it would be better that from now on I'll comment on your thread if that's ok.

Let's see, my intention was to make the improved Terran1 look very similar to the original, only higher resolution and much more realistic-looking with a touch of some artistic license. So making a totally realistic habitable planet was not on my mind when I was recreating this planet, :).

When you talk about the borked terminator line, is the problem that the shadow does not blend too well? I wasn't quite sure what you meant by borked other than I ****ed up somewhere, ;). The same goes for the illuminated percentage of the planet. I was trying to make the total illumination very similar to the original. Should I make the planet less illuminated to better match the original? As for the green, I was trying to keep the colors original, too. I noticed that on the original Terran1, there is a bluish region that I assumed to be a polar ice cap. So I did the same to the improved version. I also did the same with the vivid green hue of the terrain. If you would like, I can ease up on the green for a more realistic appearance.

The clouds.... same case :lol:. The original planet does not seem to have a tremendous amount of cloud cover, so I tried to do the same for the improved planet. I'll go back, add more cloud cover, and make the clouds more wispy. Finally, the atmospheric blur is a very light blue. I'll go back and add some more blue when I can.

Don't worry, feedback and ideas are always welcome. I am still a rookie, so I appreciate your replies and help.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Herra Tohtori on March 27, 2007, 03:02:44 am
Okay then.

Let's see, my intention was to make the improved Terran1 look very similar to the original, only higher resolution and much more realistic-looking with a touch of some artistic license. So making a totally realistic habitable planet was not on my mind when I was recreating this planet, :).

Ah. In that case it's even better work.  :)

Note that I base almost everything I do for realism, as I tend to see it produces just as pretty end results as using more artistic lisence, and won't disturb the heck out of those who are even more realism freaks than me. Using more artistic lisence is not in itself worse or better way to do stuff, just different. So don't assume my opinions to be better in themselves.

Quote
When you talk about the borked terminator line, is the problem that the shadow does not blend too well? I wasn't quite sure what you meant by borked other than I ****ed up somewhere, ;). The same goes for the illuminated percentage of the planet. I was trying to make the total illumination very similar to the original. Should I make the planet less illuminated to better match the original?

Well, it all depends. If you want to keep it close to original, it's rather good as it is, because the original is almost similarly flawed in that part.

What I'm talking about is that a terminator line practically always divides a sphere in half: dark and illuminated sides. That means that looked from the side, the shadow line starts from the exact opposite sides of the planet; how it curves then is up to the placement of light sources. Blending is not an issue here - although I personally make the terminator lines a bit differently. I make a square layer, paint it half white, half black, then blur the transition area with preferable amount of Gaussian Blur. After that I wrap the texture into sphere and rotate it until I have it at the attitude I want my planet to be illuminated with. Then I place that layer on top of the planet and make white transparent, leaving the black shadow on top of the planet.

I can post images of the shadow layers if you want.

Quote
As for the green, I was trying to keep the colors original, too. I noticed that on the original Terran1, there is a bluish region that I assumed to be a polar ice cap. So I did the same to the improved version. I also did the same with the vivid green hue of the terrain. If you would like, I can ease up on the green for a more realistic appearance.

It's not the colour of the green per ce, it's that the albedo (brightness) of those locations seems tremendously bigger than their immediate surroundings. It's like someone spread bright green enamel paint on some parts of the planet. The original planet is more uniform colour as far as I can see.

Quote
The clouds.... same case :lol:. The original planet does not seem to have a tremendous amount of cloud cover, so I tried to do the same for the improved planet. I'll go back, add more cloud cover, and make the clouds more wispy. Finally, the atmospheric blur is a very light blue. I'll go back and add some more blue when I can.

No, don't add cloud coverage, theres already slightly more than in the original as far as I can see. The thing I meant is that for the most part, your clouds look rather solid and thick with relatively sharply defined edges. It's not bad either, but real clouds are stretched and bent by the winds into vortices and other kind of formations, and that's what you can also see in the original Terran1 image, albeit with very low resolution. Here's an example of what I mean with the clouds:

(http://users.tkk.fi/~lmiettun/Kuvat/Space/planet_on_black_1024.jpg)

Although there's not too much cloud coverage on that one, you can see what I mean by wind bending the cloud formations.

I usually simply make an uniform cloud, then change the resolution so that there is more black than white visible. Then I apply IWarp filter, which is an excellent tool but takes bloody long time to complete with higher resolutions. After it finishes, I wrap the layer to a sphere again, rotate until I found satisfactory cloud patterns, then place it on top of the planet's surface and make black transparent. Then I usually apply some bump mapping to the cloud layer to make it appear to be in the atmosphere, which I can also see you have done.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: jr2 on March 27, 2007, 03:32:06 am
(http://img368.imageshack.us/img368/4259/planetonblack10244725feer2.th.jpg) (http://img368.imageshack.us/my.php?image=planetonblack10244725feer2.jpg)
That pic... is awesome!!!.  The only beef I have with it is that the rivers are too bit, IMHO.  Unless that's supposed to be that way (bigger rivers than Earth).  Howsabout I post an image from Google Earth, and a few from NASA (or someone else can), so we can compare with the real thing?  I think that pic comes extremely close to being indistinguishable from Earth by Sattellite.
Oh, and I think the cloud cover is just fine... Earth has that much sometimes, doesn't it?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Herra Tohtori on March 27, 2007, 05:07:05 am
Yeah, the rivers were an experiment.

If you want some reference, NASA pictures are good, but GoogleEarth is not. It's a map program after all. Better would be NASA's WorldWind 1.4 (http://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/download.html), which is pretty sweet. Includes atmospheric scattering, sun shading and satellite imagery of Earth. Although there's a bit too much ambient light on the dark side of the planet IMHO... but it's still cool.

Anyhow, the cloud coverage itself is not a problem, it's a planet-specific as well as season-specific property of planets. The thing is, the clouds in the new Terran1 have only little variety, and they kinda look like light gray pancakes tossed on top of the surface. Well, not really that bad... they're better than my first attempts, but that kind of clouds would mean that there's only very little wind going on in the atmosphere.


And btw... quoting big images is not really good practice, I don't have any particular problem with it but it does clutter threads un-necessarily.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: jr2 on March 27, 2007, 12:53:51 pm
Well the image resize tags don't work.  :(

EDIT: Here

(http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/8272/000000w000000syr9.th.png) (http://img164.imageshack.us/my.php?image=000000w000000syr9.png)(http://img377.imageshack.us/img377/7965/1956875w771285nlh3.th.png) (http://img377.imageshack.us/my.php?image=1956875w771285nlh3.png)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on March 27, 2007, 02:01:26 pm
What I'm talking about is that a terminator line practically always divides a sphere in half: dark and illuminated sides. That means that looked from the side, the shadow line starts from the exact opposite sides of the planet; how it curves then is up to the placement of light sources.

Ummm... maybe I'm missing this in your post, but the terminator line depends entirely upon the light source.  Point being, that much more than half the planet (that we see in FS) COULD be illuminated if the sun were place directly behind your spacecraft:  i.e.  (Planet)  ---- (You) --- (Sun)  In that case, the player's view of the entire planet (well, almost, planets are tilted) would be illuminated.

I don't know where the sun is placed in that particular mission, so maybe I'm wrong, but it seems incorrect to say the terminator line is off when you don't know precisely where the light source was located (in this case, the sun in the mission).

*shrug*  Just sayin' =)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Herra Tohtori on March 27, 2007, 02:24:34 pm
Obviously. That's why I imcluded the cover-my-arse-words "practically always".

In the end, you get the planet's light part by placing tangents to both the planet and the star, and then check what the angle between the tangents is. In most normal solar systems, the angle between the tangents is so close to zero that it's safe to say that one half of the planet is illuminated, other half is in shadow. Take Earth for example. The Sun is tiny, it's only about third of a degree in apparent diameter. It is enough to make shadows blurry at edges, but it is not enough to significantly affect the location of the terminator.

Of course there can be exotic systems with low intensity huge star and low orbit planet, in which case much more than half of the planet would be illuminated... but that would require that the star's apparent diameter was at least 20-30 degrees or more for the effect on terminator to be notable. And that's huge... Imagine if our sun would be that size. We obviously wouldn't remain solit for very long, but five degrees equals to about the width of a palm when you have your hand extended. So, if sun was 20 degrees in apparent diameter, it would fill about four palm width in the sky.

I daresay that in most cases there's no reason the GTVA would ever go that near to any star...

For all practical purposes, stars can be viewed as point light sources for what it's worth. It's way simpler that way and produces realistic enough results for most cases. And since we don't have soft shadows (or even stencil shadows for that matter), it doesn't really matter much. :cool:


EDIT: Ah, you misunderstood me. The terminator line is the line that divides the planet in two halves. How much about the planet's light side and dark side are visible is obviously entirely dependant on relative attitudes of the planet, star and the viewpoint.

But the dark side always covers roughly half of the planet, and the other half of the sphere is illuminated by the star. Except in mentioned exotic systems where there's no real need to be.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Macfie on March 27, 2007, 09:24:03 pm
I've got a bitmap for Warzone to use with the mod.  I'm attaching the bitmap and mod file.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on March 27, 2007, 09:55:14 pm
Nice, thank you! :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Goober5000 on March 27, 2007, 10:25:02 pm
I've got a bitmap for Warzone to use with the mod.  I'm attaching the bitmap and mod file.
War 2 One?

You might want to find a different Z. :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on March 27, 2007, 10:27:13 pm
I guess it isn't Z best....
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Goober5000 on March 27, 2007, 10:31:36 pm
A little 2 orthogonal, methinks...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: phreak on March 28, 2007, 07:57:06 pm
oh god that was horrible goober.

*downloads camp*
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Macfie on March 28, 2007, 11:58:36 pm
I've got a bitmap for Warzone to use with the mod.  I'm attaching the bitmap and mod file.
War 2 One?

You might want to find a different Z. :)
That is the way it was written on the original website.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on March 30, 2007, 04:36:34 pm
Nelson, the debug is spitting up turret /spline path errors in the first and second mission.  Haven't tried number 3 yet.  The first mission the error concerns the Faustus, and in the second it's the Moloch.

EDIT: 

Mission 3 has an XTSR during the in-game text transmissions.

Also, in mission 4 I assume those pixelated boxes are eventually becoming planets or something? =)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on March 30, 2007, 07:03:18 pm
Well, years ago when Warzone was released, I'm sure the planets were really good.  You see why they need to be made high rez for 2007.... :)

The spline path thing is related to models and not the missions.  I am not sure which pack has fully correct models pending the next media vps.

Fixed the XSTR message. 

Please check all directives when you test; I found in mission 2 one directive read "Destroy X" but the actual event attached to it was to protect the Valius.  There have been a variety of similar problems.  I have fixed another issue in the defend the Warlock mission in the nebula in which there is no abort mission directive, and possible trouble with the sequencing of certain messages.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on March 30, 2007, 09:09:47 pm
Well, Terran1 is almost finished. What I would like to ask is what file type should I make the image, and what size should the final image be after resolution reduction.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Herra Tohtori on March 30, 2007, 10:06:05 pm
Most likely DXT3 or DXT5 format DDS file would do... as to size, that depends on what size you want it to be in the mission!

I could calculate it accurately, but as a general rule you should pay attention to where the mission happens. Most likely key installations and events would be located on high orbit, likely on geosynchronous altitude, which are planet-specific. For earth, that altitude is about 35000 km... from which altitude Earth would appear to be about 17 degrees in apparent diameter.

Now, if you don't use any -fov X.XX command line, the default field of view in FS2 is 43 degrees horizontally. 17 degrees is about 40% of that. If the horizontal resolution of the game is 1280 pixels, 40% of that is 512 pixels...

So, if you would only have high orbit missions over some planet, you wouldn't need bigger planets than 512x512 resolution.

But it is likely that at some stage you or someone else would like to have a lower orbit mission around that planet, and in that case a bigger planet image would be required. 1024x1024 would offer possibility to do this, without being overly big. A planet of that size can be used to fill the screen from top to bottom, and quite frankly that is already big in FS2 mission. IMHO all missions closer to planet than that should be made with skyboxes anyway, so that would be a good resolution.


So... depending on the atmospheric blending, use either DXT3 or DXT5 compression DDS images. AS a rule of thumb, DXT5 has better alpha blending so if you have a thick atmosphere around your planet, blending to transparent space, use DXT5; if it's a lifeless rock or a gas giant with relatively thin atmosphere, use DXT3. Try both, though, and look which gives better results. If there's no noticeable difference, I would use DXT3 for planets.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on March 31, 2007, 10:04:54 am
There aren't any low orbit missions in Warzone, although this may well be due to the fact that retail can not handle a planet of that size that will look at all decent.  I think 512 square should work fine.  Terran1 is already much much better than the original low rez bitmap.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on March 31, 2007, 12:48:17 pm
Well, years ago when Warzone was released, I'm sure the planets were really good.  You see why they need to be made high rez for 2007.... :)

The spline path thing is related to models and not the missions.  I am not sure which pack has fully correct models pending the next media vps.

Fixed the XSTR message. 

Please check all directives when you test; I found in mission 2 one directive read "Destroy X" but the actual event attached to it was to protect the Valius.  There have been a variety of similar problems.  I have fixed another issue in the defend the Warlock mission in the nebula in which there is no abort mission directive, and possible trouble with the sequencing of certain messages.

I was being a smart ass, but literally in the destroy depot mission there are 3 boxes of yellow and white pixels.  I'm assuming those are planets or something but I'm not at all sure.  Hence why I'm asking.  I can post a screenshot when I'm back on my PC on Sunday.

Sorry, I should have mentioned the directives thing in mission 3 with the Valius.  There's a "destroy Aquarius" directive when the Knossos first appears, but Aquarius doesn't arrive for a minute or so.  I'm guessing this is the one you fixed, since you actually are supposed to be defending the Valius.  I'll keep that in mind for future testing.

Also, in mission 4 the Equinox says its beam cannons are opening fire when you're still some distance from the depot, but it doesn't actually shoot until you get much closer.  Guessing there's a problem with event timing there.  I'd suggest the Equinox should open fire while you're still on your way in, as the transmission hints, rather than when you get close, as actually happens.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on March 31, 2007, 01:41:18 pm
Sounds like some flag problem in the launcher?  I see planets, just low resolution examples; no boxes.

There are a lot of funky directives in Warzone.  I look at them all now in testing.

I'll check on the message timing for the Equinox.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 01, 2007, 05:12:59 pm
Before:
(http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r21/m22587a/Freespace%20SCP/p_terran1.jpg)

After:
(http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r21/m22587a/Freespace%20SCP/p_terran11I.jpg)

I just remembered that I am still having DDS difficulties. I would appreciate it if someone could convert the image into DXT3 or DXT5 as soon as I release it. Adm. Nelson, what system does Terran1 reside in?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 01, 2007, 05:38:46 pm
Gienah Cygni.

So much better than the old one.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Herra Tohtori on April 01, 2007, 05:41:35 pm
->m2258734a:

What kind of problems with DDS files do you have?

If you haven't already tried this, I suggest you download and install NVidia's DDS Utilities. They include (amongst other things) a batch converter to make DDS files from, for example, TGA files.

http://developer.nvidia.com/object/dds_utilities.html (http://developer.nvidia.com/object/dds_utilities.html)

After installing:

-Start -> Run -> cmd

-Navigate to the directory where your files to be converted are

-invoke nvDXT by command line:

>nvdxt -file filename.extension -<compression type> -<quality setting> -<possible mipmap generation options> -<other>

The -file command line option can be used to convert for example one file, all TGA's (or other file type) in a directory (-file *.tga) or all files with certain beginning (-file effect*.* or -file map*.*) or, if need be, all files in the directory (-file *.*).

FS2_Open compatible compression formats are (AFAIK):

-dxt1a - simple colour maps, no transparency at all. Good for basic ship textures for example. Note the "a", it separates it from dxt1 which has one-bit transparency (IIRC). Also used by some effects that use additive blending instead of alpha blending (beams, subspace vortex etc.)
-dxt3 - has colour information and limited alpha channel for transparency.
-dxt5 - like the latter, but with full alpha channel for better blending if necessary.


For planets, DXT3 or DXT5 are the correct settings, depending on which looks better.

For quality setting, -quality_highest is advisable to be used. It makes the conversion take a bit longer but results in better quality results without affecting file sizes.

For ship textures I tend to prefer the -Gaussian mipmap generating too. Dunno if it actually makes any difference, though.


Then there are a plethora of other options that can be seen by just typing nvdxt, which prints an instruction page of it's usage.

 :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 01, 2007, 08:17:39 pm
I haven't finished touching up on the planet, (I still need to correct the color of the reflected light since Terran1 is part of an orange giant system) yet I made a DDS file (DXT5). The problem that I am having is that I am not too happy with the atmosphere's final appearance. I tried both file types at the highest quality and none of them are a significant improvement over the other appearance-wise. Applying the Gaussian filter doesn't help much either. Any ideas on how to fix the atmosphere?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Herra Tohtori on April 01, 2007, 08:39:05 pm
I usually put the most important atmosphere layers behind the surface layer of the planet. That takes care of the atmospheric glow that circles the planet. Then I add a copy of that layer to the top of all, but with low intensity and possibly either soft light, hard light or other layer modes... Play with the layer settings until you get a good looking atmospheric impression.

What exactly are you trying to do to it, and what part? The part that is over the planet, or the blurred edge that forms the atmospheric glow?

At any rate, it looks pretty good to me already. The clouds are much more cloudy than before, and the colours seem pretty good too. :yes:
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 01, 2007, 09:15:01 pm
Oops, sorry about that. What I meant to say is that I am not too happy with the quality of the image after DDS conversion. The attachment I provided in my last post was to show what I meant. The atmosphere becomes jagged, and no matter what I do I can't seem to correct this jaggedness. This is what I was having problems with before, and I was assuming that it was just me making a mistake somewhere during conversion. No filters seem to help much, and there's not much of a noticeable difference between DXT3 and DXT5. Any idea on what I should do?

Thanks for the advice on improving the planet's appearance; I am much more content with the appearance of this planet than the previous Terran1. After I read your post in the art section, it looks like I will be experimenting with gas giants again.  :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 01, 2007, 09:23:23 pm

Ruh roh -- looks like a transparency issue:

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/FS2/Terran1.jpg)


Thanks for the advice on improving the planet's appearance; I am much more content with the appearance of this planet than the previous Terran1. After I read your post in the art section, it looks like I will be experimenting with gas giants again.  :)

Ah, but the other planets in Warzone are all rocky moons....  :D
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Herra Tohtori on April 01, 2007, 09:41:30 pm
Did you use this kind of command line:

>nvdxt -file Terran1.tga -dxt5 -quality_highest

If you used GIMP DDS plugin to save the DDS, I'm not surprized about the pixelation. nvDXT generally gives better image quality on that bolded setting.

Another thing you can try: increase the resolution to 1024x1024. I took a look at my planets that are converted to DDS, and the same jagged atmosphere is there too (but not to quite that extent), but when you increase the resolution, the scale of the jaggedness remains about same and this it looks smaller in the final image. And 1024x1024 is not too resource heavy for a background image.

Also, your final product should not have black background. It should be opaque where the planet's sphere exists, and the atmosphere should blend to empty space instead of black background. Putting that planet on top of nebulas will result in black box blocking the nebula images (and stars) from view, which you don't want.

I did an experiment, I used the DXT5 compression and -quality_high flag with 512x512 resolution planets. The atmosphere does become jagged but this planet has thicker atmospheric glow so it doesn't look that bad. Here are two pictures: The other one is before compression and the other is after compression, both are png images so what you see is what you get. Can you spot which has been compressed with nvDXT, without looking at file names?

(http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/8043/uncompressedpixelationskz3.png)
(http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/6577/ddspixelationsamplecb5.png)


Also, this is what the planet should look like when it's finished; atmosphere blending to transparency.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 01, 2007, 10:20:56 pm
Oops. The image wasn't ready to be placed in-game yet.  :) I posted the image so you all could see what I was talking about when I was referring to the atmosphere of Terran1;)  I was going to ask about how I should deal with the transparency in a future post, but now I know what to do. I did use the quality_highest command, but I still got the jagged atmosphere. I'll see how I can fix it. Thanks.

Is the planet warped because of the field of vision settings you have used?

Ah, but the other planets in Warzone are all rocky moons....  :D
I meant in general,  ;)  But hey, for any other campaign that needs restoration I would be glad to try to make some gas giants. I still need some practice.

I take the bright star in the background to be Gienah Cygni B. That's a dead on representation of the star's appearant brightness. Speaking of stars and such, I need to finish with the planet's lighting. Since Terran1 is habitable, it would have to be about 7.8 AU from Gienah Cygni A, since the giant star is about 61 times more luminous than the Sun. I don't want to make the planet too orange, otherwise it would not look like the habitable Earth-like planet that it is. I'll see what I can do.

EDIT: Is that your habitable moon, Herra? I really like the designs of your worlds; you should make planets for the campaigns, too.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Herra Tohtori on April 01, 2007, 10:32:43 pm
Since you already used the -quality_highest -card, your best bet is to simpy resize the planet to 200% with cubic interpolation and then see what the DDS compression does to the 1024 resolution image. Most likely that'll end up in good enough view.

Also... have you tried what happens if you try to convert it without the black background? Could be worth trying, too, but you'll need to check what it looks by copy-pasting it over a black layer after compression.

...or, if you can't get it into proper DDS, but it into game as a TGA. A 512x512 background image doesn't take too much resources anyway, regardless of if it's TGA, DDS or whatever.


If something is too difficult but there's another, only slightly inferior option, it can be the better option in the end... so don't bother too much with a DDS conversion. If it just looks crap as DDS and nothing can be done to prevent it, use TGA and be done with it. For example, if the only way to reduce pixelation is to increase resolution, you could be better off simply using the TGA, since it could be used at 512*512, and a TGA of that size will not likely use any more memory than 1024x1024 DDS anyway.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 01, 2007, 11:09:47 pm

I take the bright star in the background to be Gienah Cygni B. That's a dead on representation of the star's appearant brightness. Speaking of stars and such, I need to finish with the planet's lighting. Since Terran1 is habitable, it would have to be about 7.8 AU from Gienah Cygni A, since the giant star is about 61 times more luminous than the Sun. I don't want to make the planet too orange, otherwise it would not look like the habitable Earth-like planet that it is. I'll see what I can do.

Yeah its Gienah Cygni B, with Gienah Cygni A off screen to the right.  The planet is looking great, the original was tiny on screen.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 02, 2007, 12:09:19 am
Yeah... I've tried everything and I am still not very happy with the quality. I'll leave it as a 512x512 TGA file. I'm still trying to see how I can fix the lighting, but I can't think of a good technique at the moment. Any ideas on how I could effectively change the color of the reflection of light from the surface of Terran1?

Thanks,  :)

EDIT: I seem to be having difficulties trying to save the TGA image with a transparent background. As soon as I save the image my transparent background turns white. Is there anything in particular that needs to be done to the file prior to saving it as a TGA, or does the file need to be a saved as a different type?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Herra Tohtori on April 02, 2007, 03:58:06 am
Well.. what program are you using to do it?

If GIMP, just make sure the edges have alpha of zero, and it should then automagically use the alpha channel in addition to RGB, to make a 32-bit TGA. In other programs... try for an option between 24/32-bit TGA, and select the 32-bit option.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 02, 2007, 12:43:12 pm
Some more playtesting discoveries/comments:

Mission E1M4
-As already mentioned, the Equinox's delayed firing.
-More turret/spline errors.
-The debrief talks about what a great job you and your wingmen do, but it's rather easy to lose all your wingmen during the mission.  Maybe another goal should be added with a comment if all your wingmen die?

Mission E1M5
-The Gemini destroyed bonus objective triggered for me even when Gemini had not been destroyed (only one of the transports was).  Might have been some freakish thing, I didn't have time to replay it.

Mission E1M6
-Nothing in the debrief about losing the cruiser.  Probably should be (though it's probably also bloody hard to keep it alive, maybe just a comment in the debrief).

E2M1
-Command's transmission about speculation among your wingmen's chatter came in out of order.  Not a big deal.  probably just the way the events triggered.

E2M2
-Says something about Mintaka AB in the briefing.  I was wondering if AB was supposed to be the word "as."

E2M3 (And previous bombing missions).
-The Ptah is available.  I don't think it should be, especially during the bombing missions previous to this (M4, 5, 6)

E2M4
-Nothing.

E2M5
-Nothing

E2M6
-Capricorn keeps jumping in, even after you're ordered to return to base after the fleet arrives.
-The directives list obscures some of the more important ones.  Suggest a simple "Defend the Tatenen" and then a "Destroy Beam Turrets".  The defend covers the bombers, you don't need a directive for each of the half-dozen bomber wings that jumps in.

That's all so far.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 02, 2007, 01:20:07 pm
Some more playtesting discoveries/comments:

Mission E1M4
-As already mentioned, the Equinox's delayed firing.
-More turret/spline errors.
-The debrief talks about what a great job you and your wingmen do, but it's rather easy to lose all your wingmen during the mission.  Maybe another goal should be added with a comment if all your wingmen die?
You probably need the latest version of Vasudan Admiral's cruiser to get rid of the turret spline messages.  Perhaps a bonus goal for the wingmen and some rephrasing of the debriefing is best here.

Quote
Mission E1M5
-The Gemini destroyed bonus objective triggered for me even when Gemini had not been destroyed (only one of the transports was).  Might have been some freakish thing, I didn't have time to replay it.

Puzzling.  I'll have to try and reproduce.

Quote
Mission E1M6
-Nothing in the debrief about losing the cruiser.  Probably should be (though it's probably also bloody hard to keep it alive, maybe just a comment in the debrief).

Quote
E2M1
-Command's transmission about speculation among your wingmen's chatter came in out of order.  Not a big deal.  probably just the way the events triggered.
This is very odd, given how the events are set up.  However, all of these messages should really be in a single message list event anyways.
When you played this mission, did the GTC Nicolas survive?

Quote
E2M2
-Says something about Mintaka AB in the briefing.  I was wondering if AB was supposed to be the word "as."
Mintaka Ab is the second component of the system.  It is supposed to be the one the Shivan's destroyed.  I'll rephrase to make it clearer.
Quote
E2M3 (And previous bombing missions).
-The Ptah is available.  I don't think it should be, especially during the bombing missions previous to this (M4, 5, 6)
Makes sense.

Quote
E2M4
-Nothing.

E2M5
-Nothing

E2M6
-Capricorn keeps jumping in, even after you're ordered to return to base after the fleet arrives.
-The directives list obscures some of the more important ones.  Suggest a simple "Defend the Tatenen" and then a "Destroy Beam Turrets".  The defend covers the bombers, you don't need a directive for each of the half-dozen bomber wings that jumps in.

I'll look into these directives.


Thanks for all the comments!

EDIT
When cleaning out the Ptah, I noticed quite a few missions seem to allow the player to choose any amount of any weapon they want.  These will need to be adjusted to something sensible.

Mission E2M6 seems to have been conceived of as a TAG mission, as some friendly fighters have these (pointlessly) in their secondary banks.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 02, 2007, 02:17:19 pm
I'm going to fire up E1M6 and E2M1 again in the simulator before I keep going.  I'll post more comments after I play them (maybe 30 mins to 1 hr from now).
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 02, 2007, 02:53:17 pm
OK...

In E1M6, we have the GTC Eleris, Leviathan-class.  It seems pretty much impossible to preserve it (if the Moloch doesn't nail it, the Ravanna does).  No mention in the debrief.  Might make sense to add a note about it's destruction.

Also in E1M6, you get a message from the Britannia about needing bomber support twice in a row when the Ravanna arrives.  Identical message both times.  Seems excessive =)

In E2M1, the GTC Nicholas warps in, but I'm so busy fighting off Dragons that I didn't see if the corvette nailed it or what.  It isn't present a few minutes later, which makes me think it either jumps out or gets destroyed... I'm guessing the latter.  The out of order transmissions are from command.  It tells you the Warlock destroyed a shivan vessel, then tells Alpha 2 to stop speculating.  Should be the other way around.

Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 02, 2007, 05:44:55 pm
OK...

In E1M6, we have the GTC Eleris, Leviathan-class.  It seems pretty much impossible to preserve it (if the Moloch doesn't nail it, the Ravanna does).  No mention in the debrief.  Might make sense to add a note about it's destruction.
Yeah, good catch.  The "let's party" debrief seems a bit much when the crew of this ship has just perished!

Quote
Also in E1M6, you get a message from the Britannia about needing bomber support twice in a row when the Ravanna arrives.  Identical message both times.  Seems excessive =)

Well, you get one message from BRITANNIA and one from generic command.

Quote
In E2M1, the GTC Nicholas warps in, but I'm so busy fighting off Dragons that I didn't see if the corvette nailed it or what.  It isn't present a few minutes later, which makes me think it either jumps out or gets destroyed... I'm guessing the latter.  The out of order transmissions are from command.  It tells you the Warlock destroyed a shivan vessel, then tells Alpha 2 to stop speculating.  Should be the other way around.

I see, the issue here is that the messages depend on certain wings being destroyed.  If they are destroyed out of the expected order, you may see messages that seem a bit odd.

Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 02, 2007, 06:21:34 pm
One generic issue I've noticed throughout the campaign at this point
*Depart orders often come in before the area is secure on a successful mission.  It SHOULD force you to clear the area (otherwise you get run over by the Warlock, as in "The Ambush" :P).  I've pointed it out where I remembered to note it, but there's a few missions I missed earlier that need their objectives revised to reflect that.  Seems awful silly to abandon allied warships and RTB when there's still enemy craft around.

Another issue that cropped up at the end:  maybe I fell asleep during the briefings, but they just suddenly started talking about hybrids without any introduction in the last 3 missions.  I was totally lost.  It needs an elaboration in the E3M3 briefing (one sentence just doesn't make an impression).  Here's the original (note I've copied and pasted a couple stages in sequence here):
Quote
The Vidar Project was the first project that the then Lieutenant Russik worked on.  It was a top secret operation being conducted by the rogue Galactic Terran Intelligence back in the era of the GTA.  The objective: to meld Terran and Shivan physiology into a single hybrid for use in conjunction with Shivan communications technology.

The GTE Vidar was the only ship of it's class produced.  It was designed along the lines of a Terran Explorer class, which is a very rare vessel.  The design is old, but we can deduce that since the GTI was crushed, the ship had been refitted.

Its exact communications capabilities are unknown.  However, it is believed that Admiral Russik integrated an ETAK device into Terran Shivan genetic hybrids on the ship, potentially giving it an unparalleled capability to communicate with the Shivans.
.

My suggestion (which hints at details discussed later in the campaign):
Quote
The Vidar Project was the first project that the then Lieutenant Russik worked on.  It was a top secret operation being conducted by the rogue Galactic Terran Intelligence back in the era of the GTA.  The objective was to meld Terran and Shivan physiology into a hybrid lifeform.  The hybrids would then be used in conjunction with experimental Shivan communications technology.  We suspect several may have actually been created.

The GTE Vidar was the only ship of it's class produced.  It was designed along the lines of a Terran Explorer class, which is a very rare vessel.  The design is old, but we can deduce that since the GTI was crushed, the ship had been refitted.

Its exact communications capabilities are unknown.  However, it is believed that Admiral Russik integrated an ETAK device into the Terran-Shivan genetic hybrids on the ship, potentially giving it an unparalleled capability to communicate with the Shivans.
.

The E3M4 briefing could also use some tweaking along the same lines.  Original (again, excerpt):
Quote
Lt. Commander Niven will also be in the area and will direct your actions.  Intelligence also speculates that Admiral Russik may attempt to communicate with the Shivans.  The Vidar and it's integrated ETAK technology with living beings may bridge the gap that Admiral Bosch had sought to jump.  Monitor the situation and record everything.
Suggested:
Quote
Lt. Commander Niven will also be in the area and will direct your actions.  Intelligence speculates that Admiral Russik may attempt to communicate with the Shivans.  The Vidar and it's Terran-Shivan hybrids coupled with integrated ETAK technology may well bridge the gap that Admiral Bosch sought to jump.  Monitor the situation and record everything.

The E3M5 briefing says Russik is on an Azrael transport, but in the mission it's an Argo making its way to the node.

The E3M7 briefing also has some problems.  Original:
Quote
After hours of intelligence work aboard the GTE Vidar, we have finally learned of Russik's final plan.

Russik believes that a single Terran-Shivan hybrid holds the power to control Shivan ships.  This theory is based on the idea that Shivans are controlled by a hive mind.

--

When he made contact with the Shivans, Russik not only contacted him, but he gained control of a small number of their forces.  Intelligence  believes that a central communications nexus in the Naos system may hold the key to his power over the Shivans.  With the Shivan forces at his control, he could take over the GTVA in a matter of months.

Suggestion:
Quote
After hours of intelligence work aboard the GTE Vidar, we have finally uncovered Russik's final plan.

Russik believes that a single Terran-Shivan hybrid is capable of controlling Shivan ships.  This theory is based on the idea that Shivans are controlled by a hive mind.

--

Russik not only contacted the Shivans, but he gained control of a small number of their forces.  Intelligence  believes that a central communications nexus in the Naos system may hold the key to his power over the Shivans.  With the Shivan forces at his control, he could take over the GTVA in a matter of mere months.

And, more testing:

E3M1 Contention of Power
-The Nethys CAN survive this engagement, and so when it gets destroyed and there's no mention in the debrief, it seems like Command is being even more unreasonable than usual.  Maybe add a protect Nethys goal?
-Needs a clear area before the depart order.

E3M2
-Ship selection seems a little wide here.  Otherwise, no problems.

E3M3
-The text transmission by Command at the beginning of the actual mission play misspelled communications (missed the first "i").
-Command keeps *****ing about the comm system even after it's destroyed until you also destroy the engine on the cruiser.  Simple matter of revising the messages to either have two, one for each system, or one message that's a countdown for BOTH subsystems (which would be fine, 3 minutes is enough time to both kill the comms and disable it).
-Again, you're ordered to depart even when enemy fighters are still present.  The warlock won't leave until they're all destroyed.

E3M4
-Alpha 2 is neurotic and talks to himself.  OK, so it should be another pilot either answering the questions at the beginning, or asking them.  Otherwise Alpha 2 seems a little bit nuts.

E3M5
-Vidar's cryochamber is misspelled as "cyrochamber" for all 6.
-It IS possible to save the Liberty, so the briefing should ***** at you if you don't.
-There are no directives in this mission.  There should be 4:  Protect Vidar, Protect Liberty, Destroy Bombers, Destroy Corvette (can't recall the name offhand).

E3M6
-Return to base order appears before the area is actually secured.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 02, 2007, 06:51:47 pm
OK...

In E1M6, we have the GTC Eleris, Leviathan-class.  It seems pretty much impossible to preserve it (if the Moloch doesn't nail it, the Ravanna does).  No mention in the debrief.  Might make sense to add a note about it's destruction.

So, I have made protecting the Eleris a bonus goal.  You only get the party debriefing if this ship survives.  I also added messages from the ship when it is heavily damaged, and a message from Command when it goes down.  It seems that Eleris was originally a Vasudan ship, changed sometime in development to a Leviathan.  I am debating making survival of the Britannia a mandatory goal.  The mission presently has no failure mode unless you just plain jump out early.  Thoughts?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 02, 2007, 07:15:06 pm
OK...

In E1M6, we have the GTC Eleris, Leviathan-class.  It seems pretty much impossible to preserve it (if the Moloch doesn't nail it, the Ravanna does).  No mention in the debrief.  Might make sense to add a note about it's destruction.

So, I have made protecting the Eleris a bonus goal.  You only get the party debriefing if this ship survives.  I also added messages from the ship when it is heavily damaged, and a message from Command when it goes down.  It seems that Eleris was originally a Vasudan ship, changed sometime in development to a Leviathan.  I am debating making survival of the Britannia a mandatory goal.  The mission presently has no failure mode unless you just plain jump out early.  Thoughts?

Make the Britannia's survival mandatory.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 02, 2007, 07:19:57 pm
Last one!

E3M7
-Russik's messages (at least at the beginning) appear as coming from Command, not him.
-Russik's in an Argo, which is OK if the briefing gets corrected (and the one in the earlier mission).
-Misspelling of "commission" as "commision" when you destroy the Ravana's main beams.
-The Ravana never shoots at the player.  I have no idea if this was intentional or not... the fighters make the mission difficult, but disarming the destroyer isn't hard at all.  More tedious than anything.  Honestly, this mission could be re-balanced so you fight the Ravana, but have to deal with much fewer fighters/bombers.  Also, the comm node trick (detonate the crystal, as found in retail "Into the Lion's Den") doesn't work, which I'm not sure if that's intentional or not.

That seems to be it.

I only paid passive attention to spelling and grammar, so I can go over it again once it's been revised.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: freespaceking on April 02, 2007, 08:06:32 pm
Here are some new maps for the vidar :pimp:http://rapidshare.com/files/24054512/vidar.zip.html (http://rapidshare.com/files/24054512/vidar.zip.html)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 02, 2007, 08:19:04 pm
What a surprise!  These are fantastic!! Freespaceking is now officially my hero.... :)

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/FS2/Vidar.jpg)

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/FS2/Vidar2.jpg)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 02, 2007, 08:45:56 pm
 :yes2: :D :yes: Looks great!

Hopefully everything works out here; I believe the image is now saved as a 32-bit RGBA .tga, so if I did everything correctly the background should be transparent. If not, I'll go back and see if I can fix it.



Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 02, 2007, 08:53:02 pm
Voila:

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/FS2/Terran1_2.jpg)

The dark side probably needs some atmospheric blurring at the edges?  (Waits for Herra :) )
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 02, 2007, 09:33:07 pm
Incidentially, Gienah Cygni A is visible in the Vidar screenshots, and Gienah Cygni B in the planet shot for your review.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 02, 2007, 10:22:51 pm
Let's see:

The atmosphere of Terran1 is blue due to Rayleigh scattering. Since Terran1 has a very similar structure to that of the Earth, the day side of Terran1 will experience a full bombardment of light directed from the orange giant. This light has to travel through a transparent solid, being the atmosphere, and in the process, comes into contact with atmospheric particles and molecules. Small particles and molecules, generally 1/10 the size of the wavelength of the light it deflects, will cause this light to scatter. What wavelength of light is scattered is proportional to the inverse fourth power of the intensity of the light itself. Therefore, blue light is the predominant wavelength of light that is scattered the most, giving Terran1 a blue sky. Without any light from Gienah Cygni A, the atmosphere cannot deflect any blue light to our eyes. So, on the dark side of Terran1, the sky will appear dark. Since the visible nature of the atmosphere is dependent on the light that travels through it (the atmosphere is illuminated, not luminous), the atmosphere should appear dark on the dark side of Terran1. :)

As for the size and apparent brightness of both stars, you nailed Gienah Cygni B right on the head. At nearly 2000 AU away from Gienah Cygni A, the red dwarf should appear no brighter than how a planet with a relatively high albedo, like Jupiter, would appear in our night sky.

Gienah Cygni A looks perfect, too. Since the orange giant is about 61 times the luminosity of the Sun, Terran1 would have to reside in a circumstellar habitable zone of ~7.8 AU. Given that Gienah Cygni A is 12 times larger than the Sun, at this distance away the orange giant would appear a little more than 80% the angular diameter of the Sun. I don't know the dimensions of the skybox, so I don't know how a diameter of 0.41 degrees would look like in-game. The current size looks fine to me.  :yes:

EDIT: The only thing I would disagree with is how the star appears to be residing inside a circumstellar shell of its own ejected matter. While the star is a giant, it is not an evolved giant and has not gotten to that stage in its lifetime. But who is to say that the star is actually inside the nebula, or that the nebula came from the giant for that matter. Regardless, it looks cool  ;).

I have updated Terran1 to give it a slight orange-like illumination (slight is probably an understatement). Tell me what you think, and maybe this will be the final version of the planet.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Herra Tohtori on April 03, 2007, 07:39:51 am
The dark side probably needs some atmospheric blurring at the edges?  (Waits for Herra :) )


Yeah... there's atmosphere there too, and it causes a dimming effect to the nebulas and stars on background, even though it wouldn't be visible against black background.

I usually simply take the whole planet and blur the shadowed part outwards as well as the lighted part. If there's a lot of variation on the brightness near the edges of the planet, though, it causes the resulting atmosphere-blur to become non-uniform around the planet - there will appear to be parts that are of different colour/thickness than the planet itself. In that case, I do this:

-make a light blue or bluish texture same size as the planet texture (colour depends of the planet's qualities obviously)
-wrap it on a sphere with "map to object" (assuming that's what you are using...), using same lighting and size parameters as with the planets, but change the surface so that it doesn't cause glints and shiny reflections.


That should result in a sphere that has a shadow side and a light blue lighted side. Now, I put this layer beneath my planet and blur it at suitable level, depending on how thick an atmosphere I want.

If I need to, I multiply the layer a few times using "Screen" layer mode, which brightens up the atmospheric glow. Then I usually copy one blurred layer on top of everything and play with the layer modes and transparency, until I get an atmospheric effect I like. You can see what the dark side should look like in the pictures that I posted as png's a couple messages ago. Not that all planets should have the same thickness or intensity of the atmosphere, but the general idea should be that. Use artistic freedom... ;)


...btw, those Vidar maps look absolutely fabulous. :yes:

How many textures does that ship use, and on what resolution?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 03, 2007, 09:29:43 am
Vidar now has 4 maps at 512x512 resolution.  It used to have 1 128x128 map and three 64x64 maps.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 03, 2007, 01:25:37 pm
And here is the updated Terran1:

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/FS2/Terran1_3.jpg)

Orange tint seems appropriate for the system.

Incidentially, it's probably best to make a fresh post when you have made changes rather than an update, as it's easy to miss that you have done something.

EDIT: fixed fumble fingered image link.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 03, 2007, 01:51:11 pm
Ah, ok    no problem then. I've been on other forums where double posting is avoided, so I usually do that here. I'll be sure to provide updates in new posts.

Looks like your image isn't working, unless that's what you are working on at the moment.

As for the atmospheric blur, I see what you all are saying now. I thought you meant that I need to make the atmosphere blue on the dark side of the planet. In that case, I'll go back and give the dark side a slight blur when I can. This last Terran1 should be the final one.  :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Herra Tohtori on April 03, 2007, 02:11:32 pm
As for the atmospheric blur, I see what you all are saying now. I thought you meant that I need to make the atmosphere blue on the dark side of the planet. In that case, I'll go back and give the dark side a slight blur when I can. This last Terran1 should be the final one.  :)

Yeah... where the atmosphere receives light, it scatters it everywhere - including back to space, which causes the familiar blue glow of our planet and also the atmospheric glow. But obviously the shadow side doesn't receive direct light, so the atmosphere remains dark - but light traveling through it from the background stars or nebulae will still be affected, as some of the light will be absorbed to the atmosphere. Blurred dark edge works much better than glowing edge on the shadow side.


On a multi-star system the situation is a bit different, though... If there's for example another star behind the planet it could cause rather interesting phenomena. :drevil:
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 03, 2007, 04:56:55 pm
Hey Nelson, when you've corrected some of the identified isues would you mind putting up another WIP file set?  I'll go through the campaign one more time and mak sure the kinks got ironed out.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 03, 2007, 05:16:49 pm
I'm back...school trip and interesting French girls to deal with <my sig has been updated! ;) > but now I can get back to work!

I played the campaign and noticed much less bugs than the ones you reported here, Admiral Nelson.

Most of the bugs you mentioned can be fixed easily. Also:
1) Knossos warpmaps for ships arriving or departing in a Knossos;
2) You added text about Mintaka. I think we shouldn't touch the texts at all, unless they're to be grammar checked;
3) I don't think that changing the orientation of the Tanen is the only way to solve that problem with the Moloch. Activating the rear BVas, changing the lower SVas to a BVas or simply setting a waypoint for the Moloch(and reduce it's speed) would solve the problem;
4) What about the voice acting? I can redirect the voice acting for INFR1 to Warzone, but I have no time to copy and paste all the scripts so the voice actors can do their job.
5) What about some(voice acted!) single missions to release with the revamped campaign? All about events parallel to the storyline of Warzone. 2-4 single missions should be ok;
6) Great work with these planet bitmaps, guys!
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 03, 2007, 05:27:51 pm
I'm back...school trip and interesting French girls to deal with <my sig has been updated! ;) > but now I can get back to work!

Welcome back!

Quote
I played the campaign and noticed much less bugs than the ones you reported here, Admiral Nelson.

Most of the bugs you mentioned can be fixed easily. Also:
1) Knossos warpmaps for ships arriving or departing in a Knossos;
good point, yes.

Quote
2) You added text about Mintaka. I think we shouldn't touch the texts at all, unless they're to be grammar checked;

We don't need to be pedantic.  The text is needed to account for the fact that Mintaka is a quinternary system and not a supernova remnant.  This is no different than fixing any other mistake in the campaign.

Quote
3) I don't think that changing the orientation of the Tanen is the only way to solve that problem with the Moloch. Activating the rear BVas, changing the lower SVas to a BVas or simply setting a waypoint for the Moloch(and reduce it's speed) would solve the problem;
Perhaps, but it works fine now.

Quote
4) What about the voice acting? I can redirect the voice acting for INFR1 to Warzone, but I have no time to copy and paste all the scripts so the voice actors can do their job.

I can prepare the scripts, but I'd need to know how many folks you have lined up.
Quote
5) What about some(voice acted!) single missions to release with the revamped campaign? All about events parallel to the storyline of Warzone. 2-4 single missions should be ok;
Sure, but we should get the meat of the campaign done first.

Hey Nelson, when you've corrected some of the identified isues would you mind putting up another WIP file set?  I'll go through the campaign one more time and mak sure the kinks got ironed out.

Yep, I am going through all the stuff you posted, and will put an update out when its ready.




Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 03, 2007, 05:58:36 pm
Muchos gracias =)

I have a 4-day weekend for Easter... which means some time for play-testing around my paper writing =)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 03, 2007, 06:37:19 pm
Muchas gracias? ;)

MP-Ryan is also on TSP, so he can work on Warzone as well ;)

The actors don't seem so active. I'll talk with Bob-san.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 04, 2007, 09:08:51 pm
Next Iteration:

WIP Download (http://files.filefront.com//;7137128;;/)

Still WIP; fixed the stuff MP-Ryan brought up as well as other issues I found, primarily with directives and mission goals.

TO DO:

Create GTC Nicolas nameplate
Create Aeolus cruiser nameplates
Create high rez custom planets to replace the low res ones supplied with the campaign
Adjust backgrounds to make use of said new planets properly
Test all missions and verify that the failure conditions work correctly.  That is, deliberately fail the mission and make sure you get an appropriate nastygram.
Verify that no allied capital ship is destroyed without an appropriate in mission message and mention in debriefing.
List any fighter missions with a RTB message when enemy craft are still around.  For bomber missions, it is fine to depart if all enemy capships are destroyed.
Comm Nodes should blow up when the center crystal is destroyed
Add Knossos warp out effect where appropriate
Fix Vidar POF to correct misspelled "cyrochamber" subsystems
Report any mission in which enemy waves continue to appear after the mission objectives are met.
Make sure I didn't screw up anything in the campaign file in the course of bugfixing.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 04, 2007, 09:25:36 pm
It looks like I underestimated the capabilities of my little laptop. I recently downloaded FSO onto my computer, so I'll be going through the missions as well. Haven't had much time to fix the Terran1 (I notice in that last picture with the orange tint there is a white layer surrounding the dark side of the planet. This was not intentional and is due to a transparency issue that I will have to fix), and I'm not as lucky as some of you who have a 4-day weekend,  :mad:, so I will try to fit in some time when it becomes available.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 04, 2007, 09:27:20 pm
Your work is always much appreciated. :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 04, 2007, 11:38:25 pm
No problem  :yes:

Well, I went through the first mission and here's what I found:

During the very first briefing, right before the actual mission briefing, I noticed two redundancies and one punctuation error.

I have been seeing this whenever Capella is mentioned, and I don't think it's necessary to call Capella "the Capella star" in the second portion of the briefing. The proper noun does not need to be used as an adjective. I guess that would be similar to saying the Sun star or the Sol star, or the Earth planet.

The second redundancy occurs on the 6th portion of the briefing. When using military time, it's not necessary to specify morning or evening since the 24-hour time is used to avoid any confusion between the two. So I believe it should be 1100 hours tomorrow, without the morning at the end.

Finally, I noticed on the same page that one sentence begins, "Squadron leader, Lt. Taine...." There needs to be a comma after Taine if I am not mistaken.

Enough of the picky stuff, here are some more crucial (if not less picky) findings:

During the actual mission briefing, the Disen is displayed as a cruiser. I don't remember if there is an icon for science vessels, so if there isn't disregard this finding.

After clicking on alpha wing, the 3D model is of a Hercules Mark II instead of the default Myrmidon used in the mission.

For the actual mission itself, the only things I noticed were the planet images and the Faustus' debris. The planets are fine, but I think I have seen the same planet in plenty of other missions used in the FS universe. The same goes for its Callisto-like satellite. If you would like, I can make a new planetary system for Regulus after Terran1 (and the main-sequence stars!!!) are finished. As for the Faustus debris, some of the pieces have rotation axes which are way off the debris' actual center of mass. In fact, the rotation axes extend outside the object. Maybe this has to do with the "no motion debris" flag, but it's something I noticed.

That's all from the first mission, I'll look through the next few missions when I get the chance.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 04, 2007, 11:52:40 pm
No problem  :yes:

Well, I went through the first mission and here's what I found:

During the very first briefing, right before the actual mission briefing, I noticed two redundancies and one punctuation error.

I have been seeing this whenever Capella is mentioned, and I don't think it's necessary to call Capella "the Capella star" in the second portion of the briefing. The proper noun does not need to be used as an adjective. I guess that would be similar to saying the Sun star or the Sol star, or the Earth planet.
Yeah this can be better wordsmithed.

Quote
The second redundancy occurs on the 6th portion of the briefing. When using military time, it's not necessary to specify morning or evening since the 24-hour time is used to avoid any confusion between the two. So I believe it should be 1100 hours tomorrow, without the morning at the end.
It is redundant, but I heard this sort of usage all the time when I was on a USMC project.

Quote
Finally, I noticed on the same page that one sentence begins, "Squadron leader, Lt. Taine...." There needs to be a comma after Taine if I am not mistaken.
okay.

Quote
Enough of the picky stuff, here are some more crucial (if not less picky) findings:

During the actual mission briefing, the Disen is displayed as a cruiser. I don't remember if there is an icon for science vessels, so if there isn't disregard this finding.
FS1 has a faustus icon, but not FS2.  Whenever the icon code gets changed to remove the present hardcoded limit, it could be brought into FS2.

Quote
After clicking on alpha wing, the 3D model is of a Hercules Mark II instead of the default Myrmidon used in the mission.
oops...

Quote
For the actual mission itself, the only things I noticed were the planet images and the Faustus' debris. The planets are fine, but I think I have seen the same planet in plenty of other missions used in the FS universe. The same goes for its Callisto-like satellite. If you would like, I can make a new planetary system for Regulus after Terran1 (and the main-sequence stars!!!) are finished. As for the Faustus debris, some of the pieces have rotation axes which are way off the debris' actual center of mass. In fact, the rotation axes extend outside the object. Maybe this has to do with the "no motion debris" flag, but it's something I noticed.

It would be great to have unique planets, but I suspect that it would take a long time to do.  I'd like to start with upgrading all the low rez planets in Warzone first, as these don't look so good alongside all of the other upgraded graphics.

No idea about the debris.  This sounds like an issue in the POF file itself.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: jr2 on April 05, 2007, 01:30:29 am
Someone was working on new planets, IIRC...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 05, 2007, 09:09:48 am
I'll have a look at this on Friday and go through it again.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 05, 2007, 10:49:21 am
Working for/with MP-Ryan is a pleasure.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 05, 2007, 01:32:12 pm
It is redundant, but I heard this sort of usage all the time when I was on a USMC project.
Oh really, what sort of Marine project were you on? I'm a military guy myself, and I am currently finishing up my sophomore semester in AFROTC. Looks like I'll be going through Field Training during the end of July. But about the statement, it's no big deal. I was only being picky.

As for the quote about Lt. Taine, I don't remember if exactly how the sentence started. If "Squadron leader" is being used as a title, then no commas are necessary at all in the sentence. If the sentence was structured like this: "Your squadron leader, Lt. Taine...", then a comma is necessary after Taine.

I might have to report a bug about the Faustus if that is really the case. I'll look into it in depth over the weekend.

About the planets, I agree. I'll make new ones as soon as I finish those that really need the improvement. It looks like I have two moons, and five planets left.

EDIT: I'm not too sure of anyone specific who is working on planets for FS other than me. A while ago there was one user who posted several planets and a tutorial on how to make them. Haven't heard from that user in a long time. Topgun made some .pcx planets but I don't think they were ever completely finished. Then of course there are several users, including Herra, who are providing their works of art on another thread in the Fan Fiction and Art section. Looks like Aardwolf has made the latest contribution with his icy planet. Maybe we should open up a new thread and collaborate with one another to enhance the low resolution planets used in various campaigns, and to create new ones for future usage.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 05, 2007, 01:57:19 pm
The project was developing a manpower plan for MCEITS, a restructuring of USMC servers.  I went all over the country and abroad to produce it.

Here is a two pager on the project:
Case Study (http://www.sapient.com/pdfs/industry/MCEITSCaseStudyprose.pdf)

There is a lot of comma misuse in the text, it will take a few more times through to clean it all out.

A high rez planet pack is really a good idea.  I wouldn't be surprised if other campaigns used these planets.  Even the stock planets could use an overhaul - the recolored Jupiter and Mars examples especially.

Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 05, 2007, 10:40:56 pm
That's incredible; are you the mastermind behind the project and how long have you been integrating this into the USMC?

About the high resolution planets:
I posted on Herra's "Celestial Object Thread", and so far Aardwolf has posted his cool (no pun intended) high resolution ice planet. I would love to see everyone's artwork in all of the FS campaigns, but this is most likely going to take a while since making such planets is not on everyone's high priority list. But we will see.

As for planets and satellites for Warzone, it looks like Terran1 is finally completed (well.... depending on how it looks in-game). Here it is, atmospheric blur and all.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 05, 2007, 11:02:41 pm

I was the mastermind of the project described in the two pager, though this was just a small chunk of the whole initiative.  My current clients are commercial and not military, though.

We might actually be able to use Aardwolf's planet -- one of the Warzone planets is just a recolored version of another.  The ice world might be nice instead of the clone world.

And here we are: :)

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/FS2/Terran1_4.jpg)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 05, 2007, 11:24:30 pm
I am very impressed, but now I've learned that even entrepreneurs can't get enough of Freespace   ;)

Yeah I was just thinking about the duplicate planet in Warzone. Looks like we got two planets down, :yes: I'll go ahead and tell Aardwolf, as he'll probably want to be credited for the contribution.

Hmmm... can you do me a favor and shift the planet away from the nebula so the dark side of the planet is set against a black background? This is only temporary and you can move the planet back afterwards, but I wanted to see if the whitish glow is actually being caused by the nebula itself and not a transparency issue. Hopefully the atmosphere turns black against the black background. Thanks, I'd really appreciate it.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 05, 2007, 11:32:08 pm

I haven't really made up my mind on the positioning of any planet yet anyway....

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/FS2/Terran1_5.jpg)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 05, 2007, 11:43:19 pm
Thanks, now I know it is a transparency issue. Errrrg :mad:. I'm at a loss right now and I really don't know how I can fix this. I guess I will have to experiment...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 06, 2007, 12:54:59 pm
OK, maybe this is the final Terran1...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 06, 2007, 02:17:52 pm
hmmm:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/FS2/Terran1_6.jpg)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 06, 2007, 02:33:21 pm
 :doubt:...

I can just imagine this thread getting filled up with Terran1s, with some one-word comments from me after each image. I believe what is going on is that after I save my file as a 32-bit TGA, everything that was once transparent turns white. The alpha channel is still there, but now instead of there being an atmosphere that blends into transparency, it's blending into white. If I were to do the same with a black background, I would get a tiny black layer within the atmosphere as visible in the first successful Terran1 image without the black box behind it. I'm slowly running out of ideas.

Using the (0,255,0) green in the background only works for .pcx files, correct? I guess I will have to keep trying.

By all means, delete the older images of Terran1 so the thread can be easier to navigate through for those with slower connections. I wouldn't want to fill up your thread like this,  :).
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Herra Tohtori on April 06, 2007, 03:16:10 pm
Nonono. ;7

It looks exactly what you have made it to look. Which is, you're still using uniform colour atmospheric glow layer as far as I can see.

In order to make a dark atmosphere effect on the shadow side, the atmosphere on the dark side needs to be black before blurred. In other words.... ehm, pictures:

This is how I usually do it:

-Make a new layer and colour it blue (you'll likely need to experiment to find a good colour for your planet...)

(http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/8577/sample1yf2.png)

-Apply map to sphere to this layer with the light at appropriate place (if you did the whole planet this way, don't move the bugger), and set the environmental light to zero and rise up the diffusion factor a bit (again, experiment)
-set the background to transparent.

(http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/1812/sample2jr0.png)


-you should now have a blue sphere with a dark shadow area. Blur this layer (value depends of size) and throw a couple of them under your planet surface layer, and perhaps one above, and experiment with transparency and layer modes to find a suitable combination.

(http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/1779/sample3jj1.png)

 :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Herra Tohtori on April 06, 2007, 03:18:21 pm
Sorry for double post, but this is really more clarifying with the red background. Your atmosphere layer should look like this (roughly):

(http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/1779/sample3jj1.png)

Edges transparent, dark blurred atmosphere at the shadow region, and blue (or whatever colour) blurred atmosphere where the planet is lighted.

And note that this is a really fast job to just clarify the matter... the lighting is kinda fuxxored, but it's good enough for clarifying purposes.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 06, 2007, 05:33:13 pm
Thanks for the tutorial  :)

The problem is that what you are doing is basically what I am doing. The file that I provided has a similar effect, with the exception that the atmosphere on Terran1 isn't as hazy and thick as the planet you have created. So I ended up with a final product with a dark atmosphere on the antisunward side, and a bluish atmosphere on the sunward side, yet whenever I save the image as a 32-bit TGA everything transparent turns white. What you are seeing in-game is not what I am seeing when I am ready to save the image.

The atmosphere, as far as I can see, is whiter than the final product and practically flushed out most of the blue that was there. The same goes for the dark side, and since it was black to begin with, it appears to be a bright gray color.

It seems like no matter what I do, the atmosphere either gets an extra hint of white when the image saves with a white background, or an extra hint of black when the planet is saved against a black background. The background is always transparent, but whenever I save, it turns opaque. For this particular planet, I did not use GIMP, but Paint Shop Pro XI (it came with my laptop so I decided to see what I could do with it). I've done all I could by checking up on tutorials and how-tos, but I can't seem to get the atmosphere working properly. Any ideas?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 06, 2007, 05:56:27 pm
Well, here is Aardwolf's ice planet, anyways....

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/IcePlanet.jpg)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 06, 2007, 06:05:05 pm
I'm going through the updated Warzone campaign again tonight.  Anything else I need to look for other than what's already been mentioned?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 06, 2007, 06:13:27 pm
Head anis might be one thing.  I noticed at least one other mission with schizoid wingmen talking to themselves.... :)  Mostly otherwise I think just the stuff in the TODO list I posted last.

Incidentially, not all the planet bitmaps included in Warzone  are actually found in missions.  Only these are used:
$BitmapX: p_lava1       ;created by Dark
$BitmapX: p_moon2       ;from the Restricted Access planet pack
$BitmapX: p_deadp1      ;created by Dark
$BitmapX: p_deadp2       ;created by Dark
$BitmapX: p_terran1       ;created by Dark
$BitmapX: p_darkplanet1      ;created by Dark
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 06, 2007, 07:05:42 pm
I don't know if you're interested, but seems that Ransom Arceihn will voice act for Warzone. ;)

I noticed that you added wonderful background effects to the missions. Once you finish with them, give me the link so I can work with FRED.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 06, 2007, 07:08:50 pm
Download from the WIP link I posted before.  You should be good to go with those mission files.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Herra Tohtori on April 07, 2007, 12:19:40 pm
The problem is that what you are doing is basically what I am doing. The file that I provided has a similar effect, with the exception that the atmosphere on Terran1 isn't as hazy and thick as the planet you have created. So I ended up with a final product with a dark atmosphere on the antisunward side, and a bluish atmosphere on the sunward side, yet whenever I save the image as a 32-bit TGA everything transparent turns white. What you are seeing in-game is not what I am seeing when I am ready to save the image.

That sounds... weird, probably some JASC specific setting you have to use or something. I wouldn't know anything about that, though...

Btw, even if I used that example as a real atmosphere layer, it wouldn't appear half as thich because only the blurred edges would be clearly visible, spreading outwards from the sharp-edged planet's surface. Also, I would likely find a suitable level of opacity/intensity with layer modes and transparency settings as I told.


Quote
The atmosphere, as far as I can see, is whiter than the final product and practically flushed out most of the blue that was there. The same goes for the dark side, and since it was black to begin with, it appears to be a bright gray color.

It seems like no matter what I do, the atmosphere either gets an extra hint of white when the image saves with a white background, or an extra hint of black when the planet is saved against a black background. The background is always transparent, but whenever I save, it turns opaque. For this particular planet, I did not use GIMP, but Paint Shop Pro XI (it came with my laptop so I decided to see what I could do with it). I've done all I could by checking up on tutorials and how-tos, but I can't seem to get the atmosphere working properly. Any ideas?

Paint Shop Pro.... eeewwww...  :ick:

 :lol:

What I would do is to use a "copy visible" or equivalent setting, create a new GIMP window of same size, remove the default layer and paste the planet there, and then try and save it. I really have no knowledge at all about current PSP oddities, and only slightly more of Photoshop. Are you sure the dark side atmosphere really has RGB values like (0,0,0,0-255)? Check with the color select tool that the RGB values really are zero (black) and only the alpha varies... The saving process shouldn't alter the image. Perhaps PSP is adding some hidden layer or some other crap like that into the image... I dunno. :confused:

Other than that, I can't really help.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 07, 2007, 03:16:07 pm
I have finally started working!

That's basically what I have done:

1) Many ships(freighters, cruisers, corvettes, the Vidar)could receive orders from the player. Now they can't. There also are many fighter wings that can receive orders from the player(fighter wings that relieve the player from an escort duty, for example) and I don't know if you agree with me....normally, you jump out and you order your wingmen to do so after the arrival of these wings and they jump out as well, when they're supposed to escort a warship instead;
2) Sentry guns and cargo containers had default names. They have been changed with "Sentry X" and "Container X", respectively;
3) Some missions have the skybox "starfield01.pof". What should I do?;
4) Ships jumping to/coming from Knossos subspace portals have the Special Warp. I don't know if we should include the SW effect in the modpack;
5) E3M4. SSF Belial 13(now Sentry 9) had the alt name SCN Kali. Reset;
6) E2M5. Container 02 carries nothing. Should I leave it as it is?;
7) Since we're using skyboxes I have reduced the number of stars in the background to 100. They look weird when turning;

I will proceed with bugs...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 07, 2007, 03:17:46 pm
Yes, it was weird and very annoying. It didn't make any sense at all, which is why it would confuse me after every image Admiral Nelson posted. There was unintentional mixing of white and black in the planet's atmosphere, depending on the color of the background image... which was supposed to be transparent to begin with.

 :mad:

Anyways, the alpha within the atmosphere on both sides of the planet are in the range of 0-255, but for some reason that all changes when the image is saved. I always get a warning before I save, telling me that the image has to be merged into a single image, and that only one alpha channel can be saved. That shouldn't be a problem, yet some how a problem always arises. I took your advice and saved the merged image onto GIMP, transparent background and all. This Terran1 should be the very final TGA for this planet.



[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 07, 2007, 03:44:18 pm
Terran1 now looks done! :)

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/FS2/Terran1_7.jpg)


I have finally started working!

That's basically what I have done:

1) Many ships(freighters, cruisers, corvettes, the Vidar)could receive orders from the player. Now they can't. There also are many fighter wings that can receive orders from the player(fighter wings that relieve the player from an escort duty, for example) and I don't know if you agree with me....normally, you jump out and you order your wingmen to do so after the arrival of these wings and they jump out as well, when they're supposed to escort a warship instead;
Agreed.

Quote
2) Sentry guns and cargo containers had default names. They have been changed with "Sentry X" and "Container X", respectively;
Makes sense.

Quote
3) Some missions have the skybox "starfield01.pof". What should I do?;

All missions should have it except those in the nebula.  If you find any missing, please add it.

Quote
4) Ships jumping to/coming from Knossos subspace portals have the Special Warp. I don't know if we should include the SW effect in the modpack;

Excellent.  I think the effect is in the media vps anyway.

Quote
5) E3M4. SSF Belial 13(now Sentry 9) had the alt name SCN Kali. Reset;

Good.

Quote
6) E2M5. Container 02 carries nothing. Should I leave it as it is?;

I'd put something suitable in there.

Quote
7) Since we're using skyboxes I have reduced the number of stars in the background to 100. They look weird when turning;

This will probably help with the issue Herra has spoken of, yeah.

Quote
I will proceed with bugs...

I will stay out of editing missions until you post another WIP.  I did notice a few more you may as well fix:

In E2M5 there should be a directive "Destroy Gas Miners" and a directive "Destroy cargo."  Otherwise it is unclear what exactly you need to destroy.

In E3M2 the "Destroy Cortez" directive is misplaced at the end.  It should come chained after you are instructed to destroy it immediately.


Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 07, 2007, 03:52:22 pm
Terran1 now looks done! :)
PHEW!!! Finally...  You could put Terran1 back where you had it before if you like. I only asked you to move it because I wanted to verify the cause of the extra white portions of the antisunward atmosphere. Thanks for posting the images.  :)

Now I can finish the main-sequence stars like I said I would. It looks like we have a new contribution in the Celestial Objects thread. Do you think that planet would be a good replacement for one of the "dead planets"?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 07, 2007, 04:06:41 pm
Yes, it looks good.  The lava planet is the only one besides Terran1 that has a really unique appearance.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 07, 2007, 04:52:39 pm
I had started correcting grammar and spelling in briefings/debriefings/in-game transmissions, but as you guys have made mission changes could you upload them again?  Then I can go through the most recent copies.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 07, 2007, 05:00:55 pm
I have added events in missions where Shivan Comm Nodes appear. They will self destruct if the core subsystem is destroyed.

Also, I have added the directives you mentioned. I have created chained directives iin E2M5. They should appear on the HUD when the Setekh activates its sensors(cool and realistic, eh? ;) ). In E3M2, the "Destroy Cortez" directive should now appear after the message "We are being jammed.  It's coming from the Cortez.  Eliminate the Cortez at once!" is sent by a random wingman.

Ok, I will UL a rar with all the mission. Tell me if I have to change "starfield01.pof" into "starfield.pof"(I have always used starfield.pof, I don't know if the other works).
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 07, 2007, 05:18:14 pm
Ok, I will UL a rar with all the mission. Tell me if I have to change "starfield01.pof" into "starfield.pof"(I have always used starfield.pof, I don't know if the other works).

Yes, you are correct.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 07, 2007, 05:23:30 pm
Waiting on the RAR.  Once it's uploaded I will immediately begin going through the missions, so if you guys want to hold off on making more corrections for an hour or so I can repost it immediately when I finish.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 07, 2007, 05:25:21 pm
Yep, once Mobius posts, you will own the missions next.  We'll do round robin; Mobius owns it now, you are next, then when you are done back to me.  We'll continue with that process until all of the issues are resolved.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: neoterran on April 07, 2007, 05:36:22 pm
is another WIP build coming ?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 07, 2007, 05:37:17 pm
Yep, once Mobius posts, you will own the missions next.  We'll do round robin; Mobius owns it now, you are next, then when you are done back to me.  We'll continue with that process until all of the issues are resolved.

Sounds good.

If I have time after correcting them (I'm also working on some academic papers in the middle of this) I'll finish playtesting them again and see if there's anything else needing a fix.  That last mission with the Ravana had some issues earlier; I'm going to see if they persist and if we can re-write part of it.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 07, 2007, 06:01:42 pm
Stupid connection! I'm sorry...the UL has been slightly delayed! This is my third attempt! Even sending it to Ryan via MSN is turning out to be impossible!

Ok, everything should be ok.

I checked one more time because I wanted to be sure. Report errors, please.

EDIT: The second attachment, that is corrupted, has been deleted.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 07, 2007, 10:08:45 pm
OK, I'm done with Missions E1M1 through and including E3M1.  For the most part these missions are clean - what comments I do have are posted below.  I've checked all the in-game messages, briefings, and debriefings for content (spelling, grammar, understanding).  I have not playtested them yet. I'll get the rest done later tonight, hopefully.

To Do So Far:

E1M2
-The GTC Gouda (Aeolous class) is never mentioned in the briefing or mission, but it does arrive with the Valius and combats the Shivans.  It IS possible for the Gouda to survive the mission (The Ravana does not always fire on it, but sometimes it destroys it before the Valius) and it will jump out if the Ravana destroys the Valius first.  I recommend the Ravana's orders be adjusted so it fires on the Valius but NOT on the Gouda, and the Gouda's survival be added to the mission as an objective.  It will survive if the player defends it from bombers until the Ravana arrives (providing the Ravana does not fire on it).  Therefore, add a Defend Gouda directive, and make its survival a bonus objective.  Then add the following as debriefing texts (append to the end of what's there):
1.  Gouda survives. "While the GTD Valius was destroyed, you successfully protected the GTC Gouda from the Shivan bomber waves.  Excellent work.  If we are to repel this third advance of the Shivans into GTVA space we must preserve every ship possible."  No recommendation text.
2.  Gouda destroyed.  "It is unfortunate that we lost both the GTD Valius and the GTC Gouda in this mission.  Remember, pilot, the more ships that survive the engagement, the better chance we have of holding off the Shivans."  Recommendation:  Destroy Shivan bombers before they can fire on either capital ship.

E1M4
-GTC Abydos arrives and usually survives the engagement.  Should add a condition to the debrief that if Abydos survives, player gets commended for it.  Right now there is no mention of it.

E2M1
-Nicholas is not mentioned in debrief.  Check survival, ensure survival.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mad Bomber on April 07, 2007, 10:51:37 pm
I thought it was "Gaudua", not Gouda. (Cheese?) :p

Also, C1M4 has fighter Epsilon 1 alttyped as "Jamming Device".
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 08, 2007, 01:56:23 am
Yeah, that's a typo in the forums only.  Sorry.

OK, here's the whole batch.  I've corrected spelling, grammar, and made a few stylistic changes (most people won't even notice unless they're looking for them).  Most of the changes are simple to elaborate on exisiting mission events and provide insight.

As I said previously, E1M2 needs some revisions, as do E1M4 and E2M1.  I also came across a few missions where FRED spat up a warning about wing targets - I'm not very familiar with FRED, so I'll leave that for someone else.

I have NOT re-playtested any missions except E1M2, and as I said it needs some revisions.  Rather than mucking about now, I'll wait until one of the FREDers can make further changes and go through them again then.

Thus, I release my hold on the revisions to Nelson =)

File is attached.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 08, 2007, 10:16:33 am
Great, I'll go through it today.  The wing errors have to do with the use of the change-iff sexp.  In effect, FRED thinks some wings have been ordered to attack vessels on its own side.  By the time those wings appear, the change-iff sexp has changed those vessels to the other side.  Thus these are warnings that may be safely ignored.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 08, 2007, 12:04:37 pm
Great, I'll go through it today.  The wing errors have to do with the use of the change-iff sexp.  In effect, FRED thinks some wings have been ordered to attack vessels on its own side.  By the time those wings appear, the change-iff sexp has changed those vessels to the other side.  Thus these are warnings that may be safely ignored.

Alrighty.

I'm actually going to tinker with a few of the missions with issues for an hour or so now and see what we can do about them, especially the last one.  The way it played out last time was a very anti-climactic.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 08, 2007, 01:16:20 pm
OK... in E1M4, the Abydos survives quite easily, so maybe just add a condition that if you screw up the mission totally and it gets destroyed you get yelled at.  Also, as Mad Bomber said, Epsilon 1 is indeed named "Jamming Device", which seems an odd callsign for a pilot :P

E3M7... this mission just BUGS me.

1.  It's like the Ravana is declawed even before you do anything.  Once the primary beam cannons are destroyed, it no longer fires on anything... you, your wingmen, the Warlock... nothing.  And it's still toting at least 4 other beam cannons, plus flak turrets, laser turrets, and missiles.  Seems silly.  Suggestions:
-Change the mission briefing and events so you're going after the weapons subsystem.  Then it makes sense that the destroyer should stop firing when it's destroyed.
-Better yet, change the events so the Ravana continues firing on fightercraft and the Warlock with it's other weapons systems (when these things are within range, obviously.)  If you fly it right and escape, the Ravana never gets in range of the Warlock with its smaller beam weapons, so really it just needs to engage the fighters.  Feels really stupid to be flying your Erinyes 200 meters from the Ravana's hull and get nothing shot at you.  Of course, if you don't destroy the primary beams then the destroyer unloads on you, but as soon as those cannons are gone it gives up... which is just not right.

2.  Messaging events.  Two issues here:
-The Warlock's gunnery message comes late - it opens fire before that message appears.  I'll grant you that beam slash misses the first time, so either advance this message before the Warlock fires at all, OR add another earlier message that says "Testing beam range" or something of the like first.  Right now it seems strange.  The third option is to change that message to read "Gunnery range test complete.  Gunnery control, open fire with all beam cannons!" but I think I prefer the second or first options.
-The communications node message is linked in with the destruction of the Daskha.  It was odd to see, after the comm node had been destroyed for a full five minutes, a message from the Warlock to destroy the comm node.  That needs to be made dependent on the comm node's existence, so it has a separate event (and you should get a congratulatory message for destroying the node).

3.  The Rakshasa cruisers at the end are just... bah, I don't like them.  First off, they're singleminded about the bombers and the Warlock, so if you disarm them the never shoot at you - again, just goody.  Second, when they show up Command tells you to destroy the fighters - what fighters?  No fighters warp in with the cruisers, and if you've already wiped out those attacking the Warlock you're left sitting there going "Command is REALLY stupid.  Or delusional."  Which, while I'll grant you is not out of the ordinary in FS2, usually it's intentional and not due to errors in the mission :)  So a couple things:
-First off, the cruisers need teeth.  They should engage whatever attacks them, and engage the Warlock (which they do do if they get in range).  Also, and this is probably more controversial... two cruisers at that range are not a threat if you engage them right away.  They'll be more of a threat if they repel attack, so that's a good first start, but they're still rather anticlimactic.  Russik says he's got more friends, and then two cruisers show up.  Yay.  Big deal.  We've got a Hecate, two bomber wings, and whatever fighters are left.  So, we need to either add fighters, or maybe consider changing one of the cruisers to a corvette to make this a little more credible.
-Second, the fighter message.  Either add fighters so the message makes sense, or remove the message.

And now, I'm off to find out if the GTC Nicholas usually survives E2M1.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 08, 2007, 02:08:33 pm
OK, last nitpick for now.

E2M1
-I missed a grammar error.  "The GTC Nicolas is going to try and flush her towards the portal.  We'll keep you posted.  Carry on."  should be "The GTC Nicolas is going to try to flush her toward the portal.  We'll keep you posted.  Carry on."

-The Nicholas doesn't survive this mission.  It *might* be possible to preserve her, but I haven't been able to.  It seems to be a choice of save the Nicholas, lose a transport, or save the transports, lose the Nicholas.  As such, I suggest the debriefing be changed as follows:

Condition 1:  All transports survive, GTC Nicholas survives.  Mission success, bonus objective complete.  Debriefing to read:
Quote
A job well done, pilot.  The convoy sucessfully made the jump to what's now been identified as the Mintaka system.  If we're planning on mounting an expedition into that system we'll need all the supplies we can get.

In addition, the crew of the GTC Nicholas extends their thanks.  While your mission objective was to protect the convoy, it is a testament to the skill and resourcefulness of you and your wing that you were able to preserve the convoy intact and come to the aid of a warship in distress.  Well done!

Tomorrow's briefing will cover the details of this new system and our objectives in it.  Until then, get some rest.

Recommendation text:  Protecting the GTC Nicholas was above and beyond the call of duty.  Well done!

Condition 2:  All transports survive, GTC Nicholas destroyed.  Debriefing:
Quote
A job well done pilot.  The convoy sucessfully made the jump to what's now been identified as the Mintaka system.  If we're planning on mounting an expedition into that system we'll need all the supplies we can get.

It is unfortunate that the GTC Nicholas was destroyed, but you were correct to defend the convoy and leave the Shivan corvette to our capital ships.

Tomorrow's briefing will cover the details of this new system and our objectives in it.  Until then, get some rest.

No recommendation text.

Condition 3:  GTC Nicholas survives, convoy vessels destroyed.
Quote
While you managed to protect the GTC Nicholas, your primary objective to escort the convoy to the portal was a failure.  Many died as a result of your careless escort.  All GTVA pilots are required to follow the orders issued to them.  If you cannot do that, then perhaps you are not cut out for this outfit.

Dismissed.

Recommendation text:  Keep a close eye on the convoy.  Priority targets are the bombers, but watch out for fast moving fighters as well.  The GTC Nicholas is not your responsibility, although disarming the Shivan corvette may allow the Nicholas to escape.

Condition 4:  Nicholas destroyed, convoy ship destroyed.
Quote
Your primary objective to escort the convoy to the portal was a failure.  Many died as a result of your careless escort.  Perhaps you are not cut out for this outfit.

Dismissed.

Recommendation text:  Keep a close eye on the convoy.  Priority targets are the bombers, but watch out for fast moving fighters as well.  The GTC Nicholas is not your responsibility, although disarming the Shivan corvette may allow the Nicholas to escape.


And, that's it for me.  Anything else comes up and I'll have a look later this evening.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 08, 2007, 02:37:02 pm
I take note of Epsilon 1's alt name.

Ah, I forgot to tell you that I renamed the "GTC Nicolas". It is now called "Nicolas". In Warzone, ship names are fortunately free from prefixes.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 08, 2007, 09:05:17 pm
Okay, the holiday today prevents me from doing all I had intended, but I added some of MP_Ryan's changes, together with some other mostly directives related edits.  For instance, in the Source of Confusion mission, command would announce that jamming had ceased only when all targets in the area were destroyed.  Thus you could blow up some lousy Ashema, and get the jamming ended message.  I separated the objectives do that the jammer down message comes when the jammer blows up.  I haven't yet tackled the final mission, which we'll probably need to discuss out.  I have added proper failed RTB messages to a couple of other missions which needed them.

Mobius, I'd like you to take a look at the Northwest Passage mission and edit it such that the Shivan corvette only fires on the Nicolas _once_ with its beams.  The idea was to badly damage this ship such that the player needs to defend it against the enemy Manticores.  There is no chance for it to survive a second beam attack.  The Shivan corvette was supposed to be occupied solely with fighting the Vasudan destroyer, but for some reason it keeps turning back to reengage the Nicolas.

I think we are getting close now.  I'd like to get another round of mission testing and feedback in, then take on the final mission.  I'f be delighted if some of you other folks who have been downloading WIPs would chime in with feedback.

Mobius now has control of the mission files.

WIP (Missions only) (http://files.filefront.com//;7186964;;/)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 08, 2007, 11:59:25 pm
I'm going to wait for LGM's updates to the mission files before playtesting again.  That, and I have a combined total of 20 pages of academic writing due in between now and Wednesday at noon, so I have other things to do :)

I like your idea of holding off on the final mission for now as well.  I think that one can be significantly improved.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 09, 2007, 12:06:53 am
That's fine.  I do think we are close.  I uploaded another version just now, as I crunched another annoying bug (created by myself :) )
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 09, 2007, 07:52:35 am
Ok, you can count on me.

Have you fixed Epsilon 1's alt name in E1M4? If not, I will fix it. Simple! :D

Uhm...so the Moloch has to fire with 2 SReds? One isn't enough for our purpose, if I understand well. beam protect ship and fire-beam should solve the problem ;)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 09, 2007, 08:13:05 am
Ok, you can count on me.

Have you fixed Epsilon 1's alt name in E1M4? If not, I will fix it. Simple! :D
Yep... :)

Quote
Uhm...so the Moloch has to fire with 2 SReds? One isn't enough for our purpose, if I understand well. beam protect ship and fire-beam should solve the problem ;)

Yes, probably.  The two beams are enough to critically damage the ship, making it vulnerable to the Manticores launched by the corvette.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 09, 2007, 08:31:29 am
Uhm...strange...

I have opened E2M1, the one of your latest WIP mission pack...

None of the changes I have made is present. The Equinox, for example, has no Special Warp. The Nicolas is again called GTC Nicolas.

This problem seems to affect E2M1 only. The other missions seem to have the changed I have made.

So, what should I do with E2M1? My copy of my edited version has been replaced with this one. I can DL my package another time, but all changes MP-Ryan has made would be lost.

I can, of course, change the mission another time, but I wanted to inform you ;)

Uhm, have you tested E2M1? I think that either the Moloch or the Fenris should be replaced because the Moloch will surely pass near it when it jumps(it needs time to decelerate, I know it very well because there's one such event in SthCrs as well, and I got mad with it), so there will be just one SRed targeting the Nicolas. Tell me what I have to do.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 09, 2007, 08:49:24 am
That's curious; it is possible I had the wrong version of that mission alone in my missions folder.  I think your only changes had been to tick the special warp box and make that name change.  I'd say just to apply said change again.

I tried to position the Nicolas such that the Moloch would have time when it jumps in to blast it a single time with both beams, then turn to attack the Tatenen.  It does do so as it stands now, it is just that despite being given the order to attack Tatenen at the highest priority, it keeps turning back and reengaging the Nicolas.  Perhaps waypoint for the Moloch can be used to keep it from turning back again towards the Nicolas.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 09, 2007, 08:55:10 am
Not really, the number of stars is back to 500 and cargo units have default names...

I try to test the mission, and see what should we do with the Nicolas. I'm really taking in consideration the creation of a waypoint, but I want to play the mission first.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 09, 2007, 09:02:50 am
Curious.  Not sure why that mission alone would have reverted to a previous iteration.  If MP-Ryan can confirm whether or not he changed anything in that mission, we may be able to just go back to your version.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 09, 2007, 10:13:54 am
Ok...something to say.

The Equinox acted strangely. If I remember well, it should simply point to its waypoint and then jump out. It turned, and then jump out. Weird.

Since it was the Nicolas the ship that we added, I have reduced the y coords of it and its waypoints of 100 meters so the Rehemas can use its beams. Unfortunately, only one of the two frontal beams has fired(I have to change the coords a bit...)but it has inflicted about 40% of damage to the Nicolas. We know that the cruiser was pursued by the Shivans, and it jumps in with its hull integrity at 100%. We can set some damage, and let the Rehemas use just one SRed. This would make the Nicolas vulnerable enough for the Manticores, that can generally inflict nothing but 10% of damage(considering the presence of the player escorting the Nicolas). Quite fair for me. Also, I prevent the Nicolas from being disabled using ship subsys guardian threshold. Since there are no messages or events about eventual repairs, it is wothwile to prevent the Nicolas from being disabled. If we set some damage and the Rehemas use just one SRed, I can reset the Nicolas' coords.

The first turret of the Tatenen has been set to use BVas beams. The Rehemas will surely be destroyed in a matter of seconds: two BVas, then another BVas in case the corvette goes under the destroyer.

Also, I noticed that there's a wing of Shivan spacecraft composed by Seraphim bombers and Manticores. I suggest to split this wing in two separate wings.

The Vasudan freighters are grouped in Theta wing, while the briefing mentions Iota wing...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: jr2 on April 09, 2007, 10:21:36 am
Can you post a link or attach just that mission?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 09, 2007, 10:37:54 am
Sure...

I will make additional changes. Once we discuss about the things I mentioned in the other post.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 09, 2007, 10:39:43 am
Ok...something to say.

The Equinox acted strangely. If I remember well, it should simply point to its waypoint and then jump out. It turned, and then jump out. Weird.

Sounds like a waypoints-done-delay problem.  Did the ship or its waypoint move?

Quote
Since it was the Nicolas the ship that we added, I have reduced the y coords of it and its waypoints of 100 meters so the Rehemas can use its beams. Unfortunately, only one of the two frontal beams has fired(I have to change the coords a bit...)but it has inflicted about 40% of damage to the Nicolas. We know that the cruiser was pursued by the Shivans, and it jumps in with its hull integrity at 100%. We can set some damage, and let the Rehemas use just one SRed. This would make the Nicolas vulnerable enough for the Manticores, that can generally inflict nothing but 10% of damage(considering the presence of the player escorting the Nicolas). Quite fair for me. Also, I prevent the Nicolas from being disabled using ship subsys guardian threshold. Since there are no messages or events about eventual repairs, it is wothwile to prevent the Nicolas from being disabled. If we set some damage and the Rehemas use just one SRed, I can reset the Nicolas' coords.

Okay, this sounds reasonable.

Quote
The first turret of the Tatenen has been set to use BVas beams. The Rehemas will surely be destroyed in a matter of seconds: two BVas, then another BVas in case the corvette goes under the destroyer.

OKay, fine.  There is no need for the player to fight the corvette, it really is in the mission onyl as eye candy.

Quote
Also, I noticed that there's a wing of Shivan spacecraft composed by Seraphim bombers and Manticores. I suggest to split this wing in two separate wings.

Yes, the directive for this wing behaves oddly anyway.  You will notice that when you destroy the first wing, the directive turns blue and makes the complete sound, only to turn white again when the next wave appears.

Quote
The Vasudan freighters are grouped in Theta wing, while the briefing mentions Iota wing...

Quick fix.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 09, 2007, 11:50:41 am
I didn't change much in E2M1, so I can go back through and make the changes again.  I'll post up the version I have.  Just make sure when the Nicholas' confusion is sorted out that the debriefing gets changed to what I gave you previously.

And on an unrelated note, who mucked up this thread? :P



[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: jr2 on April 09, 2007, 11:55:04 am
Sure...

I will make additional changes. Once we discuss about the things I mentioned in the other post.

Can you try this one out & tell me if there's any difference?

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 09, 2007, 03:41:32 pm
Uhm, I don't know. What have you changed exactly, jr2?


I think that the Nicolas' hull integrity should be set to about 65 percent. I may randomize it so it will range between...I don't know...60% and 70%. This will hopefully make the mission a bit more interesting.

Nelson, everything seems ok with the Equinox, I think I will check it another time.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: jr2 on April 10, 2007, 11:02:30 am
Hmm, I was testing to see if a small change would make the Equinox behave normally... that was the mission that this problem appeared in, correct?  I'd check myself, but my FreeSpace computer got a bad BIOS upgrade, this one can play it, but refuses to do so (minimizes FS, when you click on it to restore, it resets the computer).
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 10, 2007, 01:42:29 pm
Oh...

May I damage the Nicolas a bit? Resp.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 10, 2007, 01:51:48 pm
Sure.  Do as you think best.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 10, 2007, 01:58:14 pm
Sure.  Do as you think best.

Precisely.  At this point we've gone beyond a simple restoration into a full upgrade.  So long as the story and missions remain true to the original authors, I see nothing wrong with tinkering with the missions to increase immersiveness and produce better gameplay.  Most of the Warzone missions are fantastic, but a few have a coupe glaring errors that we've managed to identify and fix... and then *gets back up on soapbox* there's that infernal final mission with so much potential and so many problems.

I'm really looking forward to re-working that sucker.  It should be a desparate battle to the finish, not a friggin' Sunday drive.

Anyway, back to the original point, the Nicholas should have some damage when it shows up, they engaged a Moloch.  Similarly, we could add damage to few other cap ships in some other missions - the Equinox takes a serious battering a few missions earlier, 100% hull integrity seems odd.  To top that off, the Leonov (in the mission where you nuke the Revial, can't remember the name.... it's the one with the Eleris and britannia) could also be a little worse for wear when it shows up.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 10, 2007, 02:08:02 pm

Precisely.  At this point we've gone beyond a simple restoration into a full upgrade.  So long as the story and missions remain true to the original authors, I see nothing wrong with tinkering with the missions to increase immersiveness and produce better gameplay.  Most of the Warzone missions are fantastic, but a few have a coupe glaring errors that we've managed to identify and fix...
:yes:

Yep.  All of our changes have really amounted to a paint job and a couple nice coats of wax on a classic car.  We don't need wholesale changes, just tweaks.  The Nicolas itself is perhaps the biggest departure from the original, but even there from reading the mission in FRED it is clear that the ship had always been intended to be in mission.

I have a couple of more small tweaks I have found in E2M3.  There are no "protect freighter" directives, so I will add these myself.

I'd also welcome any and all other feedback on any of these missions.  I think we are close to nailing everything but the final mission down.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 10, 2007, 02:17:42 pm
Something I forgot to tell you before: in mission specs, except for the first mssion(s?) and many others, no squadron is specified in the proper field.

The Hull integrity(as well as the subsystems' integrity)of both the Equinox and the Nicolas has been randomized.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 10, 2007, 04:06:40 pm

Precisely.  At this point we've gone beyond a simple restoration into a full upgrade.  So long as the story and missions remain true to the original authors, I see nothing wrong with tinkering with the missions to increase immersiveness and produce better gameplay.  Most of the Warzone missions are fantastic, but a few have a coupe glaring errors that we've managed to identify and fix...
:yes:

Yep.  All of our changes have really amounted to a paint job and a couple nice coats of wax on a classic car.  We don't need wholesale changes, just tweaks.  The Nicolas itself is perhaps the biggest departure from the original, but even there from reading the mission in FRED it is clear that the ship had always been intended to be in mission.

I have a couple of more small tweaks I have found in E2M3.  There are no "protect freighter" directives, so I will add these myself.

I'd also welcome any and all other feedback on any of these missions.  I think we are close to nailing everything but the final mission down.


Before we declare everything but the last one finalized, I think we need another WIP with all the recent changes to test (and freeze changes while its tested).  Once that's complete, we do the final mission.

Frankly, rather than the quick fixes I posted earlier I think that entire mission could be re-written and re-FREDed from the ground up - in keeping with the plot events of the original, but updated as a more fitting climax action-wise.  IF we decided to go that route, I'd be happy to write/script out a proposal for the mission proceedings and post it here for critique before we do it.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 10, 2007, 04:16:08 pm
Uhm no I think it would be exaggerated. I think that the idea of adding some single missions is already enough to revamp the campaign.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 10, 2007, 04:23:32 pm
Okay, the Nicolas seems to work as envisaged now.  However, we do need to fix Equinox's strange spinning.  I also noticed something off with Taurus wing.  Its second wave warped in something like 8 clicks from the convoy.  So far away, in fact, that the convoy had all departed by the time it could get within firing range.  The result was a long wait and pointless battle just to trigger the arrival of the Nicolas.  Was something changed in Taurus wing?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 10, 2007, 04:37:52 pm
No, I changed nothing in Taurus.

Also, I forgot to replace the Nicolas(since is just one the SReds that fires at it now). Its y coords were 400(the same is for the waypoints). Please fix it.

What about the squadron logos?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 10, 2007, 05:32:11 pm
Taurus problem was related to the fact that it was designated to appear near Theta 1 -- the first convoy ship to depart.  Since I was stooging around and not properly killing things off, Theta 1 departed before the second wave of Taurus could arrive, causing that problem.

The mission didn't work properly the second time I ran through it -- Remehaz again turned back towards the Nicolas and beamed it to death.  Perhaps Remehaz needs waypoints to force it to turn towards and stay focused upon the Tatenen.

Insignia we should add to the checklist for a final run through / clean up.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 10, 2007, 05:44:17 pm
The mission didn't work properly the second time I ran through it -- Remehaz again turned back towards the Nicolas and beamed it to death.  Perhaps Remehaz needs waypoints to force it to turn towards and stay focused upon the Tatenen.

That's impossible, the Nicolas has beam protect ship activated! Maybe I forgot to set it again(remember, the alternate mission...).

Taurus problem was related to the fact that it was designated to appear near Theta 1 -- the first convoy ship to depart.  Since I was stooging around and not properly killing things off, Theta 1 departed before the second wave of Taurus could arrive, causing that problem.

Then we should replace Taurus near the node or the Tatenen. If there's Theta 1, it jumps near it as normal. If the freighter has either departed or has been destroyed, it will jump near the Tatenen.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 10, 2007, 06:00:49 pm
Well, I tried once more, and this time Remehaz again turned away from Tatenen and towards Nicolas.  It fired its oher weapons at Nicolas but not its beams.  Remehas really needs to be prevented from turning again to face Nicolas.  It should focus on and attack with its beams Tatenen.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 10, 2007, 06:35:01 pm
Well, I tried once more, and this time Remehaz again turned away from Tatenen and towards Nicolas.  It fired its oher weapons at Nicolas but not its beams.  Remehas really needs to be prevented from turning again to face Nicolas.  It should focus on and attack with its beams Tatenen.

I have an idea, perhaps more realistic than that.

Let's face it - the Shivan corvette is assurred of wiping out the cruiser, so it would probably do that if it could.  The destroyer, by contrast, will make short work of a corvette.

Why not change the coordinates.  Have the Nicholas jump in, and the Moloch hop in after it and fire one beam.  Then jump the Tatenen in BETWEEN the corvette and the cruiser.  That way the corvette can't beat up the Nicholas further and it'll get shot down by the Tatenen.  Might be a little more dramatic, and interesting.  Plus, then you can jump one of the Shivan fighters in near the Nicholas on the other side of the Tatenen, and away from the convoy.

Just a suggestion.  Only trouble is, will a Hateshphut fit between them?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 10, 2007, 08:42:09 pm
Might be a bit tight -- a Hatshepsut is BIG.  Perhaps even setting the corvette to kamikaze would achieve the desired end?  It really isn't there as a mission challenge, but just there to blow up dramatically.

Attached are more revisions to E2M3 and M4.  Changes to M3 as described before.  In E2M4 the arrival of the Kirosi was only set to occur when the Shivan destroyer blows up.  This meant that the Warlock could still be destroyed by Shivan bombers, and Russik would be having a nice chat with the Warlock's captain even as the ship explodes around him.  Changed so that Kirosi only arrives if the destroyer and all bombers are destroyed and if the Warlock is still intact.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 10, 2007, 09:12:19 pm
Might be a bit tight -- a Hatshepsut is BIG.  Perhaps even setting the corvette to kamikaze would achieve the desired end?  It really isn't there as a mission challenge, but just there to blow up dramatically.

Hrmmm.

Is it possible to force the Tatenen to destroy the weapons subsystem of the corvette after it fires it's first beam cannon?  Then lock the beams on the Moloch (to simulate weapons failure), and let the Tatenen rip it to shreds?  That'd work too.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 10, 2007, 09:52:09 pm
The issue was really with the corvette flying the wrong way.  Changing it to a kamikaze seem to have gotten the job done.  It barrels in on the destroyer firing its beams and gets blasted to bits.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 11, 2007, 01:42:17 pm
The issue was really with the corvette flying the wrong way.  Changing it to a kamikaze seem to have gotten the job done.  It barrels in on the destroyer firing its beams and gets blasted to bits.

Urgh...what if it manages to complete its kamikaze runs? No messages mentioned a kamikaze run, and it may become noticeable once the corvette points to the Tatenen.

I would like to remember you that the Nicolas' hull integrity is a bit randomized, so chances it could be destroyed by the Rehemas. The Nicolas wasn't present in the old Warzone, consider it as our way to play a bit with the campaign :lol:

Attached are more revisions to E2M3 and M4.  Changes to M3 as described before.  In E2M4 the arrival of the Kirosi was only set to occur when the Shivan destroyer blows up.  This meant that the Warlock could still be destroyed by Shivan bombers, and Russik would be having a nice chat with the Warlock's captain even as the ship explodes around him.  Changed so that Kirosi only arrives if the destroyer and all bombers are destroyed and if the Warlock is still intact.

Good. One time, the Ravana took down the Warlock with its last beam shot before it exploded...in the following chat, all messages were sent by Command...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 11, 2007, 03:19:48 pm
We almost ready for a semi-final WIP release?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 11, 2007, 03:48:52 pm
I'm doing nothing, I'm waiting Admiral Nelson's edited E2M1...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 11, 2007, 05:14:35 pm
Here are the missions as they stand.

Kamikaze damage for the corvette is set to 0.  In any case it doesn't have any hope of reaching the destroy without being blasted.  Equinox needs to be fixed, and some dialog about the Nicolas added.

All the other missions but the last one could use another round of testing to see if there is anything else left.

WIP missions (http://files.filefront.com//;7215910;;/)

Edit:  It seems these missions were edited at some point without the vidar.tbm, as the class for the Vidar was reset to GTF Ulysses in most missions.  Fixed and reuploaded.

Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 12, 2007, 09:31:23 am
Here are the missions as they stand.

Kamikaze damage for the corvette is set to 0.  In any case it doesn't have any hope of reaching the destroy without being blasted.  Equinox needs to be fixed, and some dialog about the Nicolas added.

All the other missions but the last one could use another round of testing to see if there is anything else left.

WIP missions (http://files.filefront.com//;7215910;;/)

Edit:  It seems these missions were edited at some point without the vidar.tbm, as the class for the Vidar was reset to GTF Ulysses in most missions.  Fixed and reuploaded.

Sorry, that Vidar thing was my fault.

What dialog about the Nicholas are you thinking of?  Did the debrief additions get put in?  EDIT:  I see they didn't.  Go back a few posts, I wrote out all the debriefings for E2M1.  I can script out some more dialog around the Nicholas if you like, and you gus can add it with the appropriate events.  *shrug*
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 12, 2007, 11:55:04 am
Write it, I can add it. It won't be that difficult ;)

At this point, Nelson, I think you should request the voice acting.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 12, 2007, 11:57:56 am
I just like you guys to validate that the Northwest Passage mission now works properly, then we can add the debrieings, and some additional messaging round protecting the Nicolas.  In the original mission you could just ignore the whole Remehaz incident and leave, which is a bit odd.

One more run thru of all the missions and we should be ready to tackle the final mission, and then complete our work.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 12, 2007, 12:04:21 pm
Since voice acting needs time, we can have actors working on the campaign while we fix all the bugs. We have yet to add some text in E2M1, yeah, but the actors will need time before arriving to that mission.

Ok, I test E2M1.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 12, 2007, 02:05:50 pm
While I agree that getting this voice-acted would be marvelous, let's at least get the first two acts (E1 and E2 missions) finalized before putting them out there.

I'll test out E2M1 later today and make sure everything is working.  The debriefing I've already written.  I'll see how the mission plays out with the current events, and script 3 or 4 transmissions accordingly.

The way I conceptualized it in the debriefings (and the way I'm planning to write the lines, unless told otherwise) is that the Nicholas is a bonus objective - you don't HAVE to protect it, but if you do you get rewarded for it.

This is just preliminary (without playing it since the changes) but here are my suggestions - don't add this text, I'll re-write it, but it'll be something like this (additions, this is keeping all existing lines).  You may need to add an event or two - I'm assuming here that in order to complete the mission all transports must survive:

Event:  Nicholas is fired upon by the Moloch and severely damaged.
Message:  Nicholas-"Command, our hull integrity has been compromised by the Remhas!  We are recharging our jump drives now, but we need additional cover!"
Command-"Understood, Nicholas.  The Tatenen is preparing to launch fighters.  They will be on station within a few minutes.  Alpha leader, your mission is to protect the convoy.  Protect the Nicholas only if you can still accomplish your primary objectives."

Event:  Shivan fighters jump in and target the Nicholas.
Messages:  Nicholas-"We have been targeted by <wing name> wing!  Our jump drives are still recharging!  We won't make it without fighter cover!"
Tatenen-"Our fighters are not yet ready for launch, Nicholas."

Event:  First transport jumps out, Nicholas is still in system (along these lines, make sure the Nicholas doesn't jump out until AFTER all transports leave the system).
Messages:  Medical Ship-"Thank you for the cover, Alpha and Beta.  We'll be jumping out shortly.  Help that cruiser!"
**Note:  the transports should still be vulnerable for several seconds here, so if the play DOES abandon them at this point there should be some chance of one getting taken out and the mission failing.
Command-"Alpha and beta, engage all remaining enemy craft.  All convoy ships must make it through the portal.  The Nicholas is not your responsibility."

Event:  All enemy craft destroyed, Nicholas survives, bonus objective complete.
Messages: Wingman-"Nicholas, you still with us?  Looks like the area is secure."
Nicholas-"Our jump drives have recharged.  We're getting the hell out of here.  Thanks for the assistance, Lonestars!"

Event:  Nicholas is destroyed before the convoy jumps
Message:  Wingman-"Alpha leader, the Shivans just destroyed the Nicholas!"
Command-"Lonestars, focus on your mission.  Protect that convoy!"
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 12, 2007, 02:11:49 pm
By the time all these messages are sent the Rehemas would be destroyed :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 12, 2007, 02:18:18 pm
These are good suggestions.  We may want Nicolas to arrive a little bit earlier.  It now shows up just about when the onvoy departs.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 12, 2007, 02:24:48 pm
I know, but it jumps in when the player is in a good position to defend it. We shouldn't make it arrive earlier...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 12, 2007, 04:31:26 pm
By the time all these messages are sent the Rehemas would be destroyed :)

That's the idea... the Nicholas is crying now that it's had the crap kicked out of it, and the Shivans are hunting it down.

I don't think the Nicholas needs to arrive any earlier... the first two sets should occur basically eright after it jumps in.  E.g.

Nicholas jumps in - Remhas jumps in - Remhas beams Nicholas - Nicholas messages - Remhas destroyed - Shivan fighters target Nicholas - Second message set - Transports begin to depart - Third message set - all enemy fighters destroyed - Nicholas jumps out.

It should be a fast sequence.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 12, 2007, 05:00:57 pm
Well, try out the mission in its present state and report anything you'd like to see changed.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 12, 2007, 11:49:53 pm
OK, just went through E2M1.

First things first.  There's an unfixed grammar mistake and a few other dialog problems.  But I think rather than fixing those, re-uploading, then you guys adding stuff, and me going through it again, it's probably better if we do it this way:

First, the stuff in this post hasn't been done and probably should be:  http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,46147.msg947400.html#msg947400

Second, add the stuff from this post:  http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,46147.msg949160.html#msg949160

There is time for that exchange (it's fast, but it should be) between the Nicholas arrival and departure.  I would add this, but there are a few events that need to be specifically adjusted.
1.  Nicholas shouldn't depart until all Shivans destroyed.
2.  One Shivan wing (dragons or manticores) need to be sent after the cruiser specifically (but jump them in 5 or so clicks out so the player has time).
3.  Messages sending when first transport departs.
4.  Debriefing conditions

Lastly, the Equinox is still behaving strangely, spinning about before jumping.

Now, if you want to, just put the events in place for the messaging (since I'm not good with FRED) and I can add all the text and such later - I just need the events in place.  You can mark them with RYAN and I'll find and re-write them accordingly.  Alternatively, copy and paste the stuff I've posted here, and re-post a WIP copy of this mission for me.  Then I can go through and tweak all the messages and make sure they flow properly.

I *think* that's all for now.

I've found small grammar/spelling mistakes in other missions, but I think perhaps we should get this one finalized, then I can go through everything again and make sure I've gotten all the textual problems out of the way.  Then we can do a final playtest, and get onto E3M7.  What do you gents say?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 13, 2007, 02:10:32 pm
Uhm...

Fighters are launched by the Rehemas and damage the Nicolas a bit before they're destroyed by the player and/or the cruiser's AAA beams.


Please fix the problems with the texts, I don't want to overried someone's work by accident.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 13, 2007, 02:44:28 pm
Sorry to change subjects, but I created a new planet for Warzone. Take a look at it in the Celestial Objects thread and if you think that it would be a good substitute for Lava1, then I'll provide the attachment. I didn't want this planet to look like the original for reasons explained in the other thread. So now Lava1 is a hot super Earth rather than a molten, young planet.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 13, 2007, 02:55:54 pm
Good, but I don't know if we can add them in Warzone. We're discussing about possible modifications, that go beyond the SCP Compatible and Voice Acting thing. We may consider you work, don't worry! ;)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 13, 2007, 02:59:33 pm
Uhm...

Fighters are launched by the Rehemas and damage the Nicolas a bit before they're destroyed by the player and/or the cruiser's AAA beams.


Please fix the problems with the texts, I don't want to overried someone's work by accident.

Eh?  What I'm saying is if you do the additions now, then I can fix all the text problems at once, rather than doing it now, uploading, and doing it again later. =)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 13, 2007, 03:05:54 pm
I don't see any difference...create the messages via FRED and UL that mission only ;)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 13, 2007, 04:36:36 pm
Sorry to change subjects, but I created a new planet for Warzone. Take a look at it in the Celestial Objects thread and if you think that it would be a good substitute for Lava1, then I'll provide the attachment. I didn't want this planet to look like the original for reasons explained in the other thread. So now Lava1 is a hot super Earth rather than a molten, young planet.

The only trouble here is that what most people recall about Warzone is the lava planet.  I would think it more realistic if we imagine it a moon the size of Io, on which smaller features would be visible. Perhaps we use this hot rocky planet but give it a satellite that resembles the original lava planet more closely?

@LGM:  I did request upgraded planets specifically from m2258734a.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 13, 2007, 04:54:21 pm
I know, I like his Alpha Crucis!

Uhm...we use Io in Inferno.... ;)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 13, 2007, 07:21:56 pm
Glad you like the stars.

What I was thinking while I was typing my reason for not making the lava planet was that maybe I could create a massive planetary body that would actually cause one of its nearby satellites to become active and relatively molten due to extremely high tidal forces. If you would like, maybe we could use the hot super Earth as a substitute for one of the "dead" planets, and then I can try to make the lava planet as the satellite of a much more massive companion. This massive companion could open up a door to all sorts of possible gas giants... but that is probably pushing it in terms of maintaining the original scenery. It's up to you all.

The only problem that I see if I make the lava planet for either the super Earth I made or a gas giant, the planet will have to appear small. A hot super Earth will have it's Roche limit much closer to the planet compared to a much more massive gas giant. I would then have to remake the hot super Earth take up a large portion of the sky, or I could have a moderately large gas giant in the distance (which would still appear larger than 512x512). So again it's all up to you all. I don't mind either way, although I don't have any experience in making low orbit high rez images.

EDIT: I went ahead and added the hot super Earth TGA if you all would still like to use it.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 13, 2007, 07:27:34 pm
The original scenery is all replaced with LS Nebulae in any case.  I'd say let's use hot super earth as a dead planet, and go for the lava planet as a satellite of a gas giant.  Use your imagination to come up with a good BIG gas giant.  The original Warzone scenery included a gas giant with material being pulled off into the star it orbited. This effect looked weird due to limitations of the graphics of the period.  This idea would make a good substitute, I think.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 13, 2007, 07:35:21 pm
I've got an idea...

I am sure you have heard of a hot Jupiter. Well, I think I am going to try to recreate a hot Jupiter, similar to the extrasolar planet "Osiris", which is so close to its parent star that it is losing its atmosphere. This would produce a form of stream or tail flowing behind the planet as it orbited its star. While the chances of a satellite existing in orbit around hot Jupiters are very, very slim due to the rapid revolution of the planet and due to extreme tidal forces, we can assume that the lava "planet" is near the end of its days.

While I am all for keeping star systems as realistic as possible, adding planets to systems which don't actually have planets is no big deal. Recreating this "Osiris" type hot Jupiter will take some time and experimentation, but I will try to make it look as good as possible. I'm thinking 1024x1024 would be a good size for it. How does that sound?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 13, 2007, 07:38:26 pm
Sounds good!
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 13, 2007, 07:41:05 pm
Awesome.  :yes:

I went ahead and added the hot super Earth to one of my previous posts. I tried to update the message before anyone could read it, but I think you beat me to it.  :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 13, 2007, 07:55:25 pm
I don't see any difference...create the messages via FRED and UL that mission only ;)

Gah, Mobius ,are you trying to drive me crazy, or is it it just the language barrier? :P

In that previous post,I listed off several events changes that need to be made to the mission in FRED.  Trust me when I say you don't want me attempting that - the extent of my FREDing skills involve opening the missions, editing messages, editing the briefing text, and editing the debriefing text.

Here's the specific list:
1.  The debriefing events conditions need to be changed to reflect the four conditions I posted (two success, two failures).
2.  The Nicholas' departure should wait until all enemy craft are destroyed.  Right now, it doesn't.
3.  I need an event added to trigger when the FIRST transport jumps out, before all the others.
4.  The fighters launched by the Remehas need to go after the cruiser specifically.  They didn't when last I played it.
5.  The Equinox is still doing it's funky spin before leaving.

If you can add/change those events (or tell me how to do it), then I can go through and add all of the text changes and extra transmissions.

Is that a little clearer? :D

Refer back to this post: 

http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,46147.msg949323.html#msg949323

I'm nowhere near my computer for the next few days, but text stuff I can do from my girlfriend's computer.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 14, 2007, 10:59:09 am
But where's the mission with your mods, Ryan? As I said, I don't want to override stuff.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 14, 2007, 11:12:34 am
He doesn't know how to make the edits.  He wants one of us to add the events and messages in FRED, and then send it to him to edit the text.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 14, 2007, 11:55:06 am
I haven't made any mods since Nelson's last WIP - I'm waiting for a new copy with the events =)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 14, 2007, 12:43:00 pm
I get it...I'll try to do what you have requested :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 14, 2007, 06:13:01 pm
I get it...I'll try to do what you have requested :)

...6 posts and 2 days later :P  *noogies Mobius*

What happened to that critique I was supposed to edit for you?  It never manifested itself.  If you're still going to do it and want me to look at it, email it to me (same address as my MSN account).
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: m2258734a on April 15, 2007, 12:18:22 pm
Attached is the Lava1 TGA. Just in case you all missed it, I have placed the hot super Earth TGA in one of my previous posts which I have renamed so there's no confusion between the two celestial bodies.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 15, 2007, 12:23:28 pm
I had no time...I will edit the mission this evening :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 16, 2007, 11:22:40 am
Edited...I've done everything you wanted, Ryan.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 16, 2007, 11:29:34 am
Edited...I've done everything you wanted, Ryan.

Mobius, my friend, you're a beautiful human being =)

Alright, I'm going to finish polishing up that mission and few a few other grammatical mistakes I've found and then re-upload the WIP missions for testing.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 16, 2007, 03:26:02 pm
Guess my last post was premature.

I found a few little issues aside from textual ones which I've fixed, and I've altered some of the message/event timing around the Nicholas after a few playtests so it works a little better.

However, despite a series of edits and 3 different playtesting sessions, I cannot get the debriefings Mobius added to work - even in his original mission..  The only one that does is the AWOL - if you complete the mission, you get a "No debriefing available for E2M1" message.  I've looked through all the events and the mission objectives and I can't find the source of the problem.  Hopefully, someone else a little more familiar with FRED can.  I'm attaching the latest edition of this mission to my post.

Also, when the Nicolas departs a "Bonus Objective Complete" message does not appear on the HUD.  That should be added.



[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 16, 2007, 03:51:21 pm
This is strange, I used simple conditions for all of the debriefing stages. I'll check it...

Mobius, my friend, you're a beautiful human being =)

It's a pity you're not a girl. *runs*
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 16, 2007, 03:56:48 pm
This is strange, I used simple conditions for all of the debriefing stages. I'll check it...

Mobius, my friend, you're a beautiful human being =)

It's a pity you're not a girl. *runs*

To be a little more specific:
-I removed the obsolete secondary goals (from when you could pass the mission with a dead convoy ship) and related events.  They weren't part of the new debrief anyway.
-I fixed the briefing icons and wing name (Theta was Iota, oddly).
-Re-timed messaging events and Nicolas' departure.

The objectives throughout are:
1.  Protect the convoy
Bonus:  Protect the Nicolas.

However, when both are completed, you get no notification about the Bonus (e.g. the "Bonus Objective Complete" does not flash up in the middle of the HUD) and the debriefing doesn't work.  Hence my confusion.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 16, 2007, 04:43:36 pm
Well, the event <LGM> Nicolas Depart will return true even if the Nicolas hasn't arrived yet!  This seems to be the source of most of these problems.  This event should only be triggered after the Nicolas arrives.  It is entirely possible to get messages from and to the cruiser before it shows up, and then when it does actually arrive, it instantly departs.  The mission now seems to be making some assumptions around the timing of when you destroy Taurus wing vis-a-vis when the convoy departs.  It is quite possible for the convoy to fully depart before this wing is destroyed, and then all sorts of problems begin.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 16, 2007, 04:49:09 pm
Hrmm.  I haven't had that occur in any of my playtests but it does make sense.  Usually the mission proceeds just as it should, but then there's no bonus notification and no debrief.

Interestingly, as I just told Mob, if a convoy ship gets destroyed and you get an RTB order, if you jump out after getting the order you still get an AWOL message.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 16, 2007, 04:58:47 pm
The real problem is different, Nelson and Ryan. The goal relative to the Nicolas was set to "Invalid"!!!

Here's the mission. There are some minor bug fixes.

Also, you should have realized that the Equinox problems has been resolved...it as about the coordinates of the waypoint, that weren't placed in front of the corvette(the reason beyonf that turning).


EDIT: There's just one attachment now. I had some problems with my connection when posting, sorry.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 16, 2007, 05:03:03 pm
You have two missions uploaded there?

EDIT: I tested the first one.  The debriefing problem is fixed, but the issue I mentioned is still true.  Every time I have played the mission, <LGM> Nicolas Depart is triggered before it actually arrives.  The problem really is that the arrival of the Nicolas and Remehaz is triggered by the destruction of Taurus wing.  This event assumes that Taurus wing will be destroyed before the convoy departs.  There is no reason why this should be so -- I have had the whole convoy depart before even the first wing of Taurus has been destroyed.  The bulletproofing required is to change the arrival of the Nicolas to be triggered by proximity of the Measia to the jump node.  The Remehaz should then to be set to arrive after the Nicolas.  In this way all of the dialogue will make sense and cannot be broken by other random events.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 16, 2007, 05:26:48 pm
Part of the debrief is not fixed - I'm still getting told I'm AWOL when I fail the mission and am ordered to jump out.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 16, 2007, 06:03:05 pm
I think I fixed all the problems, plus something else...

Please test.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 16, 2007, 06:24:56 pm
Remehas arrival is still set to Taurus' destruction, when it should shouw up just after the Nicolas' arrival.  Nicolas' behavior itself now makes sense.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 16, 2007, 06:30:01 pm
Ah, I thought the Rehemas arrival is relative to the arrival of the Nicolas. My mistake <_<

It should be easy to fix, however ;)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 16, 2007, 08:30:36 pm
I fixed the Remehas arrival cue, and corrected a spelling mistake in E1M4 as well as adding an AWOL to it.  I think many others are missing AWOLs as well.

Attached is the entire Warzone missions package.  We're ready for a round of testing.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 17, 2007, 12:19:35 pm
A quick question - are you going to add whatever additional planets m conjures up at the end of this, Nelson?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 17, 2007, 12:24:57 pm
Yup.  The nebulae are pretty final but the planets are just placeholders now.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 17, 2007, 04:56:22 pm
Should we change that last mission a bit before testing the campaign?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: jr2 on April 17, 2007, 05:05:26 pm
m doesn't know how to make planets yet, trust me, I know... he's pretty good with a pen / pencil and paper, but he hasn't branched out into computer graphics yet.  :lol:  m2258734a, however, does an excellent job with planets.  :yes:
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 17, 2007, 05:10:35 pm
We don't need the new planets for the upcoming testing, we can wait.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 17, 2007, 05:14:53 pm
Should we change that last mission a bit before testing the campaign?

If we thought E2M1 was a fair bit of work, I think E3M7 is going to be worse.  Plus, I'm sure there are other minor issues we've missed in the rest of the campaign that we can sort out.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 17, 2007, 05:33:51 pm
Most E2M1 issues were related to the Nicolas, so we shouldn't be worried.

E3M7 isn't buggy, we should simply make it better, right?

Do the other missions have AWOL debriefings? If not, we must add them. We'll keep the same text since the campaign will be voice acted.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 17, 2007, 05:57:18 pm
I made two edits to these missions:
E3M2
Added the Jaluun to the escort list.
E3M5
Made protecting the GTCV Liberty a mission objective.  If this ship was destroyed, the player was left with no means to destroy the Shivan corvette.  This is because the corvette cannot be brought below 1% with fighter weapons, and there are no bombers in the mission.  It is pretty easy to protect this ship in any case, and the mission will get screwed up if it dies and the Shivan corvette is still around.

We should just look through the missions one more time for anything strange and then proceed to fixing the last mission.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: jr2 on April 17, 2007, 06:12:06 pm
You can't use fighter secondaries to destroy a cap ship?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 17, 2007, 06:19:33 pm
No, corvette classes and above are invulnerable. Only if you equip a Myrmidon with Helios torpedoes.


You have already fixed that thing in E3M5, Nelson? Fine. I almost hated that mission...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 18, 2007, 05:46:30 pm
Most E2M1 issues were related to the Nicolas, so we shouldn't be worried.

E3M7 isn't buggy, we should simply make it better, right?

Do the other missions have AWOL debriefings? If not, we must add them. We'll keep the same text since the campaign will be voice acted.

Go read my previous two lists on E3M7 =)

As for the AWOL debrief, check out the one I wrote for E1M4 and let me know what you guys think.  We could include that or something similar in most of them.

I'll deovte what time I can to testing but I'm back in exam/paper insanity for the newt week and a half, and then the girlfriend and I are moving to a new apartment, so I'll be only sporadically available :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 19, 2007, 12:26:21 pm
Since we're revamping the campaign having specific AWOL debriefs would be better("you left the field of engagement and the X has been destroyed" or "Because of your negligence, the Shivans continued their strike on...etc etc"). What do you think?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 19, 2007, 02:51:03 pm
Since we're revamping the campaign having specific AWOL debriefs would be better("you left the field of engagement and the X has been destroyed" or "Because of your negligence, the Shivans continued their strike on...etc etc"). What do you think?

I don't disagree, it just means more work if you want to get the briefings/debriefings voice-acted.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 19, 2007, 03:07:49 pm
Well,you should still get the other failure messages, "X was destroyed, blah blah" after the AWOL message anyway.  I think just by making the AWOL debriefing come first,  we can use the same text with additional context coming from the other messages.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 19, 2007, 03:54:51 pm
Good idea, but we can include everything in one stage.

"Disertion is ground for a court martial, pilot. Because of your negligence, the Shivans destroyed the Warlock severely reducing our chances of victory in this threatre of operations. You're hereby stripped of your wings and all privileges bestowed upon you as an officer of the GTVA. <stuff about preliminary pendings> A transport will bring you to the nearest Penal Colony. Dismissed."
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 20, 2007, 04:43:55 pm
So, one reason why the final mission is so easy is that Alpha 1 has the protect-ship flag set on it.....  :lol:
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 21, 2007, 12:32:38 pm
So, one reason why the final mission is so easy is that Alpha 1 has the protect-ship flag set on it.....  :lol:

You're kidding.

That might explain why nothing tries to seriously kill you.

Actually, check the mission with the Britannia and E1M4 again for that... I seem to recall sitting at 1% hull integrity through one or both of them.

Has anyone looked for the AWOLs in the other missions yet?  If I get my paper done today, I can probably do some work on them tomorrow.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 21, 2007, 01:21:35 pm
Here is a first draft of the final mission with the obvious bugs and issues cleaned out.  It still feels very easy.  I'll look at those other missions and see.  I have not touched any AWOL debriefings yet.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 21, 2007, 03:04:20 pm
Here is a first draft of the final mission with the obvious bugs and issues cleaned out.  It still feels very easy.  I'll look at those other missions and see.  I have not touched any AWOL debriefings yet.

I can't play that right now because I'm not on a computer with FS installed, but here is a quick jot down of ideas on how to re-vamp the final mission and preserve the premise of it's storyline,while making it more difficult:

Mission narrative:
-Make only Alpha wing's loadout customizeable.  Place Beta in Erinyes fighters, and Gamma in Perseus interceptors.  Give them decent loadouts.
-Russik's Argo, Comm Node, and Ravana all located in close proximity at beginning of mission.  Ravana at full hull integrity. Warlock not yet present in area.
-One wing of Maras guarding the Argo; one wing guarding the Ravana.
-Alpha and Beta wings jump in as advance recon and strike teams.  Report position of Ravana and arranged forces to Warlock (this is a little more realistic, I think, than the strike teams arriving with the Warlock).  Alpha ordered to destroy primary beam cannons, Beta to engage fighters.
-Warlock jumps in within beam range BEHIND the Ravana, opens fire with its primary beam turrets.  Ravana fires with aft beam turrets at the Warlock.  Ravana begins turning to attack the Warlock.
-The Ravana should be engaging Alpha wing with anti-fighter beams, flak, missile turrets, and laser turrets at all times during this mission to make it difficult.  The only weapons on the Ravana that should ever stop firing are all the beam cannons (read below).  We could also have the wing of Maras reappear from the fighterbay every minute or so after the previous one is destroyed.
-Alpha must destroy the primary beam cannons on the Ravana before it completes its turn and can engage the Warlock.  We could script something so that the aft turrets of the Ravana damage the Warlock, but if the primary turrets fire on it, the Warlock gets destroyed.  In the FS2 retail campaign, a Ravana is a huge threat to any destroyer. In the original of this mission, it's a large red lump to be rolled over.  These types of events would change that.
-When the primary beam turrets are destroyed, script a message and event to destroy all the beam cannons on the Ravana (excuse it as an overload or something).  At this point, the Ravana should begin launching bombers (from its fighterbay, not through subspace) at the Warlock and Alpha/Beta ordered to defend the Warlock.  Fighter launches by the Ravana should stop at this point; make it so Alpha/Beta/Gamma just have to deal with several bomber wings trying to destroy the Warlock.
-The Warlock should not launch bombers at the Ravana.
-When the Ravana is destroyed, bomber waves should stop.  At this point, the maximum hull integrity of the Warlock should be about 50%, and the minimum around 25%
-Russik taunts included here.
-Russik should call in two Molochs which should warp in several kilometers out, accompanied by a wing of Maras each.  The Warlock should then deploy two bomber wings (1 Boanenerges, 1 Artemis), epsilon wing (Perseus interceptors), and send them along with any surviving fighters from Beta and Gamma wings after the three capital ships.  Allow the Warlock to engage the Molochs when within range.  With the combined power of the Warlock, bombers, and fighters it should be scripted and timed so that it is possible for the Warlock to survive the corvettes if it has 40% or more hull integrity after the Ravana and the Shivan bombers.
-Alpha wing should be sent after the comm node, not the corvettes.  If Alpha hasn't destroyed then node by the time the Molochs are within range of the Warlock, two Rakshasa's and two wings of Seraphim jump in behind the Warlock and, along with the Molochs, destroy it.  If Alpha does destroy the comm node in time, then the Rakshasa's never arrive, and any Shivan forces left continue against the Warlock and the bombers until they are destroyed, but no reinforcements arrive.  This will require careful timing of the events, but it gives an importance to destroying that comm node.
-In other words, if the player helped the Warlock hold off the bombers and destroyed the beam cannons, and then later destroys the comm node, the mission should be a success.  If the player fails to do these things in a timely manner, the Molochs should destroy the Warlock, or (if the comm node isn't destroyed in time), the Rakshasa's and bombers should ensure its destruction and the mission should be a failure.
-If the Warlock survives and the Molochs and node are destroyed, then the end of the mission should carry out as before - Russik surrenders, and then self-destructs.  Otherwise, the mission should be a failure and Russik should jump out after the Warlock dies.

What do you guys think?  It'll take some serious work, and serious balancing, but I think it preserves the intent of the original mission and ups the difficulty.  Give me some feedback.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 21, 2007, 03:21:48 pm
The only possible way to make the last mission harder is reducing the Warlock's chances of survival...


I like your concept mission, Ryan. Let's wait for Nelson's opinion.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 21, 2007, 03:39:24 pm
It does seem to be stretching the idea of being a restoration team to completely redo the thing in that way.

I do think that the mission is indeed to easy even after removing the protect-ship flag from the player.  This is partly due to the nature of the Ravana design itself  -- a couple of bursts from a maxim can completely emasculate the ship.  Notice how in the previous mission you had Trebuchets available, but none in this one.  Why?  Because then you could hit button two on the joystick twice and win the mission... :)

The first issue is probably that the Ravana does not have enough fighter escort.  Another pilot makes a comment about "there are too many of them", yet there are 12 terran fighters to 14 shivan.  Given that many of the shivan fighters are crappy Ashemas, this is a bit much.  I like the idea of the destroyer launcher more and more fighters, this gives more urgency to destroying the vessel, as once you knock out the two beam cannons its just another trash hauler waiting to blow up.

I also like the idea of it launching bomber wings, beyond just the one wing of Taurvis.  This makes more sense than the bombers that warp in repeatedly next to Warlock.  It would again create more urgency than exists now in the mission.

The part with the Rakshasas is also a little odd, as Warlock launches _eight_ bombers to destroy them.  Where were these when the Ravana was attacking?  4 Artemis + 4 Boanerges make short work of the cruisers without any need for player intervention.

Something that always puzzled me in Warzone is what happened to the GTCV Odin.  It is the ship most closely identified with Russik, yet it vanishes from the campaign without comment.  Perhaps adding it to the cruiser group would close this plot hole plus provide challenge?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 21, 2007, 05:05:34 pm
Uhm...

It does seem to be stretching the idea of being a restoration team to completely redo the thing in that way.

Yeah, but the idea is damn good.

I do think that the mission is indeed to easy even after removing the protect-ship flag from the player.  This is partly due to the nature of the Ravana design itself  -- a couple of bursts from a maxim can completely emasculate the ship.  Notice how in the previous mission you had Trebuchets available, but none in this one.  Why?  Because then you could hit button two on the joystick twice and win the mission... :)

Should we use the Kismat from Inferno? :lol:

The first issue is probably that the Ravana does not have enough fighter escort.  Another pilot makes a comment about "there are too many of them", yet there are 12 terran fighters to 14 shivan.  Given that many of the shivan fighters are crappy Ashemas, this is a bit much.  I like the idea of the destroyer launcher more and more fighters, this gives more urgency to destroying the vessel, as once you knock out the two beam cannons its just another trash hauler waiting to blow up.

There are some Dragons as well.... but yeah you're right...

I also like the idea of it launching bomber wings, beyond just the one wing of Taurvis.  This makes more sense than the bombers that warp in repeatedly next to Warlock.  It would again create more urgency than exists now in the mission.

So...le'ts increase the number of waves. Bombers can jump in near the Warlock - remember that Russik was communicating with the Shivans so every single Shivan unit in that sector was available as reinforcement. The idea of bombers jumping in makes sense.

The part with the Rakshasas is also a little odd, as Warlock launches _eight_ bombers to destroy them.  Where were these when the Ravana was attacking?  4 Artemis + 4 Boanerges make short work of the cruisers without any need for player intervention.

That's what the designers wanted. At the end, Allied forces have a advantage and except for the Ravana, avery obstacle can be dispatched quickly. In this case we can only delay the launch of the bombers, giving the cruisers the time they need to do part of their job.

Something that always puzzled me in Warzone is what happened to the GTCV Odin.  It is the ship most closely identified with Russik, yet it vanishes from the campaign without comment.  Perhaps adding it to the cruiser group would close this plot hole plus provide challenge?
   

Err...I'd rather leave the plothole. The corvette has been either captured or destroyed at the end of Russik's rebellion...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 21, 2007, 05:17:59 pm
I think this campaign has already pushed us a little beyond Restoration anyway.  Like I said before, the final mission simply doesn't do the rest of the campaign justice.

Here's another set of suggestions then:

1.  The current bit of Warlock-on-Ravana makes very little sense.  You're telling me the destroyer wouldn't launch any fighters in advance before it jumped in?  That's why I suggested we change the beginning of the mission with the Ravana.  Jump in Alpha and Beta wings only at the beginning, and send them after the Ravana's main beam cannons.  Have them warp in 2 or so clicks out, and send a message telling the Warlock where to jump in.  Jump the Warlock in behind along with Gamma wing in Perseus interceptors, but within beam range to begin with, and force the Ravana to attack with its aft beams BEFORE it turns.  The idea is that if you don't take out the primary beam turrets before it turns around, they fire and we script in the Warlock's destruction (maybe replace the main beams with a couple BFRed's, if they aren't already).  Then, if Alpha renders the Ravana toothless, it's beams are disabled and it begins bomber launches (and abort fighters) in a last-ditch attempt to take out the Warlock.  The Warlock, meanwhile, keeps firing its beams eventually destroying the Ravana if the player can keep the bombers off it.  This is what was intended by my quote (below)... so what do you think of this suggestion in particular?

Quote
-Make only Alpha wing's loadout customizeable.  Place Beta in Erinyes fighters, and Gamma in Perseus interceptors.  Give them decent loadouts.
-Russik's Argo, Comm Node, and Ravana all located in close proximity at beginning of mission.  Ravana at full hull integrity. Warlock not yet present in area.
-One wing of Maras guarding the Argo; one wing guarding the Ravana.
-Alpha and Beta wings jump in as advance recon and strike teams.  Report position of Ravana and arranged forces to Warlock (this is a little more realistic, I think, than the strike teams arriving with the Warlock).  Alpha ordered to destroy primary beam cannons, Beta to engage fighters.
-Warlock jumps in within beam range BEHIND the Ravana, opens fire with its primary beam turrets.  Ravana fires with aft beam turrets at the Warlock.  Ravana begins turning to attack the Warlock.
-The Ravana should be engaging Alpha wing with anti-fighter beams, flak, missile turrets, and laser turrets at all times during this mission to make it difficult.  The only weapons on the Ravana that should ever stop firing are all the beam cannons (read below).  We could also have the wing of Maras reappear from the fighterbay every minute or so after the previous one is destroyed.
-Alpha must destroy the primary beam cannons on the Ravana before it completes its turn and can engage the Warlock.  We could script something so that the aft turrets of the Ravana damage the Warlock, but if the primary turrets fire on it, the Warlock gets destroyed.  In the FS2 retail campaign, a Ravana is a huge threat to any destroyer. In the original of this mission, it's a large red lump to be rolled over.  These types of events would change that.
-When the primary beam turrets are destroyed, script a message and event to destroy all the beam cannons on the Ravana (excuse it as an overload or something).  At this point, the Ravana should begin launching bombers (from its fighterbay, not through subspace) at the Warlock and Alpha/Beta ordered to defend the Warlock.  Fighter launches by the Ravana should stop at this point; make it so Alpha/Beta/Gamma just have to deal with several bomber wings trying to destroy the Warlock.
-The Warlock should not launch bombers at the Ravana.
-When the Ravana is destroyed, bomber waves should stop.  At this point, the maximum hull integrity of the Warlock should be about 50%, and the minimum around 25%

2.  The last half, encompassing the Odin suggestion:
-Begin with Russik's taunts, calling in friends.
-Jump the two Rakshasa's in within beam range of the Warlock, then launch the Warlock's bombers (a wing of Boanerges and one of Artemis's will do).  Let the Rakshasa's fire a bit on the Warlock.  This should make this seem a little more urgent.
-Again, send Alpha after the comm node again.  Put this on a timer, saying you have however long (we'll have to playtest to figure it out) to destroy the node before Russik calls in additional Shivan reinforcements.  Again, if Alpha fails, more Shivans show up and destroy the Warlock, mission fail.
-If Alpha succeeds, once the comm node and both cruisers are destroyed, warp in the Odin between Russik's Argo and the Warlock, and plot the Argo on a timed escape from the area.  Send messages from the Warlock telling Alpha to disable the Argo's engines while it deals with the Odin.  The Warlock and surviving bombers then engage the Odin but do not destroy it.
-When the engines are disabled, the Odin and the Argo surrender, and the Argo self-destructs.

What do you think?  Another alternative is to replace the Argo in the previous mission and this mission with the Odin, and instead of disabling the Argo at the end of this one, disarm and disable the Odin.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 21, 2007, 05:19:57 pm
Also, at no point should Shivan fighters or bombers jump in while the Ravana is still alive - they should be coming from that destroyer's fighterbay.  After the destroyer is kaput, the only Shivan ships jumping in should be a few fighters and the cruisers.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 22, 2007, 09:59:24 pm
Regarding adding AWOL debriefings... is there any reason we can't do an is-event-false check on the RTB orders?  Every Warzone mission has a RTB order issued when completed successfully (or unsuccessfully).  Therefore, if you jump out before you get an RTB, you're AWOL.

I tested it in the first mission and it worked correctly.

So, would this work or am I missing something glaringly simple?

Oh, here's a standardized AWOL debriefing:
Quote
You have been declared AWOL, pilot!  Jumping out before you are ordered to do so is grounds for immediate imprisonment.

Recommendation text:  Do not depart until ordered to do so.

Here's an updated copy of E2M1 with the correct AWOL debrief.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 24, 2007, 03:58:20 pm
Yes, this seems a logical solution. This will also double check that every mission has proper RTB directives.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 24, 2007, 04:39:10 pm
If we do it this way, it's a fairly quick addition too.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 24, 2007, 04:43:03 pm
Yeah, the voice acting is easy too, since its just one line.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 24, 2007, 04:56:15 pm
There are replies here? I didn't notice them...damn...

Can we do basic things like:
1) Set reasonable loadouts;
2) Change the IA level of someone;
3) More bomber wing waves attacking the Warlock;
4) Delay the launch of bombers attacking the Rakshasas;

Yeah, the voice acting is easy too, since its just one line.

I was about to suggest the use of a longer debrief...I forgot the fact that the campaign will be voice acted...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: diceman111 on April 25, 2007, 10:10:00 am
Ok well I have never played Warzone so I was wondering if you guys are close to completing it or if there is an SCP version of it or if I should simply download the old one...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 25, 2007, 10:19:03 am
I suggest you to play the old one, since we still have to work on the final mission and the voice acting will take a while.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 25, 2007, 11:28:31 am
I suggest you to play the old one, since we still have to work on the final mission and the voice acting will take a while.

We could do a pre-release of missions only, no voiceacting first :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: diceman111 on April 25, 2007, 11:49:54 am
I suggest you to play the old one, since we still have to work on the final mission and the voice acting will take a while.

We could do a pre-release of missions only, no voiceacting first :)

That would be great, cause while voice acting is good and it elevates the experiance it isent that important, atleast not to me

And you always have Microsoft Ann

/Dice
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 25, 2007, 04:05:30 pm
There are replies here? I didn't notice them...damn...

Can we do basic things like:
1) Set reasonable loadouts;
2) Change the IA level of someone;
3) More bomber wing waves attacking the Warlock;
4) Delay the launch of bombers attacking the Rakshasas;


1) Yes
2) Yes
3) Yes, though these should be launched from the Ravana
4) For what purpose?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 26, 2007, 01:18:17 am
Alright guys, beginning Thursday and ending next Wednesday, I am officially off-duty =)

If I find time to post and help in that time I will; otherwise, keep a running update and I'll keep myself caught up by reading.

It should be a simple matter for someone to add those AWOL debriefings if we use the RTB condition, as exemplied by the first mission in which I have already done it (see attached).

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 26, 2007, 05:24:53 pm
Can we do basic things like:
1) Set reasonable loadouts;
2) Change the IA level of someone;
3) More bomber wing waves attacking the Warlock;
4) Delay the launch of bombers attacking the Rakshasas;


1) Yes
2) Yes
3) Yes, though these should be launched from the Ravana
4) For what purpose?
[/quote]

1) Ok.
2) Ok.
3) Yeah, the'y're launched from the Ravana...what's the problem?
4) It's more realistic and we can make the mission harder;
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 26, 2007, 05:26:07 pm
3) No problem :)
4) Just so long as its not delayed too long, give it a try and see.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on April 29, 2007, 05:41:37 pm
And here are this missions with AWOL debriefings, save the final mission which I presume Mobius is tinkering with at present.
 
Download WIP Missions (http://files.filefront.com//;7381175;;/)

I will now turn my attention to the backgrounds; the missions save the final one are pretty much finished, I think.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 30, 2007, 07:16:01 pm
And here are this missions with AWOL debriefings, save the final mission which I presume Mobius is tinkering with at present.

:lol:


I'm DLing the package...

PS
Edit the name of this thread. I can barely notice new posts here when I see the lists of threads with new posts....
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on May 01, 2007, 12:29:59 pm
I'm back.  Somewhat early, I know.  The girlfriend and I are still getting settled in the new apartment.

Have we reached some kind of consensus about the final mission?  Adding the Odin, etc?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on May 01, 2007, 06:05:55 pm
How about the following as a synthesis of the different ideas, without diverging too much from the original:
This version dumps the recon part; it can be explained in the briefing as "our scouts have located the enemy at position x, etc..."  Also dumps the Odin -- giving the player disable / disarm objectives would require undesirable loadout changes. The command brefing can say something like "Leonov has located the Odin and will engage it" or suchlike.

Jump the Warlock in behind the Ravana along with Alpha, Beta and Gamma wings, almost within beam range to begin with, and force the Ravana to attack with its aft beams BEFORE it turns.  The idea is that if you don't take out the primary beam turrets before it turns around, they fire and we script in the Warlock's destruction (I suspect a Ravana will kill a Hecate pretty quickly anyway). 

-Make only Alpha wing's loadout customizeable.  Place Beta in Erinyes fighters, and Gamma in Perseus interceptors.  Give them decent loadouts.

-Ravana launches additional fighter waves from the fighterbay every minute or so after the previous one is destroyed.

-When the main beams are down, the Ravana should begin launching bombers (from its fighterbay, not through subspace) at the Warlock and Alpha/Beta ordered to defend the Warlock.  Fighter launches by the Ravana should stop at this point; make it so Alpha/Beta/Gamma just have to deal with several bomber wings trying to destroy the Warlock.

-The Warlock should not launch bombers at the Ravana.

-When the Ravana is destroyed, bomber waves should stop.  At this point, the maximum hull integrity of the Warlock should be about 50%, and the minimum around 25%

-Jump the two Rakshasas in almost within beam range of the Warlock, then launch the Warlock's bombers.  Let the Rakshasas fire a bit on the Warlock to make this part of the mission seem a little more urgent.

-Again, send Alpha after the comm node again.  Put this on a timer, saying you have however long (we'll have to playtest to figure it out) to destroy the node before Russik calls in additional Shivan reinforcements.  Again, if Alpha fails, more Shivans show up and destroy the Warlock, mission fail.

-Once the comm node is down, cue the Argo surrender etc.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on May 01, 2007, 06:38:17 pm
How about the following as a synthesis of the different ideas, without diverging too much from the original:
This version dumps the recon part; it can be explained in the briefing as "our scouts have located the enemy at position x, etc..."  Also dumps the Odin -- giving the player disable / disarm objectives would require undesirable loadout changes. The command brefing can say something like "Leonov has located the Odin and will engage it" or suchlike.

Jump the Warlock in behind the Ravana along with Alpha, Beta and Gamma wings, almost within beam range to begin with, and force the Ravana to attack with its aft beams BEFORE it turns.  The idea is that if you don't take out the primary beam turrets before it turns around, they fire and we script in the Warlock's destruction (I suspect a Ravana will kill a Hecate pretty quickly anyway). 

-Make only Alpha wing's loadout customizeable.  Place Beta in Erinyes fighters, and Gamma in Perseus interceptors.  Give them decent loadouts.

-Ravana launches additional fighter waves from the fighterbay every minute or so after the previous one is destroyed.

-When the main beams are down, the Ravana should begin launching bombers (from its fighterbay, not through subspace) at the Warlock and Alpha/Beta ordered to defend the Warlock.  Fighter launches by the Ravana should stop at this point; make it so Alpha/Beta/Gamma just have to deal with several bomber wings trying to destroy the Warlock.

-The Warlock should not launch bombers at the Ravana.

-When the Ravana is destroyed, bomber waves should stop.  At this point, the maximum hull integrity of the Warlock should be about 50%, and the minimum around 25%

-Jump the two Rakshasas in almost within beam range of the Warlock, then launch the Warlock's bombers.  Let the Rakshasas fire a bit on the Warlock to make this part of the mission seem a little more urgent.

-Again, send Alpha after the comm node again.  Put this on a timer, saying you have however long (we'll have to playtest to figure it out) to destroy the node before Russik calls in additional Shivan reinforcements.  Again, if Alpha fails, more Shivans show up and destroy the Warlock, mission fail.

-Once the comm node is down, cue the Argo surrender etc.

Sounds good to me.

Some addendums:
-Alpha can choose from the following fighters, primaries, and secondaries:  Perseus, Erinyes, Ares, Herc II, Myrmidon; All primaries; All secondaries excluding trebuchets and helios torpedos (so the Myrmidons don't become pseudo-bombers).
-Beta is NOT customizable: flies Ares fighters, armed with Maxim's, Kaysers, Tornados, and Trebuchets.
-Gamma is NOT customizable: flies Perseus interceptors, armed with Kaysers, Prometheus, and Tornados
-Gamma arrives from the Warlock's fighterbay ONLY when the Ravana's primary beam turrets go down (i.e. when they're needed to protect from bombers).
-The Argo surrenders when the node is down, AND the Rakhshasa's are destroyed.
-Two wings of Maras accompany the Shivan cruisers.

I'm alright with excluding the Odin; keep in mind though that if we included it as I previously wrote out, we'd be disabling the Argo, not the Deimos; that can be done with afighter weaponry without destroying the craft.  Just an idea.

Another possible option is that we replace one of the Rakhshasa's with the Odin when Russik calls in his friends.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 01, 2007, 07:57:28 pm
At this point we should change most missions of the campaign. We're not in a hurry and we can make everything better.


Could you come out with something definitive? Your ideas are all interesting but we need something we all agree with. We can't modify the last mission so many times, then decide which version is the best ;)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on May 01, 2007, 09:12:59 pm
At this point we should change most missions of the campaign. We're not in a hurry and we can make everything better.

We really don't need to touch any of the other missions any more, I think.  The goal is just to clean up, bugfix and bulletproof old campaigns, not reinvent them entirely.  There are many other campaigns out there that need some TLC.

Quote
Could you come out with something definitive? Your ideas are all interesting but we need something we all agree with. We can't modify the last mission so many times, then decide which version is the best ;)

The above sketch is pretty good.  Nothing extra thrown into the mission, just rearrangement of some of its elements to make for an exciting conclusion.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on May 01, 2007, 10:16:35 pm
So, no Odin then?  If we're not going that route, the following is a complete list of the changes to be made to the final mission (as summarized and ordered from before):

1.  The only wing which the player can modify is Alpha wing. Alpha can choose from the following fighters, primaries, and secondaries:  Perseus, Erinyes, Ares, Herc II, Myrmidon; All primaries; All secondaries excluding trebuchets and helios torpedos.

2.  Beta will fly Ares fighters, armed with Maxim's, Kaysers, Tornados, and Trebuchets.

3.  Gamma will fly Perseus interceptors, armed with Kaysers, Prometheus, and Tornados.

4.  At the beginning of the mission, Alpha, Beta, and the Warlock arrive behind the Ravana, just outside of the Warlock's beam range.  We force the Ravana to attack with its aft beam turrets before it turns to face the Warlock.  The player has that amount of time to engage and destroy the forward beam turrets on the Ravana.  IF the Ravana fires on the Warlock with its forward cannons, we script the Warlock's destruction.

5.  The Ravana should always be attacking the player and Alpha/Beta wings with flak turrets, laser turrets, AA beams, etc so long as they are within range (right now, it doesn't), including after the primary beam cannons are destroyed.

6.  Enemy fighter wings should launch from the Ravana's fighter bay as soon as the mission begins, and respawn within 60 second delays after the wing is destroyed.  Fighter launches should STOP after the primary beam cannons are destroyed.

7.  When the primary beams are destroyed, the fighter launches quit and the Ravana launches bomber waves from its bay (while the Ravana is still 'alive,' NO Shivans should be emerging from subspace).  Alpha and Beta ordered to return and defend the Warlock, and Gamma launched from the Warlock's bay at this point.

8.  When the Ravana is destroyed, bomber waves cease.  The Warlock should have hull integrity between 25% and 50% at this point (we'll have to balance the bombers accordingly).

9.  Russik will call in the two Rakhshasa's as before.  New addition:  the cruisers should emerge within beam range of the Warlock (on its flanks, maybe?) and immediately begin firing, and they should have an escort of one wing of Maras each (8 fighters total, no respawn).  At this point, the Warlock should scramble its bombers.

10.  When the cruisers arrive, Beta and Gamma should be ordered to destroy the Maras and disarm the cruisers.

11.  Alpha should be sent after the comm node when the cruisers arrive.  NOTE:  The comm node should remain invulnerable until the Ravana is destroyed.  Only AFTER the Ravana is destroyed should the comm node be able to be destroyed.  Alpha should be on a timer - if the node is not destroyed in 2 minutes (again, we'll have to balance the time), additional Shivans arrive and destroy the Warlock (let's say a couple Molochs).  If the node is destroyed, no further Shivans appear.

12.  When the node and both cruisers are destroyed, Russik's Argo surrenders and self-destructs as before.

*Possible new addition requiring discussion:  When Russik surrenders, the Odin warps into the system 20 kilometers from the Warlock.  When Russik self-destructs, the Odin jumps out.  No explanation is given.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on May 01, 2007, 10:42:26 pm
Actually, the mysterious presence of the Odin is a good idea... :)

"All primaries" should mean "all appropriate primaries" -- e.g. no training laser, Prometheus R etc...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on May 02, 2007, 12:06:43 pm
OK then, here is the finalized list of changes to E3M7 (until we add something else, of course :P):

Quote
1.  The only wing which the player can modify is Alpha wing. Alpha can choose from the following fighters, primaries, and secondaries:  Perseus, Erinyes, Ares, Herc II, Myrmidon; All appropriate primaries; All secondaries excluding trebuchets and helios torpedos.

2.  Beta will fly Ares fighters, armed with Maxim's, Kaysers, Tornados, and Trebuchets.

3.  Gamma will fly Perseus interceptors, armed with Kaysers, Prometheus, and Tornados.

4.  At the beginning of the mission, Alpha, Beta, and the Warlock arrive behind the Ravana, just outside of the Warlock's beam range.  We force the Ravana to attack with its aft beam turrets before it turns to face the Warlock.  The player has that amount of time to engage and destroy the forward beam turrets on the Ravana.  IF the Ravana fires on the Warlock with its forward cannons, we script the Warlock's destruction.

5.  The Ravana should always be attacking the player and Alpha/Beta wings with flak turrets, laser turrets, AA beams, etc so long as they are within range (right now, it doesn't), including after the primary beam cannons are destroyed.

6.  Enemy fighter wings should launch from the Ravana's fighter bay as soon as the mission begins, and respawn within 60 second delays after the wing is destroyed.  Fighter launches should STOP after the primary beam cannons are destroyed.

7.  When the primary beams are destroyed, the fighter launches quit and the Ravana launches bomber waves from its bay (while the Ravana is still 'alive,' NO Shivans should be emerging from subspace).  Alpha and Beta ordered to return and defend the Warlock, and Gamma launched from the Warlock's bay at this point.

8.  When the Ravana is destroyed, bomber waves cease.  The Warlock should have hull integrity between 25% and 50% at this point (we'll have to balance the bombers accordingly).

9.  Russik will call in the two Rakhshasa's as before.  New addition:  the cruisers should emerge within beam range of the Warlock (on its flanks, maybe?) and immediately begin firing, and they should have an escort of one wing of Maras each (8 fighters total, no respawn).  At this point, the Warlock should scramble its bombers.

10.  When the cruisers arrive, Beta and Gamma should be ordered to destroy the Maras and disarm the cruisers.

11.  Alpha should be sent after the comm node when the cruisers arrive.  NOTE:  The comm node should remain invulnerable until the Ravana is destroyed.  Only AFTER the Ravana is destroyed should the comm node be able to be destroyed.  Alpha should be on a timer - if the node is not destroyed in 2 minutes (again, we'll have to balance the time), additional Shivans arrive and destroy the Warlock (let's say a couple Molochs).  If the node is destroyed, no further Shivans appear.

12.  When the node and both cruisers are destroyed, Russik's Argo surrenders and self-destructs, as in the original.

13.  When the Argo surrenders, the Odin warps in 20 km in front of the Warlock.  When the Argo self-destructs, the Odin warps out.  No explanation is given.

If you guys can concentrate on adding the actual mission events and elements, I can add all the dialog after the events are in place.  Just add blank send-message-list SEXPs to them and I'll fill it in.  If I get a chance, I'll do some tinkering with the mission in FRED myself.

Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Macfie on May 04, 2007, 08:31:58 pm
I started playing Warzone through.  Nice backgrounds.  I ran into a problem with mission E2M1.  I completed the mission and was told to depart.  I got the success briefing but when I looked at the stats they were all zeros and when I tried to accept I was told I failed the mission and would have to replay it.  I looked at the mission and there were only 2 goals -  convoy escort and protect the Nicolas.   I had completed both goals.  I checked the campaign file and it required three goals - convoy, convoy 2, and convoy escort.  That would appear to be where the problem is.  Attached is a corrected campaign file.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Macfie on May 05, 2007, 08:40:31 am
I found a problem with mission E2M3.  Taurus 3 and 4 are labelled as GTFR Chronos but are Dragon class fighters.  Found that the alternate name for both of these was set to GTFR Chronos.  I attached a corrected mission.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 05, 2007, 04:53:50 pm
May I DL these missions? They come straight from Nelson's last package? I want to be sure before risking to override something.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Vretsu on May 05, 2007, 09:32:26 pm
The weekend is here! As promised, I will now give the missions a go.

*leaps into action*
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Macfie on May 06, 2007, 01:41:44 pm
May I DL these missions? They come straight from Nelson's last package? I want to be sure before risking to override something.

If you are asking me, these did come from the last WIP that was posted on this thread.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 07, 2007, 02:52:23 pm
Once again, I notice the presence of new replies...a bit late :eek:

If you are asking me, these did come from the last WIP that was posted on this thread.

Ok, that's fine. I'll DL them all. :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on May 16, 2007, 08:10:45 pm
*kick*

Hey, FRED-boy... how's the final mission coming? =)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 17, 2007, 11:49:30 am
I'm defeating the Tyrant(MSN)and I want to FRED a bit for INFA. Should we recruit some voice actors in the meantime?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on May 18, 2007, 03:40:14 pm
So has anyone else been playtesting this?  Any more problems?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 18, 2007, 04:01:38 pm
I copied your scheme. If Nelson doesn't have objections, I can start. :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on May 18, 2007, 04:13:38 pm
Go ahead! :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 18, 2007, 04:23:45 pm
:D

Hey, Nelson:

1) We want a badge! :P
2) Do you have some IM addresses? I need someone to bother me "FRED, you idiot!"
3) Check the voice acting subforum :nod:
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on May 18, 2007, 05:57:14 pm
:D

Hey, Nelson:

1) We want a badge! :P
2) Do you have some IM addresses? I need someone to bother me "FRED, you idiot!"
3) Check the voice acting subforum :nod:

I haven't been calling you an idiot, but I have been telling you to FRED.

However, I agree with point #1.  FSCRP staff should have badges.  Hell, we should get medals - we're fixing everyone elses problems! :P
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 19, 2007, 10:07:24 am
I want you to make pressure on me :P

I want a badge, WE want a badge for our work!

I have added everything, Molochs included. I have to script that part about the timer, however. The Molochs need names. Warzone uses Indian names, we should pick up to of them. Suggestions?!?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on May 19, 2007, 10:12:38 am
How about Krodha and Himsa?  I knew that year of Sanskrit would come in handy one day.....
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 20, 2007, 12:33:23 pm
Ok, done :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mad Bomber on May 20, 2007, 09:05:20 pm
Have you already solved the bit where there are two SC Parvati's in the same campaign?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 21, 2007, 03:55:25 pm
Are they mentioned in messages and/or in briefing stages?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on May 21, 2007, 05:23:03 pm
Hindu deities have many avatars and can reincarnate multiple times, see.... :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 21, 2007, 07:03:13 pm
:lol:
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mad Bomber on May 21, 2007, 10:38:22 pm
Are they mentioned in messages and/or in briefing stages?

Yes, in both messages and gameplay.

E2M4 "Parvati neutralized!" and E3M7 "Two ships have entered the area!  Rakshasa class cruisers, designations Parvati and Ragelam.  Also reading one wing of fighters."
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 22, 2007, 12:24:28 pm
Oh, thanks for the information.


I have played the new version of last mission. I'm going to test it again before considering it "definitive" :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 24, 2007, 01:18:34 pm
:blah:

The last mission is corrupted, I talked with karajorma and he told me to report the bug using Mantis. I can load the mission and its backups, but I can't save. I think I can continue if I DL the mission package again, pick up the old E3M7 and remake my changes. This will take some time.

:blah:
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 29, 2007, 03:07:25 pm
Oh, I solved the problem using Notepad.  :nod:

I'm testing it a thousand times, I make changes and...back where I started :blah:

Nelson, check this version. There might be some bugs, but it's cool(look at the Daskha's meneuver ;7 ). I hope you have some FreeTimeTM  :yes:

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on May 29, 2007, 04:23:12 pm
Great, I'll check it tonight, thanks!
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 29, 2007, 04:53:12 pm
Here's a list with some of the changes:

The Molochs are Lilith. They pulverize the Warlock quickly.
The Daskha beams are BFReds. I think it' better than scripting the destruction of the Warlock after only 1-2 LRed shots.
Gamma wing is on station since the beginning of the mission.
The Rakshasas engage the Warlock and the player has enough time to disarm some beam turrets before the battle stars.
All beam turrets of the Warlock are unkillable.
In order to make the mission winnable, Zeta and Iota wings can't accept orders from the player(in case you order your wingmen to engage all hostiles the bombers break off their attack on the cruisers first and on the node then).
The Rakshasas are escorted by Manticore fighters, not Maras.
When Alpha, Beta and Gamma have sustained heavy casualties I trigger ship-guardian-theshold for all survived fighters.
I was pissed off when the Daskha went down and continued to fire its beams. When its hull integrity is close to 0 all beams of the Ravana are shut down.
I have delayed the arrival of Libra(SB Seraphim)so that the player has enough time to pull back to the Warlock and protect it.
Minor debriefing buf fixed. In the original version the Warlock becomes invulnerable when the Daskha goes down. In case the Warlock is destroyed in the second part of the mission, the success debriefing stage about the destruction of the Daskha is void.

And something else I don't remember :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 30, 2007, 01:13:09 pm
Ah, I forgot something important:

There are two empty messages sent by the Warlock and Command when the Lilith arrive. I'll leave the contents to Nelson or Ryan. They should be something like this:

Warlock: Two Lilith class cruisers have jumped near our port and starboard flanks! They're targeting us!
Command: Pilots, the Warlock is sustaining heavy fire! You were told to destroy the Communications Node!


Since both the Daskha and the Lilith can dispatch the Warlock quickly, we should make these messages...

Warlock: Hull integrity is dropping!  We need a little support here!

Warlock: This is the Warlock.  We've taken severe damage!  Subspace drives are offline.  We need help here!


...appear only when the Warlock is receiving fire coming from the bombers or that couple of Rakshasa. We'll have about 4 messages appearring in sequence.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on May 31, 2007, 11:08:32 am
I'll have a look at this tomorrow.  I just got off night shifts, so I'm a little toast =(
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 31, 2007, 02:33:51 pm
I modified the mission a bit. The Warlock should be replaced again...post some feedback please. :)

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 01, 2007, 12:29:05 am
Ok, here's the new edition with the corrected messages.

I've played through it a few times.  It's difficult but winnable up until the Rakshasa's jump in.  Our problem is that as they emerge from subspace so close to the Warlock, and the Warlock is sitting around 40% hull integrity, there isn't enough time for the bombers to kill the cruisers before they kill the Warlock.  However, the device of forcing Alpha 1 to fly past the cruisers to kill the comm node on a time limit works beautifully.

In order to resolve this, I suggest we use sneaky tricks.  The Warlock can survive being attacked by one Rakshasa, but not both.  And, really, the player should not be able to fail the mission if they successfully disarm the Daskha and destroy the comm node in time.  So:

-When the Daskha is destroyed, protect the Warlock so its hull integrity cannot drop below 43%.
-When the Rakshasa's jump in, reset the protection level so its hull integrity cannot drop below 11%
-When the Rakshasa's are destroyed, remove the protection entirely.

***DO NOT ASSOCIATE THE PROTECTION WITH THE COMM NODE!  That would break the Lilith evilness if the player screws up.

So if someone (LGM?) can add that, that should make sure the entire mission works.  Then we can test it and tweak as necessary.

Mission with corrections I've made is attached.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on June 01, 2007, 10:51:51 am
I told you I was going to modify the mission again. I have replaced the Warlock and its wings...

(take a decision...should we talk via HLP or MSN? :P )
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on June 01, 2007, 11:39:26 am
Here's a newer version...Ryan, please change the messages :)

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 01, 2007, 02:28:36 pm
Here is the latest edition which has NOT been thoroughly tested.  LGM, I was still getting a destroyed Warlock every time courtesy of those two Rakshasa's.  I added a ship-guardian with random numbers for the Warlock which starts when the Daskha is destroyed, and ends after the Ragelam is destroyed (i.e. it IS vulnerable to the Parvati).

All messages have been corrected and should be filled in properly.  Let me know if something comes up that doesn't make sense.

Please test this thoroughly.  I haven't had a chance to go through it more than twice.

I also reset Beta's loadout to remove the Trebuchets - the Daskha was down below 50% hull integrity before the Warlock was even within beam range.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on June 01, 2007, 02:44:12 pm
Here is the latest edition which has NOT been thoroughly tested.  LGM, I was still getting a destroyed Warlock every time courtesy of those two Rakshasa's.  I added a ship-guardian with random numbers for the Warlock which starts when the Daskha is destroyed, and ends after the Ragelam is destroyed (i.e. it IS vulnerable to the Parvati).

That's strange, the Warlock is always able to eliminate the cruisers in time. Remember the Warlock has one BGreen and up to 3 frontal TerSlash, which should be able to eliminate most beam cannons.

I also reset Beta's loadout to remove the Trebuchets - the Daskha was down below 50% hull integrity before the Warlock was even within beam range.

Nah, the Maxims used by Beta are the responsables.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 01, 2007, 03:14:26 pm
Here is the latest edition which has NOT been thoroughly tested.  LGM, I was still getting a destroyed Warlock every time courtesy of those two Rakshasa's.  I added a ship-guardian with random numbers for the Warlock which starts when the Daskha is destroyed, and ends after the Ragelam is destroyed (i.e. it IS vulnerable to the Parvati).

That's strange, the Warlock is always able to eliminate the cruisers in time. Remember the Warlock has one BGreen and up to 3 frontal TerSlash, which should be able to eliminate most beam cannons.

I also reset Beta's loadout to remove the Trebuchets - the Daskha was down below 50% hull integrity before the Warlock was even within beam range.

Nah, the Maxims used by Beta are the responsables.

Well, I removed the Maxims from two fighters in beta wing and left them on the other two.

Also, what difficulty level are you testing on?  You should be on medium for testing just for this reason - AI can't aim on the lower levels, and you can end up with a mission that is possible on hard or insane, but which can't be beaten on Medium or Easy.

At any rate, the ship guardian SEXP I added should take care of the problems with the Rakshasa's, but please test it out on Medium and see.  I'll try to give it another shot later tonight.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on June 01, 2007, 04:42:47 pm
I play it at Medium using a mousestick. I tried it at Insane but the mousestick doesn't allow me to evade missiles and stuff.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 01, 2007, 09:38:46 pm
Here's the latest version, with miscellaneous bugfixes and tweaks to the messaging.

Everything seems to be working well now except the Iota and Zeta wing bombers.  Originally, they weren't attacking the cruisers as their initial orders told them to, and then if they did they took too long to do so.  I attempted to correct this by launching Iota early (and changing the messages accordingly... the messages work well, so please keep the early launch) and tasking both Iota and Zeta to go toward a waypoint near the comm node as initial orders.  I added clear-goals and add-goal SEXPs to both wings to send them after the cruisers (these are added under the LGM Alpha, Beta, Gamma orders event).  However, that didn't fix it.  On my last two playtests, the bombers show no interest whatsover in the cruisers and continually fly around the Warlock.

I don't get it.  Anyway Mob, looks like you're going to have to figure out how to fix that.

While you're at it, see if you can spot any other new problems I've introduced.  I think I cleaned everything up but you can never be too sure =)

And make sure you begin with my copy of the mission (see attached) this time! =)

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on June 02, 2007, 05:10:20 am
I playtest it ASAP.

Ah, the mission is becoming bigger and bigger. 10 more kbs and it will be a nice LGM StyleTM mission! :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on June 02, 2007, 04:13:29 pm
I'll be away for about a week. This is the result of a fast FREDding...the mission is enjoyable and everything is ok.

:)

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Fabian on June 05, 2007, 05:17:46 pm
I tested the mission and it works well.

However:

In all the new action you can easily miss the part with the Comm Node (especially now that its not yet voice acted). In the middle of fighting of bombers even that message voice acted could be lost.

Alpha wing automatically gets new orders to destroy the comm node, however it might work even better if they targeted the "core" as well ...

So I suggest reminding the player once that he has new orders if he is still in range of the warlock or still not in range of the comm node and also adding this order to the list of goals and the comm node to the escort list.

This way it is more visible that your goals are really new ones.

Btw. it is still enough to fly from warlock to comm node after 1 minute that the message came. I still managed in time, but it was very close ...

Also the ship-guardian can come too late if Beta and Gamma wing are already very much diminished, which happens easily on easier levels.

That is all, nice what you made out of that mission! Especially the flak can be really deadly now ...

cu

Fabian
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 06, 2007, 04:38:57 pm
The comm node should get added to the goals list... it's odd that it isn't being done.  I'll have to see if I can add it.

You can issue orders to Alpha to re-target the core - that's part of the challenge, Mr. wing leader :)

Are you talking about the ship-guardian after the Daskha is destroyed?  If so, that's intentional.  You CAN fly this mission and keep your wingmates alive, and you need to do so in order to win.

But that directive does need to be checked... I'll have a look right now.

Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Fabian on June 06, 2007, 05:42:47 pm
The comm node should get added to the goals list... it's odd that it isn't being done.  I'll have to see if I can add it.

Yes, and please also a reminder like talked above:

"Alpha, destroy the node _now_." or the like.

cu

Fabian
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 06, 2007, 09:08:47 pm
Here's an updated version of the mission.  I fixed a problem with the Liliths arrival, edited a couple text message, and re-worked the directives.

The problem was we had some many directives around the fighter and bomber wings that the comm node directive wasn't showing through.  I've changed those directives as follows:
1.  Removed all the fighter directives.  Alpha wing's goals in this mission have nothing to do with the fighters.
2.  Changed the wing directive to types.  There is now an "intercept bombers" directive that depends on Libra and Taurus wings.
3.  Comm Node directive appears as it should.
4.  When the comm node is destroyed, you get a directive telling you to engage the cruisers and escorts.

Test it out now, let me know what you all think.

Oh, I had to remove the dead link to Voilition Watch - it corrupted the mission, much as I think it did to LGM a while back.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 06, 2007, 11:10:55 pm
One more thing:

Because this is a Restoration project, and by and large we're not going to be doing many projects on the scale of Warzone, I suggest that any credits we add should be designed to raise awareness of the FSCRP, not necessarily steal the glory from the original mission designers.  As such, I suggest that any project we work on have the following text blocks added (in formulaic fashion, with the only changes being the list of contributors to each restoration).

In the readme.txt
Quote
This campaign has been modified and updated for Freespace Open builds of version 3.6.9 or later by the Freespace Campaign Restoration Project (FSCRP) team.  Campaign concept and intellectual products remain the property of the original designers.  Updates have been designed to improve compatibility and fix technical issues in the campaign, while preserving the intent of the original authors.  Any large or controversial changes were made by the FSCRP, and may be reviewed in the forums.  For more information, please visit the FSCRP forums at http://www.hard-light.net/forums under Community Projects.

Contributing FSCRP team members on this project include (in alphabetical order):
A, B, C, D, Etc

Contributing Voice Actors on this project include (in alphabetical order):
A, B, C, D, Etc


In the debriefing of the final mission of each campaign:
Quote
This campaign has been modified and updated by the Freespace Campaign Restoration Project.  Please see the readme or the Hard Light Productions forums for more information.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on June 07, 2007, 04:44:46 pm
Blaise Russel added a credits-cutscene in Derelict, I can do the same with Warzone. My plans are to use a cutscene to give everyone the credits he/she deserves.

I'm glad you worked on the mission, Ryan. Because of Real LifeTM I FREDded a bit...only for INFA.

About the mission....I think the cruisers should be destroyed before moving to attack the Comm Node. There are bombers to escort and without them... the Warlock is lost....that's why I set the time to about 3 minutes. That part of the mission isn't enjoyable if you are to go after the node immediately...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 07, 2007, 05:21:44 pm
If you fly the mission properly, you can take down the node within about 15 seconds, and then go after the escort and the cruisers.

If Russik is using the node to call in reinforcements, it makes no sense in terms of plot to destroy the cruisers first and give Russik the chance to call in more reinforcements, especially when the Warlock sends its bombers after the cruisers.  This is also why we added the Liliths - if you ignore the node, Russik's reinforcements will destroy the Warlock (which does make plot sense).

The mission plays well as it currently stands and it is fun to make it through.  If we change it again, it's another formulaic mission of destroy destroyer, protect capship, destroy more capships, destroy more fighters, win.  The way it plays now, there's a little more urgency to the situation.

That said, these are just two people's opinions.  Some other people need to start giving some feedback.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Fabian on June 07, 2007, 09:12:56 pm
About the mission....I think the cruisers should be destroyed before moving to attack the Comm Node. There are bombers to escort and without them... the Warlock is lost....that's why I set the time to about 3 minutes. That part of the mission isn't enjoyable if you are to go after the node immediately...

3 minutes and the estimate for 2 minutes is good. I still would like to have an reminder after 1 minute though, but that is just me.

Imho it would not be enjoyable if you had to destroy the cruisers first.

You have to carefully think who to send to the comm node and who to protect the bombers and who to protect the warlock with (if there are still bombers around) and you have several wingmen to command ...

cu

Fabian
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 07, 2007, 11:26:55 pm
About the mission....I think the cruisers should be destroyed before moving to attack the Comm Node. There are bombers to escort and without them... the Warlock is lost....that's why I set the time to about 3 minutes. That part of the mission isn't enjoyable if you are to go after the node immediately...

3 minutes and the estimate for 2 minutes is good. I still would like to have an reminder after 1 minute though, but that is just me.

Imho it would not be enjoyable if you had to destroy the cruisers first.

You have to carefully think who to send to the comm node and who to protect the bombers and who to protect the warlock with (if there are still bombers around) and you have several wingmen to command ...

cu

Fabian

Actually, a verbal reminder after one minute has elapsed isn't a bad idea.  I've just added it.

Please test the mission again.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Fabian on June 08, 2007, 09:58:13 pm
Hm,

I've playtested the mission more and am not really satisfied any more ...

If you do not manage to destroy the beam cannons the bombers do never show up and the SD is not mighty enough to just destroy the warlock when it got hit by at least some fighter fire ...

And even worse the debrief thanks you for destroying the beam cannons ...

Also I'm no longer sure that the mission is really balanced for insane anymore as action seems much quicker on that level ...

Btw. The bomber wings seem broken ... They have no orders ...

I had to destroy the cruisers with fighters and warlocks beam cannon ...

And please put that frakking comm node into the escort list ... It sucks to have to 't','t','t' cycle through all the targets until you found it or assign via F3 a hot key ...

Perhaps have the subspace bombers arrive also when SD is below some hull percentage ... Like a last ditch effort ?

Anyway, this needs more play testing and fixing imho.

cu

Fabian
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 09, 2007, 01:08:03 am
Hm,

I've playtested the mission more and am not really satisfied any more ...

If you do not manage to destroy the beam cannons the bombers do never show up and the SD is not mighty enough to just destroy the warlock when it got hit by at least some fighter fire ...

And even worse the debrief thanks you for destroying the beam cannons ...

Also I'm no longer sure that the mission is really balanced for insane anymore as action seems much quicker on that level ...

Btw. The bomber wings seem broken ... They have no orders ...

I had to destroy the cruisers with fighters and warlocks beam cannon ...

And please put that frakking comm node into the escort list ... It sucks to have to 't','t','t' cycle through all the targets until you found it or assign via F3 a hot key ...

Perhaps have the subspace bombers arrive also when SD is below some hull percentage ... Like a last ditch effort ?

Anyway, this needs more play testing and fixing imho.

cu

Fabian

If you don't destroy the primary beams, those BFReds should rip the Warlock to pieces in less than two shots each... so I'm not sure what you're doing there...

The debrief is easy enough to fix.

Not sure what you're referring to for the balancing on insane.  It should proceed as it does on the easier difficulty levels, but I'll have to try it out and see.

The bomber wings orders won't actually show up for whatever bizarre reason, but they do carry them out since LGM made his fixes.  That said, we can probably counteract this problem even further by allowing the player to issue orders to the bomber wings and reminding him of that fact in a message.  I've done this in the copy posted on this message.

The comm node can be targeted by assigning a key to "Target object in reticule" and facing it, but I've added it to the escort list just for you =)

I added a wing of Nahemas to arrive when the Daskha falls below 15% hull integrity as well.

Try it out now.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: jr2 on June 09, 2007, 01:24:46 am
The comm node can be targeted by assigning a key to "Target object in reticule" and facing it, ...

Default is "Y", just in case someone didn't know... although newbs probably don't browse here too often, I imagine, so I am probably preaching to the choir.  :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on June 09, 2007, 05:05:28 am
There are so many issues because we have changed the mission too much.

So, are we done with the mission?!?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Fabian on June 09, 2007, 11:15:40 am
If you don't destroy the primary beams, those BFReds should rip the Warlock to pieces in less than two shots each... so I'm not sure what you're doing there...
(...)
The comm node can be targeted by assigning a key to "Target object in reticule" and facing it, but I've added it to the escort list just for you =)
(...)
I added a wing of Nahemas to arrive when the Daskha falls below 15% hull integrity as well.

Okay, well I tried two things:

- target Daskha "c 3 1", once it turns it has fallen below that much hull capacity so that the Warlock wins against the Dashka (even though its hull takes damage)
- target Daskha with the two other wings but let alpha rip the first cannon to shreds, the same warlock wins against Daskha even though it still has one beam.

Thanks for the escort list :-). I know of that reticle function and even how to target subsystems, but I still first have to find it visually then, which can be still a problem if all hell break loose around you ...

Thanks for the Nahemas as well :-). Are these the same that arrive once the main beams are destroyed?

Or do we now have three wings of bombers? Imho it should be the same (whatever comes first), but I'll try it out ...

And regarding what I am doing here, I try out every possible way to fail or succeed the mission and post how it feels for me ...

cu

Fabian
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 09, 2007, 12:40:46 pm
1.  If even one BFRed fires, the Warlock should take so much damage that the cruisers finish it off near the end of the mission.  That I have tested, so unless something got mucked up in one of the other fixes, if the Warlock gets hit by a main beam on the Daskha, it should not survive the mission.  Now, if something odd is happening and it's still capable of surviving, we can address that through SEXPs.

2.  Taurus and Libra bomber wings only launch when the main beam cannons are destroyed - again, because those beams should wipe out the Warlock if they aren't destroyed.  Leo wing, the new wing of Nahemas, launches when the Daskha reaches 15% or less hull integrity.

Something odd is going on here, because every time I play this mission, if the main beams aren't destroyed quickly, the Warlock is toast.  So I'm going to load it up again and make sure I haven't broken something recently here.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 09, 2007, 01:10:23 pm
OK, unbeknownst to me LGM changed some stuff with the Daskha beams.  I just talked to him about it, so we're going to try something else.  Give me a few minutes to test the changes, and I'll post the revised version.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 09, 2007, 02:43:30 pm
*crosses fingers*

This should be the last set of changes.  Try it now - I promise that you have to destroy those beams, or the Warlock is toast.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Fabian on June 09, 2007, 10:06:40 pm
*crosses fingers*

This should be the last set of changes.  Try it now - I promise that you have to destroy those beams, or the Warlock is toast.

Nope :P. What do I get for your promise? ;)

I see that you really want to get this out. So I could keep my mouth shut ...

... or perhaps not  :P.

I guess I am just too creative :D :

- Put disruptor on alpha wing fighters
- Destroy engine subsystem as fast as possible

Fighters put Daksha below 19% hull already and even Rho arrives in that time span. After a long time Warlock closes within beam range and destroys the Daksha with one shot. (Bombers launched by Daksha get destroyed in its shock wave, but I guess that is okay.)

Result:

Daksha destroyed, but Beam cannon goal not done. ;7

And with that Iota wing. I wish it would just follow its new orders to destroy both cruisers, because with Iota or Zeta its much too easy to destroy the comm node. :-(

But far from that those new beams are much more powerful and that is really good :).

cu

Fabian

PS: You asked for testers, so I test it and all possibilities I can think of to fail or succeed it ... I hope that is okay ...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 09, 2007, 10:35:50 pm
Wait a minute.... the Daskha BFReds unlock just shy of two minutes into the mission.  Even if you disable the Daskha's engine subsystem, those two beam cannons should still engage and destroy the Warlock no matter what.  Unless you have somehow managed to fully disable the Daskha while it's turning, which would be impressive to say the least.

That said, I can fix this by slapping a ship-subsystem-guardian on the Daskha's engines.

You're being really creative, I must say.  Glad you're testing this, because I never thought of that.  OK, I've done two things then:

1.  The Daskha is going to be forward beam-free even earlier (you have ~100 seconds, so just after the Daskha completes its turn).
2.  I'm putting a guardian on all its subsystems until the beam cannons are destroyed.

AND, the only orders the player can now give the bombers is to destroy the target (i.e. you can't send them after subsystems anymore).

The only concievable way to have the Warlock survive the beginning of this mission now should be to kill the two beam cannons.  I hope.  Test it out now please.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Fabian on June 10, 2007, 12:22:38 am
Wait a minute.... the Daskha BFReds unlock just shy of two minutes into the mission.  Even if you disable the Daskha's engine subsystem, those two beam cannons should still engage and destroy the Warlock no matter what.  Unless you have somehow managed to fully disable the Daskha while it's turning, which would be impressive to say the least.

Yes, that was what I did.

That said, I can fix this by slapping a ship-subsystem-guardian on the Daskha's engines.

You're being really creative, I must say.  Glad you're testing this, because I never thought of that.  OK, I've done two things then:

1.  The Daskha is going to be forward beam-free even earlier (you have ~100 seconds, so just after the Daskha completes its turn).
2.  I'm putting a guardian on all its subsystems until the beam cannons are destroyed.

AND, the only orders the player can now give the bombers is to destroy the target (i.e. you can't send them after subsystems anymore).

The only concievable way to have the Warlock survive the beginning of this mission now should be to kill the two beam cannons.  I hope.  Test it out now please.

That works, however I found another creative flaw.

I succeeded in the mission even though the lilith did arrive :).

I managed to destroy both lilith cruisers and win the mission. :P

How? Quite easy, just do not destroy the "Ragelam" and tell all forces to ignore it and chase the lilith instead. The guardian on the Warlock will protect it from the deathly beams and I have all time to destroy liliths and Parvati, then destroy "Ragelam" and win. Its nice that the mission still somehow works though ... ;)

I think even the destroy order is too much as if I cannot send orders I cannot exploit the above thing as Zeta will destroy Magellan, no matter what ...

Suggestions would be:

clear-goals that you added is good, but please also add the goal to chase both cruisers just in the different orders (M,P; P,M) ...

Even better, directly add both goals to Zeta Wing:

+$AI Goals: ( goals ( ai-chase "Ragelam" 89 ) (ai-chase "Parvati" 89 ) )

And add goal to destroy comm node to Iota wing first:

+$AI Goals: ( goals ( ai-chase "Comm Node" 89 ) )

Then re-task iota as message suggests:

( has-arrived-delay 5 "Parvati" )
( clear-goals "Iota" )
( add-goal
  "Iota"
  ( ai-chase "Parvati" 89 )
)
( add-goal
  "Iota"
  ( ai-chase "Ragelam" 89 )
)
Name: <LGM> New Iota orders

Btw. I liked the "Alpha wing clear out the sentries." message before.

And one small fix still:

"Target the crystal subsystem" should be "core subsystem", which does matter for missiles ...

The last thing that was nerving me was that the secondary objective never gets fullfilled as there are always shivans that just jump out ...

Also sometimes intercept bombers turns red, when they depart ...

Okay, you could argue that you did not do your job if they are able to depart so long into the mission, but still I personally don't like this turning red or white still standing directives if fighters or bombers depart ...

This is a more general thing though ...

cu

Fabian

PS: Perhaps also add a ship-subsys-guardian-threshold on the Warlocks engine and comm as it could be possible that random bombs destroy it and then I guess the warlock might never come into beam range, but that is just speculation ...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 10, 2007, 07:37:39 am
Ah... that bit with the Liliths is a bug I introduced when we ship-guardian'ed the Warlock.  The Lilith's arrival is supposed to remove the guardian status on the Warlock.  I'm not at a computer with FRED installed so I'll have to fix that when I get home tonight.

As for the bomber orders - that is what they were ordered to do, and they were doing it when I playtested (but you said not for you).

Regarding the objectives:  it is possible to destroy all the bomber wings and successfully complete that objective.  It is also possible to eliminate all the fighters in the mission before they jump out (though difficult; however, as that's a secondary objective and makes no difference to the debrief or final outcome, I'm inclined to leave it like that unless there's a great deal of demand to do otherwise).

A guardian on the engine and comm subsystems of the Warlock isn't a bad idea.

And I'll change the messages, again.

So, here's my list of things to do when I get home tonight:
1. Clear guardian status when Liliths arrive.
2.  Remove player ability to command bomber wings again. (The new AI orders I introduced last night should fix their failures anyway).
3.  Guardian engine and comm subsystems of the Warlock (random value between 10 and 30).
4.  Adjust messages on comm node / bomber wings.

Anything else comes up in the next 8 hours or so, let me know.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on June 10, 2007, 09:53:14 am
I'm sorry, I'm working for INFA and I must complete a mission ASAP...

Do we really need these changes? When the Lilith arrive, the Warlock is doomed. All bomber wings have reasonable orders and yeah making sure that the Warlock isn't disabled is a good idea. But do we need all these changes? There's the voice acting, for example...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 10, 2007, 06:08:49 pm
I'm sorry, I'm working for INFA and I must complete a mission ASAP...

Do we really need these changes? When the Lilith arrive, the Warlock is doomed. All bomber wings have reasonable orders and yeah making sure that the Warlock isn't disabled is a good idea. But do we need all these changes? There's the voice acting, for example...

I can handle this kind of FREDing.

And yeah, these particular changes are necessary, and they won't take long to do.  We'll be done with this mission soon enough, LGM, and you can always get the voiceactors started on the earlier missions =)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 10, 2007, 07:47:19 pm
Updated with changes.

If I can get an answer soon I want to try changing the directives, but as far as mission events goes this is a final copy, barring any bugs.  Please test rigorously.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Fabian on June 10, 2007, 09:36:30 pm
Hm, its fine on Easy or Very Easy now.

I suggest the attached changes though to have both bomber wings attack both cruisers ...

I was not able to do it on Medium though ...

My mistakes on medium were:

- Send all to protect warlock => Daksha gets not destroyed => Warlock gets destroyed sooner or later
- With the change from 113 to 100 my I can barely manage with afterburners to destroy the beams. It seems that on lower than medium the speed of the Daksha is much slower ...

And my wingman never arrive in time ...

- I find there are too many bombers and Gamma dies too fast ...

But: As I normally play on lower than medium I can hardly complain though ...

But speaking of that: I don't really like that beam-free-chained changes you did ...

cu

Fabian

PS: Yes, lets end this quick. As LGM gets impatient, I guess I won't playtest another version ...

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 10, 2007, 10:05:22 pm
OK, I've beaten this on Medium several times.  It is possible to destroy the beam cannons in th allotted times (Maxims).

I've reset the beam-fire events on the Warlock - what I was doing before was allowing the BGreen to open fire, then artificially creating the delay.  Now the delay is shorter, and then everything gets freed.  This is how it used to work.  After the cannons are out, you need to kill bombers and kill lots of them to win.

I removed Leo wing - they're excessive.  On the harder difficulties, Taurus and Libra are quite enough.  I also tasked Zeta and Iota wing to both cruisers again.

The mission is difficult on Medium, but certainly not impossible if played properly.

You may need practice, but it is possible to win this on medium.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Fabian on June 11, 2007, 08:34:01 pm
Now its perfect. :-)

cu

Fabian
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on June 11, 2007, 08:41:15 pm
Hmm... I destroyed the crystal but the comm node didn't blow....
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 11, 2007, 08:54:27 pm
Hmm... I destroyed the crystal but the comm node didn't blow....

1.  Are you using the latest version?
2.  You must destroy the Core subsystem.  Crystal isn't actually something that's defined in FRED, oddly enough.  But when the core is gone, the node goes kaboom every time... for me at least.

Though this begs a question... WHEN did you destroy the core?  After you were ordered to, when the Daskha goes down?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on June 11, 2007, 08:58:52 pm
There seem to be four subsystems -- shell, blades, core and crystal.  I targeted crystal, and ordered my wingmen to destroy subsystem.  It went to 0%, and no boom.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 11, 2007, 09:02:20 pm
There seem to be four subsystems -- shell, blades, core and crystal.  I targeted crystal, and ordered my wingmen to destroy subsystem.  It went to 0%, and no boom.

Yeah, it's the core you have to destroy, not the crystal.  If you look in FRED, there are 5 pieces and a core subsystem.  Unfortunately, it's rather difficult to figure out which is which (aside from the core).

I'll poke around in FRED a bit, and maybe you can do the same if you get the chance.  But I would't worry about it too much - with a energy weapon, the core dies with the crystal.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: IceFire on June 11, 2007, 09:13:15 pm
Lost track of this...how far along are you guys?  Mind if I have a peek on the progress? :D
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on June 11, 2007, 09:19:06 pm
I am glad to see you here :)

I think everything is ready save some final tweaks to the last mission, which should be done today.... :)

Ryan, Piece4a seems to be the crystal subsystem.  The node ought to blow if either is destroyed, or the message you get should say "core" and not "crystal".
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 11, 2007, 09:32:58 pm
OK...

-Added an OR clause for piece4a or the core subsystem.
-The emergency message does tell you to destroy the core, not the crystal.  All other messages tell you to just destroy the node.
-Changed some directives.  Turned out the obvious solution should work, so we now have an "Engage Fighters" and an "Intercept Bombers" directive.  Fighters is dependent on all enemy fighter wings except Scorpio.  Bombers is dependent on all bombers.

Please test it out (especially the directives) and make sure everything works.

Oh, and IceFire, I hope you don't disagree too much with some of our changes.  For the most part the main campaign just got bugfixing and a few additions, but the final mission has gotten a more major overhaul.  Same premise and basic idea, different route to get there.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: IceFire on June 11, 2007, 09:44:11 pm
I was never happy with the last mission anyways. I worked on it for the longest and was least happy with it so I'm pleased to see it have a good look at.  I think as long as the ideas are preserved and credit is given where its due (to all of you as well) I'm very happy to see what happens with it all.  Sounds like allot of great ideas, some good fixes, and it should be a worthwhile experience to play it all over again.  Very pleased to see it get this kind of attention :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on June 12, 2007, 07:05:36 pm
The final mission feels good now.  I'd be interested if Icefire would care to check it out, too! :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 12, 2007, 09:08:18 pm
The final mission feels good now.  I'd be interested if Icefire would care to check it out, too! :)

No bugs?  You mean we've got it right, maybe?  Shock of shocks, huzzah!
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on June 12, 2007, 09:15:40 pm
Heh, one mission was 90% of the work :)

I still have to add proper planets to the backgrounds.  m2258734a hasn't logged in in a while, so I'll need to use the ordinary planets plus those that have been completed so far.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 12, 2007, 10:21:43 pm
Well, I'm officially handing things off to you for backgrounds and planets.  Make sure you have all the updated copies of the missions and the campaign.

If you need help packaging this later, let me know and I can lend a hand.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on June 13, 2007, 02:25:29 pm
There seem to be four subsystems -- shell, blades, core and crystal.  I targeted crystal, and ordered my wingmen to destroy subsystem.  It went to 0%, and no boom.

Yeah, it's the core you have to destroy, not the crystal.  If you look in FRED, there are 5 pieces and a core subsystem.  Unfortunately, it's rather difficult to figure out which is which (aside from the core).

I'll poke around in FRED a bit, and maybe you can do the same if you get the chance.  But I would't worry about it too much - with a energy weapon, the core dies with the crystal.

Mrs. Logic told me that I should make the Node go down when the core has been destroyed :rolleyes:


Sorry, I was a bit depressed...what about the status? What should I do?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Fabian on June 13, 2007, 03:08:07 pm
Mrs. Logic told me that I should make the Node go down when the core has been destroyed :rolleyes:

Sorry, I was a bit depressed...what about the status? What should I do?

Indeed that was perfectly allright, but MP Ryan did add a message, which was pointing to crystal initially and IIRC in FS2 it was also the crystal ...

Why the hell were you depressed? And what the hell did happen to your signature?

I really liked it ...

cu

Fabian
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 13, 2007, 09:26:18 pm
I've tried to attach an updated copy of the mission pack, but it's telling me that the upload folder is full.  Boooo =(

Anyway, Mob, you can probably work on the voice-acting scripts when we can put an updated mission pack in this thread.  If anymore writing or mission design needs to be altered, let me know.

Aside from that, most of my work is doing.  I can help package this thing eventually, and/or put together a credits package.  Just let me know what else needs to be done.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on June 14, 2007, 03:53:25 pm
Why the hell were you depressed? And what the hell did happen to your signature?

I really liked it ...

I don't think you're going to see it again...

I've tried to attach an updated copy of the mission pack, but it's telling me that the upload folder is full.  Boooo =(

Anyway, Mob, you can probably work on the voice-acting scripts when we can put an updated mission pack in this thread.  If anymore writing or mission design needs to be altered, let me know.

Aside from that, most of my work is doing.  I can help package this thing eventually, and/or put together a credits package.  Just let me know what else needs to be done.

The UL folder is full? It happened mostly because of my INFA uber big missions... :lol:

I can continue to work on the scripts, but the voice actors vanished all of a sudden. There already are some scripts they should work on...I will continue only if I see them working.

Ok, create this credits package and be sure to give credits to members like Fabian. I can easily design a credits cutscene for Warzone :no:
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 14, 2007, 05:52:04 pm
I've attached the completed missions packaged.

Here's the credits information.  I elected to not put in what each member of the FSCRP team was done, because most of us have made so many changes that it would look ridiculous.  So, in Communist tradition, everyone on the SCPification gets equal credit.  The original credits have been preserved as written in the Warzone readme.  Once we have created a VP file and included all the voice-acting, I'll write up a new readme which contains the old one's information at the end.

Quote
This campaign has been modified and updated for Freespace Open builds of version 3.6.9 or later by the Freespace Campaign Restoration Project (FSCRP) team.  Campaign concept and intellectual products remain the property of the original designers.  Updates have been designed to improve compatibility and fix technical issues in the campaign, while preserving the intent of the original authors.  Any large or controversial changes were made by the FSCRP, and may be reviewed in the forums.  For more information, please visit the FSCRP forums at http://www.hard-light.net/forums under Community Projects.

Quote
FSCRP Warzone SCP Team (In Alphabetical Order):
Admiral Nelson
Fabian
freespaceking
Herra Tohtori
jr2
Lieutenant General Mobius
m2258734a
Macfie
Mad Bomber
MP-Ryan

Voice Acting for Warzone (In Alphabetical Order):

Quote
Original Warzone Team:

IceFire - Creator / Designer
Dark - Model / Planet creation
Plasma - Consultation
Ace - Consultation
Agatheron - Consultation
Kellan - Consultation / Editing
Zeus Legion - Voice Manager
Kazan - Bug Help

Original Warzone Testers:

Ace
Kellan
Agatheron
AssAssIn
Fraz
WildWolf
Plasma
Dark
jbond04

Quote
Special thanks to the FreeSpace Source Code Project and Hard Light Productions.  http://www.hard-light.net

I think that about covers it.  When the voice acting is done, we need to add their names.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Game_Master64 on June 14, 2007, 09:48:04 pm
so, this is finally almost ready?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 14, 2007, 11:32:38 pm
so, this is finally almost ready?

-Planets and backgrounds remain to be updated.
-Voice acting has not yet begun (I believe, that's LGM's balliwick).
-VP needs to be compiled.

The missions themselves and the writing changes are complete.  It's all "cosmetic" stuff from here on out.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: IceFire on June 15, 2007, 09:56:30 pm
Looking forward to seeing the final version.  I'm excited to play my own campaign and see what you guys have done to bring it up to modern spec.  Really interested to see this and thankful that you folks took interest.  Thanks! :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on June 23, 2007, 05:30:19 pm
Ahem.... how's it coming, guys?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on June 24, 2007, 09:46:52 am
I am away on a business trip.  I'll be back early next week.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: IceFire on July 05, 2007, 10:23:06 pm
Just managed to get started playing it.  I love what you guys have done with it...its really great so far.  I'm keeping a few notes and will post them later.  What I am having a bit of trouble with is the backgrounds...I have a really nice full sky but no nebulas and just the sun.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Macfie on July 06, 2007, 06:53:11 am
Just managed to get started playing it.  I love what you guys have done with it...its really great so far.  I'm keeping a few notes and will post them later.  What I am having a bit of trouble with is the backgrounds...I have a really nice full sky but no nebulas and just the sun.

Do you have lightspeed's nebula pack?  All the backgrounds use the lightspeed nebulas.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on July 06, 2007, 02:31:27 pm
Just managed to get started playing it.  I love what you guys have done with it...its really great so far.  I'm keeping a few notes and will post them later.  What I am having a bit of trouble with is the backgrounds...I have a really nice full sky but no nebulas and just the sun.

Do you have lightspeed's nebula pack?  All the backgrounds use the lightspeed nebulas.

Which I'll include in a VP with the final release.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: IceFire on July 06, 2007, 06:53:50 pm
Hrrmm...I thought I did.  Are those in mv_effects as part of the Upgrade Project?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on July 06, 2007, 07:19:48 pm
No, not until 3.6.10.  Here is Wanderer's version. (http://www.game-warden.com/starfox/Non_SF_related_stuff/Nebulae.rar)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: IceFire on July 06, 2007, 07:27:50 pm
No, not until 3.6.10.  Here is Wanderer's version. (http://www.game-warden.com/starfox/Non_SF_related_stuff/Nebulae.rar)
Excellent!  I will try that.

I'm also having a bit of trouble with Northwest Passage.  The briefing and everything appears that you've won...everything jumps out intact and so forth but the mission is a failure.  I might have to take a look at that unless its a known issue.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on July 06, 2007, 07:32:45 pm
Crap, sounds like an old version of the campaign file got mixed in....  The original mission had multiple goals for the convoy departure and so this could happen.  Mobius fixed this someplace along the way.  Let me see.

[edit] Here is a corrected file.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: IceFire on July 07, 2007, 12:27:06 pm
Yep, ultimately all of these problems are probably my own fault :)

I'm really impressed with the work everyone has done.  The game looks beautiful these days and its nice to see everything updated, fixed, spell corrected, and so forth to fit.  I'll hopefully finish on the weekend with the play through and post any final comments but everything looks good so far.

Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on July 09, 2007, 04:23:36 pm
Any further comments for us?  I'd like to generate the voice acting scripts once you are happy.

One question for you.  Why does Russik abandon the Vidar?  The capture the Vidar mission begins with him almost to a jump point, with the Vidar just sitting there.  Did it suffer a propulsion casualty?  Something should be added to the mission to explain.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: IceFire on July 09, 2007, 04:35:26 pm
I forget if I had a good reason for that or not.  I wanted to keep things rolling along and initially I had planned for that mission to be the last but that seemed a bit too rushed at the time so I kept things rolling.  I think the Vidar had served its purpose, he had figured out which hybrids were important, and he knew the GTVA was on to him so he used the Vidar to stall them.

I've played the whole thing through and am very pleased.  I think there is a bug with the campaign file in the last mission as well because I was successful but the mission failed.  Again if its a known error then no problem.  Everything else is fine!
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on July 09, 2007, 09:10:49 pm
I forget if I had a good reason for that or not.  I wanted to keep things rolling along and initially I had planned for that mission to be the last but that seemed a bit too rushed at the time so I kept things rolling.  I think the Vidar had served its purpose, he had figured out which hybrids were important, and he knew the GTVA was on to him so he used the Vidar to stall them.

I've played the whole thing through and am very pleased.  I think there is a bug with the campaign file in the last mission as well because I was successful but the mission failed.  Again if its a known error then no problem.  Everything else is fine!

That's more than possible - during testing it was run through the mission simulator, which ignores the campaign file, and I did change the goals.  I'll have to take a look when I get home on Wednesday.

Glad you liked it!

EDIT:  And with regard to the abandonment of the Vidar, it made sense to me at the time when I played through.  If you gents like, I can add a line or two in a briefing or in the mission somewhere to explain it, but I think its pretty intuitive the way it stands.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on July 11, 2007, 08:58:53 pm
Here's the missions package with the correct campaign file.  Try it out again, make sure you finish the last mission correctly.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Sir T on July 12, 2007, 04:35:48 pm
Any further comments for us?  I'd like to generate the voice acting scripts once you are happy

Just jumping in with an offer to voice act on this when you are done!  ;7

I remember playing warzone way back in the time mysts. I gave up on it though as no matter that I did I could not pass that damn mission where that cruiser (i think) is hit by the 2 rakshasas. The Shasas totaled it every time. Ahh well maybe I'll do better next time round..

 :warp:
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: TrashMan on July 12, 2007, 04:52:15 pm
Whens a non-voiceacted release coming? I can hardly wait!

Just gimme the filez..gimme, gimme! ;7
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on July 14, 2007, 01:42:20 pm
Ehm...

I'm sorry, people. My computer left me alone, a few more days and everything should be ok...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mad Bomber on July 25, 2007, 09:53:35 pm
Does no one visit the Sagitta board? I have my mission 1 Alpha 2 lines ready, and no idea of where to put them.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Hades on July 25, 2007, 10:06:21 pm
Will there be HTL Vidar(i know it looks good already but it would look better :p).
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on July 25, 2007, 11:34:34 pm
Does no one visit the Sagitta board? I have my mission 1 Alpha 2 lines ready, and no idea of where to put them.

I don't think any of us have used that board.

That said, I'm going to create a gmail address for the FSCRP, along with a FileFront account.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on July 26, 2007, 04:47:39 pm
Does no one visit the Sagitta board? I have my mission 1 Alpha 2 lines ready, and no idea of where to put them.

I have also been seriously slammed with RL issues lately.  I have even been asked to fly to India this weekend (   :rolleyes: ) which has killed my preparation of the full voice acting scripts, etc...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on July 27, 2007, 01:52:23 pm
Are all the planets/backgrounds completed yet?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on July 30, 2007, 02:01:23 pm
I will work on this on my exciting 20 hour flight today / tomorrow.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on August 05, 2007, 03:58:17 am
Hey guys...I'm back...but I'm confused. What should I do? Continue to write all mission scripts on TSP?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on August 05, 2007, 08:30:51 pm
Hey guys...I'm back...but I'm confused. What should I do? Continue to write all mission scripts on TSP?

Is that what you'd been doing?  We were also confused.

I'm not sure if Nelson took over the voice acting or not.  You'll have to find otu from him.

At any rate, you could begin work on a final cutscene for credits...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Hades on August 05, 2007, 09:09:13 pm
Hey if you guys want you can have this-http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/3787/82719301bg7.jpg
http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/1070/26534709yk8.jpg
But it needs UVmapping.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on August 06, 2007, 10:38:50 am
At any rate, you could begin work on a final cutscene for credits...

Is there a list of people to mention? Where I can find it?


Hey if you guys want you can have this-http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/3787/82719301bg7.jpg
http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/1070/26534709yk8.jpg
But it needs UVmapping.

Looks fine, the old model was a bit blocky :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on August 06, 2007, 02:41:37 pm
At any rate, you could begin work on a final cutscene for credits...

Is there a list of people to mention? Where I can find it?

Right here:  http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,46147.msg968616.html#msg968616

The voiceators aren't in there yet for obvious reasons, but there's no reason why you couldn't get started.  Might want to do a run through of all the thread pages since that post and see if there have been any other contributors.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on August 08, 2007, 01:53:36 pm
Oh, I have just noticed this post!

Please, contact me via PM the next time...


Credits cutscene, WIP. :)


EDIT: All subtitle events have been added. :)

EDIT2: All FSCRP team members are mentioned, ok, but there's nothing about what they did for Warzone SCP... take care of this problem, Ryan.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on August 17, 2007, 01:19:21 am
The only problem I have with listing the type of contribution is that we're going to run out of space for some people, and others will have 1 model or something.

Can we try to agree on some sort of system for this?  Credit the tye of task, largest task, what?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: jr2 on August 17, 2007, 06:22:40 am
XD You can credit me for (mostly) useless posting on the FSCRP forums... XD
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on August 17, 2007, 11:19:04 am
Simple stuff like this:

Admiral Nelson - Coordination, FREDding, backgrounds (I can add an additional subtitle if the text is too long).

Mobius - FREDding

MP-Ryan - FREDding, Text Checking

jr2 - Spam Support :lol:

Stuff like that...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Snail on August 17, 2007, 01:28:53 pm
Snail - Lurking and waiting for something to happen.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on August 17, 2007, 04:29:42 pm
Snail - Lurking and waiting for something to happen.

Read Karajorma's FAQ and learn something about the variables. Why? Simple: you won't tell me to complete INFA missions you're not able to work on...so I will have time for WSCP. :P
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Snail on August 18, 2007, 10:16:49 am
I can use variables, but M12 got messed up, okay?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on August 18, 2007, 10:18:02 am
Okay :P

I now have to find some FreeTimeTM for this cutscene...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Fabian on August 28, 2007, 04:59:38 pm
Hey, what is the status on this project?

I thought we had finished the testing stage and then it would be almost ready to upload?

cu

Fabian
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on August 29, 2007, 06:28:37 am
Yes, and then I had to go to India for a month for business. :)

I will be home again tomorrow.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on August 29, 2007, 11:18:56 am
I'm not working on the custscene...it is difficult for me to work with a different set of ships(I'm in INFA mode now).

But the voice actors should be working...what happened to them?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on September 01, 2007, 11:36:21 am
Since I am now home, I will try to complete the backgrounds this weekend.  We then need to look at the voice acting scripts and see where we are.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on September 01, 2007, 04:52:42 pm
I wrote the scripts for the first missions, it's up to the actors now. :)

And you will have to wait for the cutscene :(
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mad Bomber on September 05, 2007, 12:27:37 pm
Already sent my lines in for E1M1. I'll get my E1M2 lines in there too (Gaudua and Alpha 2).
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on September 05, 2007, 01:51:42 pm
Ok, good :)

I will check TSP and try to update the list :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on September 09, 2007, 05:21:36 am
FYI I'm not dead, just very busy.  I'm waiting on the voice acting before compiling all the credits for you Mobius.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on September 09, 2007, 05:39:49 am
It is going to take a while. I think we should recruit more actors, there virtually is no progress. :(
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mongoose on September 09, 2007, 03:06:07 pm
Jeez...I've completely forgotten about this.  I don't even know if I found out what role I was assigned.  Hell, I can't even seem to find the link for the forum, and Google's doing nothing to help me.  I don't know if it's just me, but I really feel that something like this should have been kept on HLP (I mean, there's already a thread about it in the Voice Acting forum).  Shunting it off to some other forum, and forcing people to register there, is too much of a hassle, and it's very unlikely that people will check said forum on any sort of regular basis.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on September 09, 2007, 04:02:32 pm
I know, but discussing about assignments and posting lines is :blah:.

I'm sending you a PM, you still have to choose a role...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on September 10, 2007, 12:52:20 pm
I have just noticed something in E1M4: there are messages coming from the Equinox with Command's ANI and the Abydos is designated "GTC".
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mad Bomber on September 13, 2007, 12:13:23 pm
Alpha 2, Equinox, and Gaudua lines sent for E1M2 and E1M4. (No lines for me in E1M3.)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on September 13, 2007, 12:29:50 pm
Alpha 2, Equinox, and Gaudua lines sent for E1M2 and E1M4. (No lines for me in E1M3.)

:yes:

Since you are the most active voice actor, you should work a bit on ep1m3. Post on TSP and specify everything(which lines you're going to act). I'm having problems because I confused Blaise Russel(who has Cole)with Ransom Arceihn(who has Russik).

You know, Russel...Russik...(no offense, man!) :lol:

I have just contacted Ransom via MSN. I forced him to voice act. Blaise's not replying to my PM. Tinman and Killfrenzy seem dead. :blah:
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mad Bomber on September 13, 2007, 06:20:10 pm
Like I said before, tho, I can't seem to do characters who have "gravitas" on the microphone.

E1M3 only has voices of the Warlock (Cole I'm assuming) and Command, and if I'm going to be Command in one mission, I'd have to do it in all of them. Command needs gravitas, and I have a hard time doing that without killing my voice.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Arkangel on September 14, 2007, 10:06:03 am
Im willing to voice act for Warzone, Mobius has samples of my voice although if you would like more sample i would be more than happy to produce more  :)

Fairly english accent with a hint of Socttish, not really distinguishable or common, can make a variety of voices though :yes:
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on September 14, 2007, 02:32:52 pm
Like I said before, tho, I can't seem to do characters who have "gravitas" on the microphone.

E1M3 only has voices of the Warlock (Cole I'm assuming) and Command, and if I'm going to be Command in one mission, I'd have to do it in all of them. Command needs gravitas, and I have a hard time doing that without killing my voice.

Just act minor characters for now, most actors are inactive and I want Mongoose to voice act Command.

Im willing to voice act for Warzone, Mobius has samples of my voice although if you would like more sample i would be more than happy to produce more  :)

Fairly english accent with a hint of Socttish, not really distinguishable or common, can make a variety of voices though :yes:

Accents don't matter :P

Check your PMs ;)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mad Bomber on September 14, 2007, 08:41:19 pm

Just act minor characters for now, most actors are inactive and I want Mongoose to voice act Command.

Wingman 1, and the occasional cruiser/corvette then. Got it.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on October 13, 2007, 12:59:40 pm
I need the list of the ones who partecipated actively at this project(there might be more/less voice actors at the end, but it's better than nothing)so I can create the final cutscene.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Tinman on October 13, 2007, 02:13:58 pm
Alpha 2, Equinox, and Gaudua lines sent for E1M2 and E1M4. (No lines for me in E1M3.)

[...]

 Tinman and Killfrenzy seem dead. :blah:

1. i am alive
2. i sent you (or Nelson?) a link to the vasudan and and transport voices (in the other forum as PM)

and then the  other forum was pretty much dead... with no info what to do next...   :blah:

 
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on October 13, 2007, 02:33:12 pm
1) Good :)
2) I don't have an audio card, I told you, so sending me samples will bring to nothing...send everything to Nelson;

We don't have time to write all scripts. There are many scripts in need of attention, however. Work on them ;)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Tinman on October 13, 2007, 02:53:32 pm
[...]
We don't have time to write all scripts. There are many scripts in need of attention, however. Work on them ;)

well, i have no problem to work "on them"  :) - but i think i do not know where to get the latest version of Warzone and the scripts ...

and i volunteer to organize voice acting for some missions - cos the missing organizing of the stuff is the main problem IMHO

what do you think?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on October 13, 2007, 03:01:01 pm
The latest version is linked in this thread, look for the most recent package :)

I can't take such an important decision without Nelson's approval, but I admit it's the best thing to do right now.

We definitely need:

1) Someone mad available enough to post the scripts;
2) Someone able of organizing the voice acting;

That is exactly what you want to do :P

For me, you have carte blanche. The others will surely like the idea :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on October 13, 2007, 04:32:24 pm
Yes, I will be off on a business trip for the next two weeks, and won't have time for this then. Such help would be welcome.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Tinman on October 14, 2007, 06:32:38 am
ok, then... i searched this thread an found the following as the latest version of Warzone

http://files.filefront.com/Warzone7z/;7137128;/fileinfo.html (http://files.filefront.com/Warzone7z/;7137128;/fileinfo.html) main dir from 2007-04-04
http://files.filefront.com/missions7z/;7381175;/fileinfo.html (http://files.filefront.com/missions7z/;7381175;/fileinfo.html) latest mission files from 2007-04-29

if there are newer mission files for E1M1 to E1M4 please PM it, i will start with these missions first

to all voice actors: please send your files or links to your files as PM

TIA
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on October 14, 2007, 10:22:20 am
Your job as voice actors is separated from the rest, you don't need the latest versions to get the correct scripts. Everything related to scripts was done at the beginning.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Tinman on October 14, 2007, 11:05:34 am
Good. Then everything is ok for me.  :)


Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on October 14, 2007, 11:40:39 am
Good. Then everything is ok for me.  :)

That is relative. Most missions need voice acting :P
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on October 14, 2007, 08:43:11 pm
Once again:

I'm not dead, but I am very busy (full-time classes and half-time work).  This is the only FSCRP project I'll be able to dedicate time to; I will write the entire credits section when the voice acting is completed and finalized.

I'll be following the thread.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on October 21, 2007, 05:18:50 am
This is the problem: we want to release the SCP version without voice acting(the voice acting will proceed, a second version will be released in a second moment). I need the credits, but I'm not putting you under pressure ;)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Snail on October 21, 2007, 05:22:47 am
As a patch I hope.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on October 21, 2007, 05:33:46 am
What do you expect? Voice files and mission files ;)

We could release just a VP file with all voices if we use the Voice Acting manager. But it's going to take time, so...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on October 30, 2007, 07:17:29 pm
When did we decide to release the missions without voices?

Are the planets/backgrounds all added?  Are we ready to go except for voices?  I haven't hit this thread in a while.  Nelson, can you post the most recent Warzone package we've got?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on October 30, 2007, 08:46:50 pm
Yes, it is ready to go without voices.  I'll make it all available this weekend.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on October 31, 2007, 01:09:13 am
Yes, it is ready to go without voices.  I'll make it all available this weekend.

Alrighty then, I guess tomorrow I'll get cracking on a list on contributors so Mob can do that cutscene.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on October 31, 2007, 02:41:25 pm
Everything I need is a better credits list, the other one is "primitive". With it, I can complete the cutscene :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on November 13, 2007, 11:47:27 pm
After putting it off way too long, the credits are done.  I divided it into sections in order to showcase the specific types of changes we made.

Warzone SCP Credits
---------------------------
Warzone SCP is the first completed re-release by the FreeSpace Campaign Restoration Project (FSCRP).  Original credits apply.  FSCRP contributors include:

Mission Design Fixes and Revisions (FRED)
-Admiral Nelson
-Mobius
-MP-Ryan

Mission/Campaign Tweaks
-jr2
-Macfie

Visual & Effects
-m2258734a (Planets)
-Herra Tohtori (Planets)
-freespaceking (Vidar Maps)
-Admiral Nelson (Backgrounds, Nameplates)
-Macfie (Warzone SCP Logo)

Dialog/Text/Storyline Revision
-Admiral Nelson
-MP-Ryan

Playtesting
-Admiral Nelson
-Mobius
-MP-Ryan
-Macfie
-Mad Bomber
-jr2
-Fabian

Special Thanks to IceFire, one of the original project members, for reviewing and supporting our work.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: jr2 on November 14, 2007, 12:58:45 am
Erm... you sure I don't belong under "Spam Support"?  :nervous:  I don't remember doing much playtesting.. and I'm sure I didn't do and FREDding, although I may have dropped a helpful hint or two, not sure.  Unless I'm suffering from amnesia - :confused:

Thanks anyways, though.  ;)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on November 14, 2007, 03:48:52 am
Erm... you sure I don't belong under "Spam Support"?  :nervous:  I don't remember doing much playtesting.. and I'm sure I didn't do and FREDding, although I may have dropped a helpful hint or two, not sure.  Unless I'm suffering from amnesia - :confused:

Thanks anyways, though.  ;)

You made a few minor tweaks and edits somewhere back around page 8 EDIT: Page 7, sorry.  It was a long time ago :P  There you are, I revised and broke up the tweaks from the actual design.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: jr2 on November 14, 2007, 10:20:40 am
*checks*... eh, right-o.  Amnesia FTW!!  :lol:
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on November 14, 2007, 02:08:31 pm
After putting it off way too long, the credits are done.  I divided it into sections in order to showcase the specific types of changes we made.

Warzone SCP Credits
---------------------------
Warzone SCP is the first completed re-release by the FreeSpace Campaign Restoration Project (FSCRP).  Original credits apply.  FSCRP contributors include:

Mission Design Fixes and Revisions (FRED)
-Admiral Nelson
-Mobius
-MP-Ryan

Mission/Campaign Tweaks
-jr2
-Macfie

Visual & Effects
-m2258734a (Planets)
-Herra Tohtori (Planets)
-freespaceking (Vidar Maps)
-Admiral Nelson (Backgrounds, Nameplates)
-Macfie (Warzone SCP Logo)

Dialog/Text/Storyline Revision
-Admiral Nelson
-MP-Ryan

Playtesting
-Admiral Nelson
-Mobius
-MP-Ryan
-Macfie
-Mad Bomber
-jr2
-Fabian

Special Thanks to IceFire, one of the original project members, for reviewing and supporting our work.

Nice, Ryan!

As you know I don't have an audio card. I want to use a sound for the cutscene(nothing out of the ordinary, just one of FS2's soundtracks), you will eventually check if it works or not :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on November 14, 2007, 03:42:38 pm
Send it to me when you're done and I'll test it =)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on November 14, 2007, 03:46:32 pm
When I have time...

Oh, do you mind if the name "Mobius" is colored? :lol:
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on November 14, 2007, 07:20:48 pm
When I have time...

Oh, do you mind if the name "Mobius" is colored? :lol:


Ok Mr. Lightbright :P
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: TrashMan on November 25, 2007, 09:20:39 am
What's the status on this thing? :P
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on November 25, 2007, 11:15:30 am
The cutscene is WIP. It's not simple, basically it will show some screenshots of the post-last mission situation first and short pieces of the main events happened during the campaign(first mission = the Odin takes down the Disen, second mission = the Ravana emerges from the Knossos, etc. etc.). It's very complex, believe me.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on November 29, 2007, 12:00:31 pm
Uhm...

Since the list of credits has no reference to the actors, I had a change in mind. The cutscene I'm actually working on is going to need time, but I should be able to make a "light version" of it and work on the "bigger one" for the second release(campaign+voice acting). What do you think? :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on November 29, 2007, 04:11:49 pm
Uhm...

Since the list of credits has no reference to the actors, I had a change in mind. The cutscene I'm actually working on is going to need time, but I should be able to make a "light version" of it and work on the "bigger one" for the second release(campaign+voice acting). What do you think? :)


Sounds good.

This is actually why I wondered if there was any point in the cutscene for an initial release.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on November 29, 2007, 04:16:16 pm
Correct. I think it will be done in one or two days ;)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on November 29, 2007, 04:46:37 pm
The rest of the package will be ready to go once the cutscene is done.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on November 29, 2007, 05:56:22 pm
The rest of the package will be ready to go once the cutscene is done.

Excellent.  You'll take care of bundling it all up as a VP file then?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on November 29, 2007, 06:08:01 pm
Yup.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on December 03, 2007, 01:56:04 pm
Sorry, I had no time because of RL. I will try to get the cutscene done during this week :(
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on December 13, 2007, 12:23:48 pm
I now have serious problems, I think I'll be here just to read some posts :(

All subtitles are set...is there someone able to work on the camera movements? I can send him the mission, the wait is becoming too long... :(
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on December 13, 2007, 01:09:04 pm
Cutscenes are outside my scope of FRED knowledge.

Post what you've got, hopefully we can track down someone to do it.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on January 10, 2008, 05:04:48 am
*cough*

OK, I'm waiting on a repost of the whole Warzone package Nelson has got at the moment.  Be nice to see this thing re-released before February =)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on January 10, 2008, 08:33:33 am
I'll send it to you by tomorrow at the latest.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on January 10, 2008, 01:48:05 pm
Uhm...the UL folder seems full...

Here's the cutscene, I post it since I don't know how or when I will be able to work on it. The subtitles should be ok...an original and complex background is needed, and...all scenes should be replaced with flyby sections and/or something else(but still simple and easy to manage).


[attachment deleted by ninja]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mustang19 on January 17, 2008, 08:05:09 pm
MPRyan asked me to work on the cutscene earlier. Here's what I have so far. I did some last-minute text editing so things may be screwed up, so let me know.

A background still needs to be put in. If noone else wants to put one in, I'll just copy-and-paste some nebulae from another mission. Yeah, I suck at "original backgrounds". So that's my plan.

I'll put in the flyby sequences as well. You'll need some kind of camera plane for flybys. I have one available, it'll require a new table entry and a new model.

[attachment deleted by ninja]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on January 17, 2008, 08:23:29 pm
Will look at this on Friday/Saturday.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Tinman on January 19, 2008, 02:26:03 pm
Bug in E1M1:
If the GTSC Disen is destroyed by the Nahema bombers after the Omega transport has left the docking port but not yet jumped out.
then Command tells Alpha it will send Omega 2 to repair the Disen - but the Disen is destroyed at this time.
Also a moment later the Odin arrives and want destroy the Disen again - but the Disen was destroyed by the Nahema bombers before.
At the end the mission is a success but should be a failure.

Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on February 17, 2008, 05:37:13 am
I think I can do something...thanks, Mustang.

Nelson, can you check m1 please?

EDIT: The file is a .txt... *converting*
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on February 17, 2008, 06:56:59 am
Urgent...the max number of bitmaps is...?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on February 17, 2008, 09:44:46 am
Uhm...XD  :D

Should I add more bitmaps?

Oh, I think there should be more flyby sections and space ships.


[attachment deleted by ninja]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mustang19 on February 18, 2008, 09:25:37 am
Thanks, Mob. I'm supposed to be working on some "secret project" right now but I'll look into this.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on February 20, 2008, 04:17:04 am
Gah... as usual, I managed to get myself inundated in work and not inundated in Warzone.

Someone finish the blasted cutscene... I'll go through the rest and make sure things are up to snuff.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on February 23, 2008, 02:13:26 pm
Any feedback about the changes I made?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mustang19 on February 25, 2008, 08:21:43 am
I wish there was... but I didn't remember to play.  :( Maybe I'll get to it today.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Tinman on March 01, 2008, 02:48:37 pm
Hi Folks,

for your entertainment and to encourage all voice actors to continue to work on the project
I prepared the first four missions of Warzone as a small demo

I tested it with FS2Open 3.6.9 and 3.6.8zeta mediavps and some XT builds (3.6.10) with 3.6.10beta mediavps

all of you working on Warzone and with a TSP account can find a d/l link there...

for all of you without a TSP account, be patient  :p
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Koth on March 01, 2008, 03:07:57 pm
By the way, are there any roles I could voiceact?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Tinman on March 01, 2008, 03:22:40 pm
yes, I am working on it - I will contact you soon  :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on March 01, 2008, 03:33:37 pm
Remember to use TSP, we spent a lot of time adding the scripts there.

What about the cutscene? It's been 10 days...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on March 01, 2008, 08:57:39 pm
I am in the process of being migrated from one unit at work to another; Jill is also ill at the moment.  The only FreeSpace I've played recently was an hour of multi today for my sanity.

I am sticking a note to my monitor right now to look at it March 6th.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mustang19 on March 01, 2008, 11:20:38 pm
Finally got to look at it. The background looks nice and it looks like you changed the timing of certain "scenes" a bit, but other than that I honestly can't see many differences. All in all, the cutscene looks like it's in good shape. The only thing that might be added are the flyby scenes, which I'll get to if I have the time.

If someone else would like to give it a try, attached is my "camera plane". Use every-time set-camera-position/facing to make flyby sequences.

[attachment deleted by ninja]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on March 02, 2008, 02:06:14 am
You can do them with camera-facing, too...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on March 15, 2008, 10:12:50 am
*cough* *cough*
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mustang19 on March 17, 2008, 08:43:04 am
Hey... it's on the to-do list...  ;)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on March 17, 2008, 04:31:40 pm
Ah, ok :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on March 20, 2008, 11:37:00 am
May I know why the Camera model is a fighter?

A ship is easier to handle as we can set the speed we want with cap-waypoint-speed...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mustang19 on March 20, 2008, 02:18:14 pm
Fighter AI allows a wider range of AI orders. I've still been able to use cap-waypoint-speed on the fighter without problems. You just need to use AI-play-dead at times to make sure that the fighter doesn't fly around on it's own.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on March 20, 2008, 02:24:34 pm
Yeah, but the "wide range of AI orders" doesn't match the needings of a cutscene creator. What's the point in having a camera engaging the enemy, for example?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mustang19 on March 20, 2008, 02:25:40 pm
Personal preference. Sometimes it's nice to have the camerplane "guard" a target. Go ahead and change the flag to "cruiser" if you want.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on March 20, 2008, 02:26:54 pm
Erm...mine wasn't an offense :nervous:

Let's keep it then, ok? :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: phreak on March 22, 2008, 10:38:40 pm
I ran through the campaign with the 1/13/08 dataset using the xt 3/12 build.  Found a few issues

1) The campaign advancement goals in E2M1 and E3M7 pointed to directives that are incorrectly spelled or missing.  The mission files may have been modified and the campaign file was not

2) Taurus wing in E2M4 had two waves and was launched from the destroyer.  However the destroyer would often get destroyed before the taurus' first wave had been destroyed.  Since the destruction of taurus wing is required to continue in the mission, it was left in a state of limbo.  (i thought this was fixed in code).  My fix was to just drop the number of waves in taurus wing to 1.

3) Whoever did the background graphics and layouts in the missions needs a seal of approval.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on March 23, 2008, 03:41:24 am
1) Nobody touched the .fc2 file...I'll take a look later.

2) I also thought this was fixed in the code...

3) What do you mean? Nelson did the backgrounds. What about the layouts? Some have been modified for balance.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: phreak on March 23, 2008, 12:28:29 pm
3 was a compliment
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on March 23, 2008, 02:07:03 pm
Et voilĂ !  :pimp:

Taurus wing in E2M4 will not respawn anymore.

I changed the .fc2 file: there were two unexistant goals in E2M1. In E3M7, the goal "Destroy Ravana" was renamed "Destroy Daskha".


[attachment deleted by ninja]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: phreak on March 23, 2008, 06:12:17 pm
For E3M7, it should be "Destroy SD Daskha"
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on March 24, 2008, 02:36:49 am
Yeah, I know...it was just a typing mistake. In the .fc2 file you can find "Destroy SD Daskha" :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 19, 2008, 03:33:36 am
How's that cutscene coming?  I'm doing a run-through of the whole package on April 25th.  I'd really like to get this sucker released.  Soon.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 20, 2008, 03:04:13 am
I left it to the rest of the team...

Hey, who's working on WSCP? And can someone please test S:AH? It's so close to the release...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 26, 2008, 02:52:03 am
Cutscene?  Anyone?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 26, 2008, 03:14:24 am
OK, here's the deal.  I am on vacation May 1-7.  This thing needs to be officially released before the end of May, at the latest.

Here is the full Warzone package at present.  10 MB download, 7zip format.  Make sure you adjust the directory paths in the mod.ini file before attempting to run it.
http://files.filefront.com/MPRyan+Warzone+200804257z/;10081540;/fileinfo.html

Missing items:
-Nameplate for the GTC Nicolas.  Don't know how it got missed, but it did.
-Planet for the Regulus system (IIRC Nelson mentioned it to me).
-Credits cutscene.

I am creating an alternate final debrief with credits included.  If no cutscene exists by the time everything else is done, then there won't be a cutscene.

Please test the package.  Any other missing items or mission problems, post them in this thread.  We may still be missing a few backgrounds or stars, or minor mission bugs.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 26, 2008, 08:54:04 am
I was waiting for some feedback about the current cutscene, which may or may not be improved.

I didn't know of the other problems you mentioned. I can do nothing for the Nicolas' nameplate and the bitmap.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 28, 2008, 01:40:16 am
OK.  I (after receiving much help from Zacam) created a ship nameplate for the Nicolas so that's done.  I also fixed the campaign file - someone left an and operator in the conditions for E2M1 completion that caused all kinds of lovely errors as there was only one goal.  So that's fixed.

I'm attaching the new campaign file since its necessary for testing.  As I clean up other things I'll repost the entire package.  In the meantime, test please.

Mobius, please post a copy of the cutscene as far as its done so we can all have a look.

[attachment deleted by ninja]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: est1895 on April 28, 2008, 07:39:12 pm
Could you please put the Warzone on another mirror.  The trouble is on my end, but for some reason I can't download anything from FileFront.   :nervous: :nervous:
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on April 29, 2008, 02:58:57 am
Could you please put the Warzone on another mirror.  The trouble is on my end, but for some reason I can't download anything from FileFront.   :nervous: :nervous:

Turn off download accelerators.

If someone else can mirror it fine, but I don't have another hosting option easily available.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: jr2 on April 30, 2008, 10:03:33 am
You using Firefox?  If so, choose "save to disk" if you are using flashget.. basically, use the built-in Firefox downloader, not another one.  or just use IE temporarily... grab the IE Tab (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1419) extension and use that in FF to run IE through FF, it should work.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mustang19 on April 30, 2008, 11:01:56 am
I was waiting for some feedback about the current cutscene, which may or may not be improved.

I didn't know of the other problems you mentioned. I can do nothing for the Nicolas' nameplate and the bitmap.


I'm otherwise engaged right now, but the cutscene looks fine to me as-is. It's doubtful me or anyone else will take it up before the end of May, if that's you deadline. I say it's good to go.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on April 30, 2008, 02:28:56 pm
I'll try to do something tomorrow, I'll eventually post the result on Friday.

How's the voice acting going?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Tinman on May 01, 2008, 04:17:58 am

How's the voice acting going?


sleeping... i will contact Mongoose and Mad bomber for their files,
E1M1 to E1M4 are almost done

overall about 40% is done
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Koth on May 01, 2008, 11:09:47 am

How's the voice acting going?


sleeping... i will contact Mongoose and Mad bomber for their files,
E1M1 to E1M4 are almost done

overall about 40% is done

*starts whistling innocently* I'll should have finished my stuff by monday. Sorry for the delay.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Macfie on May 01, 2008, 04:00:41 pm
Played through the current warzone 4/25 version.  noted a couple of problems.
E1M2 GTD Valius has no nameplate
GTD Kirosi has no name plate in any mission
E3M5 an Aeolus cruiser has GTCV Coriana
Had a problem with engine glows throughout the campaign.  Any ships that came in after the initial arrival had no engine glows.  May just be a problem with the build I'm using.
Also I have a credits mission that I down loaded from the forum.  I looked at it and it seems ok will include along with a modified campaign file.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 02, 2008, 01:29:05 pm
Thanks :)

Had a problem with engine glows throughout the campaign.  Any ships that came in after the initial arrival had no engine glows.  May just be a problem with the build I'm using.

I experience the same problem when using a 3.6.10 Inferno build...must have something to do with recent builds.


I'm sorry, I didn't have time...I hope to modify the file by Sunday.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on May 07, 2008, 07:57:31 pm
Played through the current warzone 4/25 version.  noted a couple of problems.
E1M2 GTD Valius has no nameplate
GTD Kirosi has no name plate in any mission
E3M5 an Aeolus cruiser has GTCV Coriana
Had a problem with engine glows throughout the campaign.  Any ships that came in after the initial arrival had no engine glows.  May just be a problem with the build I'm using.
Also I have a credits mission that I down loaded from the forum.  I looked at it and it seems ok will include along with a modified campaign file.

-The Valius nameplate I will add.  It must have been missed.
-The Kirosi has a nameplate file in the maps, so it just must not have actually been added in FRED.  I'll see about doing that too.
-That cruiser issue sounds oddly familiar, but again should be easy enough to correct.
-The engine glows is a build-related problem.

This brings up a good point:  before reporting a problem, test in 3.6.9 AND whichever 3.6.10 build you may be using.  3.6.10-only problems should be reported in mantis; 3.6.9 problems should be reported here (this is to eliminate things that are a problem with unstable builds as opposed to campaign issues).

I should be able to get those issues patched up within the next week, work and inlaw visits permitting.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Admiral Nelson on May 07, 2008, 08:00:30 pm
Note that the Orion nameplates won't work if you have the beta MediaVps installed.  The filename is changing, and that change will have to be mirrored in every mission featuring an Orion.  I have not done this yet, since the MediaVPs aren't final, and I don't to update filenames more than once.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on May 07, 2008, 08:08:02 pm
Note that the Orion nameplates won't work if you have the beta MediaVps installed.  The filename is changing, and that change will have to be mirrored in every mission featuring an Orion.  I have not done this yet, since the MediaVPs aren't final, and I don't to update filenames more than once.

In that case, I'm only adjusting the one mission with the missing nameplate.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: blowfish on May 07, 2008, 08:50:35 pm
Couldn't you do the replacement for both textures?  You would get a warning somewhere, but it wouldn't crash the game.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on May 29, 2008, 01:18:58 am
Mobius or Mustang, can you post the cutscene?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 29, 2008, 12:36:19 pm
It's up to Mustang as I have INFA and other FSCRP campaigns in my to-do list...

Voice acting is ok, why wouldn't we wait for the voice files?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: MP-Ryan on May 29, 2008, 02:07:47 pm
It's up to Mustang as I have INFA and other FSCRP campaigns in my to-do list...

Voice acting is ok, why wouldn't we wait for the voice files?


Are they going to be done in the next six months?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Tinman on May 29, 2008, 03:11:40 pm
It's up to Mustang as I have INFA and other FSCRP campaigns in my to-do list...

Voice acting is ok, why wouldn't we wait for the voice files?


Are they going to be done in the next six months?

i hope so, schools over in a few days and then the voice actors will do their work, so - hopefully - 90% will be done until mid-August, but the last 10% are always the hardest and if voice acting is not ready in December I will vote for a pre-release without voice files
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on May 30, 2008, 03:09:30 pm
Blaise Russel's not active, should we recruit more people to fill the missing roles?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: CaptJosh on May 30, 2008, 04:37:18 pm
I'd like to voice act, but I need to find a dynamic microphone first. Condenser mics, which basically is any cheap computer microphone, and a lot of the more pricey ones as well, pick up to much ambient noise.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mustang19 on June 09, 2008, 04:05:10 pm
Mobius or Mustang, can you post the cutscene?

I don't know if this is the latest, but I found it on my hard drive.

Hosted to mediafire. (http://www.mediafire.com/?u1zo0xicddq)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on June 16, 2008, 11:09:28 am
Hello guys!

I have been playing around with show-subtitle and images...I think we can combine these two effects to boost the cutscene. Creating an image with a black background and writing text on it should be enough to get a nice cutcene effect ready to use.

When using show-subtitle, go for <image name> instead of writing a text. :)
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: blowfish on June 16, 2008, 11:35:48 am
A little note about show-subtitle and images (you may already know this), is that if the image has no alpha channel, it is displayed with additive blending (eg. darker colors are more transparent).  If the image has an alpha channel, it is just displayed.  Just thought I'd point this out.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on June 16, 2008, 11:55:34 am
Forgive my ignorance but I'd like to know more about this...

My test images are using a black background, is it good?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: blowfish on June 16, 2008, 11:58:53 am
If they have no alpha channel, then its fine.  The problem only arises when you have an image with a black background and an alpha channel.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on June 16, 2008, 12:01:06 pm
What's an alpha channel? Is it something you can set/change with Photoshop?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: blowfish on June 16, 2008, 12:02:24 pm
It is.  It sets the transparency of the image.  What format are you saving as?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on June 16, 2008, 12:07:06 pm
Photoshop file for now. I want to use images like in JAD("The End", "To Be Continued..."). How do I make the black bg transparent?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: blowfish on June 16, 2008, 12:14:42 pm
You have a choice.  You can go the alpha channel route or the no alpha channel route.  If you want no alpha channels, make the background black and save as 24 bit tga, jpeg, or DDS with no alpha (not sure how).  Any color but solid white will be partially transparent, however.  If you want to go the alpha channel route, delete the black background (make sure your photoshop file has a transparent background (you should see that checkerboard), and save as 32 bit tga or DDS with alpha.  This will yield slightly larger files, however.  Oh, and when I say save, I mean when you export for use in-game (probably keep the PSD files since they can be edited).
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on June 16, 2008, 12:23:54 pm
Where do I set/check the alpha value in PS? I'll go for the first option since I had to modify an imported pic...

What does PS set by default?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: blowfish on June 16, 2008, 12:27:22 pm
So you want to go the alpha channel route?  Well, when you create a new photoshop file, you should get an option for transparent background.  Select it.  You can create text in ps pretty easily, but if you need to use imported picts, copy the contents into a new file and use the magic wand tool to select and delete the background.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on June 16, 2008, 12:31:16 pm
Uhm, I'll let you know...possibly in another thread...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mustang19 on June 17, 2008, 03:55:42 am
If you want no alpha channels, make the background black and save as 24 bit tga, jpeg, or DDS with no alpha (not sure how).

IIRC 24 bit images have no alpha channel. That's the whole point of 32-bit; 32-bit images have no additional color information, just an 8 bit alpha channel added onto a normal 24 bit image.

So IMO it'd be easier to just go into Microsoft Paint and make the background into FreeSpace's transparent color (a shade of green) and then use the picture. I think JAD did this for the "to be continued" image. But whatever works.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on June 18, 2008, 01:30:57 pm
JAD's "To Be Continued" and "The End" use black backgrounds, that's why I asked in the first place.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Sir T on July 24, 2008, 09:20:45 am
i hope so, schools over in a few days and then the voice actors will do their work, so - hopefully - 90% will be done until mid-August, but the last 10% are always the hardest and if voice acting is not ready in December I will vote for a pre-release without voice files

I know I've done a few voices for Warzone but if you don't mind the same voice for 2 characters I could do another if you wanted.

Just offering.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: jr2 on July 28, 2008, 12:27:27 pm
Modify the pitch of the voice... should make it a bit different, no?  Perhaps speed it up a hair or slow it down a tad, too.  good idea?
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mobius on August 12, 2008, 08:46:06 am
As I said in other threads I won't be able to work on FS projects for a while... :(
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: blowfish on November 09, 2009, 09:36:27 pm
There may come a day when spambots rule the earth.




But it is not this day.  Reported.
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Thaeris on November 09, 2009, 09:50:15 pm
Now for wrath, now for ruin, and a red dawn!

Seriously. Once that toolbag is perma-banned/IP-banned, will the mods delete those links? I'd like to think so...
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Mongoose on November 09, 2009, 10:55:46 pm
The spambot's been wiped from the face of the forums, so yes. :p
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Aardwolf on November 21, 2009, 12:16:13 am
The thread got needlessly bumped.

But now, it looks like it's blowfish's fault! YAY!
Title: Re: Warzone
Post by: Droid803 on November 21, 2009, 12:25:40 am
No, now it looks like your fault...kinda.