The Bears Pit: v1.13 Coding Talk » (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver)

Home » MODDING HQ 1.13 » v1.13 Coding Talk » (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver)

Show: Today's Messages :: Polls :: Message Navigator

Re: The NAS Receiver[message #303918]

Wed, 25 April 2012 23:41

dinglehopper

Messages:134
Registered:January 2008

I think you are going in the right direction, and I like where you are headed. But please allow a suggestion.

Why not break it up into three seperate bitmasks. It seems to me like by far most items go ontop of the gun, so everything you would expect to go on top should fall under one bitmask maybe called scopes and lasers or top rail or top mount or whatever. Then take the muzzle and underbarrel as a second bitmask. And finally the magwell trigger group and anything not covered by the first two (rod and spring, etc).

You are sort of doing this already, you just have them all jumbled into one large list that is going to get larger and harder to read. This way, when you add it to the xml editor, which I assume you plan to do, you can seperate it into the three areas to make it more mangable for the modders as well.

Also, you seem to be mostly describing the gun for the attachment (pistol small, nato pistol large, ak sniper, etc) but finding yourself aometimes describing the attachment for the gun (40mm gl, RIS bottom, etc). I would probably switch it to trying to describe the attachment for the gun in all cases. It will make it less confusing and you may find allow you to shrink your list because it will make the bit mapping more usable.

So for example I would do your attachments you have done already more like this with a few added to extend the example;

  
Scopes and Lasers
ISM-V-IR Aiming Module    Scope_RIS_Battle, Laser_Scope_Combo, NATO_All, Scope_All
Battle Scope, 7x          Scope_RIS_Battle, Scope_NATO_Large, Scope_Large, NATO_ALL, Scope_All 
Reflex Sight              Reflex_RIS, Reflex_NATO, NATO_All, Scope_All
Old Aimpoint Projector    HK_Only, Laser_All
Rifle LAM                 Laser_RIS_Large, Laser All, NATO_All, WP_All
PSO-1 Scope               Scope_WP_Large, Scope_WP_Sniper, WP_All, Scope_All
Laser Sight               ATTACHES_TO_ALL (have this be zero in each bitmap, and force it)
Small Scope, 2x           Scope_Small, NATO_All, WP_All, Scope_All

Muzzle and underBarrel
Duckbill                  Shotgun
Bipod                     Bipod_Normal, Bipod_All
Grippod                   Forgrip_Grippod, Bipod_Normal, Forgrip_All, Bipod_All

Magwell and Trigger
9mm drum extender         Magwell_9mm

Then let the guns pick the categories they want to subscribe to.

As for the magwell adaptors, you will just have to make an entry for every caliber (see in example above).

I have to run and didn't really get time to flesh out everything i wanted to say, let me know if you have any questions or you think i am wrong (i can handle that no prob, wife tells me it all the time and we still married). Just wanted to offer a suggestion that may help, thanks for doing this though as i think it will be a great help to the modders.

DH

[Updated on: Wed, 25 April 2012 23:44] by Moderator

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant

[Message index]

		(New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Madd_Mugsy on Wed, 25 April 2012 01:27
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: Flugente on Wed, 25 April 2012 01:45
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: Madd_Mugsy on Wed, 25 April 2012 02:21
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: Flugente on Wed, 25 April 2012 02:49
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: DepressivesBrot on Wed, 25 April 2012 18:40
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: Wil473 on Wed, 25 April 2012 18:51
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: Madd_Mugsy on Wed, 25 April 2012 20:21
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: dinglehopper on Wed, 25 April 2012 23:41
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: Madd_Mugsy on Thu, 26 April 2012 09:44
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: dinglehopper on Thu, 26 April 2012 10:05
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: Wil473 on Thu, 26 April 2012 10:07
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: dinglehopper on Thu, 26 April 2012 10:16
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: DepressivesBrot on Thu, 26 April 2012 11:31
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: dinglehopper on Thu, 26 April 2012 16:17
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: Wil473 on Thu, 26 April 2012 16:48
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: Madd_Mugsy on Thu, 26 April 2012 18:11
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: Wil473 on Thu, 26 April 2012 18:16
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: Madd_Mugsy on Fri, 27 April 2012 09:20
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: DepressivesBrot on Fri, 27 April 2012 10:32
		Re: The NAS Receiver By: JMich on Fri, 27 April 2012 10:50
		(New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Wil473 on Fri, 27 April 2012 18:19
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Madd_Mugsy on Fri, 27 April 2012 19:26
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Gambigobilla on Fri, 27 April 2012 23:54
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Madd_Mugsy on Sat, 28 April 2012 02:46
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Madd_Mugsy on Sun, 29 April 2012 21:46
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Wil473 on Sun, 29 April 2012 23:20
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Madd_Mugsy on Mon, 30 April 2012 06:11
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Flugente on Sun, 03 June 2012 14:24
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Wil473 on Sun, 03 June 2012 18:14
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Madd_Mugsy on Sun, 03 June 2012 21:58
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Flugente on Mon, 04 June 2012 01:40
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Madd_Mugsy on Mon, 04 June 2012 03:52
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Flugente on Mon, 04 June 2012 21:08
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Madd_Mugsy on Mon, 04 June 2012 21:57
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Flugente on Mon, 04 June 2012 22:08
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Madd_Mugsy on Tue, 05 June 2012 00:25
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Flugente on Tue, 05 June 2012 00:29
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Madd_Mugsy on Tue, 05 June 2012 00:34
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: DepressivesBrot on Tue, 05 June 2012 00:36
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Flugente on Tue, 05 June 2012 00:38
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Madd_Mugsy on Tue, 05 June 2012 00:43
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Flugente on Tue, 05 June 2012 01:00
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Wil473 on Thu, 07 June 2012 22:38
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Madd_Mugsy on Fri, 08 June 2012 00:20
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: alwaysfirst on Sat, 01 August 2015 19:35
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Wil473 on Sun, 02 August 2015 01:44
		Re: (New) Common Attachment Framework (new title; was The NAS Receiver) By: Wil473 on Sun, 07 April 2013 19:19

Previous Topic:	New Stealth Mechanics
Next Topic:	[IDEA] New Magazine System

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

Current Time: Fri Jan 10 10:25:39 GMT+2 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01498 seconds