Home » MODDING HQ 1.13 » v1.13 Idea Incubation Lab  » New Attachment System Alpha
Re: New Attachment System (In Development)[message #248405] Fri, 02 April 2010 17:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Faithless

 
Messages:442
Registered:October 2009
Location: The safe end of the barre...
Allright, that should be fixed if you download again now, it's a small fix really so you don't need to download it unless it really bugs you ^^
Re: New Attachment System (In Development)[message #248407] Fri, 02 April 2010 21:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Faithless

 
Messages:442
Registered:October 2009
Location: The safe end of the barre...
Urm, the problem is a little more wide spread than just the mp5's.
Underslung Grenade launchers in general seem to be a bit weird, so I'm making them their own slot.
I don't have much time today but I'll probably release some new XML's tomorrow.
It should fix any problems with the grenade launcher / bipod slot overlapping. (while there was supposed to only be one slot)
Re: New Attachment System (In Development)[message #248421] Sat, 03 April 2010 02:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Faithless

 
Messages:442
Registered:October 2009
Location: The safe end of the barre...
Another XML update, all those overlapping grenade launcher / grip slots should be fixed now.
(this was also what caused the problems with the HK5/10)
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248434] Sat, 03 April 2010 13:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Faithless

 
Messages:442
Registered:October 2009
Location: The safe end of the barre...
Uploaded 2 screens in the download post:

http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/1737/screenshot1p.pnghttp://img402.imageshack.us/img402/1428/screenshot2vsg.png

Edit: Dieter was here Smile
Edit: WarmSteel was too!

[Updated on: Sat, 03 April 2010 13:33] by Moderator

Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248435] Sat, 03 April 2010 13:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Minty

 
Messages:115
Registered:July 2009
Location: UK
WarmSteel, you might want to put up a warning.. I just tried loading a 0.31a savegame into 0.32a, and the JA process hung on the load-screen. Didn't even get a progress bar coming up.

I'm presuming it's because of the .xml reorganisation you've been doing, but it seems like you've broken savegame compatibility with the latest update.

No big deal for me, I expect such things when I download an alpha. Very Happy
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248436] Sat, 03 April 2010 13:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Faithless

 
Messages:442
Registered:October 2009
Location: The safe end of the barre...
I'll see if I can find a reason for this, I didn't think it would be a problem before.
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248437] Sat, 03 April 2010 14:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Faithless

 
Messages:442
Registered:October 2009
Location: The safe end of the barre...
This shouldn't happen. Minty could you send me your savegame please?
With it, it'll be alot easier to locate the problem.
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248438] Sat, 03 April 2010 14:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DepressivesBrot

 
Messages:3803
Registered:July 2009
Should I mention that I can load savegames from your original 0.1 exe with the recent 0.32a exe? It doesn't seem to break savegames (although I don't know exactly, as the save in question is one of my early 'order some stuff to test the concept' saves)


Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248440] Sat, 03 April 2010 14:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
usrbid

 
Messages:1552
Registered:December 2008
[color:#000099]That AKM is pimp!![/color]

[Updated on: Sat, 03 April 2010 14:21] by Moderator



Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248441] Sat, 03 April 2010 14:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Minty

 
Messages:115
Registered:July 2009
Location: UK
Sure, no worries. Give me a moment.. Signing up to mediafire now..


savegame linky

Okay.. Not sure if I've done this correctly. Let me know if I've messed anything up, this is the first time I've ever uploaded to mediafire.

Yet another edit: Oh, and I should probably mention that I've edited the .ini to allow for more units in the field.. 30 each of militia and army.

[Updated on: Sat, 03 April 2010 14:49] by Moderator

Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248472] Sun, 04 April 2010 12:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Faithless

 
Messages:442
Registered:October 2009
Location: The safe end of the barre...
Thank you for the save, it pointed out a bug when trying to verify if inseparable attachments were still valid.
Upgraded the whole system now to make it clearer, new exe is up.

EDIT: just clearer in the code, the player won't notice it.

[Updated on: Sun, 04 April 2010 13:30] by Moderator

Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248473] Sun, 04 April 2010 12:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Randok

 
Messages:324
Registered:March 2004
Quote:
JA2_EN_3111_NAS_0.32a.rar

Is it already in this version, or until the next (new version)
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248474] Sun, 04 April 2010 12:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Faithless

 
Messages:442
Registered:October 2009
Location: The safe end of the barre...
The download that's up now is a new exe. But because to the outside nothing changed except the bugs being squashed, I didn't change the version number.

Just download the exe that's now on the first page, and it should be fine.
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248475] Sun, 04 April 2010 12:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Randok

 
Messages:324
Registered:March 2004
IMHO However, you may change the letter for clarity.
Smile
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248478] Sun, 04 April 2010 14:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Minty

 
Messages:115
Registered:July 2009
Location: UK
..Yeah, changing the version number or letter might be a good idea, Warmsteel.

As I can't start a new game without crashing to desktop, and a savegame loads fine, but crashes to desktop each time I hit 9am.

Good thing I still have the old version of 0.32a I can revert back to. Sad
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248483] Sun, 04 April 2010 15:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Faithless

 
Messages:442
Registered:October 2009
Location: The safe end of the barre...
Allright, I had removed a safety check that I shouldn't have been needed anymore.
Seems like it's not that simple. I put the safety check back in and it should do the trick like before. I'll have to look into this a little more though, sadly.
Uploaded the new version with a new number.
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248524] Sun, 04 April 2010 22:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Minty

 
Messages:115
Registered:July 2009
Location: UK
Happy to report savegames are loading now. Smile

One thing I've noticed is that the Groza with the non-removable GL says it can accept a bipod (Highlighted when I hover over a bipod in sector inv), but if I try and put one on, the bipod/foregrip slot's greyed out.

Have to say, I'm absolutely LOVING the ability to pimp my guns out to unfeasable degrees. Scope/ reflex sight/ retractable stock/ R&S/ suppressor/ bipod/ laser/ magwell adaptor. Even humble AKs become a force to be reckoned with.

Once this is stable, and hopefully integrated into 1.13, I'll be looking into doing up a set of .xmls for my personal version of Possum v5. Gods, it's going to be MIGHTY! Very Happy
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248525] Sun, 04 April 2010 22:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Faithless

 
Messages:442
Registered:October 2009
Location: The safe end of the barre...
Minty
One thing I've noticed is that the Groza with the non-removable GL says it can accept a bipod (Highlighted when I hover over a bipod in sector inv), but if I try and put one on, the bipod/foregrip slot's greyed out.

This is normal, the grenade launcher prevents you from putting on the bipod.
Apparently someone who made the gun thought it was funny to be able to attach a bipod even though you can't take the GL off Very Happy
Oh well.
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248526] Sun, 04 April 2010 22:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
CptMoore

 
Messages:210
Registered:March 2009
WarmSteel can you attach several items of the same sort? Like having several plates inserted into armor?
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248527] Sun, 04 April 2010 22:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Faithless

 
Messages:442
Registered:October 2009
Location: The safe end of the barre...
If it has no other restrictions in the NASIncompatibleItems.xml and you have 2 slots that can take the same attachment, in theory you could attach any number of the same item. (this is optional for every attachment)
With the current xml's however, it shouldn't happen.
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248528] Sun, 04 April 2010 22:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Minty

 
Messages:115
Registered:July 2009
Location: UK
Now that's a funky idea, CptMoore. Instead of DBB's cludgy "Merge two plates then stick em in a slot" method.. We could just have two plate-slots on certain armours that IRL can take plates both front and back.
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248534] Mon, 05 April 2010 03:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mauser

 
Messages:780
Registered:August 2006
Location: Bavaria - Germany
looks mighty good so far what i can see Warmsteel!

how stable is your code so far? how many issues still to be adressed before you reckon it fit for release?

i have a little idea that i want to discuss.

how about having one attachment slot to exclusively determine the type of magazine a gun can use?

for example: most 9mm smg/5.56 guns can take both 30 round mags and 100 round beta-c mags.

now, we have for every gun one dedicated attachment slot, where we can attach certain types of (empty) magazine items, that determine the current ammo capacity for a gun. but instead making it a permanent merge like current mag adapters, the mag types can be interchanged with restrictions defined in the XMLs.
so, every gun will have to come with a default magazine type attachment. without it, every gun will be limited in mag capacity to one single round (chamber).

it

☆★GL★☆
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248543] Mon, 05 April 2010 07:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Minty

 
Messages:115
Registered:July 2009
Location: UK
Hmm.. So basically, what you're suggesting, Mauser, are removable versions of the current magwell adaptors? With all detachable magazine-fed weapons defaulting to a clipsize of 1, and the magazines simply adding 9, 19, 29 or whatver rounds to the capacity of the weapon?

Interesting idea, the only niggle I have is that the excess rounds wouldn't be removed if you removed the magazine-attachment from the weapon. Which is the reason the current magwell adaptors are non-removable.
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248547] Mon, 05 April 2010 10:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Faithless

 
Messages:442
Registered:October 2009
Location: The safe end of the barre...
Mauser

how stable is your code so far? how many issues still to be adressed before you reckon it fit for release?

I've actually thought of a few mayor design flaws yesterday night. So it might take a while.

Mauser

how about having one attachment slot to exclusively determine the type of magazine a gun can use?

I've actually thought about this before, it would make everything more flexible and it would make much more sense.
However it would require changing the way guns look for their ammo, which is probably done in alot of different places.
This makes it too big for me right now to include in NAS. It's far from undo-able, though[/quote]

Quote:
Interesting idea, the only niggle I have is that the excess rounds wouldn't be removed if you removed the magazine-attachment from the weapon. Which is the reason the current magwell adaptors are non-removable.

This wouldn't be a problem if the ammo was read from the attachment instead of from some internal thingey.
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248556] Mon, 05 April 2010 11:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Faithless

 
Messages:442
Registered:October 2009
Location: The safe end of the barre...
Can someone with knowledge about saving and loading, as well as the class OBJECTTYPE please contact me?
I need to add something to OBJECTTYPE and I'm afraid it will break stuff.

The most convenient would be in IRC.

[Updated on: Mon, 05 April 2010 12:07] by Moderator

Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248626] Tue, 06 April 2010 18:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lord Leperman

 
Messages:31
Registered:February 2006
I don't know if this has been pointed out yet, but if you put a C-mag on the SCAR-L, it loses the attachment once you switch the SCAR-L to the sniper variant and close the attachments window.

Nice work so far though! I'm really having a lot of fun with decked out guns. It's been my dream for a while to play JA like this and the only thing missing for this to be my perfect game are aimed burst and auto-fire modes. Very Happy
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248633] Tue, 06 April 2010 21:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Faithless

 
Messages:442
Registered:October 2009
Location: The safe end of the barre...
Quote:
I don't know if this has been pointed out yet, but if you put a C-mag on the SCAR-L, it loses the attachment once you switch the SCAR-L to the sniper variant and close the attachments window.

This is unavoidable, they don't fit on the new gun, and they're inseperable, so the game can't drop them.
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248651] Wed, 07 April 2010 01:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Hairysteed

 
Messages:193
Registered:December 2007
Location: Finland
I don't really get why mag adapters would have to be inseparable anyway; Why wouldn't you be able to go back to using regular mags? Razz
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248655] Wed, 07 April 2010 02:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Faithless

 
Messages:442
Registered:October 2009
Location: The safe end of the barre...
Because the people that made the adapters didn't know how to solve the technical issues that arise when you de-attach the mag adapter.
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248669] Wed, 07 April 2010 05:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Hairysteed

 
Messages:193
Registered:December 2007
Location: Finland
IIRC nothing happens when you detach a mag adapter. If you have a rifle with a 100rd magazine loaded and you take off the mag adapter it'll show 100/30 rounds. Unload the rifle and you have a 100-round mag in your hand.
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248670] Wed, 07 April 2010 06:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
usrbid

 
Messages:1552
Registered:December 2008
Hi WarmSteel, The magazine adapters (like the beta c mag) were made inseparable as a result of what Hairysteed explained, removing the magazine adapter leaves the larger size mag amount of bullets in the weapon.

This can be exploited as a cheat of sorts, the concern back then was that people would attach the magazine adapter, load the bullets in the gun, then detach the mag adapter, keep the bullets in the gun, and then attach 4 attachments to the weapon as usual. This way you can prepare most ARs to hold 100 rounds and easily make it through one or two sectors before having to reload.

The limitation of 4 attachments will be lifted with the new attachment system, as a result the restriction of making the magazine adapter inseperable should be lifted assuming that removing the mag adapter will take care of the extra rounds in the gun. I believe back then unloading the gun was a challenge, this is why inseperable was chosen as a work-around.

Taking care of the extra bullets in the weapon can be done in multiple ways, here are just some of the ideas we talked about on IRC last weekend:

- Removing of the magazine adapter automatically unloads the larger size magazine and (attempts) to put it into the soldiers inventory (and if that fails drops it to the ground). I believe this is what Warmsteel has at the moment, however we can petition to change it, now is the time for that.

- Clicking on the magazine adapter (in an attempt to remove it) first unloads the weapon and makes the players mouse cursor the larger magazine (same way as if the player unloaded the gun herself)

- Removing of the magazine adapter automatically unloads a partially full magazine of the previous larger mag size into the soldier's inventory and leaves bullets for a normal size magazine in the weapon. For example removing a 5.56mm C-Mag Adapter from a Colt M4 Commando attempts to put a 5.56mm C-Mag with 70 bullets remaining into the soldier's inventory and leaves 30 rounds in the Colt M4 Commando.

Everyone feel free to chime in and post your opinion. Warmsteel wants to do the right thing here, just needs a few pointers of what should be done.


Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248683] Wed, 07 April 2010 14:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
razer

 
Messages:26
Registered:April 2007
Location: Germany
Unload the weapon (C-Mag) and then detach the adapter, leaving zero rounds in the weapon would be most realistic. In real life you would also need to unload the gun in order to get rid of the c-mag adapter.

---------Edit------------
Will there be any penalties for overloading the gun with attachments? E.g. reflex and scope should be restricted to a few optics with ris on top. I can't imagine how a reflex sight could possibly work with a pso-1? Side by side? In a row?! To many attachments should also increase draw costs. And maybe we should get rid of the trigger group (or allow just for few weapons) as the new system could allow overpowered weapons. Are there any restrictions for trigger group and ARs yet?

[Updated on: Wed, 07 April 2010 14:09] by Moderator

Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248695] Wed, 07 April 2010 16:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DepressivesBrot

 
Messages:3803
Registered:July 2009
I would go with option 1, getting one full (or whatever status it currently has) c-mag is straigth forward and intuitive.
option 2 has potential to confuse new players/ those who don't read the change-log and option 3 adds - in my opinion- unnecessary complexity which provokes errors (like vanishing mags).

My favorite would be option 4, having actual magazines Wink (I know this is at least as complex as NAS, probably requires even more work and strongly recommend finishing NAS before even thinking about it, but I felt someone had to mention)

@ razer
1. As far as I know, c-mag adapters don't exist in real life. They are there to circumvent a limitation of the code, there is no 'like you would do in RL' in their case.

2. We should probably wait till fine-tuned xmls for NAS exist before deciding if there is a need for additional penalties. I could imagine something like small drawbacks on every attachment that don't matter with 1 or 2 but with the full array of possible attachments, a carbine gets the drawcosts of a .50 Barret or something could already do the trick.

3. Trigger groups are already tagged as scifi, then again it's a matter of tweaking the xmls to adjust balance to the new system, perhaps restrict them to certain families of rifles.


Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248712] Wed, 07 April 2010 18:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Hairysteed

 
Messages:193
Registered:December 2007
Location: Finland
razer
I can't imagine how a reflex sight could possibly work with a pso-1? Side by side? In a row?!

You wouldn't believe all the different scope mounts in the market that can mount a reflex sight on top of a scope!
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248721] Wed, 07 April 2010 18:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mauser

 
Messages:780
Registered:August 2006
Location: Bavaria - Germany
DepressivesBrot


2. We should probably wait till fine-tuned xmls for NAS exist before deciding if there is a need for additional penalties. I could imagine something like small drawbacks on every attachment that don't matter with 1 or 2 but with the full array of possible attachments, a carbine gets the drawcosts of a .50 Barret or something could already do the trick.

3. Trigger groups are already tagged as scifi, then again it's a matter of tweaking the xmls to adjust balance to the new system, perhaps restrict them to certain families of rifles.


i concurr with the notion of some kind of penaltys for overloading a gun with attachments.

question is: can this already be achieved by simply tweaking the XMls and imposing draw cost penaltys, or do we need (and can we implement) a more complex system, that influences more aspects of the game and combat?

for example, is the current influence of draw costs of a gun actually serious enough to somewhat counteract the bonuses gained from all the attachments possible to make it tactically relevant?

or do we maybe need some new value, like a "ergonomics" rating, that influences the whole handling of a weapon and thus it

☆★GL★☆
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248725] Wed, 07 April 2010 19:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DepressivesBrot

 
Messages:3803
Registered:July 2009
It's pretty difficult to solve this on a theoretical basis. You would have to find values that on one hand don't render even single attachments useless but on the other hand add up fast enough when a 'critical number' of attachments is reached, and that to an extend that can't be countered by an other attachment ( 3kg of stuff rendering your gun unwieldy should not be neglected by the draw bonus of a folding stock).

To stay with draw costs:
What are they used for? Obviously readying your weapon, HAM has aiming costs partially based on them, uhmm.. probably some check I can't remember and don't want to look through all those HDIWs to find it yet.
So is it really such a big penalty to increase them? Maybe for advancing teams changing positions every other turn, but the rest?

So something else, how about accuracy, cth, to-hit modifiers?
Accuracy is kinda minor as range seems far more important in the current system.
to-hit gets pretty big bonuses from lasers, but only up to certain ranges, so something like -5 per attachment would hurt from the 5th one upwards. But goes over the top past this range and
1) forces you to use lasers on every gun (hard, especially in the beginning when every attachment is a treasure)
2) can't be properly justified with many items (scopes, pods/grips, some small stuff)

So maybe I have been a little bit optimistic about the possibilities of the xml part.

So how about some small but effective code adjustments?
Something like attaching
    if (total weight of attachments > x% of weapons basic weight)
        then decrease effective marksmanship by y 

to the cth calculation?
If yes, flat or scaled, the higher the % the more penalty? Perhaps with a lower limit (!=0) with no penalty? some nice nonlinear function? (just a spontaneous idea)


Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248730] Wed, 07 April 2010 20:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Faithless

 
Messages:442
Registered:October 2009
Location: The safe end of the barre...
I'm a fan of:
1: increasing ready cost, but have part of it count on every shot, instead of just having to pay for the ready cost to raise the gun. (even without aiming)
2: Adding cons to every attachment. This is probably better if we can get it balanced, but I've looked around and it's very hard to think of good cons for some attachment.

One important thing though :
I may not have the time or the will to do this.


DepressivesBrot
    if (total weight of attachments > x% of weapons basic weight)
        then decrease effective marksmanship by y 

This is not a good idea in my opinion, because it would make heavy guns easier to aim.
This is weird, unless perhaps you're on full auto.
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248736] Wed, 07 April 2010 21:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DepressivesBrot

 
Messages:3803
Registered:July 2009
Quote:
I may not have the time or the will to do this.

Sure, no one presses you to do anything, you already accomplished a lot on this matter .
It's finally a theoretical discussion until we get actual feedback on what needs balancing.

Quote:
This is not a good idea in my opinion, because it would make heavy guns easier to aim.
This is weird, unless perhaps you're on full auto.

hm, yes the basic idea was that an attachment of a given mass would affect an already heavy gun less than a light one, basically a substitute for an additional 'balance' value.
However, I only know guns from a theoretic point so I could be totally off.

That said, what about a (simplified) balance system? ( just throwing around some thoughts)
If an attachment goes in front of the center of mass, it gets a positive balance modifier.
If it goes behind it, it gets a negative balance modifier. If it is installed more or less above or under the center of mass, it gets no modifier (or zero). Than the values are summed up and *somehow* (directly or indirectly) affects cth. (no matter if >0 or <0, it lowers cth if it's not 0 and the value will most likely end up positive anyway as fewer stuff goes behind center and front has stuff like gl and nades)
(yes, I am aware that 'in front of' and 'behind' aren't necessary the same for every gun, it would be a solution of the lowest common denominator except you want a complete calculation of forces and lever rules for every gun)


Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248742] Wed, 07 April 2010 22:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Faithless

 
Messages:442
Registered:October 2009
Location: The safe end of the barre...
That seems like a rather complicated system, instead of being simple.
It has to be very clear to the user what's happening.
Before doing stuff like this however, I would like to wait for a certain project someone is making.
It might just change everything completely.
Re: New Attachment System Alpha[message #248744] Wed, 07 April 2010 23:34 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Flugente

 
Messages:3461
Registered:April 2009
Location: Germany
What exactly are the drawbacks (in reality) of, say, a fully kitted-out M4 against a 'stripped' M4?

Seems to me the only drawbacks would be the higher weight (resulting in a higher drawcost), perhaps a different balance ( a bit less accuracy) and... well, the price of all the stuff.

So, wouldn't it be more realistic to counter these overpimped weapons by the price and avaibility of attachments? Problem is that you get a lot of attachments very fast... hmm, I don't know.

Another problem are the enemies attachments. So far, an enemy weapon can have a maximum of only 2 attachments (with the exeption of certain hardcoded snipers in Meduna). I mean, the enemies equipment has always been worse than yours, because in the end, you own everything you loot from those thousands of corpses. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love the idea of being able to customize my weapons more. But, as Majek pointed out long ago, this'll screw the balance even more.

Funny thing is, if i was Deidranna, it equip all my forces with contender encores and let them assualt them in whole platoons. That way, the mercs would either have to use these ridiculous guns themselves and have a really hard time, or ruin themselves by importing tons of proper ammo Smile. It would take 'em longer, at least.


Previous Topic: WF6.06-Mod_beta_english_for_JA2_1.13NIV2112 and higher
Next Topic: Combo Mod Loader for 1.13
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Mon Oct 21 08:08:12 EEST 2019

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01847 seconds