Home » PLAYER'S HQ 1.13 » JA2 Complete Mods & Sequels » UC/DL 1.13 & AFS » UC-1.13 Public Beta Discussion 1 (2009/10/29 to 2010/10/16)
|
|
Re: UC-1.13 Public Beta Discussion 1 (2009/10/29 to --/--/--)[message #261716] |
Mon, 06 September 2010 03:22   | |
| tazpn
|
 |
Messages:99
Registered:December 2007
Location: CA, USA |
|
|
|
First thanks to all for doing these conversions it has added quite to replays.
I've only played a little but its been mostly bug free for me. I've never played UC completely before so I cannot compare before/after behaviors.
My first report:
1. Bruce - Also had the dollar difference reported previously $2100 vs $1300 vs $1000.
2. Bruce - If I try to purchase the Commando Vest the game Assert Fails on me. Specifically, the item does not seem to be in Bruce's inventory.
3. Bruce / Miranda - Crash when returning Miranda and talking Bruce it fails. Specifically, the crepaton report does not seem to be in Bruce's inventory.
4. Port Kip Gun Shop - Should they be selling items because I just get dialog but cannot activate any sort of shop interface.
I'm using the latest trunk SVN and built the game exe myself. Mostly vanilla settings but I added my own mod for speeding up the clock when in battle to reduce time watching AI make its turns.
I'm assuming this is a problem in configuring the UC 1.13 folders. I did not follow instructions completely since I do not want to put NAS into my core directories. Instead I modified the vconfig as such "PROFILES = SlfLibs, Vanilla, v113, UC, NAS, NAS113, UC113NAS, UserProf" since the right most profiles are searched first for files I'm assuming that should be about the correct order.
After some investigation I think the problem is NIV. There is a check for UsingNewInventorySystem() when loading merc data and if so it will clear the inventory of all mercs including NPCs like Bruce. I dont see an inventory xml file for Bruce in the NPCInventory directory so the jacket and report are not added.
I've worked around the problem in this playthough by creating missing gift items and putting them in inventory rather than asserting and failing.
Edit: More investigation says that the problem is the tags in the MercStartingGear.xml. Removing those tags completely will ensure that Bruce (and other NPCs get appropriate items). I'm guessing this means I really must use the NAS branch only when building from source and not trunk since I assume those changes are related to that code.
[Updated on: Mon, 06 September 2010 03:55] by Moderator |
|
|
|
| | | | | | |
|
Re: UC-1.13 Public Beta Discussion 1 (2009/10/29 to --/--/--)[message #261800] |
Mon, 06 September 2010 22:42 | |
| Wil473
|
 |
Messages:2840
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada |
|
|
|
The russian optics are supposed to be slightly better in some regards, durability and draw AP mostly. However with the NAS hybrid allowing the mounting of western optics on Russian gear this is making less sense. I've actually been waiting for Headrock's NCTH stuff to be implemented, mostly because his system relates directly a scope's stated magnification with in-game effect. (read: I've been putting off redoing the optics again.)
Now some specifics:
- the Bizon and other Russian SMG's based on the AK have been given the general attachment characteristics of their AK assault rifle contemporaries.
- With NAS, I've actually been a bit more "liberal" with which RIS equipped guns can take 4x optics such as the battle scope and ACOG. Basically there are only three optic's RIS: full length, short, and reflex only (used to add the reflex onto ACOG and now sniper scopes). With the RIS scope rings, you should be able to mount the 10x sniper scope onto a MP7. With the right RIS scope ring, you can add a reflex sight to take the edge off the AP penalties the 10x scope imposes.
- The KORSAK-1 is not comparable with the basic mount on every gun laser sight, instead its capabilities are similar to those of the big LAM's that require a RIS mount.
EDIT:
- I couldn't decide if the 6x PSO-P was a specialized "sniper" or more common "tactical" scope. It is sold for the RSA mount in real life instead of just the SVD mount. The Western 6x however functions as the entry level sniper scope.
[Updated on: Mon, 06 September 2010 22:48] by Moderator |
|
|
|
| |
|
Re: UC-1.13 Public Beta Discussion 1 (2009/10/29 to --/--/--)[message #261820] |
Mon, 06 September 2010 23:54 | |
| Wil473
|
|
Messages:2840
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada |
|
|
|
The logic behind the AP-to-fire penalty is based on the AP being some kind of vague unit of time and effort (at least that is how I read the English documentation) to perform an action. Most attachments I envision as changing the weight and balance of a weapon, therefore the increased AP-to-fire, which I envision as including the effort to support each shot.
Now the pistol sound suppressor, in general causes large proportional changes to weight and balance, therefore has those big penalties. This notwithstanding all the AR-15's it fits onto.
The biggest penalties are reserved for the Metal Storm three round underslung launcher.
I still need to think of penalties for the LAM's and Reflex sights, both of which are reputed to lower the effort needed to aim a weapon.
EDIT: Did a quick look at the AP costs, here are the modifications for the randomly selected pistol, the MP-446 Viking, imposed by the sound suppressor.
Un-modified: 7 ready / 21 per shot calculated
Sound Suppressor (25% ready /15% shot penalty): 8.75 / 24.15 or when rounded for game purposes 2 / 3 AP penalties
Not too bad.
Now the Reflex Sight (which does not directly fit the MP-446) does almost nullify these penalties, with 20% draw / 15% shot reductions. With the Under-barrel RIS Bridge Mount's penalties factored in (10%/5% penalties) you get a 10% reduction to both draw and shot. However, with the RIS Bridge Mount you can mount the Advance Reflex Sight with slightly greater draw/shot AP reduction, plus Aimed-shot (scope type) and General To-Hit (LAM) bonus.
Essentially I cannot bring myself to completely penalize the use of attachments. That or I am sub-consciously creating my ideal of a rich-man's world where the more you spend the better the gear...
EDIT2: also took a look at the .ini's, it seems I haven't taken advantage of the last available options to change how scopes work (also by Headrock if I remember correctly). This unused option would base each additional aim click on a fraction of draw cost if fully implemented (instead of 1 AP per click). If there is demand, I could quickly knock together an alternate scope system, with lower single-shot costs (weapons.xml can still be modified in Excel en-mass). Only require one or two XML's be overwritten.
[Updated on: Tue, 07 September 2010 01:26] by Moderator |
|
|
|
| | | | |
|
Re: UC-1.13 Public Beta Discussion 1 (2009/10/29 to --/--/--)[message #261933] |
Wed, 08 September 2010 00:51 | |
| Wil473
|
|
Messages:2840
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada |
|
|
|
Golden - What are the specifics of the version of the UC-Hybrid mod (the date based revision code please) and 1.13 ("official"/SVN, NAS, one of the various SCI's) you are running into the crash with? And to confirm, you are crashing when trying to go to the subway from A9.
If, and only if, the combination of UC Hybrid and 1.13 mods is reasonable, do you have a savegame just before the crash?
scope100 - if I remember correctly you are playing the CFSS version, on the current "official"/SVN release of 1.13 right?
- If so, then the dentonator issue can be fixed with the XMLEditor.
- I am not aware of G13_B2 having a chronic issue with map entry. How frequent is it? I've been using the basement recruitment office to test a few things recently, so far no problems with appearing beyond the defined corridors and rooms.
Sound Suppressor Penalties:
Without a set definition of what perciesly we can take from reality to give us a weapon's AP costs there is going to be disagreement. Which is ok as long as the modder is internally consistent in application. In my case, I'm thinking that the change in bulk/mass will adversly affect the overall firing of the gun, as well as draw. The problem with JA2 is that we only have the Draw (ready), and Shots/4 turns (ignoring burst and autofire for the moment). I've bundled all factors I think are worthwhile in the use of a weapon, aside from draw in to Shots/4 turns (which is of course modified by the General AP penalty under contention here).
Now that being said, I am considering that the draw impact is too low compared to the other use of weapon AP costs. Specifically the General AP penalties being imposed by the sound suppressor and grenade launchers may be too high in general, instead of the draw penalties being too low.
More so after reviewing the presently unused .ini options related to aiming and draw cost. One annoyance I've had with JA2 is that switching between targets cost the same 1 AP regardless of weapon or attachments. This is something the unused .ini options mitigates to some degree.
The Reliablity penalty: though specifics are lost in memory, probably on the forum here though, some time ago it was generally decided that in the case of some suppressors there were pressure and/or other effects thought to be detrimental to the operation of some gun. As a result in stock official JA2 1.13, the AR suppressor (renamed Intermediate Cartridge Suppressor in UC-1.13) has a -1 reliablity penalty. Some AR's have a valve that needs to be set when used with a suppressors, others do not, that's about my only research on the matter.
Anyways I've spent some time working on an alternate system for firing costs using Headrock's last published efforts to improve gun stuff in game:
- increased the shots/4 turns for all guns again by 15% (meaning guns cost 15% less to fire).
- your first level of aiming costs 1/5 Draw cost (in general bigger guns cost more to start aiming)
- each level of aiming cost more (diminishing returns), however the values I'm using are lower than those found in the stock .ini
AP_FIRST_CLICK_AIM_SCOPE = 2 vs 4 (in original)
AP_SECOND_CLICK_AIM_SCOPE = 3 vs 5
AP_THIRD_CLICK_AIM_SCOPE = 4 vs 6
AP_FOURTH_CLICK_AIM_SCOPE = 5 vs 7
AP_FIFTH_CLICK_AIM_SCOPE = 6 vs 8
AP_SIXTH_CLICK_AIM_SCOPE = 7 vs 9
AP_SEVENTH_CLICK_AIM_SCOPE = 8 vs 10
AP_EIGHTTH_CLICK_AIM_SCOPE = 9 vs 11
- cutting the pistol sound suppressor General AP penalty from 15% to 5% (leaving Draw as is). Something similar will be done to other sound suppressors.
- simplified/made consistent some scope effects (ie. all 4x scopes give the same aim bonus now)
- simplified the tunnel vision penalties to only 25%, 50%, 75% for low magnification sights, tactical scopes and sniper scopes respectively. So while all 4x scopes give you a aim bonus, the ones regarded as tactical scopes have 50% tunnel vision, while the ones treated as sniper scopes give 75% tunnel vision. This is something that has needed to be done for a while because other angles don't work well in JA2.
EDIT: Golden, saw you're 2nd post. I'm going to suggest starting with getting the basic Jagged Alliance 2 v.1.13 mod working first (as everything else requires that to be installed and working first). From there the install changes based on which version of UC-1.13 you are using.
EDIT2: While I remember being in agreement with the reasoning for the -1 reliablity for the IC/AR sound suppressor (well I didn't take the effort to remove it over all this time), I can see an argument to have it removed from the Hi-power Ammo suppressor:
- old-fashion Battle rifles tend to be tougher weapons for these more powerful cartridges
- how would the action of a bolt-action rifle be noticably affected by a sound suppressor?
[Updated on: Wed, 08 September 2010 01:04] by Moderator |
|
|
|
| | | | | | | |
|
Re: UC-1.13 Public Beta Discussion 1 (2009/10/29 to --/--/--)[message #262070] |
Fri, 10 September 2010 00:56 | |
| Wil473
|
|
Messages:2840
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada |
|
|
|
Thanks Hairysteed, fixed the RPK's, KRISS, CAR-15.
Neither FAMAS in UC-113NAS can take a C-mag, though it may show up as a valid attachment in OAS viewed in the XMLEditor. Looking at the manufacture's website, it looks like I am going to have to revisit the C-Mags like I did in the end with all the scopes.
The M16A4 duplication is intentional as one of them is not buyable, but is placed in maps with the Modified M203 as a default attachment, approximating the M16/Modified M203 combo from original Urban Chaos.
I'm not sure why there is both a G3 and G3A3 in-game. When I build CFSS v2 (A.K.A. DL-113NAS and Folding Stock NAS), there are going to be a lot of duplicates as all guns, armour, and LBE's in the original 350 item slots are going to be non-buyable copies the common item slots. This way once I produce new AIM gear selection for the vanilla campaign, I don't have to replicate the work for the DL campaign.
Good point about the foregrips. Using the alternate aiming system avaialbe, where draw costs impact the cost of the first aiming click, I can go with 0 draw impact, or a very small bonus (AP reduction) to draw.
Due to starting a new game for the testing of the new AP system I haven't gotten far enough to have rifles yet, but so far pistols and SMG's seem to getting an extra shot or two over the old system.
Now comes a rather hard problem. NAS allows for multiple attachments and enforced appearance of inseparable default attachments. This in turn seems to mean the end of "built-in" attachments via the attachment's stats being applied directly to the weapon, however if OAS compatibility is desired you end up needing to keep the the "old fashion" built in attachments. Or the following options:
1) Maintaining two seperate sets of XML's one for NAS one for OAS? I've neglected OAS for a while now, but did look into how easy it would be to generate a new OAS attachments.xml from the NAS XML's. Turns out this is easy enough as I can open up the NAS XML in Excel and quickly sort for the data I need. Unfourtunatley I then have to go back and edit back in all the stats for "built-in" attachments.
2) Pseudo-OAS, basically NAS with only four "regular" attachment slots, plus some attachment slots only for use by "built-in" attachments.
3) Dropping OAS compatibility. As it is now highly probable that the next major "official" v1.13 will incorporate NAS, this option is avaialble. This is what happened to OIV compatibility when NIV became mainstream.
|
|
|
|
| | | |
|
Re: UC-1.13 Public Beta Discussion 1 (2009/10/29 to --/--/--)[message #262305] |
Sun, 12 September 2010 04:05 | |
| Wil473
|
|
Messages:2840
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada |
|
|
|
scope100 - the CTD you are experiencing I think is related to the JA2.exe. I think the current code base has it fixed (NAS 0.61B, MP Beta, etc...) For what it is worth, several of the non-official JA2 v1.13 projects have this and other bugs fixed.
C-Mags on Bullpups - yup, that's why I dropped them from the two FAMAS AR's in UC-1.13NAS, but then again they were allowable attachments in the prior CFSS version of UC-1.13. Since they make one for the AUG, there is a market for fitting them to Bullpup rifles. In theory the "M4/M16" magazine should fit most STANAG bullpup mag wells.
I am thinking of the follwing exceptions, due to visible extra bits of plastic that look like they will interfere:
STK SAR-21's
FN F2000's
Also, while the FAMAS G2 is STANAG compatible, the F1 uses a proprietary magazines (25 rounds) and I'm presuming magazine well. The problem is, can I justify not giving it .223 C-mag compatibility in-game as I don't have a proprietary 25 round magazine specifically for it...
It is my great hope that once Headrock is ready to move on from NCTH to HAM 4.x, that the magazine system he proposed is sucessful and easy to implement...
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Re: UC-1.13 Public Beta Discussion 1 (2009/10/29 to --/--/--)[message #262355] |
Sun, 12 September 2010 20:49 | |
| Wil473
|
|
Messages:2840
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada |
|
|
|
Ok, I think I know how to take care of the FAMAS F1. I've figured out a way to do all of the following together:
- Add 25 round .223Rem magazine
- Add 24 round 5.45x18mm Machine Pistol magazine (for OTs-23 "Drotik")
- not disturb other items
How:
Right now there are three .223Rem and four 5.45x18mm magazine definitions. To accomodate the 25 round FAMAS F1 magazine, I will swap the magazine definition slots between the two calibres. I'm dropping 5.45x18mm HP rounds in favour of just making this calibre only available as an AP round (this round dispite its very low power, it has a reputation as an unintentional AP round).
Results:
- FAMAS F1 will not take a C-Mag adapter, but will have a proprietary magazine that is 25% bigger than the standard CAR-16/M16 magazine
- FAMAS G2 will take the 5.56x45mm C-Mag adapter (along with the SA80's and 30 round AUG's, this covers the bullpup weapons in 5.56x45mm that may take the adapter)
- new semi-PDW Machine Pistol for early game in the form of the OTs-32 (crap range though)
- new 9x18mm (not sure if it is going to be PM, PMM or both) Machine Pistol in the form of the OTs-33 (same image as the OTs-32, basically the Stechkin APS but with underbarrell RIS)
So far I've created the BigImage for the OTs-32/33 by using the Tokarev TT-33 (by Coolberg) as a starting point. It will take some time but at the very least I'll be getting some more variety out of the existing calibres.
EDIT: a concern raised in the SCI thread about the RPO-A graphics had me doing some research. It turns out that the graphic is actually a RPO-M (not A). This actually opens up an opportunity. Right now you have the launcher with pre-attached rocket, this is the only way to achieve the unitary RPO-A. There are some inconsistencies with pricing as the launcher currently has the same value with or without the rocket attached. However since the RPO-M has a reusable firing unit, I can buy/sell the seperated components with little room for exploit. Indeed if you sell the inexpensive launcher with the round attached, you are suffering a loss. Importantly, this change requires little in the way of testing, just some new text, and a pair of graphics (modified version of Coolberg's RPO-M).
[Updated on: Tue, 14 September 2010 19:47] by Moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: UC-1.13 Public Beta Discussion 1 (2009/10/29 to --/--/--)[message #262690] |
Wed, 15 September 2010 17:28 | |
| JP'TR
|
 |
Messages:104
Registered:April 2009
Location: Germany |
|
|
|
wil473scope100 - the CTD you are experiencing I think is related to the JA2.exe. I think the current code base has it fixed (NAS 0.61B, MP Beta, etc...) For what it is worth, several of the non-official JA2 v1.13 projects have this and other bugs fixed.
thanks wil
but i'm still a bit confused, the link in ur signature is not the actual testing object?
Should i use Tais SCI Packs for play? are these the newest?
U guys realy should do some organisation, as an outstanding person its nearly impossible to follow whats going on here. (ofcourse also a good sign that a lot is going on 
but would be nice if u can tell me, should/can i update my ja2.exe on my running game (svn1227, cfss, UC113) and should i keep reporting bugs i see, or it is senseless because my version is not up2date.
greetz
[Updated on: Wed, 15 September 2010 17:29] by Moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: UC-1.13 Public Beta Discussion 1 (2009/10/29 to --/--/--)[message #262796] |
Thu, 16 September 2010 21:42 | |
| Wil473
|
|
Messages:2840
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada |
|
|
|
Well, my signiture leads to the version that is associated with the so-called official v1.13. The problem is, we're at a point where the official version seems to be more buggy compared to the unofficial projects. Still as someone who believes that words have meaning, I will continue to refer to the Combined Folding Stock System version as the "official" face of UC-1.13 Hybrid for v1.13 despite not working on it for a while. I should note that there has similarly been no new "official" v1.13 JA2.exe since CFSS was released; all new coding is presently in behind closed doors testing, or in unofficial side projects that have access to the new code base. This is not the first time that unofficial .exe's have been more stable than the "official" publically available .exe. I suggested one of the newer .exe's (such as that included with Tais' SCI) because it does fix the problem you ran into.
What I seem to be actively at work on is UC-1.13 for New Attachment System (Beta 0.61). Once they get around to making an "offical" version of v1.13 public with NAS capability and the bug fixes, then I'll change my signiture. (I'll have to also quickly produce a NAS enabled version of DL-1.13 and Folding Stock.)
As far as coordination: there is none, and I do not believe there is any need for it. These are all independent projects. My releases are about 20MB in size, which means I'm more inclined to upload full releases instead of patches. Tais' SCI's are "unofficial" repackagings of existing mods, with everying needed in once archive (spanned in UC-1.13NAS' case). If it were up to me, I wouldn't be uploading these big archives too frequently, but that is of course Tais' independent decision.
That being said, there is a new release being finished up right now, and I believe Tais is wanting to do a SCI of this one specifically. To help with this, my final testing will involve overwriting a SCI install with the new version and seeing how many different files are needed to get the SCI's MP-Beta .exe to run the Hybrid correctly (so far as I've been informed it is one line in one file).
As far as bug reporting, there are things in CFSS that probably are still in UC-1.13NAS. There was little feedback from that release, so by all means keep reporting.
[Updated on: Thu, 16 September 2010 21:45] by Moderator |
|
|
|
| | | | |
|
Re: UC-1.13 Public Beta Discussion 1 (2009/10/29 to --/--/--)[message #262940] |
Sat, 18 September 2010 03:55 | |
| Wil473
|
|
Messages:2840
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada |
|
|
|
The ammo box graphics do everything I want them to: convey the sense that they are retail boxes, differentiate between shogun, pistol, rifle, PDW, and AMR ammo, while still being more generic than the ones I considered using from IoV/DBB. They stay till someone supplies me with better graphics that accomplish these functions.
The LMG's fitting the combat pack but not slings is a mistake. The intention is that select bigger guns (like the bigger LMG's) cannot fit the sling but may be stored in a backpack slot. The mistake occured when I had second thoughts about the Medical/Tool Kit only fitting the backpack slot and changed it so that it combat pack slot to take one of that size. Did a quick fix, now so that size 13 (weapons only) can only fit backpacks again (or be in hand). Medical/Tool Kit now uses a different size, though on reflection, I think I unintentially set these two kits to now be slingable.
By the way, I just uploaded 2.7, though I still need to make it fully compatible with the MP-Beta that Tais is using.
|
|
|
|
| | | |
| Pages (13): [ 11 ] |
  |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Nov 26 06:12:44 EET 2020
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01624 seconds
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
