Home » MODDING HQ 1.13 » v1.13 Feature Requests » Reloading and inventory manipulation & misc improvements
Reloading and inventory manipulation & misc improvements[message #345075] Fri, 15 April 2016 11:07 Go to next message

Registered:February 2015
Location: West Yorkshire, United Ki...
Just a little thing that would increase the depth of 1.13s LBE systems. If my merc has for example, a magazine in their vest and one in their pack (not rucksack), should it not cost more APs for them to reach around to their back, and less to reach into a pouch on their chest? This might not be possible due to (as far as I can tell) reload AP costs being tied to the weapon its self. This would also extend to people playing with AP inventory costs, with taking items from different LBE slots (Chest/back/legs) having different costs. The size of the item and the merc's dexterity could also factor in idk.
Anyway, if it's possible to have the AP cost of reloading change dynamically, an additional improvement would be dry and tactical reloads, where applicable. For example, I have a merc reload his M4 with 1 of 30 rounds remaining, he only has to spend say 90% of the regular AP cost, only having to spend the full amount if the weapon is run empty. This is due to not having to cycle the action to chamber a round. It could be argued however, that the act of retaining a mag, when compared to cycling the action is equally costly.
The depth to that can go even further, with AR-platform weapons having a much smaller penalty for dry reloads than say an AK, due to bolt hold-open and bolt release. If you wanna get really finicky, a character with a low enough marksmanship stat (Probably the closest indicator of firearms knowledge in general) would opt to use the charging handle instead, denying them this bonus.
Furthermore, the AP cost could be influenced by the size of the magazine being loaded. A drum or C-mag is going to be a bit more cumbersome to deal with than a regular 30-round mag.
Open bolt weapons would be generally exempt from this, however full-auto ones would incur an increased cost if the magazine is run dry firing in full-auto.

The chambered round is also something worth thinking about, though that I can see being technically difficult. I was thinking, simply increase the capacity of closed-bolt weapons by 1, and a dry reload will have it go up to 30 instead of 31. The problem comes with tactical reloads and having that one round carry over - you'd have to first establish whether there are rounds left in the gun, then deduct one from the magazine being removed and add it to the number in the magazine being inserted. Once again, open-bolt weapons would be exempt.

One more feature I request is being able to clear weapon jams by removing and re-inserting the magazine. It'd be costly AP-wise, but it would be a relatively surefire way to clear it rather than having the merc possibly run out of APs in a turn trying to do so in the traditional way. To justify this, I take the method currently used as "tap, rack, bang", while unloading and reloading would represent the merc making the effort to investigate and take proper action to clear the malfunction. Off the top of my head I can't remember whether the act of unloading a gun costs APs but if not, that'd have to be changed.

While I'm here, might as well throw this out there; In reality, most guns of the same calibre don't share magazines (There are many exceptions ofc, mainly NATO and Warsaw pact weapons). The system I have in mind would basically have magazines treated as an attachment, with each bullet being an attachment to the magazine, sorta like the grenade launchers. There are major obstacles with such a system though; reloading as it is now would just have the merc try and load a single loose round into the current mag I imagine; there's also the added tedium of going through and loading each one, which would ideally be circumvented by more sector inventory management options.
This would remove the necessity of drum and C-mag adapters (Which are currently needed to limit weapons to their "correct" capacities, otherwise you could load 100 rounds with 4 30-round mags), and allow for different size magazines in general, eg. 60-round AR mags, extended pistol mags etcetera and allow for their effects on weight and handling to be properly represented.
Plus it'd simplify some aspects of dry/tac reloads. Actually, now that I think about it, it makes it more complicated. Sorta.
With closed-bolt weapons, both the chamber and the magazine would have to be attachment slots to the weapon - a bullet must be in the chamber to fire. When the gun's fired, it takes a bullet from the attached magazine and puts it in the chamber slot. Yeah, I can see this being a nightmare to implement and that's without even mentioning burst or full-auto fire, or bolt/pump action weapons. Plus the number of art assets that'd have to go towards it, and mags would probably end up needing their own dedicated page on bobby ray's. Food for thought I guess.

[Updated on: Fri, 15 April 2016 11:10]

Re: Reloading and inventory manipulation & misc improvements[message #345076 is a reply to message #345075] Fri, 15 April 2016 12:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message

Registered:July 2009
Just do a forum search for NMS (New Magazine System), either of those multi page threads should explain all the issues, alternate approaches and issues those alternate approaches have and why nobody's gonna do this any time soon.

Need help or just want to kill some time? Visit the Bear's Pit IRC ChannelNote: Say 'Hi' and be patient, it may take a few minutes for someone to react.
Latest 1.13 Builds
My Inbox is for IMPORTANT stuff, NOT random queries about the game.

Re: Reloading and inventory manipulation & misc improvements[message #345078 is a reply to message #345076] Fri, 15 April 2016 13:41 Go to previous message

Registered:April 2009
Location: Germany
AP inventory costs already charges a different amount of APs for different LBE regions, and afaik it already takes weight into account. As for the bullet and 31-rds in 30-rnd mag idea, this post sums up why it is a bad idea.

Saren threw his head back and screamed in impotent fury, before falling to his throne, head in his claws, trembling in horrified disbelief.

Then he heard a faint chime as Sovereign subscribed to her ECHO channel.

If you want, you can donate to me. This will not affect how and what I code, and I will not code specific features in return. I will be thankful though.

Previous Topic: FemShep IMP voiceset
Next Topic: [Idea] Stats and Skills Rework
Goto Forum:

Current Time: Thu Mar 23 22:12:58 EET 2017

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00870 seconds