|
|
|
|
| Re: 1.13 Xml Editing[message #73659]
|
Wed, 10 May 2006 03:20  
|
|
 Corpse |
|
Messages:2
Registered:December 2005
Location: XXXX |
|
|
Quote:Originally posted by the scorpion:
don`t think we can attach one gun to the other, but one step could be to allow the tank to fire different sorts of shells for instance (mustard gas or napalm anybody?) More shells for tanks would be great but mustard gas? napalm?... you can't be serious mate. :rolleyes:
Don't see any point for AP or HESH, there are already HE so all we are missing is canister .
The tanks in the game are M60A3's by the look of them so their armament should be as follows:
- 105mm M68E1 Rifled Cannon (Main gun)
- 7.62mm NATO M240D Coax MG
- .50 BMG M85 mounted on commander's cupola.
- 66mm M239 smoke grenade launcher.
The GL smoke system consists of two 6-barrelled pods placed on opposite sides of the turret. Each barrel holds 1 66mm grenade of which there are two different types:
L8A1: Red-phosphorus smoke
M76 Smoke IR: Improved with visual and IR screening capabilities.
The minimum range of the tank gun may also need to be decreased as its current setting seems too high.
Report message to a moderator
|
Civilian
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 1.13 Xml Editing[message #73665]
|
Sun, 02 July 2006 10:58
|
|
| Headrock |
 |
Messages:1760
Registered:March 2006
Location: Jerusalem |
|
|
Starwalker said (in a topic in the issue) that this is a flat To-Hit bonus inherent to the weapon. I've had my own gripes about it. Doesn't seem to have a profound effect on the game, because the major difference in accuracy is between guns of different classes, so short-range weapons have a lower accuracy than long-range weapons (which they already kinda do even without this new tag). And even then, the difference is only about 5 at most, which is insignificant (jesus, a laser scope gives 4 times as much). Weapons of similar range seem to have, at most, a +1 or -1 variation from others of their ilk, a difference which to me seems incredibly negligible...
And to top it off, we already had a tag that did the exact same thing (flat to-hit bonus) in items.xml called ... which still, for half the weapons in the game, has a value! (it's usually -1, and 19/20 for RocketRifles, ARRs, and the OICW). Very strange.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 1.13 Xml Editing[message #73677]
|
Sun, 09 July 2006 12:18
|
|
| dmaas |
|
Messages:4
Registered:November 2002 |
|
|
Really really dumb question... I want to edit how much damage guns do. Like, make all guns twice as powerful. I believe I just need to double all the ubImpact values in Weapons.xml - is that correct?
(the description says "this has an effect on how much damage the bullets do" but it's not clear to me if that means ubImpact is *THE* damage value for a gun...)
Report message to a moderator
|
Civilian
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 1.13 Xml Editing[message #73680]
|
Mon, 10 July 2006 06:57
|
|
| Floh |
|
Messages:4
Registered:June 2006 |
|
|
It might be a bit overexaggerated to call that xml-editting, but i didn't really know where else to put that quzestion:
I have the problem, that Gabby can't be found anywhere - his house is in H11, but he isn't there and i'm not notified of anyones presence, so i assume he got killed some way. I would therefor like to be able to purches his elixir somewhere else - either through BR or Jake.
I tried setting the value for "BR_NewInventory" to anything between 1 and 5 in the Items.xml, but it didn't appear in the list, i also added the item to JakeInventory.xml - same result.
Do i have to do something else? (I have absolutely no idea of editing)
Or are the .xml-files only read once, when i start a new game, and therefor editing them now doesn't help at all?
If so, is there a diffrent way of gettig the elixir without starting a new game?
Report message to a moderator
|
Civilian
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 1.13 Xml Editing[message #176169]
|
Thu, 21 February 2008 11:58
|
|
| Starwalker |
 |
Messages:759
Registered:October 2005
Location: Hannover, Germany |
|
|
Jawz III think a .22, even a necked down .22 (not exactly new) should not do so much damage.
The idea of a round that peneterates body armour easily and tumbles on impact is very contradictory.
But it works. The SS190 bullet (5.7x28mm) is made mainly of aluminum, with a steel tip, the whole encased in a steel jacket. So the bullet is very light, with center of mass being quite near to the tip.
And the bullet flies at very high speed, so if something hard is in the way, only the tip counts, when it hits something soft, the tail begins wagging around (rather simple explanation  ).
Due to the high speed, the bullet cannot really be silenced. Subsonic versions exist, but they are convential jacketed lead bullets and do not have the abilities of the SS190.
Besides, what do you mean by 'a necked down .22'?
A .22 looks like a pistol round, because the case has no shoulder. Necking that down is a bad idea.
Here's a pic of 5.7x28mm
And here's .22
The 4.6x30mm is similar in construction to the 5.7x28mm.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 1.13 Xml Editing[message #176197]
|
Thu, 21 February 2008 16:00
|
|
| Jawz II |
 |
Messages:86
Registered:November 2003 |
|
|
Oh jees, I knew there was gonna be a debate, I shouldn't have said anything.
But since we're here now, and you seem to be curious, I will post this once and then I won't say anything else on the matter. 
When I said "necked down .22" I meant its necked down to .22 the projectile itself is a .22, feel free to do the math. (22% of an inch is roughly about 5.7mm), Perhaps I was speaking in too broad a terms.
And theyre nothing new, there have been other small caliber, necked down pistol rounds in the past, but no one (no major company) ran with them for obvious reasons. I honestly can't remember the names now, but 2 that come to mind, a western one called the super 22 or somesuch and a russian one, wasn't exactly .22 but it was small, and necked down.
The 5.56 mm is .22 caliber too by the way, but they don't call em that, do they? 
I've heard the 'poison bullet' and 'tumbling round' theory ad nauseam, over and over. All from the manufacturers of small rounds which claim their product to be stronger than the laws of physics allow. Its this kind of shock or that kind of trauma, as if a bigger bullet won't hurt you as much and then some.
Larger projectiles can and will tumble too on impact(but not before making BIG holes, shattering bones, etc), and when they do, they do that much more damage.
Now, I have no interest in refuting all their theories one by one, point by point, I'll just give you a few facts to consider, and leave it to you to decide for yourself.
What you are describing is a unstable trajectory. That usually is the result of a damaged barrel, and its not something desirable at all. The results are inaccuracy, and for such a small round, extremly poor penetrating power.
I don't understand the "only the tip counts" arguement at all. Why would that be the case?
Why exactly will it tumble on impact with something soft but not something hard?
How hard/soft are we speaking? bushes? tree branches? a wooden door? besides, surely body armour worn on a person is flexible, unlike a steel plate? Im sure if you went up to a SWAT guy or the like wearing the stuff, and you poked him with your finger (not recommended) there would be certain flexibility to it? Since you know, underneat theres flesh.
Anyway heres a little info about early M16 variant (XM16 or some such) where they used a 1:14 twist barrel and the bullets where indeed unstable, but at long range, thats not a good thing.
Or if there are some bushes in the way, or anything else by the way, once the projectile hits something, the tumbling begins (and accuracy and power go out the door):
http://www.jouster.com/articles30m1/M16part2.html
That might not be the problem for a PDW but still, you can't have both. You can either peneterate kevlar (make tiny little holes, in kevlar and people) or you can have the nightmarish spewer of unstable, inaccurate choppy projectiles from hell (I'd just go for a shotgun at that point, cause the riflings in most firearms are there for a reason, to stabilize!), but you can't have both.
[Updated on: Thu, 21 February 2008 16:03] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
Corporal 1st Class
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 1.13 Xml Editing[message #177469]
|
Thu, 06 March 2008 04:21
|
|
| Asaudan |
|
Messages:2
Registered:March 2008 |
|
|
Does anyone know which XML file governs weapon selections for the militia? Do they also use enemygunchoices.xml ?
Report message to a moderator
|
Civilian
|
|
|
|
Blog
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
