Home » PLAYER'S HQ 1.13 » JA2 Complete Mods & Sequels » UC/DL 1.13 & AFS » UC-1.13 Discussions and Bug Reporting (2011/07/30 to 2013/03/07)
| UC-1.13 Discussions and Bug Reporting (2011/07/30 to 2013/03/07)[message #288005]
|
Sat, 30 July 2011 23:20 
|
|
| Wil473 |
 |
Messages:2815
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada |
|
|
Starting with Urban Chaos-1.13 v3.56 please report any suspected Bugs for the mod here. Thank you.
Current UC-1.13 Release
UC-1.13 FAQ and Spoilers
EDIT: I haven't forgotten about the Jeep re-spawning. I did try setting it up to be placed in A10 via LUA scripting, but that didn't help, it still respawned on leaving the map. This doesn't happen with the Hummer in the stock game, so I don't think this is a game engine issue.
EDIT (2011/08/08): sorry everyone, my attempts at managing threads resulted in the Discussion Thread disappearing.
[Updated on: Fri, 08 March 2013 04:10] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: UC-1.13 Bug Reports (2011/07/30 to 2011/--/--)[message #288013]
|
Sun, 31 July 2011 11:12 
|
|
 Rodelero |
 |
Messages:61
Registered:June 2011
Location: Czech Republic |
|
|
Normal Foregrip shouldn't be attacheable on RIS rail, IMHO. Only RIS Foregrip or gripod,bipod, should be. Right?
SCAR and many other guns can use foregrip now even when it shouldn't be possible.
BTW, NV goggles are not shown on faces intentionally? Please note, I'm using latest 1.13 patch as well.
[Updated on: Sun, 31 July 2011 11:52] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
Corporal
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: UC-1.13 Bug Reports (2011/07/30 to 2011/--/--)[message #288097]
|
Mon, 01 August 2011 16:51
|
|
| Hairysteed |
 |
Messages:193
Registered:December 2007
Location: Finland |
|
|
Heavy bipod has no incompatible attachments. Shouldn't it be incompatible with other bipods and the grip pod?
Also, shouldn't HK21 and HK23 come with a heavy bipod?
FN EGLM doesn't look like it should be used with drum magazines (extends over the magazine well) or foregrips of any kind
Underslung GLs in general have some holes in their incompatible attachments lists (mostly missing the RIS foregrip)
In general they should not be compatible with grip pod, bipods or foregrips of any kind.
Exceptions:
-RIS bipod that can be mounted on the top rail (not applicable where top rail is absent eg. G3 family)
-FAMAS bipod doesn't interfere with an UGL
-OICW/AICW/K11 launchers where the GL is on top of the rifle barrel rather than under
-Metal Storm UGL has a RIS attachment point where possibly a RIS bipod could be mounted (no grips though since it already incorporates one)
[Updated on: Mon, 01 August 2011 18:08] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
Staff Sergeant
|
|
|
|
| Re: UC-1.13 Bug Reports (2011/07/30 to 2011/--/--)[message #288103]
|
Mon, 01 August 2011 20:05
|
|
| Wil473 |
|
Messages:2815
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada |
|
|
Heavy/Integral Bipods - yeah, I'll need to check the incompatibilities, though if a weapon comes up with both a permanent bipod and an optional bipod listed as valid attachments, that's a bug in itself to report.
FN EGLM - good points, I'll make the changes for next patch
Underslung GL's & RIS Grip - the RIS Gip is allowed to use side RIS slots on RIS quads (went to a lot of trouble to make this possible), however it should be incompatible with Underslung GL's that double as foregrips (HK AG36, Metal Storm UGL, and GP-30 I think). I'll check to make sure those three are incompatible.
Metal Storm UGL adding another bottom RIS slot - in theory it is doable, except the Metal Storm UGL itself fits the very slot that is being added (by a RIS Hand-guard in most cases). Don't really want to add another bottom forward RIS just for the RIS Bipod, there are already two of these to manage.
EDIT: H&K 21/23 bipod - I'll make the normal (detachable) bipod a default attachment, change the GR variants from an integral to the standard bipod as well.
[Updated on: Mon, 01 August 2011 20:06] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: UC-1.13 Bug Reports (2011/07/30 to 2011/--/--)[message #288138]
|
Tue, 02 August 2011 02:24
|
|
| Wil473 |
|
Messages:2815
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada |
|
|
Fair enough, I'll give the HK 21/23 the integral bipod to allow for use of the grip. Though in a similar vein I'm allowing RIS Grip to be used with some underslung grenade launchers.
Note, I don't think I used different stats for the "Heavy" bipod. The heavy bit is, or was, used to indicate the weapon has better accuracy when prone. Somewhat obsolete now with NCTH where every weapon seems to work better prone.
EDIT: one thing to keep in mind, a lot of incompatible attachment definitions I left out due to the expectation that simply having only one slot on a weapon able to accept the mutually exclusive attachments would be enough to prevent illogical combinations. This however did lead to a minor fix in the last patch concerning the RSA/SVD to RIS Scope Mount adding a slot that still allowed RSA/SVD attachments. It was easier to define incompatible attachments, than work out the bitmask (and possibly new NAS attachment types and slots) to handle this one attachment.
EDIT: the Eldorado (uses the same character ID as the Jeep) is not re-spawning. Not sure what the difference is, but I am suspecting the max vehicle count, (DL-1.13 uses the default 2 instead of the 3 available in UC-1.13 currently)
[Updated on: Sun, 07 August 2011 16:49] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: UC-1.13 Bug Reports (2011/07/30 to 2011/--/--)[message #288645]
|
Mon, 08 August 2011 18:01
|
|
| Hazapuza |
 |
Messages:262
Registered:February 2009
Location: Finland |
|
|
5.56, though I actually don't believe the problem is in the ammo items. I noticed some strange "freezing" of the advanced props tab yesterday. It seemed that after some time of playing, only the guns which had been equipped for a while (or maybe all the items whose properties I had viewed) showed their adv props tab, with everything else that page was empty. A simple restart corrected the problem for a while, but it did happen again.
This behavior was certainly not present in the 3.00-3.09 versions, so I assume it's an issue with the NCTH.
Edit: If you wish that I stop reporting these most likely base 1.13-related bugs, just say it. I have the opinion that every problem related to your mod should be posted here, so that you can forward them to the 1.13 coders if necessary, but naturally it's more work for you and I can do it as well.
[Updated on: Mon, 08 August 2011 20:37] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
Master Sergeant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: UC-1.13 Bug Reports (2011/07/30 to 2011/--/--)[message #288734]
|
Tue, 09 August 2011 21:25
|
|
| Hairysteed |
|
Messages:193
Registered:December 2007
Location: Finland |
|
|
I don't understand why a merc is not supposed to be able to shoulder his LMG. After all they do have slings. I would imagine the weapon hanging freely on your shoulder being less restrictive on its size than stuffing it into a backpack (which you're going to put on your shoulder anyway). Besides, where am I supposed to put the LMG in the middle of a fight when I'm using my sidearm?
[Updated on: Tue, 09 August 2011 21:28] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
Staff Sergeant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: UC-1.13 Discussions and Bug Reporting (2011/07/30 to 2011/--/--)[message #289089]
|
Mon, 15 August 2011 16:55
|
|
| Wil473 |
|
Messages:2815
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada |
|
|
I'm thinking of dropping the Percent Max CF bonus entirely, on giving it more though the question, "how does a muzzle brake increase someone's ability to handle recoil?" came to mind. These items reduce recoil by redirecting high velocity combustion products (ie. why I removed the flash hiding capability), but I cannot see any mechanism for these items increasing Max CF:
- negligible mass to counteract muzzle climb (this is why grenade launchers have the Max CF bonus)
Also, I'm wanting to incorporate some kind of recoil reduction to the high end suppressors. Cooling/slowing the gases produced will do something to felt recoil at least. The problem is I've already dropped the muzzle brakes to an absolute reduction of 1. Small numbers again, no wonder most games only have one pistol, one SMG, one AR, etc... and single purpose attachments.
Proposed changes to recoil reduction:
Premium/TI Suppressors = 0, -1 (minimum bonus)
Muzzle Brake = 0, -2 (generic device counters muzzle climb only)
AK Muzzle Brake = -1, -2 (semi-purpose built device, reputed to also counter the X axis movement)
No Percent Max CF bonus
[Updated on: Mon, 15 August 2011 16:56] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: UC-1.13 Discussions and Bug Reporting (2011/07/30 to 2011/--/--)[message #289106]
|
Mon, 15 August 2011 20:05
|
|
| Hazapuza |
|
Messages:262
Registered:February 2009
Location: Finland |
|
|
I'm actually not sure if there are many muzzle brakes that counter only muzzle climb, or Y recoil. They seem to either be like the current in-game model, i.e. they redirect the propellant gases both sideways and up (and sometimes backwards and/or forward, in a slight angle), and then there are those which have holes in only two sides (which to me indicates that they're meant to redirect the gases sideways, since making them go upwards and downwards doesn't make any sense, at least in those guns which have a notable muzzle climb). Maybe you should add one or two different muzzle brakes/compensators more, with different X and Y reduction values.
The counter-force concept is actually a bit hazy to me, is it supposed to represent the shooter's ability to resist muzzle climb and direct the muzzle back on target, or the ability to altogether keep the gun steadier when shooting, i.e. less movement in any direction?
Report message to a moderator
|
Master Sergeant
|
|
|
|
| Re: UC-1.13 Discussions and Bug Reporting (2011/07/30 to 2011/--/--)[message #289113]
|
Mon, 15 August 2011 20:50
|
|
| Wil473 |
|
Messages:2815
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada |
|
|
By Muzzle Brake, I think I'm actually meaning compensator...
Counter-Force - yes, it more or less is you're merc's ability to bring the muzzle back on target. I think handling may have something to do with keeping the gun steady, though it also seems to have something to do with your ability to bring a weapon back on target too...
See: http://www.ja-galaxy-forum.com/board/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=289095#Post289095 for more questions on just what these things do in NCTH.
Something else I'm considering doing is using Counter-Force tags to better model how easy/hard a weapon is controlled on burst/auto. If the increased recoil on short-barrel AK's is not enough, this may be the direction I go with things. Given the same cartridge, a lightweight weapon may be easier to point, but it won't be able to resist muzzle climb, and whatever X-Axis recoil disturbance is called, as well. As it stands, I am suspecting the low handling of the SBR's may be giving them an unwanted advantage over their full-size equivalents when bursting/autofiring.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: UC-1.13 Discussions and Bug Reporting (2011/07/30 to 2011/--/--)[message #289230]
|
Wed, 17 August 2011 01:05
|
|
| Wil473 |
|
Messages:2815
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada |
|
|
JMichParkanHello Wil473.I have a questions about Urban chaos.
Is there any chance to add to Urban chaos a normal start equipment for Imp,Aim etc mercs like in original 1.13 mod or like in Arulco folding stock?(with 4 variations of kits for Aim mercs and etc)plus add with those changes a some sort increased difficluty (for example enemy will be much stronger than before)?
You are supposed to reach Danubia through a commercial airline, so no weapons for you. You can always though change that by either changing merc's starting equipment, modifying the landing map, or using the Extra Sector Items (check the docs folder for more info). As for increasing the difficulty, not sure how that can be done, but do use the ini file for customizing it to your needs.
Yes everything JMich said. Additionally, the Extra Items XML's are already in use, supplying mercs with one additional gun and magazine based on difficulty level. Even this minor assistance to your mercs gave me concerns about balance. That said, you may of course open up the files (one per sector, per difficulty level, in TableData\Map) with NotePad++ and change that first battle that technically you are not really encouraged to participate in.
Muzzle Devices - Ok, I'm going with what I discussed earlier:
wil473
Premium/TI Suppressors = 0, -1 (minimum bonus)
Muzzle Brake = 0, -2 (generic device counters muzzle climb only)
AK Muzzle Brake = -1, -2 (semi-purpose built device, reputed to also counter the X axis movement)
No Percent Max CF bonus
Also giving the AN-94 its own muzzle device with additional sound and flash moderating capabilities. Increasing the volume level of the AN-94 to compensate. EDIT: never mind, found that the AN-94 had the same attack volume as the AK-74. Clearing the Hide Muzzle Flash option on the AN-94.
[Updated on: Wed, 17 August 2011 01:09] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: UC-1.13 Discussions and Bug Reporting (2011/07/30 to 2011/--/--)[message #289452]
|
Fri, 19 August 2011 16:29
|
|
| Wil473 |
|
Messages:2815
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada |
|
|
Short Barrel AK's - it is, probably. If you don't mind, please try the same test again but with the Kobra Reflex sight. If Tex hits more with autofire, then what you were seeing in the earlier test is the moderate NCTH CF penalties on the PO 3.5x21P scope. Since I couldn't come up with anything better, I just went with 10x the Scope mag factor, so the PO 3.5x21P has -35% CF accuracy and the such (don't have the XML's in front of me now). Being non-magnifying it has no CF penalties, and being treated as a Advance Reflex Sight equivalent it has bonuses over the plain Reflex sight.
M-LBE - pouches go in leg NIV slot to access inventory, the Modular part is when the pouch is moved to the "webbing" NIV pocket (on vest, packs, and one leg rig) or other "external" pocket for storage.
[Updated on: Fri, 19 August 2011 16:39] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: UC-1.13 Discussions and Bug Reporting (2011/07/30 to 2011/--/--)[message #289458]
|
Fri, 19 August 2011 16:59
|
|
| Hazapuza |
|
Messages:262
Registered:February 2009
Location: Finland |
|
|
Tested again with a Kobra equipped, and I couldn't really see a difference.
Edit: Forgot to mention that I also used tracers. Tex equipped with this exact same setup performed much better in 3.56, so it's not the negative CF values that scopes have. My guess is the combined effect of Krinkov's recoil increase and the muzzle brake nerf.
Edit2: Corrected 5.56 to 3.56 (patch).
[Updated on: Fri, 19 August 2011 18:30] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
Master Sergeant
|
|
|
|
| Re: UC-1.13 Discussions and Bug Reporting (2011/07/30 to 2011/--/--)[message #289460]
|
Fri, 19 August 2011 17:16
|
|
| Wil473 |
|
Messages:2815
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada |
|
|
HazapuzaTested again with a Kobra equipped, and I couldn't really see a difference.
Edit: Forgot to mention that I also used tracers. Tex equipped with this exact same setup performed much better in 5.56.
AK-108? UC's modded M4A1? Or a different gun with western optics? Note that the AK-107/108 are rather bad outliers due to their internal recoil dampening features. The modded M4A1, like all M4's, is another inherently low recoil weapon.
If the Kobra is not doing much better then it is probably v3.57's "enhanced" recoil numbers you are seeing. The AKMSU, by virtue of AK mechanism + unspecified AK clone (its even noted in-game as being non-Russian) + short barrel + 7.62x39mm ended up with the worse NCTH recoil characteristics in the process. Previously, I had simply cloned the AK-105's stats and never got back to balancing them till v3.57 (ie. prior to 3.57 the AKMSU was "unnaturally" accurate even before I decided to knock down the AK-105). Well, that was the intention, though I had been hoping the scope mods had more influence.
EDIT: AK Muzzle Brake will have bigger effect tomorrow, as I'm going ahead with the plan to give hi-end suppressors some recoil reduction under NCTH (needed to make room for "some").
[Updated on: Fri, 19 August 2011 17:19] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: UC-1.13 Discussions and Bug Reporting (2011/07/30 to 2011/--/--)[message #289478]
|
Fri, 19 August 2011 19:08
|
|
| Hazapuza |
|
Messages:262
Registered:February 2009
Location: Finland |
|
|
I apologize, I meant v3.56. And it looks like I have a bad habit of editing my posts exactly at the same time you're writing a response.
Anyhow, as you can see from my last post, I also vote for the v3.57 recoil value adjustments. And you're correct, the Krinkov shouldn't be as good as it was. But now it seems like it may have become too bad, at least in automatic fire mode.
I did notice that my IMP with the DSA-58 equipped with Muzzle Brake, Rifle LAM-Flashlight, ACOG, Reflex Sight, Grippod and ACME Trigger Group did not hit that frequently with burst fire as he did in v3.56. The Flat Base penalty of -5 you added to the 4x Reflex Scope is most likely the reason for this one. Are you sure this penalty is not too much, as I remember that you decreased the Flat Base bonus of the Advanced Reflex Sight down to 2 from 5 in one of the patches, since it was unexpectedly good.
Report message to a moderator
|
Master Sergeant
|
|
|
|
| Re: UC-1.13 Discussions and Bug Reporting (2011/07/30 to 2011/--/--)[message #289487]
|
Fri, 19 August 2011 20:22
|
|
| Wil473 |
|
Messages:2815
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada |
|
|
Like the CF penalties, the 5 Base Penalty was just a starting point based on the time honoured tradition of, "what the hell, why not." That said, I'd like to wait and see what the increased Y recoil reduction of the muzzle brake does.
The reason -5 was selected was that OCTH had a 5% CTH penalty from having a scope attached (easily overcome by one or two aiming clicks). Since there is no such thing as a conventional Chance-to-Hit in NCTH*** the use of -5 Base may have been too much, though at the time, it may have been too little as well. The two penalties are not comparable due to the different mechanics between OCTH and NCTH, which goes back to the true reason of why it is -5 being "what the hell, why not," when looking for a penalty of some sort.
Until I get more experience with NCTH, or someone with authoritative knowledge comes around and destroys my misinterpretation of NCTH, it is going to be trial and error like this.
Now of course there is the other end of things, I did want the 7.62x51mm weapons to exhibit more recoil. Are you also seeing an excessive drop in hits with intermediate cartridges, out of full size rifles?
How rifles are broadly classed (in no particular order):
Intermediate Cartridge/HBAR
Intermediate Cartridge/Normal Rifle
Intermediate Cartridge/Carbine
Intermediate Cartridge/Short Barrel
Full Power Cartridge/HBAR
Full Power Cartridge/Normal Rifle
Full Power Cartridge/Carbine
Full Power Cartridge/Short Barrel
7.62x39mm sort of fits in between, leaning towards the Intermediate Cartridge end. And of course mechanism does come into it too: Bolt-action, Direct Impingement, ... , pure mass-produced AK.
The DSA-58 is being treated as a Full Power Cartridge/Carbine, so high, but not excessive, recoil is a desired characteristic. For comparison the MC51 should have the most recoil of any 7.62x51mm weapon capable of automatic fire, and probably any gun in-game till the Saiga 12K gained the "magic" ACME Burst Trigger Group as a possible attachment.
*** My interpretation of NCTH is that it is a comparison of target's area vs. area of dispersion, the shot is always random within the area of dispersion (though merc/weapon stats have something to do with stacking the odds for/against the round coinciding with centre of the reticle, the target).
EDIT: something else I'm considering is using the Grip to modify (increase) CF Frequency so the presence of a grip gives your merc more opportunity (instead of power) to modify a burst.
EDIT2: a sudden and worrying thought just came to mind, the re-balancing the AKMSU and other AK SBR's was done in isolation, the MC51, and for that matter, the DSA, may no longer have correct recoil in the big scheme of things...
Desired General Recoil Relations from Worse to Better:
Saiga 12K - a 12 Guage shotgun not normally meant to have burst
MC51 - 7.62x51mm SBR
HK CAWS - non-standard auto Shotgun
Pancor Jackhammer
"Krinkov"/"AKMSU"
...if anyone has free time, please expand on the list. Note, the lack of values for real world recoil has been a major stumbling block for NCTH in general. Quite frankly I abandoned such high notions in favour of using values that "feel right" in-game... or would be if I wasn't doing it in such a piecemeal fashion.
[Updated on: Fri, 19 August 2011 20:56] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Pages (13): [1 ] |
  |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue Feb 04 05:27:14 GMT+2 2025
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01914 seconds
|
Blog
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
