Home » MODDING HQ 1.13 » v1.13 General Development Talk » HAM 3.6 Alpha - RELEASED
Re: HAM 3.6 Alpha - RELEASED[message #234356]
|
Sun, 04 October 2009 14:44
|
|
elenhil |
|
Messages:64
Registered:June 2008 |
|
|
LootFraggI wouldn't, however, weaken the army too severely by cutting off ressources. It's logical, yes, and it makes you want to gain control over the land first before attacking any larger city, so it makes the game quite interesting, but if you exaggerate this effect or make it realistic, you could lose some fun due to lack of fights.
Well, I imagined it to be exactly the opposite: more fights - for sectors that previously there was no need to fight for.
Quote:
In that context, more work could be dedicated to adding more villages, farms, lonely huts,
I think that we can do without additional map editing at the moment. We can simply introduce a kind of buffer zone concept. That is, instead of several farm sectors (some of which will have to be added) with several output capabilities we can use existing farms whose output will depend on the number of owned sectors around it. No matter if those are fields, woods or swamps. Image this as a kind of buffer zone for the farmers to feel secure to work their best. One farm sector only - low output. Farm + nearby 4-8 sectors - max output. Provided that the farm was safe for the last week or so (not recently captured or recaptured).
Report message to a moderator
|
Corporal
|
|
|
|
Re: HAM 3.6 Alpha - RELEASED[message #234362]
|
Sun, 04 October 2009 16:44
|
|
LootFragg |
|
Messages:349
Registered:August 2009 Location: Berlin, Germany |
|
|
Headrockthis bug can probably be found through testing, but would require fighting kingpin's men over and over again... Want me to?
HeadrockWhat savegames do you have? I did a quicksave before trying to talk to Hans (I didn't want anybody to die, after all). Have not tried to recreate it yet, though. Will do.
Anyway, San Mona isn't hard to reach. My settings are very custom and alter from time to time, but I might as well do with the default settings or any settings you want me to apply and I could do it step by step. Although he is one hell of a tough bastard. I could try if GABBI and the overkill cheat would result in the same errors. I'd be glad to help fixing this issue once and for all, even if it takes some time. Though I don't know anything about the code, so you're the Brain, I'm the Pinky.
Logistericas for hans - the only explanation is a stray bullet that hit him Nope. I can't definitely exclude that from the list of possibilities, but the fight I think never went in his direction. Even if, he's mostly surrounded by two walls and it would be hard hitting him even when you try. He's behind the counter, several shelves of tough porn, some walls, in between two more buildings. I once attacked him with a mortar, he went mad and really got hostile (like usual), that wasn't the case either. It has happened some time before, as well. I can possibly recreate it by just using knives if you want to. I think it's based on some script inside the code.
I'll see whether the quicksave produces the same result for attacking Hans again.
LoodFrakk
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: HAM 3.6 Alpha - RELEASED[message #234478]
|
Mon, 05 October 2009 22:18
|
|
LootFragg |
|
Messages:349
Registered:August 2009 Location: Berlin, Germany |
|
|
Concerning farms (which we wanted to not talk about anymore)
T_BoltAnd mines like really convert ore to cash/electronic transfer in a matter of hours. I'm sorry, didn't think of that. Yes, you're right. The thing that I won't understand is how you would make these farms produce more or less. If you raise or decrease the outcome on a daily basis, no difference would be felt, especially not with multiple farms. Then maybe that means you'd dry them all out for a week, but I don't think that's a good idea.czar1985If facilities could reduce cost of traning militia Good idea as well. So you could either make them want to join or bribe them with lots of cash.
To Headrock and anybody else
I'd like to know whether or not there is an existing thread about the messed up pathfinding of your mercs when walking in groups. It took a friend of mine to remind me of it despite this having been a problem that has always annoyed me. I can't imagine no one has ever mentioned it so there must be a thread about it. Please tell me, pm me, link it, I'm spamming the forums, which is very impolite, I'm sorry, but I need to know this.
To Headrock
I'm a dumb broad, but if you want me to download VC++ (which I wanted to do anyway) and do anything and post you any result, advise me and command me around. I'm a mindless slave and I want HAM to conquer the world. Suppress it, so to say.
Yours truly,
your obedient slave,
Lootgor
[Updated on: Mon, 05 October 2009 22:20] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
Re: HAM 3.6 Alpha - RELEASED[message #234493]
|
Mon, 05 October 2009 23:54
|
|
elenhil |
|
Messages:64
Registered:June 2008 |
|
|
LootFraggThe thing that I won't understand is how you would make these farms produce more or less. If you raise or decrease the outcome on a daily basis, no difference would be felt, especially not with multiple farms.
It certainly will be otherwise. We currently have about 20 farms for about 30 militia-capable inhabited sectors. Of course, they are not evenly distributed, but that is another matter. The thing is, each farm obviously supports more than a sector. We will yet have to decide what is the precise value of a single farm in terms of militia supported, but even with no roaming militia in mind loosing one farm should affect more than one squad of militia. Let us suppose one farm can support 2 militia squads. For the sake of simplicity make no distinction between stationary or mobile militia. That is, two farms near Drassen are needed to support its full garrison, plus the one in the NE SAM site. Loosing one will halve your initial militia numbers. Quite a loss, from my perspective.
Now, imagine those farms around Cambria feeding most of your forces in Grumm and Alma (which are obviously industrial/military cities with but one farm around each, so they certainly depend on Cambria's farms). Instead of sitting in Cambria training militia to your full and waiting for the next enemy squad to come face your ruthlessly planned urban defense strategy, you will be anxious to defend your neighbouring farm sectors. And do you remember how these enemy squads just LOVE to circle around Cambria before entering it? Now I see they've got a reason - they're trampling down those farmlands, they just don't know it yet!
Next we can thing about increased food support cost for mobile militia. It roams far from home and so should be harder to support. Make them worth 1.5 or 2 times more. Now to defend that NE SAM site you will have to secure an additional farm (near Omerta, obviously). And about two more to support another mobile squad. This way loosing a farm will make an even greater difference. Though that mobile support multiplier may be a matter of some debate, I suppose.
Report message to a moderator
|
Corporal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: HAM 3.6 Alpha - RELEASED[message #234573]
|
Tue, 06 October 2009 23:32
|
|
TheShodan |
|
Messages:23
Registered:May 2007 |
|
|
Why not make it so that a severely outnumbered militia force beating a large enemy group increases loyalty throughout the entire map?
Report message to a moderator
|
Private 1st Class
|
|
|
|
Re: HAM 3.6 Alpha - RELEASED[message #234581]
|
Wed, 07 October 2009 02:59
|
|
KEN C |
|
Messages:244
Registered:May 2007 Location: Aberdeen Washington USA |
|
|
morning or afternoon, day or night ,winter or summer, picking your nose or scratching your ass,WTF
Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant 1st Class
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: HAM 3.6 Alpha - RELEASED[message #235018]
|
Tue, 13 October 2009 19:47
|
|
Virtus |
Messages:4
Registered:October 2009 |
|
|
Just when I'am about to start new game I found a nasty bug, or maybe new feature that I missed in INI file.
Screenshot
As you can see I'am unable to see how many ammo is loaded for most weapons.
I'am playing Ja2 1.13 ver 3111 with Wildfire maps and 910 Cosplay and HAM 3.6 v6, runing game with HAM exe not regular one. Before I Instaled HAM there was no such problem.
[Updated on: Tue, 13 October 2009 19:49] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
Civilian
|
|
|
|
Re: HAM 3.6 Alpha - RELEASED[message #235020]
|
Tue, 13 October 2009 20:12
|
|
Virtus |
Messages:4
Registered:October 2009 |
|
|
Oh I see, HAM 3.6 has a lot many new features than 3.0 that I played last time. Quite nice one, quick test shows that with merc at level 3 everything is ok and I can see the ammo. Thanks for help.
Report message to a moderator
|
Civilian
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: HAM 3.6 Alpha - RELEASED[message #235111]
|
Wed, 14 October 2009 23:03
|
|
|
HeadrockThe reduction is permanent due to exposure to too much pollution from aircraft. To regain, train health. This is getting a little out of hand brother. Health degeneration because of pollution from aircrafts? This is a WAR game. I can think of a million other health related problems, like.....Getting your fucking head blown off! :roulette:
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
Re: HAM 3.6 Alpha - RELEASED[message #235116]
|
Thu, 15 October 2009 00:55
|
|
Uriens |
|
Messages:346
Registered:July 2006 |
|
|
For my self, I simply edited the xml file and removed ambient damage property from small airport. Actually, while most of the stats are great, that one makes no sense to me at all. The airport is actually AIRSTRIP and the secondary one at that. Actually, that implies that only small and sport planes can ever land there. Also, since I've taken that airport, nearly all the traffic has stoped since I'm pretty much the only one using it. I see no way that locals can't afford to use cars but can use airport...
All that means that traffic and noise over there is nearly non existent. Actually, far more noise is produced during battle because of all the gunfire and explosions and mercs don't take and damage from noise. That's why ambient damage in airport is a nono for me.
All that being said, it's good to know all the possibilities you have for making or modifying facilities and ambient damage is one of them as well. I look at those xml files as a sort of demo, to show you what you can do, but expect them to get better over time (and I don't expect Headrock to do all the work there either, let the guy have some rest) and modified by community. Actually, I plan to make a modified version of those files based on WF maps where there is more city sectors (Meduna has grown quite a lot there, lol) and a bit different placements of buildings (in Drassen, ACA building is in mining sector, not Airport one). Maybe I even think of some new facilities in the process. Thing is, Headrock has given us a great tool to customize maps and flesh them out, but we should be the ones that make use of them and to make them do what we want. I'm not going to whine about a setting in xml file and expect Headrock to change it - if you think a setting is wrong, change it yourself.
Once again, thanks Headrock for this great mod. It really makes JA2 fun game to play even after all these years.
Report message to a moderator
|
Master Sergeant
|
|
|
Re: HAM 3.6 Alpha - RELEASED[message #235137]
|
Thu, 15 October 2009 03:22
|
|
Headrock |
|
Messages:1760
Registered:March 2006 Location: Jerusalem |
|
|
@ Craig: The risk factor is way off in the current HAM 3.6 install, so you can change it manually (either edit FacilityTypes.XML and lower the risk chances, or change FACILITY_EVENT_RARITY to like 10000 instead).
@ Lootfragg: The only change in the facility risks, once I get to actually apply it in the next HAM download, will be edits to the FacilityTypes.XML, which you can do as well. Simply lower all "negative" risks to about 1/3 to 1/10 of their current value, or remove them manually. If you do a good job, you can post that XML and it'll be used for the next HAM (saving me a lot of trouble). And it means you don't have to turn off all risks. If you want an easier way out without turning off the entire risk system, raise FACILITY_EVENT_RARITY to a higher number (10000 may be right, I dunno). But then you're also reducing the chance of GOOD risks triggering. It's your call, but I'd hate to see you wait for the next HAM to experience it.
Quote:I look at those xml files as a sort of demo, to show you what you can do, but expect them to get better over time
I look at them as a call to people to try and mod them and find the balance that's missing. That's part of the idea of testing, although in this case it'll help if someone actually comes up with a good balance and publishes it. Otherwise, I'd have to do it, which will have to wait until I finish Mass Effect and Empire Total War... a long time.
Quote:Thing is, Headrock has given us a great tool to customize maps and flesh them out, but we should be the ones that make use of them and to make them do what we want.
Precisely, and thank you.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Re: HAM 3.6 Alpha - RELEASED[message #235148]
|
Thu, 15 October 2009 11:29
|
|
LootFragg |
|
Messages:349
Registered:August 2009 Location: Berlin, Germany |
|
|
Headrockwill have to wait until I finish Mass Effect Take your time. Enjoy the story, the setting. I did.
HeadrockIf you do a good job, you can post that XML and it'll be used for the next HAM Absolutely not. I've come to confirm my realization that I have a totally different playstyle from anybody else in the forums, so it's best to have it done by an average gamer.
Which gets me to the question if the mod loader can load different option packs. I don't use it, so I don't know. If so, you could have many different facility setting XMLs and one of them is chosen via some interface. Would get rid of the question whether to change this or not or what version to include with the mod.
Headrockraise FACILITY_EVENT_RARITY to a higher number What about the FACILITY_DANGER_RATE set to 0? As far as I got the hang of it, it means you can't get any serious harm with any merc anymore due to accidents in facilities.
Uriensambient damage in airport is a nono for me Definitely. I guess the defaults of this will need change before 3.6 is final.
You are right about Headrock having given us a platform to modify after our will, but I bet you know not everyone is too eager about calibrating his own game, which is why HAM already comes with default settings. I know how to tweak values, many people do, but some don't and some simply don't want to. It's not a major issue to get this fixed when finalizing HAM and it's already been discussed a lot. The general direction is clear, now let the master violate some Geth with tungsten rounds.
LootDood
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Re: HAM 3.6 Alpha - RELEASED[message #235155]
|
Thu, 15 October 2009 15:33
|
|
Headrock |
|
Messages:1760
Registered:March 2006 Location: Jerusalem |
|
|
Quote:Which gets me to the question if the mod loader can load different option packs. I don't use it, so I don't know. If so, you could have many different facility setting XMLs and one of them is chosen via some interface.
A simple BAT file could be used for this purpose, because it's all about two XML files.
Quote:What about the FACILITY_DANGER_RATE set to 0?
The problem is with the frequency of events, not how harmful they are.
Quote: I bet you know not everyone is too eager about calibrating his own game, which is why HAM already comes with default settings. I know how to tweak values, many people do, but some don't and some simply don't want to.
You're forgetting that HAM 3.6 is currently an Alpha Test. You are EXPECTED to calibrate your own game. In fact, you're expected to push the game in all sorts of unexpected directions just to see what happens, and report your findings. People who download HAM 3.6 and just play it are kind of missing the point.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Pages (12): [ 6 ] |
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Mar 29 06:47:59 GMT+2 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02850 seconds
|