Posted September 15, 2016
wookieejedi
New User
wookieejedi Sorry, data for given user is currently unavailable. Please, try again later. View profile View wishlist Start conversation Invite to friends Invite to friends Accept invitation Accept invitation Pending invitation... Unblock chat Registered: Sep 2016
From United States
FekLeyrTarg
New User
FekLeyrTarg Sorry, data for given user is currently unavailable. Please, try again later. View profile View wishlist Start conversation Invite to friends Invite to friends Accept invitation Accept invitation Pending invitation... Unblock chat Registered: Jun 2012
From Austria
Posted September 16, 2016
Azrapse: I am currently developing both the boarding mechanics, as well as devising a way to automatize importing new ship models in a less work-intensive way.
You just need to see MajorParts' new models for the TIE Fighter and the Lambda Shuttle!
I'm looking forward to see them. :-) You just need to see MajorParts' new models for the TIE Fighter and the Lambda Shuttle!
Talking about boarding:
Have you thought about placing some sort of visual effect on disabled ships? X-Wing Alliance, Rogue Squadron and Empire at War do that.
I think the way it is shown in the intro of XWA is awesome:
https://youtu.be/Mtk65gM6F58?t=2m13s
Azrapse
New User
Azrapse Sorry, data for given user is currently unavailable. Please, try again later. View profile View wishlist Start conversation Invite to friends Invite to friends Accept invitation Accept invitation Pending invitation... Unblock chat Registered: Jan 2011
From Finland
Posted September 16, 2016
Azrapse: I am currently developing both the boarding mechanics, as well as devising a way to automatize importing new ship models in a less work-intensive way.
You just need to see MajorParts' new models for the TIE Fighter and the Lambda Shuttle!
FekLeyrTarg: I'm looking forward to see them. :-) You just need to see MajorParts' new models for the TIE Fighter and the Lambda Shuttle!
Talking about boarding:
Have you thought about placing some sort of visual effect on disabled ships? X-Wing Alliance, Rogue Squadron and Empire at War do that.
I think the way it is shown in the intro of XWA is awesome:
https://youtu.be/Mtk65gM6F58?t=2m13s
But at this point, that is eyecandy. If I find a way to do that that takes me 1 hour to do, sure I could add it at this point. If it is gonna take me more than that, I would leave it for one of the polishing passes later on.
Edit:
I have searched for something fast to get it done, and I have found this, paid for, asset: https://youtu.be/OmOsyQFgI8s
Do you think it would work? It somehow reminds me to the scene when Luke is shot down on his snowspeeder during the Battle of Hoth. Or when R2D2 is disabled by the Jawas in Episode IV.
Post edited September 16, 2016 by Azrapse
scotsdezmond
Emperor's Reach
scotsdezmond Sorry, data for given user is currently unavailable. Please, try again later. View profile View wishlist Start conversation Invite to friends Invite to friends Accept invitation Accept invitation Pending invitation... Unblock chat Registered: Dec 2012
From United Kingdom
Posted September 16, 2016
I like that Unity lightning demo, looks very nice.
The original source of the 'disabled ships' effect is probably from this scene in The Empire Strikes Back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BkOVSFb2Zw (at 2:43).
The original source of the 'disabled ships' effect is probably from this scene in The Empire Strikes Back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BkOVSFb2Zw (at 2:43).
Azrapse
New User
Azrapse Sorry, data for given user is currently unavailable. Please, try again later. View profile View wishlist Start conversation Invite to friends Invite to friends Accept invitation Accept invitation Pending invitation... Unblock chat Registered: Jan 2011
From Finland
Posted September 16, 2016
scotsdezmond: I like that Unity lightning demo, looks very nice.
The original source of the 'disabled ships' effect is probably from this scene in The Empire Strikes Back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BkOVSFb2Zw (at 2:43).
The effect is more... limited in that scene than in XWA. The original source of the 'disabled ships' effect is probably from this scene in The Empire Strikes Back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BkOVSFb2Zw (at 2:43).
In the movies, ionized ships seem to spark with the ion energy for a few seconds, then stay basically dead, maybe because their electric systems are fried or something after a EMP blast.
In XWA, though, it is more like a running effect while they are disabled. Like if they were constantly being struck by lightning bolts.
It certainly add something over how it is in X-Wing, TIE Fighter and XvT. But I wonder whether they overdid it a little bit.
FekLeyrTarg
New User
FekLeyrTarg Sorry, data for given user is currently unavailable. Please, try again later. View profile View wishlist Start conversation Invite to friends Invite to friends Accept invitation Accept invitation Pending invitation... Unblock chat Registered: Jun 2012
From Austria
Posted September 16, 2016
Adywan added some rather subtile lightning to the disabled Star Destroyer in "ESB: Revisited". I think that looks nice as well.
https://youtu.be/MnhyN6Jf1Fg?t=2m49s
https://youtu.be/MnhyN6Jf1Fg?t=2m49s
MjrParts
New User
MjrParts Sorry, data for given user is currently unavailable. Please, try again later. View profile View wishlist Start conversation Invite to friends Invite to friends Accept invitation Accept invitation Pending invitation... Unblock chat Registered: Nov 2014
From United Kingdom
Posted September 16, 2016
Did you notice the shield hits in my game Az? I paid for an fx asset thing already...nothing says I didn't buy it for this :)
Azrapse
New User
Azrapse Sorry, data for given user is currently unavailable. Please, try again later. View profile View wishlist Start conversation Invite to friends Invite to friends Accept invitation Accept invitation Pending invitation... Unblock chat Registered: Jan 2011
From Finland
countbuggula
New User
countbuggula Sorry, data for given user is currently unavailable. Please, try again later. View profile View wishlist Start conversation Invite to friends Invite to friends Accept invitation Accept invitation Pending invitation... Unblock chat Registered: Mar 2011
From United States
Posted September 19, 2016
Exciting progress! Looking forward to playing around with this.
On a purely selfish note, I'll vote for OBZ, simply because I happen to have a repository of incredible ships for Fate of the Galaxy that I've already converted to obj for our website's ship database. So I could create a pack using those ships to play with - of course I couldn't distribute it to anyone (with the possible exception of other members of the FotG team).
On a purely selfish note, I'll vote for OBZ, simply because I happen to have a repository of incredible ships for Fate of the Galaxy that I've already converted to obj for our website's ship database. So I could create a pack using those ships to play with - of course I couldn't distribute it to anyone (with the possible exception of other members of the FotG team).
wookieejedi
New User
wookieejedi Sorry, data for given user is currently unavailable. Please, try again later. View profile View wishlist Start conversation Invite to friends Invite to friends Accept invitation Accept invitation Pending invitation... Unblock chat Registered: Sep 2016
From United States
Posted September 19, 2016
Wow! That sound like excellent progress!
Good ideas with the two options. I would wager that OBZs would help the game have a wider appeal since it would be easier for anyone to add in their own models. That's just my two cents though. Good luck on whatever option you decide on!
Good ideas with the two options. I would wager that OBZs would help the game have a wider appeal since it would be easier for anyone to add in their own models. That's just my two cents though. Good luck on whatever option you decide on!
FekLeyrTarg
New User
FekLeyrTarg Sorry, data for given user is currently unavailable. Please, try again later. View profile View wishlist Start conversation Invite to friends Invite to friends Accept invitation Accept invitation Pending invitation... Unblock chat Registered: Jun 2012
From Austria
Posted September 19, 2016
I think, with a proper editor, going down the OBZ route sounds more flexible.
IIRC, Freespace 2 does something similar.
IIRC, Freespace 2 does something similar.
Azrapse
New User
Azrapse Sorry, data for given user is currently unavailable. Please, try again later. View profile View wishlist Start conversation Invite to friends Invite to friends Accept invitation Accept invitation Pending invitation... Unblock chat Registered: Jan 2011
From Finland
Posted September 21, 2016
FekLeyrTarg: I think, with a proper editor, going down the OBZ route sounds more flexible.
IIRC, Freespace 2 does something similar.
I think it's the most "future proof" solution. Everyone can make OBJ models, since it's basically an industry standard and almost every modelling tool can export to that. Also, it is simple enough to be imported by the game. IIRC, Freespace 2 does something similar.
It has some problems, though:
- Material information is lost. When importing the models, you will need to create new materials for the ship. This is kind of expected. You can tweak many sliders and play with the shaders in Unity materials, so of course it wasn't going to match how materials work in modelling tools. UV mapping and texture files will still be there, but I guess the importer will need to allow you to choose textures for the albedo, bump mapping, etc, and play with some sliders and parameters to leave it at your taste. Then these settings would be stored in the metafile.
- Mesh hierarchy is lost. This is also annoying. When importing the model, you will need to group the different meshes to form up ship parts (a wing, the cockpit, the engines, the cannons). Then establish the hierarchy again: the cannon belongs to the wing, the wing belongs to the fuselage, the fuselage belongs to the ship.
This is necessary mainly for when ships explode, and the different parts break of. Also, if we had a targeting computer that let us select individual ship components, like in TIE Fighter, this would be needed.
We can circumvent this limitation by establishing the hierarchy in the mesh names. So the cannon mesh could be called "Wing.Cannon" instead of just "Cannon", so that the importer knows that the Cannon should be a child of the Wing in the hierarchy tree.
All this info would also be saved in the metadata file.
Azrapse
New User
Azrapse Sorry, data for given user is currently unavailable. Please, try again later. View profile View wishlist Start conversation Invite to friends Invite to friends Accept invitation Accept invitation Pending invitation... Unblock chat Registered: Jan 2011
From Finland
Posted September 21, 2016
Sorry for the spam.
Last evening, following some playtesting by MajorParts, I spent my time trying to solve a problem regarding how the AI is supposed to change their mind on the fly to better follow their priorities.
The scenario was this:
In the test mission, there are several group is TIE Fighters that fight the rebel ships. One particular group, TIE Fighter group Delta, has as priority the rebel shuttle Hasti. If Hasti is destroyed, the mission is failed.
Well, it can perfectly happen that T/F Delta come to the mission before Hasti does. In that case, they target one of the Y-Wings and dogfight it to death.
It may then happen that Hasti arrives, rescues Ackbar and escapes into hyperspace before the T/F Delta is able to finish off their targeted Y-Wing, so the mission becomes much easier since there is no threat to the rebel shuttle.
Obviously, the solution to this is that T/F Delta must be on the look of the arrival of their primary objective. So now, during a dogfight, and about every 5 seconds, every ship will spend some milliseconds reconsidering if there is a better target for them to attack.
It was a quick solution to the problem, but now I wonder if that would be the most appropiate, or there could be a better one. You can now notice how the ships pause for a fraction of a second, during dogfights, selecting a better target. They seem to be cleverer now, but I somehow feel that this isn't how ships behave in the original game.
What are your impressions on this? Have you been dogfighting an enemy that all of sudden ignores you and goes against another objective?
Last evening, following some playtesting by MajorParts, I spent my time trying to solve a problem regarding how the AI is supposed to change their mind on the fly to better follow their priorities.
The scenario was this:
In the test mission, there are several group is TIE Fighters that fight the rebel ships. One particular group, TIE Fighter group Delta, has as priority the rebel shuttle Hasti. If Hasti is destroyed, the mission is failed.
Well, it can perfectly happen that T/F Delta come to the mission before Hasti does. In that case, they target one of the Y-Wings and dogfight it to death.
It may then happen that Hasti arrives, rescues Ackbar and escapes into hyperspace before the T/F Delta is able to finish off their targeted Y-Wing, so the mission becomes much easier since there is no threat to the rebel shuttle.
Obviously, the solution to this is that T/F Delta must be on the look of the arrival of their primary objective. So now, during a dogfight, and about every 5 seconds, every ship will spend some milliseconds reconsidering if there is a better target for them to attack.
It was a quick solution to the problem, but now I wonder if that would be the most appropiate, or there could be a better one. You can now notice how the ships pause for a fraction of a second, during dogfights, selecting a better target. They seem to be cleverer now, but I somehow feel that this isn't how ships behave in the original game.
What are your impressions on this? Have you been dogfighting an enemy that all of sudden ignores you and goes against another objective?
wookieejedi
New User
wookieejedi Sorry, data for given user is currently unavailable. Please, try again later. View profile View wishlist Start conversation Invite to friends Invite to friends Accept invitation Accept invitation Pending invitation... Unblock chat Registered: Sep 2016
From United States
Posted September 22, 2016
Azrapse: Sorry for the spam.
Last evening, following some playtesting by MajorParts, I spent my time trying to solve a problem regarding how the AI is supposed to change their mind on the fly to better follow their priorities.
The scenario was this:
In the test mission, there are several group is TIE Fighters that fight the rebel ships. One particular group, TIE Fighter group Delta, has as priority the rebel shuttle Hasti. If Hasti is destroyed, the mission is failed.
Well, it can perfectly happen that T/F Delta come to the mission before Hasti does. In that case, they target one of the Y-Wings and dogfight it to death.
It may then happen that Hasti arrives, rescues Ackbar and escapes into hyperspace before the T/F Delta is able to finish off their targeted Y-Wing, so the mission becomes much easier since there is no threat to the rebel shuttle.
Obviously, the solution to this is that T/F Delta must be on the look of the arrival of their primary objective. So now, during a dogfight, and about every 5 seconds, every ship will spend some milliseconds reconsidering if there is a better target for them to attack.
It was a quick solution to the problem, but now I wonder if that would be the most appropiate, or there could be a better one. You can now notice how the ships pause for a fraction of a second, during dogfights, selecting a better target. They seem to be cleverer now, but I somehow feel that this isn't how ships behave in the original game.
What are your impressions on this? Have you been dogfighting an enemy that all of sudden ignores you and goes against another objective?
That is definitely a nice behavior to have in the AI, at least even for the 'brutal' mode if it doesn't fit into the old style of gamelay.Last evening, following some playtesting by MajorParts, I spent my time trying to solve a problem regarding how the AI is supposed to change their mind on the fly to better follow their priorities.
The scenario was this:
In the test mission, there are several group is TIE Fighters that fight the rebel ships. One particular group, TIE Fighter group Delta, has as priority the rebel shuttle Hasti. If Hasti is destroyed, the mission is failed.
Well, it can perfectly happen that T/F Delta come to the mission before Hasti does. In that case, they target one of the Y-Wings and dogfight it to death.
It may then happen that Hasti arrives, rescues Ackbar and escapes into hyperspace before the T/F Delta is able to finish off their targeted Y-Wing, so the mission becomes much easier since there is no threat to the rebel shuttle.
Obviously, the solution to this is that T/F Delta must be on the look of the arrival of their primary objective. So now, during a dogfight, and about every 5 seconds, every ship will spend some milliseconds reconsidering if there is a better target for them to attack.
It was a quick solution to the problem, but now I wonder if that would be the most appropiate, or there could be a better one. You can now notice how the ships pause for a fraction of a second, during dogfights, selecting a better target. They seem to be cleverer now, but I somehow feel that this isn't how ships behave in the original game.
What are your impressions on this? Have you been dogfighting an enemy that all of sudden ignores you and goes against another objective?
Azrapse
New User
Azrapse Sorry, data for given user is currently unavailable. Please, try again later. View profile View wishlist Start conversation Invite to friends Invite to friends Accept invitation Accept invitation Pending invitation... Unblock chat Registered: Jan 2011
From Finland
Posted September 23, 2016
Okay. I am going to ask for some help here with a riddle, because definitely several heads think better than one or two. :)
Also, some of you have some expertise with editing missions for the original X-Wing.
The riddle is this:
XWVM reads the mission files from the original X-Wing mission file folder. The mission files have a binary format that is not self descriptive, but it mostly figured out after so many years.
However, there is a field I don't totally understand it's encoding to read.
That field is the Arrival Delay field for every flight group. When the Arrival Condition of a flight group is met, then there can be an period of time that the flight group needs to wait for before actually arriving to the sector. This amount of time is specified in this Arrival Delay field.
The field in the mission file is encoded with one number. By using some editors, I have compared the number encoded with the amount of time it represents. Here are several examples:
Encoded -> Time in game
1 -> 1m
2 -> 2m
26 -> 36 s
44 -> 2m 24s
47 -> 2m 42s
So, from those samples, can anyone find out a general way to turn the encoded value into an amount of minutes and seconds?
I have some hypothesis, but it doesn't work with the first two samples:
Seconds = Units of the encoded value, times 6.
Minutes = Tens of the encoded value, minus 2.
This works for 26, 44 and 47. But not for 1 and 2. For these two, it seems like
time in minutes = encoded value.
Some notes:
Editors (both XED and XWMB) don't let you enter an amount of seconds that isn't a multiple of 6. You seem to be able to enter any amount of minutes. And actually, you are even allowed to enter minutes and seconds in a way that they overlap. For example, editors let you enter something like 2m 120s, that seem to translate into the encoded value 60 (that matches my hypothesis).
Any brilliant mind sees a pattern here that corrects my hypothesis to cover also the 1 and 2 values?
Also, some of you have some expertise with editing missions for the original X-Wing.
The riddle is this:
XWVM reads the mission files from the original X-Wing mission file folder. The mission files have a binary format that is not self descriptive, but it mostly figured out after so many years.
However, there is a field I don't totally understand it's encoding to read.
That field is the Arrival Delay field for every flight group. When the Arrival Condition of a flight group is met, then there can be an period of time that the flight group needs to wait for before actually arriving to the sector. This amount of time is specified in this Arrival Delay field.
The field in the mission file is encoded with one number. By using some editors, I have compared the number encoded with the amount of time it represents. Here are several examples:
Encoded -> Time in game
1 -> 1m
2 -> 2m
26 -> 36 s
44 -> 2m 24s
47 -> 2m 42s
So, from those samples, can anyone find out a general way to turn the encoded value into an amount of minutes and seconds?
I have some hypothesis, but it doesn't work with the first two samples:
Seconds = Units of the encoded value, times 6.
Minutes = Tens of the encoded value, minus 2.
This works for 26, 44 and 47. But not for 1 and 2. For these two, it seems like
time in minutes = encoded value.
Some notes:
Editors (both XED and XWMB) don't let you enter an amount of seconds that isn't a multiple of 6. You seem to be able to enter any amount of minutes. And actually, you are even allowed to enter minutes and seconds in a way that they overlap. For example, editors let you enter something like 2m 120s, that seem to translate into the encoded value 60 (that matches my hypothesis).
Any brilliant mind sees a pattern here that corrects my hypothesis to cover also the 1 and 2 values?
Post edited September 24, 2016 by Azrapse