Jagged Alliance Forum

Realist hat geschrieben:Kaiden,

I have some technical requests on 1.13.
I'd like to see the program supporting .mp3 soundfiles in addition to those big old waves. In my opinion this would help both distribute new mods and - although hard disks are getting bigger and bigger - save disk space in order to maybe have more than one installation at once, i.e. a single one for every mod.

I think it was mentioned before at the Bear's Pit, but what about a possibility in the ja2.ini file in order to configure what data-directory should be used. I think of not having a separate installation for every mod but a separate data-folder. There should still be a default data-dir, which mods would share, but they can have their own directory and overwrite the default-files. This would make mods easier to organize, wouldn't it?

And a last thing. In Bear's Pit there was the idea of increasing the resolution - at least in tactical screen. When it comes to graphical changes, would it be possible to get rid of those limitation to a 256 color palette some .stis have to use? Maybe it's also possible to use not .stis any more but bitmaps or .jpgs instead?

Realist hat geschrieben:@Spectre
That's exactly what I meant by my second point.

Realist hat geschrieben: @Kaiden
I don't know much about graphics programming neither, so I thought you might do, since you're the professional. Maybe Mugsy or Snap can help.

Spectre hat geschrieben:Cool
Maybe a launcher would be nice - the JA2.exe in the main directory. Searches subdirs for JA2 exes, so you don't have to install mods (create shortcut). Unzip would do.

Spectre hat geschrieben: I would aks Toxic.

KillerFaultier hat geschrieben: so what do you think of it, seriously?

smilingassassin hat geschrieben:@Realist

many graphic files in ja2 are multipages or animations

i doubt that bitmaps or jpegs are handy for that purpose. but increasing the number of colours in the .sti palettes would already do a lot of good to graphics modding

aber warum posten hier alle nur noch in englisch?

smilingassassin hat geschrieben:i agree that .gif is certainly an option in this respect

Kaiden hat geschrieben:You mean the Beta Editor? If so, yes I will be recompiling the Beta Editor and adding support for the 1.13 XML's, the new Prof.bin, and Snaps extended tileset support.

Ah, impressive list. I'll fall down on my knees if you get all those things done.

Spectre hat geschrieben:The chance to get the initiative should depend not only on level and attributes, the weapon held in hand should also have an influence.
For example: Level 4 with a submachine gun in hand beats lvl 6 with a Barrett. This puts "role" into the weapon classes.

Realist hat geschrieben:But in this case the play mustn't be allowed to switch the weapon in-hand. Otherwise he just gets initiative (or interrupt - not completely sure what you mean here) and puts Barrett in the hand. Since that doesn't cost you any AP's it wouldn't make any sense - in my opinion.

Realist hat geschrieben:But in this case the play mustn't be allowed to switch the weapon in-hand. Otherwise he just gets initiative (or interrupt - not completely sure what you mean here) and puts Barrett in the hand. Since that doesn't cost you any AP's it wouldn't make any sense - in my opinion.

'-=[MAD hat geschrieben:=-'][zu deutsch zum letzten satz: Selbst wenn die Idee umgesetzt wird, dann würde ich doch immer noch meinen söldner vor rundenende die MP in die hand geben, und wenn ich dann die unterbrechung bekommen hab, zum SSG wechseln. Würde also keinen unterschied machen
und ja ich weiss, das es im englischen anders steht, aber wie gesagt kann ich kaum englisch sprechen/schreiben ]

Spectre hat geschrieben:Oh, and one more thing:
Maby this feature allready exists ...but if so, it hasn't been documented.
The chance to get the initiative should depend not only on level and attributes, the weapon held in hand should also have an influence.
For example: Level 4 with a submachine gun in hand beats lvl 6 with a Barrett. This puts "role" into the weapon classes.

Realist hat geschrieben:For merging items I think of an array of type of a struct that contains information about the two items, which item(s) you'll keep, what item and also the number of items you'll recieve. That array could get its own XML file like the other arrays in items.cpp.

// Tactical\Items.cpp, somewhere near to the items table:

typedef enum
{
	KEEP_FIRST_ITEM,
	KEEP_SECOND_ITEM,
	KEEP_BOTH_ITEMS,	// listed here, although I've no idea what this might good for
} EXTENDED_MERGETYPE;

// NOTE: see BOOLEAN AttachObject(...) -function

UINT16 ExtendedMerge[][5] =
{
	// just some crazy example of items I've used before - don't be surprised if it doesn't make too much sense
	// 1st item		2nd item	result item			# of results	which one to keep
	{ COMBAT_KNIFE,	TSHIRT,		TSHIRT_DEIDRANNA,	4,				KEEP_FIRST_ITEM },
	{ 0,			0,			0,					0,				0 },
};

// Tactical\Items.cpp, at the beginning of AttachObject-function

	UINT8 ubLoop = 0;
	UINT8 i;
	
	// loop through extended merge array
	while ( ExtendedMerge[ ubLoop ][ 0 ] != 0 )
	{
		if( (pTargetObj->usItem == ExtendedMerge[ubLoop][0] && pAttachment->usItem == ExtendedMerge[ubLoop][1])
			|| (pTargetObj->usItem == ExtendedMerge[ubLoop][1] && pAttachment->usItem == ExtendedMerge[ubLoop][0]) )
		{
			// items found for extended merge...

			// switch items if necessary
			// the item you wanna keep has to be the attachment
			if ( (ExtendedMerge[ubLoop][4] == KEEP_FIRST_ITEM && pAttachment->usItem != ExtendedMerge[ubLoop][0])
				|| (ExtendedMerge[ubLoop][4] == KEEP_SECOND_ITEM && pAttachment->usItem != ExtendedMerge[ubLoop][1]) )
			{
				// switch 'em
				OBJECTTYPE *pTmp;
				
				pTmp = pTargetObj;
				pTargetObj = pAttachment;				
				pAttachment = pTmp;				
			}


			// set merge result item and amount
			pTargetObj->usItem = ExtendedMerge[ubLoop][2];
			pTargetObj->ubNumberOfObjects = (UINT8) ExtendedMerge[ubLoop][3];

			
			for (i = 0; i < pTargetObj->ubNumberOfObjects; i++)
			{
				// set some status values
				pTargetObj->bStatus[i] = pAttachment->bStatus[0];
			}

			// quit to keep attachment item
			return FALSE;
		}

		ubLoop++;
	}

smilingassassin hat geschrieben:switching weapons cost AP? that would spoil quite some aspect of the game for me

Spectre hat geschrieben:I made a list of some details i've noticed while playing ...just my personal point of view:


* The UMP is an absolutely pointless weapon.
* Imho the AK-103 comes in too soon.
* Wight problems.
* Money problems.

Spectre hat geschrieben: * Item problems.
Similar to the last point - no clue what would make it work better. While it is just boring to sell all the armor and Nightvision goggles things like ceramic plates, LAWs and mortar shells come in quite handy. I wouldn't miss them anymore. Brings dynamic to the game when you can bombshell the hell out of your enemy.
There is more incomming than i can sell to the local dealers so i am forced to dump the stuff via ALT. Besides - moving all the weapons to Toni isn't really an option. Its a pain in the ass. There is also a crossover to the money problem - thank God you don't have to, since you drown in money (at least if you are not one of the "Trevor and Magic" faction).

Spectre hat geschrieben: Maby if you could donnate the stuff to the militia...

Spectre hat geschrieben: * Rooftop party.
Nice feature, having enemies on the roof now. But they seem to develop a strange, yet allmost pervert obsession with roofs.
I cleared Alma Prison with one soldier on the roof. Shoot one enemy, the next comes climbing. Similar scenario in some of the missile sites. One small roof, 10 soldiers up there. One mustardgas mortar grenade and hasta la vista baby to halve the sector force. You can even blindfire, they are allways up there.
Imho some reballancing would be cool.

Spectre hat geschrieben: * Strange behaviour of sniperz.
There is a sniper on a roof. One of my men engages, while the rest stays far behind in the darkness of the night. The one engaging locates the sniper and misses the first shot. Now the sniper shoots one of my other men - one of the leftbehinds. He can't know they are there. If he knew, the combat mode would have started. I have seen this on many occasions when you climb to a roof f.e. The enemy starts round-mode on hearing, so there is absolutely no way he knew where the rest of my team could be - really no way, coz hes the only one left outside (Alma H/14, but i have seen this behaviour in other locations throughout Arulco)!
Strong snipers - fine with me. But plz something more "legit".

Spectre hat geschrieben: PS: One more thing...
Maby it would be a good *option* to restrict Bobby Ray to ammo and similar stuff. Takes somehow the fun out of the game to have all the rifles at your disposal, while having enuff mortar shells puts it back in.

Spectre hat geschrieben:Oh, and one more thing:
Maby this feature allready exists ...but if so, it hasn't been documented.
The chance to get the initiative should depend not only on level and attributes, the weapon held in hand should also have an influence.
For example: Level 4 with a submachine gun in hand beats lvl 6 with a Barrett. This puts "role" into the weapon classes.

Realist hat geschrieben:But in this case the player mustn't be allowed to switch the weapon in-hand. Otherwise he just gets initiative (or interrupt - not completely sure what you mean here) and puts Barrett in the hand. Since that doesn't cost you any AP's it wouldn't make any sense - in my opinion.

'-=[MAD hat geschrieben:=-']Ah, I didnt understand point 57 again
The weapons wight more when they are carried in the hands?

'-=[MAD hat geschrieben:=-']
@Spectre
I am sorry, but Kaiden sayd that balancing the weapons now would be much too early.
But I also think, that all weapons with pistol ammo (.45 like the Thompson or UMP, 9x19mm like the MP5) should have the ability to have a sound supressor.

Spectre hat geschrieben:My only point was: you should lose the initiative, if it is an initiative-move and you switch the weapon. First contact, or interrupt. The rest should stay as it is now (in my opinion). No AP costs.
This gives a role to every weapon. The smaller, the better the initiative bonus (who shoots first). You dont go and do combat with a Barrett ...you simply don't!

smilingassassin hat geschrieben:@spectre

this has also to do with enemy placement in vanilla ja2 maps

maps would have to be adjusted for 1.13 AI to work properly

(enemy placement and behaviour)

Spectre hat geschrieben:@all
There are some things i found kinda disturbing around weapon addons. Does a VAL silent need a flash suppressor?! Please ...enlighten me.

Spectre hat geschrieben:The initiative thing:
I am strictly against additional AP costs for whatever. You allready need more AP to raise a Barrett, than a MP5. I did simply say, this should also be reflected when it comes down to initiative.
For example: you need, say 8 AP to raise a Barrett and 3 for the MP5. So you get +5 bonus to "reaction" while holding the MP5 against an enemy holding a Barrett.