Topic: OP+ 3.4 Corrections Thread.

[Pestalence_XC]

To my understanding, the UI shown in the upper right corner (line drawing) is controlled by the Q3 game file.. it is unlikely that it can be fixed until the OP source code is released along with the quicksilver code for the Q3 file... as such, I think Firesoul is matching the ships to the best possible UI that represents it... People can make UI images.. but they can not be added to the Q3 game file as of yet... sorry.

[CaptJosh]

What about correcting spelling and grammar errors in the in mission comms texts like in the "Peace in Our Times" scenario for the EAW for OP stuff. "Not long ago there was a incident involing sabotage message buoys..." Corrected it reads "Not long ago, there was an incident involving sabotaged message buoys..."

BTW, has anyone ever tried to make an SFC1 campaign pack for EAW or OP? Or is it too hard to code what with having no officers you can purchase like in SFC1? And no way for a rom char to choose to join the Praetorian guard or the Tal Shiar, etc.

[FireSoul]

What about correcting spelling and grammar errors in the in mission comms texts like in the "Peace in Our Times" scenario for the EAW for OP stuff. "Not long ago there was a incident involing sabotage message buoys..." Corrected it reads "Not long ago, there was an incident involving sabotaged message buoys..."

BTW, has anyone ever tried to make an SFC1 campaign pack for EAW or OP? Or is it too hard to code what with having no officers you can purchase like in SFC1? And no way for a rom char to choose to join the Praetorian guard or the Tal Shiar, etc.

Hey Josh,
.. truth is, the amount of work required to do a SFC1 pack for EAW or OP would turn off any SFC hobby developper. Maybe you should look into doing it yourself?

[CaptJosh]

You have any recommended resources for learning how to code this stuff?

It's funny...I was going to say "maybe when I have more time" and then I stopped, and I told myself, "The hell with that! If I wait til I have more time, I'll never start!"

[FireSoul]

Well, see if you can get your hands on MS Visual Studio 6. It's older but perfectly good for SFC's mission packs. Other than that, all the ressources are online on people's sites.

[CaptJosh]

Please don't tell me they actually used Visual Basic to code this game?

[Strafer]

No, Visual C++

[FireSoul]

No, Visual C++

What he said. MSVC 6.0 sp 5.

[FireSoul]

Lyran:
  Mech Links: Y178
  PowerPack: Y177

  Module C1 lists Lyran P-refits as being Y168...that's a scary proposition, CWLs w/30 power and BCs w/38 power until Y177, even the Kzin would have more juice<shudder>

There are 2 P refits: Powerpack and phsers. I assume Y168 is the phaser refit.

[CaptJosh]

No, Visual C++

Crap. I don't even know C or C++, much less Visual C++

[FireSoul]

No, Visual C++

Crap. I don't even know C or C++, much less Visual C++

Don't get discouraged by a little detail like that.

[CaptJosh]

I also don't have much in the way of spare time to learn it. Why hasn't anyone just written a utility with a GUI to do mission scripting anyway? Or what about a basic blank minimal mission script that would let you fill in the rest? Also a basic blank campaign file?

[FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC]

When you create a mission script using VC++, it essentially creates a 'blank' mission for you to fill in. Of course, you may not want much of what it autogenerates for you and have to change things anyway.

FMSE is a GUI that creates mission scripts, but it is very limited.

Remember that because the game was written in C++, and that the mission scripts are also written in C++, anything you can do in a C++ program, you can also do in a mission script. It is this flexibility that makes using actual code essential.

[FPF-DieHard]

Could mission scripts be written that emulate single-internals?

[FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC]

Could mission scripts be written that emulate single-internals?

It might be possible to get a mission script to double the damage everytime something gets hit, effectively giving you single internals, however damage would still be distributed the same (ie. systems would still be in half damaged states).

Only the client source code can realistically change the number of internals, and it could be difficult.

[FireSoul]

Could mission scripts be written that emulate single-internals?

Not correctly.

Besides, can I get my thread back, please?

[CaptJosh]

Sorry Firesoul. That's my fault.

Corrections for OP+...Hmm...

Why don't there seem to be any XBBs or at least BBXes? At least, I can't recal having seen them. But you'd think a Battleship of all things would deffinitely get refitted with X weaps. A battleship was designed for a slugging match, after all, and better weapons = a harder punch.

[Strafer]

Actually, X-tech was developped so you wouldn't NEED to make DNs and BBs anymore.

[FireSoul]

I just know that there aren't any. For example, ADB has specifically created DLXs   (X1 DNLs)  for the pleasure of the players, but have been clear in saying that such 'technology' would have been impossible, and thus none of these ships were actually built. The same goes for DNs, DNHs, BBs, etc.

[CaptJosh]

I guess it's kinda like how during WWII, carriers took over for battleships because of Pearl Harbor and the demonstration that air power reigned supreme over the briney deep. Well, we could have some XSCSes maybe? I know that in the US Navy a lot of advanced tech ends up on carriers. Though apparently our cruisers and cans(destroyers, Arleigh Burke Class in particular) get the most advanced(AEGIS) systems, though those are the flower of 1975 tech.