Wow, that's a ton of detail in the responses, thanks guys. To go through them:
DTM wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 8:21 am
Thank you WillT for your detailed feedback. We really appreciate these analyzes, because they show that there is someone who greatly appreciates our work and helps us to improve ourselves.
Regarding landing gear: currently it is not possible to separate the control of the gears from that of the S-Foils.
Life is made of decisions. In this case we felt that the addition of the gears was more important than the flight with the S-foils closed. I understand that this idea is not shared by everyone ... I'm sorry, we hope that in the future we tend to separate the two functions.
Yeah, I really do appreciate the effort you guys are still putting into a 20 year old game. It's honestly remarkable this community is still going. Seeing all the additions in the latest patch got me to play around with some missions again and this game is
still enjoyable. A lot of that is down to you guys.
I figured you must have had that conversation. I totally understand.
It's only two ships. I'll make peace with it. I think you're right that it does make all those ships in the hangar look so much better.
DTM wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 8:21 am
I could remember badly, but I don't think the behavior of ships entering hyperspace has been changed by the hook. If I remember correctly the ships have always kept the S-foils open, with the exception of the entrance and exit from the hangar.
Phoenix Leader wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 10:19 am
That's correct. AI controlled crafts never close S-foils when entering hyperspace. In such circumstance the S-foils closure only happens for player's craft.
I checked in a vanilla install, and you guy are absolutely correct.
My apologies, consider that comment retracted. I was sure I remembered seeing B-Wings coming out of hyperspace with s-foils closed, but I'm obviously wrong.
So yes, even less for me to worry about with the new landing gear change.
JeremyaFr wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 11:46 am
Thank you Will T
Feedbacks are always appreciated.
My pleasure, Jeremy. And seriously thanks so much for all your work expanding the game's capabilities. Everything looked a bit daunting with the hooks at first, but I read through a few readmes and soon figured out how to switch out the shuttle in the hangar with DTM's U-Wing and it worked perfectly. It's amazing how simple you've made the implementation of this, the scope for even a fairly casual player to customise elements and do things with the game previously thought impossible is fantastic.
Darksaber wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 11:52 pm
You can replace the *.dat files from the backup folder within the XwingAlliance folder, it's a hidden folder and will either be called BackupDSUCP or BackupXWAUCP depending on which craft pack you have installed
If you look in the Resdata Folder with in the backup folder you will see a list of the backed up *.dat files
Explosions = Explosions.dat
Laser inpacts = Animation.dat (also includes the Hyperspace animation)
You might also want to replace the Particles.dat and Sparks.dat
Sorry this wasn't and optional install
Firstly DS, thanks so much for taking the time to go through my long winded comments. It really is much appreciated.
And thanks for that. I figured it would probably be a simple dat file swap out, but I wasn't sure exactly which files and if there were changes needed to one of the .txt or mission.ini files. And thanks for setting up backup folders as part of the install process, it makes things so much easier for the picky among us who like to customise a little.
Darksaber wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 11:52 pm
First thank you, it's me that makes the installers so I basically decides what's in the installer, sorry if you think it's messy, I can do little with the way options are selected, I've tried to make it as user friendly as possible, I'm also limited to space for the descriptions, I'm limited to around 196 characters including spaces for the descriptions. Which makes it hard to fit in all the info that is needed, I do put in (See Readme) but obviously I may have left a lot out of the readme, or just totally forgot to put anything about the specific option in the first place, the lasers are a good example, it's needs more work I know.
Separate pages isn't an option, it would really mess up the installer, this is the reason for the readme file also images are not an option either.
Yep, totally understood. I figured it must just be a limitation of the installer tool itself.
It's not something I was expecting to be changed, just a suggestion for something that could maybe be looked at in future if another solution to the install method comes along.
Darksaber wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 11:52 pm
This I can fix, but one question for you, are you using the included pilot file or creating your own, I only ask as the included pilot file has all the slots enabled so you should see all craft and objects in the library, the temp pilot files are only for this reason. they are not really to be used as a permanent pilot file, I expect the user to use there own pilot file of create there own.
I have also looked through the original txt files and the Craft Pack Fix patch (available below) fixes most of the problems you describe,
When the Fix is applied the Tie Experimental will have there original names, you won't see them in the craft library until you come across them in the mission, then they should appear in the library.
Proximity Mine, Homing Mine won't be available in skirmish
Other objects like the connector rod and worker droid and pilot are back to there original TG setup.
This was using my own pilot file, yes. I did double check after you mentioned, as I was briefly confused by the temp pilot after XWAU install, but yes my pilot file still had all of the craft library additions.
There might have been some weird stuff happen as a result of specific install order. I copied my pilot file into a clean install of XWA and loaded it, but the game still asked me to create a new pilot file on launch the first time. I switched over to my pilot file then installed XWAU, but the new pilot seemed to become the default when I checked some things in MXvTED later. I've since deleted it but... I don't know, maybe that caused some unintended behaviour?
Amazing, thanks so much for making those tweaks.
I haven't had chance to check out the craft pack fix yet, but I'll be sure to report back when I do.
Darksaber wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 11:52 pm
Fixed the names of the experimental ties, I'm not sure why you think the Medium Transport is referred to as the Tunaboat, I never liked that name for the Opt, so I renamed the Opt to MediumTransport.opt along time ago, no reference to Tuna is in the description and never has been, it was the same for the PiggyBack.opt, I renamed that to PinookFighter.opt along time ago.
Also the Experimental Ties will no longer have visible pilots and No Exterior models, though if you wish to in skirmish they will still be flyable originally they are not.
I think you might have misunderstood, DS. I was referring to the TG opts, not to any of your work. My point was that TG clearly threw some less serious joke names into the file structure. I was drawing a connection between those opts and the Experimental TIEs, as the names of the experimentals also never appeared anywhere else in the game. My point was that I don't believe, way back in 98, that TG
intended those TIEs to ever be called things like 'Bizzaro' anymore than they intended the Medium Transport to be called 'Tunaboat'. They were joke names in the backend .
For that reason, it's strange to me that a lot of the extended Star Wars community took those names at face value. Even the wookieepedia entries reference them.
But thanks for correcting them. And thanks for hearing me out on the cockpit issue. I know that means we won't get to see those opts in quite the best detail you've made for them, but I think it's the best step to stay accurate to the original intention of the game.
Darksaber wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 11:52 pm
There isn't much I can do about this as I'm not mission maker, someone else would have to alter the missions.
Do you have any suggestions what the Moncals should be called??? Any input would be grateful as in the past I've tried to research the names myself, and obviously failed.
I might have spoken a little too soon with this, actually.
I've been playing around with some missions, and I hadn't realised that you'd thrown the Home One opt in as the Independence. The new hangar hooks have kinda made my original argument a little irrelevant, as it's not so vital for the movie opts to be in the two specific slots with hangars anymore. I guess an extra model is an extra model
I still think the Defiance should also be set to a Home One type, but after seeing it done with the Independence I know I could just swap the model in Allied and everything would still work because of the hooks.
I wouldn't say it's a question of research, exactly. The Mon Cal cruisers were a total mess throughout the Legends continuity, I don't you think you
would find a straight answer. It's been cleared up a bunch in Disney canon (though there's still some questionable elements - Home One's size is
still contentious nearly 30 years after those WEG sourcebooks).
I don't want to bore you with a nerd overdose, but I guess the question is whether you want XWAU to stick firmly in the Legends continuity that XWA was part of, give it a bit of a spruce up to the new continuity in some areas (which would also be the easiest way of saying 'just make it look like the films', but would make the information something of a hybrid) or stick even more rigidly to TG's version and ignore all the continuity snarls they caused with inaccurate models and stats.
Based on the inclusion of the Home One type and the Reef Home type, I feel XWAU as a whole wants go with the 'make it look like the movies' approach. But if that's the plan, I think you should go with the new canon designations (that sort of almost make sense).
That would be as follows:
TG's 'Winged Calamari Cruiser' =
MC80 Star Cruiser (Liberty type) (already done)
TG's 'MC80a Calamari Cruiser' =
MC80A Star Cruiser (a.ka. Home One type) (already done for the Independence)
+ MC80 Star Cruiser (Reef Home type) as a new ship, because they were already in the films (already done)
The existing MC80a Chatnoir-class that DTM made based on JM's old model isn't a ship that appears in the films, or anywhere else. I know it's a nice, convenient solution to not changing the missions with the Defiance in them to account for it nearly tripling in size, but my personal take is that it isn't needed for XWAU to feel like a true 'they look like the films now' upgrade.
Again, that's just my take. If you hate the idea, I can swap things around to personal taste on my own time, it's fine. If you need tweaked copies of the B1 missions with a bigger Defiance, I can do that too.
Darksaber wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 11:52 pm
Again not a lot we can do about the sfoils, it would be great if we could split the sfoils from the landing gear.
Other fixes in this patch include fixed Naboo Fighter as it was only firing from one laser hardpoints (not sure why) but this will only be installed if installing this fix to the DSUCPv2.6
Link Removed
Please goto
Craft Pack Fixes for DSUCPv2.6/XWAUCPv1.6 to Download fix
.
.
As I said earlier, it's not a deal breaker. I'll get used to it.
Thanks again for offering up this fix patch DS, I'll be sure to check it out as soon as I get chance.
And thanks again for helping to keep this community going. I'm very grateful for all the otherwise free time you dedicate to this.
Bman wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2019 5:21 am
For landing gear issue, all Will T. has to do is just edit the .txt or .ini file and comment out the line that activates the mesh index number. Problem solved.
Another idea, toying with the mesh's LOD distance. He could cloak the landing gear mesh(es) the farther you move away from player's X-wing ship when the S-Foils are closed during flight. So it's only visible up close say for example when in the hangar bays, or parked/orbit on a platform. Best of both worlds ?
Amazing Bman, thanks for this.
I hadn't realised they were dependent on .ini files. Yeah, if ever I really want X-Wings flying with closed s-foils and no landing gear. I guess I'm kinda faced with the same decision as you guys now, after having seen how good those parked X-Wings look in the hangar, I'm no longer so sure if losing that is worth something I only do now and then for a little bit of very meaningless entertainment.
But it's good to now the option is there, and is an easy (and temporary!) solution. Seriously, these hooks are enhancing this game so much.