Home Forums Free SciFi Gaming Projects Pioneer !! Pioneer Question Time !! – Ask them here

Viewing 1,278 reply threads



Besides monthly games you also get access to over 60 free games in their library


  • Author
    Posts
    • #58011
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      Any questions that do not warrant a fresh topic can be asked here.




      This bundle expires on 3/25/2019


    • #74496
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      Original post:

      Quote:
      Please post your Pioneer related questions here to save the board being spammed by 1 reply topics.

      They Will be answered here. ๐Ÿ™‚

      Quote:
      Possible v7 bug – Loading v6 saved game crashes Pioneer

      Saves are not compatible between Alpha releases currently.

      Quote:

      Possible bug in Selling illegal goods

      Unless Tomm has changed this the Goods trader does not work as intended.

      Quote:
      Bulletin board doesnt work?

      It does, simply accelerate time ahead and the board will populate itself.

      Quote:
      Are Fuel Scoops available for the Eagle LRF?

      No, thats a gameplay decision, some ships don’t have the ability to fit them.

      Quote:
      How do I do X, Y or Z?

      Go here: http://pioneerspacesim.net/wiki/index.p … =Main_Page

      Quote:
      My ship does not use correct values for acceleration

      Save and reload.

      Quote:
      Help, doing action X crashes my game

      Don’t do ‘action X’ then

    • #74497
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      *Reserved*

    • #74498
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant
      s20dan wrote:
      Help, doing action X crashes my game

      Don’t do ‘action X’ then

      ๐Ÿ˜† Good advice there S20dan!

    • #74499
      Avatars2odan
      Participant
      Geraldine wrote:

      ๐Ÿ˜† Good advice there S20dan!

      If it works…. ๐Ÿ˜‰

      Its like those Doctor Doctor jokes.

      Quote:

      Patient : Doctor, Doctor, it hurts when I…..*insert action here*

      Doctor : Then Don’t….*insert action here*

    • #74500
      AvatarFeenicks
      Participant

      First of all, congratulations on all the amazing work you have achieved so far.

      I have a question which I guess could also be interpreted as a request … would it be possible to implement a headlight feature which is attached to the underside of each craft and can be angled forwards or aftwards? The only reason really is that due to the light model in Pioneer, you can’t see what you’re landing on if you’re trying to land on the dark side of a planet, and whilst you can use the altimeter to gauge your height, it would really help if you could actually see the terrain below.

      I was imagining something like a helicopter searchlight, with an effective range of like one or two kilometres before the atmosphere scatters the light away. It could be purchasable at the shipyard or standard issue on all craft.

      If it’s too much trouble, please say, but I thought it wouldn’t hurt to ask. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74501
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      Thats a good idea.

      Many ships do have a light like this, except that the light will not shine on other objects, so its already half-way there.

      I’ll look into it, but off the top of my head I wouldn’t know how to add it.

      I might ask Tom about it, (he’ll know what to do) as I could see this being a neat little feature.

    • #74502
      AvatarKingHaggis
      Participant

      Yeah, good idea. Would also make the game more atmospheric, i.m.o. Exploring a deep dark canyon with a searchlight. In the game Mechwarrior 2, your mech was equipped with the so called “image enhancement” system. It basically turned everything into a wireframe VR like environment which also looked nice. This way, you won’t enjoy the terrain graphics but it does look cool in a sci-fi way and you’ll be able to see everything. In later Mechwarrior games, the image enhancement was replaced by “light amplification mode”, which was basically just night vision. Not really a request though, I was just having nice memories about a nice game series.

      But good idea! I like it ๐Ÿ˜‰ .

    • #74503
      Avatarhighlander
      Participant

      Is it possible to use real star catalogs for the names, positions, and types of star systems (i.e. colour and size of star, number of stars, mass of stars)? This would allow at least a larger part of the galactic map made from real star data. If the real astronomy programs (i.e. Celestia, Red Shift, etc.) can do it, I’m sure you guys could.

      Celestia knows about more than 100,000 stars, by default. There’s add-ons for it that boost that number past 2 million stars, and that download only occupies 35 MB, which is peanuts in the broadband age.

      The Guide Star Catalog has information about roughly 10% of the stars in our galaxy (more than 940 million of the 100 billion or so).

      Even if you had real star data for stars of a certain magnitude or higher, the rest of the galaxy’s dimmer stars could then be populated using the random name/star type generation tool.

      Planets would (and should) still be generated in the same way as is being done now (which is awesome, by the way), regardless whether they are around real stars or seed-generated ones.

    • #74504
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      I’ve asked for the same thing. Tomm basically said that the galaxy generator will stay much as it is through Pioneer 1.0. After that he’ll look into adding stuff like that. See The Balancing Act thread page 3.

    • #74505
      AvatarSubzeroplainzero
      Participant

      I have a question! What are the chances of some improved ati compatibility? My desktop if fine as it has a geforce 9500gt, but I just got a new laptop which has an ati radeon hd 4250 which has major problems with the game. At start, an error message tells me it has to start with shaders disabled. Even then, planets tend to turn completely invisible when I get close or when I load my game.

    • #74506
      AvatarSzin
      Participant

      Hi everyone,

      i did a quick look on the alpha 7 and it was a real nice looking!

      On startup got an conversion error (4 to 3 component float) on the shader compiler for file postprocessCompose.frag.glsl

      replacing line 10 with

      Code:
      col += 0.1 * vec3(texture2DRect(bloomTex, vec2(gl_FragCoord.x*0.25, gl_FragCoord.y*0.25))) ;

      solved the problem.

      None the less the graphics look a little bit strange sometimes with shaders enabled (z-fighting)

      My config: Win7 64, Core i3, ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5470

      Keep going on!

      Szin

    • #74507
      Avatarcelticfang
      Participant

      I got it installed on two PCs, a win7 netbook and winXP desktop

      It runs fine on netbook, but I get out of range on the desktop and can’t find anywhere to change it

    • #74508
      Avatars2odan
      Participant
      Quote:
      It runs fine on netbook, but I get out of range on the desktop and can’t find anywhere to change it

      Thats resolution related, you need to change the resolution but you cant get into the game to do that. So you simply edit the .ini file: C:/Users/*name*/AppData/Local/Pioneer/config.ini

      Location may change with operating system.

      Quote:
      On startup got an conversion error (4 to 3 component float) on the shader compiler for file postprocessCompose.frag.glsl

      +

      Quote:
      At start, an error message tells me it has to start with shaders disabled.

      Got a feeling that those bugs are fixed, can you both try out the Alpha 7.5 please and confirm if its still in that? I messed up the packaging of alpha 7 a little so some older shaders were included with that, but thats fixed in alpha 7.5, or at least I think it is ๐Ÿ™‚

      Pioneer Alpha 7.5 WIP

      And the fix for alpha7.5

      download/file.php?id=1093

    • #74509
      AvatarSubzeroplainzero
      Participant
      s20dan wrote:

      Got a feeling that those bugs are fixed, can you both try out the Alpha 7.5 please and confirm if its still in that? I messed up the packaging of alpha 7 a little so some older shaders were included with that, but thats fixed in alpha 7.5, or at least I think it is ๐Ÿ™‚

      I tried it and the error message no longer comes up and planets dont seem to be disappearing any more! .. unfortunately there still seem to be problems. The colours on planets appear quite intense with or without shaders enabled, moreso with hdr enabled. Earth’s moon for example is red with green blotches. Great work though! It’s getting closer ๐Ÿ˜€

    • #74510
      Avatarexplorer44
      Participant

      Here a possible bug I have found in v7 : some missions in the BB have the wrong title for destination,

      it often occurs when there is 2 or more missions to the same system.

      for example :

      1st mission (good one)

      title: Need a fast ship to go to the Olack system

      content: packet to deliver to the Olack system …….

      2nd mission (wrong one = bug)

      title : Going to Olack system ?

      content : packet to deliver to the Ross 154 system …..

      (and here, the real destination is Ross 154)

      Greetings

      and congratulations for all the good work

    • #74511
      Avatarcelticfang
      Participant

      Bug, I saved up for a class 4 military drive and miitary fuel, yet it says ‘insuficient fuel (1t required)’ when I have 30t

    • #74512
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      Just found this game infinity is dragging its heels good to see a development progressing eve online blows

      So got the alpha 7 realise and love it.

      A quick question are there plans for a system whereby as u explore and trade u will have an impact on colony development – ie if u trade into a outlying system a lot it will upgrade, population grow it will become better defended or the system itself will upgrade and degrade dynamically * if u turn pirate * u can cause a system to become a pirate heaven production drops and so forth

      And also are there plans for dynamic expansion and dying of outlying colonies u know those thousands of explored and unexplored systems where if u head out with some equipment u can setup a colony of youre own or u will be given missions to take out and setup equipment for a colony 1000 light years from earth and once the mission is complete it becomes a part of the game map. U and the AI ships then expand to incorprate make it thrive or kill it off

      Or is the aim of this game more a space sim and outlying areas remain kind of only of use as high pirate levels mining and basic interaction or are there long term plans for a space sim but with influencing factors that make the world grow change based on youre acitons

    • #74513
      Avatars2odan
      Participant
      celticfang wrote:
      Bug, I saved up for a class 4 military drive and miitary fuel, yet it says ‘insuficient fuel (1t required)’ when I have 30t

      Was that for alpha 7.5?

      If so, try this fix:

      [attachment=383:Alpha7.5 fix.7z]

      Let me know if that works for you, I only tested it on 2 ships; the Panther and the Police Viper.

    • #74514
      Avatarcelticfang
      Participant

      It was Alpha 7 and happened on any ship I can fit a class 4 in. I usually use a Sirius Interdictor ora Panther

      I’ll try 7.5 with your fix now

    • #74515
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      so how close is alpha 8.0 to being let loose

    • #74516
      Avatarcelticfang
      Participant
      celticfang wrote:
      It was Alpha 7 and happened on any ship I can fit a class 4 in. I usually use a Sirius Interdictor ora Panther

      I’ll try 7.5 with your fix now

      Am I missing something? I’m using your fix and can’t find fuel for ANY ship, I buy hydrogen..no luck. I buy miitary fuel….no luck either

      Love the new textures though

    • #74517
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      are u using a military drive on a civilian ship ?

    • #74518
      Avatarcelticfang
      Participant

      Same with a civlian hyperdrive, I can’t buy fuel for both.

      If I use a military drive, military fuel doesn’t work

      Civilian drive, buy hydrogen, no fuel for that either

    • #74519
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      Erm interesting wonder if theres any fixes planned

    • #74520
      Avatarcelticfang
      Participant

      It’s fixed

      Re-downloaded, it works fine now

    • #74521
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      ah good now for the hyperspace to station via map feature

    • #74522
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      Glad thats working for you now CelticFang, the bug seemed to be related to ship mass (I noticed it more on the small ships with big drives) and drive power, I have reduced the drive power a fraction and it seemed to work, although in Alpha 7.5+fix all drives are a little more powerful anyway so you won’t notice the reduction.

      Ollobrain, I actually considered releasing that ‘fix’ as Alpha 8 as it contains a few changes, but they are pretty minor like the addition of some realistic ores and minerals for future mining as well as a few bug-fixes. The drives were also changed somewhat, I added in a new super massive super expensive fuel-less drive for a big ship that I’m working, and have reworked the drive powers of the larger civ drives and all the military drives to conincide with the increases in mass to most of the ships.

    • #74523
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      this fuelless drive for massive ships sounds something along the lines of a warp drive sounds interesting

      What will this massive ship be used for. Im guessing a battlestar or some large size suitable for docking maybe or just long range transport

      Could be useful for colony placement missions or dropping of remote science labs, satelites for recon missions or pirate bases or even emergency supplies to some outlying colony type missions

    • #74524
      AvatarStardreamer
      Participant
      ollobrain wrote:
      ah good now for the hyperspace to station via map feature

      Oh yesties. I think this must be my biggest bugbear with Pioneer right now. Not being able to use that lovely zoomable solar system map screen to set my autopilot targets. I also miss being able to see the planets and stations there.

    • #74525
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant
      Stardreamer wrote:
      ollobrain wrote:
      ah good now for the hyperspace to station via map feature

      Oh yesties. I think this must be my biggest bugbear with Pioneer right now. Not being able to use that lovely zoomable solar system map screen to set my autopilot targets. I also miss being able to see the planets and stations there.

      looks like its on the to do list just need to find a few more programmers

    • #74526
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      Has anyone tried fighting the police in 7.5 yet or just pirates? Actually its the Alpha7.5 fix on the previous page I am referring to

      I made a minute change which I thought gave an improvement to the AI from the little testing I have done.

      Instead of an enemy approaching at a constant relative speed, they will alter their speed depending on the distance from you, so will approach much quicker from far away, and slow down a lot when trying to get you in their sites.

      Sometimes it seems to work very well and they will actually follow you for a time trying to nail you with the guns, other times they will overshoot you.

      But this stil doesn’t fix the aiming of AI, from the testing I have done the AI doesn’t seem able to ‘lead’ their target. They always shoot where you were, not where you will be.

    • #74527
      Avatarmemnoch
      Participant

      Surely this can easily be “fixed” by putting beam weapons in like in Frontier?

    • #74528
      AvatarSubzeroplainzero
      Participant
      memnoch wrote:
      Surely this can easily be “fixed” by putting beam weapons in like in Frontier?

      I second that. I always liked the insta-hit weapons of frontier. Too many games have those silly, unrealistic slow moving lazers.

    • #74529
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      beam lasers are a good idea

    • #74530
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      I think if we have beams, they are gonna have to be much rarer and more expensive than the Blob thrower weapons. Perhaps even as a secret weapon and most of the police and military would have them too. ๐Ÿ˜‰

      However, Tom deliberately removed beams so that combat would be more fun and challenging.

      Remember the AI will get better as will the settings for weapons and ships, so combat will eventually feel a lot better.

    • #74531
      Avatarmemnoch
      Participant

      To me it seems more like an issue of artificial stupidity. The trick being giving the enemy beam weapons and giving the player a fighting chance. It can’t get more challenging than a beam weapon. Point and click death. But if there is ever laser combat in the future, in space or otherwise, this is how it’s likely to be. Even pulse lasers would be better than blobs flying around. It seems such a shame that a game designed with such realism: gravity, realistic orbits etc. should have “unrealistic” weapons.

      Making the AI “stupid” enough to give you a fighting chance and still make it exciting would be worth the effort I feel.

    • #74532
      Avatartomm
      Participant
      memnoch wrote:
      To me it seems more like an issue of artificial stupidity. The trick being giving the enemy beam weapons and giving the player a fighting chance. It can’t get more challenging than a beam weapon. Point and click death. But if there is ever laser combat in the future, in space or otherwise, this is how it’s likely to be. Even pulse lasers would be better than blobs flying around. It seems such a shame that a game designed with such realism: gravity, realistic orbits etc. should have “unrealistic” weapons.

      Making the AI “stupid” enough to give you a fighting chance and still make it exciting would be worth the effort I feel.

      Don’t get hung up on supposed realism, because it will make a poor game and isn’t necessarily any more realistic.

      Most likely, combat in space will involve computer-aimed lasers destroying things from tens of thousands of kilometers – no human pilot could compete so ‘manual combat’ wouldn’t exist. That is no fun. We need to build a game that feels like a real space setting, but is also crafted to be a challenging game.

    • #74533
      Avatartomm
      Participant

      Oh yeah, I’m putting a few things together for alpha 8. Everything will be fine with the project. I can’t drop 2.5 years of work on the floor.

    • #74534
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      yeah by the looks of it alpha 8 is looking good anything on ecm and AI using ECM

    • #74535
      Avatars2odan
      Participant
      Quote:
      I think this must be my biggest bugbear with Pioneer right now. Not being able to use that lovely zoomable solar system map screen to set my autopilot targets.

      I’ve been trying to add that, it might be more complicated than I initially though.

      I thought it would be a simple matter of adding this line:

      Code:
      Pi::player->SetNavTarget(m_selectedObject);

      But that was wishful thinking I think.

      @Tom, any ideas?

      It gives this error:

      cannot convert parameter 1 from ‘SBody *’ to ‘Body *const ‘

    • #74536
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      Here’s another FE2 feature that’s missing in Pioneer’s system map, the ability to see the other ships in the system. That’s the main thing I miss in FFE. Everyone can see and target you, but you can’t see them.

    • #74537
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      guessing that will come or a solar system mapping module that uncovers other shpis in local

    • #74538
      AvatarSubzeroplainzero
      Participant
      Marcel wrote:
      Here’s another FE2 feature that’s missing in Pioneer’s system map, the ability to see the other ships in the system. That’s the main thing I miss in FFE. Everyone can see and target you, but you can’t see them.

      YES!! I’d love to see this feature added in. Also, I’d love to be able to target a planet via the sytem info/trade information screen. I think a few little touches to streamline the tedious stuff and make it easier, would go a long way to make this game so much better than frontier ๐Ÿ˜€

    • #74539
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      and its only in alpha stage imagine where the development cycle could take it somewhere elite 4 has promised and faield

    • #74540
      AvatarStardreamer
      Participant
      ollobrain wrote:
      and its only in alpha stage imagine where the development cycle could take it somewhere elite 4 has promised and faield

      Elite 4 promised nothing. It was merely the whisper of a hint of a rumour of the development process actually being started and hundreds of thousands of desperate imaginations suddenly boiling over.

      But I am looking forward to the day when the fundamentals in Pioneer are mostly finished and the real work of modding the hell out of it can begin! ๐Ÿ˜€

    • #74541
      Avatars2odan
      Participant
      Quote:
      But I am looking forward to the day when the fundamentals in Pioneer are mostly finished and the real work of modding the hell out of it can begin! ๐Ÿ˜€

      If you plan on modding Pioneer you should probably brush up on some C++ and browse through the code, because unless the code is changed to allow it, you won’t be modding through the standard way of changing text files, you will mod the souce code directly which is far more effective but a little harder.

      That is only if you want to serisouly mod the game, adding ships missions and icon graphics would still work and anything else that had been moved into external files.

    • #74542
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      im sure a few more coders could be russled up from the internets just need some publiciity.

    • #74543
      Avatarelgeo
      Participant

      dont suppose you could make it an online mmo could you?

    • #74544
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      an online mmo doing this sort of thing will eventually be infinity quest for earth but timeframe is ?? pioneer even i na limited online capacity ie 32 person server might be long term

    • #74545
      AvatarSubzeroplainzero
      Participant
      elgeo wrote:
      dont suppose you could make it an online mmo could you?

      NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! There’s too many of those already.. sorry I just hate online games.. not that it’s up to me though ๐Ÿ˜ณ

    • #74546
      Avatarmathee
      Participant
      Subzeroplainzero wrote:
      elgeo wrote:
      dont suppose you could make it an online mmo could you?

      NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! There’s too many of those already.. sorry I just hate online games.. not that it’s up to me though ๐Ÿ˜ณ

      thats my opinion too, pioneer should remain a single player game. in mmo’s the seriousness and atmosphere is always getting destroyed by people having stupid names doing non-sense. Really, that would kill the spirit here.

    • #74547
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant
      mathee wrote:
      pioneer should remain a single player game. in mmo’s the seriousness and atmosphere is always getting destroyed by people having stupid names doing non-sense. Really, that would kill the spirit here.

      Here here, I second that! This is starting to remind me of a post I made on the Frontier Forum ๐Ÿ˜‰ http://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1851

    • #74548
      Avatars2odan
      Participant
      Quote:
      dont suppose you could make it an online mmo could you?

      Come on be serious, Pioneer is never going to be an MMO.

      I’ll eat a hat with those words printed on them if it ever hapens, which it won’t ๐Ÿ™‚

      That thread is funny Geraldine… Guys if you havent already, give that thread a read over it will make you laugh ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74549
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      After reading that thread, I just had to make a pic of my own ๐Ÿ˜†

      [attachment=405:mob1.jpg]

      [attachment=406:mob2.jpg]

    • #74550
      Avatartomm
      Participant

      It might be hard to make Pioneer multi-player since the code is very single-player oriented.

      If anyone wanted to do it, they would be better starting from scratch, borrowing planet rendering code, gui code and some other bits and bobs. I’m sure the engine would have to be very different though. (So that is an almost categorical no ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74551
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant
      tomm wrote:
      So that is an almost categorical no ๐Ÿ™‚

      Thank goodness for that Tomm! ๐Ÿ™‚ And glad you enjoyed that thread S20dan ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74552
      AvatarKingHaggis
      Participant

      Well, ermm.. sorry but would love to see multiplayer ๐Ÿ˜ณ .

      Not in the form of an MMO but i.m.o multiplayer games can be a lot of fun with a bunch of serious players and/or friends. But I know multiplayer probably won’t be an option for Pioneer. It’s way too complicated and I think focusing on the singleplayer game is a difficult enough task already. I’d rather see a well polished single player Pioneer than a half ass multiplayer one.

      But I hate MMO’s with hundreds of n00b players as much as you guys. It’s just that a 16 or 32 player server would be nice or the option to start a ip game with a friend. I play ArmA II Warfare almost everyday and host a Warfare server myself. It’s the most entertaining game experience ever, i.m.o. ;). No AI can play like a real flesh and blood player. But Pioneer doesn’t have the gameplay options to make multiplayer interesting (yet) but it would be nice if I could hang around in space with somebody else. But given the enormous distances you have to travel, it would be very hard to catch up with each other, especially since you need time acceleration to get anywhere soon and timeacceleration and online gameplay is practically impossible. You’d need jumpgates in that case and jumpgates would take away all the fun of spacetravel. Or you’d need interplanetary jumpdrives to get anywhere fast. Or you’d have to keep your skirmishes and other multiplayer activities in one or two systems only if you don’t want to spend 1 week of travelling just to meet somebody.

      But before all you Pioneer fans come to my place to burn my house down, let me make one thing clear: I HATE MMO’s! I do like small scale, 32 players max. multiplayer teamwork and warfare but I don’t think it’s necessary to focus attention on multiplayer for Pioneer right now. It’s a small indy game and even though a very, very good one, we can’t expect one guy to code a complete multiplayer space/warfare/trade sim. Let alone an MMO. I’m afraid it would become an endless work in progress (a la Infinity).

      Bottomline: I think if there would be more AI traffic (so you won’t feel so alone) and more gameplay stuff added, singleplayer Pioneer will be entertaining enough.

    • #74553
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      Ok lets seperate this an online MMO no

      Multiplayer ie LAN or internet servers allowing 16-32 on a private server is a bit different.

      Id like to see limited server potential well in a form of a similiar game

      MMO no done enough of those

      SIngle player version of pioneer looks good

    • #74554
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      I’m having trouble doing that. I followed the instructions, the same one that allowed me to successfully install it in 7.0, but Pioneer starts with the error message that it can’t find woods_0.lua. I can’t find that file in alpha 7.0 and it works fine. I copied the “blank” folder over to 7.5 too, due to another error message, but I’m now stumped. Any thoughts anyone?

    • #74555
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      Stations should copy straight over, but ships need a slight edit.

      What you are missing is a file that defines the woods_0 model and many other ones. My guess is that it would be in the sub-models folder but be careful overwriting the whole folder, just make sure you pick the one you need to copy.

    • #74556
      AvatarGudadantza
      Participant

      One little suggestion/question I think went unnoticed

      Any plans to add options like turn orbit lines on and off into the cockpit view? and Show axis and axial tilt perhaps?

      And some new:

      Any kind of motion space dust like in the original Frontier?

      Nebulae! Id like to see the milky way a little brighter. But Nebulae, a way to show them could be great. Real Nebulaes could be added around the galaxy and the views of the space depending the situation or system could be amazing. No idea how it could be implemented in a fine way, Pioneer is different from Celestia.

      object comets?.

      Lens flares or better, some kind of reflection in the Crystal of the cockpit ?

      Can be shadows be casted in the planet terrains for now?

      And something I mentioned ago. The planet deforms when they are at the edges of the screen. Is it due to the aspect ratio? FOV, or is inherent to the engine itself?

      greetings!!

      Iรƒฦ’ร†โ€™รƒยขรขโ€šยฌร…ยกรƒฦ’รขโ‚ฌลกรƒโ€šร‚ยดll wait here until the alpha 8 goes out ๐Ÿ˜†

    • #74557
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant
      Quote:
      What you are missing is a file that defines the woods_0 model and many other ones. My guess is that it would be in the sub-models folder but be careful overwriting the whole folder, just make sure you pick the one you need to copy.

      I thought that too, but I can’t find woods_0 in my alpha 7 instillation, and that works fine with city3k.

    • #74558
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      You seem to be missing a file with woods_0 in it, not a file called woods_0, the name could be anything, you just need to look harder for the right file and copy it over from alpha 7. PM Potsmoke and ask him where the files are kept in his addons that define woods_0, but I would guess its the submodels folder.

      Or just think back to which of P66 addons you aren’t using and check if its included with them.

      I downloaded Cities 3K just to check and it does not contain that file, or any other .lua file except the main station one. It doesn’t matter which version of Pioneer you installed that on, it would not work. The file is in a different package you will just have to figure out which one as I have no idea. Sorry.

    • #74559
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      No problem, thanks for your input. I did a Windows search of my working alpha 7 and couldn’t find it, so I’m stymied. I may have to do without city3k for a while.

    • #74560
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      No, thats not what its called. You will have to do some deductive reasoning to work out what file is likely to contain it.

      EG taking missiles as an example. There are models called m_unguided, m_guided ect ect that the ships themselves call in the lua and use as missiles, just like how the station is calling woods_0 model.

      However you will not find a file called m_unguided anywhere because it does not exist.

      But you will find a file called missile and inside that file is the information for those models.

    • #74561
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      Thanks s2odan! (I just realized that I’ve been spelling your name”s20dan” sorry about that!) I guess it’s .lua time for me! I’ve got some clues from the red screen of death. I’ll figure it out eventually, but by then we’ll be at alpha 8 and the whole galaxy will change again! ๐Ÿ˜†

    • #74562
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      Well with any luck P66 could chime in and inform you of where the file actually is to save you the time. Since it is his file that your missing anyway.

      P66… any ideas?

    • #74563
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      p66 mighjt be out of town what about a text search in each of the files that might turn something up

    • #74564
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant
      Quote:
      what about a text search in each of the files that might turn something up

      That’s what I’m going to do, but it will be a couple of days before I can get to it. It’s strange, because I tried it with and without copying p66’s sub-models folder. I’m probably just doing something stupid.

    • #74565
      AvatarTaquito
      Participant

      I have a little question. Why you guys haven’t yet posted in indiedb that little neat video I saw in youtube? The one with the baby counting for launch? Aren’t you guys interested in Indie of the year? Cause this game can be a nominee imo. Needs better presentation in the site. Presentation is key! ๐Ÿ˜€

    • #74566
      AvatarJonathonr31
      Participant

      Hello all

      First post here, i would like to say to the development team you are unbelieveably awesome taking on this legendary game after having a mess around with versions 7.0 and 7.5 the memory of the times playing this gaming has come back and its now better than ever so great job :).

      I was wondering if there were any active ingame debug tools to help users with the game ?

      ie: short cut keys that may increase/decrease the amount of cash we recieve so we can test out ships that are more expensive along with the ship equipment that is available at that stage of the play through.

      Thanks again for remaking this game it really is amazing to play this game again ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74567
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      when youre docked dont open up the info screen re missions etc just on the docking screen press crtl+m gives u i think 1 million credits repeat for more

    • #74568
      AvatarJonathonr31
      Participant

      Thanks alot ollobrain much appreciated. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74569
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      im not sure on any others like free fuel there is a jumpdrive less ultra expensive ship coming into game soon ( TM ) prbably alpha 8 or 9 but cant confirm.

      THe devs might be able to post a full list of debug-cheats

    • #74570
      Avatarbonvoyage
      Participant

      Hello everyone this is my first post, ๐Ÿ˜€

      I was just wondering if you guys could implement sky scenery , space debris, and Rare meteor collisions with the planets

      for example, if you land on a barren planet,it would be astonishing if you where just sitting around enjoying the view of shooting stars, and BOOM a random meteor or asteroid hit the planet that your on, a phenomena like this would make me jizz my pants,

      p.s im sorry if this is to demanding

    • #74571
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      such an asteroid crashing into a planet could provide rare materials worth a lot if u could find em

    • #74572
      AvatarBugbear
      Participant

      Has anyone tried docking at a Torus station without the autopilot?

      When I attempt to do so, I request docking permission, then fly deep into the green hazy entrance in the centre of the station.

      I keep flying until I smack into the rear wall, then I can fire the thrusters in a random direction and bounce off the inside walls of the station until my hull disintegrates.

      How does the autopilot manage to dock?

    • #74573
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      Bugbear im assuming alpha 8 will fix that i think alpha 7.5 does. alpha 7 has some bugs that have been fixed up and will be in alpha 8 in the next month or so when it comes out

    • #74574
      AvatarPotsmoke66
      Participant
      Quote:
      Has anyone tried docking at a Torus station without the autopilot?

      of course no big deal, Tie pilots have no space for a autopilot ๐Ÿ˜† (with fitted hyperdrive)

      just make shure you’re not to fast 10 – 20 m/s will do fine.

      you didn’t even need to lower the landing gear.

      oh, sorry i forgot that’s nonsense ๐Ÿ˜†

      if you missed it (that could happen) you won’t be to fast to engage retro thrusters and fly softly straight backwards,

      that works to and the releasing invisible poly will be hit then.

      make shure you are straight in line, that will help to, imissed it sometimes to, but only when i came in a weird direction.

      take your time, in reality docking maneuvres takes hours, we do it seconds or a half a minute.

    • #74575
      AvatarSubzeroplainzero
      Participant

      I remember reading somewhere that photo-fit images for the com link on stations are needed for this project. I have some ability with photo manipulation and might give it a shot. Does anybody know what exactly would be required? ie dimensions etc and would these faces be made up of various parts such as eyes, mouth, nose, or simply a selection of different faces with different hairstyles? ( I’m not sure how coherent any of this is, sorry!) :mrgreen:

    • #74576
      AvatarShingen
      Participant
      Bugbear1973 wrote:
      Has anyone tried docking at a Torus station without the autopilot?

      How does the autopilot manage to dock?

      I tried to dock manually to a starbase on Proxima d, but every time I tried I just fell through the structure and proceeded to explode. The autopilot couldn’t manage it either. It would just egress to an altitude of 3k, turn around and smash into the mountain-side. I guess those people aren’t going to get that delivery.

      I guess the collision detection still needs some work. ๐Ÿ˜€

    • #74577
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      collision detection has had some working and hopefully will work in alpha 8

    • #74578
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      Subzeroplainzero, Fe2 had a character generator that randomly put faces together out of various parts. I kind of like the 3D talking heads that I mentioned in my Possible solution for “Video Link Down” thread, but anything that produces random heads will do.

    • #74579
      AvatarGudadantza
      Participant

      Steampunk anyone? :mrgreen:

      normal_00068-Wing-Scouts--National-Wing-Commander-for-girls--Mrs--Harry-T.jpg

    • #74580
      AvatarSubzeroplainzero
      Participant
      Marcel wrote:
      Subzeroplainzero, Fe2 had a character generator that randomly put faces together out of various parts. Here’s an example pic of my co-pilot from back then.

      [attachment=0]Caroline Hooper.jpg[/attachment]

      It worked well, but doesn’t necessarily have to be the method that will be used in Pioneer. I kind of like the 3D talking heads that I mentioned in my Possible solution for “Video Link Down” thread, but anything that produces random heads will do.

      Ok I’m going to go ahead and start experimenting with cutting some images together. It would be great if perhaps Tomm could give me a nod. It’d be rubbish if spent time doing it just to have it blown away by an awesome piece of procedurally generated face creation code that he’s been working on ๐Ÿ˜‰ ๐Ÿ˜‰ (infact, what am I talking about? that would be fantastic!)

    • #74581
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      actcually procedually generated face graphics could be an angle to work on

    • #74582
      AvatarSubzeroplainzero
      Participant
      ollobrain wrote:
      actcually procedually generated face graphics could be an angle to work on

      You fancy doing it? It’s probably a piece o’ cake! :mrgreen:

    • #74583
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      bit of code here bit of code there

    • #74584
      Avatarmathee
      Participant
      ollobrain wrote:
      bit of code here bit of code there

      Feel free to start working on it dude. Let us now when you have some results to show :mrgreen:

    • #74585
      Avatarshenle
      Participant

      The galaxy map in Pioneer is significantly different from Frontier. Many systems that I was used to (Facece, Hotice, Soholia, Riedquat, Formalhaut, Ross 154, Achenar etc) have simply disappeared, others have been moved to completely different locations (Delta Pavonis, van Maanen’s, Eta Cassiopeea, Sirius etc.) and a few are in the same place, Alioth for instance.

      Is there a specific reason for that? Such as, copyright issues etc? (one would think that Alioth would stand out like a sore thumb if that was the reason).

      If that’s not it, then why?

    • #74586
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      Alioth is a real star. No copyright issues there. I believe that the altered locations of the stars are a result of the fact that the star maps are projected from different directions. I read somewhere that Frontier’s map is looking up from below the plane of the ecliptic, while Pioneer’s, I believe is projected in the standard way.

    • #74587
      Avatarshenle
      Participant

      You’re right, I forgot about Alioth being real. ๐Ÿ˜ณ

      But otherwise my other points stand – major systems from Frontier/FFE are just missing (I did a quick grep through the code)

      Not even the original startup world from Elite, Lave, is there anymore.

      (some data and analysis of the FE2 and FFE galaxy can be found at http://www.jongware.com/galaxy2.html)

    • #74588
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      pioneer is a open source project written from scratch so in no way is there copyright issues

      they arent intending ar emake of ffe2 – afte ralpha 8 i believe the game is going to move well beyond what elite ever was

      the appearence and the game map atm look the same but id like to see them improved as well

      the galaxy is a new procedural generation ( and even the systems now ill chane in a few months time)

    • #74589
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      I’ll just chime in here.

      If Allioth is in the wrong place compared to the other stars then that was my fault as I added Allioth by looking at the data in FFE.

      As for the other worlds, Lave, Phecda (also all real star names) ect well they have yet to be added into the custom starsystem section.

      They are small additions which is probably why no-one has bothered to add them in.

      I did once toy with adding in all local stars round Earth from the real starmap but the amount of correctional work to add them in was rediculous so I gave up on that idea. Your talking thousands of lines of extra code that once automatically generated must then be hand tweaked to work correctly…. bah ๐Ÿ™

      And then even once I had added close to a few hundred stars, many of them were duplicates with totally different names(Eg you would have Allioth, and also a star named FGX74 ๐Ÿ™‚ Made up name but you get the idea, so then you also need to take note of duplicates and remove them, which is even more work), so as you can see it would be a lot of work for hardly any thing extra at this stage of the game.

      Here’s a pic of what the map looked like with these extra load of stars I had added, bear in mind that I had not even added in half of the local stars within Earth’s vicinity.

      [img]http://www.spacesimcentral.com/download/file.php?id=883[/img]

      ๐Ÿ˜† Note how far from ecliptic plain those stars are.

      [img]http://www.spacesimcentral.com/download/file.php?id=884[/img]

      There is actually a thread on stuff like this. Its the Chocolate Flavoured Galaxy thread, have a read through it if you have the time, and maybe even add to the suggestions on there..?

    • #74590
      Avatarshenle
      Participant
      s2odan wrote:

      There is actually a thread on stuff like this. Its the Chocolate Flavoured Galaxy thread, have a read through it if you have the time, and maybe even add to the suggestions on there..?

      Will do.

      May I request that cemiess and its accompanying bug be reintroduced? :mrgreen:

    • #74591
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      What was its accompanying bug?

    • #74592
      Avatarshenle
      Participant
      s2odan wrote:
      What was its accompanying bug?

      Negative prices at an illegal goods merchant for gems/precious metals. The key to quick riches. :mrgreen:

      http://www.sharoma.com/frontierverse/trading.htm

    • #74593
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      ๐Ÿ˜† Cool

    • #74594
      Avatarshenle
      Participant

      You can actually make lots of money from nothing without ever needing to leave the docking bay. When your cargo hold is full of stuff, just trade your ship off for another one at the local shipyard. They will dispose of the gems/metals and you can go on buying more negative price cargo. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74595
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      Hehe thats sneaky

    • #74596
      Avatarrobn
      Participant

      New guy here! Just downloaded and built the code, with a view to perhaps doing some hacking. Trouble is, I can’t stop spinning! From the moment the ship leaves Shanghai it spins, making it rather difficult to get away. This happens on manual control and set speed, and continues even after a jump and a full stop.

      I thought this might be related to the joystick support (I don’t have a stick, but do have an accelerometer that sometimes gets seen as one). I can’t see an obvious way to disable joystick support outright though.

      What say you?

      Cheers ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74597
      AvatarJameson
      Participant

      I would suggest attempting to disable your accelerometer and seeing if that improves things any.

      On an unrelated note, I just compiled tomm’s current git repo and it segfaulted like crazy. What are the system requirements for this? I’m gonna try s20dan’s next to see if it makes a difference. If you guys need any info from me, I’ll try to give you what I can, but I’m not that savvy when it comes to linux.

      Edit: s20dan’s was the same result. Novel. I’m gonna try it in windows.

    • #74598
      Avatarrobn
      Participant

      I kinda never thought about disabling it because I never really understood what it was or why it was there and didn’t want to break anything. I found the three kernel modules that appear to control it and removed it. Hopefully it hasn’t broken something else. I guess I’ll find out. Still, ability to unbind the joystick would be nice.

      I just built from source and seem to get segfaults when there’s a lot happening, like spawning many ships. I didn’t know if this was normal or not, being my first run through.

    • #74599
      AvatarJameson
      Participant

      So far you’re having more luck than I am, seeing as you’ve got it running.

      Edit: When I actually use a precompiled binary, it does nothing but opens and closes, leaving behind a weird pioneer9.0 executable, which also seems to do nothing. I dunno.

    • #74600
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      How about the actual released version, does that play ok?

      At this stage there really isn’t a lot thats in the source and not in the latest 8.11 version, unless your wanting to check out jaj22’s AI additions.

    • #74601
      AvatarJameson
      Participant

      I downloaded 8, extracted everything, and tried it. The window opened, my pointer changed from white to black, thenthe window closed. Same results with 8.1 and 8.11.

      For 8.1 and 8.11, all that I need to do is extract the files to the 8 folder and overwrite when prompted, or am I doing that wrong? When I attempted to compile the source manually on ubuntu, I got segmentation faults on both the game itself and the model viewer. When I did it in vc2008 on windows 7, it gave me the error I attached to my previous post.

      Could it also be that I don’t meet the minimum requirements? This laptop isn’t what I’d call ‘robust’ as it’s only an Amd Sempron 3600+ (2.0ghz) with 1.5gb ram and an ATI Radeon Xpress 1150 (integrated) video card. I don’t recall seeing any specific system requirements, but this thing is kind of sluggish running FFED3D at times, too.

      Edit: I was gonna give it another go, just in case, but the links in the Alpha 8 thread seem to be broken now. I’ll try compiling your latest source from github again.

    • #74602
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      I take it you have the Microsoft Visual C++ 2008 re-distributable package installed on the windows pc?

      http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta … laylang=en

      If you can run FFED3D I would think you can run Pioneer. Everything I have tested it on has worked rather well.

      As for the links, the Pioneer site seems to be down at the moment.

    • #74603
      AvatarJameson
      Participant

      I get an application error still. The forum won’t let me attach my build log, so it’s at http://jameson.pastebin.com/z4YJUFD0

      Most of that stuff is all technobabble to me, but I think the actual output starts at line 853

    • #74604
      Avatars2odan
      Participant
      Quote:
      0 error(s),

      Yeah it seems to build fine. Not sure whats going on with you not being able to run it. Don’t suppose theres anything interesting being mentioned in stdout.txt or stderr.txt is there?

    • #74605
      AvatarJameson
      Participant

      It gives me pioneer-msvc-9.0_debug.exe but when I run it, it gives me the error attached to my post at the top of the page. If I debug it from VC2008, then all I get is what you can see in the attached image.

      Just to be sure, I’m supposed to be compiling pioneer-msvc-9.0.vcproj, correct?

    • #74606
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      Sorry I didn’t read your post correctly.

      Anything being mentioned in stdout.txt and stderr.txt when you get that error?

    • #74607
      AvatarJameson
      Participant

      stderr.txt reads:

      Code:
      GL_ARB_point_sprite: No

      stdout is blank.

    • #74608
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      I think it means graphics not good enough…. โ“

      One other thing I can think of for you to try if you haven’t already tried it is to go to ‘Username/AppData/Local/Pioneer/config.ini’

      And try turning shaders off in the config.

    • #74609
      AvatarJameson
      Participant

      I have the pioneer/ folder, but no files inside. I think it didn’t even get to that point.

      Once I have my desktop set up (lacking a monitor at the moment), I’ll give it a shot on there, since it outperforms this laptop in nearly every respect. Thanks for the help, though. At least I know I was doing it right up until this point.

      Edit: Just double checked, it’s definitely my system. It works fine on my brother’s Core2Duo/Radeon 3800 HD. Very pretty.

    • #74610
      AvatarTaquito
      Participant

      Can somebody please pinpoint where’s the file for the font values? I’ve been playing with different fonts for the game and I finally found one that looks awesome (space age) but I need to make it smaller. Help me please! ๐Ÿ˜ฅ

    • #74611
      Avatarhento
      Participant

      Don’t know if anybody noticed in alpha 8 but the game exits when you try to load a savegame after you have died.

      Also an idea for smuggler types – would it be possible to add a 1 or 2 t compartment (or something similar) in the ship which would overlooked by the authorities ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74612
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      Taquito wrote:
      Can somebody please pinpoint where’s the file for the font values? I’ve been playing with different fonts for the game and I finally found one that looks awesome (space age) but I need to make it smaller. Help me please! ๐Ÿ˜ฅ

      src/glfreetype.cpp. The constructor function FontFace::FontFace() is where the geometry is set up. The simplest place to start to effect size changes would be to modify the values passed to FT_Set_Char_Size(). The FreeType docs explain what the parameters are.

    • #74613
      AvatarTaquito
      Participant
      robn wrote:
      Taquito wrote:
      Can somebody please pinpoint where’s the file for the font values? I’ve been playing with different fonts for the game and I finally found one that looks awesome (space age) but I need to make it smaller. Help me please! ๐Ÿ˜ฅ

      src/glfreetype.cpp. The constructor function FontFace::FontFace() is where the geometry is set up. The simplest place to start to effect size changes would be to modify the values passed to FT_Set_Char_Size(). The FreeType docs explain what the parameters are.

      Thanks rbn ^^. Right now I’m using Monkirta pursuit font and it does fit quite well in the game and looks better. Can I have another question rbn? I found a nice music ogg file that I would like to implement in the game. Do you know where should I place the file or which file should I replace in order to make it work? Thank you. ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74614
      AvatarBugbear
      Participant

      A couple of suggestions / minor gripes…

      When visiting the bulletin board looking for package delivery missions, it can get a bit tiresome clicking on the ad, then clicking on the “request due date” button to find out when the delivery is due. At the risk of hitting a nerve with regards to changing original Frontier behaviour, would it be desirable to make the vetting of package delivery requests a little less of a grind?

      Another minor ‘nice to have’ – a sort button on the Missions page. When you’ve done a couple of dozen missions, you’ll find yourself constantly scrolling down to the bottom of the list to see the active missions. It would be nice to sort this page by due date, active, basically any of the fields on the page.

      Cheers

    • #74615
      Avatarmemnoch
      Participant

      I think what you are getting at, with regards to the BBS, is the same thing going on in MMOs and their mission descriptions.

      There is usually several paragraphs of text explaining the quest/mission and other things and 99% of people click right through ignoring the lot.

      However there are those who enjoy the lore and backstory.

      If you reduce the BBS to a list of “Click here for great rewards!” items we may be in danger of losing part of the “soul” of the game. Certainly later missions for the military should not be an open advert to bomb some installation somewhere for 2000 credits.

      Perhaps it would be okay to simplify the more innocent ones. I just feel it may be a slippery slope to appease the lazy, ADD crowd! ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74616
      AvatarPotsmoke66
      Participant

      that would look like this

      Code:

      — Danger should be from 0 to 1. zero means nothing bad happens. greater than
      — zero means spawn an enemy ship of that ‘power’ to kill you
      local delivery_flavours = {
      {
      adtext = “GOING TO the %1 system? Money paid for delivery of a small package.”,
      introtext = “Hi, I’m %1. I’ll pay you %2 if you will deliver a small package until %7 to %3 in the %4 (%5, %6) system.”,
      whysomuchdoshtext = “When a friend visited me she left behind some clothes and antique paper books. I’d like to have them returned to her.”,
      successmsg = “Thank you for the delivery. You have been paid in full.”,
      failuremsg = “Jesus wept, you took forever over that delivery. I’m not willing to pay you.”,
      danger = 0,
      time = 3,
      money = .5,
      }, {
      adtext = “WANTED. Delivery of a package to the %1 system.”,
      introtext = “Hello. I’m %1. I’m willing to pay %2 for a ship to carry a package until %7 to %3 in the %4 (%5, %6) system.”,
      whysomuchdoshtext = “It is nothing special.”,
      successmsg = “The package has been received and you have been paid in full.”,
      failuremsg = “I’m frustrated by the late delivery of my package, and I refuse to pay you.”,
      danger = 0,
      time = 1,
      money = 1,
      }, {
      adtext = “URGENT. Fast ship needed to deliver a package to the %1 system.”,
      introtext = “Hello. I’m %1. I’m willing to pay %2 for a ship to carry a package until %7 to %3 in the %4 (%5, %6) system.”,
      whysomuchdoshtext = “It is a research proposal and must be delivered by the deadline or we may not get funding.”,
      successmsg = “You have been paid in full for the delivery. Thank you.”,
      failuremsg = “I was quite clear about the deadline and am very disappointed by the late delivery. You will not be paid.”,
      danger = 0,
      time = .75,
      money = 1.1,
      }, {
      adtext = “DELIVERY. Documents to the %1 system. %2 to an experienced pilot.”,
      introtext = “Hello. I’m %1. I’m willing to pay %2 for a ship to carry a package until %7 to %3 in the %4 (%5, %6) system.”,
      whysomuchdoshtext = “Some extremely sensitive documents have fallen into my hands, and I have reason to believe that the leak has been traced to me.”,
      successmsg = “Your timely and discrete service is much appreciated. You have been paid in full.”,
      failuremsg = “Useless! I will never depend on you again! Needless to say, you will not be paid for this.”,
      danger = .5,
      time = 0.75,
      money = 2.5,
      }
      }

      –[[
      for i = 0,10 do
      local sys = StarSystem:new(i,2,0)
      print(‘Looking near ‘ .. sys:GetSectorX() .. ‘/’ .. sys:GetSectorY() .. ‘/’ .. sys:GetSystemNum())
      print(sys:GetSystemName())
      print(sys:GetSystemShortDescription())
      local sport = sys:GetRandomStarportNearButNotIn()
      if sport then
      print(sport:GetBodyName() .. ‘ in the ‘ .. sport:GetSystemName() .. ‘ system’)
      else
      print(“No suitable nearby space station found.”)
      end
      end
      –]]

      Module:new {
      __name = ‘DeliverPackage’,

      Init = function(self)
      self:EventListen(“onCreateBB”)
      self:EventListen(“onUpdateBB”)
      self:EventListen(“onEnterSystem”)
      self:EventListen(“onPlayerDock”)
      self.ads = {}
      self.missions = {}
      end,

      GetPlayerMissions = function(self)
      return self.missions
      end,

      _TryAddAdvert = function(self, station)
      local gender = Pi.rand:Int(0,1) == 1
      local flavour = Pi.rand:Int(1, #delivery_flavours)
      ad = {
      flavour = flavour,
      personGender = gender,
      client = Pi.rand:PersonName(gender),
      reward = Pi.rand:Real(200, 1000) * delivery_flavours[flavour].money,
      due = Pi.GetGameTime() + Pi.rand:Real(0, delivery_flavours[flavour].time * 60*60*24*31),
      bb = station,
      dest = Pi.GetCurrentSystem():GetRandomStarportNearButNotIn(),
      id = #self.ads+1
      }
      — if we found a destination
      if ad.dest ~= nil then
      table.insert(self.ads, ad)
      local addescription = _(delivery_flavours[ad.flavour].adtext, {
      ad.dest:GetSystemName(),
      format_money(ad.reward) } )
      station:SpaceStationAddAdvert(self.__name, #self.ads, addescription)
      end
      end,

      onCreateBB = function(self, args)
      local station = args[1]
      for i = 1,10 do –Pi.rand:Int(0, 5) do
      selfGDN_TryAddAdvert(station)
      end
      end,

      onEnterSystem = function(self)
      for k,mission in pairs(self.missions) do
      if mission.status == ‘active’ and
      mission.dest:GetSystem() == Pi:GetCurrentSystem() then

      local danger = delivery_flavours[mission.flavour].danger
      if danger > 0 then
      –ship, e = Pi.SpawnShip(Pi.GetGameTime()+60, “Ladybird Starfighter”)
      ship, e = Pi.SpawnRandomShip(Pi.GetGameTime(), danger, 20, 100)
      if e == nil then
      ship:ShipAIDoKill(Pi.GetPlayer());
      Pi.ImportantMessage(ship:GetLabel(), _(“You’re going to regret dealing with %1!”, {mission.client}))
      end
      end
      end
      end
      end,

      onPlayerDock = function(self)
      local station = Pi.GetPlayer():GetDockedWith():GetSBody()
      print(‘player docked with ‘ .. station:GetBodyName())
      for k,mission in pairs(self.missions) do
      if mission.status == ‘active’ then
      if mission.dest == station then
      if Pi.GetGameTime() > mission.due then
      Pi.ImportantMessage(mission.client, delivery_flavours[mission.flavour].failuremsg)
      mission.status = ‘failed’
      else
      Pi.ImportantMessage(mission.client, delivery_flavours[mission.flavour].successmsg)
      Pi.GetPlayer():AddMoney(mission.reward)
      mission.status = ‘completed’
      end
      elseif Pi.GetGameTime() > mission.due then
      mission.status = ‘failed’
      end
      end
      end
      end,

      onUpdateBB = function(self, args)
      local station = args[1]
      for k,ad in pairs(self.ads) do
      if (ad.bb == station) and (ad.due < Pi.GetGameTime() + 60*60*24*1) then
      self.ads[k] = nil
      ad.bb:SpaceStationRemoveAdvert(self.__name, ad.id)
      end
      end
      if Pi.rand:Int(0,12*60*60) < 60*60 then — roughly once every twelve hours
      selfGDN_TryAddAdvert(station)
      end
      end,

      onChatBB = function(self, dialog, optionClicked)
      local ad = self.ads[dialog]
      dialog:Clear()
      if optionClicked == -1 then
      dialog:Close()
      return
      elseif optionClicked == 0 then
      dialog:SetMessage(_(delivery_flavours[ad.flavour].introtext, {
      ad.client, format_money(ad.reward), ad.dest:GetBodyName(), ad.dest:GetSystemName(), ad.dest:GetSectorX(), ad.dest:GetSectorY(), Date.Format(ad.due) }))
      elseif optionClicked == 1 then
      dialog:SetMessage(delivery_flavours[ad.flavour].whysomuchdoshtext)
      –[[
      elseif optionClicked == 2 then
      dialog:SetMessage(_(‘It must be delivered by %1’, { Date.Format(ad.due) }))
      –]]
      elseif optionClicked == 3 then
      dialog:RemoveAdvertOnClose()
      self.ads[ad.id] = nil
      ad.description = _(“Deliver a package to %1 in the %2 system (%3, %4).”,
      { ad.dest:GetBodyName(), ad.dest:GetSystemName(), ad.dest:GetSectorX(), ad.dest:GetSectorY() })
      ad.status = “active”
      table.insert(self.missions, ad)
      dialog:SetMessage(“Excellent.”)
      dialog:AddOption(“Hang up.”, -1)
      return
      end
      dialog:AddOption(“Why so much money?”, 1);
      dialog:AddOption(“Could you repeat the original request?”, 0);
      –dialog:AddOption(“How soon must it be delivered?”, 2);
      dialog:AddOption(“Ok, agreed.”, 3);
      dialog:AddOption(“Hang up.”, -1);
      end,
      }

      this is how i use it

      Code:
      — Danger should be from 0 to 1. zero means nothing bad happens. greater than
      — zero means spawn an enemy ship of that ‘power’ to kill you
      local delivery_flavours = {
      {
      adtext = “GOING TO the %1 system? Money paid for delivery of a small package.”,
      introtext = “Hi, I’m %1. I’ll pay you %2 if you will deliver a small package until %5 to %3 in the %4 system.”,
      howtogettheretext_0 = “O.K., i will take a look, wait…”,
      howtogettheretext_1 = “Oh, excuse me Sir, i forgot, %1 in the %2 system has %3, %4 as coordinates. live long and prosperous, Sir”,
      whysomuchdoshtext = “When a friend visited me she left behind some clothes and antique paper books. I’d like to have them returned to her.”,
      successmsg = “Thank you for the delivery. You have been paid in full.”,
      failuremsg = “Jesus wept, you took forever over that delivery. I’m not willing to pay you.”,
      danger = 0,
      time = 3,
      money = .5,
      }, {
      adtext = “WANTED. Delivery of a package to the %1 system.”,
      introtext = “Hello. I’m %1. I’m willing to pay %2 for a ship to carry a package until %5 to %3 in the %4 system.”,
      whysomuchdoshtext = “It is nothing special.”,
      howtogettheretext_0 = “I thought in your Spaceship?.”,
      howtogettheretext_1 = “Of course i can tell you, %1 in the %2 system has %3, %4 as coordinates, have a nice trip.”,
      successmsg = “The package has been received and you have been paid in full.”,
      failuremsg = “I’m frustrated by the late delivery of my package, and I refuse to pay you.”,
      danger = 0,
      time = 1,
      money = 1,
      }, {
      adtext = “URGENT. Fast ship needed to deliver a package to the %1 system.”,
      introtext = “Hello. I’m %1. I’m willing to pay %2 for a ship to carry a package until %5 to %3 in the %4 system.”,
      whysomuchdoshtext = “It is a research proposal and must be delivered by the deadline or we may not get funding.”,
      howtogettheretext_0 = “What do i know? are YOU the Pilot or am I?”,
      howtogettheretext_1 = “%1 in the %2 System, is located %3, %4. I thought you know that?”,
      successmsg = “You have been paid in full for the delivery. Thank you.”,
      failuremsg = “I was quite clear about the deadline and am very disappointed by the late delivery. You will not be paid.”,
      danger = .5,
      time = .75,
      money = 1.5,
      }, {
      adtext = “DELIVERY. Documents to the %1 system. %2 to an experienced pilot.”,
      introtext = “Hello. I’m %1. I’m willing to pay %2 for a ship to carry a package to until %5 %3 in the %4 system.”,
      whysomuchdoshtext = “Some extremely sensitive documents have fallen into my hands, and I have reason to believe that the leak has been traced to me.”,
      howtogettheretext_0 = “-“,
      howtogettheretext_1 = “Are you shure that you are the right Pilot for this Delivery? %2 is located %3, %4.”,
      successmsg = “Your timely and discrete service is much appreciated. You have been paid in full.”,
      failuremsg = “Useless! I will never depend on you again! Needless to say, you will not be paid for this.”,
      danger = 1,
      time = 1,
      money = 2.5,
      }
      }

      –[[
      for i = 0,10 do
      local sys = StarSystem:new(i,2,0)
      print(‘Looking near ‘ .. sys:GetSectorX() .. ‘/’ .. sys:GetSectorY() .. ‘/’ .. sys:GetSystemNum())
      print(sys:GetSystemName())
      print(sys:GetSystemShortDescription())
      local sport = sys:GetRandomStarportNearButNotIn()
      if sport then
      print(sport:GetBodyName() .. ‘ in the ‘ .. sport:GetSystemName() .. ‘ system’)
      else
      print(“No suitable nearby space station found.”)
      end
      end
      –]]

      Module:new {
      __name = ‘DeliverPackage’,

      Init = function(self)
      self:EventListen(“onCreateBB”)
      self:EventListen(“onUpdateBB”)
      self:EventListen(“onEnterSystem”)
      self:EventListen(“onPlayerDock”)
      self.ads = {}
      self.missions = {}
      end,

      GetPlayerMissions = function(self)
      return self.missions
      end,

      _TryAddAdvert = function(self, station)
      local gender = Pi.rand:Int(0,1) == 1
      local flavour = Pi.rand:Int(1, #delivery_flavours)
      ad = {
      flavour = flavour,
      personGender = gender,
      client = Pi.rand:PersonName(gender),
      reward = Pi.rand:Real(200, 1000) * delivery_flavours[flavour].money,
      due = Pi.GetGameTime() + Pi.rand:Real(0, delivery_flavours[flavour].time * 60*60*24*31),
      bb = station,
      dest = Pi.GetCurrentSystem():GetRandomStarportNearButNotIn(),
      id = #self.ads+1
      }
      — if we found a destination
      if ad.dest ~= nil then
      table.insert(self.ads, ad)
      local addescription = _(delivery_flavours[ad.flavour].adtext, {
      ad.dest:GetSystemName(),
      format_money(ad.reward) } )
      station:SpaceStationAddAdvert(self.__name, #self.ads, addescription)
      end
      end,

      onCreateBB = function(self, args)
      local station = args[1]
      for i = 1,10 do –Pi.rand:Int(0, 5) do
      selfGDN_TryAddAdvert(station)
      end
      end,

      onEnterSystem = function(self)
      for k,mission in pairs(self.missions) do
      if mission.status == ‘active’ and
      mission.dest:GetSystem() == Pi:GetCurrentSystem() then

      local danger = delivery_flavours[mission.flavour].danger
      if danger > 0 then
      –ship, e = Pi.SpawnShip(Pi.GetGameTime()+60, “Ladybird Starfighter”)
      ship, e = Pi.SpawnRandomShip(Pi.GetGameTime(), danger, 20, 100)
      if e == nil then
      ship:ShipAIDoKill(Pi.GetPlayer());
      Pi.ImportantMessage(ship:GetLabel(), _(“You’re going to regret dealing with %1!”, {mission.client}))
      end
      end
      end
      end
      end,

      onPlayerDock = function(self)
      local station = Pi.GetPlayer():GetDockedWith():GetSBody()
      print(‘player docked with ‘ .. station:GetBodyName())
      for k,mission in pairs(self.missions) do
      if mission.status == ‘active’ then
      if mission.dest == station then
      if Pi.GetGameTime() > mission.due then
      Pi.ImportantMessage(mission.client, delivery_flavours[mission.flavour].failuremsg)
      mission.status = ‘failed’
      — erase the mission
      self.missions[k] = nil
      else
      Pi.ImportantMessage(mission.client, delivery_flavours[mission.flavour].successmsg)
      Pi.GetPlayer():AddMoney(mission.reward)
      mission.status = ‘completed’
      — erase the mission
      self.missions[k] = nil
      end
      elseif Pi.GetGameTime() > mission.due then
      mission.status = ‘failed’
      — erase the mission
      self.missions[k] = nil
      end
      end
      end
      end,

      onUpdateBB = function(self, args)
      local station = args[1]
      for k,ad in pairs(self.ads) do
      if (ad.bb == station) and (ad.due < Pi.GetGameTime() + 60*60*24*1) then
      self.ads[k] = nil
      ad.bb:SpaceStationRemoveAdvert(self.__name, ad.id)
      end
      –self.missions[k] = nil
      end
      if Pi.rand:Int(0,12*60*60) < 60*60 then — roughly once every twelve hours
      selfGDN_TryAddAdvert(station)
      end
      end,

      onChatBB = function(self, dialog, optionClicked)
      local ad = self.ads[dialog]
      dialog:Clear()
      if optionClicked == -1 then
      dialog:Close()
      return
      elseif optionClicked == 0 then
      dialog:SetMessage(_(delivery_flavours[ad.flavour].introtext, {
      ad.client, format_money(ad.reward), ad.dest:GetBodyName(), ad.dest:GetSystemName(), Date.Format(ad.due) }))
      elseif optionClicked == 1 then
      dialog:SetMessage(delivery_flavours[ad.flavour].whysomuchdoshtext)
      –[[
      elseif optionClicked == 2 then
      dialog:SetMessage(_(‘It must be delivered by %1’, { Date.Format(ad.due) }))
      –]]
      elseif optionClicked == 3 then
      local answ_1 = math.fmod((ad.dest:GetSystemLawlessness()),1)
      if answ_1 > .15 then — old value = .125
      dialog:SetMessage(delivery_flavours[ad.flavour].howtogettheretext_0)
      else
      dialog:SetMessage(_(delivery_flavours[ad.flavour].howtogettheretext_1, {
      ad.dest:GetBodyName(), ad.dest:GetSystemName(), ad.dest:GetSectorX(), ad.dest:GetSectorY() }))
      end
      elseif optionClicked == 4 then
      dialog:RemoveAdvertOnClose()
      self.ads[ad.id] = nil
      local answ_1 = math.fmod((ad.dest:GetSystemLawlessness()),1)
      if answ_1 > .15 then
      ad.description = (_(“Deliver a package to %1 in the %2 system.”,
      { ad.dest:GetBodyName(), ad.dest:GetSystemName() }))
      else
      ad.description = (_(“Deliver a package to %1 in the %2 system (%3, %4).”,
      { ad.dest:GetBodyName(), ad.dest:GetSystemName(), ad.dest:GetSectorX(), ad.dest:GetSectorY() }))
      end
      ad.status = “active”
      table.insert(self.missions, ad)
      dialog:SetMessage(“Excellent.”)
      dialog:AddOption(“Hang up.”, -1)
      return
      end
      dialog:AddOption(“Why so much money?”, 1);
      dialog:AddOption(“Could you repeat the original request?”, 0);
      –dialog:AddOption(“How soon must it be delivered?”, 2);
      dialog:AddOption(“How do i get there?”, 3);
      dialog:AddOption(“Ok, agreed.”, 4);
      dialog:AddOption(“Hang up.”, -1);
      end,
      }

      it adds a “how do i get there” while not all will tell you the coordinates (it depends on target system lawlessness, as soon as we have a character value this could be changed).

      removes the “useless” – howsoon.

      deletes all finished missions from the roster (you could optionally only erase succeeded).

      increases danger somewhat.

    • #74617
      AvatarJameson
      Participant

      Just a note, I’m on a slightly more upgraded system (Core2duo 1.73ghz, radeon mobility x1400, 2gb ram) and I still have the same problem with the game opening, then immediately closing with 8, 8.1, and the 8.11 fix.

      stdout.txt reads:

      Code:
      SDL_GetVideoInfo says 32 bpp
      GLSL shaders on.

      and stderr reads

      Code:
      GL_ARB_point_sprite: No

      Edit: Interestingly, if I rename the shaders folder, I actually can see the errors, which makes me think it might be related to them. I’ll have to mess with this further.

      Just for curiosity’s sake, is there any chance of a D3D version in the works? I’m entirely sure it’s somehow related to my openGL.

    • #74618
      AvatarNecalli
      Participant

      When making in-game screenshots I keep getting something like this: [hsimg]https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/_5lXMBe99-s8/TVptMAGf3EI/AAAAAAAAAFA/Z3caH6G9rb0/094224.jpg[/hsimg]

      Is there a problem in my graphics card? I have GF 7300 with latest drivers and DirectX 9.0c.

    • #74619
      AvatarBugbear
      Participant

      I know I’ve raised this before but with the release of alpha 9 I thought I’d give it another try.

      Disclaimer up front. I’m a bit of a masochist. The first thing I do with a new game is sell my autopilot – if anyone’s going to be flying my ship it’s going to be me. And yes, I like to do my own in flight turnaround velocity calculations…

      But this puts me i a bit of a dilemma. Is there a trick when docking with a torus station? I have no problem landing manually planetside but these space stations tend to be (sometimes) hit and (mostly) miss.

      Occasionally I’m able to dock manually but most of the time I find myself flying through the blue glow in the docking corridor, through the yellow glow at the back and straight into the wall.

      Does anyone else have this issue? Is there a trick or is this a bug?

      Cheers all!

    • #74620
      AvatarPotsmoke66
      Participant

      happens sometimes, but when it happens, the autopilot can’t handle that to.

      but to be shure you wasn’t to fast (happens often), putter straight backwards if the speed is ok and docking is possible, docking sequence will be released even then.

      btw, the blue glow has no meaning, the trigger is on very front of the tunnel.

      you didn’t even have to lower the undercarriage to dock at a orbital spacestation (it doesn’t matter).

      general advice, since the spacestations rotate along their y axis it’s best to position your ship proper in front of the gate, keep your accel. crosseye on the centre of the station and it should be no problem to dock.

      under certain circumstances you spin around the station especially when you have to “hunt” the station, get some distance to the station, about 10’000km and reapproach.

    • #74621
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      Don’t forget to request permission also…. its pretty easy to forget with this station as it has no doors ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74622
      AvatarBugbear
      Participant

      Thanks for that advice. I’ve noticed the ship ‘jink’ as I approach the entry. I presume that’s the docking sequence attempting to take hold of my ship. I’ll try switching off speed control and fly in on pure manual to test the idea that it is interfering with docking.

      On another note…I’m doing a lucrative package run to Callisto Spaceport in the AD Leonis system. I’m now sitting outside the station. I’ve requested docking clearance but the station master is telling me ‘Cleance denied. There are no free docking bays.’

      OK, fair enough, it’s good to see some signs of life appearing in the universe.

      My question, though, is how long do I need to wait for docking clearance. I can only get 10x time acceleration due to the proximity to the planet, which again is fair enough.

      I’ve also tried travelling out and back to another planet in the system to kill some time (a 2 A.U. round trip) but even that was not enough.

      Maybe I need to fire on the station to clear some of the police vipers and take their bays… ๐Ÿ˜€

    • #74623
      AvatarPotsmoke66
      Participant
      Quote:
      Maybe I need to fire on the station to clear some of the police vipers and take their bays… ๐Ÿ˜€

      has helped in frontier, but not in pioneer, police simply can’t start to.

      did you fly into the station nonetheless? (it’s possible)

      maybe you would have seen a “shipwrecked” transporter (lies on it’s side like a dead fish), sometimes the ships can’t launch proper from the stations and hang after in the station occupying it for ever (i experienced that foremost in wheel stations). only a previous saved game can help and good luck not the same ship will be selected next time you enter the system. i’m not shure, but i mostly have seen Panthers locking up the station, but i can’t tell you why exactly the panther.

      it’s a bit a problem to let the AI act on unforeseen occasions, mankind can do such, we are creative, machines not, how shuld he act when the panther touches a wall, lost it’s direction? moves in same direction as before, but that might not work because the ship has turned around allready, finish, lies there forever.

      you can see similar on the new docking procedure, which i think should be overworked a bit, maybe just slowed down, because sometimes not enough time is taken to align the ship proper to the stations y axis and you repetively fly into the stations wall because AI assumes still straight fwd (god how stupid, reminds me of that police joke, knock as long until it fits).

    • #74624
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      Bugbear1973 wrote:
      I’m doing a lucrative package run to Callisto Spaceport in the AD Leonis system. I’m now sitting outside the station. I’ve requested docking clearance but the station master is telling me ‘Cleance denied. There are no free docking bays.’

      OK, fair enough, it’s good to see some signs of life appearing in the universe.

      My question, though, is how long do I need to wait for docking clearance. I can only get 10x time acceleration due to the proximity to the planet, which again is fair enough.

      Right now they never leave. The TradeShips module right now spawns a few ships inside stations and a few more out space and sets them to fly to stations. Once they get there they stop. I intend to have something a bit more fluid for alpha 10. For now if they’re really messing up your game you can delete/move data/modules/TradeShips.lua and they won’t spawn.

    • #74625
      AvatarPotsmoke66
      Participant

      should have thought about that to, old “nice spacestation” has only one dock, of course it’s locked by traffic sometimes.

      still a previously saved game will help best, because at enter system “the cards will be shuffled new”.

      next time you’ve got better luck maybe.

      still it’s wise (and i do allways) to save a game before you leave a system, that’s a old frontier wisdom.

      it always allows you to get better chances.

    • #74626
      AvatarBugbear
      Participant

      Hahaha…got a bit of a chuckle out of this one then. Oh well it is beta software after all!

      After some frustration last night I decided to ram the docking bay – went straight through the outer door and into the maw of a sippy imperial courier inside.

      Tried to shoot it there and then in the bay but my relative velocity was too high and I slammed into either it or the rear wall! ๐Ÿ˜† ๐Ÿ˜† ๐Ÿ˜†

      Game over!

    • #74627
      Avatarrobn
      Participant

      RIP OLD BEAN

    • #74628
      AvatarSeanN
      Participant

      I’ve been enjoying the nightly builds (thank you robn) but I can’t seem to save the game in any of them. When i put in the file name in and press save it drops me to the desktop. I read the post about the save game code being rewritten, is it still a work in progress in the nightly builds? Alpha 8 and 9 save fine.

      Also, where would be a good place to post issues/bugs?

    • #74629
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      SeanN wrote:
      I’ve been enjoying the nightly builds (thank you robn) but I can’t seem to save the game in any of them. When i put in the file name in and press save it drops me to the desktop. I read the post about the save game code being rewritten, is it still a work in progress in the nightly builds? Alpha 8 and 9 save fine.

      Sorry about that. The short of it is that the “real” code for Windows to establish the location of the save dir didn’t work at all on the alternate compiler I use for the nightlies, so I had to rewrite it. I did so in the simplest way I could and gave it the tiniest amount of testing. Unfortunately I can’t do much more as I don’t have easy access to a Windows machine to test. We need a Windows programmer to step up and fix that save dir code for both platforms.

      Quote:
      Also, where would be a good place to post issues/bugs?

      For the moment pretty much anywhere – forums, mailing list, IRC. We’re pretty quick and finding and fixing stuff at the moment, and for anything bigger I’m keeping a todo list. I want to get a bug tracker up and running soon but I haven’t quite got around to it. As I mentioned elsewhere it would be a huge help if someone wanted to step up to do bug triage work, which is kind of a psychological impediment to me getting a tracker up – I don’t want more work right now.

    • #74630
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      I guess that could be me, if you want bugs triaged once each day. I can try to get them sorted by priority, match duplicates where possible, request more information if needed, the usual.

    • #74631
      AvatarSeanN
      Participant
      Quote:
      Sorry about that. The short of it is that the “real” code for Windows to establish the location of the save dir didn’t work at all on the alternate compiler I use for the nightlies, so I had to rewrite it. I did so in the simplest way I could and gave it the tiniest amount of testing. Unfortunately I can’t do much more as I don’t have easy access to a Windows machine to test. We need a Windows programmer to step up and fix that save dir code for both platforms.

      No problem. All the developers/contributors are doing an outstanding job on what is really a “labor of love”. It’s a privilege to run the builds and see how Pioneer is taking shape. Besides, blasting off from Shanghai in an Asp Explorer and skimming the Himalayas before accelerating into orbit never gets old. ๐Ÿ˜€

    • #74632
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      It looks like I’m the guy now, and will be triaging all of your bugs, misfeatures and feature requests. I’ll let robn give the ‘official’ announcement, along with the URL of our bug tracker, just in case he has any changes to make before we go live. Once that’s public, it will become our preferred means for you all to tell us about bugs you find.

      The idea here is for me to receive all incoming bug reports, to assess their severity, make sure they aren’t already known, and to submit them to the developers without drowning them. My job is to make their job less stressful. So, if you have a bug right now, send it to me by PM (so that I notice it) and I’ll make sure it’s in the system.

    • #74633
      AvatarPotsmoke66
      Participant

      what is about input recording, could such be realized (limited to physical gameworld)?

    • #74634
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      will input recording be useful ?

    • #74635
      AvatarPotsmoke66
      Participant

      i guess it would be great to replay your action, change to outside view and watch the scenery, a “fixed” outside cam would be another idea.

      the scene in Pioneer is not very big i know, i exported some with OGLE.

      [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xaOidViiuOY[/youtube]

    • #74636
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      Gernot, would it be possible to re-make the classic Frontier intro using Pioneer? I know you already have the ships (except for the LRC), but I dont know how it could be done. I always wondered how Braben did the original too.

    • #74637
      AvatarPotsmoke66
      Participant

      it’s somekind of a special scene he used, objects simply act like in the game, but “input” is predefinied, so the ships (all objects) act allways the same.

      “camera” would have to be predefinied to and moved by “storyboard”.

      but i think robn is thinking about such allready (to make such a “live” intro).

      one could (but it would mean a horrible work) export scenes to .obj and rebuild them in blender to create a movie, this would allow at least to place the camera where you like.

      but if you don’t like to get to close to the original intro, it should be possible in a more simple way (play a scene and record it, later cut all into one).

      the basic LRC won’t be a big thing to build (stupid brick with city blocks on it).

    • #74638
      Avatarrobn
      Participant

      Thinking, though its a fair way off. One item fairly low on my list is a mechanism for scripts to define a path through space for a ship to follow. Setting up movies (cutscenes!) would be a natural extension of this. A little extra stuff would be needed to put the camera on a similar path, but I don’t think that would be a lot of extra work.

      Don’t hold your breath waiting ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74639
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      Of course, there is more important things to do in the meantime, but later on when the game is in it’s “polishing phase”, at least some kind of intro would be nice, if not an exact re-creation, them something even better. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74640
      Avatarleighhobson89
      Participant

      I have tried 7, 8, and version 9 of Piuoneer, but in all cases when I boot the executable, my display driver crashes, but it is only for this program and no other I have used. Im running windows 7, any help?

    • #74641
      AvatarSeanN
      Participant

      Another question,

      Is Saturn missing its rings? I read in earlier posts that certain video cards (ATI) were having trouble displaying the rings but didn’t know if it was my drivers (Nvidia) or something that was being worked on.

    • #74642
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      There is an issue with Saturn’s rings and possibly more issues with other planets. I can get them to display although there is still some graphical errors

    • #74643
      AvatarAnonymous
      SeanN wrote:
      Another question,

      Is Saturn missing its rings? I read in earlier posts that certain video cards (ATI) were having trouble displaying the rings but didn’t know if it was my drivers (Nvidia) or something that was being worked on.

      I just did a test on my iMac (with an ATI card) and I don’t have Saturns rings.

    • #74644
      Avatarrobn
      Participant

      Also ATI here, and also no rings, though my gut feeling (having not checked the code) says its not to do with graphics card and more to do with the system/terrain seed which is changing with pretty much every build at the moment.

      We will need to do something to make sure the rings are always there for Saturn. I’ve logged an issue so it doesn’t get forgotten: https://github.com/pioneerspacesim/pioneer/issues/18

    • #74645
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      I should have pointed out that I am using an Nvidia card with the latest drivers on Windows XP. Pioneer screen shot showed the Alpha 9 version not a nightly build.

    • #74646
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      I can see the rings in alpha 9 with my Radeon 9550. Ring shadows don’t display and when I got near the rings sections of them would disappear. That sort of thing happened in FE2 as well, so I assumed it’s not a bug, it’s a feature! ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74647
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      its a lcoalisation feature

    • #74648
      Avatarleighhobson89
      Participant

      I posted once, but nothing. I am really interested in playing this game and have tried 3 or four of the more recent versions, and none of them boot, it says simulating evolution of universe, it goes up to 15billion years and then the screen goes black like its loading, but then windows comes back up and i get a message saying “pioneer-msvc-9.0_release has stopped working” followed by another pop up on the task bar basically saying my graphics driver stopped responding but now has recovered, and after, the program just terminates.

      I have tried all compatibility modes, and just so you know I am using windows 7. Help cos i want to play this game!! I have a standard computer with no extras, just a HP Laptop, with 2Gb Ram, 120Gb HD, Dual Core Processor running at 2.4Ghz or there abouts.

      Yours hopefully.

    • #74649
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      Hi leighhobson89

      Firstly welcome to the SSC ๐Ÿ™‚

      As to your laptop spec, it should be enough, certainly it is more powerful than my crappy PC. Have up updated your graphics drivers recently? I had some weird crashes and updating the drivers fixed it on my Nvidia based heap of crap. It might be a Windows 7 issue or perhaps you might have something else running in the background. Wish I could be of more help but I use XP ๐Ÿ™

    • #74650
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      leighhobson89 wrote:
      I posted once, but nothing. I am really interested in playing this game and have tried 3 or four of the more recent versions, and none of them boot, it says simulating evolution of universe, it goes up to 15billion years and then the screen goes black like its loading, but then windows comes back up and i get a message saying “pioneer-msvc-9.0_release has stopped working” followed by another pop up on the task bar basically saying my graphics driver stopped responding but now has recovered, and after, the program just terminates.

      If updating your graphics drivers don’t help, you might like to try a development build. They’re available at http://twitter.com/pioneerspacesim.

      If a dev build works where alpha 9 didn’t, we’d be interested to know (since they’re built in a different way).

    • #74651
      AvatarPotsmoke66
      Participant

      could it be simply hardware related, you only have a “softs” grafic chip, no real grafic card, don’t you?

    • #74652
      AvatarSeanN
      Participant

      Just another quick question: Is anyone unable to view screenshots with the latest build?

      I’m using Windows Vista 32 sp2, Nvidia 9600, and the dev build fe6f6a5. I use ctrl-prtsc to take a screenshot but when I try to look at the picture later, no program (paint, explorer, quicktime or photo viewer seems to be able to read the .png file. I tested a few other .png files from the viper’s textures and they open fine so it seems like it’s just the generated screenshot .png’s.

    • #74653
      AvatarLuomu
      Participant
      SeanN wrote:
      Just another quick question: Is anyone unable to view screenshots with the latest build?

      I’m using Windows Vista 32 sp2, Nvidia 9600, and the dev build fe6f6a5. I use ctrl-prtsc to take a screenshot but when I try to look at the picture later, no program (paint, explorer, quicktime or photo viewer seems to be able to read the .png file. I tested a few other .png files from the viper’s textures and they open fine so it seems like it’s just the generated screenshot .png’s.

      Does HDR on/off make a difference?

    • #74654
      AvatarSeanN
      Participant
      Luomu wrote:
      SeanN wrote:
      Just another quick question: Is anyone unable to view screenshots with the latest build?

      I’m using Windows Vista 32 sp2, Nvidia 9600, and the dev build fe6f6a5. I use ctrl-prtsc to take a screenshot but when I try to look at the picture later, no program (paint, explorer, quicktime or photo viewer seems to be able to read the .png file. I tested a few other .png files from the viper’s textures and they open fine so it seems like it’s just the generated screenshot .png’s.

      Does HDR on/off make a difference?

      No. I tried two shots each, HDR on and off. All four files gave the message: “not a valid bitmap or file not supported”.

    • #74655
      AvatarLuomu
      Participant
      SeanN wrote:
      Luomu wrote:
      SeanN wrote:
      No. I tried two shots each, HDR on and off. All four files gave the message: “not a valid bitmap or file not supported”.

      All righto, I added it to our issue tracker: https://github.com/pioneerspacesim/pioneer/issues/166

      Let’s see if we get more reports.

    • #74656
      AvatarSeanN
      Participant
      Luomu wrote:
      Quote:
      All righto, I added it to our issue tracker: https://github.com/pioneerspacesim/pioneer/issues/166

      Let’s see if we get more reports.

      Thanks, Luomu.

    • #74657
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      Indeed, thanks. (-:

    • #74658
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      FYI I’ve not been able to get any of the new .png stuff to work on windows.

    • #74659
      Avatarrobn
      Participant

      Windows screenshot bug found and fixed. It will be in tonight’s build. It ended up being pretty simple – Windows requires you to be explicit if you’re writing a binary file instead of a text file. We weren’t being explicit, so Windows was doing some text conversions on the binary data and screwing it up.

    • #74660
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      Cool, I just got to get this stuff compiling on my end now ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74661
      AvatarRetsof
      Participant

      Hey all. Been lurking for a while but I have a problem. No other ships appear. No trade ships at stations, no pirates in uninhabited systems, nothing. Any suggestions? Forgive me if this has been brought up already and I missed the fix.

    • #74662
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      Retsof wrote:
      Hey all. Been lurking for a while but I have a problem. No other ships appear. No trade ships at stations, no pirates in uninhabited systems, nothing. Any suggestions? Forgive me if this has been brought up already and I missed the fix.

      First, what version are you running?

      There are no pirates in uninhabited systems. There are often (but not always) pirates in inhabited systems, but the AI currently isn’t able to catch you so you’ll probably never see them. That’s something we’re hoping to sort out in the next month or two.

      There are “trade” ships (that is, ships spawned out in space and flying to port). You might see them docked with a station, but they are random. You might also find bulk freighters in orbit over ground station or parked outside orbital stations, but these too are random. You have more chance of finding these in more populous systems.

      This all needs lots of work. By the time we’re done you should see ships all over the place performing various tasks.

    • #74663
      AvatarRetsof
      Participant

      I am using Alpha 10. Question: will friendly’s show up on radar or only hostiles. Also, will there eventually be an autopilot command to land on a planet with no spaceport? Getting from orbit to ground is hard for the impatient (I cant stop icantstopICANTSTOP*splat*)

    • #74664
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      Retsof wrote:
      I am using Alpha 10. Question: will friendly’s show up on radar or only hostiles. Also, will there eventually be an autopilot command to land on a planet with no spaceport? Getting from orbit to ground is hard for the impatient (I cant stop icantstopICANTSTOP*splat*)

      Cool, my answers hold for alpha 10.

      Everything shows up on the scanner – there’s no way for your ship to know if something is hostile until it starts shooting.

      No plans for a rough-landing autopilot, mostly because of the difficulty in specifying a target. Besides, you need to learn to fly sometime ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74665
      AvatarRetsof
      Participant

      Look like I was just unlucky. Just found another ship.

    • #74666
      AvatarAnonymous
      Retsof wrote:
      Getting from orbit to ground is hard for the impatient (I cant stop icantstopICANTSTOP*splat*)

      Haha.. that’s exactly how I ‘land’ on planets ๐Ÿ˜ฎ

    • #74667
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      I bet you never use your mirrors, either.

    • #74668
      Avatars2odan
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      I bet you never use your mirrors, either.

      ๐Ÿ˜†

      Mine melted ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74669
      AvatarAnonymous

      This would be awesome if something like this was used in the game.

      http://www.existor.com/

      just an idea and it should be an optional thing because it would get annoying after awhile

    • #74670
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant

      Nice idea but she refuses to engage in a serious discussion about warp nacelles… I got bored before she did though ๐Ÿ˜€

    • #74671
      AvatarGudadantza
      Participant

      The future is a database of real stars.., of course.

      Oops Is it here?

    • #74672
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant
      0hyeah132 wrote:
      This would be awesome if something like this was used in the game.

      http://www.existor.com/

      just an idea and it should be an optional thing because it would get annoying after awhile

      I just typed in “deus ex machina” and it said “I am the machine”! Shodan anyone? ๐Ÿ˜•

    • #74673
      AvatarAnonymous
      fluffyfreak wrote:
      Nice idea but she refuses to engage in a serious discussion about warp nacelles… I got bored before she did though ๐Ÿ˜€

      Yeah well the way she works is that she learns from how people have responded to things she has said. So in theory, If she was in the game then people would only talk about ingame stuff with her and that would be all she talked about. The only problem is if you ask if she is human. In that case if you asked her if she was real she would start going on about you being the machine and how she is real and if anyone ever told her their name then she would think that is her name and she can’t carry out long conversations because she can’t remember anything she has said previously.

      An example is this conversation with cleverbot (an AI that works in the exact same way just without the face).

      Cleverbot: Do you have a brain, Cleverbot?

      User: You are cleverbot, not me.

      Cleverbot: I beg to Differ. You are the Cleverbot and I am the User.

      User: That is an interesting point of view.

      Cleverbot: Why do you think you are human?

      User: I think, therefore I am.

      Cleverbot: But thought can be wrong.

      User: If thought is wrong, I still have thought.

      Cleverbot: Very funny, but I know some cheerleaders that went on to be doctors. I don’t really care George, if you don’t think having to feel accounts for much, then fine.

      User: I am not george.

      Cleverbot: I know. You asked if I love george though.

      User: Do you love george?

      Cleverbot: I do not love george.

      User: Who is george?

      Cleverbot: You.

      User: I am not george, I am John.

      Cleverbot: So your name is ben?

    • #74674
      AvatarRetsof
      Participant

      Got another one for you. Because no space sim is complete without epic space battles, will this eventually support capital ships and turrets?

    • #74675
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      Retsof wrote:
      Got another one for you. Because no space sim is complete without epic space battles, will this eventually support capital ships and turrets?

      Probably both but no concrete plans at this stage. Also wrt capital ships, as Brianetta is fond of pointing out, we need to make a concious decision about how much realism we’re willing to trade for gameplay.

    • #74676
      AvatarLuomu
      Participant

      I don’t think there will ever be Star Wars style battles (with slow kilometer-long capital ships and zippy fighters), the high velocities don’t lend itself to that. But realistic approaches can be ‘epic’ as well and not done to death ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74677
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      I think that the ability to be hired as a mercenary to take part in such an epic space battle could be awesome to add eventually. Or how about transporting goods and people through war zones. Just imagine the possibilities, the danger, the intrigue!

    • #74678
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      Marcel wrote:
      I think that the ability to be hired as a mercenary to take part in such an epic space battle could be awesome to add eventually. Or how about transporting goods and people through war zones. Just imagine the possibilities, the danger, the intrigue!

      My end goal for the stuff I’m working on is to be able to do convoy escort missions. You’d be docked with some capital ship, which would be some kind of space station lite (dock and minimal repairs/refueling, no market or bulletin board). You’d launch when they get attacked, you might get some buffs in battle based on your wingmen or extra tech carried by the larger ship (extra scanner bits, missile control, extra cameras). When you get to the destination you get paid or get awards or whatever.

      Out of that we get a long list of work items:

      * path/waypoint-following AI

      * “wingman” AI that can accept simple high-level commands (defend me, attack my target, etc)

      * scriptable camera control

      * GUI chat forms that aren’t tied to a space station

      * turrets

      * combat AI for large ships that don’t rely on being able to turn the ship quickly (ie use turrets)

      * ships with docking ports

      That’s just off the top of my head, and that’s only code bits. There’s also broader mechanical/story/history/realism stuff that comes into play. What do these ships do? Who owns them? Why do they need protecting? Why do they even exist (can’t lots of smaller ships do the job)? Who are the factions involved? How does your involvement in such a mission affect how others see you? How do your actions influence events elsewhere? And so on.

      All this from one simple idea. Answer all these questions and implement all this stuff and you’ve got a very powerful set of tools for doing all sorts of other things that so far we haven’t considered.

      And that’s why I’m here ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74679
      AvatarLuomu
      Participant
      robn wrote:
      That’s just off the top of my head, and that’s only code bits. There’s also broader mechanical/story/history/realism stuff that comes into play. What do these ships do? Who owns them? Why do they need protecting? Why do they even exist (can’t lots of smaller ships do the job)? Who are the factions involved? How does your involvement in such a mission affect how others see you? How do your actions influence events elsewhere? And so on.

      Here’s some more from the rain on your parade dept.:

      – Why don’t the attacked ships just jump to safety?

      – How and where can they be attacked in the first place? (can’t really set up an ambush for ships already moving at 100000km/s, and we don’t have fixed “jump-points” where ships would predictably enter)

    • #74680
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      Luomu wrote:
      Here’s some more from the rain on your parade dept.:

      Nah not raining on anything, just more stuff to think about. We need to have some kind of idea of what’s possible in our universe; questions like these always help.

      Off the top of my head, and in no way indicating any kind of commitment to these:

      Quote:
      – Why don’t the attacked ships just jump to safety?

      Some space games/systems (notably EVE and Star Wars) have had a concept of a ship or piece of equipment that can pull a ship out of hyperspace and/or prevent it from jumping.

      Quote:
      – How and where can they be attacked in the first place? (can’t really set up an ambush for ships already moving at 100000km/s, and we don’t have fixed “jump-points” where ships would predictably enter)

      Deep in the hyperspace code there’s a concept of hyperspace “entry zone” from 9-11AU from the primary system object (star or binary gravpoint). Admittedly its a random position so thats actually a massive spherical area, but maybe we could use that as a starting point for a more formal concept of where ships appear after hyperspace.

      Or we could implement fixed jump points ala Babylon 5. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74681
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      Quote:
      Deep in the hyperspace code there’s a concept of hyperspace “entry zone” from 9-11AU from the primary system object (star or binary gravpoint). Admittedly its a random position so thats actually a massive spherical area, but maybe we could use that as a starting point for a more formal concept of where ships appear after hyperspace.

      Or we could implement fixed jump points ala Babylon 5.

      One option for an ambush would be for that entry point to be within a cone with it’s base pointing at the origin system. Erm. Ok that was an awful way of describing what was in my head! ๐Ÿ˜† damn… what I mean is… they’d appear within a region ~9AU from the destination star, but the centre of that region (volume/cone/sphere/whatever) would be inline with their jump origin star.

      Um, does that make sense? It’d give ambushers a limited volume to set a trap within so ambushes wouldn’t be completely predictable, but not utterly random.

      Also I do think that fix jump gates would make a lot of sense, might even make smaller ships reasonably sensible choices. However that smells like feature creep ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74682
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      fluffyfreak wrote:
      One option for an ambush would be for that entry point to be within a cone with it’s base pointing at the origin system. Erm. Ok that was an awful way of describing what was in my head! ๐Ÿ˜† damn… what I mean is… they’d appear within a region ~9AU from the destination star, but the centre of that region (volume/cone/sphere/whatever) would be inline with their jump origin star.

      Um, does that make sense? It’d give ambushers a limited volume to set a trap within so ambushes wouldn’t be completely predictable, but not utterly random.

      I quite like that. It would also mean that we could get rid of the hyperspace following hack for assassinations and such. You’d just land in the same general region and then its up to you to find the cloud. Of course there’d have to be some other mechanism to help with that, but its slightly more plausible.

      Quote:
      Also I do think that fix jump gates would make a lot of sense, might even make smaller ships reasonably sensible choices. However that smells like feature creep ๐Ÿ˜‰

      We don’t exactly have a defined scope, so by definition its not creep. But I take your point. I don’t think its too outrageous though – conceptually it doesn’t change how hyperspace works, it would mostly be a range or fuel modifier.

    • #74683
      Avatars2odan
      Participant
      Quote:
      it would mostly be a range or fuel modifier.

      Thats how gates should be done IMO… not a requirement just an aid.

      Also, WRT hyperspace entry points. What about lagrange points? It could be simply if gravity = 0(close enough to 0) then jump is possible, which would bring lagrange points into play as you could both enter and leave a system from the inner planets, providing there was a lagrange point.

      And I suppose literally every system with at least one planet there would have a lagrange point.

      A combination of this and the directional ‘cone’ thingy fluffy mentioned is how I think it should be done.

    • #74684
      AvatarLuomu
      Participant

      Jump points, artificial or natural, are quite common for a reason… they provide strategic choke points and concentrate traffic. But it’s straying quite far from Frontier. If we keep the current free-er jump model, it’s conceivable that activity will happen near planets, stations and other installations where velocities are lower and it’s easier to catch up/intercept. In deep space things will be quiet.

      The point-less model can be limited at least by gravity, you need to be clear from planets and stations before jumping. Artificial limitations are OK too as long as the effects are well thought out…

    • #74685
      AvatarRetsof
      Participant

      I also think that gravity wells should effect jumping. perhaps even giving you damage if you jump out close to one. The problem with small jump gates is that you would need some kind of JTC (jump traffic control) to prevent collisions. a simple capital ship AI could be just “headlong pass, turn around, repeat” before better things are implemented. I’m no coder, but every game since Asteroids has turrets so they can’t be that hard. What I feel is really important, and that most games lack, is a good collision avoidance AI. Also, Capships will be sluggish by nature, unless half the ship is engines. That could actually be interesting. Have there be both the big bruisers and other ones devoted to fast delivery of fighters.

      EDIT: More of an under-the-hood question here. Will there be any work toward making the game look better for those of us that lack support for the shaders in this game? I know some shaders will work because in other, older games (SW empire at war, SW battlefront) things like heat distortion and motion blur still work. Maybe some kind of low shader setting, or a better auto detect? (particularly grating is the gradient used for planet atmospheres, with an eternal night sky above the horizon)

    • #74686
      AvatarLuomu
      Participant
      Retsof wrote:
      EDIT: More of an under-the-hood question here. Will there be any work toward making the game look better for those of us that lack support for the shaders in this game? I know some shaders will work because in other, older games (SW empire at war, SW battlefront) things like heat distortion and motion blur still work.

      What’s your hardware?

    • #74687
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      The machine at which I am currently sat has an Intel G31, which has no shader support in Pioneer. The hardware supports 2.0 shaders, and apparently so can the Linux drivers, if my Google-fu is strong today. My laptop has an Intel graphics adapter beginning i8, which doesn’t support pixel shaders at all.

      Pioneer is an ugly experience on both of these machines, despite running adequately quickly. I’d be happy to see Frontier’s fake sky. (-:

    • #74688
      Avatardurandal
      Participant

      I’m on Win 7 ultimate and old ATI card, old laptop with only 512MB RAM. Enabling shaders makes gas giant halfwhite/halfblack.

      When runing oolite, shaders option is by default disabled and can not be turn on.

    • #74689
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant
      Quote:
      One option for an ambush would be for that entry point to be within a cone with it’s base pointing at the origin system. Erm. Ok that was an awful way of describing what was in my head! ๐Ÿ˜† damn… what I mean is… they’d appear within a region ~9AU from the destination star, but the centre of that region (volume/cone/sphere/whatever) would be inline with their jump origin star.

      I posted this same idea a while ago, so obviously I think it’s the way to go. One modifier, I think the distance from the destination star at which one arrives should be based on the mass of the destination star. The more massive the star, the further away you end up from it. Ideally, the stars would all be in their actual positions and the effects of gravity wells of neighboring stars and planets would be taken into account by a pseudo-physics equation, but a plausible random fudge would be fine.

      The idea that one couldn’t jump unless the gravity well one is in is near 0, or a jump gate or Lagrange point is available is intriguing, but perhaps a bit clumsy or convoluted, but I still like it. Perhaps jumping from too large of a gravity field would cause damage, but it would be a good logical way to introduce mis-jumps into the game. ๐Ÿ˜€

    • #74690
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      Anyone have a link to a good free mp3/midi to ogg converter? I’ve been playing with the alpha 12 dev version which has music support. It’s a good start, but the music gets repetitive after a while. I’m sure that there will be folders we can drop our music into that are based on trigger events eventually, but even so I, and probably everyone else here have some music they’d like to add to their personal copy of Pioneer. I’ve looked around, but I’m not sure which one to download. Any recommendations โ“

    • #74691
      Avatarrobn
      Participant

      If you’re running the latest nightly you’ll already have those event-based dirs.

      The music that will be in the game proper can be downloaded from issue #171. I’m working through it today and will be looking to merge it tonight or tomorrow in preparation for Alpha 12 (due for release on 8 July).

    • #74692
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      That’s wonderful! I’ll try to download it today, (takes 6 hrs for me) but I still want to convert some music I have and use it in my copy of Pioneer, so does anyone have a free converter?

    • #74693
      AvatarLuomu
      Participant
      Marcel wrote:
      That’s wonderful! I’ll try to download it today, (takes 6 hrs for me) but I still want to convert some music I have and use it in my copy of Pioneer, so does anyone have a free converter?

      On Windows, OggDrop is nice & simple drag and drop converter: http://www.rarewares.org/ogg-oggdropxpd.php. If you need to convert .mp3 to .wav first, there’s Lamedrop: http://www.rarewares.org/mp3-lamedrop.php

    • #74694
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      Thanks, Luomu! ๐Ÿ˜€

    • #74695
      Avatardoomdark64
      Participant

      Any time frame for when planetary mining will be implimented?

      Regards

    • #74696
      Avatardurandal
      Participant

      It is currently not planed at all, we developers are lazy people after all.

      You can post new issue/bug/feature request on pioneer github page to make sure this nice feature is not forgotten.

      Easier stuff are probably going to appear sooner than later, but you never know.

    • #74697
      Avatarrobn
      Participant

      I wouldn’t say its not planned – its required for feature parity with Frontier, so we have the design already. But yes, its not being worked on at the moment.

    • #74698
      AvatarVlastan
      Participant

      Now that the alpha12 is out, are the roll keys still disabled when using the mouse for turning around?

      I clearly remember that this was not an issue in older alphas. I hope this will get fixed soon.

    • #74699
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      Does the Pioneer community ever think the game could have an XBox friendly version? I dont mean the 360 (too many legal hassles and whatnot), but say running on a modded original Xbox with it’s standard OS having been replaced with something like XBMC?

    • #74700
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      Geraldine wrote:
      Does the Pioneer community ever think the game could have an XBox friendly version? I dont mean the 360 (too many legal hassles and whatnot), but say running on a modded original Xbox with it’s standard OS having been replaced with something like XBMC?

      Yes, actually. I don’t have an XBox but I bought an XBox stick in anticipation. I think it could be quite a natural control mechanism, but we’d need to rework the UI a bit to support it as you don’t want to be rushing to the keyboard or mouse for every other function. Some radial menus would probably be nice.

    • #74701
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      Thats interesting news robn. Modding old X Boxs has become popular these days, so I am sure there will be people out there who will be glad to hear that there could be a possibility of one day seeing Pioneer running on them. ๐Ÿ™‚

      For me personally, mouse control will always be my favourite, but it would be nice to have options. ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74702
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      robn wrote:
      Geraldine wrote:
      Does the Pioneer community ever think the game could have an XBox friendly version? I dont mean the 360 (too many legal hassles and whatnot), but say running on a modded original Xbox with it’s standard OS having been replaced with something like XBMC?

      Yes, actually. I don’t have an XBox but I bought an XBox stick in anticipation. I think it could be quite a natural control mechanism, but we’d need to rework the UI a bit to support it as you don’t want to be rushing to the keyboard or mouse for every other function. Some radial menus would probably be nice.

      I don’t think we’ll get it running in 64MB of ram without trashing the terrain stuff at the least.

      But adding pad control to the current version shouldn’t be difficult at all.

      The PS3/Xbox360 would be better targets and they’re already ~7 years old.

    • #74703
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      Yes you are correct fluffy freak, you would be looking at lower detail level and yes the PS3/360 would be more capable, but to bring out Pioneer on these platforms involves signing agreements with Sony & Microsoft respectively to port the game. I guess for a free open source project like this, that would not be a realistic option, at least for now. This was why I suggested modded X Box 1s only

    • #74704
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant

      Only if you’re doing it officially. There’s Xbox360 and PS3 homebrew as well.

      My point however was more that the original Xbox is more than a decade old, even it’s successor is long in the tooth. If you pick up an nVidia ION based platform (now itself be retired) you’ll have hardware that’s dozens of times more powerful.

    • #74705
      Avatars2odan
      Participant
      Quote:

      Yes, actually. I don’t have an XBox but I bought an XBox stick in anticipation.

      Hang on… Are you saying : Put it *on* XBOX, Or Play with it on PC *with* Xbox pad?

      Because I honestly don’t ever see this being ported to the 360… Not that I wouldn’t use it, I have a 360 or the old dust catcher as I call it ๐Ÿ™‚

      Why don’t we make a snes version? s20dan snickers ๐Ÿ˜‰ Snes roms FTW…. ๐Ÿ˜†

      Pioneer in Mode7 YEAH!

    • #74706
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      The idea was only for modded Xboxs s2odan. Their new replacement OSs are much closer to what you would find in a PC in that, you can configure them. Even then you would still have to think about how you would actually control the game, so big changes would have to be made. Such a thing could only exist after the Mac, PC and Linux versions were finished, as the game as momentum now and long may it continue! ๐Ÿ™‚ Although some I am sure, would not mind playing the game on their PCs with a controller.

    • #74707
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      s2odan wrote:
      Quote:

      Yes, actually. I don’t have an XBox but I bought an XBox stick in anticipation.

      Hang on… Are you saying : Put it *on* XBOX, Or Play with it on PC *with* Xbox pad?

      I meant play with an XBox pad – I have no interest at all in XBox port. On the other hand, if the interface was already built for use with a gamepad then it makes porting it a much more compelling project for an interested hacker.

      Quote:
      Why don’t we make a snes version? s20dan snickers ๐Ÿ˜‰ Snes roms FTW…. ๐Ÿ˜†

      Pioneer in Mode7 YEAH!

      Sort of related, I had a bit of an idea for a “Pocket Pioneer” for DS (or I guess iPhone/Android), which is mostly just a glorified modelviewer so you can look at ship stats on your phone. No game in there, just a bit of fun. I think of lots of things that will never happen though ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74708
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      2d pocket pioneer lol

    • #74709
      Avatarhighlander
      Participant
      s2odan wrote:
      Pioneer in Mode7 YEAH!

      Already been done – it’s called “Elite”, I hear it’s getting quite popular ๐Ÿ˜†

    • #74710
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      lol

    • #74711
      Avatars2odan
      Participant
      Quote:
      Already been done – it’s called “Elite”, I hear it’s getting quite popular

      Good point hehe. There was actually a NES version wasn’t there?

      Quote:
      I had a bit of an idea for a “Pocket Pioneer” for DS (or I guess iPhone/Android), which is mostly just a glorified modelviewer so you can look at ship stats on your phone.

      ๐Ÿ˜€ We think alike my good man. I have similar Dreams/Nightmares hehe.

    • #74712
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant

      Just the other day someone was telling that instead of getting another coding job (yes i’m an unemployed bum! ๐Ÿ˜€) I should look into writing Android Apps, not sure this is quite what they had in mind!

    • #74713
      Avatarlee
      Participant

      Hi,

      having a mission to deliver something to Eagles Nest in Epsilon Eridani, I tried to dock at the station and found that I can’t. The autopilot only takes the ship close to the station, and flying into it manually doesn’t get me docked, either. They gave me docking clearance and told me I should dock at bay 1.

      Is docking at this station currently not possible, or am I missing something?

    • #74714
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      That looks like a bug to me. Its good you reported it as it all helps to bring in a list of new fixes that need to be done for the next alpha. ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74715
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      I just started a new game at Epsilon Eridani and docked at Eagle’s Nest. My speculation, based on no examination of the script, is that Eagle’s nest may have been full up. Random ships are generated in the starports. Sometimes even when not on a mission you are unable to dock for this reason. The mission script might not have the ability to handle such a situation. If you saved your game before you jumped into the system, try it again and see if it works. If you saved a game in the system, go up to the station, stop and use external view. You can pan and zoom around to see inside the station. It holds two ships. I don’t think the code is implemented for the ships to leave yet. And of course, my idea could be totally wrong. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74716
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      so maybe to do such missions the coding for ships leaving station needs to be finished first.

    • #74717
      Avatarrobn
      Participant

      The current trade ship module doesn’t try to make ships launch ever. Its a known shortcoming. There is work in progress to improve the trade ship module but its not ready yet.

    • #74718
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      ah ok but it is coming along that is good to hear at leats

    • #74719
      AvatarRobsoie
      Participant
      robn wrote:
      Bugbear1973 wrote:
      I’m doing a lucrative package run to Callisto Spaceport in the AD Leonis system. I’m now sitting outside the station. I’ve requested docking clearance but the station master is telling me ‘Cleance denied. There are no free docking bays.’

      OK, fair enough, it’s good to see some signs of life appearing in the universe.

      My question, though, is how long do I need to wait for docking clearance. I can only get 10x time acceleration due to the proximity to the planet, which again is fair enough.

      Right now they never leave. The TradeShips module right now spawns a few ships inside stations and a few more out space and sets them to fly to stations. Once they get there they stop. I intend to have something a bit more fluid for alpha 10. For now if they’re really messing up your game you can delete/move data/modules/TradeShips.lua and they won’t spawn.

      Hello,

      Is this problem fixed in alpha 12 ?

      I ask because i’m in front of a station that tell me the same thing, no free docking bays, it’s been a while i’m waiting in front of it, and the ship that is inside has not left the station, i just can’t get docked there.

    • #74720
      AvatarZiusudra
      Participant
      Robsoie wrote:
      Is this problem fixed in alpha 12 ?

      No.

      Edit: here is the tracker issue

    • #74721
      AvatarDevious
      Participant

      Hi

      i just recently stumbled upon the pioneer project and i’m truly amazed! If anyone of the developers are reading this i just want to say that your work is amazing! and, keep it up! Pleeeeaaase :).

      Anyway. a couple of days ago i downloaded the alpha12 build for my mac and i’m learning it. I watched videos on youtube from previous builds with totally amazing graphics! High mountains, deep valleys. Beautiful environments!

      Well, although I have a high end macbook pro 2011 and choose “very very good” on all graphic options n stuff. I get a pretty crappy blurry environment on the planets.

      Is there any difference between the mac and the PC versions? Or is there any graphic patch that I should download or something?

      Cheers

    • #74722
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      good job all round game is atm graphics heavy but content and gameplay lite so that i think is where they are going amoung other things

    • #74723
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      Devious wrote:
      Well, although I have a high end macbook pro 2011 and choose “very very good” on all graphic options n stuff. I get a pretty crappy blurry environment on the planets.

      Is there any difference between the mac and the PC versions? Or is there any graphic patch that I should download or something?

      Choosing very, very high level on either terrain or city detail is basically giving Pioneer permission to drag your computer to its knees, however powerful it is. Try reducing it a notch; it’ll still look very good, but won’t sit there painstakingly arranging every single grain of dust on the planet (so to speak) that you’ll likely never look at.

    • #74724
      AvatarKingHaggis
      Participant
      Quote:
      Anyway. a couple of days ago i downloaded the alpha12 build for my mac and i’m learning it. I watched videos on youtube from previous builds with totally amazing graphics! High mountains, deep valleys. Beautiful environments!

      Well, although I have a high end macbook pro 2011 and choose “very very good” on all graphic options n stuff. I get a pretty crappy blurry environment on the planets.

      Is there any difference between the mac and the PC versions? Or is there any graphic patch that I should download or something?

      Some planets are just more worth visiting than others, I think. Pioneer has a few flat, featureless planets and moons which may look a bit cartoony but also amazingly beautiful worlds with mountainranges, canyons and a nice foggy atmosphere. Especially when you can see other moons or planets from the surface of a planet. That’s the cool thing about this game, you have to explore a lot to find the really nice worlds. If you have everything set to high and you get decent framerates, then you can’t get it any better graphically so just look for the best planets. The newer alpha builds keep changing planet terrains by the way. It may be that some terrains from the previous builds are gone but for alpha 12 I really like the vulcanic, desert and icey worlds and if you want to see a nice world that’s not far away, just fly to Io. If it doesn’t look all that impressive on your Macbook, then maybe it’s your different hardware. It appears that, though we have more variety in terrains and a few extremely beautiful worlds, I can’t seem to find really high mountainranges anymore. Io has a nice big mountain but haven’t come across more of those. Maybe I have to look harder. Previous builds sometimes had those spooky looking planets with extremely high mountains, lakes and mist. Does anybody have a tip?

      But man, I really enjoy these newer alpha and Robn w.i.p. builds! The new terrain with the canyons, the new cockpit, the fonts and the awesome music! The new starmap which instantly shows which starsystems have colonies, the very easy to use autopilot interface (just select a planet from the planetinfo screen, return to cockpit and engage autopilot), the ability to use manual thrusters while in speedcontrol mode and many other features. And I get the feeling somehow everything’s smoother and sharper looking now. Excellent work!

      Now if only the deadzone for joysticks would be fixed some day… it’s still impossible for me to control the joystick with speedacceleration engaged. It’s summer and I’m almost never behind my PC but I’m really looking forward to playing Pioneer again in the colder seasons. It’s amazing to see how much it has evolved and how the regular contributers still work so actively to make it even better.

    • #74725
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      terrian generation is great just teh content now which is being worked on ot to add the gameplay element to the game

    • #74726
      AvatarDevious
      Participant
      Quote:
      Maybe I have to look harder. Previous builds sometimes had those spooky looking planets with extremely high mountains, lakes and mist. Does anybody have a tip?

      I have a tip for ya! Go to Proteus, on of Neptunes moons. It’s the best one i’ve found so far, I fly there every evening <3

    • #74727
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      Devious wrote:
      Well, although I have a high end macbook pro 2011 and choose “very very good” on all graphic options n stuff. I get a pretty crappy blurry environment on the planets.

      Is there any difference between the mac and the PC versions? Or is there any graphic patch that I should download or something?

      Choosing very, very high level on either terrain or city detail is basically giving Pioneer permission to drag your computer to its knees, however powerful it is. Try reducing it a notch; it’ll still look very good, but won’t sit there painstakingly arranging every single grain of dust on the planet (so to speak) that you’ll likely never look at.

      Indeed, setting it to “very very high” will make it look great… eventually, but at first it will probably look worse than a lower resolution because it takes so long to generate the detail. Hopefully for alpha 14 (maybe) we’ll be able to implement a decent threaded system that will be a bit quicker for people with multi-core cpus. At the moment the current threaded version is just an experiment.

    • #74728
      AvatarDevious
      Participant

      Just wanted to say that i miss Miranda! Is it there or am i just bad at finding it?

    • #74729
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant
      Devious wrote:
      Just wanted to say that i miss Miranda! Is it there or am i just bad at finding it?

      That looks like a very tricky moon to get right. It looks as if it has been glued together from odd bits and bobs. s2odan is the man who could answer your question.

    • #74730
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      the sdman has done a very good job

    • #74731
      AvatarDaWheel92
      Participant

      Does the star gliese 581 exist in Pioneer? I went looking around for it and I can’t seem to find it >.>”

      Any help will be greatly appreciated = D

    • #74732
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      DaWheel92 wrote:
      Does the star gliese 581 exist in Pioneer? I went looking around for it and I can’t seem to find it >.>”

      Any help will be greatly appreciated = D

      In the 3D Galaxy branch, it does. I found it with the system search feature. In sector -2, -2, -1, it is a type M star, 24 light years from Sol.

      Its nearest neighbours include 33 G.Lib, NN3877, Gliese 588, Gliese 570, Gliese 595. Its nearest named neighbour is Xi Bootis.

      Since you probably don’t have the 3D Galaxy branch, and none of you will have seen it yet, here’s a sneak peek of Gliese 581, this afternoon. FOR BEST RESULTS: View this on Youtube, and expand to large size, or use full screen.

      [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rJHYgNoO6o[/youtube]

    • #74733
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      Hey, I love that search function Brianetta! ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74734
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      Geraldine wrote:
      Hey, I love that search function Brianetta! ๐Ÿ˜‰

      All kudos to Rob for that. I’m just the tester.

    • #74735
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      Geraldine wrote:
      Hey, I love that search function Brianetta! ๐Ÿ˜‰

      All kudos to Rob for that. I’m just the tester.

      Naw, its actually Tom’s doing. I’m just getting things cleaned up for release.

    • #74736
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      A group effort then, still very useful and welcome addition to Pioneer. Great work guys! ๐Ÿ˜Ž

    • #74737
      AvatarSGDominator
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:

      Since you probably don’t have the 3D Galaxy branch, and none of you will have seen it yet, here’s a sneak peek of Gliese 581, this afternoon. FOR BEST RESULTS: View this on Youtube, and expand to large size, or use full screen.

      Will we get to play with the 3D Galaxy and Search feature in the next nightly build?

    • #74738
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      SGDominator wrote:
      Will we get to play with the 3D Galaxy and Search feature in the next nightly build?

      Life is pretty busy at the moment, so I’d say it won’t hit the nightlies for at least a week, maybe two.

    • #74739
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      the fact a 3d search and map feature has even gone in is a major step – its not new content but it reorganises content in a more complete way ( map content)

    • #74740
      AvatarCreepyStepdad
      Participant

      Had to register with the site just to say this. Pioneer could be awesome! I really enjoy the autopilot system, and the search feature coming to the map should really help. Many of the models look fantastic. Really impressed, I have now played this more than Oolite.

      A couple questions:

      Is your team looking for someone to do documentation on gameplay and how to add new models and missions to the game? I looked around but didn’t really find anything.

      I love the planetary take-off and landing, barring a few bugs. What will planets eventually be host to? I could see being able to pilot drones that collect natural resources like digging up gems, harvesting exotic biologicals, or hunting indigenous species. Being able to “get out” of your ship in some respect would really make the planets come alive, at least giving wealthy players a chance to joyride over different terrains (maybe even different gravities?)in their fancy new rovers, and give bases another form of revenue.

      There are lots of planets that serve little purpose as far as I can tell, aside from exploring their terrain (which is probably really cool, my pc sucks). Are there plans to make all the planets have some type of commercial resource or have some other purpose? With the variety of different planets and stars I realize this could get complicated, but imho it would add a great deal of gameplay as well as opportunities for all sorts of randomly-generated missions. Even alien races could be generated in much the same way as your character portraits are(another really cool feature), and their economic output generalized as one of the existing trade categories, or perhaps adding a few unique commodities once discovered.

      Sorry, but your game makes my mind switch into overdrive. Very cool folks, keep up the good work.

    • #74741
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant
      Quote:
      Sorry, but your game makes my mind switch into overdrive.

      ๐Ÿ˜† Mine too! There are better qualified people here than I to answer your questions, so I just wanted to say Welcome! ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74742
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      CreepyStepdad wrote:
      Is your team looking for someone to do documentation on gameplay and how to add new models and missions to the game? I looked around but didn’t really find anything.

      Yes. Documentation is being written in markdown in this repository. I’m coordinating that, and at the moment i’m the only contributor. Work on that has been waiting for a bit, because seriously, Pioneer is a rapidly moving target. That repository’s wiki contains the rendered markdown of the manual. You can see the style of writing I’m looking for (humorous, and reminiscent of the Frontier manual) and you can also see that the graphics are out of date.

      I’m thinking of leaving out the graphics until right at the end, and just getting all the text in there, with placeholders for screenshots, icons etc.

      CreepyStepdad wrote:
      There are lots of planets that serve little purpose as far as I can tell

      That’s just what the universe is like. Space is big and empty. There *will* be enough to do, don’t worry. Pioneer is a space game with planets, not a planet game with spaces. Er… whatever. (-:

    • #74743
      Avatarnumidianian
      Participant

      So, what about translating the game in other language? I’d like to have a look at the volume of the text data for translation.

    • #74744
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      รƒยร…ยกรƒยร‚ยพรƒโ€˜รขโ‚ฌยกรƒยร‚ยตรƒยร‚ยฒรƒยร‚ยฝรƒยร‚ยธรƒยร‚ยบ wrote:
      So, what about translating the game in other language? I’d like to have a look at the volume of the text data for translation.

      This has already been mentioned in other threads here. The translation files live in your data/lang directory. The most recently released English version is available here:

      https://raw.github.com/pioneerspacesim/ … nglish.txt

      That file will continually be updated, and will have new strings for the 3D galaxy branch as soon as that comes out.

      If you wish to become an official translator for Pioneer, tell us. We’ll track the language’s progress on the issue tracker, and all who are involved can be informed when new translatable strings appear. At the moment there is only one official translator, and that’s for the German language. That translator is me, and I’m not even a native speaker. We’d like to see people get involved in all aspects of the game, not just coding.

      The manual isn’t translated yet, but then, it isn’t even complete. The Lua missions scripts aren’t formally translated yet either (although there is one very enthusiastic Polish copy). Lua missions don’t actually have a proper translation mechanism yet; again, people who want to get involved should let us know.

    • #74745
      AvatarJoseMaria
      Participant

      (Alpha 13) That the Imperial Courier can’t land on planets city-spaceports (also by Autopilot) and also crash after start if bought on planet-spaceports is ->

      a) intended? They are only for space-stations ?

      b) a problem that will be fixed later?

      c) my Problem ? I donรƒโ€šร‚ยดt know how to fly that ship?

    • #74746
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      I think it may be “b”. I’ve found similar problems with the Imperial Trader, a similar ship created by the same person, potsmoke66. It would crash into stations, and sometimes, when approaching a station on autopilot it would point its tail toward the station an use its retro thrusters to accelerate toward it. I suspect these ships may not be alpha 13 compatible.

    • #74747
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      Marcel wrote:
      I suspect these ships may not be alpha 13 compatible.

      I’ve not given any thought to the actual problem, but I thought I’d point out that the AI/autopilot has not changed in any significant way since alpha 9, released in March. The actual problem is likely to be far more subtle.

    • #74748
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      I wonder if they might still be using the os clock.

    • #74749
      Avatarnumidianian
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:

      Guess, I should not translate lines like: “VID_LINK_ESTABLISHED”, but only “Video link established”, right? Or should everything be translated?

      Brianetta wrote:
      If you wish to become an official translator for Pioneer, tell us.

      Yep, why not.

    • #74750
      AvatarZiusudra
      Participant
      รƒยร…ยกรƒยร‚ยพรƒโ€˜รขโ‚ฌยกรƒยร‚ยตรƒยร‚ยฒรƒยร‚ยฝรƒยร‚ยธรƒยร‚ยบ wrote:
      Brianetta wrote:

      Guess, I should not translate lines like: “VID_LINK_ESTABLISHED”, but only “Video link established”, right? Or should everything be translated?

      Correct on the first. VID_LINK_ESTABLISHED is how the game finds the line and must not be changed.

    • #74751
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      รƒยร…ยกรƒยร‚ยพรƒโ€˜รขโ‚ฌยกรƒยร‚ยตรƒยร‚ยฒรƒยร‚ยฝรƒยร‚ยธรƒยร‚ยบ wrote:
      Brianetta wrote:

      Guess, I should not translate lines like: “VID_LINK_ESTABLISHED”, but only “Video link established”, right? Or should everything be translated?

      You’re quite right, those lines are the tokens used by Pioneer to find the strings it needs to use.

      If your translated string contains spaces, it needs to be quoted. The indents at the beginning of each line are removed by the game when it uses them; they’re there for clarity. The only escape sequence is \n for a new line. sprintf tokens within the string (%d, %f0.0, %s etc) should be preserved.

      Quote:
      Brianetta wrote:
      If you wish to become an official translator for Pioneer, tell us.

      Yep, why not.

      Cool. If you’re not on Github already, you’ll need to be in order to make pull requests containing your translation(s).

      You will need to create your language file in data/lang and name it after the language’s native name (just like English.txt and Deutsch.txt). Add this file to your copy of the Pioneer git repository on Github and make a pull request to the main one; that way, we can automatically put your language into the game. Submit updated languages in exactly the same way.

      This issue here:

      https://github.com/pioneerspacesim/pioneer/issues/381

      That’s the place where developers will let translators know that they have changed something in English.txt. If a translation is not provided for any of the phrases, Pioneer will fall back to the English when needed for that phrase. I’ll be using it to open new language issues for all of the languages that we have.

      If you need any technical assistance with Github or your local git installation, or you have any other questions, ask me here.

    • #74752
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      If your translated string contains spaces, it needs to be quoted.

      Actually it only needs to be quoted if it has leading or trailing spaces that need to be preserved.

    • #74753
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      Is it possible to use this to automatically translate adverts? I know they’d have to be re-written to be a background image with text overlaid, and a selection of fonts to make them look good. Is it worth the effort?

    • #74754
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      Marcel wrote:
      Is it possible to use this to automatically translate adverts? I know they’d have to be re-written to be a background image with text overlaid, and a selection of fonts to make them look good. Is it worth the effort?

      Not possible yet. There’s a few things involved – extending the translation system to Lua, extending it further to LMR, working out how to let models choose their fonts, and so on.

      Now that I think about it though, I wonder if it would be better to not provide translations for ads but rather provided different sets of localised ads. Translations are for the player and really only apply to the UI. In the same way that I wouldn’t expect to travel to Berlin and see ads in English, perhaps neither should I expect to travel to New Germany in Pioneer and see English ads there.

      Of course I rather think its more likely that we’ll want sets of ads based on location or faction rather than language. “Join the Empire” or “Outer Rim News” or something.

    • #74755
      AvatarLuomu
      Participant
      Marcel wrote:
      Is it worth the effort?

      I don’t think so… but they could be more diverse by default. Same for ship and location names, they shouldn’t be localized but they should include non-English ones. The backstory/setting affects this too, what languages are in use in the year 3200.

    • #74756
      AvatarRipp
      Participant

      Can anyone help me find the autopilot? Tried every key and nothing.

    • #74757
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      When you’re flying F4 activates the autopilot. When you’re docked F4 communicates with the station. Everybody seems to have difficulty finding this at first. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74758
      AvatarCreepyStepdad
      Participant

      So how far away is functional Enemy AI? I was reading some other posts and it sounds like a lot of work. How’s that going?

      Really digging the new map feature. Kudos.

      I was wondering how booty will be gained, for example when enemies are killed. Will the player have to pick stuff up with grippers or something, or simply touch the items?

      Looking forward to the next nightly build. ๐Ÿ˜€

    • #74759
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      CreepyStepdad wrote:
      So how far away is functional Enemy AI? I was reading some other posts and it sounds like a lot of work. How’s that going?

      The enemy combat AI is fine – try the debug start point to see. That’s only useful if an enemy can actually track you down, which right now is pretty much impossible.

      Quote:
      Really digging the new map feature. Kudos.

      Yeah, we’re loving it too. Cheers!

      Quote:
      I was wondering how booty will be gained, for example when enemies are killed. Will the player have to pick stuff up with grippers or something, or simply touch the items?

      In Frontier ships would sometimes drop cargo canisters which you could scoop up with the proper equipment. I imagine that will be where we start, though there have been other ideas discussed.

      Quote:
      Looking forward to the next nightly build. ๐Ÿ˜€

      Go grab it right now – it was made last night and there’s been no user-facing changes yet ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74760
      Avatarbarrayar
      Participant
      Marcel wrote:
      When you’re flying F4 activates the autopilot. When you’re docked F4 communicates with the station. Everybody seems to have difficulty finding this at first. ๐Ÿ™‚

      Maybe should be icon for F4 changed during flight. I’d some problems with autopilot too… ๐Ÿ™„

    • #74761
      AvatarRayvenQ
      Participant

      I’m just wondering how the illegal Goods mechanic works (if there is even one) as I always end up getting caught (Sure, i’ll probably get told “take it to where its not illegal” but theres no money in that.)

    • #74762
      AvatarZiusudra
      Participant
      RayvenQ wrote:
      I’m just wondering how the illegal Goods mechanic works (if there is even one) as I always end up getting caught (Sure, i’ll probably get told “take it to where its not illegal” but theres no money in that.)

      You can figure this out by observation and trial and error, but for the impatient:

      Small spoiler:

      Each station always has the same goods traders. Each trader is always the same (except for stock quantities.)

      Big spoiler:

      Each trader may be undercover police. If they are, they always will be.

    • #74763
      Avatarnumidianian
      Participant

      Having problems translating this line:

      Quote:
      DUE

      Due

      What is it uded to indicate?

    • #74764
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      รƒยร…ยกรƒยร‚ยพรƒโ€˜รขโ‚ฌยกรƒยร‚ยตรƒยร‚ยฒรƒยร‚ยฝรƒยร‚ยธรƒยร‚ยบ wrote:
      Having problems translating this line:

      Quote:
      DUE

      Due

      What is it uded to indicate?

      “When is it due?”

      “Due date”

    • #74765
      Avatarnumidianian
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      “When is it due?”

      “Due date”

      Ok, I get it.

      Now there is another problem. I have this line:

      Quote:
      JETTISONED

      “Jettisoned 1 tonne of “

      Which presupposes that the item name will be placed at the end of the line. In Russian this position requires a genetive case of the subject, so in order to preserve grammar rules it is required to place the item name at the beginning of the line. But as I see no indicator for the item I suppose the name will be automaticly placed at the end of the line, right?

    • #74766
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      That’s right. This is the sort of thing we need to fix. I’ve opened an issue for this on the tracker: Issue #509.

    • #74767
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      That’s right. This is the sort of thing we need to fix. I’ve opened an issue for this on the tracker: Issue #509.

      OK, while I slept, somebody went ahead and fixed this! (Thanks, John!) As robn put it:

      robn wrote:
      From #509 & #510, `JETTISONED` replaced with `JETTISONED_1T_OF_X`. Non-English translations have been updated but can now be re-translated in a nicer way.[/robn]
    • #74768
      AvatarPrzemyslav
      Participant

      I have question about ship’s prices.

      Do you plan to lower it’s prices? Now it is almost impossible to buy some real cargo ship to start trading, because your starting ship has so tiny cargo hold, so it is impossible to gather enough money from trade in reasonable time now without cheating…

      Maybe changing prices by the factor of 1/5 or 1/10 would do? (Maybe some difficulty setting menu? Easy – 1/10, Medium – 1/5, Hard – as is now)

    • #74769
      Avatarmatthewfarmery
      Participant

      it does take a while, but it can be done, and I have done it, but I know what you mean, however this kind of thing can be worked out later, when the game gets balance testing

      if you want to cheat, (for testing purposes) press control and m, just keep doing that until you have money

      but yeah, the ship prices are a bit high, but Im sure it will be sorted in due time ๐Ÿ˜€

    • #74770
      AvatarPrzemyslav
      Participant
      matthewfarmery wrote:

      if you want to cheat, (for testing purposes) press control and m, just keep doing that until you have money

      I didn’t knew that! I was changing prices manually in game files when I had to ;p

    • #74771
      Avatarmatthewfarmery
      Participant

      I asked if it was possible, and told it was ๐Ÿ˜€

      but anyway, the ship prices need to come down a tad, but I have traded for a while, so getting a sidewinder is possible through trader the normal way,

    • #74772
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      Przemyslav wrote:
      Do you plan to lower it’s prices? Now it is almost impossible to buy some real cargo ship to start trading, because your starting ship has so tiny cargo hold, so it is impossible to gather enough money from trade in reasonable time now without cheating…

      Right now the entire economic model is up in the air. We know we need to do something, and we have discussed it, and there’s a few good ideas kicking around, but we’re just not there yet. The ten year plan is that politics, trade, economies, industry types, etc will all be part of the same system and will all affect each other in interesting ways. The steps in between aren’t really defined though.

      In the meantime, a good source of cash is to do delivery missions within the same system. Get yourself a fast ship (eg the start Eagle or a Talon), remove everything except autopilot and atmospheric shielding (or for Brianetta mode remove the autopilot too) and tour the system running every delivery you can. With your ship empty you’ll go faster and should be able to make money from nearly all of them.

    • #74773
      Avatarmatthewfarmery
      Participant

      you could try this

      I have been trading and there are problems at this time, at least in some systems, not really checked every single one mind

      viewtopic.php?f=35&t=2365

      while that does work, those systems are bugged, with a very annoying tradeship error

      https://github.com/pioneerspacesim/pioneer/issues/513

      so right now, some systems aren’t good for trading full stop, I’ve not traded in the same system, but I guess that is possible, but I would be careful at this moment in time, I should have mentioned this in my other post

      as long as you don’t save and load, (at least in the windows build) the game is stable, as I was able too last night nearly do two game years worth of trading,

      however due to another annoying, bug

      https://github.com/pioneerspacesim/pioneer/issues/60

      this got me

      so my best advice is, get to the medium distance to the station and manually fly the ship in, some ships seem more effected then others, and also seems to be different stations, / orbits that seem to effect this

      but anyway, trading is possible like I said, just a few very annoying bugs to watch out for when you do trade,

    • #74774
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      dynamic trading system at some point

    • #74775
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      ollobrain wrote:
      dynamic trading system at some point

      this sentence no verb

    • #74776
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant
      robn wrote:
      Right now the entire economic model is up in the air. We know we need to do something, and we have discussed it, and there’s a few good ideas kicking around, but we’re just not there yet. The ten year plan is that politics, trade, economies, industry types, etc will all be part of the same system and will all affect each other in interesting ways. The steps in between aren’t really defined though.

      I was thinking about this and someone came to mind, Farcodev. He has been quietly working away creating economic and political models for his 4X game Far Colony. Perhaps he might have some advice?

      Which reminds me, I must have a look at his blog to see how he is getting on with the game.

    • #74777
      Avatarzych
      Participant

      Hi.

      I’m working in indie game development studio, we have some successful titles on our account. I saw a big sign on Pioneers page saying “open source space simulation game”. I’ve got a question to you folks.

      Does it mean that it would be legal if our company took that pioneer, extend it, add some story line, modern graphic ect. and start selling it on Steam?

      Best Regards.

    • #74778
      Avatarmatthewfarmery
      Participant

      have you looked at what pioneer looks like at the moment? it looks pretty damn epic if you ask me, and the very high settings, you need a pretty high end rig to play this game, due to the fracture generation and other things

      the game is still in alpha, but a lot is planned already, there is a lot of chatting in the irc channel that anyone is free to join and join in. everything from missions, to a more dynamic universe, to having fleets and more,, they all been discussed and the direction on which the game is going will outshine the original frontier by miles,

      yes there are bugs, yes there are feature requests, and the community of this game is growing, for me personally, Im a new member here but already learnt, (thanks some members) learnt to compile from source so I can run a debbuger, so I can help track down game problems, and have found a few, but Im just one member of many, who is willing to help, the dev community is strong and always open to new ideas

      your post sounds like you not really looked at the latest stable build or the bug tracker or even the forum posts

      so I think you will find that, you idea of expending the game, adding missions and more, is already been discussed, won’t happen for a while, but it will! but things are happening, a new alpha build is released on the second Friday of every month, and each build is getting more added, what’s more, the game will is mainly for unix and windows users, but thanks to Philbywhizz, there is a reworked mac installer that might make it into alpha 15

      so before you think you can do any better, take a look around the forum and the bug tracker and the release notes of the versions, maybe then you will see, that the game is going to be very big, and a lot, lot better in time

      edit

      as the game is still in alpha, your probably better off looking else where, you should look at the outerra engine, or a commercial procedural engine, rather then then pioneer

      the game is under the GPL licence

      http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html

      When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for them if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it in new free programs, and that you know you can do these things.

    • #74779
      Avatars2odan
      Participant
      zych wrote:
      Hi.

      I’ve got a question to you folks.

      Does it mean that it would be legal if our company took that pioneer, extend it, add some story line, modern graphic ect. and start selling it on Steam?

      Best Regards.

      Pioneer is GPL. Which basically means while it *can* be sold commercially, it is not practical to do so. Bascailly you would be required by law to uphold the GPL licence which means that all works included with pioneer must be released openly in the same way. So yes while you can sell it you also must offer the source material to all works included. Which means literally after 3 customers have bought it, if that many, it would be freely available everywhere.

      Pioneer is also heavily inspired by other space-games to the point that a commercial variant would likely be removed by the courts.

      So please don’t spoil our fun ๐Ÿ˜‰

      To say nothing of the fact that Pioneer is no way near ready….

      Quote:

      I’m working in indie game development studio, we have some successful titles on our account

      What studio?

    • #74780
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant
      s2odan wrote:
      So please don’t spoil our fun ๐Ÿ˜‰

      Exactly, can you imagine how a certain Cambridge based development company would react if someone released this commercially?………………….. ๐Ÿ˜ฏ

      By all means get involved zych and help out if you are willing, but trying to sell the game would only end badly. Actually, it sends me giddy to think how bad it would be. ๐Ÿ˜•

    • #74781
      Avatarrobn
      Participant

      You should go and read up on the GPL and what it allows – there’s many many analyses out there. That basic gist is that you can do what you like with the game, including sell it, but all modifications that you distribute (for cash or not) need to have an offer of source code made available, and you cannot place restrictions on anyone further distributing that source.

      The other thing to think about outside of legal obligations is your reputation within the community, which is really the currency of the open source world. If you took Pioneer and made a game out of it without any thought or regard for where it came from, you could sell it without any legal problems (provided you meet your obligations) but you could incur the wrath of nasty internet dwellers that felt they’d been slighted. Channeled appropriately that kind of wrath could kill you. On the other hand, where you to work closely with the community, adding development resources but still working within the same processes then you’d probably find an army of people willing to do free advocacy for your game.

      Commercial open source can be tricky, but plenty of other companies have done it with great success. If you’re serious about working with us we’d love to have you on board – just like anyone else.

    • #74782
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      Geraldine wrote:
      Exactly, can you imagine how a certain Cambridge based development company would react if someone released this commercially?………………….. ๐Ÿ˜ฏ

      The code is 100% clean so there’s no problem there. There might be some stuff ship names or models that look too similar (particularly the “iconic” ones like the Cobra III), but they need removing or improving anyway. I wouldn’t be here if I thought this project was legally dubious (though I’m not a lawyer).

    • #74783
      Avatarzych
      Participant

      Thank you for fast answers.

      By the way. As a great and loving fan of Frontier series I wish that project best luck.

    • #74784
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant
      robn wrote:
      I wouldn’t be here if I thought this project was legally dubious (though I’m not a lawyer).

      I am just a great believer in letting sleeping dogs lie robn. I too agree with you that Pioneer is 100% legit, but still,….I worry what the implications for the project such a commercial move might have if someone did mount a legal challenge, no matter how remote that chance might be. I am thankful to whoever decided to go with a GPL license in the first place, Tomm, JJ, yourself? In the end though, I just don’t want to see the project killed off for some stupid legal reason. You have all come so far and achieved so much. I just don’t want it to end. Thats honestly what I feel, maybe I am over-reacting ๐Ÿ™„ .

    • #74785
      Avatarrobn
      Participant

      Oh, absolutely – I’m not going to try and stir up trouble. If someone else would like to do that then they’re welcome to! I don’t think that there will be problems, but of course I can’t afford to go to court to prove it.

    • #74786
      AvatarAnonymous
      matthewfarmery wrote:

      … a new alpha build is released on the second Friday of every month, and each build is getting more added, what’s more, the game will is mainly for unix and windows users, but thanks to Philbywhizz, there is a reworked mac installer that might make it into alpha 15

      “I am but a simple man among giants”

      The original mac port was done by me and has been around since Alpha 9, all I have done is re-written it and removed all the legacy crap in it. My code is a spec compared to the likes of others (terrains, 3d maths, etc) before me. You give me far too much credit!

      ๐Ÿ˜€

    • #74787
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      Group hug and congrats on the mac port

    • #74788
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      zych wrote:
      Hi.

      I’m working in indie game development studio, we have some successful titles on our account. I saw a big sign on Pioneers page saying “open source space simulation game”. I’ve got a question to you folks.

      Does it mean that it would be legal if our company took that pioneer, extend it, add some story line, modern graphic ect. and start selling it on Steam?

      Best Regards.

      Hi zych,

      I know you’ve already had a bunch of replies, but I’m going to dip my oar in the water too.

      There are already GPL titles on Steam. Id have released some, and there are probably others. While it might seem that there’s a distinct lack of a revenue stream if you have to give your game away for free, that’s not necessarily the case.

      Your changes and improvements must, of course, be given back to the community. That’s the fundamental premise of the GPL, the very reason it was written. This is the cost to you of licensing all of our work. We would very likely incorporate many, if not all, of those improvements into the core Pioneer project.

      That said, yours would be the one on Steam, and the one with Steam achievements and so on. I don’t know what sort of arrangement you could come to with Valve to make sure that you’re the only studio releasing Pioneer on Steam, but if you were the first, then you’d remain the popular one. People want their achievements to be seen, and if your price is reasonable, they’ll buy your edition in order to make those achievements.

      Of course, the source you distribute must be the source that actually built the Steam edition, which might cause you some interesting problems.

      GNU wrote the license, and own its copyright. Their (lengthy) FAQ on the subject is here:

      http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html

      Good luck. Releasing a GPL title through a DRM system, where you don’t own the rights to dual license that title, probably hasn’t been done before. I suspect it’s possible, although it might not be profitable. I’d love to see it happen!

    • #74789
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      Brianetta:

      1309286491-flogging_a_dead_horse.jpg

      Please will you just leave that bloody horse alone…..

      NEVER HAPPEN!

      And please have some respect for the commuinity here can you? The devs and contributors don’t do this so you or anyone else can take an idea to Steam….. Dont you see that? Jesus…. All your doing is stirring up trouble and reducing motivation its not productive.

      Yeah Im probably over-racting, don’t get me wrong Brian, we love you here ๐Ÿ™‚ Just forget about the money, its for the luuurvvv ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74790
      AvatarLuomu
      Participant

      Huh? Commercial potential is a great thing. Someone working full time (well, part time is maybe more common for indie games) is able to do so much more than hobbyists doing a hour here and there. And since any engine improvements made are under GPL we can pull them right back into Pioneer.

      There are indeed a bunch of GPLd titles on Steam (although they are all titles opensourced well after release?) and similarly many commercial re-releases of DOS games use a product from the open-source community – DOSbox.

      Realistically I wouldn’t think that anyone would sell Pioneer – it’s too much like Frontier unsurprisingly – but a different game built on the same technology.

    • #74791
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      Luomu wrote:
      Huh? Commercial potential is a great thing. Someone working full time (well, part time is maybe more common for indie games) is able to do so much more than hobbyists doing a hour here and there. And since any engine improvements made are under GPL we can pull them right back into Pioneer.

      There are indeed a bunch of GPLd titles on Steam (although they are all titles opensourced well after release?) and similarly many commercial re-releases of DOS games use a product from the open-source community – DOSbox.

      Luomu, I wouldn’t take the outburst too seriously – it made me laugh, which was probably the intention.

      There are GPL titles on Steam, but I’m not sure that there are any that are solely GPL. I would suspect that all the GPL titles on Steam right now are published on Steam by the copyright owner, who has the right to license it under another license as well as the GPL. This means that (for Pioneer) it’s the GPL version, for which source code must be made available, which will be on Steam, including any Steam libraries, application IDs and so forth required to make it work (this being GPL3).

      Pioneer can’t be re-licensed or dual licensed without the consent of everybody who owns it. The Git repo alone has 32 contributors listed (some of whom are duplicates), and that’s not even including many of the artists and coders who had their work committed by the dev team, or the owners of source code that was taken from other GPL projects. Basically, it’s GPL to the end.

      So, while I’d love to see Pioneer on Steam, I don’t think it’ll turn out to be practical or profitable. Never mind, eh?

    • #74792
      AvatarLuomu
      Participant

      How the hell can a dead horse talk anyway?

    • #74793
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      I’d be more interested in how a living one could talk…

      Quote:
      it made me laugh, which was probably the intention.

      A bit of humour yes, but also I do feel you like to fixate on the commercial side of Pioneer when we should just forget about that altogether, I don’t personally see how it could ever be good, so if you don’t mind could you walk me through that? Or at least an example for me to get my head around….

      WRT steam and dosbox… Yes steam use dosbox, but yes many people consider it to be pretty dishonest, just check out the dosbox forums, you will have about an even split of those who are pretty apathetic towards the situation and those who think its out of order…

    • #74794
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      It’s not a fixation, it’s just a refusal to rule it out. Unlike non-commercial licenses, such as some of the Creative Commons, the GPL allows software to be used for any purpose, including getting rich, subjugating citizens, controlling missile launch systems, exterminating pandas and any other unsavoury activity. Of all the possible uses of software, making money is not the most nefarious by quite a margin.

      If some commercial house does try to get Pioneer into a box and into a shop, I’m happy to get the exposure. If they actually want to pay their staff to contribute to it, that’s even better. I’m not going to discourage it, and if somebody who’s unfamiliar with GPL in the commercial world asks about it (like they did here), I’m not going to tell them not to try.

    • #74795
      AvatarLuomu
      Participant
      s2odan wrote:

      WRT steam and dosbox… Yes steam use dosbox, but yes many people consider it to be pretty dishonest, just check out the dosbox forums, you will have about an even split of those who are pretty apathetic towards the situation and those who think its out of order…

      Yeah, it’s not really a good example at all since it’s just commercial use of an open-source software, not modified in any way so publishers are not obligated to contribute anything (they could at least donate to the project but I don’t believe they have done that – no sense doing it secretly when you can get some PR/goodwill out of it). I would be surprised if DB *developers* are unhappy about it – they picked the license after all.

      btw I read “commercial house” as “commercial horse”…

    • #74796
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      getting rich, subjugating citizens, controlling missile launch systems, exterminating pandas

      …amazing, how do you know what I do at the weekends? ๐Ÿ˜†

    • #74797
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      zych wrote:
      Hi.

      I’m working in indie game development studio, we have some successful titles on our account. I saw a big sign on Pioneers page saying “open source space simulation game”. I’ve got a question to you folks.

      Does it mean that it would be legal if our company took that pioneer, extend it, add some story line, modern graphic ect. and start selling it on Steam?

      Best Regards.

      Everyone else has covered pretty much all of the other angles so I’ll just give my own.

      You’re first problems are going to be the licensing agreements for any other APIs which you might want to use, things like FMOD audio libs for example or Bink video playback blah blah blah… actually no I apologise, your FIRST real problem is getting your lawyers to stop bawling their fists into their eye-sockets to hold back the tears :mrgreen: it seems to be unreasonably hard to find a lawyer that will even let you use GPL code in our TOOLS, it’s completely forbidden in production code ๐Ÿ˜•

      I personally wouldn’t have a problem with someone forking the whole codebase and going nuts making a game based on it. The way that the Quake engines worked for example is that the code is GPL’d but the art assets are still copyrighted. Which would be one way of working, then we could also pull back from your work any source code changes we wanted (because you’d be legally obligate to release them) but the scripts and data assets like spaceships etc would all be copyrighted over to you guys (if you wanted).

      It’s a tricky road to walk though.

      Well, I think this horse is thoroughly dead now ๐Ÿ˜€

      Andy

    • #74798
      Avatars2odan
      Participant
      Quote:
      Well, I think this horse is thoroughly dead now ๐Ÿ˜€

      Almost, Im jumping on for one last ride….

      Quote:
      then we could also pull back from your work any source code changes we wanted (because you’d be legally obligate to release them)

      Yeah after some discussion on IRC it was pointed out to me that it could be a good thing, if that indeed did happen.. However, I have never seen this happen and in my experience have only seen the bad side. IE person comes in forks project, makes changes does not commit them to project, sells the package and does not publicly release the source code. Or.. comes in, does not contribute, does not commit, does not write code, sells it and makes money uner a different name. There are so many examples of both of these situation, but does anyone have an example of when it actually works? IE company appears, forks project, commits their changes into the main repository, changes are pulled into project….. they sell their ‘product’ however they adhere to the law.

      So bad examples:

      Dosbox, Dosbox, Dosbox… 3 times because there are at least 3 version on-sale which do not contribute to the project, not to mention the differently named ebay knock-offs.

      Numerous emulators on the android market place.

      Blender, someone is actually selling blender under a different name for quite a lot of cash…

      Celestia, resold and re-named by a non-contributor.

      Ok so yeah while the law says things have to be done a certain way, I think we aren’t all that naive to actually believe that people will adhere to it are we?

      Its taken Google over two years to remove naughty apps…. two years of clean sales.

      There are laws and there are laws ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74799
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      That all said, I doubt that any of those perpetrators would have started off by approaching the community. Zych came here and asked, which is much more community involvement than might have been given. That’s the right way to start, and definitely the way to begin the journey toward s2odan’s elusive “good example.”

    • #74800
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      Mmmm, that is a good point Brianetta, certainly it makes me feel better after reading yours and the others posts. I was just worried when I first heard of this issue, that (apart from possible legal entanglements) it might cause divisive differences within the Pioneer community too. I would hate to see that. However, there seems to be a consensus now that it would or could be a good thing. So,…….Alert status green :mrgreen:

    • #74801
      Avatarthefranklin
      Participant
      s2odan wrote:
      does anyone have an example of when it actually works? IE company appears, forks project, commits their changes into the main repository, changes are pulled into project….. they sell their ‘product’ however they adhere to the law.

      Apple did so with the FreeBSD project. Massively, including hiring FreeBSD developers.

      I’m not so familiar with everything else in the open source world, but Leonard Richardson has a pretty good job thanks to Canonical redistributing Linux.

      The gaming world is going to be slow to adopt the principles of open source, but it may eventually (if Sony goes out of business).

    • #74802
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      BSD has a far more commercially friendly license. There’s absolutely no obligation whatsoever to contribute all (or even any) of your changes back to the public. Apple couldn’t have done what they did with BSD, with Linux.

      Having said that, though, Apple did contribute some changes back – including the Darwin project. It’s not a whole lot of use to anybody just yet, but that’s mere detail.

    • #74803
      Avatarthefranklin
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      BSD has a far more commercially friendly license. There’s absolutely no obligation whatsoever to contribute all (or even any) of your changes back to the public. Apple couldn’t have done what they did with BSD, with Linux.

      Having said that, though, Apple did contribute some changes back – including the Darwin project. It’s not a whole lot of use to anybody just yet, but that’s mere detail.

      Apple was also under no particular obligation to provide anything back to the FreeBSD project, yet they did.

      I also didn’t mention Juniper & Yahoo, who’ve done much (Yahoo’s almost entirely in 1997-2004, RIP).

      Additionally, we have the history of Unix itself, which was an example of open source succeeding (and corporations feeding code back into a project) before even the coinage of the term “open source”. That the corporations later closed the source is a footnote, but Unix (and the Berkley Systems Distribution) gave us the foundation for open source.

    • #74804
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      thefranklin wrote:
      Apple was also under no particular obligation to provide anything back to the FreeBSD project, yet they did.

      That was the gist of my post, yes.

      If they’d used a GPL project as their basis, they would have been obliged to provide all of their derived work back to the public. The reason I’m mentioning this, is because we’re trying to draw a parallel between commercial involvement in Pioneer, and commercial involvement in other projects. Anything under a BSD license gives a poor comparison. In the case of Apple, there’s no chance they would have got involved with a GPL project.

      I’m having a hard time finding any strong examples of commercial involvement in the development of a GPL project, where that GPL project isn’t entirely owned by the commercial entity (as is the case with, for example, MySQL). The only one that crops up is Canonical, with their adoption of Debian and the release of its fork, Ubuntu, back to the public. That is a particularly fine example, though!

    • #74805
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      keep pioneer development going open source and all clear sunny skies ahead

    • #74806
      AvatarMiMoriarty
      Participant

      Hi,

      I’ve been playing Piooner few days and I can not get involved in any fighting with pirates ๐Ÿ˜• . The universe is not very populated Piooner except large ships cargo ships around the spaceports and stations. Is it something that will change as and when playing and trading?

      I also find it somewhat strange hyperspace jumps, does not require too many days of normal time โ“ ?

      Best regards,

      MiMoriarty

    • #74807
      Avatarrobn
      Participant

      Welcome to the forum MiMoriarty! Always happy to see a new face! ๐Ÿ™‚

      MiMoriarty wrote:
      I’ve been playing Piooner few days and I can not get involved in any fighting with pirates ๐Ÿ˜• . The universe is not very populated Piooner except large ships cargo ships around the spaceports and stations. Is it something that will change as and when playing and trading?

      There are pirates, but right now our AI is not smart enough to hunt you down. This will improve in time.

      Quote:
      I also find it somewhat strange hyperspace jumps, does not require too many days of normal time โ“ ?

      Jump duration is dependent on a number of factors, including distance, size of drive, size of ship, amount of cargo, and a few other minor points. We’ve found it to be reasonably balanced. Can you be more specific about what you see and what you expect?

    • #74808
      AvatarMiMoriarty
      Participant

      Hi robn, many thankx for your answer.

      Quote:
      There are pirates, but right now our AI is not smart enough to hunt you down. This will improve in time.

      I’ll look forward to have some fun on that side. ๐Ÿ˜€

      Quote:
      Jump duration is dependent on a number of factors, including distance, size of drive, size of ship, amount of cargo, and a few other minor points. We’ve found it to be reasonably balanced. Can you be more specific about what you see and what you expect?

      I’ve often agreed to carry small packages and i have been unable to reach the destination system in the deadline anytime. Maybe I was always late because I reach the origin station too late from the time the mission was scheluded?

      MiMoriarty

    • #74809
      Avatarmatthewfarmery
      Participant

      yes I understand what you mean, some of the dealines do seem to be very strict, however there might be a few reasons for this, one is that the game is still in alpha, and B the game isn’t really in SP balancing, I think once the game is in beta, stuff like this can be worked on, the other problem is, there are too few populated stars, which doesn’t help matters either, but again this will probably change later once factions and other stuff get added,

      the last thing, is the ship size, hyperdrive and weight of the ship, (how much its carrying) also milatary drives are faster, (but have pros can cons for using them) I think once the game is in beta and SP balancing gets underway stuff will change or be refined farther, as the game is still not really in a playable state at the moment, well you can play it, but theres not much to do in game, unless you do get a bigger ship / faster,

      Im sure this will change, but the game is still very early, you have to remember that

    • #74810
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant

      I think there really need to be a LOT more ships flitting around on their own errands.

      It would make the place seems a lot more alive.

      Right now it’s as though the human race has spread out amongst the stars and then almost died out! ๐Ÿ˜†

    • #74811
      Avatars2odan
      Participant
      fluffyfreak wrote:
      Right now it’s as though the human race has spread out amongst the stars and then almost died out! ๐Ÿ˜†

      Right now they are all waiting at home for Elite 4

    • #74812
      Avatarmatthewfarmery
      Participant
      s2odan wrote:
      fluffyfreak wrote:
      Right now it’s as though the human race has spread out amongst the stars and then almost died out! ๐Ÿ˜†

      Right now they are all waiting at home for Elite 4

      then they will be in for a very long wait, you will have better chance waiting for pioneer to finished then seeing an elite 4 ๐Ÿ˜€

    • #74813
      Avatardurandal
      Participant
      MiMoriarty wrote:
      I’ve often agreed to carry small packages and i have been unable to reach the destination system in the deadline anytime. Maybe I was always late because I reach the origin station too late from the time the mission was scheluded?

      Because you need right ship and equipment for that job and some brain to calculate if you can reach destination in time.

    • #74814
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      MiMoriarty wrote:
      Quote:
      Jump duration is dependent on a number of factors, including distance, size of drive, size of ship, amount of cargo, and a few other minor points. We’ve found it to be reasonably balanced. Can you be more specific about what you see and what you expect?

      I’ve often agreed to carry small packages and i have been unable to reach the destination system in the deadline anytime. Maybe I was always late because I reach the origin station too late from the time the mission was scheluded?

      The start ship is pretty much incapable of making jumps in time to complete deliveries. The Eagle needs a class 2 drive to be useful. The best way to start the game is to run in-system deliveries until you can afford one. You could also sell unneeded equipment (missiles) to make up the difference.

    • #74815
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      durandal wrote:
      MiMoriarty wrote:
      I’ve often agreed to carry small packages and i have been unable to reach the destination system in the deadline anytime. Maybe I was always late because I reach the origin station too late from the time the mission was scheluded?

      Because you need right ship and equipment for that job and some brain to calculate if you can reach destination in time.

      That’s always been tricky though due to the in-system travel time. I’ve arrived well ahead of schedule sometimes but then taken days to cross the whole bloody system. Whereas I’ve arrived late in others and still made it.

      Although to be certain, a viper with a class military drive will always see you arrive in time… almost f@#king anywhere ๐Ÿ˜†

    • #74816
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant

      Wouldn’t it be a good idea to have the options screen accessible from the startup menu?

      It seems like it would make sense to be able to configure Pioneer before loading it, especially if you changed a setting and can no longer safely load the game.

    • #74817
      Avatarmatthewfarmery
      Participant

      yeah that would be a good idea, might be worth adding that to the issue tracker ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74818
      AvatarGudadantza
      Participant

      Hi all, I have a question about module translations.

      Into data subfolders there are *.lua archives, ok. For example: (modules/Assasination/translation.lua)

      Is enough adding the new langage translation lines under the english lines? The polski translation appears to be in this way under the engligh lines.

      And then, should I send the archives to somebody? It seems there is not option to translate modules in the github for now.

      Greetings!

    • #74819
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      Gudadantza wrote:
      Hi all, I have a question about module translations.

      Into data subfolders there are *.lua archives, ok. For example: (modules/Assasination/translation.lua)

      Is enough adding the new langage translation lines under the english lines? The polski translation appears to be in this way under the engligh lines.

      And then, should I send the archives to somebody? It seems there is not option to translate modules in the github for now.

      Greetings!

      Yes, add the translated lines somewhere after the English ones. English must come first, otherwise it will crash.

      Info can be found here.

    • #74820
      AvatarGudadantza
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      Gudadantza wrote:
      Hi all, I have a question about module translations.

      Into data subfolders there are *.lua archives, ok. For example: (modules/Assasination/translation.lua)

      Is enough adding the new langage translation lines under the english lines? The polski translation appears to be in this way under the engligh lines.

      And then, should I send the archives to somebody? It seems there is not option to translate modules in the github for now.

      Greetings!

      Yes, add the translated lines somewhere after the English ones. English must come first, otherwise it will crash.

      Info can be found here.

      Ok, understood.

      Greetings

    • #74821
      AvatarGudadantza
      Participant

      Is the new module translation ready when the new language is added? or something must be done for the new language to work?

      I make the question because testing it the game gives an error

      error: data modules/assasination/languages.lua237:รƒโ€šร‚ยด}รƒโ€šร‚ยดexpected nearรƒโ€šร‚ยดtack traceback

      And I have the doubt if it is my fault or not

      Greetings

    • #74822
      AvatarGudadantza
      Participant

      Forget it, it was my fault. The translation seems to work but now the problem is with the non standard text like accents and non english characters.

      The translation appears in game but some characters are garbled making the text pseudoillegible in spanish.

      Do the file need to be saved in any text format?

      Greetings.

      In any way the module translation is completed.

    • #74823
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      Gudadantza wrote:
      Do the file need to be saved in any text format?

      Yes. They need to be UTF-8.

    • #74824
      AvatarGudadantza
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      Gudadantza wrote:
      Do the file need to be saved in any text format?

      Yes. They need to be UTF-8.

      Yess! I suspected it. but not UTF-8 option avaiilable,

      Sorry

      tomorrow

      I wil explain tomorrow

    • #74825
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant

      If you need a UTF-8 capable text editor then I suggest Notepad++

      http://notepad-plus-plus.org/

      Hope it is useful.

      Also if anyone is looking for a general Windows based text editor then Notepad++ is just generally awesome with syntax highlighting etc and has LOADS of plugins available.

    • #74826
      AvatarGudadantza
      Participant
      fluffyfreak wrote:
      If you need a UTF-8 capable text editor then I suggest Notepad++

      http://notepad-plus-plus.org/

      Hope it is useful.

      Also if anyone is looking for a general Windows based text editor then Notepad++ is just generally awesome with syntax highlighting etc and has LOADS of plugins available.

      Iรƒโ€šร‚ยดll make a try. Thanks. I suspect the problem comes with the vanilla windows notepad.

    • #74827
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      I have notepad++ too although personally I prefer using Notepad2 : http://www.flos-freeware.ch/notepad2.html Its pretty similar though…

    • #74828
      AvatarGudadantza
      Participant

      notepad++ is amazing .

      Great. I will never come back to the vanilla notepad headaches.

      Well, Ive just sent the lua modules to Brianetta. The translation appears to work well in the new nightly.

      Greetings.

    • #74829
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      I got the files. The Spanish was properly encoded, but somehow you broke the Polish and German translations in there. I merged your lines alone into the files I already had.

      I’ve never used Notepad++. I’m not sure why you would want to, when Vim is available for Windows… (-:

    • #74830
      AvatarGudadantza
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      I got the files. The Spanish was properly encoded, but somehow you broke the Polish and German translations in there. I merged your lines alone into the files I already had.

      I’ve never used Notepad++. I’m not sure why you would want to, when Vim is available for Windows… (-:

      Opss… sorry ๐Ÿ™‚ has become clear I am not good at all editing text files.

      Greetings

    • #74831
      Avatarhansolo0
      Participant

      Apologies if this was asked already, I couldn’t find a thread. Well done on the game so far. I was playing alpha 13 build before, and tried 14 and 15 which just came out, and neither will load my game saves from 13. It says ‘ game can’t be loaded because there were errors’. Am I forced to start over? I’d worked up to getting a pretty good ship…. ๐Ÿ˜ฅ

    • #74832
      Avatardurandal
      Participant

      This is still alpha man, old savefiles are not supported but could be converted if someone write script.

      You can get money with Ctrl+M.

    • #74833
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant

      Yes it’s a problem that every release currently breaks the previous save games because they’re just stored as a binary blob.

      I guess we could (in theory) switch to using a plain text/xml/etc save file and add some versioning but it’s a lot of work and would probably still be a constantly moving target.

    • #74834
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      I’ve never used Notepad++. I’m not sure why you would want to, when Vim is available for Windows… (-:

      You’re a sick, sick man Brianetta :mrgreen:

    • #74835
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      fluffyfreak wrote:
      Brianetta wrote:
      I’ve never used Notepad++. I’m not sure why you would want to, when Vim is available for Windows… (-:

      You’re a sick, sick man Brianetta :mrgreen:

      iWhy, thank you very much.:wq

    • #74836
      AvatarPrzemyslav
      Participant

      I am wondering if there is any way to ‘hack’ hyperdrive range. I have tried some alterations in ship’s lua or something but it made things worse ;p

      And by hacking I mean changing it to some enormous range, like thousands of lightyears – I would like to go somewhere really far away and explore things ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74837
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      Actually, I agree that you should be able to explore far and wide in the game, although I also think it is right that jump drives do need servicing. Perhaps a special (highly expensive) “Explorer Ship” could be availble that could reach the parts other ships cannot reach. Call it a Heineken ๐Ÿ˜† For balancing though, it should be good for not much else, otherwise everyone would be using it.

    • #74838
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      Remove BreakdownServicing.lua and your drive will never break down. That whole feature is written in Lua.

      I hear that it’s possible to hack a saved game, and to fit a large plasma accelerator into the drive bay. It has enormous power output, and requires no fuel. I don’t know the details.

    • #74839
      AvatarPrzemyslav
      Participant
      Geraldine wrote:
      Call it a Heineken ๐Ÿ˜†

      Good call ๐Ÿ˜›

      So, if I understood you correctly – there is no easy way to change ship’s hyperspace jump range?

      Save files seem to be encoded, or do they need to be edited in hex mode?

    • #74840
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      Przemyslav wrote:
      Geraldine wrote:
      Call it a Heineken ๐Ÿ˜†

      Good call ๐Ÿ˜›

      So, if I understood you correctly – there is no easy way to change ship’s hyperspace jump range?

      Save files seem to be encoded, or do they need to be edited in hex mode?

      You can buy a higher class of hyperdrive, carry less cargo, equipment or weapons, switch to a military drive – all of these things will increase your ship’s hyperspace range. The right ship makes a huge difference, too. The power to mass ratio really matters.

      I don’t know how the saved games are coded. The best way to find out is to read (and understand) the source.

    • #74841
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      Przemyslav wrote:
      Save files seem to be encoded, or do they need to be edited in hex mode?

      What you want isn’t in the save file anyway. You can’t arbitrarily change you hyperspace range. As Brianetta said, its calculated from a bunch of things.

    • #74842
      AvatarPrzemyslav
      Participant

      So, the only way to do this is making new type of ship, which uses max military hyperspace engine which has almost (or exactly) 0 mass (don’t ask me, what happened when I changed ship’s mass to below 0 ๐Ÿ˜† ) with enormous power resources and cargo hold big enough to fit autopilot, atmosferic shielding engine and fuel? Right?

      How to add military engine etc. I think I can work out but I really don’t know how to add more ‘power’ to ship?

      I haven’t seen anything like that in ship’s files…

    • #74843
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant

      Some time ago I added military drives up to Class 9 on a personal branch. Just for exactly this kind of galaxy hopping fun.

      It requires some simple code changes as well as Lua (or it did at the time anyway), if the idea is popular I could update it for the current build?

      Some things to consider would be the cost and mass of the drives. In my personal version everything up to the Class 8 followed a curve I’d plotted against the standard hyperdrive vs military equivalents which seemed ok… the CLass 9 weighed 1 tonne and cost $1 though ๐Ÿ˜† put that in an interplanetary shuttle and you could go FAR ๐Ÿ˜€

      The other option is for there to be other types of drives, such as those supposedly used by the LRC & Lynx bulk carrier.

      What would people prefer?

    • #74844
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      If I understand this correctly, LRCs and the Lynx could possibly use something like “stutter drives”, in that they only have a short jump range, but can do lots of simultaneous jumps to cover very large differences. Obviously these ships would have to use standard hydrogen fuel for re-fuelling requirements from Gas Giants (or stars if they are desperate). Or perhaps having “tender ships” do this for them. This is good because it still maintains the games mechanic and remains a plausible way to explore, in that, you need a massive ship that is super costly to own.

      There is a problem with this though. How would such a ship be able to reach a star system, if despite getting as close as it could to it in a neighbouring star system, the distance was still greater than the ships range? In effect, it could not lock on to that star system to plot a jump.

      A way around this problem could be to introduce the possibility to plot “intra hyperspace jumps” deep within the interstellar space between star systems. This would allow the ship to reach not only the edge of the galaxy, but go beyond the rim too.

      Another way is to introduce advanced second generation ships (like for example Gernot’s Orion) which could reduce their mass to zero for massive gains in hyperspace range. However, this would mark a break in the game mechanic and could cause balancing issues as they are (to use Gernots words), “cheated”.

      Another thing, servicing requirements. Perhaps the larger the class of drive used, the less it needs servicing because they are larger and more sturdily built. Smaller drives would need more servicing because they must work that much harder to do jumps. Military drives should require the shortest servicing intervals because of their high performance.

    • #74845
      AvatarPrzemyslav
      Participant

      I would prefer the first option of fluffyfreak – Interplanetary Shuttle with military drives of class 9 and 1t weight seems to be l33t ๐Ÿ˜› The cost is not important since money can be cheated easily and I only wonder how far I could go in Pioneer and that is just the simplest workaround here I think.

      fluffyfreak, could you please tell me what files I need to change to make a new build with this ‘cheat’ ? (idea here: maybe programmers would put in game some kind of cheat mode – like ctrl+m for money, so everyone who bother could play around?)

    • #74846
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      Przemyslav wrote:
      I would prefer the first option of fluffyfreak – Interplanetary Shuttle with military drives of class 9 and 1t weight seems to be l33t ๐Ÿ˜› The cost is not important since money can be cheated easily and I only wonder how far I could go in Pioneer and that is just the simplest workaround here I think.

      It’s a fun little hack, especially as I had it set up with something a bit more reasonable.

      Basically I hacked everything for “testing” so that I had a much nicer ship with that Class 9 drive, weapons, scanners etc.

      The game itself is fun when you’re playing from the ground up, but a nice “debug” ship for testing is awesome ๐Ÿ˜€

      Przemyslav wrote:
      fluffyfreak, could you please tell me what files I need to change to make a new build with this ‘cheat’ ? (idea here: maybe programmers would put in game some kind of cheat mode – like ctrl+m for money, so everyone who bother could play around?)

      To do this hack locally; on the Lua side you’ll need to add them to at least:

      “/ data / pienums.lua”

      By adding entries like DRIVE_MIL1=56 for the military drives, but you’ll have to also re-number ALL of the entries which follow it.

      THEN you’ll have to find that same enum within the cpp source code and add them there and anywhere they are used, making sure that you maintain exactly the same order as the Lua files.

      SOME of that appears to be in:

      “/ src / EquipType.h”

      and

      “/ src / EquipType.cpp”

      Where prices and mass etc are defined.

      Then you’ll have to compile it yourself, this is pretty easy and we can talk you through any problems on here if you like.

      If you like I can do this when I next have access to one of my own PC’s and I can create a branch that you can look at/get with all of the changes done but that won’t be until um… almost midnight tonight when I get home from working in London :ugeek:

      Andy

    • #74847
      Avatars2odan
      Participant
      Quote:
      How to add military engine etc. I think I can work out but I really don’t know how to add more ‘power’ to ship?

      Hi , Brianetta already told you this, but I’ll repeat:

      The real only way to give yourself a super ship is to equip it with a large plasma accelerator as a main drive. It will use no fuel and will have a power magnitudes larger than any class 9 drive. There are two ways you can do this:

      1. Hack your savegame,

      2. Hack the source to start you in a ship with that drive.

      Possibly 3.. Might be able to use the lua console to equip one to the ship, although that might not work as it may be restricted by the fact that its not a hyperdrive.

      So your large plasma accelerator will have an equivalent power to a class 100 hyperdrive !

      You can fly anywhere with it! ๐Ÿ˜‰

      This is the minimal effort way, you can edit drive powers or add in new drives like Fluffyfreak mentioned, and thats probably the best way but its quite fun using a giant weapon as the hyperdrive ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74848
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      Oops duplicate post ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74849
      AvatarPrzemyslav
      Participant
      flufflyfreak wrote:
      If you like I can do this when I next have access to one of my own PC’s and I can create a branch that you can look at/get with all of the changes done but that won’t be until um… almost midnight tonight when I get home from working in London :ugeek:

      Andy

      I would very appreciate that, not because I am lazy, but mostly because I am not much into programming and compiling thing, so I can create a nasty blackhole instead of debug ship ๐Ÿ˜‰ (however I could try, if I had to)

      s2odan, what you write is very interesting but it seems far beyond my understanding. I am not that good, unfortunately ๐Ÿ™

    • #74850
      Avatardurandal
      Participant

      pienums.lua is gone (FINALLY)

    • #74851
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      Geraldine wrote:
      If I understand this correctly, LRCs and the Lynx could possibly use something like “stutter drives”

      Chain drives, they were called. They were only class 1!

      Quote:
      There is a problem with this though. How would such a ship be able to reach a star system, if despite getting as close as it could to it in a neighbouring star system, the distance was still greater than the ships range? In effect, it could not lock on to that star system to plot a jump.

      A way around this problem could be to introduce the possibility to plot “intra hyperspace jumps” deep within the interstellar space between star systems. This would allow the ship to reach not only the edge of the galaxy, but go beyond the rim too.

      The key here is a large crew, including a map room full of experienced navigators.

      Quote:
      Another thing, servicing requirements. Perhaps the larger the class of drive used, the less it needs servicing because they are larger and more sturdily built. Smaller drives would need more servicing because they must work that much harder to do jumps. Military drives should require the shortest servicing intervals because of their high performance.

      Again, large crew. Surely a ship that size can carry a few engineers and spare parts? Certainly everything that a space station might have handy.

    • #74852
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      Przemyslav wrote:
      flufflyfreak wrote:
      If you like I can do this when I next have access to one of my own PC’s and I can create a branch that you can look at/get with all of the changes done but that won’t be until um… almost midnight tonight when I get home from working in London :ugeek:

      Andy

      I would very appreciate that, not because I am lazy, but mostly because I am not much into programming and compiling thing, so I can create a nasty blackhole instead of debug ship ๐Ÿ˜‰ (however I could try, if I had to)

      s2odan, what you write is very interesting but it seems far beyond my understanding. I am not that good, unfortunately ๐Ÿ™

      I’ll give it a go ๐Ÿ™‚ just got home, unfortunately bumped into my old boss and had a bottle of wine.. each, so lets see when I next post ๐Ÿ˜†

    • #74853
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      durandal wrote:
      pienums.lua is gone (FINALLY)

      Does that mean they’re automatically reflected somewhere so still accessible via Lua or are they just _gone_ completely?

    • #74854
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      fluffyfreak wrote:
      durandal wrote:
      pienums.lua is gone (FINALLY)

      Does that mean they’re automatically reflected somewhere so still accessible via Lua or are they just _gone_ completely?

      From alpha 16 (and in the current nightlies) models use EquipType strings instead of raw numbers.

    • #74855
      AvatarPrzemyslav
      Participant
      fluffyfreak wrote:
      I’ll give it a go ๐Ÿ™‚ just got home, unfortunately bumped into my old boss and had a bottle of wine.. each, so lets see when I next post ๐Ÿ˜†

      Thank you soooooo much ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74856
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      robn wrote:
      From alpha 16 (and in the current nightlies) models use EquipType strings instead of raw numbers.

      Ah yes I see what you’ve done ๐Ÿ™‚ Ok that’s easy enough to work around.

      I’ve just done the engine masses as a simple sequence expansion so they’ll probably want tweaking if we ever wanted to have military drives up to Class 9 within the game proper. Prices would also need some serious attention.

    • #74857
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      Przemyslav wrote:
      fluffyfreak wrote:
      I’ll give it a go ๐Ÿ™‚ just got home, unfortunately bumped into my old boss and had a bottle of wine.. each, so lets see when I next post ๐Ÿ˜†

      Thank you soooooo much ๐Ÿ™‚

      Okay my actual commit changelist is here:

      https://github.com/fluffyfreak/pioneer/commit/01d4ea618ab94ecf900bebc184e480198e0a7f76

      It’s based off the latest master I could get so you could try compiling it yourself, otherwise you’ll have to wait for it to be accepted into the master branch (IF it gets accepted) and then for another nightly build to be done.

      This is more to the other devs: when you guys have built a specific nightly based version for people to test etc where do you upload it?

      Andy

    • #74858
      Avatars2odan
      Participant
      Code:
      Lang::DRIVE_MIL9,0,

      + Equip::SLOT_ENGINE, -1, {Equip::MILITARY_FUEL},

      + 21400000, 285, 9, 0, 0, 0

      + }

      Hey, you see this: {Equip::MILITARY_FUEL} ? Thats its fuel requirement, if you want to cheat like a mother… just remove that ๐Ÿ˜‰ Also you see this number : 285, 9, 285 is the mass, but 9 is the power… With fuel use removed you might as well ramp this number up to 100 or 1000…

      However upping power and leaving the fuel requirement intact will drastically increase its fuel use…. But doing this and removing fuel use will give you an insanely powerful drive ๐Ÿ™‚

      Anyway I thought I would mention that as I thought you were actually looking to cheat and not just expand the available drives ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74859
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      s2odan wrote:
      Anyway I thought I would mention that as I thought you were actually looking to cheat and not just expand the available drives ๐Ÿ™‚

      Hah, no cheating would be on way of doing it but have you actually put a Class 9 Mil drive into a ship ๐Ÿ˜ฏ it’s _amazing_ it pretty much is cheating once you have one of those!

      I never understood why there wasn’t parity between the normal drives and the Military spec’ ones except that I assumed the Military forces get them secret for their own mythical warships.

      However I actually wanted to expand the drives available to players.

      In the future it might also be nice to offer tune-ups or replacement in-system drives too so that you could improve the thrust say of the standard Eagle you have inherited rather than being forced to replace it with another ship…

      So many ideas, so little time. I suppose my contract does end in 2 weeks, though I am hoping I’ll have something else lined up by then! ๐Ÿ˜†

    • #74860
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      The Frontier manual had it that the military had access to more advanced drives, but that they hadn’t been released into the public arena; civilian attempts to produce a class 4 military drive hadn’t yet produced a safe and stable drive system.

      I’m happy to see these drives exist, but I think that the in-game fiction should hold onto the poor availability. Perhaps only through a military mission, or a really high-end civilian mission, could such a drive come your way.

      Right now, of course, there are no practical limits on what’s available for general sale. Before release, though, there should be a mechanism for limiting availability of goods, equipment and ships by faction, tech level, licensing, compatibility or even arbitrary per-station settings.

    • #74861
      AvatarPrzemyslav
      Participant

      I could use some advice, fluffyfreak – I have been trying with DevCpp and NMake but it is beyond my understanding and to be honest, after few hours am still where I started which means I don’t know where to start…

      I have downloaded your source and also the newest one of clean Pioneer.

      I am using Windows.

    • #74862
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant

      If you’re using windows then download Visual Studio Express it’s free.

      There’s already projects and solutions for 2008 and 2010.

      I haven’t been using anything else on Windows as I figured most people would just use VS Express as I didn’t think DevCpp was still under development or being supported! ๐Ÿ˜ณ

    • #74863
      AvatarPrzemyslav
      Participant

      Thank you for your kind support. I am downloading now the 2010 version. We’ll see what happens ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74864
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant

      Hmm, I’m still trying to figure out Git/Github. I’d like to just give you the link to my NewMilDrives branch of my repository but can’t see an easy way of doing it.

      I suppose you could just go to my repo and download the zip/tar straight from that branch, unzip it too a folder and give that a go.

      You should be able to find within the Pioneer folder there should be this path:

      \pioneer\win32\vc2010\

      and the file: “pioneer.sln”

      That’s the solution which visual studio uses and the “.vcxproj” files are the various projects that it contains for the modelviewer and Pioneer itself.

    • #74865
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant

      Right, things you’ll probably encounter as issues and one way of solving them for now.

      I’m just going to type all of this out but if you need a video or pictures erm… I’ll think of something! ๐Ÿ™‚

      Building the solution:

      Open the vs2010 “pioneer.sln” with Visual Studio Express.

      At the top, in the middle, there should be two dropdown boxes. One of these will have “Debug”, “PreRelease” and “Release” – choose “Release”.

      Then in the “Solution Explorer” (left hand side) right-click on the line which says something like “Solution ‘pioneer’ (3 projects)” and choose to “Build Solution”.

      It should also say next to that what the shortcut key is, probably F7 or F5, so you can just press that in future.

      If there are any errors, errors not warnings, shown in the output or error list windows along the bottom of the screen. Don’t be put off if there are it’s probably just some setup that will need tweaking.

      Running Pionner from VS2010:

      This always catches me out and I need to find a proper way of fixing it. The game _won’t_ run at first.

      There’s a couple of things you need to setup so that it tries to run from the correct place and so it can find the dll’s etc.

      First go into “/pioneer/win32/libs/” and copy all of the dll’s into the “/pioneer/” folder.

      This is also the folder we’re going to tell Pioneer to run from now.

      1) go back to the “Solution Explorer” and right-click on the “pioneer” project.

      2) choose “Set as Startup Project” – this means it’s the one we’ll be debugging.

      3) right-click on the “pioneer” project again, this time choose “properties” – it’s near the bottom.

      4) under the “Configuration Properties” choose the “Debugging” panel.

      5) You need to change the “Working Directory” to read “$(ProjectDir)..\..\”

      6) Apply and then Ok the changes.

      Assuming that everything compiled ok you should now be ready to run the Release version.

      Go to the “Debug” menu and choose “Start Debugging”, it should launch the game, it might complain about not having symbols or some other shit but just ok that and if the stars are correctly aligned the game should run.

      I’m looking into building and uploading a built version for you somewhere with properly cheating engines but getting another person compiling this thing is invaluable too! :mrgreen:

    • #74866
      AvatarPrzemyslav
      Participant

      Thank you for your in-depth tutorial ๐Ÿ™‚

      It helped me, although I had to use VC2008 version – I forgot that I have some software that are not compatible with SP3 which is needed for 2010 to run.

      Building gone pretty well ๐Ÿ™‚ I will now hack this drive to use no fuel and have 1t mass and enormous power ๐Ÿ˜ˆ

      I think I will upload some screenshots later from the far side of the galaxy ๐Ÿ˜€

      Thank you again ๐Ÿ™‚ I wish all games had such support from dev’s.

    • #74867
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant

      Awesome, attached is juts such a hacked exe! ๐Ÿ™‚

      I encourage everyone to hack away at the code though so give it a go and ask whatever questions you need.

      I’m hellishly busy during the week but I’ll try to get on here sneakily whilst at the office like I have the last couple ๐Ÿ˜ˆ

    • #74868
      AvatarPrzemyslav
      Participant

      I haxxed that exe even further, giving class 9 military power of 500k times more, so on standard starting ship with starting equipment it gives you almost 80k ly (24 kpc) range ๐Ÿ˜€ (77184.5 ly to be precise) ๐Ÿ˜€ ๐Ÿ˜€

      I have attached my exe too.

      edit: Added my slightly enchanced Wave Hypersonic Fighter ๐Ÿ˜‰ and I am not going to tell you what damn range it has ๐Ÿ˜†

      edit2: Added more stable 5000 times more powerful drive. (Watch out to stop fast forward of game time short before hyperspace counter reaches 0, if not your game will go supernova ;p ye be warned)

    • #74869
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      These are absolutely crazy……………but I am going to give these exes a try anyway ๐Ÿ˜›

      Well done Przemyslav & fluffyfreak ๐Ÿ™‚ Now off to find Z’ha’dum ๐Ÿ˜Ž

    • #74870
      Avatarjoseph6085
      Participant

      @Przemyslav

      sorry to be a noob but how do i install these hacks every time i try to start them it says i’m missing the libvorbisfile.dll

    • #74871
      AvatarPrzemyslav
      Participant

      joseph6085, no need to apologize ๐Ÿ™‚

      You should download fluffyfreak’s source from here https://github.com/fluffyfreak/pioneer/downloads

      When you open that archive you will have various catalogs, you must enter Win32\lib and copy all the .dll files from here to the Pioneer directory (just where the main Pioneer exe is located by default)

      That should do the trick ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74872
      Avatarjoseph6085
      Participant

      thank you but now there’s another problem i am now getting a run time error every time i start the game

    • #74873
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      try deleting your model_cache folderin documents/Pioneer/model_cache

    • #74874
      Avatarjoseph6085
      Participant

      nope and im running a windows 7 if that helps at all

    • #74875
      Avatars2odan
      Participant

      the run time error will likely be model_cache, which you already checked, or language… so you might have forgotten to place the new language files into the data directory too, the game will crash horribly if there is an error in them, like a missing drive name.

    • #74876
      Avatarjoseph6085
      Participant

      the run time error only with the hack when i put the .dll stuff for the hack Przemyslav gave, i can play the game just fine

    • #74877
      AvatarZiusudra
      Participant

      Try replacing the data folder with the one in the zip you got the dll files from.

    • #74878
      Avatarjoseph6085
      Participant

      still get the samething and im not sure why…… ๐Ÿ˜

    • #74879
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant

      Are you trying to get the Military Drives things I hacked together to work?

      Plan A:

      One way would be to download the zipped archive of my NewMilDrives branch that you’ve been pointed at, extract that to a folder somewhere, go into the Win32/libs folder and copy all of the DLLs, paste them into the pioneer folder (that one has win32, src, data, etc in it).

      At this point there is nothing to run!

      So next come back here and download the exe’s from this post:

      http://www.spacesimcentral.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=1579&start=370#p23614

      Then place this into the same folder as the DLL files. Now you should have my DLLs, my EXE and my Data from that branch.

      Make sure that you now clear out your model_cache as the others have directed you earlier.

      Plan B:

      I’m currently working on a newer version with my recently fixed repository, this will be submitted for a inclusion with the main branch shortly where it will go up for discussion with the other dev’s and everyone else, it may or may NOT get included depending on where people want the game to go.

      If it doesn’t get included but there’s still demand for it then I’ll see about building and uploading a stable version of it just for you guys ๐Ÿ™‚

      Andy

    • #74880
      AvatarPrzemyslav
      Participant

      Maybe that lang file is making runtime error like s2odan suggested.

      I have attached my english.txt, because it may be the key for you.

      Funny thing is that I haven’t cleared my model_cache and everything worked good. So maybe that lang file is missing.

      Maybe try to download and install VB/VC runtimes?

      http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/de … px?id=5555

      http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/de … x?id=20429

    • #74881
      AvatarTonySpike
      Participant

      dont mean to be a pain and sorry if these are dumb no brainer questions ….or have been asked before

      are their any plans to add military presences somwhere down the line ………adding not only the standard bulk carriers ……but perhaps federation ….empire ….or any other races destroyer/cruiser types (i remember saying i would help with this) ……. and some sort of AI for them

      perhaps you could become a military commander on one of their ships

      or even having dockable large ships

      what are the plans on extra curricular activitys and how difficult would it be to impliment them, either in the main core game or as an OXP

      eg ……perhaps you could work for a taxi company ferrying passengers from planetside to station ……or maybe from planet to planet, ….just to earn a buck or ferry passengers to see subspace objects/the sights of a system ….take several days ….go to some waypoints and orbit round them for a time …..come back …idk shit like that

      ok those are my questions ….now for my final thought (this part is just me wanting to pick peoples brains bout somthing …not a question or suggestion ….ansering is optional)

      i saw somthing cool once ..in a game called universal combat i got for 50p in a bargain bin about a month back (yes i didnk know it was freeware till i looked it up but at 50p i wasnt going to moan) ……i thought to myself how cool ..would that kind of shit be …if it was in pioneer

      ……having the ability to get out your ship and float in space …..even walk around planetside …..or become a colonial marine and take a shuttle down to a hotspot and kickass with your laser rifle lol ……ok this kind of shit probly wouldnt fit with pioneers “frontier remake” demographic ….but so what i think it would just be so f***king sweet a feature to have even if i know it wont happen …..sod it i can dream lol

      actualy universal combat was a good idea poorly implimented (shitty controll interface ..ect ect)…….be nice to see it done right eventualy …i wonder if in 10 years time somthing like pioneer will step up to the plate

    • #74882
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      spike1984 wrote:
      dont mean to be a pain and sorry if these are dumb no brainer questions ….or have been asked before

      Its worth noting that we generally don’t design things in a lot of detail beforehand. We discuss a lot of things in IRC and on the issue tracker, and usually come to vague consensus, but nothing is really decided on until code appears.

      Quote:
      are their any plans to add military presences somwhere down the line ………adding not only the standard bulk carriers ……but perhaps federation ….empire ….or any other races destroyer/cruiser types (i remember saying i would help with this) ……. and some sort of AI for them

      Factions are certainly planned, and presumably at least some of them will have some for of military presence. What that will look like is presently unknown.

      Quote:
      perhaps you could become a military commander on one of their ships

      The general consensus is that the player is considered to be a lone character with no particular affiliation – just a random guy in the emptiness of space. Based on that its unlikely that the player would ever be part of a standing military. That said, we have discussed the idea of having “wingmen” (ie your party) and being able to issue high-level commands to them, so this might simply be an extension of that.

      Quote:
      or even having dockable large ships

      Convoy missions are something wanted/planned. One particular model for that would be that you’re docked with a large ship which has basic refueling and servicing facilities, and you are launched on attack.

      Quote:
      eg ……perhaps you could work for a taxi company ferrying passengers from planetside to station ……or maybe from planet to planet, ….just to earn a buck or ferry passengers to see subspace objects/the sights of a system ….take several days ….go to some waypoints and orbit round them for a time …..come back …idk shit like that

      We already have that to an extent. The bit we don’t have is the persistence of working for a single company – right now you just take jobs from the board. It would certainly be possible to implement a “private” company board that you could special jobs from. You could almost implement that right now via Lua scripts.

      Quote:
      ……having the ability to get out your ship and float in space …..even walk around planetside …..or become a colonial marine and take a shuttle down to a hotspot and kickass with your laser rifle lol ……ok this kind of shit probly wouldnt fit with pioneers “frontier remake” demographic ….but so what i think it would just be so f***king sweet a feature to have even if i know it wont happen …..sod it i can dream lol

      Yes, extremely unlikely. Pioneer is a game about space flight. Taking you out of your ship presents a huge number of conceptual and technical challenges. Its better that we just stick to making a great space game and leave the shooters to other games ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74883
      AvatarTonySpike
      Participant

      thanks for the quick responce …….yeah like i say ……i can dream lol ๐Ÿ˜€

    • #74884
      AvatarSubzeroplainzero
      Participant
      robn wrote:

      Quote:
      perhaps you could become a military commander on one of their ships

      The general consensus is that the player is considered to be a lone character with no particular affiliation – just a random guy in the emptiness of space. Based on that its unlikely that the player would ever be part of a standing military. That said, we have discussed the idea of having “wingmen” (ie your party) and being able to issue high-level commands to them, so this might simply be an extension of that.

      Hmm I always thought that frontier’s main enphasis was on choice. Infact you could even join the military in fe2 and ffe, athough in my opinion the missions were hardly worth doing. I think that not eventually including this element would be a bit of a step back. Of course, what really needs working on before anthing like that could be tackled is the combat.. which leads me to my question.

      Is anybody thinking about what kind of direction to go in regards to the combat? I’ve been thinking and the more I think about how awkward high speed combat can be (we all remember the endless jousting battles) the more I think it would be better to avoid it completely. Perhaps instead of having enemies persue you at high speed through space, they could instead put more work into choosing where and when to attack. What I mean is perhaps ememies should wait to attack you when they know you have slowed down greatly, like perhaps around starports or within planetary atmospheres. Ambushes could be the most common forms of assault.

      The thing that used to bug me the most in fe2 was the fact that pirates could hone in on you travelling at immense speeds through space, but as hard as I tried, I couldn’t do the same. Have there been any ideas floating around at all, because since pioneer is already looking so good, it is a bit of a shame that such a big thing as the combat is being slightly overlooked. Of course, these are just ideas though, so take them or leave them. Sadly I am a mere mortal unable to program, and I know how annoying it can be when people unable to have any real imput start making demands ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74885
      AvatarUncleBob
      Participant
      Quote:
      (we all remember the endless jousting battles)

      The endless jousting matches were not because of high velocities, they are inherant to unskilled pilots lobbing at each other in a newtonian physics engine. In original frontier and FFE they were also unavoidable due to lacking lateral thrusters, which meant that the neccesary maneuvers to make it interesting simply were not available. This changed in JFFE, where at least YOU had lateral thrusters, while the enemy AI still didn’t use them. As a result, if you had a slight edge maneuvering wise and knew what you’re doing, the enemy didn’t stand chance (this was slightly mitigated by neccesary information like relative speed and distance not being available on the HUD, but still).

      Fact is, in a newtonian environment with both people knowing what they’re doing, the initative in a dogfight is always with the higher maneuvering capability. If you know how to use it, you’re dictating the fight, even against multiple oponents. The AI currently doesn’t really know how to use it, which still results in jousting matches if the opponent has a higher maneuverability. With equally capable ships, jousting is almost inevitable, I’m afraid, that’s just inherant in the physics. In such a situation, the bigger gun or the bigger number of missiles dictates the fight, and it’s short, and brutal, and intensive.

      This can make combat rather frustrating: If you write a good AI that can use higher maneuverability to its advantage, new players don’t stand a chance. If you make the AI more aggressive when maneuverability is equal (i.e. not holding back with the missiles, and thinking about when to use its gun so it doesn’t overheat), new players don’t stand a chance. If you don’t do those tweaks (the first one is pretty hard to do actually), the AI doesn’t stand a chance against an advanced player.

      Making it a difficulty option has its own problems, as new players will complain about jousting matches on low difficulty, and about being mercylessly slaughtered on high. Still, this might be the best way to go.

      But usually, the first thing to tell a player that complains about jousting, is: You don’t have those missiles under your wing to look cool. You have them to overwhelm the enemy before he even knows what’s going on. Don’t hold back on them!

      Quote:
      The thing that used to bug me the most in fe2 was the fact that pirates could hone in on you travelling at immense speeds through space, but as hard as I tried, I couldn’t do the same.

      As far as I remember, the autopilot in FFE could do the job. The hard thing was getting a target…

      Quote:
      Sadly I am a mere mortal unable to program

      But you’re a modeler. Last time I checked, this project had quite a lot of programers, but a bit of a lack of good modelers. It shows in many of the ship models (actually, more in their textures), if I may say so. I’m sure if you contribute a few models, the Devs will gladly lend you a few ears ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74886
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant

      Another point to consider about combat is turrets. Or more generically: attachment points.

      In other games you see ships of varying sizes, though usually larger ones, adorned with rotating turrets and missile pods.

      That’s something that would be quite nice to see in Pioneer too I think as it seems strange that they’re not there already.

      On the authoring side it could work like the existing engine/thruster locators with a list of places and orientations of where things can be attached to the outside of the ship. It would probably be easier to do from a modelling package like Blender/3DS Max etc but perhaps we could extend the modelviewer to support it? It already looks like it has ray casting support.

      For gameplay reasons we might require that the player owns a special battle computer or something, which might actually be illegal in some systems.

      Hmm, lots of implications ๐Ÿ˜†

    • #74887
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      joseph6085 wrote:
      still get the samething and im not sure why…… ๐Ÿ˜

      Just for you I’ve uploaded a tested, and stripped down, version of the Military Drives additions for you to try.

      https://github.com/fluffyfreak/pioneer/downloads

      Could you try that please?

      Andy

    • #74888
      AvatarTonySpike
      Participant
      UncleBob wrote:
      Quote:
      (we all remember the endless jousting battles)

      The endless jousting matches were not because of high velocities, they are inherant to unskilled pilots lobbing at each other in a newtonian physics engine. In original frontier and FFE they were also unavoidable due to lacking lateral thrusters,

      yes but we have to remember ..games need pick up and playability to appeal to a wider audiance ….i know a few scifi fans that are discoraged by the controll system and the wide learning curve ….and forcing people to learn shit just because you yourself are good at is never a good idea ……….tbh its this difficulty that makes universal combat (the game) so shite despite having some excelent ideas

      having said that i love the newtonian model ……..it forces you to change tactics dependant on ship size ….i can imagine this happening anyway …with small fighters jousting and leviathans lining up and broadsiding each other …….but having said that …the tactics shifting for a ships class would still be their for an oolite controll method anyway……..the oolite forces you more into flight sim territory …..engaging using scizzor moves trying to get on each others six (breaking till someone overshoots is a fave of mine lol) ….and still your larger ships would need to broadside (or just get them in range of the long nines ..depending on your pleasure lol …..i still think of big ships like old galleons in space lol)

      so here are some ideas of mine ….feel free to ridicule at leasure

      1 ….have elite mode/oolite mode selectable

      elite has newtonian …oolite gives instant stop/direction change capibilitys ……but make oolite mode A …only reach deadly rank or somthing like that ….and B make playing in this mode net less points per kill ..just to give them the incentive to learn to fly like an elite

      2 …..upgrade to the taccom

      i find that my nav comp always wants to target the ships in red ….but it wont automaticaly hone in on it ……it just flys towards the green even when the red selection is the only thing selected, ..so how bout this

      A ..the red sight focuses turrets in that direction (if the ship has any)..the green focuses the craft …..so you can command turrets without actualy sitting in them and still controll the directon of flight/ forward gun mounting .(this would be possible because large ships have a crew …..and this way i wouldnt always feel like im paying them for doing fuck all)……if the ship dont have turrets ..you cant select a target using the red sight, ….this means you can use the autopilot to fly towards an enemy automaticaly whilst you concentrate on arming torpedoes/missiles (yeah torpedos would be effing cool lol) and firing the front mount (all fingers and thumbs me) …of course …autopilot kills score less than a manual controll/set speed one does …….just to give incentive to learn to not use it ….it feels a bit like cheating but its a handy trick to have in your arsenal tbh

      B improved interface …..i could never get the hang of the combat computer in FFE …..thought it got in the way …..so it would need making better if this feature got added

      3 …..improve the message system

      all to often i find i bring up the weapons controlls only to find that by the time my mouse pointer gets to click the missile/torpedo (yeah torps would be cooler lol) the scanner has changed because the game wants to tell me im at red alert again or getting fined sommore,

      i find that once im under attack ..i know and dont need reminding …so why not

      A have the console simply light up differant colours for differant situations possibly with a short siren

      blue = all clear

      green = ships in this sector are broadcasting a freindly signal (this could be used by pirates to suprise you so be careful)

      orange = ships in this sector have taken up hostile positions towards you ….please state your intentions and manifest log

      red = red alert …you are under attack ……hostlies are powering up weapons …….raise shields and prepare to fire back (powering up shields and weapons …another cool idea lol)

      an orange alert status is taken …either by police after you fire a weapon or by navy ships in communist/imperial systems ….especialy if you carry a federation ID signal

      orange status prompts comms to open up as they hail you …you can then respond …telling cops it was an accident ..or to go to hell, (all to often i have been blown out the sky because i couldnt open a channel quick enough …..perhaps they should hail you first)

      perhaps their is also a button on the console that allows you to state the signal that YOU broadcast personaly …..enabling you to turn the trick pirates will use to jump you to your own advantage

      B …..simply putting all comm messages somewhere on the screen not tthe scanner would reduce the faffing cos you cant fire a missile ….cos your computer wants to constantly update your fine status/ tell you your under attack …..so it keeps annoyingly switching ……..i can still see through the text so its ok just for one quick message update and it grabs your attention better …..plus it stops the switch

      these are just my ideas ..take the good and dump the bad ….debate about the rest at your will

      oh …and if anyone needs skins for their models give me a shout

    • #74889
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      spike1984 wrote:
      1 ….have elite mode/oolite mode selectable

      elite has newtonian …oolite gives instant stop/direction change capibilitys ……but make oolite mode A …only reach deadly rank or somthing like that ….and B make playing in this mode net less points per kill ..just to give them the incentive to learn to fly like an elite

      This shows a distinct lack of understanding of the scales in Pioneer. If your ship flew like one in Oolite, it would takes months, possibly years, to fly to another planet. It would require a complete rewrite of the autopilot. It would require that we stop all planets and space stations. Did you realise that Earth is travelling around Sol at 30km/s? Everything in the entire game is in motion relative to something, because it’s modelled with Newtonian physics.

      You can’t just fit a switch to that. You’d need to rewrite the game. Put simply, people who would like to play Oolite are going to have to download it.

    • #74890
      AvatarUncleBob
      Participant

      As Brianetta explained, Oolite mode is impossible. The universe in pioneer is not abstracted enough to allow that abstract a flight model.

      I do agree with most of your interface suggestions, though. IMHO it wasn’t the best idea to copy the Frontier interface, as I really think it was already outdated the day FFE came out (except for the 3d scanner, that was still ahead of its time), but I already ranted about that once here, no need to do it again.

      Quote:
      i could never get the hang of the combat computer in FFE

      The combat computer in FFE was broken. Everyone agrees that it had no use whatsoever ๐Ÿ˜‰

      Quote:
      yes but we have to remember ..games need pick up and playability to appeal to a wider audiance ….i know a few scifi fans that are discoraged by the controll system and the wide learning curve ….and forcing people to learn shit just because you yourself are good at is never a good idea ……….tbh its this difficulty that makes universal combat (the game) so shite despite having some excelent ideas

      What makes universal combat so darn difficult is blatant lack of documentation and tutorials. Once you get the hang of it, it isn’t that complicated. Now, if Pioneer documentation is going to be as good as the developement documentation so far, I think we’ll have nothing to fear in that sector, but it’s good to keep in mind.

      Problem is, If you have a newtonian flight model, you have to get the hang of it. A bit of flightschool somewhere maybe, but weather you play Vega Strike, Evochron, good old I-War or pioneer, the rules are all more or less the same (just that in pioneer, relative velocities aren’t artificially limited). Some autopilot help might be of great help here. a match velocity AP that does nothing else than trying to keep relative velocity at zero while still being overridable by user input (so you can maneuver, you know), for example, should be a good help for most beginners, and even apreciated by more expierienced people if it can be engaged/disengaged easily. My Evochron flying was mostly based on letting the automation take care of my velocity while aiming and kicking it out again when evading (and firing missiles all around me, ’cause evochron is somewhat less forgiving), something like this should work quite nicely in Pioneer too.

      Quote:
      simply putting all comm messages somewhere on the screen not tthe scanner would reduce the faffing

      aaaand, a hundred times this.

      Quote:
      oh …and if anyone needs skins for their models give me a shout

      Currently I have seen the interdictor and the flowerfairy in the game that both don’t have skins, although I’m not sure the flowerfairy is worth the effort.

      Imperial Courier and Trader have something, but it’s rather bland. They have pretty nice models though, a good skin would bring them a long way. Anyways, no pressure…

    • #74891
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      UncleBob wrote:
      Quote:
      simply putting all comm messages somewhere on the screen not tthe scanner would reduce the faffing

      aaaand, a hundred times this.

      This is coming. The scanner is getting buffs for alpha 16 and now the messages are really pissing me off. Annoying a developer is a guaranteed way to get something changed ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74892
      AvatarTonySpike
      Participant
      UncleBob wrote:

      Quote:
      oh …and if anyone needs skins for their models give me a shout

      Currently I have seen the interdictor and the flowerfairy in the game that both don’t have skins, although I’m not sure the flowerfairy is worth the effort.

      Imperial Courier and Trader have something, but it’s rather bland. They have pretty nice models though, a good skin would bring them a long way. Anyways, no pressure…

      im on em ………i like the look of the flowerfairy ……so im working on giving it specs more to my likeing with a new name lol …..just for me of course …..but yeah i will have a go at retexturing those ….now if anyones got the texture map …or an unwrapped version of the model (since i cant find it in game) it woild be a help but it dont matter

      Brianetta wrote:

      This shows a distinct lack of understanding of the scales in Pioneer.

      never said i understood lol ….im just offering ideas ….i totaly forgot about the planets.. tbh……but their has to be someway of giving the game more simple pick up and play ….its bloody frutrating sometimes

    • #74893
      AvatarElectricSkies
      Participant
      spike1984 wrote:
      but their has to be someway of giving the game more simple pick up and play ….its bloody frutrating sometimes

      Is this really the case at the moment? FFE actually required you to fight, so it was indeed difficult to learn Newtonian combat on the go while you had three dudes shooting at youรƒยขรขโ€šยฌรขโ‚ฌยnot to mention the countless cases where you explode within literally a couple of seconds after they open fire. Pioneer gameplay, on the other hand, doesn’t need anything but autopilot for most things, so it’s basically point-and-click.

      That, though, is a situation that will only last until the need for combat is put into Pioneer, most likely in the form of pirates. I have to admit that I tried the combat scenario in “start new game from debug point” and found it next to impossible, even with the setup used for FFE, pointing with the mouse and controlling thrusters with the left hand. I never got all that great at fighting in FFE, and here on top of that you have non-instant weaponry to deal with. If the game actually starts sending pirates after me at some point, I’m going to be hearing a lot more of that Pachelbel’s Canon, that’s for sure. Fun? Quite possibly. Frustrating? For many, certainly.

      Subzeroplainzero wrote:
      I’ve been thinking and the more I think about how awkward high speed combat can be (we all remember the endless jousting battles) the more I think it would be better to avoid it completely.

      I really feel that this is one solution to consider. If you think about it, Elite, Frontier, and all the games that take after them only offer one real threat to the continuation of your game: dying in combat. That’s literally the only way to game-over if you know how not to crash your ship; other than that, surviving is about how efficiently you can grind up your money so that you can make yourself safer from dying in combat[1]. There is definitely a box here that weรƒยขรขโ€šยฌรขโ‚ฌยmaybe not the Pioneer team, but definitely somebody in the space sim communityรƒยขรขโ€šยฌรขโ‚ฌยcan be trying to think outside of. Does it make sense that if pirates didn’t exist in space, we would be able to keep flying around forever? Does a space sim need pirates as a device to partially enforce our mortality[2]? It would be intriguing to have instead a Firefly-type situation where you needed to scrounge up all the money that you could, just to keep your ship going. It would also be a radical departure (too radical for Pioneer?) from the Elite/Frontier model where there is almost no economic pressure on the player, and all the player needs to do to buy the best ship in the game is to grind long enough.

      And now I need to shut up or write my own damn game. ๐Ÿ˜‰

      _________________

      [1] The Elite games have a weird difficulty progression where the constant upgrading means that the game gets easier over time, not even considering increases in player skill.

      [2] The whole existence of pirates in Elite and Frontier is totally absurd: they float around space blowing up newbies for the negligible amounts of cargo they happen to be holding, only to be slaughtered wholesale by the first competent pilot to come along. I always wondered why they stuck with the piddling returns and inevitable death of pirating when there was so much more money to be made in even the most innocuous trading.

    • #74894
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant
      Quote:
      im on em ………i like the look of the flowerfairy ……so im working on giving it specs more to my likeing with a new name lol …..just for me of course …..but yeah i will have a go at retexturing those ….now if anyones got the texture map …or an unwrapped version of the model (since i cant find it in game) it woild be a help but it dont matter

      The Interdictor and the Flowerfairy are scripted models. They’re both in /data/models/ships.lua. Look at the Ladybird Starfighter for an example of how to texture them. Texturing the Ladybird was the first thing I did for Pioneer. I haven’t gotten around to texturing the rest of the default ships in that file. I’m sure you’ll do a much better job. I was thinking of using the Sidewinder’s hexagonal texture on the Flowerfairy. There’s a kind of flower effect with the different colored hex looking a bit like the center point of the flower. That thought is as far as I got before I started messing with the stations. Have fun! ๐Ÿ˜€

    • #74895
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      ElectricSkies wrote:
      That, though, is a situation that will only last until the need for combat is put into Pioneer, most likely in the form of pirates. I have to admit that I tried the combat scenario in “start new game from debug point” and found it next to impossible, even with the setup used for FFE, pointing with the mouse and controlling thrusters with the left hand. I never got all that great at fighting in FFE, and here on top of that you have non-instant weaponry to deal with. If the game actually starts sending pirates after me at some point, I’m going to be hearing a lot more of that Pachelbel’s Canon, that’s for sure. Fun? Quite possibly. Frustrating? For many, certainly.

      The flight model in Pioneer is quite a bit more advanced than in Frontier. You will have more success if you learn to use all six thrusters well. Jousting doesn’t work ๐Ÿ™‚

      That said, combat is one of the parts of Frontier that needs the most work. Basic combat flight is mostly done, but a full combat system (if you like) needs to be done. The AI needs tactical knowledge (when to fire missiles, when to trigger the ECM) and the player probably needs more information and tools available. How ships actually join and leave combat is another huge problem that we’re only just starting to get a handle on.

      So don’t worry too much – combat will probably look very little like what’s currently there.

      Quote:
      There is definitely a box here that weรƒยขรขโ€šยฌรขโ‚ฌยmaybe not the Pioneer team, but definitely somebody in the space sim communityรƒยขรขโ€šยฌรขโ‚ฌยcan be trying to think outside of. Does it make sense that if pirates didn’t exist in space, we would be able to keep flying around forever? Does a space sim need pirates as a device to partially enforce our mortality? It would be intriguing to have instead a Firefly-type situation where you needed to scrounge up all the money that you could, just to keep your ship going. It would also be a radical departure (too radical for Pioneer?) from the Elite/Frontier model where there is almost no economic pressure on the player, and all the player needs to do to buy the best ship in the game is to grind long enough.

      These are good thoughts. I quite like the idea of having to scrounge for parts to keep your ship alive. That’s the sort of thing I could expect you needing to do in hostile outer systems, where the opportunities (and profits) are high but things are dangerous and quality repair services are hard to come by. Ship parts should presumably be cheap and plentiful in core safe systems, but the profit margins should be close to non-existent.

      We very much recognise the need for a proper economic model. Its still undecided as to what exactly that looks like.

      The next question we should be asking after what you’ve written above is what should the goals of the game be? Obviously there’s no hard endpoint, but we can wonder why is the player doing what he does? Is it to accumulate wealth and perhaps buy a moon one day? Is it influence? Fame? (medals/combat rating). Infamy (again, medals/combat rating). What other options are there. Keep in mind that they’re things we have to be able to reasonably put into a space game – we don’t want to become The Sims ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74896
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      I’m all for running costs. Profit is easy, and in the late game your only limit in Frontier was the allocated size of your cash integer.

      Big ships shouldn’t just cost a lot to buy, they should be almost prohibitively expensive to run. Crew should sap your funds, maintenance should be frighteningly expensive – to the point where a player might even want to consider a downgrade.

      In Frontier, the growth of my ship was exponential and self-fuelling; the only limit was locating crew, and that was an annoying way to slow me down, not a fun one. Once I got my Panther, though… well, crew costs were more than paid for on each run, and the only real decision I had to make was how big a gun to put in each turret, and how many shields to throw into the hold, leaving room for cargo.

      Even the 4 Cr. docking fee in Sol stopped being an issue after the first couple of cargo runs in the game. Perhaps bigger ships should pay bigger berthing charges, too.

      It’s the reason I wrote the drive breakdown and servicing script. Perhaps, there, the bigger engines should be much more expensive to maintain than they are right now.

    • #74897
      AvatarUncleBob
      Participant

      @Brionetta, I think the economic pressure shouldn’t be so strong to become the major factor in the game (It’s a space simulator, not an economy simulator after all), but otherwise I agree with everything. Maybe maintenance costs could be modified by a difficulty setting.

      As for introducing more detailed running costs per se, I think that should go hand in hand with a detailed damage simulation, which would increase the fun of pretty much all aspects, from combat to exploration. Ships parts break down over time, and obviously a lot faster when they’re getting shot at. Having expensive repairs for large ships would also be a good motivation for players to not turn their trader into a battleship, because getting shot at in a smaller, more agile vehicle is so much less expensive.

      As for combat itself, since we’re already talking about it, here’s two suggestions running through my mind. First to consider is that almost all sims with a newtonian flight model have active targetting. I.E. the gun can swivel and aim itself at a target within a certain angle. I think this would be a very good addition to pioneer as an upgrade. I’m thinking of a narrow angle carriage and wide angle carriage. Make them weight a few tons, and the wide angle carriage a few tons more so that building them into a small ship that already has a maneuvering advantage is impractical, but at least a narrow angle carriage should be among standard equipement for anything that isn’t a pure fighter craft, right there with the gun cooler.

      Then there’s the ECM, which was really broken in Frontier and FFE. Having a dead-certain countermeasure against some missiles while having zero against others was too easy a solution. Rather, ECM’s should have a certain chance to bring a missile down. The better the ECM, the greater the chance, up to somewhere around 90%. Missiles have a certain resistance factor that can diminish those chances, so it’s not an all-or-nothing affair. Plus, if there are multiple missiles, the ECM should only be able to bring down one at a time, so that overwhelming an opponent with a missile barrage is a viable tactical option (instead of being frontierian roulette, because there’s a good chance that they’ll just blow up in your own face)

    • #74898
      AvatarTonySpike
      Participant

      whilst were taking ship parts and paying for crew ……expanding on my alert status and new targeting ideas ……as i said before it would be nice if the crew that drain your funds could actualy fire the turrets for you (you just select the target and presto the turrets are manned ……in a bigger ship this is how it works anyway and it takes away the frantic trying to move the ship whilst manning the turrets thing ….

      plus if your talking ship parts ……would it be an idea to be able to select witch parts of a ship to target and damage ……that way you can target a pirates engines and take him out ……of course the same can happen to you ….so perhaps that same said crew can be used to make inflight repairs to certain parts ……speeding up your hulls auto repair (or maybe making it cheaper to not have one)

      hell you could use gunners skill and repair ability to sift the wheat from the chaff when hiring crew members for your big ship ……..no one wants to have a gunners mate first class phillip asshole as their gunner do they lol

      im just thinking ..im fed up of paying these guys for simply needing them to fly so I can do everything else lol ……it dont have to be overly complicated …..perhaps just an assignment button on your inventory…….but it could work

    • #74899
      AvatarUncleBob
      Participant
      Quote:
      plus if your talking ship parts ……would it be an idea to be able to select witch parts of a ship to target and damage

      The ships we have currently aren’t really big enough for such pin-point work, and it would need a lot of ship-dependant scripting (defining damage areas). Could be done, but I don’t know how much it would add to the gameplay.

      I just had the pleasure of meeting an imperial courier on the road a few minutes ago, and from the encounter I can kind of conclude two problems with combat that could be solved pretty easy, I think.

      First, Ships take too much punishement. It prolongs dogfight too much, even if there’s just one and he’s unshielded. Fighting against smaller craft takes longer because it’s tough to hit them, I can live with that. But the sheer amount of punishment that courier soaked up was a bit exagerated.

      Second, heavy ships have too high turn rates (indeed, so far I have been unable to make out significant differences in turn rates between individual ships). There goes the main advantage of small craft, and that’s why currently even fights against a technically slower opponent still turns into a strafe-fest. I think we should tweek those turn-rates a bit.

      Completely unrelated, I just died the most awsome death after disposing of that courier: The starport I targeted to land was pretty exactly on the opposite side of the sun, and the autopilot of course first aproached the star to then maneuver around it. I got a bit too close however, and even with dumping all my cargo my mains didn’t have the power to pull me out of the gravity well ๐Ÿ˜†

      I made a slow ass-first dive into a star (I guess I could have deactivated the autopilot and instead of the frantic “pull away” maneuver tried to sling myself around it, but it was too fascinating to watch).

    • #74900
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      UncleBob wrote:
      Second, heavy ships have too high turn rates (indeed, so far I have been unable to make out significant differences in turn rates between individual ships)

      Take a Hammerhead out for a spin. Literally. Once you set it going, stopping it can be hard work, too.

    • #74901
      AvatarUncleBob
      Participant

      My scout missions are done, where should I upload it? I don’t have any webspace…

    • #74902
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      UncleBob wrote:
      My scout missions are done, where should I upload it? I don’t have any webspace…

      You could make yourself a GitHub account, fork the Pioneer repo’ and then you’ve gone the full developer route ๐Ÿ™‚

      Otherwise I believe you can just attach the script to your forum post with the “upload attachment” tab beneath the message window.

    • #74903
      AvatarUncleBob
      Participant

      Ah, I searched for something like that, didn’t see it down there.

      Anyways, this will need some testing, proof-reading, and translation (tested it pretty thouroughly, but you never know). It also doesn’t work with Alfa 15, it needs at least the nighly build from 2. November.

    • #74904
      AvatarCreepyStepdad
      Participant

      I apoligize in advance if this not not the right place to bring this up, but I was reading a previous discussion about relative speed for ftl jumps. What if jumping to a target with relative speed meant having to first attain relative speed before jumping? This way, jumping to a station or planet could be done at low speed or when stationary, but intercepting a moving craft would take a little work? My thinking is, if a target can be identified by scanners BEFORE jumping, so should its heading and velocity, allowing the player to build up speed before attempting to intercept.

      If there was a built in level of error in where the jump leaves the player, having a high relative speed when trying to dock with a station could be disasterous, as could jumping into a group of pirates when moving slowly.

    • #74905
      AvatarUncleBob
      Participant

      Say, has anyone ever succesfully set down on an asteroid? I’m sitting there alright, but altitude is still shown as 29m and I don’t get a landed message (and my survey doesn’t start, of course. Just my luck that the first code test happened to pick an asteroid as the target!)

    • #74906
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      UncleBob wrote:
      Say, has anyone ever succesfully set down on an asteroid? I’m sitting there alright, but altitude is still shown as 29m and I don’t get a landed message (and my survey doesn’t start, of course. Just my luck that the first code test happened to pick an asteroid as the target!)

      I have. It’s not easy. Are you actually landed, or just buried in the surface? You can only land if your wheels are pointing toward the middle of the asteroid, which can be a real bugger to judge.

    • #74907
      AvatarTonySpike
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      UncleBob wrote:
      Say, has anyone ever succesfully set down on an asteroid? I’m sitting there alright, but altitude is still shown as 29m and I don’t get a landed message (and my survey doesn’t start, of course. Just my luck that the first code test happened to pick an asteroid as the target!)

      I have. It’s not easy. Are you actually landed, or just buried in the surface? You can only land if your wheels are pointing toward the middle of the asteroid, which can be a real bugger to judge.

      i managed a rough landing on phobos just yesterday

    • #74908
      AvatarUncleBob
      Participant

      Huh? something ate my post, it seems… so here goes again:

      Quote:
      Are you actually landed, or just buried in the surface?

      I’m not actually landed by the game’s definition of landed, and I’m not burried beneath the surface. I’m sitting pretty snuggly on top of it, the ship is at an absolute standstill. Finding a place on an asteroid where you can align your gear with the center is somewhat… impractical. I think this still needs a bit of work. The collision detection seems to work pretty well, so there should be a way to involve it a bit more with the landed state.

      Also, a bit of instrumentation for manual flight would be nice (artifical horizon, a straight-down camera view, good old targetting tunnels), especially considering the many “suicides by autopilot” I suffered on this mission with a fully decked out Imperial Courier (600 tons). They ranged from screwed up landing, screwed up docking, to screwed up stellar aproach (there I go sundiving again…) and screwed up asteroid aproach (The ka-boom type… most of it had to do with the asteroid being really close to the sun. I did get there eventually by chopping the way up into smaller, more specific autopilot instructions). Seems like the Autopilot doesn’t like heavy ships yet. Oh well, everything in its own time.

    • #74909
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      UncleBob wrote:
      I’m not actually landed by the game’s definition of landed, and I’m not burried beneath the surface. I’m sitting pretty snuggly on top of it, the ship is at an absolute standstill. Finding a place on an asteroid where you can align your gear with the center is somewhat… impractical. I think this still needs a bit of work. The collision detection seems to work pretty well, so there should be a way to involve it a bit more with the landed state.

      You’re right, the way it decides if you’re landed or not is based on the assumption that a planet is nearly spherical.

      So you must be aligned with it’s centre on a flat enough piece of the surface.

      Unfortunately I think that the planet collision system is also spherical based so I’m not sure that will be much help in this case.

      Maybe you should drop your requirement to be landed? Perhaps base it on the distance if the object is an asteroid instead?

    • #74910
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      I’d just avoid the requirement of landing on asteroids. Treat them as done if the player gets close enough to them, and then move on.

    • #74911
      AvatarUncleBob
      Participant
      Quote:
      Unfortunately I think that the planet collision system is also spherical based so I’m not sure that will be much help in this case.

      I didn’t get that impression. My Courier set down with its right foot, then tilted until it had something underneath the left foot. In other words, it fit itself to the terrain as you would expect it to. This tells me that the terrain collision detection is actually quite sophisticated, unless my tilting was for another reason and I misinterpreted it.

      Quote:
      I’d just avoid the requirement of landing on asteroids. Treat them as done if the player gets close enough to them, and then move on.

      Kind of a pity, because landing on asteroids is fun… but well. I guess I can make do without them for now.

    • #74912
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      UncleBob wrote:
      Quote:
      Unfortunately I think that the planet collision system is also spherical based so I’m not sure that will be much help in this case.

      I didn’t get that impression. My Courier set down with its right foot, then tilted until it had something underneath the left foot. In other words, it fit itself to the terrain as you would expect it to. This tells me that the terrain collision detection is actually quite sophisticated, unless my tilting was for another reason and I misinterpreted it.

      Not it’s dumb as a brick but I probably didn’t explain myself.

      When landing on a planet it finds out what “height” the terrain is underneath you by querying the terrain generation with a position relative to the centre of the planet. That then generates the terrain height. It does this so that the collision is always “perfect” rather than relying on the terrain itself which might still be in the process of being created and is therefore changing all the time.

      Problems with this are that if you have an asteroid or something that is not approximately spherical the terrain will rarely be level beneath you. You also get the ship intersecting the visibly generated planet, or hanging above it a little way, because the height generation is effectively at a much higher resolution than the visible terrain is.

      Collision with ships etc is a completely different system.

      I ran into all of this stuff dealing with the Orbital code which was tricky because I tried to keep using the same system but treat it as a projection onto the inside of a cylinder and my maths wasn’t that great.

      EDIT: Perhaps “dumb as a brick” is unkind ๐Ÿ™‚ What I mean is that it’s a very simple method which works well enough for planets but possibly not for other bodies.

    • #74913
      AvatarCreepyStepdad
      Participant

      Running delivery missions in sol with the starting ship my autopilot kills me about half the time. Do I need to know something else? Is there a way I can be avoiding these accidents, or is this a bug in the autopilot code?

    • #74914
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      The autopilot is one of the parts of Pioneer that is getting intensive development work right now.

    • #74915
      AvatarUncleBob
      Participant
      Quote:
      Running delivery missions in sol with the starting ship my autopilot kills me about half the time.

      Interesting. My eagle never commited suicide by autopilot so far, only the heavier ships. Anyways, it’s good to hear it’s being worked on. It’s not only for the player, after all, it’s also for NPC AI. It might be fun for a while to watch incomming trade ships crash and burn, but it gets kinda old… ๐Ÿ˜†

    • #74916
      Avatarpebblegarden
      Participant

      Whatever issues the current autopilot has, it’s infinitely more robust than the one in Frontier. ‘Save early and often’ was the rule with that monster. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74917
      Avatarrobn
      Participant

      Related, jaj22 has completely rewritten the autopilot after the last couple of weeks. Imaginatively named “autopilot v2”, it will hit the nightlies sometime in the next week.

    • #74918
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant

      @robn

      On a completely different note, has any thought been given to those extra military drives?

    • #74919
      Avatarrobn
      Participant

      There hasn’t been any discussion on IRC. All the discussion is in the issue. My personal opinion is somewhere between “no” and “not yet”. I’ll try and find time to write something soon.

    • #74920
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant

      Cheers, it’s just kinda hard to form a rebuttal to a “no” argument if there’s been no argument ๐Ÿ™‚

      I’m personally a little in favour, but I’d like to add a second layer somehow defining that you cannot own them. I want them in so that we can have military ships with better engines than the players, if the engines don’t exist them no-one can have them. Likewise I’d like to have smuggling missions with carrying these things as cargo, it seems very weird actually that we can’t carry ship components as cargo just like the commodities – but that’s probably a whole other can of worms.

      So yeah, I want them in, but later on we should add a way of limiting them to prevent players from getting them (and other equipment) except via missions. Them not being there at all stops us from doing other mission scripting. We should actually be adding more items to that list rather than limiting it, things like cameras, nukes, mines etc. Things that aren’t available to purchase but that can be given to the player via scripts for missions.

      If they’re not on the list, they don’t exist in the game.

    • #74921
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      robn wrote:
      Related, jaj22 has completely rewritten the autopilot after the last couple of weeks. Imaginatively named “autopilot v2”, it will hit the nightlies sometime in the next week.

      Will this autopilot allow for flying to other ships?

    • #74922
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      fluffyfreak wrote:
      So yeah, I want them in, but later on we should add a way of limiting them to prevent players from getting them (and other equipment) except via missions. Them not being there at all stops us from doing other mission scripting. We should actually be adding more items to that list rather than limiting it, things like cameras, nukes, mines etc. Things that aren’t available to purchase but that can be given to the player via scripts for missions.

      This is a reasonable argument in favour. Based on that, I’m happy to remove my “no” and make it a firm “not yet”. The reason for that is that we first need a way to exclude them from the shipyard. I also think it’d be worth waiting until we have a clear outcome to #717.

    • #74923
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      fluffyfreak wrote:
      robn wrote:
      Related, jaj22 has completely rewritten the autopilot after the last couple of weeks. Imaginatively named “autopilot v2”, it will hit the nightlies sometime in the next week.

      Will this autopilot allow for flying to other ships?

      I think it still only knows how to fly to a fixed point and doesn’t update its target to follow. We’re moving away from the general “intercept AI” concept towards allowing ships to make short in-system hyperspace jumps. The idea is still in very early development; see the Active Discussions topic on the wiki.

    • #74924
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      robn wrote:
      These is a reasonable argument in favour. Based on that, I’m happy to remove my “no” and make it a firm “not yet”. The reason for that is that we first need a way to exclude them from the shipyard. I also think it’d be worth waiting until we have a clear outcome to #717.

      Well I can update the pull request branch with a flag that simply says whether something can be bought/sold and define it for each item, then check in the ship upgrade system if an item can be bought/sold.

      As to the second though: That’s much trickier to answer, mostly because I’m not convinced there’s any good argument for the system that’s been described in issue #717. Perhaps in the very long term we’d need a system that allowed for completely decoupled items that are built from data. However right now we have 99% of the things that people want in the game and the focus seems rightly to be elsewhere on implementing missions and fleshing out the galaxy, not to mention factions etc.

      So the real cost of maintaining or extending the existing system is very small, these engines, camera for recon’ missions, nukes for military missions maybe… that’s a tiny handful of new things versus a complete rewrite of the entire system, and the rewriting of every system that defines the existing items to use any new system.

      It might be cleaner from a code point of view, but after all that work I don’t see how what you’d have would be better than what we’ve got.

      EDIT – (unless of course we’re not talking about a complete data driven rewrite, in which case adding some flags and allowing for Lua to add untradable items would probably cover 90% use cases)

      Just my 2p though.

      Andy

    • #74925
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      fluffyfreak wrote:
      So the real cost of maintaining or extending the existing system is very small, these engines, camera for recon’ missions, nukes for military missions maybe… that’s a tiny handful of new things versus a complete rewrite of the entire system, and the rewriting of every system that defines the existing items to use any new system.

      That’s making the grand assumption that missions will only require engines, cameras and nukes. Lua coders shouldn’t have to have the engine modified to support generalized ideas, so it follows that Lua coders should have some mechanism for defining custom equipment and cargo at the very least.

    • #74926
      AvatarUncleBob
      Participant
      Quote:
      We’re moving away from the general “intercept AI” concept towards allowing ships to make short in-system hyperspace jumps.

      Nooooooo!

      I would really regrett that.

    • #74927
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      That’s making the grand assumption that missions will only require engines, cameras and nukes. Lua coders shouldn’t have to have the engine modified to support generalized ideas, so it follows that Lua coders should have some mechanism for defining custom equipment and cargo at the very least.

      It’s not a grand assumption it’s experience from previous work. You can often spend weeks rewriting something to be incredibly flexible, to offer up unlimited opportunity, you re-enter all of the existing 200+ items/models/animations/whatevers data and then… 3 new things are added which are used in just 1% of the cases and would have taken 15 minutes for a coder to add. Or worse, the 1 and only way that something is used remains the 1 and only way that something is ever used. I’ve seen it happen repeatedly and been powerless to stop it before.

      If someone wants to do it then great, but without a concise and cohesive reason for doing it I don’t see what the difference will be. There’s a table with 40+ entries which will need to be rewritten to support this new system, for the sake of adding a few more. Adding all of the other military drives only took an hour or two of my time, and a lot of that was doing some maths on a piece of paper to work out the prices. That time is cheap for the amount of reward.

      So what I see is a working system that is easy to support vs an unknown with limited benefits – more than anything it just feel like the kind of system described above.

      I guess in principle I agree with the motivation, to drive the definition and creation of ingame objects from data, that would be nice. It’s simply that I don’t see the benefit in doing so in this case.

    • #74928
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      UncleBob wrote:
      Quote:
      We’re moving away from the general “intercept AI” concept towards allowing ships to make short in-system hyperspace jumps.

      Nooooooo!

      I would really regrett that.

      Did you ever play I-War? I quite liked their drive idea, think it was called the LDS or something. It “sliced up space and put it behind you” a bit like a warp drive or some nonsense… but it made it easier to get around in real-time.

      Not sure I’d like to see it in Pioneer though, part of the fun and gameplay is that things-take-time and you need to plan ahead for them.

    • #74929
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      It’s not time that made us consider in-system jumps. It’s the fact that you’d basically never, ever meet anybody. Pirates are already out there, in space. Ever been caught by one? Didn’t think so. They can’t reach you before you dock, an the only alternative would be for them to to hang around space stations waiting for incoming traders. Like the authorities would stand for that.

      Frontier got around this by teleporting pirates to your location. Pioneer just might have to do the same thing. At least we let you do it back!

    • #74930
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant

      Good point, so how about the I-War third way where you can travel for a limited time, and using generous amounts of fuel perhaps(?), in-system at some high fraction of the speed of light – or warping more accurately.

      … but can we not call it warping, please, Star Trek is not something I want this particular game associated with! ๐Ÿ˜€

    • #74931
      AvatarUncleBob
      Participant
      Quote:
      Did you ever play I-War? I quite liked their drive idea, think it was called the LDS or something.

      I-War is exactly what I was thinking about. I could condone the LDS because you need some mcguffin like that if you don’t want to go all the way and include orbital propagation and a gravity simulation, which would clearly have been overkill for the first game, and in the second they pretty much had to go by what the first provided.

      But since we already have orbital propagation and gravity simulation in pioneer, it would be a sad thing to see the flight model go the way of every other flight model in every other space sim out there. Space just isn’t big if you even can jump around inside systems. Well, it would be sad for me, anyways.

      EDIT: As for pirates, I suppose they would intercept your hyperspace arrival cloud before you arrive at the system. At least that’ how I used to assasinate people in FFE.

    • #74932
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      Quote:
      But since we already have orbital propagation and gravity simulation in pioneer, it would be a sad thing to see the flight model go the way of every other flight model in every other space sim out there. Space just isn’t big if you even can jump around inside systems. Well, it would be sad for me, anyways.

      The flight model wouldn’t be going away. This would be an extra system with extra costs. Critically, it would not be free and instant travel – there will be costs and risks involved.

      Consider this scenario: you see a battle happening and want to join, but it would takes days of normal flight to get there, so you decide to jump. The battle is happening perilously close to a planet, so there’s a non-zero chance that you could end up too close the the planet and crash, unless you allow your computer to take the time to calculate the jump properly. It will take five minutes, but the battle will be over by then, so maybe you only do a partial calculation and take your chances. Oh, and maybe your shields need a recharge after jump for some reason.

      Now I don’t know which if any of those factors would happen or make sense. My point is that there should be a way to balance it so that normal flight is probably the right choice most of the time, but a short jump may occasionally make some sense. We discussed a fair bit of this in IRC. The log of those discussion is linked from the wiki topic I mentioned.

    • #74933
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      Perhaps using something like Oolite uses, some form of fuel injection that will burn up your fuel reserves at a massive pace. Also, because you also need to reduce your mass to zero (using some fuel hungary mass adjustment add-on), yet at the same time, travel in normal space, your shields would be stripped bare. This happens because you are exceeding relativistic speeds, so even tiny particles hitting your ship will slowly but surely reduce your shields to zero. Once this happens you must drop out of these “superluminal speeds” or your hull will disintegrate. Doing it this way, you will have more control over the process but also have easy to understand costs for doing it. Also, since it takes such a toll on your ship, you could only do this in short bursts. Doing it all the way from hyperspace jump entry point to planetfall wouldn’t feel right in my view.

      For those interested here is what The Wiki says on FTL http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light

      Or perhaps increase the accuracy of the jump engines but with penalties the closer you get to a gravitational reference point, for example, trying to jump to just outside a planetary atmosphere also includes a very high chance of having an exit point beneath the planet’s crust! ๐Ÿ˜ฎ

      I know this “intercept” issue must be giving you guys some trouble, it’s not easy having full-sized solar systems and reconciling that with pirate intercepts, but if you can pull it off, it would be awesome ๐Ÿ˜Ž

    • #74934
      AvatarUncleBob
      Participant
      Quote:
      Now I don’t know which if any of those factors would happen or make sense. My point is that there should be a way to balance it so that normal flight is probably the right choice most of the time, but a short jump may occasionally make some sense.

      Okay, you got me back there. ๐Ÿ˜€

    • #74935
      AvatarCreepyStepdad
      Participant

      Would someone mind explaining the cargo and fuel scoop. I tried to get close to Sol with the fuel scoop equipped, but ended up TOO close. I also tried to mine Phobos but got chased off by the fuzz. Can mining be done yet?

    • #74936
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      CreepyStepdad wrote:
      Would someone mind explaining the cargo and fuel scoop. I tried to get close to Sol with the fuel scoop equipped, but ended up TOO close. I also tried to mine Phobos but got chased off by the fuzz. Can mining be done yet?

      Mine somewhere that doesn’t have a base in it! Fuel scooping is safer in a gas giant’s atmosphere.

    • #74937
      AvatarTonySpike
      Participant

      i agree with geraldine on the intercept issue ….i thought the oolite system for getting round was great …….the fuel injection system giving you short range warp capabilitys would take away the need to constantly speed up time just to get places quickly

    • #74938
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      spike1984 wrote:
      i agree with geraldine on the intercept issue ….i thought the oolite system for getting round was great …….the fuel injection system giving you short range warp capabilitys would take away the need to constantly speed up time just to get places quickly

      Geraldine’s idea of using up fuel to get a speed boost… does it slow down again if you run out of fuel? How?

      That sort of concept doesn’t make sense in a vacuum governed by Newtonian physics. It’s not just the huge distances, but the vast differences in velocity that everything has. You don’t just have to reach your target; you must also reach your target’s velocity.

    • #74939
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      Sorry Brianetta, I should have fleshed out the idea better. ๐Ÿ™‚

      Granted that FTL is impossible for objects with mass, but that was why I suggested a “mass altering device” that would reduce the ship’s mass to zero, however it takes a lot of fuel to run this gadget. When your fuel runs out (or if you choose to shut it off), mass returns to the ship, hence you would drop to sub-light speeds again. This gadget is smart though in how it re-applies mass in that it returns you to the same space normal speed you were doing before you engaged it perhaps by actually increasing the original mass of your ship untill equilibrium with your starting speed is attained. Obviously it would also incorporate some form if internal damping to handle the massive Gees involved in changing your velocity.

      It’s only an idea though, my attempt in trying to deal with this tricky intercept problem. It’s only now when thinking about it, how difficult this would be for the devs to get right.

      Whatever method the devs decide upon, I just hope it doesn’t involve jumpgates ๐Ÿ˜•

    • #74940
      AvatarElectricSkies
      Participant

      A mass-reducing device might work kind of well. If hyperspacing works by travelling through a different dimension than our three, then you may be able to put your ship partway into that dimension while what’s left of you in the third dimension moves around the system.

    • #74941
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      Geraldine wrote:
      Sorry Brianetta, I should have fleshed out the idea better. ๐Ÿ™‚

      Granted that FTL is impossible for objects with mass

      Perhaps in real life. In Pioneer, we use Newtonian physics, not Einsteinian physics. There’s nothing special about the speed of light.

      Quote:
      When your fuel runs out (or if you choose to shut it off), mass returns to the ship, hence you would drop to sub-light speeds again. This gadget is smart though in how it re-applies mass in that it returns you to the same space normal speed you were doing before you engaged it perhaps by actually increasing the original mass of your ship untill equilibrium with your starting speed is attained. Obviously it would also incorporate some form if internal damping to handle the massive Gees involved in changing your velocity.

      See, the problem there is that you move across the system just fine, and might even be at the same place as the guy you’re trying to meet. Trouble is, you’re still at the velocity you started at, and he almost certainly isn’t, so you’d see him continue to coast away from you at whatever speed he’s doing. You’re still playing catch-up; you still have to spend time matching his velocity, and once you’ve done that, what a surprise, he’s bloody miles away.

      Jump into Sol and select Earth. Look at your speed relative to Earth – very nearly 30km/s, which is positively belting along. Ships are in a hurry; Earth dawdles along at only 6.28 AU per year. Just reaching them quickly isn’t the problem. It’s reaching them and staying with them.

      Any scheme that relies on a temporary speed boost simply won’t work, unless your game is like Oolite and everybody knows what 0 m/s means.

    • #74942
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      In Pioneer, we use Newtonian physics, not Einsteinian physics. There’s nothing special about the speed of light.

      Of course, I keep forgetting the Pioneer universe is not Einsteinian ๐Ÿ˜ณ Still, its nice to pretend it is! ๐Ÿ˜†

      Brianetta wrote:
      See, the problem there is that you move across the system just fine, and might even be at the same place as the guy you’re trying to meet. Trouble is, you’re still at the velocity you started at, and he almost certainly isn’t, so you’d see him continue to coast away from you at whatever speed he’s doing. You’re still playing catch-up; you still have to spend time matching his velocity, and once you’ve done that, what a surprise, he’s bloody miles away.

      Ah, ok now I see what you mean. Hard (15 hour) day at work so I am a little slow ๐Ÿ™‚ Ok then, how about “the gadget” plotting the course and velocity of your intercept according to your target? You could set a small relative velocity differential between yourself and the target by sharing the same reference point. That would drop you out of superluminal speed right on their tail. After that it’s all down to piloting skills if you make the kill or not. Conversely, attacking ships could pull the same stunt to intercept you.

      Brianetta wrote:
      Any scheme that relies on a temporary speed boost simply won’t work, unless your game is like Oolite and everybody knows what 0 m/s means.

      Yes I agree there is no absolute 0ms with regards to Pioneer as it depends on what your measuring your zero velocity at (the reference point), but for intercepts, you could use the same reference point as the target ship. Once you are close enough, use the gadget to automatically adjust your speed to bring you within striking range at a low speed differential. Remember though, there is costs to doing this because your shield will be weak from travelling at superluminal. So some tactics would need to be employed to enable you to survive this vunerable period until your shields recharge. Thats about it Brianetta, a fudge by any other name I admit, but to be honest I would still like to see what others could come up with. Perhaps there is an even simpler solution, if I could only think of it ๐Ÿ˜•

    • #74943
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      Geraldine wrote:
      Perhaps there is an even simpler solution, if I could only think of it ๐Ÿ˜•

      Well, there’s still the cheating by teleporting…

      General consensus *seems* to be (and I can’t speak for all of the dev team) that since we already have a drive that can make hyperspace wormholes, we should use that rather than invent yet another fictitious technology.

    • #74944
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      Geraldine wrote:
      Perhaps there is an even simpler solution, if I could only think of it ๐Ÿ˜•

      Well, there’s still the cheating by teleporting…

      General consensus *seems* to be (and I can’t speak for all of the dev team) that since we already have a drive that can make hyperspace wormholes, we should use that rather than invent yet another fictitious technology.

      Which is effectively cheating by teleporting, but we’re just trying to spin a bit of plausibility around it ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74945
      AvatarTonySpike
      Participant

      LMAO …..see …..now my brain just jumped out the back of my head ………..im not a rocket scientist ……nor do i have ANY understanding of newtonian or einsteinian physics (i dont even know the differance im not even gonna pretend to) …….it dosnt bother me in my everyday life so as far as im concerned i dont need to know the differance ๐Ÿ˜‰

      but the one thing i dont want is to need a degree in engineering to be able to fly a ship ๐Ÿ˜€ ….in my opinion in the future this kind of thing would get passed from father to son ……otherwise how the hell do pirates themselves exist ……cos the only people who would be able to fly in space would be the military and have the training afforded by that way of life ……..so their must be some kind of tech that makes this simpler

      now im being told that the speed of light means nothing …….ok i can handle that …so as an uneducated moron i can factor that into my thoughts

      i also DO have some grasp of the fact that space is the thing thats moving ….but like simon pegg ….i forget this fact easily

      so here are my thoughts on this ……. bear with me whilst i make my retarded suggestion in the hope that its not actualy as retarded as it sounds (i dont explain things so good)

      if faster than light travel dosnt exist ….than the only other explaination as to what a hyperdrive does is dimension shifting ……witchspace ..if you prefer ………

      so if you can enter witchspace to fly to another system that means that portable wormhole tech exists …..and if that is the case ….than isnt it possible that tech to get an accurate destination would also be required am i right

      so its obvious to me that if a ship has said tech already its not actualy cheating ………your already bending the rules to get to a destination as it is ….(because in this model your cheating anyway to just jump to a new place) so its not cheating to bend them a little further and say ..look …..ships have this onboard thing that locks onto a target destination with as much accuracy as it can ………how close it gets you to said destination depends on how old it is (when it was invented …..and when it was last serviced) ….tech for this would obviously get better as time goes on ….so obviously you get some that are more accurate than others

      now how this computer works is ……it uses your ships star charts to lock onto a body and automaticaly puts your speed relative to that body (geting rid of the need to build up to that speed on re-entry …… it automaticaly boots you out of witchspace at this speed because the witchspace dimention wraps around our own meaning that when you enter you automaticaly appear in every point in our universe at the same time and are theirfore reletive to everything …..its just a case of picking a spot to emerge (or somthing like that …..think infinite improbability drive from hitchikers)

      mis jumps can still occur because the drive has malfunctioned or is old and does a …no ..i want to go here .not their thing

      their problem solved …….if you cant come up with a plausible explaination ….than make one up ….because uneducated boneheads like me wont know the differance and at least this way sounds plausible to those that are …..why try to apply rationality to somthing that isnt already

      basicaly what im saying is …… your calling teleporting cheating when effectivly its what your already doing in game anyway …….so their is no point holding back ……just work out how to get to planets within a system with that in mind ….you cant have an explaination to everything in life or the fun is lost

      EDIT ………yeah im probly talking out my arse …..but im just trying to make sure you dont lose sight of things by trying to rationalise everything …….if you want my honest opinion you could use this theory and say that the drive gets less accurate the further away you are ….but within a system its accurate to the point of intercepting ships

      EDIT 2 ….yeah i just read that back and i know i havent solved the getting from planet to planet problem ๐Ÿ™„ ……..but at least i have tryed to make an explaination to make the teleporting thing seem plausible and not cheating

    • #74946
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant
      Quote:
      Ships will now emerge from hyperspace at a point “close” to the source system (#724)

      If I understand this correctly from the alpha16 new features list, then a ship jumping from system a to system b will always emerge into system b in the same area of system b every time. If this is true then pirates would wait in that area for victims to appear. That’s what I imagined the ‘teleporting’ of Frontier pirates was supposed to simulate, and would give them a good chance of intercepting you without intra-system jumps being necessary. That being said, such jumps if implemented should require as much fuel as inter-system jumps to prevent them from being over used, imho. The rationale could be that jumps close to a gravity well would require proportionately more energy.

    • #74947
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      Yea, more accurate jumps sound good to me too ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74948
      AvatarBugbear
      Participant

      Hi all, a compilation on Linux observation.

      On the Wiki, you’ve specified the following prerequisites:

      Code:
      sudo apt-get install libsigc++-2.0-dev libglut3-dev libglew1.5-dev libsdl1.2-dev libvorbis-dev libsdl-image1.2-dev dh-autoreconf git libfreetype6-dev

      I’m getting errors (package not found error) for libglut3-dev.

      I’ve found that replacing this prerequisite with freeglut3-dev resolves this missing dependancy.

    • #74949
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      Bugbear1973 wrote:
      Hi all, a compilation on Linux observation.

      On the Wiki, you’ve specified the following prerequisites:

      Code:
      sudo apt-get install libsigc++-2.0-dev libglut3-dev libglew1.5-dev libsdl1.2-dev libvorbis-dev libsdl-image1.2-dev dh-autoreconf git libfreetype6-dev

      I’m getting errors (package not found error) for libglut3-dev.

      I’ve found that replacing this prerequisite with freeglut3-dev resolves this missing dependancy.

      Something I only discovered the other day, after finally upgrading. Those stated dependencies are correct for Ubuntu 10.04 and 10.10.

    • #74950
      AvatarBugbear
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      Something I only discovered the other day, after finally upgrading. Those stated dependencies are correct for Ubuntu 10.04 and 10.10.

      OK, I’m using XUbuntu 11.10…

    • #74951
      AvatarCailean556
      Participant

      It may be purely because I’m an Aussie but is there any scope to add a spaceport to the continent of Australia on Earth? Australia’s importance in the space program (by the way of tracking stations and communications and radio telescopes) means that surely there’d be a spaceport SOMEWHERE on the continent in the 31st century. It’s the only major continent not to have a spaceport. That and maybe Africa/Middle East…y’know, so each continent is represented equally or something like that.

    • #74952
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      There’s no spaceport on the Australian continent, but there *is* an entire Australian star system. Bear in mind that about half of the dev team are Australian, live in Australia or have strong family ties to Australia. Australia isn’t forgotten! (-:

    • #74953
      AvatarCailean556
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      There’s no spaceport on the Australian continent, but there *is* an entire Australian star system. Bear in mind that about half of the dev team are Australian, live in Australia or have strong family ties to Australia. Australia isn’t forgotten! (-:

      Where is this Australian starsystem you speak of? I shall make it my home!

    • #74954
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      Cailean556 wrote:
      Where is this Australian starsystem you speak of? I shall make it my home!

      Werribee (22,4,11)

      This script:

      https://gist.github.com/1433651

      …will get you there with the minimum of effort. Just download that into your data/modules directory and start a new game. I’ll fly you right there in my custom ship; you just need to find me on the bulletin board.

    • #74955
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      I posted an addon that places a spaceport at people from SSC’s home towns. It works in alpha 16 and can be found here. http://www.spacesimcentral.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=2249&start=20

    • #74956
      Avatarbroben
      Participant

      Hello

      I have just downloaded ships from the completed models for Pioneer thread, last page

      I would like to know the exact procedure to add them to Pioneer alpha 16,I assume it

      is a bit more complex than just dropping the contents from the zip files in to the ships

      folder thanks

      (edit in fact i now know its a bit more complex than just dropping the contents into the

      ships folder)

    • #74957
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      If you figure it out, do let us know…

    • #74958
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      Broben, I’ve tried to install the stations, but I get errors regarding the submodels. I’m not sure if we’re supposed to delete or override the sub_models folder or what, but I’m sure that you’ll have to install them before you install the ships. And yes, normally you just extract the folder to the ships folder. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #74959
      AvatarCailean556
      Participant

      Thank you Brianetta for the script. I have yet to try it out, been busy at work. But I shall visit Werribee very soon. I have been meaning to ask…do you intend to include bigger ships that can carry little ones? Ships that are too big to enter an atmosphere but carry smaller ships to conduct business, mine and explore? In line with that, will the player be able to own their own base(s) on worlds they decide to colonise for mining (or whatever) purposes? This game reminds me of the ‘X’ series only you’re able to land on planets and literally go anywhere. Provided you have enough fuel and don’t run out in a system that has no spaceports…not that I did that… It was…someone else I know… What a dumbass… ๐Ÿ˜ฏ

    • #74960
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      Ships that carry smaller ships, possibly – but not yet. Regarding colonisation, the answer is no. You’re simply not that big a player in the universe. Don’t expect to be commanding fleets or building your own space stations.

    • #74961
      AvatarCailean556
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      Ships that carry smaller ships, possibly – but not yet. Regarding colonisation, the answer is no. You’re simply not that big a player in the universe. Don’t expect to be commanding fleets or building your own space stations.

      Ah well, I look forward to motherships at any rate. It doesn’t have effect when you’re orbiting a planet looking down on it from the cockpit of a one man fighter or a slightly larger cargo ship. But to look down upon it from the command deck of a mothership whilst your crew preps a shuttle with fighter escorts for launch…that I could get used to… It’s not a fleet, just a man with a big ship and a couple pilots on the pay roll… ๐Ÿ’ก

    • #74962
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      Ships that carry smaller ships, possibly – but not yet. Regarding colonisation, the answer is no. You’re simply not that big a player in the universe. Don’t expect to be commanding fleets or building your own space stations.

      Regarding the colonisation should someone along the line be able to program it it it would be quite and very plausible and possible to pull off. Small scale colony control if u have enough funds no doubt u can setup youre own business and a few planets on the outer rim.

      I would say fleet commanding at some point may be a bigger issue than small space station ownership

      Of course all theoretical until someone or a group comes along. Getting back to the original idea of bigger ships that carry smaller ships its a step in the right direction im seeing mining ideas going in on another part of the game this is also a good step for resource acqueistion

    • #74963
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      I have a question about the Moon. Is it me or does it look at bit on the small side when viewing it from Earth?

    • #74964
      AvatarZiusudra
      Participant
      Geraldine wrote:
      I have a question about the Moon. Is it me or does it look at bit on the small side when viewing it from Earth?

      That picture was taken during the final Columbia mission. So it was probably taken at a little less than half the altitude of your screenshot. So they were a bit closer to the Moon.

      But, the biggest difference is “field of view”. Look how the horizon of the Earth is almost flat which indicates that quite a bit of zoom was used.

    • #74965
      AvatarCailean556
      Participant
      Ziusudra wrote:
      Geraldine wrote:
      I have a question about the Moon. Is it me or does it look at bit on the small side when viewing it from Earth?

      That picture was taken during the final Columbia mission. So it was probably taken at a little less than half the altitude of your screenshot. So they were a bit closer to the Moon.

      But, the biggest difference is “field of view”. Look how the horizon of the Earth is almost flat which indicates that quite a bit of zoom was used.

      The man does have a point though… The moon is roughly a quarter the size of earth, and only (hah, ONLY) 380,000km away, give or take, so we should be able to see something. A grey ball at the very least… I guess it’s a draw distance thing. In line with that, why the hell is Gates Spaceport 1/3 of the way to the moon?

    • #74966
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      some creative programming to solve this little condrum

    • #74967
      AvatarUncleBob
      Participant
      Quote:
      The man does have a point though… The moon is roughly a quarter the size of earth, and only (hah, ONLY) 380,000km away, give or take, so we should be able to see something. A grey ball at the very least… I guess it’s a draw distance thing. In line with that, why the hell is Gates Spaceport 1/3 of the way to the moon?

      It’s not a draw distance thing. We see the moon a lot bigger in real live than we’re actually supposed to see it. Part if it has to do with atmospheric lensing, but the major parts concern our own eyes, and Albedo. We do not have a flat perception, but a flat interpretation is what we are forced to draw on the screen. Our eyes have an FOV of almost 180 degrees, but they actually ZOOM IN on what they focus. If you’d simulate that on a screen, you’d get kind of a fish-eye vision. The only way to evade this would be to have a screen that extends 180 degrees around us and set the field of view to 180 degrees.

      The other problem is albedo: In Pioneer planets don’t actually reflect light. They get lit up when turned to an active lightsource, but they do not become themselfes lightsources and emit light back. Pioneer has no moonlight on earth, and we have no earthlight on the moon (or in orbit, for that matter). So we don’t see these objects as prominently as in real life.

      The first problem is pretty much unsolvable without an awesome-ish screen, the second would be solvable theoretically, but it gets you into ray-tracing hell, and the hardware requirements would increase quite a bit.

    • #74968
      Avatartomm
      Participant
      Cailean556 wrote:

      The man does have a point though… The moon is roughly a quarter the size of earth, and only (hah, ONLY) 380,000km away, give or take, so we should be able to see something. A grey ball at the very least… I guess it’s a draw distance thing. In line with that, why the hell is Gates Spaceport 1/3 of the way to the moon?

      The scales are correct. The problem is that Pioneer renders a field of view of over 80 degrees. Your small screen certainly doesn’t fill 80 degrees of your actual field of view. Consequently the sun & moon look too small.

    • #74969
      Avatardurandal
      Participant

      The “problem” can be solved by editing pioneer’s config.ini and changing FOV from 80 to 40. Now, try to fly without using autopilot, Good Luck!.

    • #74970
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      durandal wrote:
      The “problem” can be solved by editing pioneer’s config.ini and changing FOV from 80 to 40. Now, try to fly without using autopilot, Good Luck!.

      Mine’s already 60. Reducing it to 20 wouldn’t greatly harm the ability of a competent pilot, because our instrumentation is so much better now.

    • #74971
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      Mine’s already 60. Reducing it to 20 wouldn’t greatly harm the ability of a competent pilot, because our instrumentation is so much better now.

      Thanks for that tip Brianetta ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74972
      AvatarElectricSkies
      Participant
      durandal wrote:
      The “problem” can be solved by editing pioneer’s config.ini and changing FOV from 80 to 40. Now, try to fly without using autopilot, Good Luck!.

      I tried this, and I have to say that all the game objectsรƒยขรขโ€šยฌรขโ‚ฌยterrain, stars, planetsรƒยขรขโ€šยฌรขโ‚ฌยnow look much more like the size you would expect if you were actually a human looking out a window into space. I’d always thought that everything looked too small, and never imagined that there would be an option to change that. (Should this be in the in-game options screen, by the way?)

      I would argue that the current default FOV is too small for the purposes of eye-candy and mimicking human vision. With FOV 80, there is even a sort of reverse fish-eye effect in which the image at the edges of the screen is dilated, so there is a lot of room for adjusting down. This may also depend on the resolution people are usingรƒยขรขโ€šยฌรขโ‚ฌยI’m on 1280×800.

    • #74973
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      OK, had a little play around with the POV settings. See what you think. The Moon is just above the crosshairs. Note the change in the perspective of the buildings too. These screen shots were taken shortly after take off from London.

    • #74974
      AvatarCailean556
      Participant

      60 POV looks more like what you’d expect… I’m going to make the change too. ๐Ÿ˜€ Funny thing is, I didn’t really notice it until it was pointed out… Does that make me a bad person? ๐Ÿ˜ณ

    • #74975
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant
      Quote:
      Does that make me a bad person?

      Depends on your Point Of View. ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • #74976
      Avatarlowesox
      Participant

      Hello, everyone. I’m completely new to both Pioneer and Frontier but discovering that there are Newtonian space simulations out there for pure, procedural, realistically-scaled exploration has nearly brought me to tears. I play mostly Minecraft because a few minutes of exploration is about the most videogaming I can fit in these days, and exploration is what I prefer. That coupled with my love for human-centered science fiction has made me suspect I’m about to lose a lot of time in this game. In fact I’ve spent most of my time practicing manual maneuvering around the space stations (although I was disappointed after I thought synchronizing my rotation and orbital velocity with that of the station that I couldn’t plant my ship on the end of it). And, of course, for anyone approaching that period of her or his life when it’s too late join the Air Force in hopes of making it into some space program, moon landings. Many many (at first, failed) manual moon landings. I love you all for this game.

      All that considered, I have a bit of an embarrassing question (considering the existence of Google), but after scouring information about Frontier: Elite II and the boards here, I still can not figure out how to engage one’s hyperdrive. I got a mission early on to travel to Grecan (which I found in the star map accidentally, I think, as I didn’t entirely interpret the coordinate system properly after rotating the map) and started randomly looking at systems. The first one I pulled up because it was inhabited also had a binary star system and now I’m absolutely dying to go fly around in it. It seems that there’s a button (f7 I think) that should show up when there’s a hyperspace target selected but I can’t seem to get it to show up. I’ve selected systems both near and far (all within the range of my drive) but can’t get anything to happen besides their selection in the f3 map screen. Once I go back to the f1 view, I’m back to targeting objects in local space. (One final thought that just came to mind: should I not be targeting anything in local space when I pull up the f3 map?)

      Also, I’m using the Christmas Alpha.

    • #74977
      Avatardurandal
      Participant

      How far in ly (light years) is that system?

      Do you have enough fuel? Is that system actually in hyperspace range of your ship?

    • #74978
      Avatarprismra
      Participant

      Any plans to include the awesome geodesic habitat domes from Frontier? I’ve always been partial to them.

      frontier1.png

    • #74979
      Avatarlowesox
      Participant
      durandal wrote:
      How far in ly (light years) is that system?

      Do you have enough fuel? Is that system actually in hyperspace range of your ship?

      I did it finally. Turned out a target selected in the f2 starmap only sticks if you’re not targeting anything in local space.

      My next, again elementary, question is, how do I clear targets?

    • #74980
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      lowesox wrote:
      durandal wrote:
      How far in ly (light years) is that system?

      Do you have enough fuel? Is that system actually in hyperspace range of your ship?

      I did it finally. Turned out a target selected in the f2 starmap only sticks if you’re not targeting anything in local space.

      That’s not the case at all. They’re completely independent.

      Quote:
      My next, again elementary, question is, how do I clear targets?

      Click them.

    • #74981
      Avatarlowesox
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      lowesox wrote:
      durandal wrote:
      How far in ly (light years) is that system?

      Do you have enough fuel? Is that system actually in hyperspace range of your ship?

      I did it finally. Turned out a target selected in the f2 starmap only sticks if you’re not targeting anything in local space.

      That’s not the case at all. They’re completely independent.

      Hmm. It’s definitely only giving me the hyperdrive button if I don’t have anything already targeted in local space. I’m using a hybrid dvorak keyboard that simultaneously lets me type using dvorak but keeps qwerty mapping in games. It’s been known to screw with other games so that might be it. (The function keys will randomly stop working for me until I alt-tab to desktop and back. I’m used to fussing with the keyboard drivers af this point.)

      I’m just going to sit down with the Frontier manual in case I’m missing something. Thanks for the help.

    • #74982
      Avatarollobrain
      Participant

      actually the frontier manual is no good this game is actually i think well beyond it its a open source project started from sctrach to have the spirit of frontier only. That said back to previous comment about the geo domes its a good idea might be usseful for later colony management to to have somewhere to stash the worker bees

    • #74983
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      ollobrain wrote:
      colony management

      Whatever game you have pictured in your mind as you write this, it isn’t Pioneer.

    • #74984
      Avatarlowesox
      Participant

      One needs hydrogen in their cargo to jump to hyperspace, I see.

    • #74985
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      lowesox wrote:
      One needs hydrogen in their cargo to jump to hyperspace, I see.

      Yes, hydrogen is the basic fuel for your hyperdrive.

    • #74986
      AvatarDaWheel92
      Participant

      Hello again!

      I was wondering how one goes about making their own .hmap file!

      I tried to just save my intended height map as “name.hmap” and it didn’t work.

      Also, are the heightmaps in greyscale or RGB?

      Any assistance is greatly appreciated! = D

    • #74987
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      DaWheel92 wrote:
      Hello again!

      I was wondering how one goes about making their own .hmap file!

      I tried to just save my intended height map as “name.hmap” and it didn’t work.

      Also, are the heightmaps in greyscale or RGB?

      Any assistance is greatly appreciated! = D

      Heightmaps are one of the few dark corners left in Pioneer. The heightmap format is a Pioneer-specific thing and nobody really remembers where the earth map came from. s20dan has done a little bit of work with new maps for Mars etc.

      The format (such that it is) is documented here:

      https://github.com/pioneerspacesim/pion … heightmaps

      The code that actually produces terrain height values from this map is:

      https://github.com/pioneerspacesim/pion … ed.cpp#L28

      If there was a lot of interest in heightmaps then we’d probably do more to make it sane. At the moment thought maps are really of limited usefulness. They’ll be good to make Earth, Mars and the Moon look right but there doesn’t seem to be a great deal of point past that.

      Let us know if you come up with anything interesting!

    • #74988
      Avatars2odan
      Participant
      Quote:
      s20dan has done a little bit of work with new maps for Mars etc.

      very little ๐Ÿ™‚ Ae from irc was the one who figured out the format and managed to convert the mars heightmap.

    • #74989
      Avatarexplorer44
      Participant

      Hello all,

      I cannot find any “underground spaceport” on planets , only launchpads !

      Can someone tell me where there is one if someone has seen it ?

      Thanks.

    • #74990
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      explorer44 wrote:
      Hello all,

      I cannot find any “underground spaceport” on planets , only launchpads !

      Can someone tell me where there is one if someone has seen it ?

      Thanks.

      Same thing. They’re buried a little bit.

    • #74991
      Avatarexplorer44
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      explorer44 wrote:
      Hello all,

      I cannot find any “underground spaceport” on planets , only launchpads !

      Can someone tell me where there is one if someone has seen it ?

      Thanks.

      Same thing. They’re buried a little bit.

      Yes I remeber have seen some in previous alpha, but in the current one, can you give an example with the spaceport /planet/ system name ?

    • #74992
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      Enki Catena, Sol. Beware, the doors might be underground, too.

    • #74993
      Avatarexplorer44
      Participant

      You are exact, I have been there and I saw the image beneath :

      But what is starnge is that in the lua file (00_sol.lua) for this starport, it is written :

      Code:
      CustomSBody:new(‘Enki Catena’, ‘STARPORT_SURFACE’)
      :latitude(math.deg2rad(84))
      :longitude(math.deg2rad(96)),
      },

      So How can you know this one was underground ?

    • #74994
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      I see a shader bug – you can see all the parts of buildings which should be buried, including the foundations. Believe me, half of that station’s landing pad is buried. Landing there can be problematic, depending which pad you get assigned. (-:

      Here’s what mine looks like (bear in mind that I’m running a more recent version of Pioneer). Note that things being underground isn’t rare here.

      fSBzF.jpg

    • #74995
      MarcelMarcel
      Participant

      I think one thing needs to be clarified. The pads aren’t intentionally underground. They just turn out that way sometimes due to the procedural way things are generated. Btw, I can’t see shaders either. That bug occurs with some ATI cards.

    • #74996
      Avatarrobn
      Participant

      The shader “bug” is about the way depth and distance is calculated. It needs to be analysed and fixed, but it doesn’t affect gameplay.

      The real problem is that buildings are sometimes placed under the terrain. When a building is placed, the terrain height is checked at a single point and the centre point of the building model is positioned at that point. If the terrain surrounding that point is steep and the building is wide, then the edges of the building can go under the ground. Its very noticeable with stations because they’re huge and the central point of the model is the at the tower, which is always far from the pads.

      Issue #7 documents our work on this problem so far. It is not easy to fix. There’s other problems and shortcomings in our terrain engine as well as this so I’ve been reading as everything I can find on realtime procedural terrain generation over the last few days. The beginnings of a plan are starting to form in my head, but nothing much to report yet, and certainly no commitments. Something will be done, that I can promise. I just don’t know what or when yet.

    • #74997
      Avatarexplorer44
      Participant

      Hello,

      I’m trying myself on a new job in Pioneer : Mining ๐Ÿ™‚

      To do this, I have read in an other thread that I need a mining laser + cargo scoop.

      It’s Ok for the mining laser (17 Mw).

      Cargo scoop is present in “Ship equipment” menu but is never available to equip the ship

      (there is no button next to it to install it onboard! )

      I tried to put it on:

        [*:1tgvznnw]default Eagle

        [*:1tgvznnw]StarDust

        [*:1tgvznnw]Lanner

        [*:1tgvznnw]FlowerFairy

        [*:1tgvznnw]Natrix

        [*:1tgvznnw]Ladybird

      How to do ?

    • #74998
      AvatarZiusudra
      Participant

      There are currently only four ships that can fit a cargo scoop: Eagle MK-IV “Bomber”, Adder, Constrictor, and Sidewinder.

      The way that the scoop works in the game engine requires that the ship model has a scoop on it and those four are the only ones that do.

    • #74999
      Avatarexplorer44
      Participant

      OK, thanks for the info.

      I will try it this evening. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #75000
      Avatarexplorer44
      Participant

      Well, I tried (on Phobos and on Nereid) and it’s quite very hard to catch any floating mineral.

      Wonder if there was a special key to activate the cargo scoop functionnality ?

    • #75001
      AvatarZiusudra
      Participant

      No, scooping happens when the material collides with the surface of the cargo scoop.

      Using the target relative set speed mode makes it easier to catch them. Hold CTRL while targeting the material, then press F5 to enter set speed mode.

    • #75002
      AvatarSneaksie
      Participant

      Hello, its great to see that Frontier is being improved after all these years.

      However, i just started playing it (visuals are great!) and almost immediately fired a laser to see its effect. To my dismay it fired some kind of a moving red blob and not the ray.

      I assume this was changed from original?

      Is there a way to return normal lasers, maybe by editing a lua script? I can’t stomach space games where ‘laser rays’ fly like moving objects like in Star Wars. ๐Ÿ™

    • #75003
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      Sneaksie wrote:
      Is there a way to return normal lasers, maybe by editing a lua script? I can’t stomach space games where ‘laser rays’ fly like moving objects like in Star Wars. ๐Ÿ™

      No. That would be a fundamental physics change, rather than a quick job. Opinions are divided on the subject, but the Pioneer devs have basically made the decision to go with “laser bolts” for gameplay reasons.

    • #75004
      Avatarrobn
      Participant

      Hi Sneaksie, welcome to Pioneer and to the SSC forums.

      Sneaksie wrote:
      However, i just started playing it (visuals are great!) and almost immediately fired a laser to see its effect. To my dismay it fired some kind of a moving red blob and not the ray.

      I assume this was changed from original?

      Is there a way to return normal lasers, maybe by editing a lua script? I can’t stomach space games where ‘laser rays’ fly like moving objects like in Star Wars. ๐Ÿ™

      There’s no way to return it the Frontier style. There are still vestiges of some raycasting code from the beginning of the project, but it would take a fair bit of work to bring it back to life.

      I’m curious though. What exactly is your objection to the projectile setup? Certainly they’re not “lasers” in the real-life sense but then neither were Frontier’s – a true laser light “beam” would not be visible from side-on. We use the word “pulse cannon” in the code more often than we use “laser” (though of course “laser” is still prominent in the UI) and we tend to think of the projectiles as sub-light blobs of energy/plasma/antimatter/etc.

    • #75005
      AvatarSneaksie
      Participant

      Thanks for the info, it’s a pity that old lasers were ditched. I understand that developers have their own vision of space game they want to implement, but i had hoped they at least left a hidden option somewhere.

      In my opinion, Frontier and FFE nailed down how the space engagement will (?) happen – ‘jousting’, momentary (speed of light) effect weapons and secondary weapons like missiles, ECMs and so on. It may be hard to survive when you and your enemies have momentary effect weapons, but its far more likely that future space ships will have something similar than plasma weapons. Lasers exist, while ‘plasma’, ‘pulse’ and any other usual space game weapons don’t. It’s not clear whether a way to stabilize a plasma ball even in vacuum will be ever found. Stabilization is quite a problem, because of it we still don’t have thermonuclear reactors.

      Most space arcade games have ‘flying object’ weapons where you must lead the target to hit it. I think it all started since first Wing Commander – space ships were made to behave like WW2 era fighters and an entire game played like dumbed-down WW2 dogfight – turning, evading, drag and so on. This model continued in most space games – Freespace series for example. Shoot-em-up gameplay in them was very captivating on its own accord, but it was quite laughable to read the description of a first weapon that said something like ‘laser cannon, projectile speed 220 m/s’.

      On the other hand, Frontier and FFE (and a few other games) offered a LOT more – Newtonian physics, almost real galaxy and ‘real’ weapons. If its a laser, its ‘projectile speed’ can be only 300000km/s in my opinion. Its a pity that Pioneer developers removed what i think was one of the unique game features. Well, maybe you would implement an option to turn normal lasers on in some future release. Unfortunately, it seems i would have to return to glfrontier and jjffe (maybe ffe d3d) for my space fix, Pioneer looks georgeus though ๐Ÿ™ Thanks for reading ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #75006
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      Not wanting to get overly picky, but plasma does exist and is easy enough to manufacture in a microwave oven. It can be accelerated magnetically, and it’s extremely hot. It’d be a great weapon for use in very close quarters, although it’s arguable that such close quarters are rare in space.

      I suspect that the only weapon that would be seriously employed on board a spacecraft for use against other spacecraft would be a self propelled missile. It doesn’t suffer conic dispersal, doesn’t impart a reactive force on the launcher, doesn’t heat up the launcher (if properly engineered) and the technology is simple and well proven.

    • #75007
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      Hi Sneaksie

      Firstly welcome to the SSC ๐Ÿ™‚

      Personally, I would like see kinetic weapons, rail guns, mini guns and the like make an appearance where you would have to manage ammo stores and recoil when you fire them. The bigger the gun, the bigger the recoil. Also anti ship missiles used in space might work better if they were round with thrusters covering their surface rather than traditionally shaped. That way, they could quickly change direction. Traditionally shaped missiles can still use fins to vector the missiles exhaust but its turning circle would be bigger. If you fire a round missile, the target has little chance to evade.

    • #75008
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      I can’t imagine taking rail guns or mini guns into space with the serious intention to use them as weapons. The recoil would be ridiculous; you’d have to carry pretty much as many kilos of propellant as you are planning to carry bullets, just to counteract the recoil and avoid winding up lost in space.

      We’re using reactionless engines, though, so I suppose that our guns would use exactly the same magic.

    • #75009
      AvatarGfamad
      Participant

      Hello everybody !

      Does anyone know where we can find the config file for the Mac OSX version ? I would like to desactivate the Antialiasing because of a performance drop compared to Alpha17 (Macbook air 11” 2011 version).

      Thanks in advance.

    • #75010
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant
      Brianetta wrote:
      I can’t imagine taking rail guns or mini guns into space with the serious intention to use them as weapons. The recoil would be ridiculous; you’d have to carry pretty much as many kilos of propellant as you are planning to carry bullets, just to counteract the recoil and avoid winding up lost in space.

      We’re using reactionless engines, though, so I suppose that our guns would use exactly the same magic.

      True, except that rail guns don’t use propellant but mag rails instead to accelerate their projectiles. And as for the ammo weight, the projectile does not need to be massive if its relative closing speed between ships is Mach 8 ๐Ÿ˜‰ Its going to do plenty damage, likely going right through the hull! ๐Ÿ˜ˆ

      http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol … ry/4231461

      And Gfamad? I cannot say for sure if this applies to the Mac version, but in Windows the config file is in the same directory as the save files. Perhaps someone could confirm if the Mac version is the same?

    • #75011
      Avatarrobn
      Participant
      Gfamad wrote:
      Does anyone know where we can find the config file for the Mac OSX version ? I would like to desactivate the Antialiasing because of a performance drop compared to Alpha17 (Macbook air 11” 2011 version).

      I don’t have a Mac so I can’t test, but according to the source it should be in Library/Application Support/Pioneer in your home directory. I hope that means something to you ๐Ÿ™‚

    • #75012
      AvatarGfamad
      Participant

      Thanks a lot Geralidne and Robn. If found the Library folder at the end. It is hidden, so here is the tip to access it:

      Finder -> Go to… and then write “~/Library” without quotes.

      Thanks again.

    • #75013
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant
      Geraldine wrote:
      True, except that rail guns don’t use propellant but mag rails instead to accelerate their projectiles.

      I mention the propellant as fuel for the engines that will need to correct for the recoil of the magnetic gun. I do know what a railgun is; I’ve even tried (and failed) to build one. Like anything that exerts a force on a projectile, it exerts recoil. That’s Newton’s second law. Net momentum in any closed system cannot change, so if you send bullets in one direction, you send the gun (and anything bolted to it) in the other. You can compensate by throwing propellant (more bullets, exhaust from a rocket, irritating passengers) in the opposite direction at an appropriate speed.

    • #75014
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      Ah, I see what you mean now Brainetta. Yes to use a rail gun effectively is not only going to require skill, but use more fuel too, but Pioneer already has very powerful engines on all of its ships. A few blips of main thrust should negate most of that recoil, um a bit ๐Ÿ™‚

      Wouldn’t it be great though if the ship would shake a little when you did open up with it ๐Ÿ˜Ž

      As for the passengers being miffed, they would be even more miffed if the ship there on got blown to bits! ๐Ÿ˜†

      And yes I see what your hinting at here in avoiding combat while carrying them, maybe a feature request? Dip in rep (not Elite rating) and less money from passengers if you get involved in combat?

      Finally, you built a rail gun? ๐Ÿ˜ฏ What happened, why didn’t it work?

    • #75015
      AvatarBrianetta
      Participant

      It didn’t work because the principles of a railgun require a sweet-spot compromise between a load of conflicting physics. Mother nature doesn’t want to launch a chunk of metal at high speed, and I couldn’t talk her round.

      What compromises? Well, the magnetic acceleration requires a powerful magnetic field, which must be provided by induction in the rails. You need a ludicrously high current between the rails and across the (conductive) projectile. Even if your rails don’t promptly buckle under the attractive forces and become one rail (my biggest problem) then the current required will tend to cause the projectile to weld itself to the rails if there’s anything but the very closest contact. Close contact means high friction, of course, so if you get a good contact your projectile doesn’t want to get going at all.

      Frankly, it left me understanding why railguns aren’t standard weapons. They’re an engineering nightmare, and mine was a tiny one. I’ve read that big ones have all the problems multiplied, including the cost. My little one only required a lead acid battery, and would in theory have lobbed its little metal slug across the room (not very quickly). The biggest ones made require a compulsator (yeah, I had to look that up) to provide the kind of DC current needed. The rounds needed a sabot (which tended to vaporise), and would leave at the kind of speeds that would raise eyebrows in the military. I wasn’t trying to build a weapon, so much as a toy.

    • #75016
      Avatarfluffyfreak
      Participant
      Geraldine wrote:
      Finally, you built a rail gun? ๐Ÿ˜ฏ What happened, why didn’t it work?

      The police caught him first, that profile photo isn’t for fun y’know, it’s where they keep him now, well out of the range of any mischief ๐Ÿ˜†

      Seriously though the recoil argument doesn’t necessarily hold water. If we’re firing plasma then it too has mass and being a compressed gas need accelerating to even higher speeds than a railgun projectile which is at least a solid blob.

      So “realistically” missiles make the most sense for ship to ship combat.

      Long range firepower between capital ships would probably be railguns because there’s no warning or chance to evade the shot.

      Minigun/vulcan/etc would only make a limited sense for very close, i.e. 1 to 2 km, range between small ship and as anti-missile weapons like the goal-keeper/phalanx systems – maybe if we ever get around to sorting out turrets this could in fact be one good use/argument for them.

      Lasers, we don’t really have them, we have some kind of plasma at the moment maybe there should be some renaming to avoid confusion?

      Or perhaps we can add in some limited Laser weapons in the future.

      Or whoever wants them could add them in?

      Andy

    • #75017
      GeraldineGeraldine
      Participant

      Still a great achievement Brianetta. I was looking at a you tube vid of the one the American Navy are building. Its scary stuff. They want a 64 Mega Joule version! ๐Ÿ˜ฏ

      [youtube]http://www