The oldest space gaming website still in operation
https://spacesimcentral.com/
).shit happens 
mostly after midnight...besides, sorry for not being able to put my stuff on github...simply guess i'm to stupid or whatever,however,it didn't works for me.let me do a rigged animation with three "bones" in a script, but spare github...[/hr]see, another reason why i guess moving all exchangable stuff to mods is fine.it's to see that one could in future "build" a complete mod for pioneer, means star-systems, models and scripts all in one, but therefore all must be moved there what is not needed for the engine.already i moved most things there in my installation, actually only the submodels are left in the "pioneer/data" directory (systems are already there and customized).but i'm thinking of even to remove the submodels and add necessary ones with the models or some even as a mod, but i have to make proof first if that will work.anyway it won't work "out of the box", it needs a stripped naked pioneer for this.personally i guess it's far safer as to move directories to/in the installation,further, like mentioned before, it would allow to create a replacement for the whole environment.actually i have a lot of small mods to exchange, especially because some stuff i like much, other i dislike much and i see others might like feel the same way.but if you have a "naked" pioneer, one could setup a complete mod (quite a big file then) and you place the thing to mods, while removing the other(s), and you go on with a "new" pioneer.perhaps i upload such a naked pioneer with (right after) the next release, it will be rather small without all the models, and you can place only the things to "mods" which you like to see in your pioneer.as a example one could make a basic FE2 mod, e.g. a "clean" pioneer and run that one, while someone else likes perhaps a more recent looking version.there is a little hurdle, 4 ships are requested by their name from pioneer, but by naming some 4 others the same this can be already handled.so if one would like i.e. a Star-Wars mod, he "only" would need some wrong named ships to go on (yeah, a bit stupid, but out of my reach to offer a better solution, not quite true, i could either change the source a bit for this or hack the compiled prog. for the needs, which would be actually the only option on my macbook, a lot of stuff didn't works as expected, so i can't install many softs i would need, similar goes to github...)really, one day i would like to install a "christmas mod" with snowpeaked buildings and other goodies, if the time is for christmas 
[/hr]ah, instead of a lot of words... but like i said this persist even in a "standard" view, it's only hard to recognize. i guess it's the same reason as when a ship is docked or landed and you accelerate the time full, then you will notice a tumbling of the view similar to that (especially now with the cockpit view it's better to recognize, you tumble as the hours fly).actually not to get annoyed to much by it i imagine, ok, the pilot will lean a little fore and back to have a better view :lol:but you have still the original setup you can use...i was thinking of doing it vice versa, to name the experimental camera setup "shipname_x.alt", but then i thought no, i liked to provoke replies else you maybe won't noticed it and you wouldn't have posted it, so that's fine it was my intention.i like to know "like it or not", that's why they have the frontcamera setup by default.so if you don't like it (i guess you like it marcel) then feel free to post that, post your suggestions please, because if "everybody" feels it's useless i won't do it anymore.[/hr]argh, this way i get nowhere with the old factory... :mrgreen:hey, marcel you like to get my big crappy? i will do the needed changes in "no time". I disabled their .luas and now it works with my saved game and the cockpit, except that there are some unlabeled old Ladybird ships in the yard that crash the game if I try to look at them. So, Never mind! as a extra model.i'm running all from mods now and such is no problem then, doubled instance? ok move the "infected" mod out and see if it's ok.while ok, I KNOW that i can't run the old ladybird and the "ladybird-viper" together.for me it's very handy, because if i'm working on a model i can remove most ships and leave only a mod containing the afforded 4 ships to start the game, starts much faster with a minimum of models.to the sealed space port, hmm, yes there is a slight problem, due to fact that the docking sequence is ONE for all bays it can get confused and all ships are "locked" inside the station, or they hang around inmidst of the sequence. this is like i said because of one sequence for all. but there is no getting around that if you have only one door for a groundstation.but it should only happen when you docked to it in a saved game (and of course for all "active" stations where some ships are docked).to explain, if you save a game and there are some ships docked to any station and you install now the "sport_hostile", some stations will turn to this.the ships that are resting in the station which turns to "sport_hostile" are now in wrong position and the docking sequence get's released, but let's say all bays are full, then it leads to a funny situation, one is halfaways docking, one hangs in the lift and the third presumerably "waits" for engaging the sequence "outside" (old position). two ships can't be docked simultanously, so the sequence locks and there is no way to free that.i will see perhaps i find a solution for this.in the orbital spacestations, no matter which, the ships are in similar positions, so it will never be a problem there when the type of station changes. they don't engage the "full" docking sequence, only the last part to get to the proper resting position (and there is no lift which can be used only by one ship), the sequence is else in general like for the big crappy (one at a time), but it seems it fails when ships are "inside" (resp. outside) and all want together find their "home".but like i said only for a loaded game, if you start a new one and keep then "sport_hostile" it should never happen.i guess i have already a idea to counter that, i have to tell it in a way that if there is a ship "docked" and it's not in the proper position not to engage the docking sequence therefore move it directly to the proper position (not "move" more a "flip"), so the docking sequence can't get "locked" because it's not released.good that i have you as a reminder i already nearly forgot this problem since i always have the "sport_hostile" in my installation and also didn't load often a career actually none, all is only testing and i know often when i change something i can't use the old ones, no problem for me, only a test run no "career".and if you load a fresh started game (let's say i bought a ship and equipped it to have a test ship ready to launch) after installing "sport_hostile" it's neither a problem, other ships that are probably docked to it will be already in proper position only your saved ship has to be moved, but of course any other station that has more then one docked ship and turns to "sport_hostile" will lock, i forgot this fact, sorry.well that's the next thing to do (must delay the big crappy).[/hr]therefore i fixed the wring named sub_models dir. and finished old "ACME Bolts & Nuts" for alpha23.the factory model will of course work in all releases, like most buildings it uses no special sub-models.need some supplyment?[attachment=1288:Bildschirmfoto 2012-06-25 um 02.04.01.jpg][attachment=1289:Bildschirmfoto 2012-06-25 um 02.04.jpg]and the files,http://spacesimcentral.com/downloads/Pioneer/potsmoke66_files/ACME_bolts_and_nuts_alpha23_1.ziphttp://spacesimcentral.com/downloads/Pioneer/potsmoke66_files/sub_models_alpha23_6.zip
ACME_bolts_and_nuts_alpha23_2.zipbut anyway i enhanced the textures a little and it looks even better now.i added some transperency to the window props, that's a good method to let them look sunken in a bit, additionally to a slight shade.even the walls and chimneys have a fade to dark to let it look less plain and add more depth.[attachment=1290:Bildschirmfoto 2012-06-25 um 14.44.jpg]i know, i know, still a very basic model and "any cad" could do it better and in less time, but that's not the "goal", when you script a model.it's the challange i like, find a way to build something that equals to your imagination, find a way to texture it with simple projections.besides, look how the "window props" sink in visually, you can't do that with one material and one texture on one plane, no.the wall wouldn't be matte or the windows aren't glossy, neither you can let them "sink in" (except you model it), but if you do it this way they look fine.it needs a second layer for the windows or doors to achieve that, further you have to add some slight transparency to the border of the props, that's what let's them "sink in".i adapted this from "SC3K" and how the props are made there, they look very nice in a close up when you build, unfortunately for the game all get's rendered new and with such a low resolution that not much is left of that effect. but we can have it.you could add some stucco to to a building in this manner and it will look much better then just a single texture, much more realistic shaded.the difference is foremost because you can have a different material for the props if they are layed over and give them a own diffuse color or specularity.it's n ot that this could be only scripted, but i guess if i look at most other buildings anywhere they have windows "plastered" with one texture on the wall.seems like you have first to script one to find better ways. (roll back the shit, like i state below) [/hr]apropos texture projections.i snooped once a little into the model cache and noticed that the scripted models are extremely blown up, yes of course all LOD's geometry is stored seperately, offense. but what i'm worrying a little about is that i expect the texture will be per face for the cached models, of which i know it's much more consuming power rather a projection (check NVIDIA's history page). it's not that it wouln't have been technically possible to have perface textures back in the early 90's, no the machines was simply to slow to manage a game with perface textured models, so there IS a difference between. besides i feel the cache makes the scripted models "unwanted", i mean they have no longer any advantage or not much.i feel already with the caching it would be better to convert the scripted models to .obj, they run actually better, but it wasn't always like this.so you can go on "tweak" the handling of the models until scripted models are useless and then tell us it's not good (that's what i fear).only because some think it's not "state of the art", no it's certainly not state of the art, it's progressive art 
if you really like to get something new you can't build on existing, it will lead nowhere, you never found something new then, nothing.only when you roll back the shit and start from 0 it's possible to do it better any else is "flickwerk" (patchwork).i loved it from the first bite and i'm still grateful for the scripted models, yeah i do really love that shit.i know some devs would like to see DX meshes, not so i, i love this method of scripting models and instead just to take something existing of which i think it's a compromise, we should go in a own direction.also i "fear" that the cached animations are now "stepping" from frame to frame, likewise a "odd" DX model does with it's matrix animation.it's not fluid, not really animated, it's a stepping from frame to frame and a altering of the matrix.i know visually there is no big difference as long as the frames per second are high enough.a little more history, to me it was funny to see how modelers worked out the animations for FFED3D, they expected a common handling of the DX model.but FFE handles animations exactly like pioneer has handled scripted models, dynamic not stepped, you don't need any frames for a animation in FE2/FFE only a start and a end (for the "hard coded" models the same shit like we use, translate (often single vectors) from - to and rotate with radians), the rest get's managed by the game. so any working on frames and framerate is useless for FFED3D, except you need to change the direction of a animation (speed you can't change no matter what you do it didn't get's regarded, or not as expected, it will change the speed if you force it with longer or shorter steps/frames, but i feel this a a "violation" of FE2's animations, or you can hack the model and reach then something special, but not everyone is willing to do so, i mean if you do such, hacking a DX model, ok then you can start even to script them. and even more, if you go on and hack the "hard coded" models to reach a special animation... start scripting then).personally i love this "back to the roots", we should really take the chance to make something "new" out of it, instead copying DX methods.imho, DX meshes are NOT the non plus ultra, they are only most common and due to MS monopolism state of the art, that's all.there are some "leaks" or hurdles for scripted animations, so it's nearly impossible to make correctional posings, means a can't simply correct a slightly misfitting joined animated part with a changing of it's matrix, to make it fit again with the other animated parts, that's not possible or would cost a i don't know what calculation for it. but that's anyways "cheating" in my eyes.i mean if you think of connecting rods you can't influence that, it works - the steam engine is able to rotate the wheel, or it didn't works and it's blocked, there is no "correctional data".and likewise it's possible for real machines to transform a translation to a rotation or whatever movement, the same must be possible for a model, without correctional data. it's only a question of investigation and a little maths.this is modeling to me (even when i'm neither a perfectionist) like it works in reality it has to work in the model, virtual models or real ones.of course i'm a lazy modeler and cheated often in my scripted models, but it's also a question of experience, actually i learned a lot and would do a lot of things different as a year ago.one of my biggest problems was always how can i synchronize a rotation and a translation (e.g. a rotating landing gear to a translating piston), "parenting" isn't possible like you do in a cad, or different to do. but after the last (the "R41") i know now how to achieve that and once you found out, it didn't seems so hard to do. like i thoughtit misses (if you like to have a docking timeout of 5mins)without, the docking timout is 0 seconds and as soon as you request clearance it's run out of time.steer_clear.mp4strange, i downloaded the whole movie from youtube, but when i upload the excerpt it's "closed worldwide", so it's now on photobucket. attempt to fool with quotes arond title failed, i really wonder how this person could get the video published, bribing someone?now to the uncovered lanner, what a **** has happened there? (my shit) what is between 286 and 428?nothing!
I don't see where the bug is. Here's my spacestations.lua if you want to look at it. The line number of the ad is 1689.[attachment=1299:spacestations_with_ads.zip]By the way, who is that dancing with Spidey in spiderwood? That's cool!