HUD OXZs

[Diziet Sma]

Whilst not quite a bug, it's kind of in the vicinity.

Currently, the Expansion Manager allows players to install multiple HUDs with no complaint. Since only one can be active (barring ship-specific HUDs of course, but those aren't a problem anyway) this seems wrong to me.

The current system of identifying conflicting OXZs in the manifest.plist is not really workable when it comes to HUDs, since all HUD authors would have to go back and update their manifest.plists every single time a new HUD was released.

Perhaps a kind of blanket conflict can be introduced instead. If the Expansion Manager notices that you have a HUD installed, it marks all others as conflicting by default, or better yet, requires you to uninstall the current HUD before allowing you to install a new one. Possibly (with a warning and option to cancel, of course) it could even do this automatically.

Of course, this would mean that MFDs would need their own category, instead of being classed as HUDs, as is presently the case. Probably best to take care of this detail now, as the situation will only get worse as more and more MFDs are released.

[spara]

Of course, this would mean that MFDs would need their own category, instead of being classed as HUDs, as is presently the case.

I'm probably the one to blame here, as I put the first one in the manager into HUDs. Maybe just class them as equipment?

[Diziet Sma]

Of course, this would mean that MFDs would need their own category, instead of being classed as HUDs, as is presently the case.

I'm probably the one to blame here, as I put the first one in the manager into HUDs. Maybe just class them as equipment?

Perhaps.. but to me, equipment is something I can buy.

[Smivs]

Perhaps MFDs should be buyable. For example, spara's Navigation MFD could be sold as a 'Navigation Computer Upgrade' or somesuch. We need more things to spend our credits on, don't we. I agree that MFDs should be separated from HUDS and have their own catagory if it is decided that they are not to be viewed as Equipment.
Also, +1 to Dizzie's point about being able to install multiple HUDs. It does seem a bit silly, and if there is a simple solution...

[Zireael]

Perhaps MFDs should be buyable. For example, spara's Navigation MFD could be sold as a 'Navigation Computer Upgrade' or somesuch. We need more things to spend our credits on, don't we. I agree that MFDs should be separated from HUDS and have their own catagory if it is decided that they are not to be viewed as Equipment.
Also, +1 to Dizzie's point about being able to install multiple HUDs. It does seem a bit silly, and if there is a simple solution...

Heh, I installed 2 HUD OXZs Monday too.

And +1 to making MFDs buyable, such as spara's Nav MFD or mine/Norby's Combat MFD.

That said, an idea for MFD HUD is still there niggling at my brain...

[Cody]

Perhaps MFDs should be buyable.

I kinda like that idea - and they'd be liable to damage, yes?

[spara]

Perhaps MFDs should be buyable.

I kinda like that idea - and they'd be liable to damage, yes?

Hmmm. Maybe not, mostly they are software upgrades. Then again as a game mechanic, more stuff breaking -> more money sinks. That would be a good thing of course .

[Cody]

Maybe not, mostly they are software upgrades.

Some of the core kit could be classed as software upgrades, yes?

[spara]

Maybe not, mostly they are software upgrades.

Some of the core kit could be classed as software upgrades, yes?

Very true. I'm really bad at putting price tags, what would be a proper price tag for example for the Navigation MFD? 300? 500?

[Cody]

... what would be a proper price tag for example for the Navigation MFD? 300? 500?

Hmm... the ANA is 2,250 and the ASC is 650... somewhere between the two, perhaps? 1250-1500?

[cim]

The current system of identifying conflicting OXZs in the manifest.plist is not really workable when it comes to HUDs, since all HUD authors would have to go back and update their manifest.plists every single time a new HUD was released.

Not quite - if A conflicts with B, B doesn't need to conflict with A as well. The newest HUD author just needs to conflict with all the existing HUDs each time. Still a lot of effort, though.

Perhaps a kind of blanket conflict can be introduced instead. If the Expansion Manager notices that you have a HUD installed, it marks all others as conflicting by default

I really don't like this idea - it means that if some person comes up with a way to make HUD OXPs non-conflicting, there then has to be a new stable release of Oolite before it does any good, which then takes away the incentive to come up with the way to make HUD OXPs non-conflicting.

...oh, all right then. To make HUD OXPs non-conflicting, start by changing them to define oxpprefix-hud.plist rather than hud.plist. Then, write a HUD manager OXP which creates an F4 HUD Selector interface. The HUD OXPs register themselves with the HUD manager OXP (and require the HUD manager OXP in their manifests, of course); the HUD manager OXP then sets player.ship.hud as chosen by the player in the interface (either on select, or stored in a mission variable for reload).

The HUD OXPs could then even optionally sell their HUDs as ship upgrades, and only register themselves with the manager once the equipment is bought (set the equipment to be invisible, transferable between ships, and non-damageable).

(Handling switching HUDs this way is only slightly more complex: the switching HUDs just need to make sure that they only run their HUD switch code if the current HUD is one they own)

Of course, this would mean that MFDs would need their own category, instead of being classed as HUDs, as is presently the case. Probably best to take care of this detail now, as the situation will only get worse as more and more MFDs are released.

MFDs should go in whatever category makes sense - some will be Equipment, some will be HUD, some will be components of a larger OXP (e.g. a mission). Using HUD as the category for ones which are basically just HUD enhancements (even if you need to buy a piece of equipment to allow you to turn on the MFD) seems to make sense to me - the distinction between equipment which is an MFD and equipment which provides an MFD to help with control/output of the equipment, perhaps?

[Norby]

I think multiple HUDs can live together and do not need to set conflicts in manifest.
Please check my solution here.