(Release) Ship Configuration

[phkb]

Version 1.1.2 has just been released. In this version:

• Fixed issue with missing header text on Ship Configuration main menu.
• Adjusted default equipment space for Fer-de-Lance.
• Fixed some invalid ship reference errors during an escape pod sequence.
• Extended the length of time cabin heat warning messages are displayed for.
• Storing equipment for the first time at a station will now incur a deposit fee.
• Fixed issue with cargo weight/space not being including in storage costs.
• Fixed issue with incorrect/misleading labels on cargo storage menu items.
• Code refactoring.

[DataPacRat]

(Yet another thread, necromantically revived. )

I very much like the new sets of tradeoffs that this addon offers, and am thinking about making it a permanent part of my Ooniverse. However, there seems to be some oddness going on with my copy, and I have a few questions.

I've got a cheaty millionaire pilot for testing purposes, so I set her up with a generic set of components, and then threw in all the scanner addons available in the main F3 purchase menu. Going back to ship-config, the ship was overweight, and stuff had to be sold, and 'return' was blanked out; but when I tried to click on either 'sell' or 'store', it dropped me back to the main F3 menu. Is that what's supposed to happen? Maybe one of my oddball oldtimey addons includes a piece of equipment that ShipConfig doesn't know how to handle, so it fails out of its menu? (Would a copy of a relevant latest.log help?)

Is there any way of showing how much equipment space (and cargo-converted equipment space) is still available while in the main F3 menu, and/or how much space each piece of equipment takes up, so I can have a better idea of whether it's worth buying without having to maneuver back to the ShipConfig menu every time to check?

Is there a particular in-Ooniverse justification for the limit of converting 40 tons of cargo space for equipment? That is, if my pilot choose to start living large in an Anaconda, with a base of 750 tons of cargo space, what's keeping them from filling said space with scanners, computers, and whatnot?

Is anyone interested in going over OXPs with me, to see if EquipmentSpecifications.ods can be updated with any gear that shouldn't be given the 1t-space/1t-weight defaults?

[phkb]

Going back to ship-config, the ship was overweight, and stuff had to be sold, and 'return' was blanked out; but when I tried to click on either 'sell' or 'store', it dropped me back to the main F3 menu. Is that what's supposed to happen?

No, that shouldn't be happening. The "Return" should be blanked out (to force you to do something about the weight), but that sounds like I've missed some condition somewhere. Can you check your latest.log file for any info that might help?

Is there any way of showing how much equipment space (and cargo-converted equipment space) is still available while in the main F3 menu

Unfortunately, no. The F3 screen doesn't have any way to add secondary info to it, like equipment space remaining. I added an F4 interface screen that lists all equipment items and the space/weight properties for each, and the Ship Comparison OXP will show the standard equipment space for each ship, but that's as far as I can go.

Edit to add: The one thing I can do on the F3 screen is to show a console message after each purchase, saying how much space is remaining. Would that do the trick, do you think?

Is there a particular in-Ooniverse justification for the limit of converting 40 tons of cargo space for equipment?

Each ship has a different limit, but there is a maximum of 40t (which will only apply to larger ships, eg Anaconda). As for the reason for 40t, it was just designed as a limiter to avoid the "throw in everything plus the kitchen sink" (which was the whole point of the OXP in the first place). 40t seemed about right.

A lot of settings in Ship Config were guestimates only. Real-world physics and geometry don't play a big part in any of the calcs (which really applies to the rest of the game, too!).

Edit to add: The EquipmentSpecifications.ods file might be a little out of date. I'll look at getting an updated version out shortly.

[DataPacRat]

Going back to ship-config, the ship was overweight, and stuff had to be sold, and 'return' was blanked out; but when I tried to click on either 'sell' or 'store', it dropped me back to the main F3 menu. Is that what's supposed to happen?

No, that shouldn't be happening. The "Return" should be blanked out (to force you to do something about the weight), but that sounds like I've missed some condition somewhere. Can you check your latest.log file for any info that might help?

Here's the relevant bits:

Code: Select all

00:50:29.427 [LogEvents]: Fer-De-Lance Carrier 4 13471 spawned at 112 km
00:50:42.441 [LogEvents]: Player gui screen will change from GUI_SCREEN_STATUS to GUI_SCREEN_EQUIP_SHIP
00:50:43.730 [LogEvents]: Player gui screen changed from GUI_SCREEN_STATUS to GUI_SCREEN_EQUIP_SHIP
00:50:54.297 [LogEvents]: Player ship got EQ_SHIPCONFIG
00:50:54.308 [LogEvents]: Player ship lost EQ_SHIPCONFIG
00:50:56.249 [LogEvents]: Player gui screen changed from GUI_SCREEN_EQUIP_SHIP to GUI_SCREEN_MISSION
00:50:56.423 [script.javaScript.exception.unexpectedType]: ***** JavaScript exception (BountySystem_MostWanted 0.8): TypeError: rt is null
00:50:56.424 [LogEvents]: Player bought EQ_SHIPCONFIG
00:51:06.749 [LogEvents]: Player gui screen will change from GUI_SCREEN_MISSION to GUI_SCREEN_EQUIP_SHIP
00:51:08.675 [script.javaScript.timeLimit]: ***** ERROR: Script "ShipConfiguration_Core" ran for 1.5384 seconds and has been terminated.
00:51:08.854 [LogEvents]: Player gui screen will change from GUI_SCREEN_EQUIP_SHIP to GUI_SCREEN_EQUIP_SHIP
00:51:09.707 [LogEvents]: Player mission screen ended
00:51:11.675 [script.javaScript.timeLimit]: ***** ERROR: Script "ShipConfiguration_Core" ran for 1.96466 seconds and has been terminated.
00:51:11.680 [LogEvents]: Player mission screen opportunity
00:51:13.633 [script.javaScript.timeLimit]: ***** ERROR: Script "Lib_EntityStrength" ran for 1.95256 seconds and has been terminated.
00:51:17.945 [LogEvents]: Player gui screen changed from GUI_SCREEN_EQUIP_SHIP to GUI_SCREEN_OPTIONS
00:51:19.705 [exit.context]: Exiting: Exit Game selected on options screen.
00:51:19.706 [gameController.exitApp]: .GNUstepDefaults synchronized.

Closing log at 2018-02-26 00:51:19 -0500.

... It looks like "BountySystem_MostWanted 0.8" might be the culprit?

Is there any way of showing how much equipment space (and cargo-converted equipment space) is still available while in the main F3 menu

Unfortunately, no. The F3 screen doesn't have any way to add secondary info to it, like equipment space remaining. I added an F4 interface screen that lists all equipment items and the space/weight properties for each, and the Ship Comparison OXP will show the standard equipment space for each ship, but that's as far as I can go.

Edit to add: The one thing I can do on the F3 screen is to show a console message after each purchase, saying how much space is remaining. Would that do the trick, do you think?

If that's what I'm imagining it is, it could certainly help.

Is there a particular in-Ooniverse justification for the limit of converting 40 tons of cargo space for equipment?

Each ship has a different limit, but there is a maximum of 40t (which will only apply to larger ships, eg Anaconda). As for the reason for 40t, it was just designed as a limiter to avoid the "throw in everything plus the kitchen sink" (which was the whole point of the OXP in the first place). 40t seemed about right.

A lot of settings in Ship Config were guestimates only. Real-world physics and geometry don't play a big part in any of the calcs (which really applies to the rest of the game, too!).

Fair enough, though I'd be willing to debate with you about some possibilities for differences between pieces of equipment that are fairly solid lumps, like engines, and ones which are more diffuse across a ship, like armor; but without my Oolite running right now, I'm going to guess that you've already accounted for that in the differences between equipment-space-tonnage and weight-tonnage.

If a pilot picks the default set of gear, the ship is supposed to match the specs if the ShipConfig addon isn't installed, right?

Edit to add: The EquipmentSpecifications.ods file might be a little out of date. I'll look at getting an updated version out shortly.

Looking forward to it.

[DataPacRat]

The EquipmentSpecifications.ods file might be a little out of date. I'll look at getting an updated version out shortly.

A quick list of (at least some of the) equipment items that have the default 1t/1t weights, and thus are probably missing from that .ods:

Advanced Navigation Computer
Advanced Space Compass
Boosters Class 1
Bounty Scanner
Cargo Scanner
Dock Assist System
Docking Computers
Duplex Fuel Tank (full)
E.C.M. System
Electronic Thumb
Emergency Witchspace Initiator
Escape Pod Locator
Fuel Collector
Galactic Hyperdrive
HUD Integration of Ship Identifier
Laser Reductor
Misjump Analyser
Missile Analyser
Missile Spoof
Quirium Fuel Processor
Quirium Fuel Transfer
Quirium Mine Detector
Range Finder Extender
Rock Hermit Locator
Service Level Perfect
Ship Version 8.1
Ship's Library Flight Interface
Telescope
Torus Jump Drive
Towbar
Warrant Scanner
Wormhole Scanner

... And, weirdly, this time when I fired up Oolite and loaded up Commander Cheaty, it went straight to the ship-config menu, and it's perfectly fine with me selecting the 'sell equipment' submenu.
... Until I bought some more things, at which point it crashed out of ship-config back to the F3 buy menu when I tried to sell them from the ship-config submenu.

[phkb]

It looks like "BountySystem_MostWanted 0.8" might be the culprit?

Hmm, weird.

Code: Select all

[script.javaScript.timeLimit]: ***** ERROR: Script "ShipConfiguration_Core" ran for 1.5384 seconds and has been terminated.

*Sigh*. Performance-related issues. Hard to track, hard to reproduce. Could I ask a favour, though? Could you install the Developer Release? That way, the Javascript line numbers will be included in your log file, which will make tracking things down slightly easier.

[DataPacRat]

*Sigh*. Performance-related issues. Hard to track, hard to reproduce. Could I ask a favour, though? Could you install the Developer Release? That way, the Javascript line numbers will be included in your log file, which will make tracking things down slightly easier.

I'll see what I can do.

(My laptop has all sorts of weird aspects it's picked up over the years - eg, the main hard-drive still has separate partitions from when it was dual-booting Windows/Linux, and I'm in the middle of updating some packages and about to reboot in hopes of solving a weird issue with lightdm - so I may need to do a bit of wrestling to put it back into submission.)

[phkb]

A quick list of (at least some of the) equipment items that have the default 1t/1t weights, and thus are probably missing from that .ods:

Thanks for that. There are a few items in the ods file that I've specifically set at 1t/1t. The ECM System is one of them (it's in the list as EQ_ECM), as is the docking computer (EQ_DOCK_COMP), Advanced Space Compass (EQ_ADVANCED_COMPASS), the Telescope (EQ_TELESCOPE), the Advanced Navigation Computer (EQ_ADV_NAV_COMP), Cargo scanner (EQ_CARGO_SCANNER), and a few others. I guess confusing bit is that I'm listing the equipment key, not the equipment description. I'll see about adding the description to make it clearer.

Until I bought some more things, at which point it crashed out of ship-config back to the F3 buy menu when I tried to sell them from the ship-config submenu.

Aw, dang. <scratches head>

[DataPacRat]

Aw, dang. <scratches head>

Okay, developer was easier to install than I expected. I just got the standard menu-bug, and I've popped the log up on here so you can give it a better look than I could.

(And now, off to reboot to fix something entirely unrelated.)

[spara]

It's also possible to add custom information to the f3 screen by using a custom hud with custom dials. That's how MarketObserver works.

[phkb]

It's also possible to add custom information to the f3 screen by using a custom hud with custom dials. That's how MarketObserver works.

I'd forgotten about that method. Thanks spara!

[DataPacRat]

Is there a particular in-Ooniverse justification for the limit of converting 40 tons of cargo space for equipment?

Each ship has a different limit, but there is a maximum of 40t (which will only apply to larger ships, eg Anaconda). As for the reason for 40t, it was just designed as a limiter to avoid the "throw in everything plus the kitchen sink" (which was the whole point of the OXP in the first place). 40t seemed about right.

I'd like to propose a variant of the existing system, for your consideration: Instead of having a hard cut-off of 40+40 tons, what if a pilot could indeed install equipment beyond that limit... but doing so requires an exponentially increasing weight penalty ("structural reinforcement"), so that by the time they've got Class 7 Everythings, their vessel is about as maneuverable as a gas giant? This would provide every pilot with the constant temptation to add Just One More Gadget, and eye their weight penalties nervously as they try to decide whether that Ore Processor is worth the risk of pirates "mining" their over-sluggish vessel.

Better, worse, fodder for a different approach entirely?

[phkb]

I'd like to propose a variant of the existing system, for your consideration: Instead of having a hard cut-off of 40+40 tons, what if a pilot could indeed install equipment beyond that limit... but doing so requires an exponentially increasing weight penalty ("structural reinforcement"), so that by the time they've got Class 7 Everythings, their vessel is about as maneuverable as a gas giant? This would provide every pilot with the constant temptation to add Just One More Gadget, and eye their weight penalties nervously as they try to decide whether that Ore Processor is worth the risk of pirates "mining" their over-sluggish vessel.

Better, worse, fodder for a different approach entirely?

It sounds like what you’re suggesting is removing all the equipment space components of the system, leaving just the weight considerations. An interesting experiment perhaps, but my initial response was like whoa! there’s a lot of code I’d have to turn off! I’ll have a deeper look and see if my first response is at all accurate, but it might be a while.

[DataPacRat]

I'd like to propose a variant of the existing system, for your consideration: Instead of having a hard cut-off of 40+40 tons, what if a pilot could indeed install equipment beyond that limit... but doing so requires an exponentially increasing weight penalty ("structural reinforcement"), so that by the time they've got Class 7 Everythings, their vessel is about as maneuverable as a gas giant? This would provide every pilot with the constant temptation to add Just One More Gadget, and eye their weight penalties nervously as they try to decide whether that Ore Processor is worth the risk of pirates "mining" their over-sluggish vessel.

Better, worse, fodder for a different approach entirely?

It sounds like what you’re suggesting is removing all the equipment space components of the system, leaving just the weight considerations. An interesting experiment perhaps, but my initial response was like whoa! there’s a lot of code I’d have to turn off! I’ll have a deeper look and see if my first response is at all accurate, but it might be a while.

That's not quite what I aimed to propose. Lemme try a worked example:

Commander Cheaty is about to kit out an Anaconda, which has 40 tons of spaces too small for cargo (equipment space), and room to add a further 40 tons of space of equipment without having to start significant remodelling.

If he cheaps out and buys 20 tons of gear, that fits well within the equipment space, and it's just like the current addon.

If he goes for Level 3s, and gets 60 tons of gear, then he loses 20 tons of cargo space, and it's just like the current addon.

If he tries to turn the Anaconda into a literal iron-ass, maxxing out rear shield and armor, and ends up with 100 tons of gear, then instead of his engineers laughing at him and saying 'no', he not only loses 60 tons of cargo space, but also gets an extra weight-penalty, which provides the standard negative consequences of weight on his ship's maneuverability, turning him into more of a lead-ass.

My proposal is that the current equipment-space considerations still come into play; it's just that I'm proposing turning the current 'hard no' if you exceed current limits into a 'soft no' with an extra weight penalty if the ships runs over them.


Is that a more coherent explanation?

[phkb]

Version 1.2.0 is now available. In this version

• Improved handling of player ship death scenarios.
• Added extra equipment items to the ignore equipment list.
• Added specialised HUD for the F3 screen to show equipment and cargo space remaining. Can be disabled via Library Config.
• Updated EquipmentSpecifications.ods file with all current equipment keys specifically recognised.
• Value for "Disable booster sound" setting now saved between sessions.