Page 3 of 7
Posted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 5:07 pm
by Capt. Slog
Would it be possible to reflect certain currently unused keys back to oxps, leaving writers and/or users to sort out who could use which key?
Posted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 9:17 pm
by JensAyton
Capt. Slog wrote:Would it be possible to reflect certain currently unused keys back to oxps, leaving writers and/or users to sort out who could use which key?
No, that is very specifically what I don’t want to do. OXP writers don’t know which keys are unused on each user’s systems, and users definitely should not have to fiddle with configuration files to make things work.
Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 12:08 am
by zevans
Ahruman wrote:Capt. Slog wrote:Would it be possible to reflect certain currently unused keys back to oxps, leaving writers and/or users to sort out who could use which key?
No, that is very specifically what I don’t want to do. OXP writers don’t know which keys are unused on each user’s systems, and users definitely should not have to fiddle with configuration files to make things work.
I'll second that: I noticed there was no definitive BBC-style keylist on the Wiki, so I made one locally with comments in it, and ran a diff afterwards. It's amazing what I had to shunt around to free up even the few keys I wanted freed up.
Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 8:04 am
by Capt. Slog
zevans wrote:Ahruman wrote:Capt. Slog wrote:Would it be possible to reflect certain currently unused keys back to oxps, leaving writers and/or users to sort out who could use which key?
No, that is very specifically what I don’t want to do. OXP writers don’t know which keys are unused on each user’s systems, and users definitely should not have to fiddle with configuration files to make things work.
I'll second that: I noticed there was no definitive BBC-style keylist on the Wiki, so I made one locally with comments in it, and ran a diff afterwards. It's amazing what I had to shunt around to free up even the few keys I wanted freed up.
And in the meantime some oxps don't work as well as they might?
Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 1:19 pm
by zevans
Capt. Slog wrote:
And in the meantime some oxps don't work as well as they might?
"in the meantime" is the problem - there's stuff we will have to live without until the next stable release, and that phrase "next stable release" comes up so often I'm all for making sure that's the FIRST thing we have. Thereby, "the meantime" becomes as short as possible.
Keymap editor in-game is a) not rocket science and b) probably not too hard to give to one or more other developers and fold back in whilst the gurus get on with harder things, so my view would be it should be near the top of the list for MNSR+1, absolutely.
This is yer classic "can't please all of the people all of the time..."
I might add that missile-related scripts seem to be using an undue amount of memory on my system, so need to get to the bottom of that first...
Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 9:03 pm
by Capt. Slog
zevans wrote:Capt. Slog wrote:
And in the meantime some oxps don't work as well as they might?
"in the meantime" is the problem - there's stuff we will have to live without until the next stable release, and that phrase "next stable release" comes up so often I'm all for making sure that's the FIRST thing we have. Thereby, "the meantime" becomes as short as possible.
Keymap editor in-game is a) not rocket science and b) probably not too hard to give to one or more other developers and fold back in whilst the gurus get on with harder things, so my view would be it should be near the top of the list for MNSR+1, absolutely.
This is yer classic "can't please all of the people all of the time..."
I might add that missile-related scripts seem to be using an undue amount of memory on my system, so need to get to the bottom of that first...
You're a bit full of yourself aren't you?
Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 10:59 pm
by Disembodied
Guys, can we keep it polite, please? Friendliest board this side of etc. and all ...
Posted: Thu Jul 16, 2009 5:27 am
by another_commander
Capt. Slog, that was a bit uncalled for, don't you think?
.
Posted: Thu Jul 16, 2009 5:41 am
by Lestradae
... Shanti ...
Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 5:20 pm
by Thargoid
OK, with thanks to Gorans for the heads-up, v1.01 is now available from the wiki and box.net. Minor bugfix to catch when your attacker gets nuked before the autolock can happen (gives a warning in the console).
Same direct URL as the first post of this thread, or via the links below.
Posted: Sun Jun 13, 2010 4:39 pm
by Thargoid
A small note on the 1.74 update of target autolock. It has been expanded with new functionality and is now Target Autolock Plus v1.10.
As well as auto-locking, your current target (whether autolocked or manually done) now shows up as a flashing grey/blue stick on your scanner, to aid in locating where it is. If the ships target is changed then the old target ship's lollipop will revert to it's default colours.
For any OXP maker who doesn't want autolock to happen on their ships, if you add the role "OXP_noAutolock" to the ships role list then TAP will ignore it. Similarly any stealth ship with the role "OXP_stealthShip" is also ignored.
Posted: Sun Jun 13, 2010 4:50 pm
by JensAyton
Thargoid wrote:For any OXP maker who doesn't want autolock to happen on their ships, if you add the role "OXP_noAutolock" to the ships role list then TAP will ignore it.
While this will work, script_info is a slightly more efficient way to do this sort of thing (and either way, it should be prefixed with your name and/or the OXP’s name).
Posted: Sun Jun 13, 2010 5:54 pm
by Thargoid
OK just for you the relevant role is now "TAP_noAutolock".
I chose roles over script_info as I thought them a bit easier for people less experienced in coding up shipdata.plist to use and understand.
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2010 6:55 pm
by Cody
I’m not absolutely certain, but I don’t think the Target Autolock oxp is working in 1.74.
I’ve tried both Target Autolock Plus 1.10 and Target Autolock 1.01… can someone doublecheck for me?
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2010 7:53 pm
by Thargoid
That one had a late change in it due to a last minute bugfix in trunk.
I'll have a look at it and see if something (or someone, aka me) screwed up.
Editted to add - tested, it works fine for me under XP. What exactly are (or aren't) you seeing? Anything in the logs?
Oh and the correct version for 1.74 is TAP 1.10.
Is this OXP not working for anyone else? If so please post here