For information and discussion about Oolite.
https://bb.oolite.space/
I know you meant to write 4km, because that's where the red zone on the altimeter starts. And, my guess is the substantive answer is: yes, but it would be javascripted, not just tweaking a planetinfo parameter.Cholmondely wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2024 10:30 pmCan one increase the turbulence on Zaatxe below (say) 4km - and possibly even add "sand" to the effects?
Since it is Phkb's javascript which actually introduces the turbulence, I suppose that it would have to be. A shame. I find that the OpenStep legacy script actually makes a little sense to me, but since the Javascript is so superior in its capabilities, there seems little point in mastering it.Wildeblood wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2024 10:38 pmI know you meant to write 4km, because that's where the red zone on the altimeter starts. And, my guess is the substantive answer is: yes, but it would be javascripted, not just tweaking a planetinfo parameter.Cholmondely wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2024 10:30 pmCan one increase the turbulence on Zaatxe below (say) 4km - and possibly even add "sand" to the effects?
The height is tweakable as a global setting - I hadn't really considered having it as a local setting. It shouldn't be difficult to add, though.Cholmondely wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2024 10:30 pmCan one increase the turbulence on Zaatxe below (say) 5km - and possibly even add "sand" to the effects?
Again, had this as a global setting. And again, shouldn't be difficult to allow this to be tweakable on a system level.Cholmondely wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2024 10:30 pmCan one increase the wear and tear/hull damage on the ship from landing?
I was thinking more in terms of what one is actually flying through on the way down to the beacon. Would it be that difficult to create clouds/sandstorms/rainstorms/lightening storms to fly one's ship through?phkb wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2024 11:11 pmAs for the sand effects - yeah, not as sure. Not sure I could come up with something that wouldn't be immersion breaking. Signs are definitely pointing to "maybe", with regular dips towards "no".Cholmondely wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2024 10:30 pmCan one increase the turbulence on Zaatxe below (say) 5km - and possibly even add "sand" to the effects?
I'd would need to create a visual effect (which is the easy bit) that is then thrown up in front of the player in increasing amounts. The issue is: what will that visual effect be? Probably some form of shader, which is the hard bit. I have examples from the planet rings OXP that *might* be transferable to this task, but I;m really not sure. Thus, the "maybe" with a healthy dose of "possible no".Cholmondely wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 7:30 amI was thinking more in terms of what one is actually flying through on the way down to the beacon. Would it be that difficult to create clouds/sandstorms/rainstorms/lightening storms to fly one's ship through?
This I understand. I will give it a go (once I've finished off a couple of other projects), but no promises at this stage.Cholmondely wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 7:30 amThe reason for all this is a desire to emulate the FP descriptions.
I can't see it as too urgent.phkb wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 7:38 amI'd would need to create a visual effect (which is the easy bit) that is then thrown up in front of the player in increasing amounts. The issue is: what will that visual effect be? Probably some form of shader, which is the hard bit. I have examples from the planet rings OXP that *might* be transferable to this task, but I;m really not sure. Thus, the "maybe" with a healthy dose of "possible no".Cholmondely wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 7:30 amI was thinking more in terms of what one is actually flying through on the way down to the beacon. Would it be that difficult to create clouds/sandstorms/rainstorms/lightening storms to fly one's ship through?
This I understand. I will give it a go (once I've finished off a couple of other projects), but no promises at this stage.Cholmondely wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 7:30 amThe reason for all this is a desire to emulate the FP descriptions.
But it's good to point out some of the exceptional cases. That gives me some idea on the things I need to allow for so individual systems can be made more unique.Cholmondely wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 9:21 amThe only real stuff to do down on the planet is the Feudal States stuff. How many trips will players make down planet? Will they ever notice that Zaatxe's turbulence is just the same as anywhere else's? And ditto for Teaatis's wear and tear! And neither is a Royal House of Santaari (Feudal Teaatis has a TL of 3 and so misses out!).
Code: Select all
"New 4 (9)",
"{1 4 } 9",
"{5 4 } 9",
"{6 4 } 9"
Thanks for that. If you want to patch your version prior to an official release, the lines you quote should look like this:LittleBear wrote: ↑Tue May 14, 2024 2:26 pmSmall thing I noticed in the names file is that at lines 1003 to 1005, there is a missing pair of brackets round the 9 array so not all types get the type of base bracketed off.
Code: Select all
"New 4 (9)",
"{1 4 (}9)",
"{5 4 (}9)",
"{6 4 (}9)"
)DGill's Feudal State's is the only OXP where this might be important. I'd say that it should be his call. (Personally I'd go for #1 - I'm all for surprise improvements!).phkb wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2024 4:05 amI'm prepping to add this to the DM. However, I'd value some input on the best approach to take.
At the moment, I've kept the identifier from the original Planetfall ("oolite.oxp.Thargoid.Planetfall"), so the new version is a straight upgrade to the old one. However, I've made some radical changes to the original (fixed points for the different landing sites, atmospheric turbulence, and so on). If I leave it as it is, players will get this at the upgrade to the old version, and have a completely different experience landing on a planet. That might come as a bit of a shock.
So, my options are:
(1) Leave it as it is, and give players a surprise. Having something a bit unexpected happen doesn't have to be a turn off.
(2) Leave it as it is, and pop-up a message to players when they load a game for the first time with the new version, informing them of the changes. Could be a bit distracting, though.
(3) Change the identifier so that it's not a straight upgrade, make this new version incompatible with the old one, and thus give the player the choice as to when (and if) they take on the new version. The downside to this is that OXP integrations become a bit messy, as some OXP's might decide to support version 1.51, rather than 2.0, and also that two quite different versions end up being "supported". Essentially, this makes more headaches for me, rather than the players.
If there's another option I haven't considered, please shout it out. (In a figurative sense, rather than SHOUTING IT WITH TEXT!
Let me know your thoughts.
Code: Select all
Exception: TypeError: tempalloy[0].script.allowSpawnShip is not a function
Active script: PlanetFall2 2.5
planetFall2_worldScript.js, line 985:
allowed = tempalloy[0].script.allowSpawnShip(pfKeys[i]);
Code: Select all
15:59:52.519 [script.load.notFound]: ***** ERROR: Could not find script file feudal-planetfall-conditions.js.
15:59:53.712 [script.load.notFound]: ***** ERROR: Could not find script file feudal-planetfall-conditions.js.
15:59:53.775 [script.javaScript.exception.notFunction]: ***** JavaScript exception (PlanetFall2 2.5): TypeError: tempalloy[0].script.allowSpawnShip is not a function
15:59:53.775 [script.javaScript.exception.notFunction]: AddOns/PlanetFall2.oxz/Scripts/planetFall2_worldScript.js, line 985.