Page 4 of 4
Re: Military Fuel Injectors OXP
Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:13 pm
by Eagle1
Thanks very much Thargoid. Much appreciated.
Eagle
Re: Military Fuel Injectors OXP
Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 5:40 pm
by Thargoid
You're welcome. It's been on the cards for those two for a while - I was trying to iron out the effect using script (it's fairly easy to kill the backward velocity with the JS console, but for some reason doing the equivalent in script doesn't have the same effect) but I keep getting side-tracked by other matters. So it's quicker and easier all round to chop that aspect of them out.
Re: Military Fuel Injectors OXP
Posted: Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:15 pm
by Lone_Wolf
OXP Standards 1.82 wrote:
Injectors and torus
Injector and torus speeds are no longer a fixed multiple of normal flight speed. player.ship.injectorsEngaged and player.ship.torusEngaged are recommended to detect enabling of these flight modes.
in Config/script.js , line 43
Code: Select all
if(player.ship.speed == 7 * player.ship.maxSpeed) // if the ship is under fuel injection (FI is speed x 7, torus is speed x 32)
Re: Military Fuel Injectors OXP
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2024 10:04 am
by Cholmondely
Just to post this
here
(taken from Hullblazer's 2015 "Military Injectors" thread)
cim wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2015 3:29 pm
Diziet Sma wrote:Anonymissimus wrote:You can see the fuel bar go up a little at times, watching carefully. (Of course you don't gain any fuel still.)
That's the only way it could simulate being slightly more fuel-efficient than regular injectors.. the handwavium is that unburnt fuel gets recovered and returned to the tanks.
Now that
ship.injectorBurnRate and
ship.injectorSpeedFactor are available it might be worth rewriting it. This OXP was one of the ones I had in mind when making various ship properties writable for 1.82
Our current version seems to be an OXZ'ed v.1.03 (November 2012).
This could now be updated by somebody understanding javascript to have real fuel efficiency sans handwavium - and also restore the original speed boost if desired (unsure what it actually was but see below).
Thargoid wrote: ↑Mon Jul 02, 2012 5:12 pm
It does two things
1) When you are under injectors (ie at 7x your normal max speed) you get 0.1ly of fuel back every 8s. Basically that means that you do still consume fuel, but overall at a slower rate than normal (it's the best that can be done to emulate a lower consumption injector, or in this case a fuel reclaim system).
2) When you get the refuel, your velocity is also increased by x1.2 . This will slowly decay over time, hence the dependence on the ship you're flying (or at least on its stats).
...
This might also have implications for the Vortex OXP (original source of these military fuel injectors).
Re: Military Fuel Injectors OXP
Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2025 10:06 pm
by Lone_Wolf
Was looking up ways to conserve fuel and realised this oxp could be simplified a lot .
Oolite 1.81 introduced
Ship.InjectorBurnRate and
Ship.injectorSpeedFactor .
Upon buying the MFI burnrate could be decreased slightly and Speedfactor increased slightly .
This would reduce the amount of fuel used when injecting as well as shorten the period it is used.
Are those values reset to default on launch / exiting witchspace ?
Re: Military Fuel Injectors OXP
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2025 7:18 am
by Redspear
Lone_Wolf wrote: ↑Wed Sep 17, 2025 10:06 pm
Are those values reset to default on launch / exiting witchspace ?
I don't think so but they're common places to test (especially the first one) if the altered values should be in play.
Of course equipment added and equipment damaged/removed would be relevant checks if it were tied to a piece of equipment.
Lone_Wolf wrote: ↑Wed Sep 17, 2025 10:06 pm
Was looking up ways to conserve fuel...
... burnrate could be decreased slightly and Speedfactor increased slightly .
Injector grades oxp does this albeit by assigning values to the shipdata.plist of some vessels. So if you just want the benefits without their being tied to equipment then it would be a simple matter to apply them to whichever ship you're flying.
My argument as to why such doesn't need to be tied to an additional piece of equipment would be that 1. They already are (i.e. fuel injectors) and 2. Equipment clutter is an issue for me in this game. But you could do it however you see fit, certainly if it were to be your own oxp or a personal version of this one.
Re: Military Fuel Injectors OXP
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2025 10:44 pm
by Lone_Wolf
Redspear wrote:
Injector grades oxp does this albeit by assigning values to the shipdata.plist of some vessels. So if you just want the benefits without their being tied to equipment then it would be a simple matter to apply them to whichever ship you're flying.
Interesting shipdata-override.plist, I've copied some parts to my 'personalsettings oxp'
Are those values also applied to NPCs ?
Understood about the equipment clutter, I do feel that MFI should replace & provide WFI if that can be done in script.
Re: Military Fuel Injectors OXP
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2025 7:48 am
by Redspear
Lone_Wolf wrote: ↑Fri Sep 19, 2025 10:44 pm
Are those values also applied to NPCs ?
For my oxp, yes. Idea being that some ships just have better injector capability than others e. g. Mamba was a bit slow for its racing heritage so...
if you want them for player only ships then just apply to player versions of ships, e.g. ferdelance-player instead of ferdelance.
Lone_Wolf wrote: ↑Fri Sep 19, 2025 10:44 pm
Understood about the equipment clutter, I do feel that MFI should replace & provide WFI if that can be done in script.
You could have a script that removes WFI once MFI is installed (similar to NEU and EEU IIRC).
Two things you might need to add for it to work as intended:
1. Prevent WFI from being purchasable once you have the MFI (condition script or incompatible with depending upon how you script the purchase of MFI).
2. Have MFI 'include' WFI (in the same manner that fuel scoops include cargo scoops) in order to preserve functionality.
OR...
Skip all of the above and just make injectors non visible and perhaps non destructable to prevent confusion. Indestructible Injectors oxp does both of these things and also makes WFI standard player equipment.
Re: Military Fuel Injectors OXP
Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2025 9:29 pm
by Wildeblood
Lone_Wolf wrote: ↑Wed Sep 17, 2025 10:06 pm
Was looking up ways to conserve fuel...
... burnrate could be decreased slightly and Speedfactor increased slightly .
Redspear wrote: ↑Fri Sep 19, 2025 7:18 am
Injector grades oxp does this albeit by assigning values to the shipdata.plist of some vessels. So if you just want the benefits without their being tied to equipment then it would be a simple matter to apply them to whichever ship you're flying.
My argument as to why such doesn't need to be tied to an additional piece of equipment would be that 1. They already are (i.e. fuel injectors) and 2. Equipment clutter is an issue for me in this game. But you could do it however you see fit, certainly if it were to be your own oxp or a personal version of this one.
Just write a new equipment.plist for the existing injectors EQ that attaches a script. Script a variable burn rate: press B for lower speed boost and lower fuel burn, press N for higher values. Have 5 options. Five is a good number. Has anyone done that?
Re: Military Fuel Injectors OXP
Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2025 11:29 pm
by Redspear
Wildeblood wrote: ↑Tue Sep 23, 2025 9:29 pm
Script a variable burn rate: press B for lower speed boost and lower fuel burn, press N for higher values. Have 5 options. Five is a good number. Has anyone done that?
Not that I know of and I do think it's a good idea but I don't think it's what L_W wanted (best of both: lower burn rate & higher speed factor).
Re: Military Fuel Injectors OXP
Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2025 3:01 pm
by Lone_Wolf
Wildeblood wrote:
just write a new equipment.plist for the existing injectors EQ that attaches a script.
I always assumed core equipment could not be changed without causing trouble , but you imply that's easy ?
My impression is that Thargoid wanted MFI to have 2 benefits : efficiency and speed and I feel that later oxp maintainers should try to stay close to the intent of the creator of them.
Thinking about why/when I use injectors :
Green condition : not needed, torus is much faster
Yellow condition - to get out of the masslock
Red condition
- I shoot much better at short range (< 2 KM) so need to get close to attackers fast
- reducing the number of attackers by injecting away so instead of 8 I only have to face 2 or 3
A speed increase helps in all 3 cases, decreasing burn rate means I don't have to carry 6 LY extra (2 ramirez external fuel tank) but only need one.
BTW, I have installed injector grades so (atleast some of) my opponents have the same benefits as I do.
Re: Military Fuel Injectors OXP
Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2025 3:58 pm
by Wildeblood
Lone_Wolf wrote: ↑Wed Sep 24, 2025 3:01 pm
Wildeblood wrote:
just write a new equipment.plist for the existing injectors EQ that attaches a script.
I always assumed core equipment could not be changed without causing trouble , but you imply that's easy ?
Easy. I showed how to attach a script to a core EQ item back in the olden days:-
https://wiki.alioth.net/index.php/Galac ... rdrive_OXP
Re: Military Fuel Injectors OXP
Posted: Fri Sep 26, 2025 7:28 pm
by Lone_Wolf
Wildeblood wrote:
just write a new equipment.plist for the existing injectors EQ that attaches a script. Script a variable burn rate: press B for lower speed boost and lower fuel burn, press N for higher values. Have 5 options. Five is a good number. Has anyone done that?
lower speed bust = increase time needed to use injectors
lower burn rate = increase efficency > injectors can be used longer .
default : burn rate 0.25 , speed 7 .
To make comparisions easy let's assume injectors are used for 20 sec.
Default uses 5 LY fuel , distance travelled 140 in 20 sec
Some calculations with 5 LY fuel
burn 0.35, speed 11 > 5/.35 = 14.28 sec , distance 157
burn 0.30, speed 9 > 5/.30 = 16.7 sec , distance 150
burn rate 0.20 , speed 6 > 5/.20 = 25 sec , distance 150
burn 0.15 , speed 5 > 5/.15 = 33.3 sec , distance 166.7
Is this similar to what you had in mind ?