Springblossom blows when exiting Kyoto

Ericmor · Post by **Ericmor** » Sun, 18. Mar 12, 00:44

Seems like the new corvette bay on the Kyoto M2 wasn´t fully tested: normal figthers leaves normally, but if you change to a docked Springblossom M6 while onboard the Kyoto, the ship blows while exiting and game over.
The workaround is to tell the Springblossom to go idle or any other command that forces it to leave the ship and then transport to it; seem´s like the m6 can leave the Kyoto undamaged if you aren´t inside.
Also, i suddenly wasn´t able to pick up the jump beacon that i just ejected while on the same Springblossom - the ship was passing trough it without any colision detection...i had to dock back on the kyoto and use the m2 to pick it back up.

Post by **Alan Phipps** » Sun, 18. Mar 12, 12:55

The first part is well-known, see this thread.

The beacon bit is more likely that you were trying to pick it up on the cockpit sightline which might be different to the collision envelope centreline for the Springblossom model. You may see a similar issue with picking up crates and ejected pilots, etc and maybe need to experiment a bit to determine the correct pick-up approach.

Ericmor · Post by **Ericmor** » Mon, 19. Mar 12, 00:51

Terran conflict still have errors after all this years of development... AP is still a modded X3:reunion, isn´t?
I don´t want to poke my nose in anyone´s script, i know how hard it is to fix one thing and break two others, but i can´t help but worry about how many bugs X: rebirth will have... the first release version of reunion i saw with a friend years ago was barely playable!
Well, nothing that stops gameplay, but it sucks that an awesome ship like the springblossom have this issue with the Kyoto.
I also miss the other m2+ i saw in the X-tended alpha, especially the paranid Olympus and her superjumpdrive... it was like flying a mobile base, the thing was amazing!...
I hope egosoft keep releasing more plots for AP, this add to the game value immensely and would be specially gratifying to see plot missions were you actually can fufill the steam achievements (blow up a solar power plant, board over 10 ships, board a Xenon Q, etc).

Post by **Alan Phipps** » Mon, 19. Mar 12, 16:24

X3AP first introduced vanilla M6 docking at such bigships in the X3 series so your argument there is a bit off target.

X-R will be based on a completely different game engine and AI design and coding so yes we can expect some initial teething issues that slip through Beta testing but there will definitely not be any carry-overs from X3.

Ericmor · Post by **Ericmor** » Thu, 22. Mar 12, 18:58

Sorry, i was considering the official beta x-tended mod for terran conflict as the starting point from were AP was developed.
I played the official beta and there were so many things removed in AP.
As i replayed recently the vanilla version of x3:reunion 2.5, i noticed that the official x-tended mods added such depths and new concepts to the game, when you compare x3:reunion, Terran Conflict and AP.
In the original x3:reunion, the story mode didn´t even considered the fact that you might be flying a carrier in any given point of the game, even if you did have the ability to do so from normal gameplay, and the tutorials simple were nonexistent, assuming that EVERYBODY played the tutorial levels in X2 - some people who played terran conflict didn´t even knew that there were engine time acceleration or jumpdrives!
I´d like to point out that the best way to introduce an x universe game really is to take the player by his hand, force him to do step-by-step ALL the trading, fighting, docking, gate tracking, gear equipping and marine invading while giving him detailed instructions without much window to do enything else.
Seriously, DISABLE some menus during this, like a frigging flash tutorial.
After this stage, then you take everthing off his hands and lose him free in a gearless m5 without sector maps.

Post by **Alan Phipps** » Thu, 22. Mar 12, 19:07

Comparing vanilla with a 3rd Party modded game is a bit of a moveable feast.

Anyway this isn't Tech Sp now so moving to Universe forum.

Lone Jedi · Post by **Lone Jedi** » Sat, 24. Mar 12, 16:59

Egosoft is well-known for releasing games prematurely. Luckily she is also well-known for the determination to patch such buggy games.

It's wise to buy their games at least 3 to 6 months after going gold.

Ericmor · Post by **Ericmor** » Sat, 24. Mar 12, 19:35

It´s both a commercial and community manuver, if not a technical limitation one.
When a complex game like x4 (oh yeah, it´s x4!) is released, the bugs are detected mostly by the players and only official buyers immediatly get pathes straight after players complained about it.
I can also bet that egosoft is planning a somewhat broader support for the modding community, since this comunity is basically responsible for the very existence of Terran Conflict.
By the moderator behavior it seems that egosoft like to avoid the issue, but is fact that several good mods are later released in a bath as a patch extension or something.
This is nothing to be ashamed off: The sims, Oblivion, Skyrim... mods are supported heavily, and creation kits are released with full support of the
publishers.
A smart move would be to make a contest of some sort among modders and select the best ones for a polished patch.

delray · Post by **delray** » Sat, 24. Mar 12, 20:27

If my proposed nerf of cutting 2/3 of Springblossom's cargo, guns and speed was accepted, it'd be fixed and could undock from Kyoto... Just saying.

Ericmor · Post by **Ericmor** » Sat, 24. Mar 12, 22:19

The springblossom shouldn´t be nerfed in anything. NO ship should.
She´s perfect the way she is, and should undock by code fixing alone.
Faction miniplots should be added in the next expansion, together with this fix.

Post by **Alan Phipps** » Sat, 24. Mar 12, 22:27

@ Ericmor: You said: "By the moderator behavior it seems that egosoft like to avoid the issue"

What makes you think that there is a bigger connection between Moderators and Egosoft than the fact that the Moderators play and enjoy Egosoft's games just as you do (and volunteer to help out unpaid on these forums)?

Ericmor · Post by **Ericmor** » Sat, 24. Mar 12, 22:58

It was clearly denied that Allbion Prelude wasn´t made ontop of Terran Conflict X-tended, wich is untrue.
Vanilla AP is a TC X-tended alteration.

Post by **Alan Phipps** » Mon, 26. Mar 12, 15:43

Err ... No. Some particular modders' talents might be apparent in both games, but X3AP is an extension of X3TC and decidedly not of X-TC (of which v 2.0 isn't even released yet so no-one outside their dev/test circle even knows the version of X-TC with plots yet).

Are you confusing Moderators and Modders somewhat?

The X-Plorer · Post by **The X-Plorer** » Mon, 26. Mar 12, 23:42

delray said quote, "If my proposed nerf of cutting 2/3 of Springblossom's cargo, guns and speed was accepted, it'd be fixed and could undock from Kyoto... Just saying."

How the heck would that make sure the ship doesnt explode when it exits the Kyoto? your only affecting it's statistics, not it's dimensions.

The body of the ship is the reason why Ericmor had this problem in the first place.

Before I go into this...

@ Alan Phipps:

Wasn't the Aran In X3 TC the first to have M6 or larger docking for an M1 in the X3 series?

Anyway... I had the same problem with A different corvette when I tried to fly it out of my Aran in X3 TC. I wound up exploding.

I've fiddled around with a Kha'ak corvette and discovered that it's rotating body makes it collide into station docking bays when undocking and is a navigational hazard for ships that get too close for comfort.

So really it's the ship's shape. Not the Statistics.

If Ericmor had undocked in a centaur? odds are he'd slide out completely fine and with no hitch.

Aparrently the M6 docking bays dislike any corvettes that aren't shaped like a centaur.

Personally I think it would make more sense if the exit hangar for a corvette from an M1 was the same as the entry Hangar. In star wars battlefront II the hangars in space battles were completely open, you could fly in and out of it without a hitch. Why not do that for this game?

Munchfinger · Post by **Munchfinger** » Tue, 27. Mar 12, 02:58

delray wrote:If my proposed nerf of cutting 2/3 of Springblossom's cargo, guns and speed was accepted, it'd be fixed and could undock from Kyoto... Just saying.

It is probably the most r******* idea I saw here. How changes of ship attributes would affect model clipping? There is a whole bunch of other ships that also go boom when leaving Kyoto or even some EQ or shipards for that matter. The fact that most of them have much lower speed and cargo doesn't really tell anything to dellray apparently...

The X-Plorer · Post by **The X-Plorer** » Tue, 27. Mar 12, 03:58

Ditto Munchfinger... Ditto.

Either redesign the shapes of those victimized vessels or make it so they dont go BOOM on the way out, is what sums the solution to this problem up.

Post by **Alan Phipps** » Tue, 27. Mar 12, 12:17

@ The X-Plorer: Quite correct - the special-case Aran was the first in vanilla X3TC to dock M6s but then it could also dock M7/M1/M2 as well. I definitely would not have recommended trying to unassisted dock/undock them in person either!

RefocusedLight · Post by **RefocusedLight** » Tue, 27. Mar 12, 14:40

Alan Phipps wrote: the special-case Aran was the first in vanilla X3TC to dock M6s but then it could also dock M7/M1/M2 as well. I definitely would not have recommended trying to unassisted dock/undock them in person either!

Aran could dock another Aran =) there we are talking about this minor case of logical and spatiotemporal exceptions. Like, 18 (three times six) chaindocked Arans with a Kyoto loaded with 6 Hyperions and 12 Fenrirs at its core = an avatar of Azatoth, the Laughing Chaos, inflicting 1d100 sanity damage on each undock - on everyone in sector AND PLAYER IRL. At that point it doesn't even matter whether they explode, undock, explode when undocking or undock when exploding because physics within that sector becomes acausal.
It's not even wrong, it's different.

But the M6 trouble has persisted so long and is so annoying and wrong. Why does one need collisions in an automated undock sequence at all?

Post by **Alan Phipps** » Tue, 27. Mar 12, 14:58

Generally there were three issues which have contributed to these X3 problems:

1. Stations and maybe big-ships that allowed (or were forced by their design to require) M6s or TS/TM/TP to dock internally in docks intended only for fighters rather than on external docking arms.

2. Ship and station designs that evolved separately from each other such that ships grew bigger/wider to the extent that standard external docking arms were too close together for them to dock beside each other or were now too close to projecting other parts of the station for these ships to avoid them.

3. Docks whose safe approach lanes are unsuitable for bigger and less-agile ships when approached or left in particular directions or station orientations relative to routes or gates.

More extensive use of disabling ship IS collision-detection when approaching or leaving stations would make attacks on those ships temporarily impossible and no doubt upset the sensibilities of players involved in 'near-station ambushes'. I think it is rather unlikely that there will be a redesign of vanilla X3 ship and station models from this point on.

Ericmor · Post by **Ericmor** » Tue, 27. Mar 12, 16:26

Calm down... he might have tampered with code and found out that first person view of a certain cargo bay/hull value changes collision detection or something.
I´m not a modder, so i´m not sure.
But i´ll tell you guys this: TC X-tended beta has a feature where you ejected a shield in space and refilled your own shields instantly if you picked it up; this happens in AP also, but NOT in terran conflict.

egosoft.com

egosoft.com

Springblossom blows when exiting Kyoto

Springblossom blows when exiting Kyoto