Jagged Alliance 2 is how I want my SR combat to be, Thanks to those who recommended it Options

[Arethusa]

I think your main description may be too long. I don't know at what point you run out of space, but you don't have a huge amount of room to work with. It's a shame they didn't spend less time putting in angry glasers and more time making the interface, you know, not suck.

[Austere Emancipa...]

Yeah, I'm afraid it might be just a bit too long. I'd have to check in game to be sure though: there are descriptions in the game that are 6 words shorter and that do display properly, but those come awfully close to filling the whole description box.

It is kinda weird that the coverage .exe is that much smaller -- well, it's only 80kb but still. It was apparently done by inserting a bit of extra code into a revision that's only a few days old, but it's smaller than even those .exe's. The wonders of compiling, I guess. Anyway, as ShadoWarrior said on the other forums, it's safe: I'm currently playing with it, at any rate. The xml's you've got from me might not be, however: I had typoed a space into a format line in one version of Armours.xml, I'm not sure if you have that one. I'll update Armours and Items at ja2dumpshock.wikispaces.com anyway.

[Edit]Seems ShadoWarrior already included the coverage bit into his newest release, so better get that one here (1.3Mb .rar).[/Edit]

[Austere Emancipa...]

Arethusa: I haven't done anything big on Weapons.xml for days, and the stats I've got there now are a bit boring, so if that's something you might be interested in then by all means, I'd love to see what you can do with it.

I've also since realized that effects of inbuilt scopes, sights, bipods, foregrips, telescopic/folding stocks, etc. are all included in Items.xml so Weapons.xml can be edited without worrying about those at all.

[Arethusa]

Alright, cool; I'll take a look through weapons.xml tonight and see what happens. If you could set up a MoonEdit server, I think it would really help make this work.

[Austere Emancipa...]

I tested the flak jacket description, and it's actually just fine -- there's still room for 4 words or so on the last line of the description box before you'd run into trouble.

[Wounded Ronin]

D'oh! I already shortened it. That being said, I think I just made it more condensed and thus better writing. I'm still working on this, in any case. Last night I got a pretty bad case of diarreah and stomach pain probably because someone at the place where I ate my lunch didn't wash their hands before working in the kitchen, so it cut my writing short a bit. But, I'm still working on it with great enthusiasm and will get it to you as soon as I'm done. How do I upload to the wiki?

[Wounded Ronin]

Hmm, I have a question. So far I've been working on the assumption that uiIndex 16X in items corresponds to uiIndex X in armours. However, when I reach uiIndex 170, it looks like it should correspond to uiIndex 9 and not uiIndex 10 in Armours. Am I reading the file in the right way?

[Wounded Ronin]

Lastly, for interest and commentary, here are the descriptions I've written so far, with main desc coming first and BR coming second and the C18 and crepitus jelly descs following:

For flak jacket:

This 20th century incarnation of plate mail is made from DuPont ballistic nylon and steel plates. It was designed to protect Word War II servicemen from shrapnel but is ineffective even against direct fire from a handgun.

A true collector's find! This Vietnam-era flak jacket is constructed with DuPont's original ballistic nylon. The perfect gift for the military historian in your family!

This historical artifact was dipped in Compound 18 for anti-ballistic type protection. The World War II era concept of DuPont ballistic nylon and metal plating was not very effective so hopefully now it will actually protect a little better.

This Vietnam-era jacket of ballistic nylon and metal plates was dipped in Compound 18 to improve its durability. It's a perfect gift for the military historian in your life who also has destructive toddlers at home.

This historical artifact was coated with jelly from the queen Crepitus to improve its protectiveness.

"Kevlar Vest" was renamed to NIJ level 2 vest:

This turtleneck style vest was tested by the NIJ and found to protect against multiple hits from 9mm, 10mm, and .357 magnum handgun cartridges.

This turtleneck style NIJ level 2 vest will provide ample protection for aggressive slumming activities in Detroit, New Orleans, and Baltimore.

This turtleneck style NIJ level 2 vest has been improved with compound 18.

If you thought NIJ level 2 was good, it's even better when it has been treated with Compound 18.

This NIJ level 2 vest provides even better protection since it has been treated with Crepitus royal jelly.

The Spectra Vest was renamed to NIJ level 3 vest:

This turtleneck style vest provides protection from multiple hits against 7.62 FMJ bullets and may accept a ceramic plate for even better protection.

This turtleneck style vest provides good coverage and protection from even the almighty NATO 7.62mm FMJ cartridge. Don't go to war without it!

This turtleneck style NIJ level 3 vest protects even better since it has been treated with C18.

If you felt safe wearing a turtleneck vest rated as NIJ level 3 you'll feel like Superman now that it's been treated with C18.

This NIJ level 3 vest offers even more protection with its coating of queen Crepitus jelly.




That's where I stopped because I was confused about which entry on Armours corresponds to Kevlar Pants, which was next on the list.

[Austere Emancipa...]

Ahh, maybe my diarrhoea this morning was out of sympathy. :)

The way it should work is that, as long as it's an armor item, the value <ubClassIndex> in Items.xml should correspond to the <uiIndex> value in Armours.xml. For example, the <ubClassIndex> of Kevlar Pants is 9, so its attributes can be found under <uiIndex>9 in Armours.xml. One way to check you're not looking at the wrong entry is that <ubArmourClass>0 in Armours.xml is a helmet, <ubArmourClass>1 is a vest, <ubArmourClass>2 is leggings, <ubArmourClass>3 is a plate insert and <ubArmourClass>4 is a creature skin (I think) -- and the C18 and Treated options of a piece of armor are usually (but not always) the 2 succeeding <uiIndex>es in Armours.xml.

I was thinking of even the best flexible armor vests (ie. Spectra and Dyneema and their upgraded versions) as still being level III-A. For reference here's how much armor is necessary to stop cold with zero damage certain weapon/ammo combinations (note: protection of a plate = its own protection + the protection of the vest underneath it):
9x19mm handgun FMJ: 23
9x19mm SMG FMJ/.357 Magnum handgun FMJ: 25
.44 Magnum handgun FMJ: 30
12 gauge slug (assume this is a non-deforming brass or other harder metal slug): 40-42
5.56x45mm and 7.62x39mm assault rifle FMJ: 48
7.62x51mm/7.62x54mmR rifle FMJ: 59
5.56x45mm M995 AP: 80
7.62x51mm M993 AP: 98
Note that the highest rating armor combination possible in the game is Ceramic Plates (uiIndex 22 in Armous.xml) + Field Ops upgraded Spectra or Dyneema vest (uiIndex 112 & 113 in Armours.xml, I think), which provide 82 (50+32) armor.

I really like the flavor, especially on the BR descriptions. Nice work. :)

You can upload into ja2dumpshock.wikispaces.com/ if you first become a member of wikispaces.com (which was very simple, IIRC) and then ask for permission in ja2dumpshock. Someone also suggested Savefile.com for uploading files, and that seems like an easy enough option to use.

This post has been edited by Austere Emancipator: Sep 6 2006, 06:01 AM

[mfb]

[Arethusa]

I'm really wondering about how rates of fire are handled. Having played through a bit, it seems like the only drawback from high rof is ammo consumption. Does the game have any balancing factors like controllability?

Also, I haven't look at the items.xml yet, but I'm pretty sure none of the attachments make any sense at all (well, maybe the foregrip). I'm not even sure what a battle scope is (I'm guessing something like an ACOG or an ELCAN), but it seems to do exactly the same thing as a reflex sight, which is not good.

[Austere Emancipa...]

Nope, there's no built-in balance there. A high <bAutofireShotsPerFiveAP> needs to be balanced with <AutoPenalty>. That's something I might not have done very well originally, even though I tried to keep it in mind.

A reflex sight and a reflex scope reduce the AP cost of readying and firing, while the battle scope only allows for more accurate aiming. Those would be pretty easy to fix, but I haven't touched them yet. I should probably do a bit of testing on them.

I'll think of something smart to say about how the different sights should be handled later today.

This post has been edited by Austere Emancipator: Sep 6 2006, 06:35 AM

[Arethusa]

Yeah, I meant reflex sight and reflex scope. I am up way too late. And I have class tomorrow. Augh.

[Shrike30]

An ELCAN is hardly a reflex sight. While it's got a nice big field of view and a clear picture even when your head isn't perfectly aligned, it's not going to provide you with the same kind of advantage as a reflex sight in terms of quick firing at close distances.

At "medium" distances (the kind where a 3.4x scope comes in handy), they certainly make shooting faster and easier.

Hm... don't scopes have some sort of "minimum distance" in JA2, where when you use them inside of that range, they apply a penalty? If this was tweaked properly, things like the ELCAN could be represented reasonably accurately. At close ranges, you've got a penalty from it, but at mid-long range it makes life a lot easier, and has certain advantages over a high-mag scope (namely, that it's easier to engage a moving target with and you can see a lot more in it's field of view).

[Austere Emancipa...]

I think they simply do not give their bonus inside the minimum distance. Doesn't mean a whole lot, since the bonus they provide is to allow cutting down the effective range by using the aim action -- not something you'd need within 5-10 tiles.

I was thinking of giving a non-magnifying reflex sight the same bonus it does now, reducing the AP cost of readying the weapon and firing it, but providing no particular bonus to accuracy, while reflex scopes might reduce the draw cost but not firing AP cost. I haven't tried it, but I imagine it's not easier to re-acquire the target after a shot through a 4x ACOG than it is through ghost ring iron sights.

[Shrike30]

That seems pretty good. That way, you don't necessarily "rapid fire" any more accurately, but you could "aimed fire" to the same degree of effectiveness in a shorter period of time, or (with the same amount of time invested) more accurately.

[Arethusa]

[Austere Emancipa...]

Crikey, they do. Now that's weird. Makes you wonder what they were smoking.

Looking more closely at the scopes, a sniper scope reduces tha AP cost of firing by 9% while a battle scope does not. A sniper scope also increases the damage dealt by 2. You can't make this shit up.

[Arethusa]

You see, the sniper scope doesn't make any sense. In fact, it make so little sense that the bullet gets really confused and angry, doing more damage.

[Wounded Ronin]

I think they wrote somewhere on the wiki that the sniper scope makes your shot placement more accurate and therefore raises damage. Obviously, though, if we start working with armor coverage that damage bonus can be nixed since the abstraction of the shotplacement would be more directly handled by the armor bypass probability.

EDIT: You guys are starting to think a lot about t3h mechanics. Here's my suggestion, since probably most of the 1.13 guys wouldn't totally agree with the things you wanna implement. Make your edits, do you thing with the scopes (minimum ranges and so forth), and just make a product designed to work with the basic September release, and don't worry about subsequent releases. Hell, I'll be happy enough not updating my 1.13 and playing the "realism" mod instead.

[Wounded Ronin]

OK, I'm going through the armors and I'm noticing, like you pointed out, how most of the "good" armor items are basically providing a ~IIIA level of protection.

Given that the "twaron", "dynema", "guardian" etc items are all providing similar levels of protection, how do you suppose I should describe them differently?

Also, what about the EOD and SWAT outfits? Those descriptions probably don't need revision, do they?

EDIT:

Just making sure I've got the right idea here...let me know if this description and revision for the "titanium plating" is good or not:

[Arethusa]

I think the SWAT outfit could use renaming and redescribing. Not like there is such a thing as a standardized "SWAT outfit".

Also, can someone explain to me why the SG551 and SG552 have integral reflex scopes? Please?

[edit]

[Wounded Ronin]

How shall I describe the SWAT equipment, then? I must confess my SWAT-fu is weak and I don't know much about them. My understanding is that they flash you and then empty MP5s into you which dosen't let me know much about their armor.

[Wounded Ronin]

OK, for what it's worth, here are the descriptions I've written so far. I haven't addressed the things I'm a bit confused about, which are:

*All the special armors added by the 1.13 modders, like the zylon, twaron, SWAT gear, and so on. I'm not sure what to call them because in terms of protection a lot of the pieces of gear are similar.

*The ceramic plates give 50 protection...should I classify that as Type III or not? It's not quite Type III but for now I'm classifying the crappier plates as Type IIIA already, so I'm not sure where that leaves me for the ceramic plates. I suppose we could always upgrade the ceramic plates so they are a true type III...

Anyway, here are my descs:

Flak Jacket

[Austere Emancipa...]