Stable Build 13 Work In Progress

LarryHookins · Nov 15, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pieter Boelen @ Nov 15 2006, 01:36 PM) [snapback]171683[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Hook @ Nov 15 2006, 08:28 PM) [snapback]171677[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
I would like to see the RUM_DAYS changed to the same value as wheat days, so instead of having 30 and 15, you'd have 30 and 30. Less confusing. Unless everyone sails at double rum ration. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="biggrin.gif" />
</div>
Sounds good to me, but we would also need to change the code then, right?
</div>
Obviously! <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="biggrin.gif" />

Should be a single line change somewhere. If you want I'll go find it.

Edit: It's used in several places, but if you make the BS.h setting more intuitive, it will make the code look odd.

Hook

Pieter Boelen · Nov 15, 2006

<img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/me.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=" :onya

" border="0" alt="me.gif" />

I uploaded a file "Build 13 Beta Code.zip" to the FTP in the "+ Build 13 WIP Work" folder. This file contains all code files I have for Build 13 at the moment, including also the latest ReadMe version. Modders can have a look at this file to make sure I haven't left any important fixes out or if I made any obvious mistake. I would have uploaded the new Beta today, but I just don't have the time to do it, so this is te best I <i>can</i> do right now. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/modding.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=" :modding

" border="0" alt="modding.gif" />

The required resource files are not in this file, but they are available on the FTP.

Black Bart · Nov 15, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Hook @ Nov 15 2006, 08:04 PM) [snapback]171657[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
I've got LDH_TURN_RATE_FACTOR set at 2.0 in my game and have since I introduced it. Original comment said, "Because who wants to sail a fort?" I was surprised when someone upped the default from 1.0 to 1.5 but at least it's there for people to change if they want.

As far as start money goes, do you check the weapons locker in the start cabin as well as the normal ship locker? <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="biggrin.gif" /> It sometimes has money in it too. I think. In any case it has more loot to sell.

Hook
</div>

You are right on sailing a fort btw <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="smile.gif" /> And not sure - i usualy skip checking my ship before leaving "Yes i remember everything fine" choice has become the norm fo rme now. Ok if you can find other stuff to sell ok the default 1000 gold is fair enough' like i said it was a painfull option for me to think about - i'd rather the player had 0(zero) gold to start with!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pieter @ Nov 15 2006, 08:04 PM) [snapback]171657[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
You are supposed to have 2000 gold when you leave your ship. That should be enough to handle your affairs.

The LDH_TURNRATE_FACTOR should be set to 1.0 by default, shouldn't it?</div>

default is 1.0 BUT as navigation skills(sailing) dont seem to work its not a good option currently. 1.5 or 2.0 is better(i usualy choose 2.0 also).

2000 gold!? i must be missing some - i do have 500 personal gold plus my 1000 start gold - but i think i know why that is now. If i'm just being 'lazy' and not finding the other 1000 gold then thats cool, keep it as is <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hat @ Nov 15 2006, 08:04 PM) [snapback]171657[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
CHOOSABLE_NEWGAMESKILLS 0.......I personally hated the idea, and thus made this small mod toggle to simply pile those points into what you initially get, so YOU can decide easier....</div>

exactly - it should imho be the players choice, as default. This is an rpg game so all options for the player to guide their role play should be given. Any char should be able to have any start skills imho. power back to the player etc.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hat @ Nov 15 2006, 08:04 PM) [snapback]171657[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
LDH_TURN_RATE_FACTOR 2.0
Turn rate was originally 1.0. Hook suggested it to be 2.0 when we updated some things. So I had compromised and set it to 1.5 so as to not piss off the diehard realistic sailing enthusiasts. Heh.</div>

well i'm a diehard realisitic sailing enthusiast(currently landlocked), and imho 2.0 'feels' most realistic(possibly not on the really large ships?) for the starting ships. As navigation skills seem hosed/broken in the current build - so you cant improve your actual ships handling as you progress, i think 2.0 is a make-do compramise untill the skills issue is resolved?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hat @ Nov 15 2006, 08:04 PM) [snapback]171657[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
SURR_GLOBAL_SCL 0.1
0.2 to me is still to high. Hook says he likes 0.05. So, maybe reduce it a bit more. Surrenders should not occur so often it becomes ridiculous.</div>

yeah i've been playing with this, and like you i think it needs much lower settings before you notice any real difference 0.05 sounds good(maybe lower even?).

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hat @ Nov 15 2006, 08:04 PM) [snapback]171657[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
ENABLE_SKILLUP_IFZERO 0
To me, if an officer has "0" for a skill, it means they cannot be enhanced in that department. This should be left to off like the stock game had. I regard this setting as a 'cheat', not an improvement.</div>

Thats just nasty! I had '0' in graphic skills once upon a time - now i'm probably a '3' <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="wink.gif" /> so erm keep it so the player can choose to improve the officer as they like....choice is good(i'm going to be saying that a lot - its a favourite <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="wink.gif" /> ).

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hat @ Nov 15 2006, 08:04 PM) [snapback]171657[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
RARE_RAND_RETRIES 2
This is to reduce not only the 'hiccup' factor on applying random items to locations, but to also make random items a slight bit more rare (not a whole lot, but a bit). I have always run with 2, as 5 just seemed like overkill on this process.</div>

Yeah sounds ok - random items were far to often in build 12.1.
I also change the box_item finds from 3(which had been changed from 5 recentyl) a little further to 2. This makes you think hard on trying a locked box/chest/barrel. At 3 your still pretty much always going to find something in locked box. At 2 this falls to maybe 50% of the time, so it makes you think if taking the damage is worth it.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hat @ Nov 15 2006, 08:04 PM) [snapback]171657[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
FOOD_PER_CREW 0.005
The reduction of this number only means that 1 food goes a bit longer. With it being at 0.01, its about 1 wheat is 1 day of travel on a small ship (much more so with a bigger ship). By reducing this, it will mean more room in cargo for loot, and also the ability to go a bit longer without buying more food (or stealing it). Also reduces the annoying factor. If this is set too high, and a new person gets fed up with the mod (like I originally did), they might just turn the whole thing OFF without looking at how to reduce the consumption rate. That wouldn't be wanted, now would it. So, reducing this to a less troublesome number, may make the food mod a bit more appeasing. (Actually maybe this number should be moved to BS.h right under the FOOD_ON toggle!)</div>

i plan on having a good hard look at all this - its ok as is, but needs some tightening up. I've talked with Pieter about the introduction of 2 other required food/drink stuffs(Fruit+Ale/water). Anyway i tend to think the other way - i always top up supplies when in port and never actualy get close to running out. Then this might be due to me using small ships/small crew? But yeah a rework is in order for a later build for sure.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hat @ Nov 15 2006, 08:04 PM) [snapback]171657[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
TAVERNBRAWL_FISTSONLY 1
Tavern brawls shouldn't be with swords and guns! Heh.</div>

well it is the caribbean in the 17th century! but yeah i know what you mean. Is there an easy way to make it a random chance of either fists or weapons when these encounters are spawned? rather than an on/off type thing?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hook @ Nov 15 2006, 08:04 PM) [snapback]171657[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
I don't like the idea of messing with the food consumption. Either give your guys a pound of wheat a day, or disable the darn thing. If people want to change the stock values for their own game, let them.

I would like to see the RUM_DAYS changed to the same value as wheat days, so instead of having 30 and 15, you'd have 30 and 30. Less confusing. Unless everyone sails at double rum ration. biggrin.gif

Hook</div>

I agree with not messing just now with it - it works, could be better but then we have lots of time for that.
So your seriously saying crew would drink as much rum as they would eat rations!? what kind of ship do you run sir!? <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />

I'd like to see a few other food stuff requirements:

Food(wheat) and Water/Ale(it was often watered down for such a use) would deal with the health of your crew(so they would start to die if they run out of these).

Rum and Fruit would deal with Morale - so you would need much less of these as they can be seen as necesary luxeries. Rum to keep spirits up(and fighters mean+reckless) Fruit to keep scurvy away - scurvy is a morale trasher.

something like that, but we can mess with all this for a later build.

IncredibleHat · Nov 15, 2006

The only real change in code, is for realistic sailing. The affect 'sailing skill' has is now only 40-100%, where stock it used to be 20-100% affecting.

So, meaning, skill 1 is really 40% of ability, not 20%.

How stupid of a change is that?

EDIT:
So, bart, if you wanna try that out and see if it makes any difference, open your /PROGRAM/SEA_AI/AIShip.c file, and find the following two lines (around line#3838):
<div class='codetop'>CODE</div><div class='codemain'>fTRFromSkill = Bring2Range(0.4, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 2.0 * stf(rCharacter.TmpSkill.Sailing)); // was min 0.2
fTRFromPeople = Bring2Range(0.3, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, stf(arCharShip.Crew.MinRatio)); // was min 0.2</div>

Then change them to look like this:
<div class='codetop'>CODE</div><div class='codemain'>fTRFromSkill = Bring2Range(0.2, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 2.0 * stf(rCharacter.TmpSkill.Sailing));
fTRFromPeople = Bring2Range(0.2, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, stf(arCharShip.Crew.MinRatio));</div>

IncredibleHat · Nov 15, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pieter Boelen @ Nov 15 2006, 02:55 PM) [snapback]171695[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
I uploaded a file "Build 13 Beta Code.zip" to the FTP in the "+ Build 13 WIP Work" folder. This file contains all code files I have for Build 13 at the moment, including also the latest ReadMe version. Modders can have a look at this file to make sure I haven't left any important fixes out or if I made any obvious mistake.
</div>
Looks good compared to what I have. So, no new fixes to report (unless Black Bart REALLY thinks that two-line code change I posted above is worth doing).

I'll try to hold off doing anymore bug fixes <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />

Black Bart · Nov 15, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IncredibleHat @ Nov 15 2006, 09:45 PM) [snapback]171746[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
The only real change in code, is for realistic sailing. The affect 'sailing skill' has is now only 40-100%, where stock it used to be 20-100% affecting.

So, meaning, skill 1 is really 40% of ability, not 20%.

How stupid of a change is that?

</div>

I dont really understand this?
Having a navigator(with skills) in your active party used to(as in origonal game) make a big difference to your ships handling - you really could tell the 15% maneuver bonus(perk) if you gave it to an officer or chose it your self, same for speed increase(perk) also. Your overall sailing skill would also be seen to have an overall effect to your ships performance? This doesnt happen now.

Anyway we can leave this for now - i'll try out the code change, but i think this is going to need lots more looking into as its not only the navigator but other party officer types that seem to not work properly now in this context. So yeah dont worry about it for this build.

And yes have a break from bug fixing <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/yes.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=" :yes

" border="0" alt="yes.gif" /> i wonder how long you can last <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="wink.gif" /> <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/icon_mrgreen1.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=" :cheeky

" border="0" alt="icon_mrgreen1.gif" />

IncredibleHat · Nov 15, 2006

Well see, I dont see the problem then. When I take those two persk, I notice a drastic change in my sailing ability... as well as adding skill to sailing.

Looking at the code, nothing other than that thing I posted above, looks like it was really screwed with in respect to the perks and skills. There is something done odd for enemy captains of nations (nations get certain boosts/reductions to types of skills), but that code is never executed for you or your companions.

*shrug*

Black Bart · Nov 15, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IncredibleHat @ Nov 15 2006, 11:23 PM) [snapback]171772[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
Well see, I dont see the problem then. When <b>I</b> take those two persk, I notice a drastic change in my sailing ability... as well as adding skill to sailing.
.......
</div>

what about if you give them to your navigator instead?

but i'm sure you got better things to do - like think/plan for your hols <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/icon_mrgreen1.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=" :cheeky

" border="0" alt="icon_mrgreen1.gif" />

IncredibleHat · Nov 16, 2006

Hmm. I havn't done that.... give the skill to a officer in my group.

"But"... the code that checks for skill or perk for the speed and turn of a ship, is still 'stock' code. If an officer of yours has the perk, your ship gets the trait. Same with skills (whomever has the highest in your band of four).

Same goes with all your companions too (ships in your fleet).

The code is there, and still the same as the stock code (with the addition of new perks). Wish I knew the problem, but I'm not reading it and am starting to think you're just pulling our leg <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="biggrin.gif" />

ged · Nov 16, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IncredibleHat @ Nov 15 2006, 04:06 PM) [snapback]171782[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
Hmm. I havn't done that.... give the skill to a officer in my group.

"But"... the code that checks for skill or perk for the speed and turn of a ship, is still 'stock' code. If an officer of yours has the perk, your ship gets the trait. Same with skills (whomever has the highest in your band of four).

Same goes with all your companions too (ships in your fleet).

The code is there, and still the same as the stock code (with the addition of new perks). Wish I knew the problem, but I'm not reading it and am starting to think you're just pulling our leg <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="biggrin.gif" />
</div>
im pretty sure one of my officers had "quick turn" and i was not able to use it. or does my character need the prerequisites for the perk?

anyhoo, what i wanted to ask, could you explain to me, where i need to change what, so i can scroll menus with the wasd keys, hat?

LarryHookins · Nov 16, 2006

None of the timed perks are available to you if only your officers have them. I looked into fixing that, but haven't decided yet how to make it work right.

Hook

IncredibleHat · Nov 16, 2006

Yeah, only passive perks seem to work. I think thats how stock was too, since I see no adjustment to that in the current code (?)

-------------------
As for the "A" and "D" control of battleinterface... uh... the reason I havn't posted a "how to" for that, is there is a wee slight oddity with the battleinterface the first time you load up the game.

Its hard to explain, and its really weird why it does it. But once I enter battleinterface, then hit 'escape', it clears up for the entire game run. Weird, but I havnt figured out the glitch, so I have not wanted to post how to use those keys as a result.

Scrolling in dialogs works fine though for the "W" and "S" keys. Using spacebar as the key to 'select' a choice.

-------------------
Dialog keys change how to:

Open up "<i>PotC/PROGRAM/CONTROLS/init_pc.c</i>".
Find these two lines:

<span style="font-family:Courier New"><span style="font-size:10pt;line-height:100%">CI_CreateAndSetControls( "DialogControls", "DlgUp", CI_GetKeyCode("VK_UP"), 0, false );
CI_CreateAndSetControls( "DialogControls", "DlgDown", CI_GetKeyCode("VK_DOWN"), 0, false );</span></span>

Change to these two lines:

<span style="font-family:Courier New"><span style="font-size:10pt;line-height:100%">CI_CreateAndSetControls( "DialogControls", "DlgUp", CI_GetKeyCode("KEY_W"), 0, false );
CI_CreateAndSetControls( "DialogControls", "DlgDown", CI_GetKeyCode("KEY_S"), 0, false );</span></span>

Save file, and then play the game and do a "Options -> Controls -> Reset defaults". Then you'll have to go reassign all your other keys to what you had due to the reset. but the reset is needed to get the game to remap your options with the new dialog control keys.

Don't worry that walk forward and back are ALSO set to W and S, same with walking the ship in 1st person mode. The W and S change their behavior only when you are in a dialog with someone, thus allowing you to use W and S as the choice selection keys without having to move your hand to the blastid arrow keys.

Takes getting used to at first, but now I feel handicapped in a game if I havn't got my keys set like this.

ged · Nov 16, 2006

thanks a ton.
is that possible for "A" and "D" and the trader/inventory screens too?

i took a look at the file, i think i got a little clue how to do it, but im afraid ill just bork everything up.

another thing that puzzles me:
sometimes you can use a key for different things. like space for interaction and firing.
other times you can only map ONE function to a key.
sometimes a keymapping changes the same behaviour in another surrounding.

for instance, if i try to set (through options)
3rd person sailing fire to space
then 1st person manual aim to space
then 1st person auto aim to v

suddenly 3rd person sailing fire becomes remapped again to v... arrrghhhhh
no biggy, but a little weird.

since i can use -on land- one key for different things in combat and movement mode.

Black Bart · Nov 16, 2006

Yeah the control system is a little 'old school' in some respects, i got used to it quick enough but then i have over 20 years of gaming to fall back on, and used to love the most ridiculous flight-sim controls(Space shuttle was a good example of this madness <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="wink.gif" /> ).

Atleast there are SOME simularities between the controls that get used in the different game 'views', but it is frustrating that the in-game option to re-configure the controls is far too limited on what it actualy allows you to do.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IncredibleHat @ Nov 16 2006, 01:06 AM) [snapback]171782[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
......Wish I knew the problem, but I'm not reading it and am starting to think you're just pulling our leg <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="biggrin.gif" />
</div>

Now that would be just totaly evil of me - i'd never do that rest assured <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="smile.gif" /> Sadly i cant coment on the code - only what the game 'feels' like when i play it.

But now you've got me doubting myself so i'll look into it more. I'm baseing this on what a few others have said and from my experience of playing PotC on the xbox for a good long while - still that was a long time ago, so i could be mistaken.
What i'll do is put plenty of hours into both the new PC build we got here and the Xbox(origonal game - that is going to be so horible to play now!) version and i'll take photos using my digital camera(like i did for the other xbox screenshots i posted for looking at the issue of 'dead sails') and show the actual performance differences i think there should be between the two versions. yeah that sounds like a plan <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

Oh and while we're at this kind of stuff, tell me if my reported 'problem' of the forts now fireing over massive(possibly un-realisitc) distance is my imagination also <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />
I've mentioned this a few times, and it gets roundly ignored - sooooo i think it must be a conspiricy of the coders or something <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/razz.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=" :razz

" border="0" alt="razz.gif" /> <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/icon_mrgreen1.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=" :cheeky

" border="0" alt="icon_mrgreen1.gif" />
Anyway i personaly think it does more harm than good(causeing lots of off screen surrenders/forts wasting ammo by shooting mountains etc)?

EDIT: A couple more buildsettings.h suggestions to consider:

1. #define QUEST_CHAR_MONEY 10000[is 20000]( i know its already been downgraded quite a bit, but more wont harm, especially as one of PotC flaws is the amount of easy money sloshing around, could be lower even than 10000 - i just didnt want to go under the 5 digits just in case!)

2. #define DEATHRATE 65/70[is 130](sometimes you die/sometimes you survie - so 50/50? with it set to always survive the player gets to miss some fun 'death animations'. the only one that can look out of place is if you die on land(as the picture is always the games origonal char))

3. #define CCC_PITFALLS 0.1[is 1.0](so you actualy have to 'push up' against the doors rather than be walking 3 feet away and sudenly fall in, it keeps a little 'mystery' in the game(like making the good blades much rarer has done) - and if the player wants to explore the doorways etc - they will still fall down it)

4. #define OBJECTS_IN_BOX 2[is 3](as mentioned above, with a setting of 2 its roughly 50/50 if a locked container will have any loot at all - player has to make a choice now, is it worth maybe getting hurt for no reward? player choices are good .before you would just 'zombie' around all the locked items - get damaged but know you would find some loot most of the time)

5. #define SAIL_LUFFING_SOUNDS 1[is 3](anything else and all you can hear are the sails!? as certain sound effects are quite faint in the game(sea/footsteps etc) i often have sound effects turned up quite high(3/4's) so i HAVE to change this to 1 otherwise its uncomfortable - you still hear them on 1 quite clearly to know what it means and even if you have sound effects set to the default 50%)

IncredibleHat · Nov 16, 2006

Keys:

The reason for the doubling up, is in the init_pc.c file. Every section COULD have their own key, however many actions have been 'aliased' across multiple sections. Like, the auto-aimed fire of cannons between 1st and 3rd person sailing.

One key, the 'activate battleiinterface' key, is aliased across MANY sections. I had actually tried at one point to make the key that ACTIVATEs the battleinterface, be the same key to CLOSE it (instead of esc). Unfortunately the way the game execute keys, it would execute that keypress as both actions and you could never get your interface open <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="sad.gif" />

ALL keys you see in all sections of the control options COULD be mappable to their own setting (even if it is the same key as in another section). It would mean a change in the init_pc.c file.

One thing to note though, if you really want a certain key setup, you can force it in the init_pc.c file and just reset to defaults. Its how I have my game setup. I never go into the controls options menu to setup keys, as I just edit the init_pc.c file and then have it reset to defaults <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="biggrin.gif" />

Forts:

Changing the behavior of the cannons on forts will negatively affect the behavior of cannons on ships, as its all the same code when fired. At least, thats the going jist.

To me: nothing is solid unless its built into the engine.

So, I personally think that the forts definitions of cannons have their 'upward arc' angle TOO HIGH, which allows them to aim upwards and shoot 2km away due to the new 'cannons physics' that were added a long long time ago.

But what do I know <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="wink.gif" /> I have never messed with that code, or looked into how forts are setup.

QUEST_CHAR_MONEY

I don't know what the big infatuation is with this blastid number. The stock game was 1 million. Why? Becuase out of all the characters who HAD that setting, getting it from them was difficult to do, and more of a 'insider tip' type reward. Those who know how, will already be so loaded that another million isn't going to make a hoot of difference. However lowering this number to even lower than you get from some random bloke out on the sea?!?! Geez, thats no reward for the new player who happens to come across one of these special quest characters and managers to wrangle their money out of their hands.

If anything, this setting should be set to 100,000.

SAIL_LUFFING_SOUNDS

I've never heard this, as I have always played with arcade mode on. Apparently hook never added this code to 'both' types of sailing, and as such I never noticed the difference from 1 or 3.

OBJECTS_IN_BOX

I'm fine with that, but only because I wrote in the whole rpg style items stuff. Others wont agree on the reduction as they are greedy <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="biggrin.gif" />

DEATHRATE

Good idea, as it is supposed to be a rare chance it happens. Not every single time. The only problem I have with this mod, is it wasn't completed. See, if you are in a sea battle, with at least one companion, if you 'sink' you should be rescued (by chance) by your companion, and then take command of their ship, still in the battle.

CCC_PITFALLS

There is only 1 pitfall in the game. Setting to 0.1 would basically insure no one would ever run into it, so why not just "0" ? It can be left as is I think <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />

LarryHookins · Nov 16, 2006

Sail luffing should default to 2. Someone changed it to 3 along the way. Three is too much in my opinion.

The reason it doesn't happen in arcade sailing is because it's impossible to sail at the edge of the wind. You'll move forward no matter what direction the wind is blowing, so having the luffing sounds if you're sailing into the wind would be pretty annoying.

Hook

LarryHookins · Nov 16, 2006

Here's my suggestion for settings in the BuildSettings.h file:

IF THE SETTING WOULD HAVE HAD A PARTICULAR VALUE IN THE STOCK GAME, F*CKING *LEAVE* IT AT THAT SETTING! THERE ARE REASONS THE STOCK GAME USED THOSE NUMBERS!! The fact that *YOU* don't know what that reason is has no bearing on these numbers.

There. Feels better to get that out.

Just because some modder likes a different setting is not sufficient reason to change it for everyone. Especially on things like the control keys. People coming over from the stock game will expect the controls to work the same. People who want the controls changed can change them. I *DAMN* sure do NOT want to use someone else's customized keyboard layout.

Hook

Black Bart · Nov 16, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IncredibleHat @ Nov 16 2006, 03:27 PM) [snapback]171867[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
Forts:

Changing the behavior of the cannons on forts will negatively affect the behavior of cannons on ships, as its all the same code when fired. At least, thats the going jist.

To me: nothing is solid unless its built into the engine.

So, I personally think that the forts definitions of cannons have their 'upward arc' angle TOO HIGH, which allows them to aim upwards and shoot 2km away due to the new 'cannons physics' that were added a long long time ago.

But what do I know <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="wink.gif" /> I have never messed with that code, or looked into how forts are setup.</div>

Ah yes that would make sense - in terms of the distance vs angle of fire. Still IF forts are behaving exactly as ships do - then with the real cannons mod on shouldnt the angle of fire be much restricted? And also you dont see ships still trying to attack things over 2km away or even be able to hit a target at that distance?(even in stock game with huge possible angles of fire) Forts can do it know - without breaking a sweat, i think i've seen them fireing over 3km a few times? just seems wrong.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IncredibleHat @ Nov 16 2006, 03:27 PM) [snapback]171867[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
QUEST_CHAR_MONEY 10000

</div>

Ahhh ok its for very specific chars - i thought it was a random limit for ANY char you can meet and talk to. Ok ignore that one <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IncredibleHat @ Nov 16 2006, 03:27 PM) [snapback]171867[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
SAIL_LUFFING_SOUNDS 1

I've never heard this, as I have always played with arcade mode on. Apparently hook never added this code to 'both' types of sailing, and as such I never noticed the difference from 1 or 3.</div>

serious? you only play in arcade mode - havent you been curious? <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="smile.gif" /> Well hooks reply clears things up a bit. Still i think if some other bods tested it as 1 they would be cool with it(and still hear other soundeffects at the same time <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="smile.gif" /> ).

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IncredibleHat @ Nov 16 2006, 03:27 PM) [snapback]171867[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
OBJECTS_IN_BOX 2

I'm fine with that, but only because I wrote in the whole rpg style items stuff. Others wont agree on the reduction as they are greedy <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="biggrin.gif" /></div>

2 actualy makes it quite fun - "will I/wont I?" "can i afford to lose some hp for nothing right at this moment?" - choices <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IncredibleHat @ Nov 16 2006, 03:27 PM) [snapback]171867[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
DEATHRATE 70

Good idea, as it is supposed to be a rare chance it happens. Not every single time. The only problem I have with this mod, is it wasn't completed. See, if you are in a sea battle, with at least one companion, if you 'sink' you should be rescued (by chance) by your companion, and then take command of their ship, still in the battle.
</div>

The death animations are great also. in future I'll look into changeing the on land one so you wouldn't actualy see your body(always nathanial hawk) - but maybe replace it with a skeleton,like in the other animations? more stuff for me to do in the coming years <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IncredibleHat @ Nov 16 2006, 03:27 PM) [snapback]171867[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
CCC_PITFALLS 0.1

There is only 1 pitfall in the game. Setting to 0.1 would basically insure no one would ever run into it, so why not just "0" ? It can be left as is I think <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />
</div>

ok so "0" isnt off completely, just makes you have to try the door first? i guess in that light 0.1 doesnt really matter - still i like the idea of it being a surprise rewarding the player for trying something+exploring, than just walking along and suddenly bamn! not a biggie.

IncredibleHat · Nov 16, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Hook @ Nov 16 2006, 09:44 AM) [snapback]171877[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'>
Sail luffing should default to 2. Someone changed it to 3 along the way. Three is too much in my opinion.

The reason it doesn't happen in arcade sailing is because it's impossible to sail at the edge of the wind. You'll move forward no matter what direction the wind is blowing, so having the luffing sounds if you're sailing into the wind would be pretty annoying.

Hook
</div>
Well then! No wonder! ... I had always said, "what luffing sounds?".

Hehe... Wasn't till I was looken at the speed/turn rates with perks/skills that I came across WHY I never heard it. I think my game options have been stuck on arcade for a long long time. I should actually turn the friggen thing off, to see how more fun the sailing is. I always found it stupid that you could sail straight upwind. Were like in SM Pirates! if you went into the wind, youactually moved 'backwards'.

Setting pitfalls to 0 will turn off that single pitfall in the game. Period. No open, no pass go, no pitfall <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="biggrin.gif" /> So, leaving it at 1, means it will occur when the player is wandering around in oxbay town. Of course, its a little bad for the first time player, especially if they happen to be doing th tutorial at the time *cough*.

Black Bart · Nov 16, 2006

<img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

:" border="0" alt="laugh.gif" />

I'm still gobsmacked you've never tried 'realistic' sailing <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/keith.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=" :keith

" border="0" alt="keith.gif" />

And ref Hooks erm.....polite plea for sanity <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />

Yes i'm following you on this(controls especaily) - except for where we're dealing with the mods, this is fair game to tweak if we can see an issue in game with the balance/functionality of the feature.

Of course most of us just put the settings we want and away we go -still for quite a few people, what we think is easy might be a bit intimidating?

oh and the fact PotC was half baked when it was released is also mitigating reasons to make it more fully baked - which is what you guys have been doing for ages now <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

Stable Build 13 Work In Progress

Buccaneer

Navigation Officer

Corsair

Landlubber

Landlubber

Corsair

Landlubber

Corsair

Landlubber

Landlubber

Buccaneer

Landlubber

Landlubber

Corsair

Landlubber

Buccaneer

Buccaneer

Corsair

Landlubber

Corsair