New Windows Installer and Source Tarballs

New Windows Installer and Source Tarballs

[Eric McDonald]

Hello Xconquerors,

   A new source tarball and new installer for Windows are now available at:
   http://xconq_hacker.home.comcast.net

   There are a number of bugfixes in the new prelease. Also, there are 
updates and improvements to Elijah's Starfleet Battles family of games, 
including one new family member, Conquest. Unfortunately, there is 
little to see in the way of SDL interface improvements at this point.

   Enjoy,
     Eric

Re: New Windows Installer and Source Tarballs

[Elijah Meeks]

>    There are a number of bugfixes in the new
> prelease. Also, there are 

It doesn't seem like looks-like and see-mistake-chance
do what they're supposed to?  Is this the case or are
my tables still screwy?


		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com

Re: New Windows Installer and Source Tarballs

[Lincoln Peters]

On Sun, 2004-10-10 at 15:51, Elijah Meeks wrote:
> >    There are a number of bugfixes in the new
> > prelease. Also, there are 
> 
> It doesn't seem like looks-like and see-mistake-chance
> do what they're supposed to?  Is this the case or are
> my tables still screwy?

I've played with see-mistake-chance and looks-like, but I never
thoroughly tested them because the AI didn't understand the subtle
tactical value of a unit that looks like another unit.  What do your
tables look like?

---
Lincoln Peters
<sampln@sbcglobal.net>

I am an optimist.  It does not seem too much use being anything else.
		-- Winston Churchill

Re: New Windows Installer and Source Tarballs

[Eric McDonald]

Elijah Meeks wrote:
>>   There are a number of bugfixes in the new
>>prelease. Also, there are 
> 
> It doesn't seem like looks-like and see-mistake-chance
> do what they're supposed to?  Is this the case or are
> my tables still screwy?

Your 'see-mistake-chance' looks fine. Technically, you don't need to 
crank the weight up so high in 'looks-like', but it shouldn't matter.

If you want to see the bugfix at work, start up the 'battle-bug.xcq' 
game that you sent me. You will (should) see the markers instead of the 
ships for the two furthest out Fed vessels.

Eric

Re: New Windows Installer and Source Tarballs

[Elijah Meeks]

> Your 'see-mistake-chance' looks fine. Technically,
> you don't need to 
> crank the weight up so high in 'looks-like', but it
> shouldn't matter.
> 
> If you want to see the bugfix at work, start up the
> 'battle-bug.xcq' 
> game that you sent me. You will (should) see the
> markers instead of the 
> ships for the two furthest out Fed vessels.

I don't have the .xcq in front of me, but I'll check
it as soon as I can.  The two tables are:

(table see-mistake-chance
   (lrsensors ship-types 10000)
   (damlrsensors ship-types 10000)

)

(table looks-like
   (ship-types fedmarker 10000)
)

I haven't checked it with looks-like set to 100, maybe
that's the problem.  Also, the fedmarker unit has the
same point-value of a cruiser, so hopefully that helps
the AI.  Otherwise, since it's a unit that never
appears in the game, I can give it all the stats of a
fully functional cruiser, that's no problem.


		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com

Re: New Windows Installer and Source Tarballs

[Eric McDonald]

Elijah Meeks wrote:

> (table looks-like
>    (ship-types fedmarker 10000)
> )
> 
> I haven't checked it with looks-like set to 100, maybe
> that's the problem.

Well, 'looks-like' is just a table of weights. You could set:
   (ship-types fedmarker 1)
and it would be the same as above. The only time the numbers would 
matter is if you had something like:
   (ship-types fedmarker 100)
   (ship-types klingmarker 150)
in which case there would be a greater chance of a ship being seen as a 
Klingon ship than a Federation ship on the LR sensors.

Eric

P.S. I forgot to uncomment the 'match-transport-side' property in 
Starfleet Battles before I made the new release. Sorry.

Re: New Windows Installer and Source Tarballs

[Lincoln Peters]

On Sun, 2004-10-10 at 18:45, Elijah Meeks wrote:
> I don't have the .xcq in front of me, but I'll check
> it as soon as I can.  The two tables are:
> 
> (table see-mistake-chance
>    (lrsensors ship-types 10000)
>    (damlrsensors ship-types 10000)
> 
> )
> 
> (table looks-like
>    (ship-types fedmarker 10000)
> )

One possible issue I see is that (to my knowledge) there is no mechanism
by which the view code could determine whether the unit you see is a
"ship-types" unit or a "fedmarker" unit.  You would need a way for the
views of other units to override the views of "lrsensors" and
"damlrsensors" units when you get close enough for more accurate
short-range sensors to take over.

This would not be easy to fix, as you would need some mechanism to
determine which unit view would take priority.  This would have to be
added as either a unit property (u_view_priority) or a table
(uu_view_priority), depending on how much detail you need.

---
Lincoln Peters
<sampln@sbcglobal.net>

Too much is just enough.
		-- Mark Twain, on whiskey