Development Snapshot - MegaMek, MegaMekLab, MekHQ: v0.43.0

[pheonixstorm]

Yes

[ckessel]

There was a MekHQ feature request thread at one point, but since this thread is active I figured I'd post it here.

Related to the "tweaking princess" thread, it'd be nice to be able to assign AI behaviors to specific units rather than to a side as a whole. That'd give the ability to do the tweaking without having to go through the steps to create several small "sides" that are required to give different behavior to different mechs.

[Hammer]

There was a MekHQ feature request thread at one point, but since this thread is active I figured I'd post it here.

Related to the "tweaking princess" thread, it'd be nice to be able to assign AI behaviors to specific units rather than to a side as a whole. That'd give the ability to do the tweaking without having to go through the steps to create several small "sides" that are required to give different behavior to different mechs.

I already have that data in MM, and it's used in the formation builder that's in the newest dev snapshot. The problem with putting it the unit files is that the role is only available for official units (and not all of those), leaving a large number of unofficial units out. I've done a fair amount of work on an algorithm to determine most likely role for a unit which generally narrows it down to three or four possibilities out of the eight. That's probably as good as it's going to get. I haven't decided whatnto do with that data yet.

The best way to make sure this happens to open a RFE on the MegaMek Github tracker (see my sig).  Forum posts get lost and forgotten easily.

[Lanceman]

Standalone MegaMek 0.43.0 is not working correctly for me. Once I get into the game lobby and open the add units screen, it will not add units or close, and I have to kill the process from the task manager. 0.43.0 as included with MekHQ is working normally.

[pheonixstorm]

Any errors in the log file?

[Shatara]

Getting the same thing. Looks like something with drawing the unit sprites is throwing NPE.

edit: Actually...what the buck did you do to the unit images folder!?

[Hammer]

edit: Actually...what the buck did you do to the unit images folder!?

Yep...looks like the packaging scripts have NOT added all the sprites which is causing the crash.

The quick fix for now is to download an use the MekHQ download which is complete.

[arlith]

edit: Actually...what the buck did you do to the unit images folder!?

All of the images that are included in the release are now packed into an image atlas.  So instead of having 1,000's of 40KB files, we have several much larger image atlases.  The mechset files haven't changed at all, as there's an XML file that keeps track of the which image files where packaged this way, and that path can get translated into a location in the image atlas.  This moderately reduces the size of the releases, but also makes it much easier for your filesystem to handle.

[Sartris]

found one of those weird discrepancies that only really happens by accident.

LB-10X prototype intro date - 2590
LB-10X ammo intro date - 2595

this means that you can't load LB10 ammo on a design with an intro date during those five years. my current campaign is set in 2591  :))

This is a problem (if you want to call it a problem) with all prototype ballistic weapons where there's a fiveish year gap between when the gun prototyped and the production model (and attending ammo) are introduced.

[Hammer]

found one of those weird discrepancies that only really happens by accident.

LB-10X prototype intro date - 2590
LB-10X ammo intro date - 2595

this means that you can't load LB10 ammo on a design with an intro date during those five years. my current campaign is set in 2591  :))

This is a problem (if you want to call it a problem) with all prototype ballistic weapons where there's a fiveish year gap between when the gun prototyped and the production model (and attending ammo) are introduced.

These are all being addressed in the IO branch and when IO is complete the only issue will be ones CGL has missed.

[Southernskies]

When you think about it, that gap is not necessarily a bug.  Stealing a weapon doesn't mean the ammo to go with it is in commercial production.

During prototyping, they're probably making each round by hand and then expending all of them on the weapon range.

[Sartris]

These are all being addressed in the IO branch and when IO is complete the only issue will be ones CGL has missed.

cool

When you think about it, that gap is not necessarily a bug.  Stealing a weapon doesn't mean the ammo to go with it is in commercial production.

During prototyping, they're probably making each round by hand and then expending all of them on the weapon range.

from the perspective of using a design program, i want to be able to load ammunition for weapons that require ammunition

[Hammer]

cool

from the perspective of using a design program, i want to be able to load ammunition for weapons that require ammunition

So i'll get the dates set to match in the short term.  For the record, I hate the ~ thing on dates.  But if/when I ever get IO finished these issues will go away.  Best part people can start fighting over tech progression on units.