Difference between revisions of "Talk:Exploits"

From UFOpaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(53 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
Does anybody mind if I delete the "Extra Ammo" exploit? What is described there, is actually avoidance of a glitch, not an Exploit. And it's already described under [[Known_Bugs#Disappearing_Ammo]]. I'm about to flesh out the Glitch, and it's annoying to have to repeat in two places when the second's not really an Exploit. I'll do it in a week if nobody objects. If somebody objects, it stays. ---[[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 13:35, 11 December 2005 (PST)
+
== Section structuring ==
  
 +
EsTeR: Perhaps we'll go with the levels of severity to split the exploits into groups, but then make separate pages for each severity level and then move all the related exploits into them. This page is getting quite large (the article).
  
−
==Repairing damaged UFOs==
+
All that needs to be left behind is a quick listing of the exploits (bookmarks).
 +
 +
This might be a good way to reduce the size of the document to something that's less intimidating.
  
−
Want to stop a UFO from doing it's mission? Shoot it down. Want to get a full load of engines and elerium? Leave it alone for about 2 days. The longer you wait before launching the ground assault, the smaller the hole and smoke, and eventually the craft will be completely repaired.
+
- [[User:NKF|NKF]]
  
−
Note that you will also get a full complement of enemy soldiers -- all the dead will come back to life when you do this.
+
: "intimidating" - thats exactly what i thought before I started editing this page.
 +
Yes for the bookmarks thingy.
  
−
(You may want to save the game before landing, so you can resume waiting if the UFO was not fully repaired when you attacked.)
+
I've got plans to rip up the Known Bugs page and categorise the bugs into different ratings also. i think four/five major titles should do, obviously having the critical game-killer bugs first, then severe next, etc.
  
−
----
+
"get quite large" - and another reason! My browser (firefox v2.##) started bombing out when trying to load the whole page. i dunno if its wiki fault, or the browser, but I think it would look 'unprofessional' on us all if it were a dodgy mess. Uniformity and ease of navigation for all!
  
−
Actually, UFO damage is random. You see, the damage done to a UFO in the battlescape is caused by the game detonating the power units with varying detonation strengths every time the map is generated. Sometimes it's only strong enough to destroy the power unit, and if there are many power units, some of the might not even be detonated at all. So there's no wait, just save the game in the Geoscape, and enter the mission. If the damage is not to your liking, reload and try and try again until you get a favourable outcome. - [[User:NKF|NKF]]  
+
I have been re-writing most sub sections with an eye to an easy explaination to start the article, then trying to apply uniformness in formatting. I think I'm going OK so far. [[User:EsTeR|EsTeR]]
−
----
 
  
−
Keybouncer and NKF, you've both tested this likelihood versus time? Seems easy enough to do. Two related questions (have they been answered here?): 1) How long do crash sites persist?, and 2) If one Power Source (PS) blows up, yes, it will destroy E115 within a particular [[Explosions|distance]], but will it cause them to explode?
 
  
−
The reason I ask is that page 311 of the OSG says PSs have a 70% chance of exploding, which sounds about right to me. A table of probabilities of finding intact PSs for the various UFOs could be generated. I would have thought the answer to #2 is that they don't cause them to explode; they're not an [[Explosions#Explosive_Map_Objects|explosive object]]. But in my experience, the ground floor of a Terror Ship is always the same - all four PSs are always blasted up, and the surrounding interior walls are always in the same bad shape (i.e., they're always all gone, except by the door at the south).
+
= IS EVERYONE HAPPY =
 +
...with the look of the exploits main page??
  
−
Anyway, a probabilistic thing would be fun to do. But the question of successive explosions has been puzzling me. Could E115 trigger something special in crashes? (Successive explosions even though it's not registered as an explosive?) E115 has always had that odd boolean checkmark at [[OBDATA.DAT]][45]. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]]
 
  
−
----
+
I think if any links are made to the actual exploits, it is possible to go thru the main page with its dooms-day disclaimer?? The reason why I ask this is just so any visitors to this site are "forced"' to go thru the main exploit page to get to the exploit texts if anyone linked to the texts from elsewhere. I dunno what it possible.
  
−
While I have not collected large amounts of data to show any pattern in the extent of the damage vs time, I haven't really seen any difference in damage between the moment the crash site was created or at a point just before the crash site vanishes. It's roughly the same and varies from game to game. If the UFO is repaired over time, this information will have to be stored somewhere. Craft.dat or loc.dat are probably the most likely files to watch. As for the explosions - I guess during the pre-detonation stages, the game may take into account nearby power units that get caught in the blast and detonate them as well. The 70% chance still holds true for isolated units. Can we add extra power units to the existing craft maps to test this I wonder? Or what about setting this boolean flag for enemy corpses, and crossing our fingers? Heh. That might not work. - [[User:NKF|NKF]]
+
:I think there is a way to do that... NKF, you know how, right? BTW ... you are going to go fix all the old links now, right? :) (Using "what links here") So they point to the exploit itself? I for one could've lived with simply collating all the exploits under headings on the Exploit page... then no re-linking would've been needed. But you and NKF spend a lot more time here, and both favored new subpages, shrug. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 16:09, 12 October 2007 (PDT)
  
−
----
+
::Bookmarks? Simple, use a standard wiki link, but add a hash and then the section title that you want to jump right to (naturally if it's in the same page, just leave the page name out and just put a hash in right away). Check the source for this example that takes to you to ExploitsB [[ExploitsB#My Pet Alien | My Pet Alien]] section. - [[User:NKF|NKF]]
  
−
Hehe, it might be fun to play with those booleans. Or not. ;)
+
:Hey MTR, I will go thru and fix links. I knew what I'm getting myself into by going into the exploits page and running amok. Its not that I have a perverse trait to make anyone suffer, its just that my browser was screwing up the page because it was so large and convoluted. Relax please. Obviously there is no reason to go thru and clean stuff up until the exploits page (and all sub-pages) are in order. I'm eyeing off that Known Bugs page as well. Once those two are in order and have a more logical progression, then visitors to the site can enjoy themselves instead of wondering why things are going spaz.  
  
−
I wouldn't think info has to be stored anywhere; after all, the crash site is not created unless/until you fight it. (If I remember right.) If it does "repair", it could simply be based on the time since the crash... and I guess this would basically equate to, a lower probability of PS explosion. FWIW, I never had the impression that more time meant less damage, but then I wasn't paying attention to the possibility.
+
'''by all means''' please help with edits if you want. I don't actually contrib many new things, but I do want to be able to enjoy learning new things without losing half a page of what you, and the few regulars, have written... and for your contributions, and other poeples contributions, thankyou for making my favourite game series better.
  
−
I guess that, since PS explosions are performed by code that is "above" normal battlescape properties (i.e., PSs are not explosive per se), it's entirely possible they also programmed in, that they trigger successive detonations. It could be fairly easily tested, in theory... There are only 3 UFOs where PSs can "interact": Harvester (2 PSs), Supply (3), Terror (4). Supply UFOs might be the most interesting in terms of teasing out whether there are successive detonations. FWIW, straight odds (no interaction) of having 2 PSs intact is 9.00% (.3<sup>2</sup>), 3 intact is 2.70%, and 4 intact is 0.81%.
+
:No problem, sounds great and is looking good, EsTeR. :) Right, the Bugs page is another one that grew into a huge "successive tack-on" page. NKF, I see what you mean - I missed how easy the link-fixes would be. The Explosion page is another "tack on" page - most of that done by me (the writing, at least) - and I hope to restructure it sometime soon. Meanwhile I'm still adding to it, lol. - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 16:02, 17 October 2007 (PDT)
−
 
 
−
Remind me, is there some quick way to "lift the fog of war" and see the whole map? Maybe with [[Links|Mapview]]? (I don't have it installed ATM; I recently got a new PC.) If so, it would be fairly easy to see e.g. if terror ships ever vary their explosion pattern, etc. Also any differences between combat early or late after a crash.
 
−
 
 
−
Maybe we should move all these comments, maybe even this whole section, to Discussion? - [[User:MikeTheRed|MikeTheRed]] 17:43, 10 January 2007 (PST)
 
−
 
 
−
----
 
−
 
 
−
Moved - and discussions split up and line breaks inserted for your reading convenience. Coincidentally, Mike, it has been a while, but I'll let you decide what to do with your earlier comment up above.
 
−
 
 
−
As for the maps - I know XComutil has an option to clear the fog of war and make everyone on the map visible (and sets the lighting for the whole map to the brightest setting until you move). Use the command line utility's '''VIS''' command. Like so: '''xcomutil game_n vis wrt''' - game_n being the directory for your tactical savegame.
 
−
 
 
−
-[[User:NKF|NKF]]
 
−
 
 
−
----
 
−
 
 
−
Or the time left until the crash site disappears.  <b>That</b> is almost certainly in the savegame, and would be worth mapping in its own right.
 
−
 
 
−
-- [[User:Zaimoni|Zaimoni]], 9:25 Jan 11 2007 CST
 

Latest revision as of 23:02, 17 October 2007

Section structuring

EsTeR: Perhaps we'll go with the levels of severity to split the exploits into groups, but then make separate pages for each severity level and then move all the related exploits into them. This page is getting quite large (the article).

All that needs to be left behind is a quick listing of the exploits (bookmarks).

This might be a good way to reduce the size of the document to something that's less intimidating.

- NKF

"intimidating" - thats exactly what i thought before I started editing this page.

Yes for the bookmarks thingy.

I've got plans to rip up the Known Bugs page and categorise the bugs into different ratings also. i think four/five major titles should do, obviously having the critical game-killer bugs first, then severe next, etc.

"get quite large" - and another reason! My browser (firefox v2.##) started bombing out when trying to load the whole page. i dunno if its wiki fault, or the browser, but I think it would look 'unprofessional' on us all if it were a dodgy mess. Uniformity and ease of navigation for all!

I have been re-writing most sub sections with an eye to an easy explaination to start the article, then trying to apply uniformness in formatting. I think I'm going OK so far. EsTeR


IS EVERYONE HAPPY

...with the look of the exploits main page??


I think if any links are made to the actual exploits, it is possible to go thru the main page with its dooms-day disclaimer?? The reason why I ask this is just so any visitors to this site are "forced"' to go thru the main exploit page to get to the exploit texts if anyone linked to the texts from elsewhere. I dunno what it possible.

I think there is a way to do that... NKF, you know how, right? BTW ... you are going to go fix all the old links now, right? :) (Using "what links here") So they point to the exploit itself? I for one could've lived with simply collating all the exploits under headings on the Exploit page... then no re-linking would've been needed. But you and NKF spend a lot more time here, and both favored new subpages, shrug. - MikeTheRed 16:09, 12 October 2007 (PDT)
Bookmarks? Simple, use a standard wiki link, but add a hash and then the section title that you want to jump right to (naturally if it's in the same page, just leave the page name out and just put a hash in right away). Check the source for this example that takes to you to ExploitsB My Pet Alien section. - NKF
Hey MTR, I will go thru and fix links. I knew what I'm getting myself into by going into the exploits page and running amok. Its not that I have a perverse trait to make anyone suffer, its just that my browser was screwing up the page because it was so large and convoluted. Relax please. Obviously there is no reason to go thru and clean stuff up until the exploits page (and all sub-pages) are in order. I'm eyeing off that Known Bugs page as well. Once those two are in order and have a more logical progression, then visitors to the site can enjoy themselves instead of wondering why things are going spaz.

by all means please help with edits if you want. I don't actually contrib many new things, but I do want to be able to enjoy learning new things without losing half a page of what you, and the few regulars, have written... and for your contributions, and other poeples contributions, thankyou for making my favourite game series better.

No problem, sounds great and is looking good, EsTeR. :) Right, the Bugs page is another one that grew into a huge "successive tack-on" page. NKF, I see what you mean - I missed how easy the link-fixes would be. The Explosion page is another "tack on" page - most of that done by me (the writing, at least) - and I hope to restructure it sometime soon. Meanwhile I'm still adding to it, lol. - MikeTheRed 16:02, 17 October 2007 (PDT)
Retrieved from "https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Talk:Exploits&oldid=13564"