Talk:TFTDextender

Questions or Comments

A place to provide feedback or ask questions:

Thanks to Kyrub, Spike, and numerous others who help to troubleshoot problems, provide feedback on releases, and innumerable other activities to help make TFTDextender and the game better! - Tycho

• The zip archive does not seem to include an .ini file. Where do I get the .ini file from?

If the latest release is a patch, meaning there are no new additions to the INI file, only the patcher.dll file will be updated. In this way, those who already have the current release won't have their INI settings overwritten. You will need to download the last full version, extract the files from it, and then extract file from the latest patch. When I first release the Extender and lots of problems were being reported, I was releasing fixes almost on a weekly basis and so I still continue with this idea. Tycho

Bug Reports

Major Bugs

• Battlescape Crash when HWP present in non-Base Defense missions

An error in the code will cause the game to crash. This will be fixed in the next release. For now, it can be avoided by copying the line for 'No Freebies for Tanks' from the bugfix reference file into the [Bug Fix] section of the INI - Tycho

• Battlescape Crash when alien (Old One) is in fire and "Fire Fix" bugfix is enabled.

I've got a savegame which makes TFTDextender chocke on the "Fire Fix" bugfix - basically, during a terror map (Fiji, iirc), there's a Deep One on the third level in the house. I've just fired an incendiary round at it, and it's now standing in fire. I end the turn, and when all alien movement is done (presumably this is where the fire-check happens) the game crashes with the error message "TFTD crashed at 0x42E061 with error 0xC0000005 trying to access 0x0051C1C0". Those addresses are the same each crash, so it's a consistent bug.

Disabling "Fire Fix" before starting TFTD and loading that savegame prevents the crash, and the Deep One dies.

System is Windows 7 64 bit (up to date with patches and service packs), running on the Steam version of TFTD (but not through steam, obviously).

I can provide the savegame (the entire GAME_8 folder as a zip) and the TFTDextender.ini in use, in the hopes this will aid in debugging. - MacGyver

Thanks MacGyver! It is nice when someone has troubleshot an issue to identify the cause. Just based on your initial report, I found the problem: The TFTD base code differed slightly from EU. I found the offending lines and modified them to fit the TFTD code. The problem was in the section to check if the unit catches fire. - Tycho 10:58, 2 May 2013 (EDT)

• (a)Lobstermen don't use their guns and (b)their melee attack is weak.

The first part(a) is a problem in the fix for the code to determine a unit's abilities in the first step of the AI process. The latter problem (b) is a bug in the original program. If a unit has a ranged weapon, the damage is set to the value of the weapon's melee attack and not the strength of the lobsterman, as it is for all other units that have a natural melee attack.

• Interception Crash

TFTD latest version (with the 7.2 patch) crashed in Geoscape on the 1st Intercept (subs vs Alien craft). I had already had a tactical combat against a landed craft, but this did not involve an interception. I did notice that the Geoscape Graphs looked strange (faulty) prior to the interception and crash. Running windowed mode with most things switched on apart from the [ make defense missions harder ] mods. Geoscape and battlefield shortcuts switched [off].

If this happens again, please include any error message as well. -Tycho (talk) 09:37, 2 June 2015 (EDT)

I also encountered this issue. Saved game here: File:GAME InterceptorCrash.zip There are two failure modes I've seen. Either the game dumps to desktop with this error message: TFTD crashed at 0x556EC1C7 with error 0xC0000005 trying to access 0x00F03634, or the interception runs as normal except that the Barracuda doesn't fire its weapons. Either is inconvenient :-) Off the Rails (talk) 22:16, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Latest issue of TFTD full, with the 7.2 patch I noticed in first tactical game that one of my aquanauts holding a gas cannon had it magically transformed into a sonic pistol (i think from the Deep One I was targetting at the time). Obviously I could not use it as it was my first mission. When I clicked away from the aquanaut and clicked back on him later, the sonic pistol was back to the gas cannon.

This sounds like the strangeness that using the More Reaction Fire mod can introduce. Try playing the game without that mod enabled for a while.-Tycho (talk) 01:45, 3 June 2015 (EDT)

I also note that even though I only expended 2 shots from each of my gas cannons carrying HE ammo, all my HE ammo was used up at the end of the mission.

TFTD needs the "collect ammo" feature that is used in UFO.

TFTD does have the collect ammo feature but it seems it needs more work.-Tycho (talk) 20:23, 2 June 2015 (EDT)

Minor Bugs

• I've got a feeling, though I can't check, that "Know Thy Enemy" currently doesn't register that autopsies have been performed - e.g. it shouldn't take 4 or 5 sonic-blasta shots to down a single Gill Man. When I disable "Know Thy Enemy", the game becomes significantly easier, also in missions with creatures on which autopsies have been performed. - MacGyver

I found the problem and the code is working now. It will be out in the next version.

• For some reason, the loader (newest version) opens TWO windows at startup. One is titled 'X-COM Terror From the Deep Gold Edition' and contains the game's video output, the other is titled 'Terror From The Deep.exe' and is completely blank (not even a blinking console prompt). Win7 auto-groups their buttons on the taskbar and closing either closes the other too. Is this normal behavior or am I missing something?--amitakartok 11:47, 24 August 2013 (EDT)

To my knowledge, this has always been the case even with UFO Extender. The first 'blank' window is the loader which spawns the second 'game' window. Closing the Extender will abort the game and quitting the game automatically closes the Extender.

Well, UFOextender never did that for me, only TFTDextender. Maybe it's due to using an earlier build?--amitakartok 11:43, 25 August 2013 (EDT)

It's doesn't happen with UFO. I checked earlier versions and this has been present since the beginning. The command to create the process for the game is different from UFO and the flags don't seem to allow the extender shell window to close. I've tried a few things but either they have no effect or they lock the game as it boots up. Since it is a cosmetic issue and doesn't impact the gameplay, I'm not too concerned with it for now.-Tycho (talk)

Fixed in version 1.07.3-Tycho (talk) 06:58, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Things that TFTDextender does not fix

Just more or less as a note to the reader, TFTDextender does not fix some of the following things that are sometimes thought of as needing fixing (and this is probably deliberate?):

• Does not fix the apparent swap of the ground map for the VERY SMALL Survey Ship (1 occupant) with the SMALL Escort (half-dozen or more occupants). So you get the VERY SMALL sub occupying about 25 squares of usable area on the Battlescape, and the supposedly larger SMALL sub occupying one square of usable area on the Battlescape, begging the question of how all those aliens got inside there in the first place. XcomUtil will fix this, as will the original patches that XcomUtil incorporates.
• Does not fix the incorrect pictures for the large USO in the interception window.

Both of the above issues have been corrected by Zombie, who swapped the USO map files and changed INTERCEPTION.DAT. You can get these updates from the StrategyCore file section.[1]

• Does not fix the Dart Gun to make it any less utterly useless. Though you can do this yourself via the OBDATA.DAT section of TFTDextender. (Suggestion: don't fix it. The useless Dart Gun is all part of the "oh no we're all gonna die" experience of the beginning of TFTD.)
• Does not improve the armour and effectiveness of the basic Aqua-Jet and Gas Cannon Coelecanths (it does upgrade the Coelecanth/Gauss). (Again, suggestion: this is a good thing - XCOM should start the game hopelessly outclassed, and scramble to catch up).

The 'Ablative Armor' mod improves the endurance of the Gas Cannon and Aqua-Jet Coelecanths.

• Does not allow you to mount weapons on Tritons, or use Barracudas as transport subs. XComUtil can help you cheat in this way.
• Does not allow you to have 360 degree vision out of your sub before exiting it. (What kind of coward would want that?). XComUtil does this.

Actually, XComUtil just sets the facing of your soldiers to each vector which gives you full view around the Skyranger. The same thing happens if you have a soldier on the front and back, right and left corners rotate in place 180 degrees on the first turn.

FYI

• The game crashes when I start mission against a sub: "XCOM crashed at 0x7C82A5CD with error 0xC0000005 trying to access 0xFFE00B30."

It's an already reported bug. What is happening is the Alien Sub is landing on land, and the Triton is also attempting to land on land. Probably the game crashes when it fails to generate the appropriate terrain type? So the GEOSCAPE map/terrain data must be corrupted. I've seen three examples of this. In a couple of cases the landing site is clearly inland, by hundreds of kilometres. In some cases it's right on the sea/land boundary and hard to tell. I have two save games that reproduce the bug now. From memory, the previous cases all happened around North Africa, like these present cases. Spike 08:31, 9 September 2012 (EDT)

• Trojan Horse? AVG Anti-Virus reports that TFTDExtender.exe contains a Trojan Horse (Generic30.MKG).

AVG has been known to produce false positives before. I use AV software on my machine and have checked this by uploading/downloading from a site with its own AV check. In some sense Extender acts like a trojan, in that, it overwrites code in memory, just not in a malicious way.

Resolved Reported Problems

• USOs not detected or Alien Missions not appearing with the Geoscape Clock mod enabled

Fixed in version 1.07

• Changes to executable name under [loader] section of INI ignored by Extender

Fixed with version 1.061

• Save Equipment not working

Fixed in 1.05p4

• Weight Issues or "Weightless" Ammo Bug

All fixed in 1.05p4

• Items on transport floor lost on Abort

Fixed in 1.05p4

• Coelacanth/Gauss mutates into Coelacanth/G.C. after battle

Fixed in 1.05p4

• Cannot build Leviathan

Fixed with 1.05p3.2

• Mysterious artifacts recovered during aborted missions

Fixed in the 1.05p3.1-

• Stunned MC'd Aquanauts MIA on Abort

Fixed in 1.05p2 -

• • Crewed Flying Sub Lost on Abort

Fixed in 105p4.

• Materials deducted from wrong base

Fixed in 1.05p2

• OBDATA changes in INI only working in Geoscape

Fixed in 1.05p2.

• Displacer/Sonic damage incorrect
• Weight Display in Inventory not Localised
• Grenade Resistance in INI file
• Manufacturing Projects Minimum Production

In the unmodified game, if you have a manufacturing project underway, you can't reduce the quantity below the level that have been built or are in production now (the number that have been built, plus 1). With the autosell and autobuild features turned on, you need to be able to cursor down below zero, so the quantity cursor no longer stops when you reduce to this minimum. This may have some unintended effects, like changing a manufacturing project to produce less units than it has already reduced. On the other hand there may be no impact at all other than losing the built-in stop on the quantity cursor that reminds you how many units of that type you have already built or started to build. Spike 22:06, 21 September 2012 (EDT)

It would be interesting to experiment to see what the effects of doing this are, if any: What happens if you reduce the number desired for an item below what has already been produced? What happens if you create an order for a set number of items and later change it to auto-produce? Tycho

OK I will take a look at this and report back. Unless some bugs/glitches are being introduced, the only loss of existing functionality is that you can currently use the down arrow keys in the unmodified version to in effect say "stop production after completion of the next unit", which avoids the wasted cost and effort of hitting the Stop Production button. Spike 04:45, 25 September 2012 (EDT)

Tested - If I reduce the production quantity of a current production run to less than what as already been produced, the display completion time changes (incorrectly) to 'Indefinite', but production ends after completion of the next unit. So if I start by producing 10 units, wait until I have produced 2, then reduce the quantity to 2 (or probably 1), production stops after 3 units. Thies basically replicates the pre-existing behaviour when using the down arrow on the Quantity, so there has been no loss of functionality with your Mod. Also, Autosell and Autoproduce work normally when applied as changes to an existing production run. The only thing is I can't distinguish them on the Manufacturing display - both say 'unlimited' quantity and 'indefinite' period - is that intended? I suppose it makes sense, but it would be good to be able to tell which kind of production it is, *** Autoproduce or $$$ Autosell. Spike 08:57, 2 October 2012 (EDT)

Autosell should report 'unlimited $' like the pic on the information page. I could change this to '$unlimited$' - Tycho

I think that extra '$' would be helpful. Also, maybe when production is reduced to equal-to or below the already-completed quantity, could you change the quantity display to 'halting' instead of 'indefinite'? Spike 09:46, 5 October 2012 (EDT)

Changed the output to display "$unlimited$".Tycho

Changed the output on duration to read "halting" when changing an order from unlimited to anything above zero. The order will terminate after the next unit is produced. This will be in version 1.08 Tycho

• TFTD Extender and XComUtil/Error Messages with Bomb Bloke's ComboMod

Getting TFTDextender to work with XcomUtil has to be handled by XcomUtil: XcomUtil needs to know the filename for TFTDextender.

I put together a patch for XcomUtil that adds the support, but this was close-ish to the time when TFTDextender was still named TFTDLoader. Which means you still have to rename the extender executable, but it's buried away here if anyone wants to take a look. I may update it shortly and send it off to Blade again.

For whatever reason, kryub's fix for the splitter code STILL doesn't prevent an error on exiting the geoscape to the battlescape, but only if using TFTDextender, and not if you're quitting the game completely. I've been right through the ini and disabled everything I could find (cross checking against the ini ref file, but couldn't find a way to prevent this. Oddly enough it only seems to happen on my XP machine, not my Windows 7 laptop. The error is:

TFTD crashed at 0x7C9102F6 with error 0xC0000005 trying to access 0x00000002

-  Bomb Bloke (Talk/Contribs) 20:04, 24 January 2013 (EST)

After using your patch, I managed to get XComUtil to run with TFTD Extender. I'm using Windows XP Home. I get the above error when the program swaps from Geoscape to Battlescape and I get another error upon 'Quit to DOS' [TFTD crashed at 0x1 with error 0xC0000005 trying to access 0x00000001] with any version of TFTD Extender or even Xusalik's TFTDloader. --Tycho 20:26, 26 January 2013 (EST).

Note that disabling the debug code entirely is bad, because then the default Windows debugger takes over and that takes ages to load if it's not already in RAM (and of course that still gives you an error pop-up window)... You'd want the Extender to still catch crashes, but then just exit cleanly if it detects one. -  Bomb Bloke (Talk/Contribs) 16:58, 29 January 2013 (EST)

I put a new line under the [Loader] section call Debug Messages. If =1, crashes are reported to the player. If =0, debugging still occurs but the player doesn't get any notifications. This fixes both errors that occur with using the split executable when exiting from Geoscape and from the game. In the case of the error on exiting geoscape, Geoscape.exe actually terminates but the extra code that bridges the split executables forces Battlescape to load so it appear seamless. In other situations, I believe the game will break to the desktop or command prompt with no warning. - Tycho 23:36, 1 February 2013 (EST)

Feedback

Please check the TFTD Known Bugs or EU Known Bugs(for bugs common to both games) and post bugs which are part of the original game in the appropriate section. Please post any general suggestions for the game here: Wish_List_(TFTD).

• Any errors that are a result of the Extender should be posted here.
• Use this section for suggestions and feedback on options currently available in the Extender or to discuss projects in Extender that are under development.

alternate damage routines

1)For AP the armor works as it does currently: The armor value is applied as is and damage that is lower than the value is ignored but a hit that penetrates does a little damage to the armor.

2)Laser(Gauss) and Plasma(Sonic) attacks have to burn through the armor: The current armor value in the location hit is doubled and then damage is subtracted from this value. The remaining armor value (if any) is halved and saved. For these attack types, armor is stronger but quickly is gone. A soldier in power(ion) armor can take at least one seriously good hit from a heavy plasma(sonic) from the front without damage to the soldier. In testing, I've had a lot of occasions were a soldier in coveralls was able to survive a hit from a plasma pistol, although be seriously wounded.

3)HE works just like laser and plasma.

4)Stun damage depends on the weapons used: the stun rod works like an AP attack vs armor (normal game rules), but a stun bomb is applied against the modified armor value.

5)IN still works the same. Fire damage is unchanged.

Know thy Enemy: This will now affect the damage that is applied against the unit's health:

• Headshot: full damage
• Other: If autopsy on this unit type has been done: full damage. Otherwise half damage.

Would it also be worth adding some kind of bonus for Live Alien research? Maybe the negation of some kind of Morale penalty and/or Psi penalty? Fear of the unknown, know your enemy, that kind of thing?

I thought about that but the game doesn't record live aliens that have been researched. When you finish research on a live alien, it only follows the routine to unlock the appropriate UFOpaedia articles and then checks to see if the finished research can unlock other topics. Tycho

I had a further thought on this while trying to guess what your new pre-requisites are for the various armours. For now it's really cool to be guessing but once people have figured it out, well, it will be more logical but still will have 'replay fatigue'. Would it be possible to randomise the pre-requisites for a lot of the key research topics, from out of a plausible list of items (or even randomise pre-requisite topics)? That would make every game fresh in terms of the research sequence, and make the research aspect of the game more challenging and less dry & predictable. As ever, just a suggestion. :) Cheers, Spike 16:01, 19 October 2012 (EDT)

General Tank Modding

I see you are interested in modding tanks (HWPs/SWPs) and that's partly what got you into updating UFO Extender. I made some suggestions for Tank Modding myself, including some of the mechanics required to make it work via a config file such as the UFO / TFD Extender config file. For example you could have cargo carrier / ambulance / casevac tanks, you could have demolition tanks, mine thrower tanks, and of course tanks with custom weapons including dual weapons. Could you have a look here: User:Spike#Tank_mods and see if any of that makes you feel like getting creative?

Thanks, Spike 10:46, 3 September 2012 (EDT)

Deep Colonies

I am thinking of including an option to set all colonies to be Very Deep. Why would the aliens not do so? It would also delay the progress of the game in that the player would need the armor and subs necessary to get access to the appropriate commanders.

I suppose so long as it isn't so deep as it requires a Leviathan (which does require a commander), it shouldn't be game-breaking? That would be my only concern with that sort of option. I would assume it would at the very least finally make X-COM require building the intermediate transport? I've never bothered with the Lightning or Hammerhead since they always offered LESS crew space than the default ship, and really didn't offer any major advantage beyond speed, and I was never bothered by having to wait a bit longer for the transport to arrive somewhere if it meant a better-equipped and manned team. They always seemed like such useless transitional craft. You already have the Manta/Firestorm by the time you get it, so you already have something much better for interception, and the smaller crew capacity seemed like shooting yourself in the foot before every mission. --StormhawkAPS 09:07, 9 October 2013 (EDT)

That's not a problem: Any transport, other than the Triton, can go very deep.-Tycho (talk)

D3D Window Position

This option in the INI has what I can only describe as 'schizophrenic' behaviour, as, if the initial two numbers do not match (which would make the order of the numbers not matter), the program will interpret them in flip-order and overwrite them in kind every time it is run. To put simply, the window shifts between two locations with every launch. I suspect this may be due to the system or program somehow not respecting the intended number order and reading it backwards for whatever reason. I also notice two more numbers are added to the option line, seemingly to denote the far sides of the window as defined by the resolution dimensions listed in the subsequent lines.

Related to this, the wiki entry seems to not represent the current structure of the settings INI in regards to these particular options, and it might be wise to update it. --StormhawkAPS 16:29, 9 October 2013 (EDT)

If anyone wants to help update the entries, they can. Please, keep the information on the main page descriptive and save personal opinions for the discussion page.-Tycho (talk)