Cargo and such

Melonhead · Post by **Melonhead** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 3:38 am

I've been doing some work trying to tweak the cargo balance. So far, I 've figured out how to add new cargo items, and how to make their prices randomly variable around a certain price point. (Wiki updated.) I'm wondering about the interest in making prices approximate the values found in cargo.csv. I know there are folks working a more sophisticated VS economy; this is just a short-term tweak to give us a reason to look for better prices.

The other problem I'm having is that changing the mass or volume of cargo items doesn't seem to have any effect. I see in another thread that Zool was able to change the values for reactors, weapons, radars, etc. It seems that it would be a very realistic addition to make some cargo very dense (e.g. tungsten or iron), while other would be much less dense (e.g. games or computers). I'm thinking that if I'm attacked, I'd be a lot more willing to dump my high-density, low-value iron ore than I would be to dump my low-density, high-value computers. It seems that dumping 225 cubic meters of iron ore should help my maneuverability a lot more, too.

Do the cargo mass/volume values in master_parts_list.csv have any effect?

Zool · Post by **Zool** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 5:21 am

..........It seems that it would be a very realistic addition to make some cargo very dense (e.g. tungsten or iron), while other would be much less dense (e.g. games or computers). I'm thinking that if I'm attacked, I'd be a lot more willing to dump my high-density, low-value iron ore than I would be to dump my low-density, high-value computers. It seems that dumping 225 cubic meters of iron ore should help my maneuverability a lot more, too..........

Cool, this is something I have also been thinking about. I have been looking at the ways to work out a more viable pricing for items that each base type sells and where to sell them at a profit and along with this I was looking at changing the masses and volumes of the commodities to make them more realistic.

It's easy, just edit the mass and volume columns in the master_part_list.csv and the volumes in the units.csv to match.

As for performance, you would expect it to make a difference to your flying abilities when you are fully loaded with cargo, but I'm not sure that it does. Maybe one of the VS team can answer that. It would be good if it did?

Dilloh · Post by **Dilloh** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 11:04 am

We've had this question before. micheal_andreas_stahl did the test, hacked his centurion to about 1.000.000 cargo and filled it up with stuff. It behaved more like a capship then a fighter.

Melonhead · Post by **Melonhead** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 4:33 am

It just occurred to me what I was doing wrong. I didn't change the cargo mass values in master_parts_list.csv enough to make a difference, and then I didn't realize what my ship was doing.

Sure enough, increase the iron mass from 0.01 to 100 (still per 1 m3), and the ship behaves much more sluggishly--it takes a lot longer to accelerate, and a lot longer to decelerate when I wanted to go back in the other direction. Acts like a real spaceship.

No obvious effect on rotation rate, though. Not sure if this is a limitation of the VS engine, or if I've missed something. It looks like a ship's moment of inertia is defined in units.csv, but there's no equivalent for cargo. I don't know if the extra cargo mass is considered in the rotation equations. (Anyone who can point me where in the code to look, that would save a lot of hunting!)

Now, on to Wikipedia to find densities of Tungsten, Uranium, and Sulfur. Anyone want to offer a thought on the densities of software, appliances, or Playthings (tm)?

Melonhead · Post by **Melonhead** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 1:50 am

Ran into an interesting problem. I was trying to create a derelict ship with some spilled cargo floating around it. I added the ship and cargo to CM-N1054, but apparently, you can't tractor in cargo that's defined in the *.system files. (I couldn't destroy it, either.)

So, on to Plan B: Is there a way to script an AI ship to jettison cargo?

Dilloh · Post by **Dilloh** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 12:37 pm

If you'd post your system-file, I might take a look at it. So long, you could look at the wiki HowTos. There are different ways of creating stuff in a system. There's <planet>, <unit>, <vehicle>, maybe more. Some things might not be able to be tractored in according to its variable, to post a theory. But surely things need to be able to be destroyed.

Otherwised, you can try to give the cargo its own entries in units.csv. This will give you the chance alter its armor and mass, which might solve the problem.

I'm interested, what exactly are you trying to create?

Btw, thx for using the CM-N1054 system! I always thought that there must be something special.

Melonhead · Post by **Melonhead** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:10 am

Basically, I'm trying to create some interesting things for explorers to discover, so they have a reason to go looking in backwater systems. Eventually, I'd like to make a series of small side campaigns or missions. At this point, in CM-N1054, I was just trying to visually create a wrecked ship with cargo floating around it. The player could examine the ship or just tractor in the cargo. Eventually, I like the idea of creating rooms with stuff for them to find--maybe a note that contains the location of a hidden cargo dump.

I tried using entries other than "unit" in the *.system file. "Enhancement" and "nebula" showed up, but "vehicle" and "building" didn't. But, I still couldn't tractor in the cargo. Nebula showed up on the nav screen; enhancement didn't, so enhancement would be a better choice--after all, if you're exploring for salvage, you should at least have to look around.

I also discovered I couldn't destroy cargo I've jettisoned, so I'm not surprised I can't destroy cargo defined by the *.system file. Are you really able to destroy the Heimdall Militia HQ? I tried, but I'm flying a Galaxy, so I may not have enough power.

I copied the generic_cargo_upgrade line to a new line in units.csv so I could tell the difference between it and jettisoned cargo. (No underscores in my new one.) The first part is:

genericcargoupgrades ./objects/cargo generic_cargo FIXME FIXME CARGO WRITEME cargo-hud.spr 1 {generic_cargo.bfxm;;}

The rest just duplicates generic_cargo_upgrade, so I didn't include it.

I've attached my CM-N1054.system file, renamed to .txt so it would upload.

Melonhead · Post by **Melonhead** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:26 am

On a related cargo note...

Other than for fun, does anyone actually use the "enslave passengers" option? I was thinking about how to incentivize players to pick up ejected pilots, but saw all the warnings about not changing the names of contraband pilots because the code uses it, and I don't want to fool around with the code. (Actually, no one wants me fooling around with the code!)

I like the idea of rescuing pilots (even the ones that shot at me), but I don't really like the idea of selling them as slaves. On the other hand, the S.O.B. probably cost me plenty in damage, so I think he ought to pay me a little more than hitchiker rates for my effort.

Here's my thought: add a new "cargo" type of "stasis passenger." That kind of passenger can't be enslaved, since it isn't the right kind of cargo for the VS code. Adding cargo types is easy. Then, use the "free slave" function to turn contraband/pilots into hitchikers. Change hitchikers so they are not available for sale as cargo at any base, but are "bought" at any base for 5000 credits. You aren't actually selling the hitchiker, he is paying a reward/parole to you.

This would only involve changes to master_parts_list.csv and units.csv, as far as I can tell.

Dilloh · Post by **Dilloh** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 11:27 am

Well, the "Free Pilot" Button would certainly require a change to code. Another idea would be to create a hospital base where you can bring them to. I could create a kind of campaign link where you get instantly the credits and your "rescued pilot" quantity is reduced by 1. Else, the doctor would tell you that you have no wounded loaded.

I created Heimdall as an nealy indestructable base (Armor settings are extremely high). Basically, you can destroy everything: Bases, planets, even nav points (but no jumps). Try hacking your arms to 99999 and shoot at your cargo.

Dilloh · Post by **Dilloh** » Mon Mar 05, 2007 2:15 pm

Your file doesn't work so far, at least if I haven't made a mistake. I can't see the floating cargo, still my radar can see it. I think we need your units.csv to be able to see it.

Melonhead · Post by **Melonhead** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 1:36 am

Sorry about that. In my previous post, I just included the info that I'd pasted into a new units.csv line. I've attached it now--the info is in the last line. Renamed to units.txt--I kept getting upload errors with the csv extension.

Hadn't thought of the text on "free pilot." Will have to think about that.

Edit: deleted attachment because it is uploaded later with some additional changes.

Melonhead · Post by **Melonhead** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 1:48 am

Okay, have done some thinking.

By "free pilot" do you mean alt-f, free slaves, as opposed to enslave, alt-s? If so, NOT changing them is my idea--don't change the code, just change the concept of what they do by changing the buy/sell prices of the cargo they affect. The idea is that he enslaved pilots become hitchhikers, which are redefined to be valuable in master_parts_list.

The problem I see with my original idea is that the same key combination frees pilots AND slaves, which are different types of contraband cargo in master_parts_list. If the resulting hitchikers are very valuable (because they pay a reward to you for rescuing them), then everyone would want to go to pirate bases, buy slaves, free them, and accept the reward--but slaves aren't really likely to have any money, so that's unrealistic.

Alternatively, you could just make the hitchiker sale price equivalent to or slightly higher than the slave purchase price. Conceptually, that could represent the government rewarding citizens who risk their ships rescuing slaves. For pilots, the reward for rescuing them would be a little more than currently, but not enough to make it really interesting. (How much would you pay to get dropped off at the nearest base?)

The other possibility I see would be to make the slave purchase price VERY high, so the hitchiker price could also be high. The other piece of this that never made sense to me is that contraband slaves can still be sold at virtually all bases. Slaving is pretty heinous, so why are slaves bought almost everywhere? I'm thinking they ought to be accepted at very few bases--perhaps a Kilrathi one, since we know they like the idea of slaves, at least in the afterlife. There's a reason to run the blockade points. Maybe just a few Confed bases would buy them, making slave running a very risky proposition. That would require defining a new special base, kind of like what was done to create the milita HQ, and putting it far away from any pirate bases where you can buy slaves (so the risk is high).

Dilloh · Post by **Dilloh** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 10:58 am

Creating a kilrathi base should be no problem, thanks to your help with the HQ base

. I could take care of taking a model out of WCU, maybe a stationary carrier. We could combine this with the fralthi campaign; I always thought that those rebels should eventually loose control over their carrier because the timeline for the Ghoran Khar rebels is not yet reached.

Melonhead · Post by **Melonhead** » Sat Mar 17, 2007 3:02 am

Keeping two thoughts going here, I had another idea about creating the derelict and floating cargo--I could create a new spawn point in the system, but have it only spawn the floating cargo. I recall a thread that said where the spawn points were in Privateer, but now I can't find it, and I can't figure out which script contains the values--I know I saw them recently while looking for something else, but didn't make a note of it at the time.

Dilloh · Post by **Dilloh** » Sat Mar 17, 2007 11:53 am

/Privateer/modules/faction_ships.py

This would require creating a new faction which does nothing else than spawning your cargo. Otherwised, by e.g. adding it to the merchants, you'd face situations where you have to intercept enemy textiles trying to siege a refinery.

I see also problems in giving it the floating (=orbiting) values when those units are spawned

Melonhead · Post by **Melonhead** » Sat Mar 17, 2007 10:32 pm

Found it, thanks!

But, your comment reminded me of a comment somewhere that the VS engine only specifies what system to use, not what point within the system. So, my cargo wouldn't necessarily appear floating near the derelict cargo ship.

I suppose I could still use the *.system file and just call the floating stuff "ruined cargo," so no one would care that they couldn't scoop it up with the tractor beam.

Well, back to the economy--I'm going through each of the cargo types, trying to figure out how to tweak the prices so there are reasons to haul stuff farther, without accidentally creating milk runs.

Shissui · Post by **Shissui** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 1:33 am

Melonhead wrote:I suppose I could still use the *.system file and just call the floating stuff "ruined cargo," so no one would care that they couldn't scoop it up with the tractor beam.

Better -- create a cargo item "Ruined Cargo" or "Destroyed Cargo" & use, as a model, some approximation of the box fragments that you get when you shoot cargo. Then, people can scoop it up if they really care to. It would be defined in the same way as failed mission cargo -- to jettison or keep & totally unsaleable.

Of course, it is not really necessary to make the extra model; but greebles add flavour. All that is really needed is to define it as unsaleable.

Melonhead · Post by **Melonhead** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 2:28 am

The problem is that items defined in the *.system file can't be tractored in; or, at least, it didn't work when I tried it. My original idea was to have a bunch of floating cargo around the wrecked cargo ship, so people could grab some of that before going inside to explore the wreck.

Dilloh · Post by **Dilloh** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 11:27 am

Why not modify an asteroid field? Lower the density and give it your cargo instead of asteroids. We all know that asteroids are
- floating
- destructable
- tractorable
- respawning
You can set your drayman right into the middle of it and voilÃ - a never ending tractor beam paradise.

Only prob I see is that there could be a need to shoot at the containers first so that they can be tractored in. I suggest to have large boxes (just change unit scales) like stock asteroids.

Melonhead · Post by **Melonhead** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 3:23 am

I like it! Using your suggestion I've figured out how units.csv maps the asteroids and ore to fragments (and fragments to sell price), so that looks workable. The only thing I'm still trying to figure out is how to change the meshes/textures for the asteroid field to cargo containers, without changing all asteroid fields to cargo.

Dilloh · Post by **Dilloh** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 10:27 am

Looking at a stock asteroid field in a system file, you find the following:

<unit VarName="asteroid_detail" VarValue="1" name= "Nav_2" file="Asteroid_Field" faction="neutral" x="0" y="250" day="-14000" difficulty=".22" ></unit>

Now we need to find the file called Asteroid_Field. The standard search turns out nothing, so let's look manually:
The asteroid graphics and bfxm are located in /units/objects/asteroids
Stock asteroid: /textures/asteroid.bmp
Looking up units.csv, you find an entry showing the unit "Asteroid-Field".

All you have to do is create a new unit, e.g. "cargo-field"

Copy all values from "Asteroid-Field"

Change bfxm allocations from e.g. asteroid.bfxm to cargo.bfxm, either by allocating the correct folder or just copying the files into the asteroid folder.

Same with png files, maybe create a new HUD

now Asteroid_Field opens up asteroidsPriv when shot upon, so create cargoPriv

go on until you have reached the final aim, maybe skip some events (like "further mining"

Melonhead · Post by **Melonhead** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 1:50 am

So far, I'm still doing something wrong on this.

I noticed that Asteroid_Field actually has subunits AsteroidsPriv, but I can't figure out whether that's a reference to the line AsteroidsPriv in units.csv or the file AsteroidsPriv in units/objects/asteroids. I tried both without success (made a copy of Asteroids Priv called CargoPriv and a copy of the units.csv line with a key CargoPriv).

AsteroidsPriv (or my copy of the line, which I called cargoPriv) has subunits asteroid0, asteroid1, etc., so I tried making a line cargo0 and mapping the subunits to that. cargo0 maps to generic_cargo.bxfm. But, nothing beyond the initial Asteroid_Field (Cargo_Field) appears.

To ensure I wasn't getting things confused, I made a new directory under objects called \debris, copied everything from \objects\asteroids and \objects\cargo into \objects\debris, and changed the references in units.csv to \objects\debris. Still no luck. I've attached my units.csv in case there's something obvious I've overlooked.

Melonhead · Post by **Melonhead** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 2:13 am

I've been working my way through the various types of cargo, thinking about how to make the prices make more sense, and I keep getting stuck on Plutonium. Here's the problem as I see it: a) it's canon. It was in the original game. b) it makes almost no sense. Plutonium is not naturally occurring, and, well, doesn't really make a good glowing paint--that would be Tritium.

So, the ONLY way you're going to find it at a mining base is if the base is using fission reactors AND is reprocessing the spent fuel.

Given that Uranium seems to be a popular item for sale at mining bases, I guess I can believe that WC/Privateer uses fission reactors, at least at refineries. But, it's hard to believe that mining bases would have breeder reactors, and that any civilian would be allowed to carry the reprocessed fuel.

So, I guess the question is: should we keep Plutonium as a cargo at mining bases, or replace it with something else? How about making it contraband?

Shissui · Post by **Shissui** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 3:39 am

Melonhead wrote:So, I guess the question is: should we keep Plutonium as a cargo at mining bases, or replace it with something else? How about making it contraband?

I would tend to favour:
(a) Plutonium spawns at refineries
(b) Plutonium is also contraband
(c) military bases, pirate bases & retro worlds want the stuff.

NOTE: You might get accosted by the navy while shipping Plutonium into Perry, but if you make it safely to dock, then they will buy it without further question. I see no problem with this. That is just how this economy works.

However, this is not canon. There may be much screaming. It might be better just to eliminate it as a resource if the protests to this are loud.

Dilloh · Post by **Dilloh** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 9:27 am

(d) Plutonium is a garbage product in 2669. Nobody wants it, except of Refinieries which can process is economically correct - of course within gaining money from the mining bases. Unfortunately, you can transport plutonium from mining base a to mining base b, so it doesn't make too much sense at all.
(e) Melonheads description of the mining bases is correct - they might have breeding reactors, that'd be no problem in space, the universe is rather cold. Civilian craft might also be able to transport radioactive material due to new safety technology. And if the transporter gets blown up, the plutonium floats in space, who cares, everybody has shields.
(f) Some guns or missiles use plutonium or uranium within their production, or for processing jump fuel.

Vega Strike Forums

Cargo and such

Cargo and such

Plutonium: canon or crazy?

Re: Plutonium: canon or crazy?