Any way to get around the armor limit in armors.txt?

[Pxtl]

Hey. I'm working on Hardcore Annihilation (my OTA-purist mod) and I've run into a conundrum. The old implementation by zwszg for armors was one armour-class per unit. Spring has a 31-class-limit, so that failed. So instead, I wrote up a C# script to collect units into the minimum possible number of armour units that would still preserve all of the OTA unit-specific damages.

It came out to 37 classes.

What this means is that I have two choices:

1) start making some design decisions about which armour classes to axe, or

2) come here and beg.

Naturally, I chose the latter. Anybody got an idea?

[Argh]

Um, unit-specific damage still works, IIRC. Each Unit can have its own, specific effect applied, i.e.:

Code: Select all

	[DAMAGE]
		{
		default=12000;
		ULTRAHEAVY=10000;
		REFLEC=2000;
		HEAVY=10000;
		LIGHT=12000;
                MyUnit=100;
		}

Would allow MyUnit to be affected by that specific Weapon with a damage value maximum of 100. Unit-specific stuff overrides Armor.txt stuff, IIRC. Don't kick me if I'm wrong, mind ye, I never use the armor system like that, I've always found it works best to keep the number of categories of damage as low as is practical, without losing the RPS factors.

[lurker]

What exactly does it say when there are too many? I can't find this limit nor a reason for it anywhere.

And if you're actually talking about categories I will not be happy about the wild goose chase.

[Pxtl]

What exactly does it say when there are too many? I can't find this limit nor a reason for it anywhere.

And if you're actually talking about categories I will not be happy about the wild goose chase.

It's a comment in the CTA armors.txt file (I assume by zwzsg), and I did some testing and verified that the Core Neutron didn't seem to be working properly (which is the most obvious test).

[Argh]

Ok, but you still haven't answered my question: have you tested whether individual-unit entries in your Damage table function properly? I would certainly think they should... they did the last time I tested them, which I admit was ages ago... most OTA mods are still using them...

[Pxtl]

Ok, but you still haven't answered my question: have you tested whether individual-unit entries in your Damage table function properly? I would certainly think they should... they did the last time I tested them, which I admit was ages ago... most OTA mods are still using them...

Really? Which? I just tested it with no armor.txt (lua crash - clean out my widgets?) empty armor.txt (no worky) and dummy-data armor.txt (no worky).

I suppose I should probably just try and find out if some of the armor classes are similar-enough to change the damages to be the same - there's probably a mine or two that could just be clustered together - I've got one class for each right now.

I know Caydr made an armor.txt for AA, and I'll bet the myriad AA-based mods are using one.

[Argh]

Whoa. So, like every single weapon had every single Unit listed, with different damages?

If that's so... meh, even if it can be done, it should not be done. Setting it up that way creates a huge matching list that must be searched, every weapon hit. There are many better ways.

[KDR_11k]

Whoa. So, like every single weapon had every single Unit listed, with different damages?

Uh, no? Just the units they did different damages to. Also they often do the same damage to a group of units (hence the condensation to 37).

You could make a Lua gadget that would add or remove damage for some targets...

[[Krogoth86]]

Maybe also have a look at CA where no more armor.txt is used. You'll find a armordefs.lua in the gamedata folder and the weapons now are defined in the units "FBI" file (which now is LUA too)...

There might not be such restrictions but I'm not sure about that so you'd have to ask someone else...

[Pxtl]

Maybe also have a look at CA where no more armor.txt is used. You'll find a armordefs.lua in the gamedata folder and the weapons now are defined in the units "FBI" file (which now is LUA too)...

There might not be such restrictions but I'm not sure about that so you'd have to ask someone else...

tx, i'll look into that.