and others, come to think of it.
hello,
- the idea around this is to move a pilot to a different (identical with one more spob added) system set at x=5000/y=5000 (so far away that the pilot won't be able to run into it ever again) by using the Nxxx operators instead of hiding the system. the system in question doesn't connect to any other systems at any point in the game, so i don't have to worry about that.
my question revolves around ncb's, which i've only just started dealing with. if i put N129 in the "OnShipDone" field, that would mean the ship and pilot will be transported magically to system id 129, retaining the same position he had in the other system upon destroying/raping/pillaging the special ships, correct?
and on a side note, if i duplicate system 1, which includes spob 1/2/3 and so on, i do not need to duplicate the spobs, correct?
-
i would like to change the name of the pilot's ship at the start of the mission, yet am confused about what str# resource to use. i've created (temporarily) resource #151, which, as far as i can see, doesn't conflict with anything in the nova files. is it safe using id#'s 131, 132, 133, 135, 139, 142-149, 151-899, 902-999 in the plugin? the only string# listings i've found are in the nova application, data 5, and graphics 3.
-
missions require you to put in an avail location, but if i have "S129" in the onsuccess field, that means mission 129 should start immediately upon the completion of the last mission. because of that specific operator, do i need to worry about the avail location field, or will the mission just start up right after the completion text of the last mission?
-
the last one just revolves around stacked bits. by monkey see/monkey do, i've set up my bits in the mission success field as "b0 H129 b1 S129", which, as far as i know, means bit 0 and 1 are set, player gets ship 129, and mission 129 starts automatically. the nova missions didn't include any operators when they stacked bits, so i assume this type of stacking doesn't require a "&" symbol. am i correct in this assumption, or just pissing up a rope without that symbol?
thanks for helping, if you can.
This post has been edited by antihero : 25 July 2005 - 02:40 PM