Hi,
It is an interesting tool you did… Very suited for new modders IMO.
Would it be possible to also add some patrol generation (if there’s not) ? Even with dummies populations, just to understand how it is made ?
Many thanks for your work, I’ll test it soon (missing some free time recently ^^) !
The easiest method I’m thinking if you don’t know how to mod ships or equipement files :
75-->EB freelancer.exe 080942 M0tah allow engines to be sold
0F85-->90E9 freelancer.exe 0808AD adoxa allow engines to be transferred
It will allow you to sell one of the engine. Be carefull, in your mod, there’s no engine for sale, so if you sell the 2 engines, you will have to buy another ship 
@Alucard : I don’t seem to have this problem. Maybe it is because I’m using TGA rectangular textures, with sphere mapping option (as opposed to default mapping like it seems in the tutorial)
Edit : just checked again, I don’t think I have the problem you described. My textures are made with gimp, tga no compression, no alpha channel on the surface, scaled down to 4096x2048, mirrored vertically and horizontally, sphere mode in ms3d.
@Timmy : I’m using TGA 4096*2048 textures because after testing with dds (square) and tga, tga finally looks better (50% superior resolution, and my mercator texture is less ‘stetched’ on the poles with rectangular tga). On a side note, I don’t have a problem with tga textures filesizes, as my mod is not meant to become largely public.
@Silent : Thanks for the advice, this one was the first working version, I plan to make tests with other settings on the clouds. Using different models for the different layers allows me to apply different effect on each layer, it was the point.
I would like to also make the surface a little more reflective and the clouds diffuse the light of the cities glowmap behind it.
I will try with 3ds.
About this, what is the difference between cmp and 3ds ? I note cmp are often being used in models and 3ds are being used for icons and small solars, but why ?
Edit : btw, I’m using these nasa maps for my textures. Maybe it will be useful for someone.
Edit #2 : a wild idea… Is it possible to use bumpmaps in FL ? And if yes, is it possible to use bumpmap + glowmap on the same model ? I just found a very good earth bumpmap…
Edit #3 : using my technique I notice something strange : I applied different spinning speeds to the different layers, but the surface is the only one which keeps spinning after a while. I already changed the spinning offsets, and it resolved my ‘single model planet’ spin issue (stopped after a few seconds).
You’re welcome.
For old mods versions, you could also check here
I’m currently mirroring this database just in case, 22Gb full of mods so far…
Hi,
You may have seen it already, but it is one of the best footages I’ve ever seen on the web :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG0fTKAqZ5g
(watch it in HD on the original youtube page)
If you have other footages of this kind, feel free to share
Have a nice and lovely day !
Hi, I have a rebel X-wing available in my shipyard.
You can find it attached to this post. I think I may have other variations, I will check.
If you need something else, I have backups of everything I downloaded since 2003 (+40Gb mods, tools, models, tutorials, etc…)
Have fun !
Ok, after re-doing everything from the start, the second method is now working : 2 different models, one for surface+glowmap, the second 10% larger for the atmosphere (but without a sur, not needed).
Here is the result, with the original tutorial glass texture :
Not so bad, but needs some tweaking.
I think my problem was due to working blind inside milkshape without experience with it, my models being too large for the software (isn’t there a workaround about this ?)
I still don’t know why I wasn’t able to render the 2 models on the same time yesterday… Now the exact same technique is working… Go figure ! 
EDIT :
one step further… need to work on the alpha channel to reduce the aliasing effect.
Next one will be with a 3rd model for the atmosphere layer…
(edit for a new screenshot, in HD res, I wanted to see the previous result on a good pc :p)
Hi,
I just started working on my planets.
With this great tutorial and this one, I am now capable of creating a new cmp planet model (the first thing I make in milkshape ^^), scale it to the size I want, apply my high def texture to it, and finally add glowmap to the mat. Everything is very nice, I’m more than happy about this part :
Except are missing the atmosphere effect and the clouds layer.
So with the help of this tutorial, I’m trying to add the atmosphere layer. Problem is : the model provided with the tutorial has far too low poly counts for my enormous planet. It is working, but it is very angular and ugly.
So, I tried the whole evening to reproduce the tutorial model but with a lot more polys (99*99, scale 100000 for the surface layer), and I go nowhere. The best I can achieve is this :
The ‘tube’ you see in the middle seems to be the atmosphere layer, the surface layer is completly cut… Not so good, isn’t it ? ^^
I say again, I’m a total noob with modeling / texturing. All I can do well is creating glowmaps xD
So, is there anyone with enough will and time to reproduce the tutorial model for me, but with 99*99 polys for surface and atmosphere layers ?
Or at least, could someone please explain how I could do it myself ?
Thanks
EDIT
Ok, I tried to take another route to do it, and I think I noticed something weird.
I’m trying to make a cloud layer using a second model, a little bigger than the ‘surface’ model, and using the alpha channel technique of the second tutorial.
I can render the ‘clouds model’ fine, but only if I remove the surface model from the map. I tried to make 2 differents ‘planets’ for the test, not at the same position, but the clouds one doesn’t seem to render if the surface one is present. I can select it, so the sur is ok. As soon as I remove the surface planet, the clouds one appears where it is supposed to be, with the right transparency.
I cannot use transparency and glowmapping at the same time, or something like that ? I repeat, i’m totally noob to this
The only thing I can tell you about mBases.ini :
A base start with [Base] and ends just before the next [Base]
When I want to remove old bases leftovers, I just search for the base ID to remove (ie : NE01_01_base) and remove everything between [Base] and the next [Base]
Other than that, I cannot help you about mBases.ini as I usually don’t mess with it (except correcting errors / removing old bases)
Hi,
I think it would be more easy to add a new base with the right dealers than adding a shipdealer to an existing base.
For that you’ll need the Freelancer Explorer tool. It is graphical and very easy to play with for this kind of stuff.
Add a new base to the system and choose an existing base template where the shipdealer is present.
Then, add everything you want to the base. FLexplorer can do that for you, but personnaly I prefer doing it at hand. You seem to know how to do that part.
Good luck with your mini-mod !
Hi, I tried it too, and I’m having errors.
My mod certainly contain real errors, so I’ll try to report only execution errors or those I don’t understand :
[error] An error happend while parsing. The scan can't continue. 'La méthode ou l'opération n'est pas implémentée.' à FLScanIE.EquipmentChecks.ParseGoodFile(String file, List`1& goodNicknames)
à FLScanIE.EquipmentChecks.ParseEquipmentFolder()
à FLScanIE.Checker.Parse(String flPath)
```(the method or operation is not implemented)
[error] An error happend while checking loadouts ‘La valeur ne peut pas être null.
Nom du paramètre : source’ à System.Linq.Enumerable.Contains[TSource](IEnumerable1 source, TSource value, IEqualityComparer1 comparer)
à System.Linq.Enumerable.Contains[TSource](IEnumerable`1 source, TSource value)
à FLScanIE.EquipmentChecks.EquipExists(String nick)
à FLScanIE.LoadoutChecks.CheckLoadoutFile(String file)
à FLScanIE.LoadoutChecks.CheckLoadouts()
à FLScanIE.Checker.RunCheck(CheckDelegate check, String name)
[error] An error happend while checking ships ‘La valeur ne peut pas être null.
Nom du paramètre : source’ à System.Linq.Enumerable.Contains[TSource](IEnumerable1 source, TSource value, IEqualityComparer1 comparer)
à System.Linq.Enumerable.Contains[TSource](IEnumerable`1 source, TSource value)
à FLScanIE.EquipmentChecks.EquipExists(String nick)
à FLScanIE.ShipChecks.CheckShip(String file, Section ship)
à FLScanIE.ShipChecks.CheckShipFile(String file)
à FLScanIE.ShipChecks.CheckShipFolder()
à FLScanIE.Checker.RunCheck(CheckDelegate check, String name)
[error] An error happend while checking equip ‘La référence d’objet n’est pas définie à une instance d’un objet.’ à FLScanIE.EquipmentChecks.CheckEquipmentFile(String file)
à FLScanIE.EquipmentChecks.CheckEquipmentFolder()
à FLScanIE.Checker.RunCheck(CheckDelegate check, String name)
[error] An error happend while checking fonts ‘La référence d’objet n’est pas définie à une instance d’un objet.’ à FLScanIE.FontChecks.CheckFontFolder()
à FLScanIE.Checker.RunCheck(CheckDelegate check, String name)
Other than that, the other errors I have seem to be real errors, or it tells me where to look for something strange.
The report is maybe a little difficult to understand for non-english and non-freelancer-gurus people (like me), but it's a very good work…
Thank youYou could try to move the folder or reinstall it outside of Program Files or Program Files (x86). Right are a little strange sometimes inside these 2 folders.
You could try a malware scan with MalwareBytes AntiMalware (free for this use).
Could you try to connect from someone else web connection, to check if your problem is OS/soft or network related ?
Wow… It seems really good… and very beautiful…
Hi, it’s very good news you give us !!!
The only thing I would dream to see is something to help stations modular elements positionning. Designing good looking complexes stations is really hard… and just rotating it several degrees is even more difficult xD
But anyways, thank you for this tool !
about the nudge_force :
it has also something to do with docking capabilities. A too low nudge_force breaks the docking sequence.
In Startrader’s calculation, I read nudge_force = mass * 3
In mine, nudge_force = max_force ( = mass * 9.81 * Gforce) but mass = ~ 10x Startrader’s, and docking seems ok. I didn’t test some collision as I wasn’t aware of this force translation in collisions (and my COLLISION_DAMAGE_FACTOR = 10000, so I don’t really have collision issues with fighters :D) .
I also understand that nudge_force has something to do with object avoidance (like in asteroids fields), but I fail to see the mechanic behind it.
Many thanks Gisteron, I’ll try the new version as soon as I will modify my shiparch :)… There’s quite a lot of work each time I change the calculation method ^^
The last try I did (the last page of the sheet) is a theoric mix of your two methods, I didn’t had the time to test it yet.
Edit: Ok, I tested it, and after a nudge_force correction, it seems working nicely.
Startrader, if I understand correctly, you applied a coeff factor to the steering_torque, right ?
I allready tried the same, and it’s working well. I’ll reintroduce this kind of “modifiers” at the end, when the calculation will be right for my taste.
I’m using excel too because it’s simpler this way, I could change everything with ease, and that is needed at this stage. And I like being able to produce simple graphics to see the errors I made.
At the end, I think it could be a web-based php/sql tool with automatic ship scripting. Another story.
On a side note, last night I discovered (with a mistake I made) that a little linear_drag on the hull is not a bad thing. I had a linear_drag = 17 on the hull and a linear_drag = 599 on the engine, and handling was really good (the kind of handling you can see for cylons fighters, in Battlestar Galactica : very agile and quick u-turns but with a heavy feeling).
I didn’t know why the feeling was so good on this ship before I noticed this (I find strange that a so small amount of linear_drag on the hull could change the handling so radically. Ship’s mass was 750 at this time, so hull’s drag was ~= mass / 45).
So I had an idea for the swappable engines :
maybe is it possible to keep the same (static) linear_drag for every type of similar engines (light fighter, heavy fighter, etc….) and apply the variable part of linear_drag to the engine ? It’s only a variation of the wild idea I had the night before, but I think it could be worth the try.
What do you think about it ?
Many thanks Gisteron, you can modify ‘asap’ with ‘when you have will and time’, there’s no emergency, really 
Edit : new link :
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmEeSUau01IJdHJseW1PbTFja3NQbThyNU9JU3c5bmc
Gisteron, i’d be very interested to see your equations, many thanks (i’m not using Skype, so PM would be the way to go).
You are right, the first table is StarTraders method, the second one is yours, tweaked a little.
Each method has pros and cons, IMO :
I’m trying to make a mix between the two :
As you said, I tweaked your calculation a little : I didn’t like the steering_torque so I reintroduced the deg/s factor, but it’s a problem of personal taste, not your your tool’s fault
I tried to introduce a ‘inertial damper’ factor too (rotation related), but it is not working very well yet…
StarTrader wrote:
“disproportionately” high.Yes but I thought we are all reasonably clever guys and would know that we have to scale everything down, no? Do I need to spell out everything? Oy Vay, My life!!
Or the other way, scale up systems…
I’d be very interested to see how you make your calculations, as I’m actually trying to find mine.
I’ve a (rather simple and small) excel sheet for this with “variables” for your 2 types of settings. Maybe you could help to make it better ? I just uploaded it and made it collaborative, if you wish :
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmEeSUau01IJdFF0TW8zYmtzbmQwc2hORnB6VXhZTHc
I really like the idea of having some strong calculations method for handling, I think this is a must for good balancing
Thanks Gigsteron for the update, the readme is very, very informative.
It is a nice philosophy you have, a strong +1 to that !