All in one 2.0.1 beta 5 available

[Spocks-cuddly-tribble]

any potential issues?

Depends on the code of BoP-large (same as base with different values or other special changes?).

Same code frame = same four UE adaptions for inner ring area=0, so no issues

[Flocke]

Yes, it would be a 'mess up at your own risk' option. I don't argue against your point, but funny thing is that UE doesn't understand the requested opcode frame. In this example it allowed input values of invalid range (IDs >127) but rejects the same values with a working, but unkown frame.

Guess I need to fix UE to interpret these op codes as signed byte values then. Bet that breaks TC's fixture again.

I start getting ready to patch installer trek.exe's but noticed the "large map" version had different values

4AF30A 0xae70a B9 0B -> BA 00
4AF194 0xae594 B9 0F -> BA 00

any potential issues?

luckily we have validation, you swapped the offsets

4AF30A 0xae70a B9 0F -> BA 00 is fine, here both eax and ecx are same
4AF194 0xae594 B9 0B -> BA 00 this looks different, but actually is fine as well since ecx without being read is overridden again at AUTO:004AF1B1 with mov ecx, 0Ah

these unnessary overrides could be cleanup up as well, but as they don't conflict and I dunno what ecx is used for I don't mind

[Spocks-cuddly-tribble]

I dunno what ecx is used for I don't mind

BotF default code for small & large ring galaxies (not medium) uses each the same shared value for WidthOfRing and HomeSystemsMinDistance (ecx).
I think Gowron fixed this limitation in the BoP code and the UE issue with his RingCentreSize workaround is just a side effect.

Such a value separating patch (and UE support for it) might be useful for many mods...

ECM uses the special workaround 'fairer starting positions spread for default maps' patch (without UE conflicts).


Vanilla patch example for separate HomeSystemsMinDistance values:

Code: Select all

004AF026   33C9             XOR ECX,ECX // set 0
004AF028   90909090         NOP

004AF1A9   B1 04            MOV CL,4   // small ring

004AF31F   B1 06            MOV CL,6   // large ring

[thunderchero]

Anyway looking forward to AIO beta 6 !

I have compiled and installed beta 6 for basic testing before release later this weekend, anything I should be checking for on ECM?

[Spocks-cuddly-tribble]

anything I should be checking for on ECM?

All test games with pending patches were flawless. So I hope all is fine. And thank you for all your efforts.

[Flocke]

BotF default code for small & large ring galaxies (not medium) uses each the same shared value for WidthOfRing and HomeSystemsMinDistance (ecx).
I think Gowron fixed this limitation in the BoP code and the UE issue with his RingCentreSize workaround is just a side effect.

Such a value separating patch (and UE support for it) might be useful for many mods...

Ah I see, that patch actually is already integrated with UE (RingMinEmpireDistanceFix)
So it must not be cleaned up to remain compatible for the fixture detection.

It is auto-applied by UE when the values differ.

[thunderchero]

anything I should be checking for on ECM?

All test games with pending patches were flawless. So I hope all is fine. And thank you for all your efforts.

after compiling 3 time due to missing tasks and syntax ECM now is installing with all the correct files.

not many changes in beta 6
ECM coding and GUI fixes
BOP UE compatibility changes for UE
MUM borg and load/save gui improvements
if there was any other changes I don't remember them

so watch for link later this weekend

[Spocks-cuddly-tribble]

if there was any other changes I don't remember them

For ECM its (many changes/patches): viewtopic.php?p=57301#p57301 + download/file.php?id=3125 (other res.files)

MUM use less than 9 upgrades and UE tends to break upgrades by changing a working upgrade list.

When UE saves any Edifice changes, it overwrites these ids and fills any missing values repeating the last upgrade ID.

By your comment above the fixture is correct.

So BoP issue was uneeded/unused special group buildings in between. But what was the MUM issue?

UE Read/Write Error Validation error/unknown modification

Wouldn't it be an easy workaround (e.g. MUM morale buildings) to just add the option to modifiy value at position X regardless of unexpected opcode?

No, this basic validation really is great to detect and avoid coding mess. Further UE has no mod detection, but you'd need different configurations for different mods plus your modifications of mods. Adding all those options leads to alot of mess where you easily forget on some changes, not to speak of all the needed code refactoring to make all those locations configurable.

Furthermore many patch locations have duplicates, some are overridden by mods, some become completely unavailable.
MUM morale buildings here are a good example where even the data type is changed. It wouldn't be enough to tell the new location, UE needs to be aware of what values it can write - which is validated by the op code.

I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but rereading this it still feels like an epic miscommunication.
It's about a power-user override option (if it's not too much work, a simple 'do it anyway' checkbox) for guys like thunderchero who are able to understand and use OllyDbg. A person of your intelligence should understand the ask (not the same as approve), but the answer indicates the contrary (it's not about refactoring the validation / UE 'awareness')?

[thunderchero]

So BoP issue was uneeded/unused special group buildings in between. But what was the MUM issue?

you really expect BOTF to be logical?

BoP yes and un-edited upgrade table

MUM issue was UE setting to first structure only in upgrade table then completing table with same id when it had 4 upgrades.

[Flocke]

you broke the quote algorithm with the quoted quotes

So BoP issue was uneeded/unused special group buildings in between. But what was the MUM issue?

I currently can't debug, but by the integrity check the ids look fine:

Code: Select all

Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 0 main industry buildings: IDs 42 to 46.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 0 main food buildings (minus primitive farms): IDs 48 to 52.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 0 main intel buildings: IDs 53 to 57.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 0 main energy buildings: IDs 58 to 62.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 0 main research buildings: IDs 63 to 67.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 1 main industry buildings: IDs 82 to 86.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 1 main food buildings (minus primitive farms): IDs 88 to 92.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 1 main intel buildings: IDs 93 to 97.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 1 main energy buildings: IDs 98 to 102.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 1 main research buildings: IDs 103 to 107.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 2 main industry buildings: IDs 122 to 126.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 2 main food buildings (minus primitive farms): IDs 128 to 132.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 2 main intel buildings: IDs 133 to 137.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 2 main energy buildings: IDs 138 to 142.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 2 main research buildings: IDs 143 to 147.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 3 main industry buildings: IDs 162 to 166.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 3 main food buildings (minus primitive farms): IDs 168 to 172.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 3 main intel buildings: IDs 173 to 177.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 3 main energy buildings: IDs 178 to 182.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 3 main research buildings: IDs 183 to 187.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 4 main industry buildings: IDs 202 to 206.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 4 main food buildings (minus primitive farms): IDs 208 to 212.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 4 main intel buildings: IDs 213 to 217.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 4 main energy buildings: IDs 218 to 222.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 4 main research buildings: IDs 223 to 227.

since the upgrade table is written along with it, the ids should be correct

I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but rereading this it still feels like an epic miscommunication.
It's about a power-user override option (if it's not too much work, a simple 'do it anyway' checkbox) for guys like thunderchero who are able to understand and use OllyDbg. A person of your intelligence should understand the ask (not the same as approve), but the answer indicates the contrary (it's not about refactoring the validation / UE 'awareness')?

Thing is already on load it must be enforced, then it must apply to all hidden values (like patch code or value duplicates) the user isn't even aware of. Furthermore all the asm reading code must be refactored since the read and written values are content of many encapsulating classes that each have their own validation.

edit: ok, it could be done in maybe a week of work when just wrapping each validation and caching the invalid data inbetween values of same segment, but I still don't think it's worth the effort

edit2: when the op-code changed, it is likely the meaning changed too, and when the change is done for reason, why not implement it with UE right away? where is the use case?

[thunderchero]

I currently can't debug, but by the integrity check the ids look fine:

Code: Select all

Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 0 main industry buildings: IDs 42 to 46.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 0 main food buildings (minus primitive farms): IDs 48 to 52.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 0 main intel buildings: IDs 53 to 57.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 0 main energy buildings: IDs 58 to 62.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 0 main research buildings: IDs 63 to 67.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 1 main industry buildings: IDs 82 to 86.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 1 main food buildings (minus primitive farms): IDs 88 to 92.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 1 main intel buildings: IDs 93 to 97.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 1 main energy buildings: IDs 98 to 102.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 1 main research buildings: IDs 103 to 107.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 2 main industry buildings: IDs 122 to 126.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 2 main food buildings (minus primitive farms): IDs 128 to 132.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 2 main intel buildings: IDs 133 to 137.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 2 main energy buildings: IDs 138 to 142.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 2 main research buildings: IDs 143 to 147.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 3 main industry buildings: IDs 162 to 166.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 3 main food buildings (minus primitive farms): IDs 168 to 172.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 3 main intel buildings: IDs 173 to 177.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 3 main energy buildings: IDs 178 to 182.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 3 main research buildings: IDs 183 to 187.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 4 main industry buildings: IDs 202 to 206.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 4 main food buildings (minus primitive farms): IDs 208 to 212.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 4 main intel buildings: IDs 213 to 217.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 4 main energy buildings: IDs 218 to 222.
Info: in edifice.bst: Empire 4 main research buildings: IDs 223 to 227.

since the upgrade table is written along with it, the ids should be correct

but here is the changes UE wants to make to upgrade table

the original is correct table.

Code: Select all

Description: None

Changes:
30 00 58 00 80 00 A8 00 D0 00 30 00 58 00 80 00 A8 00 D0 00 30 00 58 00 80 00 A8 00 D0 00 33 00 5B 00 83 00 AB 00 D3 00 31 00 59 00 81 00 A9 00 D1 00 34 00 5C 00 84 00 AC 00 D4 00 34 00 5C 00 84 00 AC 00 D4 00 34 00 5C 00 84 00 AC 00 D4 00 34 00 5C 00 84 00 AC 00 D4 00 2A 00 52 00 7A 00 A2 00 CA 00 2A 00 52 00 7A 00 A2 00 CA 00 2A 00 52 00 7A 00 A2 00 CA 00 2D 00 55 00 7D 00 A5 00 CD 00 2B 00 53 00 7B 00 A3 00 CB 00 2E 00 56 00 7E 00 A6 00 CE 00 2E 00 56 00 7E 00 A6 00 CE 00 2E 00 56 00 7E 00 A6 00 CE 00 2E 00 56 00 7E 00 A6 00 CE 00 3A 00 62 00 8A 00 B2 00 DA 00 3A 00 62 00 8A 00 B2 00 DA 00 3A 00 62 00 8A 00 B2 00 DA 00 3D 00 65 00 8D 00 B5 00 DD 00 3B 00 63 00 8B 00 B3 00 DB 00 3E 00 66 00 8E 00 B6 00 DE 00 3E 00 66 00 8E 00 B6 00 DE 00 3E 00 66 00 8E 00 B6 00 DE 00 3E 00 66 00 8E 00 B6 00 DE 00 3F 00 67 00 8F 00 B7 00 DF 00 3F 00 67 00 8F 00 B7 00 DF 00 3F 00 67 00 8F 00 B7 00 DF 00 42 00 6A 00 92 00 BA 00 E2 00 40 00 68 00 90 00 B8 00 E0 00 43 00 6B 00 93 00 BB 00 E3 00 43 00 6B 00 93 00 BB 00 E3 00 43 00 6B 00 93 00 BB 00 E3 00 43 00 6B 00 93 00 BB D0 E3 00 35 00 5D 00 85 00 AD 00 D5 00 35 00 5D 00 85 00 AD 00 D5 00 35 00 5D 00 85 00 AD 00 D5 00 38 00 60 00 88 00 B0 00 D8 00 36 00 5E 00 86 00 AE 00 D6 00 39 00 61 00 89 00 B1 00 D9 00 39 00 61 00 89 00 B1 00 D9 00 39 00 61 00 89 00 B1 00 D9 00 39 00 61 00 89 00 B1 00 D9 00
Original:
30 00 58 00 80 00 A8 00 D0 00 31 00 59 00 81 00 A9 00 D1 00 32 00 5A 00 82 00 AA 00 D2 00 33 00 5B 00 83 00 AB 00 D3 00 34 00 5C 00 84 00 AC 00 D4 00 34 00 5C 00 84 00 AC 00 D4 00 34 00 5C 00 84 00 AC 00 D4 00 34 00 5C 00 84 00 AC 00 D4 00 34 00 5C 00 84 00 AC 00 D4 00 2A 00 52 00 7A 00 A2 00 CA 00 2B 00 53 00 7B 00 A3 00 CB 00 2C 00 54 00 7C 00 A4 00 CC 00 2D 00 55 00 7D 00 A5 00 CD 00 2E 00 56 00 7E 00 A6 00 CE 00 2E 00 56 00 7E 00 A6 00 CE 00 2E 00 56 00 7E 00 A6 00 CE 00 2E 00 56 00 7E 00 A6 00 CE 00 2E 00 56 00 7E 00 A6 00 CE 00 3A 00 62 00 8A 00 B2 00 DA 00 3B 00 63 00 8B 00 B3 00 DB 00 3C 00 64 00 8C 00 B4 00 DC 00 3D 00 65 00 8D 00 B5 00 DD 00 3E 00 66 00 8E 00 B6 00 DE 00 3E 00 66 00 8E 00 B6 00 DE 00 3E 00 66 00 8E 00 B6 00 DE 00 3E 00 66 00 8E 00 B6 00 DE 00 3E 00 66 00 8E 00 B6 00 DE 00 3F 00 67 00 8F 00 B7 00 DF 00 40 00 68 00 90 00 B8 00 E0 00 41 00 69 00 91 00 B9 00 E1 00 42 00 6A 00 92 00 BA 00 E2 00 43 00 6B 00 93 00 BB 00 E3 00 43 00 6B 00 93 00 BB 00 E3 00 43 00 6B 00 93 00 BB 00 E3 00 43 00 6B 00 93 00 BB 00 E3 00 43 00 6B 00 93 00 BB D0 E3 00 35 00 5D 00 85 00 AD 00 D5 00 36 00 5E 00 86 00 AE 00 D6 00 37 00 5F 00 87 00 AF 00 D7 00 38 00 60 00 88 00 B0 00 D8 00 39 00 61 00 89 00 B1 00 D9 00 39 00 61 00 89 00 B1 00 D9 00 39 00 61 00 89 00 B1 00 D9 00 39 00 61 00 89 00 B1 00 D9 00 39 00 61 00 89 00 B1 00 D9 00

just compare first entry cards food (fed, fer, klin, rom between each entry)
my table
30 00 31 00 32 00 33 00 34 00 34 00 34 00 34 00 34 00

UE table
30 00 30 00 30 00 33 00 31 00 34 00 34 00 34 00 34 00

[Flocke]

just compare first entry cards food (fed, fer, klin, rom between each entry)
my table
30 00 31 00 32 00 33 00 34 00 34 00 34 00 34 00 34 00

UE table
30 00 30 00 30 00 33 00 31 00 34 00 34 00 34 00 34 00

That issue is fixed along with a bunch of other stuff and code refactoring.

UE messed the upgrade table here by filling the list for the first 10 tech levels.
Now it simply fills the upgrade table in sequence of the building list like above.

I still have some minor TODOs on my list like fixing the bytes and value sorting of the segment list and some own testing, but I should have the dev version ready on weekend.

[thunderchero]

Downloaded and compiled ultimate-editor-modded_save_detection version and tested very well on MUM now.

UE even found an error in my upgrade table. I doubt if error had any effect (unused upgrade slot) but needed to be fixed.

[Flocke]

I don't recall sociology during 7 years usage of my german BotF 1.0.2 CD rom version. And I should have noticed that (Flocke or any other old school german user?).

I admittedly noticed that glitch before on multiple mods, not sure which it was. I however thought it was related to the many broken dictionary address mappings in some of the mods. Therefore, half a year back, I fixed UE to not automatically recompute the addresses but display the text like it is shown ingame. Plus I added option menus to either recalculate the addresses based on the dictionary index, or to reset them to current description start.
The latter option might not be of much use, but at least it helps to check what entries actually are mapped.

desc-fixture-tools.jpg (60.35 KiB) Viewed 1287 times

I did not ever imagine that there might be such a weird umlaut issue with the game.

answer is UE make changes that is not needed to make files look more logical (description pointers not in same order as tech list)

Is that current development version or last release? I changed and fixed lots on reading and writing the descriptions. If there still are issues with it, please report.

edit:

hope you did not waste too much time on this one, this issue was due to UE adjusting description order. game code can handle any description order.

techdesc.tec
English
weapon 0 - 10
sociology 0 - 10

German
sociology 0 - 10
weapon 0 - 10

so after UE adjusted order it read sociology descriptions for weapons

sorry I did not explain issue better.

I can't recall to have fixed such a bug. But I just tested to edit the tech level descriptions with latest development build and all went fine.
Did I miss something or is it fixed?

UE even found an error in my upgrade table. I doubt if error had any effect (unused upgrade slot) but needed to be fixed.

Glad to hear you already could make practical use of it.
I still see a bunch of trek.exe validation errors with MUM though. I will check them later.

[thunderchero]

I can't recall to have fixed such a bug. But I just tested to edit the tech level descriptions with latest development build and all went fine.
Did I miss something or is it fixed?

I think it is fixed
in my case I think what happened was I manually swapped descriptions in UE and UE swapped index at same time.

I still see a bunch of trek.exe validation errors with MUM though. I will check them later.

at a quick glance most "invalid" look to be irregular galaxies changes and extended tech levels