[Updated on: Fri, 06 January 2006 17:19]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

crr65536 wrote on Sun, 08 January 2006 23:33

Nice! Would it be possible to skip some of the animation? The book effect is nice, but it gets old after a while.

The animation is what gave me the motivation to make the book as a Flash movie. What is a movie without animation? Last year when I purchased SwishMax, one of my first projects to learn how to use it to make Flash movies, was to make this little book. I started with a simple book without the curling pages (more difficult) to get the hang of the program.

I suppose when I get the time I could try to have the table of contents link directly to the pages they are on, without the flipping. But with only fourteen pages this shouldn't be a problem, except for maybe speed readers.

The page speed likely depends on your computer graphics speed. Clicking and holding the mouse button on the words below the book causes pages to flip faster. Slow page movement is accomplished by clicking anywhere on the bottom edges of the pages.

[Updated on: Mon, 09 January 2006 19:50]

Report message to a moderator

Useful book. Book effect itself is nice too. Maybe that it turns the pages somewhat slower than reading people do it in real life. I got quite fast computer, so it cant be the reason.

Only thing, seems there is inconsistency in the page turning mechanism. To turn page forward its enough to click "Forward" once. To turn page in reverse order i got to hold down on "Reverse" until page is fully turned. When i click "Reverse" it only lifts page slightly and then it falls back. Maybe its just my flash player.

[Updated on: Mon, 09 January 2006 20:31]

Report message to a moderator

Kotk wrote on Mon, 09 January 2006 19:22

Useful book. Book effect itself is nice too. Maybe that it turns the pages somewhat slower than reading people do it in real life. I got quite fast computer, so it cant be the reason. Only thing, seems there is inconsistency in the page turning mechanism. To turn page forward its enough to click "Forward" once. To turn page in reverse order i got to hold down on "Reverse" until page is fully turned. When i click "Reverse" it only lifts page slightly and then it falls back. Maybe its just my flash player.

Yes, it certainly can be made faster. I basically used someone's source code, a free-to-use example, to accomplish the page turning with only slight modifications. Again, this was when I first learned the programming language, a beginner, so I expect I could do much different if I were to make a new one, having much more experience with the program, especially the scripting language.

Yes, and I almost mentioned it in my last post, there is a kink in the "reverse" that the page returns to start if you release the button. I never bothered to fix it, as I went on to program other things... basically got bored with it, and wanted to learn new territory. You can, however, click instead on the lower portion of the page, and it will turn just fine.

I don't know how much effect a slower system has on this movie. I never tried it on other systems. But I do know there is considerable speed difference in my older win98 system and my newer XP system with running many Flash movies. The flash movies run smoother on the XP, especially when there is lots of intense animation/calculations, like with lots of bitmap movements. A good example would be my "Virtual Aquarium" demo at my website. It runs very good on my XP, but on the much slower 98 system the animation is not smooth but jittery.

Report message to a moderator

Kotk wrote on Mon, 09 January 2006 19:22

Useful book. Book effect itself is nice too. Maybe that it turns the pages somewhat slower than reading people do it in real life. I got quite fast computer, so it cant be the reason. Only thing, seems there is inconsistency in the page turning mechanism. To turn page forward its enough to click "Forward" once. To turn page in reverse order i got to hold down on "Reverse" until page is fully turned. When i click "Reverse" it only lifts page slightly and then it falls back. Maybe its just my flash player.

Version 2, pages turn faster now and inconsistency is fixed. Revised book style with more realistic page turn, but bigger download size, because I switched from text to bitmaps. The use of text slows down the page turning animation.

I also added to the webpage some more old articles I have accumulated over the years. Especially useful for beginners to learn Stars! techniques.

Report message to a moderator

BlueTurbit wrote on Mon, 16 January 2006 00:59

Revised book style with more realistic page turn, but bigger download size, because I switched from text to bitmaps. The use of text slows down the page turning animation.

Lot better looking. The new turning feature feels quite realistic.
Just that ... the descriptions for Hush-A-Boom and Alien Miner take some pixel hunting to get now.

Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Mon, 16 January 2006 02:07]

Report message to a moderator

Kotk wrote on Sun, 15 January 2006 19:02

Lot better looking. The new turning feature feels quite realistic. Just that ... the descriptions for Hush-A-Boom and Alien Miner take some pixel hunting to get now.

Hmmm. Seems to work fine for me. You must have downloaded the beta version.

Report message to a moderator

Tomasoid wrote on Mon, 16 January 2006 01:00

Do you plan to put most Stars! articles on your web site?

No, because I don't have most Stars! articles. I just went through and picked out a few that I thought might be useful for newcomers who may not find them on the websites that no longer exist. But I suspect much of this material is still to be found in the newsgroup, if you dig deep. But I will dig some more and put them up also... soon... I will make a note of that.

Quote:

I also have some notes about the tech manual...

Yes, more notes. I will put them on the pile with the other notes. I will make a note of that right now.

Report message to a moderator

Was just creating the wiki page for the Mystery Trader and used the MT ships info from the tech manual.(Most of the rest of the entry is from your previous MT post thanx)

While using my current game to get images, I noticed the armor and shield values for the MT Scout don't match with the tech manual data. I have RS, but both the armor and shield values were listed low compared to my game, I'd have thought with RS the(my) armor would be lower and the sheilds higher.

Report message to a moderator

The scout weight is low in the tech manual. Maybe the source used older version of Stars! or made error. Looks like the cargo pod armour wasn't added on.

According to a test game the scout (without RS) has
495 armour and 375 shields.

The scout pictures, which have hard to read text, are actually from a German version. Instead of 2 of 2, they say 2 von 2.

I suppose I need to update the info. I will make a note of this and put it on my notes pile.

EDIT:
It appears in 1998 there were many different scout specs.
I dug up another article on MT's and it gives this:

5.01) M.T. Scout:

Hull Type: Minimorph
Engines: 2 Enigma Pulsar
Shields: 3 Langston Shell
Weapons: 2x2 Anti Matter Torps
Misc. Equipment: 1 Multi Cargo Pod,
1 Multi Function Pod,
1 Jump Gate

Weight: 192 kt
Max. Fuel: 400 mg
Armour: 485 dp
Shields: 375 dp
Rating: 480
Cloak/Jam: 60%/23%
Initiative/Moves: 2/2.5
Scanning Range: 65/32


from: Mystery Trader FAQ (v3.1 for Stars! 2.6h)

[Updated on: Wed, 01 February 2006 20:20]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Well, I am looking at a probe with RS and that carries three mega poly shell with 400 armour each, but the total armour of the ship lists only 900 and the shields are 420.

200+200+200+ 250 hull + 50 ? Cargo pod full 50 armour?

EDIT:
The langston shell is a shield and therefore retains the full armour, the mega poly is armour so it loses its value with RS.

Next case...

[Updated on: Thu, 02 February 2006 01:36]

Report message to a moderator

gible wrote on Thu, 02 February 2006 00:03

I expect the weight would change with miniaturization, but the others shouldn't.

Yeah, those midget scouts. They not only weigh less, but they eat less too.

Report message to a moderator