• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

Working on Gal 2.5 - Weekly Status Update # 1

Merxiless

SOC-13
Well, this is the first of a series of posts I am gonna kick out every few days or so, or at least weekly, letting people know what is going on with my undertaking of the Gal2.4 >> Gal2.5 Project, being done in Compiled QuickBasic 4.5.

I have yet to get with Jim V on this upgrade of gal2.4 (But in the past, many times via back and forth emails, he's told me hack it up, whatever I need, it's Public Domain, with his blessing).

I also have some other somewhat major issues to work out, as regards using some tables and stuff from Merchant Prince (I was fixing bugs and putting in other code, so I haven't even gotten close to that yet).

I want to make sure it's not going to infringe on Marc Miller's rights. I guess I'll have to ask him for permission, pretty soon, before I share any of the code with anyone.

That being said, here is a short description of what I got done yesterday in the pursuit of this integration with the Trader.BAS revival project, as discussed in another thread.

So far, I have cracked open a clean copy of Gal2.4, and just to be thorough, have done some testing, and bug fixes, as follows:

Updated 20 Feb 2006:

Overall, did some cleanup, and little minor cosmetics, like adding (y/n) in printed lines for when it prompts "Continue" to next screen.


Insdel.exe 2.0

The Subsector Starport Types Generation Tables from MegaTraveller Ref's Manual p. 24 included in gal2.4 have been expanded, to allow for referees to develop Non-Canon areas with active frontiers,
or less settled Subsectors of their own Campaign Settings.

The code itself is hardwired into READ/DATA Statements inside Insdel.bas, and I did not wish
to change this tradition by making it it's own outside data file, for fear of breaking it.

Gal 2.4 had: Unexplored, Backwater, Standard, Mature, and Cluster (Jim V called it Economic Hub), taken from MT Ref's Manual, P.24.

These are tables are unchanged, except for renaming Economic Hub to "Cluster", and Unsettled
to "Unexplored" to maintain coherence with the new tables..

Tables Now Included in 2.5 [Beta] are:

</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">
Cluster Mature Standard Backwater Periphery Frontier Explored Outlands Unexplored
2 A 2 A 2 A 2 A 2 A 2 B 2 B 2 C 2 X
3 A 3 A 3 A 3 A 3 B 3 B 3 C 3 C 3 X
4 A 4 A 4 A 4 B 4 B 4 C 4 C 4 D 4 X
5 A 5 B 5 B 5 B 5 C 5 C 5 D 5 D 5 X
6 B 6 B 6 B 6 C 6 C 6 C 6 D 6 E 6 X
7 B 7 C 7 C 7 C 7 C 7 D 7 D 7 E 7 X
8 C 8 C 8 C 8 C 8 D 8 E 8 E 8 E 8 X
9 C 9 D 9 D 9 D 9 E 9 E 9 E 9 X 9 X
10 D 10 E 10 E 10 E 10 E 10 X 10 X 10 X 10 X
11 E 11 E 11 E 11 E 11 X 11 X 11 X 11 X 11 X
12 X 12 E 12 X 12 X 12 X 12 X 12 X 12 X 12 X</pre>[/QUOTE]Starport Type Notes:
Cluster Subsectors have many worlds close together, or are an Economic Hub.
Mature Subsectors are older, and more established.
Standard Subsectors are the expected norm for the Imperium.
Backwater Subsectors are out of the mainstream of interstellar culture and communication.
Periphery Subsectors are at the Periphery of traveled space, more remote than Backwaters.
Frontier Subsectors are less well settled areas, bordering an Explored area farther out.
Explored Subsectors have active exploration and development of previously Charted Systems.
Outlands Subsectors have systems marked for development, some Scout bases, and few colonies.
Unexplored Subsectors have no Starports at all.
--------------------------------------------------

Makesec.exe 2.0

Edited Make Sector Step 4 : Subsector Civilization Levels Input
Corrections:
U = Unsettled renamed "Unexplored"
C = Economic Hub renamed "Cluster"
B = Backwater
S = Standard
M = Mature

New Starport Chart Additions:
P = Periphery
F = Frontier
E = Explored
O = Outlands


Line 1300 - Assigning Stellar probability Percentages
added in the following for reference, above the input area (on one line going across):
Rift 4 %
Sparse 16 %
Scattered 33 %
Standard 50 %
Dense 66 %


Fixed a bad bug in MAKESEC.EXE Allegiance Codes Entry, where allowing 0 Allegiance codes halted program due to lack of assigned code per Subsector.
(Users can no longer enter 0 Allegiance on the 1-15 Entry line.)

Spotted a bug in gal2.4 in MAKESEC.EXE Allegiance Codes Entry, where entering a non-numerical character caused a Redo From Start Error, for value of "num" variable.
[I'm considering input as a string, then get val$]
For now, you can just retype the text, when it reports "Redo from Start."


SECGEN.EXE

Corrected a bug in SECGEN.EXE where sectors with 100% Stellar Density were generating 10% density
due to a datafield field parsing error, from secgen.dat.

This took me a bit of tracking down, as it was not obvious what the problem was for some time.

Updated the Data statements in SECGEN.EXE to reflect 9 Starport charts from 5.
-------------------------------------------------
Future Enhancements:

Add Error Proofing in Secgen.exe, to check for codes and fields and such, when parsing Secgen.dat, especially when users do manual entry.

Perhaps allow for manual input, or something, on any failure to fall within values from the Secgen.dat file, like a manual override.

Working on a fix for Step 6, MAKESEC.EXE assigning allegiance codes per sector, such that the app will see if there is only 1 Allegiance Code assigned to a sector, and if so, auto fill the spaces, then ask user if this is correct.

I want to update the sec gen files and readers so that all civ codes are included in the secgen.dat template file, after it is generated.

looks like secgen2 is the base template for this.
-------------------------------------------------

I don't plan to release this as a series of patches, as too many files reference the various data files. It really needs to be one system.

And my 4 new Starport Charts included above **Should** not break anything. The changes made references a one-time variable in the temporary secgen.dat file, and is not used anywhere in any .sec file UPP.

I did some pretty good testing for some hours, fixed the problems that came up, and I think it was a good evening's work, for a start.

I'm still reading the various Trader rules from different editions to see what will shake out as the best attack plan.

I already have a method to add in Trade route lines, similar to the way jump route lines are displayed, on the Sector "M" Map Screen.

I'm planning long term, to see if I can do a color dot "G" and "S" Galactic Map, like what I have seen on Leroy Guatney's pages, some years ago.

Will advise, as I go. Some weeks from now, I'd appreciate it if any Gal 2.4 fans could do some testing, and give helpful comments on features they'd like to see in a possible 2.6 and later.

The above plans are not an all-inclusive list. I'm not trying to make the Stuart Ferris' H&E for Quickbasic, but there are some nice plugins I can write to do various things with all the sector data.
 
wow you got your work cut out for you!

i tried to do an update a year or so ago
and gave up as it fried my brains...

could you lighten the colors a bit?
its pertty hard to read sector names and
such on my screen...

i love qbasic BTW good choice to stay with
it and not port...
 
Well, I really enjoy working with Galactic, and I have already greatly rewritten my own personal variant since I first discovered it about 6 years ago.

This is just so that the community can make more use of it / update it.

When Jim V wrote it, he used really good coding technique, some documentation in REM statements where critically needed, and it's all pretty much straightforward, if a lot of math and formulas.

As to color change, Sure, I can do that.

I can basically change the defaults, and then put in a hot key to change map text name colors on the fly.

I've added it to my list of changes.

Yeah, I figure at least I can get Galactic running good, and then once all that code is worked out, perhaps take some time to port it over to visual basic, or a C++ Application.

This way, Galactic rises like a somewhat dusty Artifact of the ancients, into the modern world.

I'm not sure if people with WIN XP can use it or not, I have heard WIN XP does not support Basic.

But I'm not up on XP's Capabilities at all.

Those die hards (like me) that use WIN 98 SE will certainly be able to use it, and the code (If not infringing on Traveller's Fair Use), will be Public Domain.

But I am not looking to get onto anyone's IP Infringer list.

- Merxiless
 
Originally posted by Merxiless:
I'm not sure if people with WIN XP can use it or not, I have heard WIN XP does not support Basic.

But I'm not up on XP's Capabilities at all.
If you are using the quickbasic 4.5 compiler, it spit's out executables which work just fine on XP. (been there, done that).
 
I'm not sure if people with WIN XP can use it or not, I have heard WIN XP does not support Basic.

But I'm not up on XP's Capabilities at all.
WINXP...
i can but some folks might have to use dosbox
or something to run it
 
Well it seems a few people are interested in this. If you have ideas of what you'd like to see, describe and and I'll give it a go.
 
BTW: There is a way to run Basic in interpreted mode on an XP box... Dosbox. Dosbox emulates a Dos 5-6 OS, and runs QBasic 4.5 just fine. (It won't do PDS aka QB7, since PDS assumes you're running windows, and WIn won't run on DosBox... yet).

http://dosbox.sourceforge.net/
 
I wouldn't mind just seeing the current functionality in a windows style, rather than the DOS style interface currently. I'm running GAL2.4 on Windows XP Professional without any problems, but it's a pain switching between the DOS style screen and the rest of Windows. Pretty up the graphics a bit and I'm happy.
 
Agreed. After I get it all rigged up in Quickbasic, I'll work on windows style. I have VB4, and it'll take some time, but eventually, that's the plan.

After that, if anyone wants to take over, I'll host both.
 
Originally posted by Valarian:
I wouldn't mind just seeing the current functionality in a windows style, rather than the DOS style interface currently. I'm running GAL2.4 on Windows XP Professional without any problems, but it's a pain switching between the DOS style screen and the rest of Windows. Pretty up the graphics a bit and I'm happy.
Already been done: its called Universe and version 1.7 is sold under the BITS label. It can even import/export in a variety of formats including Galactic SEC files (but doesn't support SARs yet).

Having said that I still think there is a place for Galactic. Being DOS based it is better suited to low-spec machines plus it is easier to port (through emulation) onto other platforms. So a spring clean of the Gal2.4 code is certainly well overdue.

Regards PLST
 
The problem with Universe (IMHO) is that it uses the Borland Interbase as its database, which can cause problems if you have a lot of MDAC issues on your 2000/XP machine, as I did on one of my computers.

Using SQL as a datastore or, better still, XML, would make more sense and be less tied to a proprietary datasource.
 
Originally posted by Jim Fetters:
The problem with Universe (IMHO) is that it uses the Borland Interbase as its database, which can cause problems if you have a lot of MDAC issues on your 2000/XP machine, as I did on one of my computers.

Using SQL as a datastore or, better still, XML, would make more sense and be less tied to a proprietary datasource.
The original idea was that the database should be vendor neutral. I just chose Interbase at the time because it met my requirements and could be freely redistributed. However, vendor neutrality never really took off (too much of a distraction) and there were a number of issues with Interbase (most minor but ...) so for release 2 I am migrating across to MSDE 2000 (aka MS SQL Server 2000) which (a) will work better with Windows (same vendor) and (b) I now have legal redistribution rights for.

(I did look briefly at XML but it just wasn't an appropriate solution.)

Anyway, I didn't intend to hijack this thread. What's next for Gal2.5?

Regards PLST
 
Originally posted by Hemdian:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Valarian:
I wouldn't mind just seeing the current functionality in a windows style, rather than the DOS style interface currently. I'm running GAL2.4 on Windows XP Professional without any problems, but it's a pain switching between the DOS style screen and the rest of Windows. Pretty up the graphics a bit and I'm happy.
Already been done: its called Universe and version 1.7 is sold under the BITS label. It can even import/export in a variety of formats including Galactic SEC files (but doesn't support SARs yet).

Having said that I still think there is a place for Galactic. Being DOS based it is better suited to low-spec machines plus it is easier to port (through emulation) onto other platforms. So a spring clean of the Gal2.4 code is certainly well overdue.

Regards PLST
</font>[/QUOTE]I already have Universe. However, Universe still doesn't have all the functionality of Galactic (version 2 still outstanding) in terms of sector and system generation. I use both Galactic and Universe.

The ease of upgrade and upgrade cost from version 1.7 to version 2.0 will be a major factor in whether I continue with Universe or stick with the version I've got. Unless I've got a reduced cost upgrade (as an existing user) and an easy database migration path to choose I'm not going to be upgrading.

If the database is changing between 1.7 and 2.0, will we still be able to directly modify data in the database?

Point being ... Universe is a work in progress and has its quirks and functionality issues. It's a good piece of software, but still needs work. Hopefully this will improve in version 2.0.

Galactic (I've found) is easier to use and has greater functionality. It's just the interface that makes it look a bit dated.
 
Originally posted by sid6.7:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
I'm not sure if people with WIN XP can use it or not, I have heard WIN XP does not support Basic.

But I'm not up on XP's Capabilities at all.
WINXP...
i can but some folks might have to use dosbox
or something to run it
</font>[/QUOTE]Just a quick note - I was playing around with Galactic on my Tablet PC (XP SP2) and it worked fine - once I placed it into a directory that had no security restrictions. (Gotta love the days of no security...)

Interestingly, I can only get the thing to run in full screen - it doesn't stay in a smaller window. And when I had my Tablet in slate mode on a docking station - it ran upside down.


So a resounding YES on the Win32 version!
 
Originally posted by Valarian:
The ease of upgrade and upgrade cost from version 1.7 to version 2.0 will be a major factor in whether I continue with Universe or stick with the version I've got. Unless I've got a reduced cost upgrade (as an existing user) and an easy database migration path to choose I'm not going to be upgrading.

If the database is changing between 1.7 and 2.0, will we still be able to directly modify data in the database?
Sorry for the delay, I have some internet connection issues at the moment.

Re Universe 2

The plan is that Universe 2 will come as a "full version" and an "upgrade version". The upgrade version will be the full version (with old version verification) plus an automated migration tool but sold at a discount. I'm actually working on the migration tool now. Final prices haven't been decided yet but one idea was £20 full, £10 upgrade.

I hadn't given much thought to the idea of directly modifying the data in the database: most of the data is accessable through the application and it comes with a freeform SQL query tool. Interbase came with an admin program much like MS SQL 2000, but MSDE 2000 is just the engine. I'll have to look at this. How important is this to you?

Re Galactic 2.4

There is a strange bug with the copy of Gal24 that ships on the HIWG CD: If you try to look at the classic universe (there is no problem with the others) the program aborts with "Error #53 detected around line 5725". Or atleast it does on my CD. Since this only occurs with the classic universe I guess that means a corrupted data file.

Now I was able to work around this by finding another version on the net but it occurs to me that there should be an "official" home for Galactic on the net that includes all the usual things (downloads, links, FAQs, technical documents) and a simple knowledge base. If I wasn't technically savy I might not know how to recover my data after a bug like this.

Thoughts?

Regards PLST
 
Back
Top