Nuke clone problems

[~Mevitar~]

I was trying to make a working nuke clone and i noticed a problem: when i made one almost 100% same as original it should be to work (same projectiles, weapons etc. , but different names and different mouse action) it did work, but when i changed the Payload=NukePayload tag to something else the Nuke caused an IE when the missile going down should appear.

This time I DID check all the coding and it IS ok, everything is as it should be . I even tried to change the WeaponType=NukeCarrier to something else and it worked then, but not when the Payload=NukePayload was modified. And i'm not the only one who's nuke clone doesn't work: Speeder also was trying to make one but it occured an IE in the same moment, so i think it has something to do with the RTB patch. :unsure:

[pd]

this report comes at the right time , I'll check it out tomorrow (it's almost 1am so not now).

Can you attach your except.txt please?

[~Mevitar~]

had to register to add it

but here it is:
[attachmentid=63]

[pd]

OK, since the except didn't tell me anything and jonwil's code is completely OK, I began thinking, and I got it:

The error occured because the weapon doesn't exist.
YES, you might have introduced its section, but did you remember that weapons only get parsed if they are used by something?

Attach your new payload weapon as a DeathWeapon of some dummy unit (XCOMET for instance) and it will work properly, I just tested it

BTW: NukePayload is used as a DeathWeapon by the nuclear reactor.
Now we have a new reason for that.

[~Mevitar~]

you're right, stupid me
i tried it out and it is working now, sorry for blaming the patch for it :bleh:

[pd]

I found out this:

Missing weapon = missing warhead.
Both gives the same IE, and this is the reason:

Invalid weapons aren't a problem at all.
Weapons that couldn't be found will be created at runtime, but without any pointer to a warhead. Since a Warhead with a Null-name doesn't exist, this will cause an error.

This will practically not change anything, but it's knowledge

Edit:
Oh btw, you might get the idea to create a null-warhead like
106=
That doesn't work

[Bobingabout]

lol, full of fun, lol

PD, maybe you should program a null warhead.

[Renegade]

Not even if you have the appropriate
[]
section?

[Bobingabout]

lol.
I'm prety sure that the way it works, you atleast need 1 charactor, and since space isn't considered as a charactor in the ini parser, it won't even read a space.

[CNCM_BLITZ]

This shouldn't be a problem for you more knowledgeable users. Just make a real WH that has no real effect, and list it, and it should be fine. Besides, why do you people want a null-warhead? Dummy wwarheads do fine.

[DCoder]

Because we, more knowledgeable users, can see what the problem is, and you apparently can't.

[Saberhawk]

null is an empty string. So if someone forgets to list a warhead, it is a null. Now since it doesnt exist in the listing, it cant be used, and crashes.

[CNCM_BLITZ]

Oh, sorry. :oops: I got mixed up.

i have a suggestion. How about a missing warheads are to be automatically replaced with an existing warhead, one that exists in the inis. Although this might make that warhead unusable during gameplay except for the unit with a missing WH, it might fix the problem.

[C00L DuDe]

or how about a warhead named [null] (instead of [] )
now it is a legal string

another option: reprogram the engine to look for some dummy warhead (like [emptyWH] or something ) instead of looking for an empty warhead

[Saberhawk]

While "null" may be a legal string, the character null is defined as 0x0.