Posts by seafarer101

On a computer with a clean Vista install I get the following error message when trying to activate the Crossfire mod.

3 files restored and 0 directories deleted
Error: problem activating 'Crossfire Mod 1.70 Client Edition'
Error: SHCopyFile failed ('C:\Program Files\Freelancer Mod Manager\mods\Crossfire1.70\EXE\MSINET.OCX' to 'C:\Program Files\Microsoft Games\Freelancer\EXE\MSINET.OCX')

I've tried all the uninstalls and complete removals usually recommended. Freelancer runs fine by itself or when started through the FLMM.
I would really like to play Crossfire again but a the momment it's not looking too good. Any suggestions?
Cheers!

I well aware that the download link here at the crossfire swatt-portal points to Lancersreactor, however that site has been down for some time now. Is there really nowhere else that 1.7 can be downloaded?!?

HI!
Lancersreactor seems to be down. Is there anywhere else 1.7 can be downloaded?
Cheers!

The Scouser comes, logically enough, with a freighter shield, however if you de-mount it in order to mount another one, you can only mount fighter shields
Something higher than a class 7 shield for this vessel would be nice, and not unreasonable, but thats another matter.

I will agree that the current, completely static, commodities market is somewhat unrealistic and that once the most profitable trade routes have been found, trading does become monotonous.
However, if the buy/sell prices of commodities change on a daily basis, then making money by trading will not only become hard it will be hugely influenced by chance. All scouting around for trade routes will be almost futile, as prices will change again within the next 24 hours.
If commodity prices are set become this dynamic, then I really think that, for trading not to end up like some kind of lottery, current prices should be available on the website.
I am well aware that being able to access this data will need quite an interface, but traders must have some means of planning if they cant rely on the routes they find by themselves.

Have been away for a few months so the answer to my question may be common knowledge - but anyway, why does is seem that the server is stuck in rebooting?
Cheers!

It also happens in SP so it can not be lag. It seems likely that it has something to do with vessel size and the geography of certain docking bays. In all in the intances where I have experienced this glitch, it has resolved itself after a few minutes of bouncing around, and the vessel has completed the docking.

This has happenen, seemingly randomly, 3 times to me; twice with a Deimos and once with a Dromedary. On all occasions the approach angle was from below, either at a battleship or at asteroid base. No idea whether there's a connection or if it's coincidence.

I'm all for a mooring fixture at Earth - the other day I took my newly acquired Train for a test spin before noticing it didn't come with a shield, leaving me hanging outside the docking ring feeling rather vulnerable and somewhat silly. [wall2] This aside, it does rather seem logical to have a mooring fixture at the only planet where the large freighters are available.

Pls can we have a mooring fixture at earth?

On the topic of Trains - would it be possible to give these, and maybe other freighters, the ability to mount shield upgrades, either the ones already available or new ones specifically for freighters. Without escorts, the Trains can be sitting ducks in hostile territory, shield upgrades would offer a slightly greater chance of making it to safety. Maybe this could be arranged while the the tendency for Trains to deflection violently from their trajectory at the slightest knock is being looked into?

On a general note - the effort which goes into making CF the high quality, benchmark FL MOD that it is, really is impressive and most commedable. Thnx all those who work to make this possible! You deserve more encouragement than is generally offered. [thumb]

Cheers!

Okie dokie. Thnx for the enlightenment!
Can't say I wholeheartedly agree with the "... are mounted on the same place (the hull) so you can only mount one of them" business, I would still view the reduction as being a component replacement process rather than something supplementary being mounted, but, you're the boss
As for replacing nice strong steel (density aprox. 8030 kg/m3) with flimsy aluminium (density 2700 kg/m3) ; yes, that would mean a lot of aluminium to attain the same strength, but then one might well see the weight reduction become a weight increase. Actual components of a set shape and size would loose weight but also considerable strength. Why not go for Titanium (density 4050 kg/m3) or something even more exotic - after all, we are not exactly limited by our present level of technology here are we [wink2] - thereby both loosing weight and gaining strength within the confines of the same volume.
Still, all this waffling aside, if the weight reduction is set to 1% then I can clearly see that it is of very little benefit to any but the largest of vessels. Though it didnt quite come with a money back guarantee, Ive already handed it back to the nice arms dealer who sold it to me.
The speed thing, which appears to have stuck even after ridding myself of the weight reduction: It disappears after cruise has been activated once, then reappears after docking with a station or planet but can again be alleviated by a short burst of cruise. A little odd, but a harmless and quaint enough little quirk [konfus]
Thnx again for the info!
[prost]

Could someone with insight please explain the precise workings of this Weight Reduction Upgrade. There are a number of aspects about it which I find rather peculiar.

1. Why should replacing heavy compnents with lighter ones take up 60 cargo units?
2. Why is thruster speed reduced? With a Weight Reduction Upgrade III mounted and Armour Class 10 onboard (but not mounted, see question 3.), I have observed a drop from 189, with an Advanced Thruster, to a lethargic 154! This remained the case when the Armour was mounted and not the Weight Reduction Upgrade.
3. Why is it possible only to mount either Armour or a Weight Reduction Upgrade? The two would seem to compliment rather than eliminate one another.
4. As e.g. Class 10 Armour increases armour by 100% by how much, % or specific weight units, do the various Weight Reduction Upgrades reduce a vessel's mass?

Hope someone can help out with this.
Cheers!

What are the criteria for being able to mount weight reduction upgrades?
With 70 units cargo space available I am confronted with "..not enough cargo space available.." This connection with cargo space seems a bit odd, after all, the upgrade is supposed to replace heavy components with lighter ones... ?

I've got

the 1.56 and am rather eager to use it. However, it now seems that a password is needed to

connect to the server. Is the server only open to a few for testing purposes or...?
If

not, then how does one obtain the password?
Cheers!