4b676fc2e9
Reading the docs first paid: unit-substructure-records already had UN_e001_ADAN_Elan_EX4 and arsenal-item-weapon-chain already had _T_EX5_el, so last pass's "the only two _EX5 names on the disc" was too narrow. Withdrawn and replaced by a census. Every name ENDING in _EX<digit> across all 41 archives, taken from parsed IDXD record names, field names and string values (never a raw byte scan): 26 names, two digits only - _EX4 (7 units, 6 ADAN + 1 TCAF) and _EX5 (4 TCAF units + 1 weapon), each with a UnitName_/WeaponCannonName_ twin. The stage join is exact. _EX4 appears only in tables S27 declares (EnumUnit_S27.tbl, UnitGroup_S27.tbl); _EX5 only in S28's (EnumUnit_S28.tbl, UnitGroup_S28.tbl, EnumWeapon_EX5.tbl); the other 20 stages have neither. The challenge missions are S24-S29 in order, so S27 is challenge #4 and S28 is challenge #5: _EXn names the n-th challenge ("EXtra") mission's bespoke variants. S28 declares both schemes at once - EnumUnit_S28.tbl by stage number, EnumWeapon_EX5.tbl by challenge index, for the same mission. Refuted: _EXn is not the Extra0n numbering. There are four Extra slots but _EX5 exists, and under that reading Extra04 would be S29, which has no _EX assets. Makes available but does not settle result-screens' open "what does EX_ mean": "the challenge-mission debriefing" fits its evidence that the EX_ twin drops overview_rank/overview_medals. Recorded there as a reading, not adopted. All fifteen artefacts byte-identical.
84 lines
4.3 KiB
Markdown
84 lines
4.3 KiB
Markdown
# ✅ The debriefing and pilot-record screens — `STAGE_RESULT`, `OVERVIEW`, `EX_OVERVIEW`
|
|
|
|
- **Where:** `tables.pak` (the menu config pak), records `STAGE_RESULT`, `OVERVIEW`,
|
|
`EX_OVERVIEW`; key lists compiled into the executable at `sub_822814D8` and
|
|
`sub_8227A3A0` (found by the base-solver, [[player-tuning-tables]]).
|
|
- **Related:** [[mission-scoring]] owns the *rules* (`Score_*` in the stage
|
|
settings); this is the *readout*. [[savegame-format]] documents the same
|
|
compiled-key-list shape for the LOAD/SAVE screen.
|
|
|
|
## The shape was already known — for other screens
|
|
|
|
[[savegame-format]] establishes it: *"the LOAD/SAVE screen's config key list is
|
|
compiled into the executable, as a pointer array of key strings — the same shape
|
|
as the Arsenal's (whose keys sit a few hundred bytes earlier and match the pak
|
|
record exactly)"*, run starting `0x820A0074`. **`sub_82286BC8`'s 18-name block is
|
|
exactly that list** — 17 of its 18 are a `tables.pak` field or record name, so it
|
|
is the documented save-screen list and nothing new. Its lone residual is
|
|
**`PLAYER_AMMO_LESS_10`**, which is not a `tables.pak` name at all.
|
|
|
|
## ✅ Two more screens, and the key lists match their records exactly
|
|
|
|
| block | names | all present in `tables.pak`? |
|
|
|---|---:|---|
|
|
| `sub_822814D8` | 24 | **24 / 24** |
|
|
| `sub_8227A3A0` | 21 | **21 / 21** |
|
|
|
|
And the arithmetic closes against the records themselves:
|
|
|
|
* **`sub_822814D8` = the debriefing screen.** 24 names = 2 screen ids
|
|
(`STAGE_RESULT`, `EX_STAGE_RESULT`) + **21 `stage_*` fields** + one sound cue
|
|
(`SE_BOSS_CORE_CHARGE`). The `tables.pak` record `STAGE_RESULT` has **exactly
|
|
21 fields** (2 objects, both 21).
|
|
* **`sub_8227A3A0` = the pilot record / career screen.** 21 names = 5 screen ids
|
|
(`LAST_RESULT`, `EX_BASE`, `EX_MAIN`, `EX_OVERVIEW`, `OVERVIEW`) + **7
|
|
`ex_overview_*`** + **9 `overview_*`**. The records `EX_OVERVIEW` and
|
|
`OVERVIEW` have **exactly 7 and 9 fields** (2 objects each).
|
|
|
|
`2+21+1 = 24` and `5+7+9 = 21`, with 21/7/9 measured independently off the pak.
|
|
|
|
### The debriefing readout, in full
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
stage_num_shoot_down_aircrafts stage_points_shoot_down_aircrafts
|
|
stage_num_shoot_down_ships stage_points_shoot_down_ships
|
|
stage_points_shoot_down_others
|
|
stage_weight_shoot_down
|
|
stage_num_main_objectives stage_points_main_objectives
|
|
stage_num_sub_objectives stage_points_sub_objectives
|
|
stage_clear_time stage_points_clear_time
|
|
stage_shoot_down_ratio stage_points_shoot_down_ratio
|
|
stage_damages_friendly_ships stage_points_damages_friendly_ships
|
|
stage_damages_wingman stage_points_damages_wingman
|
|
stage_points_friendly_fire
|
|
stage_total_points stage_rank
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
🔑 **Nine `num`/`points` pairs plus three points-only lines** — the screen shows
|
|
a raw count *and* its score contribution for kills by class, objectives, time,
|
|
ratio and both damage categories; `friendly_fire`, `shoot_down_others` and
|
|
`weight` have no counter column. That is the same partition
|
|
[[mission-scoring]] measures on the settings side.
|
|
|
|
### The career readout
|
|
|
|
`overview_points`, `_total_play_time`, `_clear_stages`, `_retry_times`,
|
|
`_shoot_down_aircrafts`, `_shoot_down_ships`, `_shoot_down_weight` — seven, and
|
|
`OVERVIEW` adds **`overview_rank`** and **`overview_medals`**. The `EX_` twin has
|
|
the seven and neither of the two, which is what makes `EX_` the reduced variant
|
|
rather than a different screen.
|
|
|
|
🟡 Not settled: what `EX_` means (a second profile? the online/leaderboard
|
|
variant?) — **but see
|
|
[stage-numbering-and-player-craft](stage-numbering-and-player-craft.md):
|
|
`_EXn` on an asset name is measured to mean "the n-th challenge mission", which
|
|
makes "`EX_` = the challenge-mission debriefing" a consistent reading of why
|
|
this twin drops `overview_rank` and `overview_medals`. Not adopted — the
|
|
selection has not been shown** — `EX_BASE`, `EX_MAIN`, `EX_STAGE_RESULT` and `EX_FONT` are keys with
|
|
**no record of that name**, so the prefix is a screen-id convention, not a table.
|
|
And `PLAYER_AMMO_LESS_10` is unexplained.
|
|
|
|
**Reproduce:** parse `tables.pak` with `tools/re-capture/unitgroup.py` and count
|
|
the fields of the three records; take the key lists from the `sub_822814D8` /
|
|
`sub_8227A3A0` / `sub_82286BC8` sections of [`../data/name-block-bases.txt`](../data/name-block-bases.txt).
|