Two exhaustive probes agree on the same 15 records. The six Shift-JIS type words occur in the six GP_MAIN_GAME_* paks and nowhere else, and a disc-wide sweep of every parsed record name for a wildcard shape (???, *, ###, NNN, <...>) returns 7 distinct names - exactly the seven already in the schema: Turret_???, Hatch_???, Bridge_???, Thruster_???, ShieldGenerator_???, Versatile_???, NS_*, each x6. So the weapon datasheet, the arsenal item and StageResource ship NO schema; the unit datasheet is the only structure the disc describes to itself. Wildcard field names are confined to the schema records too - NozzleSpec_???, NozzleFrame_???, CannonFrame_???, MuzzleFrame_???. No untyped gaps either. The full residual is 30 slots and every one holds a sample value rather than a missing type: 28 booleans spelled Yes, plus Generic.ID = Ship_ and Generic.Type = Vessel. The booleans follow one pattern - the six destructible part types each carry the same four-boolean core (IsDestructible, IsInvolved, IsRadarVisible, IsShielded), Turret_??? adds IsAuto, Generic carries only IsDestructible, and NS_* has its own pair AttenuationAlpha / AttenuationVolume. 28 + 2 = 30; 7 fully-typed records + 8 with examples = 15. The third result is a refutation of my own instrument. Testing the four genuinely-undeclared effects against the 166 .xpr packages put eff_f0002 and eff_f0002_barn in Base.xpr and found nothing for eff_e0044 or eff_h308 - but the control kills the negative: eff_n0071, which we measured LIVE as an Explosion record's ExplosionFxModel, also returns nothing from the same search. A known-live name the test cannot find means the test has no power here. Only the positive half counts: eff_f0002/_barn do ship. Nothing follows about eff_e0044 or eff_h308, and the earlier "no mesh" remarks about eff_e0058/_e0059/_e0060 are weaker than written - absent from a byte search over .xpr is not absent from the disc. How an effect mesh is actually reached is now the open question, since eff_n0071 is not a plain name string in any of the 166 packages. All sixteen artefacts byte-identical.
14 KiB
✅ The destructible-subsystem model — a unit's sub-records
The corpus has named the sub-records of a unit .tbl since
unit-struct-runtime ("Generic, Maneuver,
Shield, Explosion, Mass, Effect, SE, Turret_00N … all flattened
into that single object") but has never opened them. This does.
One unit = one IDXD pak entry. 114 of them
(the Generic partition). Artefact
../data/unit-substructures.txt, regenerator
tools/re-capture/unit_substructures.py.
| family | records | max/unit | non-indexed fields |
|---|---|---|---|
Turret_NNN |
835 | 63 | 38 |
Generic / Maneuver / Effect / Shield / Mass / SE / Explosion / StructureCount |
114 each | 1 | — |
NS_Body |
68 | 1 | 12 |
ShieldGenerator_NNN |
46 | 4 | 21 |
Thruster_NNN |
38 | 4 | 21 |
Hatch_NNN |
26 | 4 | 23 |
Bridge_NNN |
25 | 2 | 20 |
Seven singletons named with a literal ??? (Turret_???, Versatile_???, …)
are the schema's own template rows.
The shared destructible-part base
Turret, ShieldGenerator, Thruster, Hatch and Bridge are the same
record shape with per-kind extras. Every one of the 970 part records carries:
ID Name ParentStructureID Frame NomalModel CollisionModel Radius
HP IsDestructible IsShielded IsInvolved IsRadarVisible SpreadDamage
DamagedMotionName DestroyMotionName DestroyMotionTime
Effect_Explosion Effect_Flare Effect_Paralyze
(NomalModel is the game's own spelling.) Frame is a mesh node name —
GN_mnt on the player craft — so a part is bolted to a named bone of the
Generic.Model mesh the corpus already decodes.
Per-kind, on top of that base:
| kind | extra fields |
|---|---|
Turret |
WeaponID, AngularVelocity, YawLimit, PitchLimit_Elevation, PitchLimit_Depression, CoverArea, IsAuto, HasBarrel, CommonCannonModel/Frame, CannonModel_NNN/CannonFrame_NNN (up to 80), SequencingCount, SequencingInterval, and on a few: CurveAngle, FCSAngle, FollowView, ShellModel, CoverModel |
ShieldGenerator / Thruster / Bridge |
PowerRatio — losing the part degrades the parent |
Thruster |
NozzleCount |
Hatch |
SquadronID, LoadedCount, MaxAvailableCount, TakeoffInterval — a carrier's launch bay |
🔑 That is a complete component model: named bone, own mesh and collision mesh,
own HP and destruction motion + effects, and a PowerRatio saying what the
parent loses when it dies.
The one-record blocks
| record | fields |
|---|---|
Shield |
MaxValue, ChargeSpeed, ChargeDelay, ChargeDelay_Break |
Mass |
DryMass, GrossMass |
SE |
ExplosionSE, Thruster, SideThruster, JumpIn, JumpOut, ShipEnvironmentSE, LowerHPSE, LowerHPThresholdRatio |
Explosion |
Delay, DelayAdjustment, ExplosionFxModel, ExplosionMotionName, LowerHPFxModel, DestroyMotionName, DestroyMotionTime |
StructureCount |
TurretCount, BridgeCount, HatchCount, ShieldGeneratorCount, ThrusterCount, VersatileCount |
NS_Body |
Model, NodeCount, Interval, StartingVelocity, Deceleration, Volume, Color_R/G/B, AttenuationVolume, AttenuationAlpha, DeleteFadeSpeed — an engine-trail ribbon, on 68 of 114 |
Every field the runtime doc reached for Shield (MaxValue +0x238,
ChargeSpeed +0x244) and Mass (DryMass +0x274, GrossMass +0x278) is
here, at the same names.
🧪 Control 1 — StructureCount counts the part records
declared == #<Kind>_NNN records, over 114 units × 6 kinds = 684:
| equal | 612 |
| declared 0, one blank placeholder record | 55 |
| differs | 11 |
kind absent from StructureCount |
6 |
The 55 are a real sub-rule, not slack: a kind with a count of 0 still emits
exactly one record, and all 55 have empty Name, NomalModel and Frame.
So the file always carries at least one slot per kind.
Every one of the 11 exceptions is a Turret, and every one has
declared < records — never the other way round. Nine are the player's
DeltaSaber family:
declared=4 records=63 x7 f001_T, f001_T_EX5, f001_T_EX5_el, f001_T_Player,
f002_W, f002_W_Player, f004_A_Player
declared=4 records=5 x2 f001_T_Player_Ttrl1 / _Ttrl2
declared=1 records=2 x1 UN_e001_ADAN_Elan_EX4
declared=8 records=9 x1 UN_e107_ADAN_AAFrigate_EX4
✅ ADOPTED the next day — on the player craft the Turret_NNN list is a
hardpoint catalogue and TurretCount 4 is how many mount at once. The
Arsenal table proves it from an independent file: 59/59 of its items name a
Turret_NNN slot in PlayerWeapon, see
arsenal-item-weapon-chain. The two +1
warship/craft cases are still unexplained.
⚠️ The "10 distinct WeaponIDs" measured here is the AI variant
UN_f001_TCAF_DeltaSaber_T. The _Player variants give the same 59 slots
59 distinct weapon records — wingmen fly a collapsed 10-class set.
🧪 Control 2 — turret weapons resolve into the weapon datasheet
835 / 835 Turret_NNN.WeaponID values are an ID in the 131-record
Weapon table. Zero unresolved. 105 distinct values are used; 26 of the
131 weapons are never mounted on a turret — the player-only arsenal.
That is a hard cross-table link: the weapon datasheet is what arms every gun on every ship.
❌ Refuted in the same pass — "the 59 hardpoints are the 59-name arsenal roster"
The DeltaSaber's 63 turret slots hold 59 non-Weapon_NULL entries, and the
WEAPONS roster in GP_HANGAR_ARSENAL.pak has exactly 59 names. Tempting,
and wrong: the two sets overlap in 0 values, and the 59 slots carry only
10 distinct WeaponIDs. The roster is display names
(Machiene_Cannon_MG1 — the game's spelling); the hardpoints reference
Weapon.ID (Weapon_TCAF_DeltaSaber_Gun). Two namespaces, one coincidence of
count.
✅ CoverArea is a 6-bit mount mask — and the other three leftovers
Artefact ../data/turret-coverarea.txt, regenerator
tools/re-capture/turret_coverarea.py.
Six bits, never more. Across all 835 turrets: 41 distinct values, max
0x3f, bits 6 and 7 set on none. Per-bit counts 709 / 117 / 274 / 274 / 260
/ 237; popcounts 0…6.
| mask | n | what |
|---|---|---|
0x00 |
34 | the empty Weapon_NULL hardpoints — YawLimit 0 on all 34 |
0x01 (one bit) |
439 | craft hardpoints — YawLimit 2.5 / 1.0 / 0 |
| 2–6 bits | 362 | warship mounts — YawLimit 45…180, real pitch limits |
🔑 It tracks the MOUNT, not the weapon. UN_e107_ADAN_AAFrigate carries
eight identical ..._AAFrigate_AAGun turrets: GN_GunXS_01…04 are 0x1d
and GN_GunXS_05…08 are 0x2d — same gun, same YawLimit 120, different
mask. UN_f104_TCAF_Battleship spreads five masks (0x1d, 0x39, 0x35,
0x27, 0x2b) across GN_TGunL_01…05 / GN_TGunM_02…03, all firing the same
CAF_Ship_ASGun.
🟡 Which physical sector each bit denotes is NOT determined. Six bits and a field called CoverArea invite ±X/±Y/±Z or six hull faces, and the 01–04 / 05–08 split above looks like a side — but nothing static fixes the axis convention. A reading, not adopted. ❌ Also refuted on the way: bits 2 and 3 are not a mutually-exclusive pair — 188 turrets set both.
The 26 weapons no turret mounts
Weapon.ID 131, mounted 105, never 26 — and they are a coherent set, not
strays: 11 _P player variants (…_Beam_P, _Gun_P, _Bomb_P, …),
the nose and twin mounts (_NoseGun, _NoseGun_P, _NoseGun_None,
_NoseGun_Ttrl, _TwinGun, _TwinGun_P), two _Child sub-munitions
(wep_13, wep_29), the three S16Boss_* weapons, three Weapon_Test_*,
and ADAN_Attacker_S_GunTurret.
Versatile_NNN ships nowhere
0 populated records across all 41 archives — only the ??? template row.
The schema declares a sixth destructible-part kind with zero instances.
The two units one turret short — both extras are MISSILE mounts with no frame
UN_e001_ADAN_Elan_EX4:TurretCount 1, two records —Turret_000…Turret_NoseGunandTurret_001…Turret_Missile, both mask0x01, both with an emptyFrame.UN_e107_ADAN_AAFrigate_EX4:TurretCount 8, nine records — eightGN_GunXS_0N_ContHgun turrets, plus one…Ship_AAMissileat mask0x0cwith noFrameat all.
🔑 In both, the uncounted extra is a missile launcher with no mesh node — so
TurretCount counts frame-mounted guns, and a frameless launcher rides in the
same record family without being counted. Consistent across both, n=2, so
stated as the observed pattern, not a rule.
🟡 Not settled
- What links a roster entry to a
Weapon.ID— the 59-of-131 question is still open, and this pass shows the answer is not the hardpoint list. Versatile_NNNhas 0 populated records in this pak; only the???template row exists, so its schema is known and its instances are not.Opened above: a 6-bit mount mask. Which sector each bit means is still open.CoverAreareads as a hex word — a bit mask, bits unknown.- The 6
no fieldcomparisons are one unit whoseStructureCountomits every count.
✅ Every effect a datasheet binds, against every effect the LOD tables declare
The Explosion substructure's field list is already above; what was untested is
whether its ExplosionFxModel — and the whole effect-binder family — actually
resolves. Run as a declared × used partition, sweeping 34 binder field
names (*FxModel*, *EffectName, Effect_*, ShellModel, CoverModel,
SilhouetteModel) against every name declared by a LOD_Effect_<n> or
GameModel_<n> field anywhere on the disc:
| declared | not declared | |
|---|---|---|
| used | 172 | 58 |
| not used | 318 | — |
490 declared, 230 used. The top binders are Effect_Paralyze (2 874 values),
ShellModel (996), HitFxModel (738), JetFxModel_000 (408),
MuzzleFlashFxModel_Loop (384).
🔑 The 58-cell is almost one field. 53 of the 58 are bound by
SilhouetteModel alone, and all 53 are rou_f###_wep* names — the arsenal
item silhouettes already documented in arsenal-item-weapon-chain. They are
undeclared because they are the wrong kind: each resolves as its own
standalone package, e.g. rou_f001_wep_01.xpr, and never as a LOD-table entry.
Nothing is missing — the sweep was reading an asset-file name as if it were an
effect name.
That leaves four genuinely undeclared effects — eff_e0044
(ExplosionFxModel), eff_f0002 + eff_f0002_barn (JetFxModel_00N /
AfterBurnerFxModel_00N) and eff_h308 (HitFxModel) — plus one placeholder
(below). None of the four resolves as a record name or a field name either.
⚠️ Controls, both from the previous iteration and both reproduced: eff_n0071
is declared and used 6× (= one user, per the per-pak-copy rule);
eff_e0033 is declared and used 0×, i.e. it sits in the 318-cell. The 318
is expected rather than alarming — the EnumLODSet/EnumGameModel family is
overwhelmingly equipment, so most of what it declares no unit datasheet binds.
🔑 A Shift-JIS dev placeholder: 文字列
One "effect name" in the 58-cell is not a name at all. Bound by
Effect_Explosion and Effect_Flare, 72 occurrences = 12 users, its bytes
are 95 B6 8E 9A 97 F1 — Shift-JIS for 文字列, literally "character
string". It is the placeholder a developer left in the field.
⚠️ Reader defect this exposes: tools/re-capture/unitgroup.py hands the
value back as Latin-1 mojibake (¶ñ), so an IDXD string field can carry
Shift-JIS and our decode does not know it. Worth fixing before any of these
strings reach a port; harmless for name-matching, because every other value in
the corpus is ASCII.
✅ _hangar is a package-naming convention — 59 of 166, zero partials
Following the silhouettes into the ISO tree: 59 of the 166 .xpr packages end
_hangar.xpr, and 59 of 59 have a bare twin of the same stem. So a model
shown in the hangar ships as a second package beside the in-flight one.
This is the direct contrast to the previous iteration's refutation — _all /
_child was 1 of 166 with one stem and is not a convention; _hangar is
59 of 166 with zero partials and is. Suffix conventions in this corpus are
worth testing precisely because they are not all real.
❌ An .xpr byte search cannot answer "does this effect ship"
Testing the four genuinely-undeclared effects against the 166 .xpr packages
gave eff_f0002 and eff_f0002_barn in Base.xpr, and nothing for eff_e0044
or eff_h308. But the control refutes the instrument, not the effects:
eff_n0071 — measured live, bound by an Explosion record's
ExplosionFxModel — also returns nothing from the same search.
A known-live name the test cannot find means the test has no power here. So:
eff_f0002/eff_f0002_barndo have a mesh inBase.xpr(presence is still evidence when it is positive);- nothing follows about
eff_e0044oreff_h308, and the earlier remark thateff_e0058,eff_e0059andeff_e0060"have no mesh" should be read the same way — absent from a byte search over.xpris not absent from the disc.
Whatever ships eff_n0071 is not a plain name string inside those 166 files,
so effect meshes must be reached some other way. Finding that route is the open
question; until then, only the positive half of this test counts.