Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Ok. I've been fighting this for some time now and am still unable to figure
a solution for these two rules issues. Game is Lord of the Rings Since Reflections release it is now possible to have alternate ringbearers. Problem is that the original Frodo ring-bearer had a twilight cost of '0' and therefore didn't count against the 4 twilight limit in the starting fellowship. The new alternate rb's have costs ranging from 2-3 twilight. With that in mind how do I get around the rules to use the new ring-bearers with a correct cost of zero if in the starting fellowship and still account for the new rb's if NOT used in the starting fellowship and just used in your deck normally. I currently use this as the rule for rb's: <rule id="frodo" message="There must be at least one copy of Ring-bearer in the deck" summary="Must have Ring-bearer" priority="20" scope="all"> <![CDATA[ card:resist.? = 1 ]]> </rule> Secondly: There are currently 13 cards distinct cards that have a twilight cost of 3 to play during a game. However - if they are in the starting fellowship their twilight cost is reduced to 2. Is there a way to support this issue in rules validation. I have a list of those cards if needed. It's essentially 5 versions of Eomer, 3 of Theoden, 2 of Faramir, Alcarin, Ranger of Ithlien & Elite Rider (both versions). The following is the rule that currently is used for validation without the above issue. This is, of course tied into the question I posted first. Maybe I'm wrong in trying to handle them separately. <rule id="strtfellow" message="Your starting Fellowship has a total Twilight cost greater than 4" summary="Starting Fellowship too big" scope="deck3"> <![CDATA[ sum:twilight.? <= 4 ]]> </rule> Any help would be appreciated. I've read myself to a total state of insensibility going over the Rules and Statistics manuel though I did learn a lot and cut down the size of my rules file. Thanx loads to the CV guys - they're geniuses in my book. Jim ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSI...LSAA/WuQolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cardvault/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: cardvault-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ |
#1 |
Senior Member
Lone Wolf Staff
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,690
|
At 10:23 PM 5/31/2004, you wrote:
>Since Reflections release it is now possible to have alternate ringbearers. >Problem is that the original Frodo ring-bearer had a twilight cost of '0' >and therefore didn't count against the 4 twilight limit in the starting >fellowship. The new alternate rb's have costs ranging from 2-3 twilight. >With that in mind how do I get around the rules to use the new ring-bearers >with a correct cost of zero if in the starting fellowship and still account >for the new rb's if NOT used in the starting fellowship and just used in >your deck normally. > >I currently use this as the rule for rb's: > ><rule id="frodo" message="There must be at least one copy of Ring-bearer in >the deck" summary="Must have Ring-bearer" priority="20" scope="all"> ><![CDATA[ > card:resist.? = 1 >]]> > </rule> If I'm not mistaken, the starting fellowship gets its own 'deck' in Lord of the Rings. Therefore, there shouldn't be any problem distinguishing between the SF and your Free Peoples deck - any rules for "deck1" will apply to the FP deck only, while any rules for "deck3" will apply to your SF deck only. This means you can do funky things. Here's a way I can think of off the top of my head: Everyone has TWO twilight cost tags - one for when they're in the deck, and one for when they're in the SF. (I don't know whether you'd want to expose this detail to the user or not - you might keep it hidden 'under the covers' and just display a single twilight cost for each card, like you currently do.) To calculate the total twilight cost of the deck, you'd then need 3 rules: rule 1: Sets value 'twideck' to sum of 'twideck' tags in deck1 rule 2: Sets value 'twistart' to sum of 'twistart' tags in deck3 rule 3: Does any necessary validation against total twilight cost - twideck + twistart. >Secondly: > >There are currently 13 cards distinct cards that have a twilight cost of 3 >to play during a game. However - if they are in the starting fellowship >their twilight cost is reduced to 2. Is there a way to support this issue >in rules validation. I have a list of those cards if needed. It's >essentially 5 versions of Eomer, 3 of Theoden, 2 of Faramir, Alcarin, Ranger >of Ithlien & Elite Rider (both versions). The following is the rule that >currently is used for validation without the above issue. This is, of course >tied into the question I posted first. Maybe I'm wrong in trying to handle >them separately. > ><rule id="strtfellow" message="Your starting Fellowship has a total Twilight >cost greater than 4" summary="Starting Fellowship too big" scope="deck3"> ><![CDATA[ > sum:twilight.? <= 4 >]]> > </rule> The above should help with this scenario as well. You're already specifying deck 3 only, so you'd just check against the 'starting twilight' tag value instead of the 'normal twilight' tag value. An alternative way to do it would be to 'special case' all the funky cards. Each of these cards would get a hidden tag, something like 'specEomer1', 'specTheo3', or whatever - just enough to identify them to you within a rule. Then, in your rule / stat to calculate the total twilight cost, you can check for the presence of the tag - if it's present, add or subtract to the total twilight cost appropriately. E.g. if Eomer2 had a twilight cost of 4 (but 2 in the starting fellowship), in the 'starting fellowship twilight' validation rule, you would get the total number of 'specEomer2' tags, multiply that by 2, and subtract that number from the total. For example: sum:twilight.? - (sum:specEomer2 * 2) If no 'specEomer2's are in the deck, 0 will be subtracted - if one, 2 will be subtracted, if two, 4 will be subtracted, etc. Hope this helps, -- Colen McAlister (colen@wolflair.com) Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSI...LSAA/WuQolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cardvault/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: cardvault-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ |
#2 |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AB 3.1 LoTR problems | chgobiker | Army Builder | 4 | December 9th, 2005 04:09 PM |
LOTR problems | dizpatch1 at verizon.net | Card Vault | 0 | September 3rd, 2004 09:48 PM |