• Please note: In an effort to ensure that all of our users feel welcome on our forums, we’ve updated our forum rules. You can review the updated rules here: http://forums.wolflair.com/showthread.php?t=5528.

    If a fellow Community member is not following the forum rules, please report the post by clicking the Report button (the red yield sign on the left) located on every post. This will notify the moderators directly. If you have any questions about these new rules, please contact support@wolflair.com.

    - The Lone Wolf Development Team

Child Counts against Grandparent

J

Jamz

Well-known member
Simple question and couldn't seem to find the answer with search so sorry if this has been covered, at least I think. I've tried to find a solution in the docs but it escapes me atm.

Situation:

Unit A has Child Unit B. Unit B has option to attach Unit C.

Unit A has min/max counts of 4-8 ("Effective" = True)
Unit B is always 1, does NOT count towards Unit A min/max (so "Effective" = false)
Unit C has min/max counts of 1-2 ("Effective" = True)

I've added a new link option under unit B which adds Unit C. How do I get Unit C to count towards Unit A counts? (Currently it's adding towards Unit B's count.)

I have exclusions so Unit B can only add 1-2 Unit C's, but when added, Unit B's count goes from 1 to 0.

So basically, I want Unit C to only be "Effective" counted towards it's grand-parent.

PS I'm a little rusty as I've been away for almost 3 years, but my game is making a come back! So I've dusted off my v2 files and trying to finish converting them to v3 :) So I'll probably have a few more dumb questions lol
 
A few thoughts ( I haven't tried these out myself yet) - make B effective, and make A's range 5-9, then, since you have the problem of reducing the count of B when you add C, have your option also increase the count of B so that the net result is to stay at a single B.

Possibility 2; create an accumulated stat, with A and C at 1, then test on the accumulated stat, rather than the model count.

Possibility 3 - even if it's not the official way to do it in the army list, will it look OK to put C's option on A? If the problem is that B is optional, and C requires B, that's what chained options are for.
 
Hmm, may have something with #3. Unit B isn't optional (always attached) but I can try and attach unit C to unit A. Right now, you add option to B, which exposes via live script an option to add C, I can try and put the "add unit C" on A with a live script looking at unit B's option? Let me try thatt...
 
Ah, there are a choice of B's, and the available C's depend on which B you chose. May I suggest exclusions?

On A, there's a list of options for the available children. Unit B1 uses 1 from exclusion group B1 (range 0-1), and since every version of C that can't be taken along with B1 also uses 1 from that exclusion group, all the unavailable options will be greyed out without any scripting. Of course B1 also uses 1 from exclusion group B (range 1-1), so the program automatically enforces the rule that exactly one unit B is selected. You can also put a remainder on one of your B's so that the user doesn't need to do anything to get the standard choice of unit B's.
 
Thanks for the help mgehl! I thought I'd post what I finally did as a solution in case it helps others.

Basically, On the parent unit (A), I put the "Add Support Unit" option (which adds unit via new link) and put a Live Expression based on a tag.
On the Child Unit (B), I put the option with cost on that unit (which is the unit that gets the "upgrade") with an eval script that adds the required tag to it's parent (Unit A).

So now when you select the option on unit B, unit A gets a new option (with a exclusion of min 1, max2 so it goes red warning user to new options) and the all the model counts are aquired properly!

Whew, what a pain lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top