• 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

design problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter zebuleon at peoplepc.com
  • Start date Start date
Z

zebuleon at peoplepc.com

Guest
I have a problem that I can't seem get to work. Heres the
background.

I have two forces, force A and force B, Force A has a unit that Force
B can use but they get a new skill, Option A, while in force B. Now
I could go through the whole process of writing up the unit in force
B's list but I'm lazy. so this is what I tried but it doesn't work.

Under unit A I went to its External Attributes and put in
"race:fa,fb" now this made it show up for each force which is fine.

Then I put "must:option=opA-race=fb"

Now according to the description of this function I should be able to
go to ArmyBuilder create a rooster for Force B, choose Unit A, and it
should have Option A. But this doesn't happen. I'm not sure if I'm
doing it wrong or not because no errors pop up. Or does this function
not actually do anything.

Any ideas

Zebuleon


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Failed tests, classes skipped, forgotten locker combinations.
Remember the good 'ol days
http://click.egroups.com/1/4053/3/_/36190/_/959586751/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
The "must" attribute is for performing validation. It does NOT have
anything to do with actually giving a unit an option. This can only be done
via linking options to units.

If I understand you're objective, the solution is to attach "opA" to the
unit normally. This will make it appear in both Force A & B. To get it to
only appear in Force B, you can use the "legl:race=fb" attribute on "opA".
This will make it only available to the unit while in Force B.

Hope this helps,
Rob


At 07:52 AM 5/29/00 +0000, you wrote:
>I have a problem that I can't seem get to work. Heres the
>background.
>
>I have two forces, force A and force B, Force A has a unit that Force
>B can use but they get a new skill, Option A, while in force B. Now
>I could go through the whole process of writing up the unit in force
>B's list but I'm lazy. so this is what I tried but it doesn't work.
>
>Under unit A I went to its External Attributes and put in
>"race:fa,fb" now this made it show up for each force which is fine.
>
>Then I put "must:option=opA-race=fb"
>
>Now according to the description of this function I should be able to
>go to ArmyBuilder create a rooster for Force B, choose Unit A, and it
>should have Option A. But this doesn't happen. I'm not sure if I'm
>doing it wrong or not because no errors pop up. Or does this function
>not actually do anything.
>
>Any ideas
>
>Zebuleon


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Old school buds here:
http://click.egroups.com/1/4057/3/_/36190/_/959587748/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
Wouldn't that make the option not available to other members of force
A that are allowed to have it? If yes, is there another way around
it.

Zebuleon

---In armybuilder@egroups.com, Rob Bowes <rob@w...> wrote:
> The "must" attribute is for performing validation. It does NOT have
> anything to do with actually giving a unit an option. This can only
be done
> via linking options to units.
>
> If I understand you're objective, the solution is to attach "opA"
to
the
> unit normally. This will make it appear in both Force A & B. To get
it to
> only appear in Force B, you can use the "legl:race=fb" attribute on
"opA".
> This will make it only available to the unit while in Force B.
>
> Hope this helps,
> Rob



------------------------------------------------------------------------
Failed tests, classes skipped, forgotten locker combinations.
Remember the good 'ol days
http://click.egroups.com/1/4053/3/_/36190/_/959633811/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
Correct. That detail wasn't specified in your example, so I didn't know
that was a constraint.

Given your constraint, the simplest solution is to use "utyp" on OptionA
and assign a specific type to each unit that can have OptionA. In the case
of the unit that can live in both races, you'll need to assign this type
via OptionB that is included automatically. OptionB would have the
following attributes:

hide
type:AllowOptA
legl:race=fb

You'll also need to be sure that the option category assigned to OptionB is
HIGHER priority than the category assigned to OptionA. This ensures that
the type is assigned before the "utyp" checks for it. Lastly, make sure you
use the "-all" qualifier on "utyp".

Thanks, Rob


At 08:55 PM 5/29/00 +0000, you wrote:
>Wouldn't that make the option not available to other members of force
>A that are allowed to have it? If yes, is there another way around
>it.
>
>Zebuleon


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------
CLICK HERE***SPECIAL OFFER***$60 in FREE calls
***SPECIAL OFFER***CLICK HERE
http://click.egroups.com/1/4127/3/_/36190/_/959634929/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
I tried what you suggested but couldn't seem to get it to work so I
just created a new option and linked it to the augmented units. That
seems to be working just fine.

But I have a new problem along the same lines, but I'm not sure what
I want to happen can without adding a bunch of stuff to the
definition file. Anyway here it is.

I have a unit, unitA, it has the ability to choose what kind of unit
it wants to be via options, we'll use opA, opB and opC. Now these
options do several things,

stat:m+1
unam:="new"
item:+3
spec:newab

These all work fine, its when I get to the item choosing that the
problem comes in. Under item list "newab" there are several items
but not all of them will or can be available to choose. I'm trying to
avoid adding 9 new item categories to the def file.

Lets say itemA and itemB are allowed to "new" but itemB is not
allowed to "new2", now I've tried using 'type:new-grand' with the
option but 'ityp:new' under the item doesn't recognize it. I've
tried
using 'catg:xxx' as well, I've tried adjusting the priority too.

So basicly is there a way to limit what items show up based on what
option the user chooses. Or is there a way to link items to options
while leting them choose among those. 'take:xxx' automatically gives
it to the unit they can't choose it and thats the closet thing, I
believe.

just so you know what else I tried without success was the 'ireg:xx'
it allowed all items because it was the same 'unit' just with a new
option. Other constraints, several units will be able to choose from
these options thus altering their stats accordingly. The units need
to be available in their original form as well.

I think thats is, sorry its so long, but I want to make sure you
understand what I'm trying to do.

Thanks for all you help
Zebuleon



------------------------------------------------------------------------
Old school buds here:
http://click.egroups.com/1/4057/3/_/36190/_/959680055/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
>Lets say itemA and itemB are allowed to "new" but itemB is not
>allowed to "new2", now I've tried using 'type:new-grand' with the
>option but 'ityp:new' under the item doesn't recognize it. I've
>tried
>using 'catg:xxx' as well, I've tried adjusting the priority too.

I *THINK* the problem is that you should simply be using "type:new" -
WITHOUT the "-grand" qualifier. The "-grand" qualifier indicates the parent
of the unit, which doesn't exist. If you specify without the "-grand", it
should modify the immediate parent unit (the one you want).

FYI: V2.0 will allow you to specify complex boolean expressions that allow
an item to be restricted based on combinations of types, regiments,
categories, etc.

Let me know if this doesn't work and I'll investigate it further for you.....

Thanks, Rob

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------
CLICK HERE AND START SAVING ON LONG DISTANCE BILLS TODAY!
http://click.egroups.com/1/4125/3/_/36190/_/959729253/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
Rob,

This wasn't from me... you may want to double check this and resend it to
the correct poster.

BTW, you responded to my request for help on adding my campaign items to my
Warhammer files... I haven't had a chance to look at your reply yet,
but will do so tomorrow.

Thank you,
Debbie


>From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
>Reply-To: armybuilder@egroups.com
>To: armybuilder@egroups.com
>Subject: Re: [AB] Re: design problem
>Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 16:30:47 -0700
>
>
> >Lets say itemA and itemB are allowed to "new" but itemB is not
> >allowed to "new2", now I've tried using 'type:new-grand' with the
> >option but 'ityp:new' under the item doesn't recognize it. I've
> >tried
> >using 'catg:xxx' as well, I've tried adjusting the priority too.
>
>I *THINK* the problem is that you should simply be using "type:new" -
>WITHOUT the "-grand" qualifier. The "-grand" qualifier indicates the parent
>of the unit, which doesn't exist. If you specify without the "-grand", it
>should modify the immediate parent unit (the one you want).
>
>FYI: V2.0 will allow you to specify complex boolean expressions that allow
>an item to be restricted based on combinations of types, regiments,
>categories, etc.
>
>Let me know if this doesn't work and I'll investigate it further for
>you.....
>
>Thanks, Rob
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
>Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hot off the press- summer's here!
School's out and it's sizzling hot. Whether you're planning a
graduation party, a summer brunch, or simple birthday party,
shop GreatEntertaining.com before your next celebration.
http://click.egroups.com/1/4473/3/_/36190/_/959748311/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
thanks for your help I finally got everything working the way I need
it to.

thanks
zebuleon


------------------------------------------------------------------------
22,345,678 matches to your search term?
Inforocket.com is the fast way to the right answer - guaranteed.
http://click.egroups.com/1/4521/3/_/36190/_/959833701/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top