• 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

Question about glob:

  • Thread starter Thread starter rjs at inorbit.com
  • Start date Start date
R

rjs at inorbit.com

Guest
(sorry if this appears twice - the first one wasn't quite complete :)

I'm using glob:cost on a heap of options combined with lglx:race=??
so that units taken as allies or mercenaries can have the appropriate
options assigned to them. Each of these units can also have leaders
assigned which must take the same option, so the glob also applies to
the leaders. The Leaders are set up to mirr: each of the options,
however I want the link type to be auto, not cost. The Leaders have
each of the options linked in (via a clon option) as type auto.

The strange thing is, some of the options on the Leader are appearing
in Army Builder as if they were linked via cost and others as if via
auto. Even wierder, if I pick two diffferent units, add a leader to
each unit then check the available options for each leader - the link
natures aren't consistent between the two (yet they use the same unit
to clon from)!

Is there some degree of random link order associated with glob?
It seems that in some instances, the glob link is overriding the clon
link type, yet in others it isn't and it appears somewhat random... I
have noticed that its NOT random for the same unit type (ie. if I add
a unit and leader twice, I get the same mix of link types for both)

Any ideas? Is it just another stupid thing I'm doing?

Thanks,
Russell.
----
Russell Sparkes, rjs@inorbit.com http://www.cfm-resources.com/r/rjs
"Experience is what you get just after you needed it" - Unknown


To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
If you have two identical options on a unit, AB will randomly decide which
one is kept and which one is thrown away. It is illegal to have two
identical options on a unit, and AB checks for that when you load the
files. However, the "glob" mechanism bypasses all the standard safeguards
and file checks that are performed to ensure you have valid data files.
That's why you are getting the behaviors you're experiencing.

I recommend abandoning "glob" for this problem. Instead, create a basic
"trooper" unit and a basic "leader" unit. Then have all units inherit the
proper set of options from those basic units. This way, you can encapsulate
all the behaviors and all the complexity into a single pair of units. Then
all you have to do is specify who to inherit from for all your units.

Hope this helps,
Rob


At 04:10 AM 1/9/01 +0000, you wrote:
>(sorry if this appears twice - the first one wasn't quite complete :)
>
>I'm using glob:cost on a heap of options combined with lglx:race=??
>so that units taken as allies or mercenaries can have the appropriate
>options assigned to them. Each of these units can also have leaders
>assigned which must take the same option, so the glob also applies to
>the leaders. The Leaders are set up to mirr: each of the options,
>however I want the link type to be auto, not cost. The Leaders have
>each of the options linked in (via a clon option) as type auto.
>
>The strange thing is, some of the options on the Leader are appearing
>in Army Builder as if they were linked via cost and others as if via
>auto. Even wierder, if I pick two diffferent units, add a leader to
>each unit then check the available options for each leader - the link
>natures aren't consistent between the two (yet they use the same unit
>to clon from)!
>
>Is there some degree of random link order associated with glob?
>It seems that in some instances, the glob link is overriding the clon
>link type, yet in others it isn't and it appears somewhat random... I
>have noticed that its NOT random for the same unit type (ie. if I add
>a unit and leader twice, I get the same mix of link types for both)
>
>Any ideas? Is it just another stupid thing I'm doing?
>
>Thanks,
>Russell.


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

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
--- In armybuilder@egroups.com, Rob Bowes <rob@w...> wrote:
> If you have two identical options on a unit, AB will randomly
> decide which one is kept and which one is thrown away. It is
> illegal to have two identical options on a unit, and AB checks
> for that when you load the files. However, the "glob" mechanism
> bypasses all the standard safeguards and file checks that are
> performed to ensure you have valid data files.
> That's why you are getting the behaviors you're experiencing.

Fair enough :) I figured I was trying to do something I shouldn't be.

>
> I recommend abandoning "glob" for this problem. Instead, create
> a basic "trooper" unit and a basic "leader" unit. Then have all
> units inherit the proper set of options from those basic units.
> This way, you can encapsulate all the behaviors and all the
> complexity into a single pair of units. Then all you have to do
> is specify who to inherit from for all your units.

Fair enough - it will achieve the exact same result anyway (and keep
Army Builder happy) It's just heaps more work... Thanks Rob. :-)

Cheers,
Russell.
----
Russell Sparkes, rjs@inorbit.com http://www.cfm-resources.com/r/rjs
"Experience is what you get just after you needed it" - Unknown


To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
At 10:30 PM 1/9/01 +0000, you wrote:
> > I recommend abandoning "glob" for this problem. Instead, create
> > a basic "trooper" unit and a basic "leader" unit. Then have all
> > units inherit the proper set of options from those basic units.
> > This way, you can encapsulate all the behaviors and all the
> > complexity into a single pair of units. Then all you have to do
> > is specify who to inherit from for all your units.
>
>Fair enough - it will achieve the exact same result anyway (and keep
>Army Builder happy) It's just heaps more work... Thanks Rob. :-)

Is it really heaps more work? This is how the Clan War stuff is
implemented, and it sure made the Clan War stuff VASTLY easier to manage. I
think Colen will definitely agree with this, since he's handled most
everything in the CW data files since I put the basic framework together.
I'd really like to understand how this adds heaps more work, since that
means I need to give serious thought to better ways of managing things for
a subsequent release.

Thanks, Rob

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

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
At 16:15 09/01/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>At 10:30 PM 1/9/01 +0000, you wrote:
> > > I recommend abandoning "glob" for this problem. Instead, create
> > > a basic "trooper" unit and a basic "leader" unit. Then have all
> > > units inherit the proper set of options from those basic units.
> > > This way, you can encapsulate all the behaviors and all the
> > > complexity into a single pair of units. Then all you have to do
> > > is specify who to inherit from for all your units.
> >
> >Fair enough - it will achieve the exact same result anyway (and keep
> >Army Builder happy) It's just heaps more work... Thanks Rob. :-)
>
>Is it really heaps more work? This is how the Clan War stuff is
>implemented, and it sure made the Clan War stuff VASTLY easier to manage. I
>think Colen will definitely agree with this, since he's handled most
>everything in the CW data files since I put the basic framework together.
>I'd really like to understand how this adds heaps more work, since that
>means I need to give serious thought to better ways of managing things for
>a subsequent release.

Oh, yes. It's so nice just to add one option to the 'unit' base unit and
have it applied to all units. Inheritance Is Your Friend.



--
'Not Colin' McAlister - License to Skrill
Email: demandred@skrill.org | Visit http://www.skrill.org/ today!
-----------------------------+------------------------------------
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain" - Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time


To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
--- In armybuilder@egroups.com, Rob Bowes <rob@w...> wrote:
> >Fair enough - it will achieve the exact same result anyway (and
> >keep Army Builder happy) It's just heaps more work... Thanks
> >Rob. :-)
>
> I'd really like to understand how this adds heaps more work, since
> that means I need to give serious thought to better ways of
> managing things for a subsequent release.

Only that I've changed quite a few things in the Crucible files from
the way you set it up initially... Due to the Natives, Mercenaries
and Allies, Warp Magic got a bit more complicated. That's what I was
using glob for. I've gone and changed a heap of stuff to using glob
instead of the clon: stuff you originally had and now I will have to
change it again :-) I guess it's not HEAPS more work - I'm just
lazy :-) It's certainly heaps LESS work than it would've been without
clon. Don't take my petty grumbling so seriously :)

Cheers,
Russell.
----
Russell Sparkes, rjs@inorbit.com http://www.cfm-resources.com/r/rjs
"Experience is what you get just after you needed it" - Unknown


To unsubscribe from this group, email

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