Caveman 2 Cosmos

OK, I am not understanding something as no all promotions have no combat types after the change:D.

I was using
Code: 
for iI in range(gc.getNumUnitCombatInfos()):
	if (0 != gc.getPromotionInfo(self.iPromotion).getUnitCombat(iI)):

I am now using
Code: 
for iI in range(gc.getNumUnitCombatInfos()):
	if (0 != gc.getPromotionInfo(self.iPromotion).isQualifiedUnitCombatType(iI)):

BTW I think I can get rid of the 0 != as the return is true or false anyway. 0 is false and not zero is true in Python.

edit Doh! I am using Unit Combat not Unit Combat Type assuming they are different.
 
I'm not sure about your last point there but
BTW I think I can get rid of the 0 != as the return is true or false anyway. 0 is false and not zero is true in Python.
Click to expand...
is correct since this is a boolean return: 0 or 1. In the dll compiler it could dislike booleans being equated directly to integers but I think it's just fine in python to do that. I still don't think it's necessary to do though since the if() statement is just asking for a true or false statement and it makes its own true or false by its return. So yeah, it's a little redundant to include the 0 != if I'm not mistaken.
 
I was confused by the different naming of the functions for the same thing
Code: 
for iI in range(gc.getNum[B]UnitCombat[/B]Infos()):
	if (0 != gc.getPromotionInfo(self.iPromotion).isQualified[B]UnitCombatType[/B](iI)):

Unfortunately putting this code in means that no promotions have any unit combats being shown for then at all. I checked 5 or so, maybe I just chose the 5 that don't. Accuracy was one.

Is this what should be happening? If so I'll post it on the SVN.
 
Dancing Hoskuld said:
I was confused by the different naming of the functions for the same thing
Code: 
for iI in range(gc.getNum[B]UnitCombat[/B]Infos()):
	if (0 != gc.getPromotionInfo(self.iPromotion).isQualified[B]UnitCombatType[/B](iI)):

Unfortunately putting this code in means that no promotions have any unit combats being shown for then at all. I checked 5 or so, maybe I just chose the 5 that don't. Accuracy was one.

Is this what should be happening? If so I'll post it on the SVN.
Click to expand...

Try starting a game and then looking at the pedia. I believe that's necessary in this case. Not ideal I know. I can probably find a better place to load the data into the storage for this function.

There could also be a bug in the method being used for that particular boolean function.

But check after starting a game. If it works then at least you can leave it as is and I can simply try to find where to load the data without needing a game initialized.
 
I'll try to find where I should put the data loading. Clearly it's valuable to have that info show up in the pedia before a game is loaded as well.
 
I have a working version of Platypings Tech Tree screen working with C2C. It adds functionality to
  • hide techs you have researched

  • hide techs you can't research "ever" - I don't think we have any of these yet. They are used for special civilization techs in other mods.

  • select which range of eras to display on the tree

It has a different layout but I think we have all the stuff we had from before. Do I put it on the SVN for all to try? It involves changes to 3 files. The Python file and two BUG XML files.

I have not yet removed the BUG options associated with the old tree and there are a couple of other things we need to add in eg buildings that are required for the tech.
 
Bullet 2 would be nice for the dead end religions that someone has beaten you to.
 
Dancing Hoskuld said:
I have a working version of Platypings Tech Tree screen working with C2C. It adds functionality to
  • hide techs you have researched

  • hide techs you can't research "ever" - I don't think we have any of these yet. They are used for special civilization techs in other mods.

  • select which range of eras to display on the tree

It has a different layout but I think we have all the stuff we had from before. Do I put it on the SVN for all to try?
Click to expand...
Excellent! Does it reduce the time it takes to open the screen (due to only showing techs from 1 era)? If you have playtested it, I would like to see it in the SVN soon.
 
New Patch available for V36 and v36 Mega Patch users. See 1st post v36 Crime Patch Thread.

JosEPh
 
Taxman66 said:
Bullet 2 would be nice for the dead end religions that someone has beaten you to.
Click to expand...

I have not been able to get the religion techs to be "no longer able to be researched". I need to talk to Koshling about my understanding of the use of Granular Python Callback component.

If I do get it working then yes it will do that. edit looks like it wont be as easy as to do this as I thought because the code asks the dll if it can be researched not the Python - will have to wait and see.

The other question is "will it hide the techs that require a building if I don't have that building?". I don't know as I forgot to test that out:D.

I need to show any building requirement on the tree and I was thinking of having the techs that have a building requirement be a different colour.

Toffer90 said:
Excellent! Does it reduce the time it takes to open the screen (due to only showing techs from 1 era)? If you have playtested it, I would like to see it in the SVN soon.
Click to expand...

Maybe or maybe not. It goes through preparing all techs first and is only when displaying them that it makes the decision. There will be savings from hiding the end of the tree. There maybe savings from not displaying the beginning because you wont be calling the exe to do the display as you loop through them.
 
If I do get it working then yes it will do that. edit looks like it wont be as easy as to do this as I thought because the code asks the dll if it can be researched not the Python - will have to wait and see.
Click to expand...
I kinda thought that may be the case. The inability to research the tech once someone already has would have to be established there. I can look into that eventually.
 
Thunderbrd said:
I kinda thought that may be the case. The inability to research the tech once someone already has would have to be established there. I can look into that eventually.
Click to expand...

It should already be the case. If we weren't using Koshlings Granular Python Callbacks I could do it easily at a cost to game turns.
 
Not sure if this is a bug or is intended (using SVN 8992 via Joe's patch):

The auto-hunt button causes the unit to go into 'Quick march' mode. While, for Trackers at least, that is "general" useful vs. all but the mightiest animals it makes them complete toast vs. Neanderthals, even if they are in good terrain. It also means more micromanagement to remember to turn it off when you have to escort those valuable subdued units home.

Personally, I'd like to have the option separate from the auto-hunt.
 
Taxman66 said:
Not sure if this is a bug or is intended (using SVN 8992 via Joe's patch):

The auto-hunt button causes the unit to go into 'Quick march' mode. While, for Trackers at least, that is "general" useful vs. all but the mightiest animals it makes them complete toast vs. Neanderthals, even if they are in good terrain. It also means more micromanagement to remember to turn it off when you have to escort those valuable subdued units home.

Personally, I'd like to have the option separate from the auto-hunt.
Click to expand...

As it's been explained before, all automation does is establish that the unit will act as an AI with a certain unit ai setting. So... yeah, this is probably not optimal. I'll have to take a look into this because this is not an optimal way to utilize Quick March statatuses. I'd bet if you watched closely that when the hunter sees a challenging combat and has the time to react before finding itself right in the middle of it, it would change the status out of quick march. Still, not really a good idea to be running around this way in general.
 
I know I've seen them attempting to heal up with the quick march status still on. Double plus ungood.
 
Taxman66 said:
Not sure if this is a bug or is intended (using SVN 8992 via Joe's patch):

The auto-hunt button causes the unit to go into 'Quick march' mode. While, for Trackers at least, that is "general" useful vs. all but the mightiest animals it makes them complete toast vs. Neanderthals, even if they are in good terrain. It also means more micromanagement to remember to turn it off when you have to escort those valuable subdued units home.

Personally, I'd like to have the option separate from the auto-hunt.
Click to expand...

Why use auto hunt? Or auto Patrol or any of the other Auto functions from BUG? The game plays just fine without them. And afaik those functions have not been updated for sometime now.

Just place your chaser/tracker/hunter on a forested hill a couple of tiles from your border and let them absorb the animals. A pair works even better in that 1 of them will generally survive a neander attack or str 4 animal. Most of the time, by the time you are using Trackers, they both survive and they level up fast too. 1 can be healing while the other set on Trap Hunting or Pursuit takes care of most animal attacks. Then switch the pair after the one is healed up and let the other heal.

No need to go chasing after animals till later on impo. :)

JosEPh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Caveman to cosmos relegion bug
Replies
3
Views
995
jshetley
J
AbuHab
My units becoming invisible
Replies
2
Views
435
Thunderbrd
Thunderbrd
B
Installing a mod
Replies
11
Views
2K
raxo2222
raxo2222
S
[MOD] Just a list of what I think C2C going stand-alone MAY pay at least some attention to.
Replies
15
Views
2K
Osk21
Osk21
M
Modding Question
Replies
1
Views
642
Osk21
Osk21
Back
Top Bottom