Narrowness Of Game Engine Effects Is Becoming Frustrating, I Think It Bodes Ill For Future Modding

[Smayo]

I wouldn’t think that would be the reason it would fail. If your xml is all under the same action, it should make all the sql changes with foreign key constraints off, then does a final check. I’d say if you were using some code from Firaxis, it always best to have a LoadOrder specified so you can be sure you load after their stuff. I normally do like 300 or so.

What is possible is to build a Requirement or modifier that technically doesn’t cause the database to fail, but will not work in game.

For example, if you wrote rESOURCE_DATES as the modifier Argument value, it would silently just not work.

 

[tman2000]

I wouldn’t think that would be the reason it would fail. If your xml is all under the same action, it should make all the sql changes with foreign key constraints off, then does a final check. I’d say if you were using some code from Firaxis, it always best to have a LoadOrder specified so you can be sure you load after their stuff. I normally do like 300 or so.

What is possible is to build a Requirement or modifier that technically doesn’t cause the database to fail, but will not work in game.

For example, if you wrote rESOURCE_DATES as the modifier Argument value, it would silently just not work.

I don't think I had spelling errors or typos, I checked many times, including for missing '/'

What I'm saying is the (ResourceType, Value) (RESOURCE_TEA, 1) for example was not loaded into the database yet as a requirement entry. So even though I had something like
<Argument name="ResourceType">RESOURCE_TEA</Argument>
Because this wasn't already loaded into the database it simply returned "false" as a default for any tiles that were checked as resources, then for some reason returned "true" for non-resource tiles. Assigning the bonus to all non-resource tiles is a major fluke so it has to do I think with default behavior in the absence of the requirement entry.