@zlefin I think @LaFayette is the one deciding about bots.

Sounds too good to be true to me.

@victoryfirst

yea, what I started doing is rolling for all the units and give the first ones to INF, then Arty, Tanks etc

so 3 Inf 1 Arty and 2 tanks is 6 dice first 3 are the Inf, 4th is Arty and the last two the tanks

@thedog said in Active Units and Move Selection:

So the menu option only appears if
"Selectable Zero Movement Units" is true ?
or is it always displayed but greyed out?

Good question! It would function more as a replacement, taking its first setting from "Selectable Zero Movement Units" but should otherwise stay active.

"Selectable Zero Movement Units", IMHO, is very ineffective as it only checks if a unit's movement is set to greater then 0, and then adds a check for non-combat moving units, whether selected or not. The Active Units window does the same except it starts with unit that have movement left. Neither, I think, present a suitable view of what's able to move.

Second, what is filtered by "Selectable Zero Movement Units", or "Filter To-Move Units" are the only units available to be selected with the mouse pointer. So, in the first example the German cruiser, destroyer and transport can be selected even though they cannot move.

Cool, no.

Cheers...

@victoryfirst said in Air Battles Can Be Ignored:

Yeah so the air battle precedes the land battle but the prompt for ignoring land battles is shown after combat movement and before combat. So when the game asks you to fight in a territory and you click "no", no battle happens. I think it should be possible to extend this to air battles too, so I don't understand why the air battle preceding the land battle is a problem?

You are right! With the message coming prior to selecting the order in which to fight battles, it is quite easy to check for the preceding air battle and nix it also.

Wow who knew?

Cheers...

@thedog said in Review of "estimatedResourceProduction":

The property "Economic Victory"

This property only checks for ownership of a territory, it does not check for blockade, convoy, convoy routes, contested etc... (Something the engine calls "Can the territory produce?").

@thedog said in Review of "estimatedResourceProduction":

Also 1941 GCD industries produce PU each turn, so any units like Oil-Fields and Lend-Lease-Depots should also be taken into account, yes?

At this point "no". But I say this with caution, because getting this information is quite easy. It may require a new condition "territoryUnitProduction" created so it is not confusing.

Also triggers/objectives cannot be added because triggers/objectives could use the condition.

@beelee said in Review of "estimatedResourceProduction":

You doing just fine brother. We are who we are at this point. You get high marks from me

Thank you both.

Cheers...

@wc_sumpton

oh yea 😞

bummer

kinda doesn't make one want to help Be nice if someone would try and help with your work instead of just saying no.

idk maybe they do and I'm just reading it wrong.

You're good at what you do and more devs are always wanted.

idk not enough time for them to teach I guess 🙂

@cernel said in Allow income levels to be checked in conditions.:

However, it is good to have PUs as default if a resource is not specified.

Yes, this is how both conditions would/have been designed. "haveResources" is already set up in this manner. Whatever the other condition would be called would follow.

Cheers...

@cernel

No, just haven't resubmitted.

Cheers...

@cameron
Here is the code from 1941 GCD with a foreach all players

<!-- ======================================= GO isAI ======================================= --> <attachment foreach="$All-Players$" name="conditionAttachment_isAI_@All-Players@" attachTo="@All-Players@" javaClass="RulesAttachment" type="player"> <option name="isAI" value="true"/> </attachment>

There are lots of examples of its use, search the xml for

_isAI_

i'm not sure why you'd want air units to have diff stats over water vs land but if you did couldn't you just give water TTs a terrain effect that gives air units +/- ATT and/or DEF?

@lafayette

as far as I've seen in all the games and maps I've played, battle calc ALWAYS takes the hit from multi-hit units first no matter what and even with a casualty list order; unless there's some special casualty list order I'm unaware of that isn't listed on the description text.
I just verified the behavior by constructing a test case in the arda map with mordor 6 naz 6 pikemen attacking 12 gondor rangers on a forest in lowluck.

It's been that way for as long as I can remember; and it wouldn't have been unreasonable when first implemented since at that time it was the right choice for nearly all maps/situations.

@cameron said in units with multiple HP (Hit Points) heal fully:

... whether slowly healing is better or not ...

Personally, I like to take a bunch of roids and heal as fast as I can 🙂

Jam Tomorrow? 😜

@victoryfirst

Would be easy enough to do, there is a section of code in the engine that takes into account the type of unit, and blocks certain options based on the type, air, sea or land.

But as was done with "isStrategicBomber", which was blocked for land units, can cause side effects in the rest of the code.

There would need to be a discussion how to treat air units prior to allowing them "transportCost".

Cheers...

@cernel Thx for your advise.
I forwarded it here:
https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/issues/12677

fasthard created this issue in triplea-game/triplea open Assign aircraft to carrier #12677

finally got this working. dunno what i did wrong the first time... sometimes you just need to delete it and start again. 😉

thanks for the help. 🙂

<attachment name="conditionAttachmentPlayerAT1" attachTo="Player" javaClass="RulesAttachment" type="player"> <option name="techs" value="ArmouredWarfare" count="1"/> </attachment> <attachment name="triggerAttachmentPlayer_NewTech" attachTo="Player" javaClass="TriggerAttachment" type="player"> <option name="conditions" value="conditionAttachmentPlayerAT1"/> <option name="availableTech" value="Advanced:MartianTechnology"/> <option name="uses" value="1"/> </attachment>

Ok, thank you.

@Panther could you please move this post to the Feature Requests & Ideas?

Here is my request:

Add to the current syntax of the tooltips.properties

tooltip.unit.fortress=Requires 3 hits to destroy

The option to define different tooltips for the same unit in different scenarios:

1941_Start_Date.tooltip.unit.fortress=Requires 3 hits to destroy 1942_Start_Date.tooltip.unit.fortress=Requires 3 hits to destroy<br/>Can be upgraded in MegaFortress

For my second request, I realized that it has already been suggested several times, for example here: https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/421/add-unithelp-attribute