Sweet !

There are 2 ways to change French forces to Vincy (Pro-Axis) French without having to count through the units. First is the use of "isInfrastructure" as infrastructure units change over to the territory owner. But it's really not that controlled as there may be some unexpected changes. Next is "canBeCapturedOnEnteringBy". This works as long as unitAttachments, territoryAttachments and playerAttachments edits are done prior to the changeOwnership of the territories. "canBeGivenByTerritoryTo" also works, but the changeover in not until the endTurn and the "Franco-German Armistice" is check at the beginning of the French players turn.

uhd_ww_ii_global_test.zip

This is my testing file with a map.yml. The Vincy process starts at line 6408 ~ 6625 little over 200 lines without the French Liberation (so add another 100 lines). Compared to about 8000 (yes that's 200 vs 8000 and I did not use any variables/foreach, just straight code).

Cheers...

I used unitPlacement to place the BB/Bismark, the damaged Italian BB at 97 and the damaged structures in London, Malta and Southern Italy. If "Oztea 1941" is not checked, then all damaged units are removed and replaced as needed. Yes, I know that placement cannot place a damaged unit, that is why all damaged units are placed during <unitInitialize>. It just the reverse of having to change the map when "Oztea 1941" is checked.

Cheers...

yea so the BB/Bismark in Oz needs to start damaged or with 1 hit. Can't do it with a trigger I don't think. unitPlacement that is.

Oh you lucky Dog

My Doctors all anti pain medicine. I have to self medicate

Edit
I'll have to look at the above closer. Looks as if we can get Oz to start without edit. Or at least for the Ships. Infrastructure damage probably not.

I guess I really should decouple but then you have to maintain multiple repos and anytime anything changes you have to change them all.

I thought just having a one click option, only need to DL one map would be easier for the user too.

Maybe not

I really like the "sedate" part

Dr. has pills and I just took mine!

Cheers...

So, this works:

	 <!-- If not Oztea 1941 replace damaged units-->
    <attachment name="triggerAttachment_41ozInvert_Germans" attachTo="Germans" javaClass="TriggerAttachment" type="player">
      <option name="conditions" value="41ozInvert"/>
		<!-- Damaged battleship not replaced -->
      <option name="removeUnits" value="118 Sea Zone:battleship"/>
      <option name="when" value="before:frenchTech"/>
      <option name="when" value="before:frenchPurchase"/>
      <option name="uses" value="1"/>
    </attachment>
    <attachment name="triggerAttachment_41ozInvert_Italians" attachTo="Italians" javaClass="TriggerAttachment" type="player">
      <option name="conditions" value="41ozInvert"/>
      <option name="removeUnits" value="97 Sea Zone:battleship"/>
      <option name="removeUnits" value="Southern Italy:harbour"/>
      <option name="placement" value="97 Sea Zone:battleship"/>
      <option name="placement" value="Southern Italy:harbour"/>
      <option name="when" value="before:germansTech"/>
      <option name="when" value="before:germansPurchase"/>
      <option name="uses" value="1"/>
    </attachment>

      <unitPlacement unitType="battleship" territory="118 Sea Zone" quantity="1" owner="Germans" unitDamage="1"/>
      <unitPlacement unitType="battleship" territory="97 Sea Zone" quantity="1" owner="Italians" unitDamage="1"/>
      <unitPlacement unitType="airfield" territory="Malta" quantity="1" owner="British" unitDamage="5"/>
      <unitPlacement unitType="airfield" territory="United Kingdom" quantity="1" owner="British" unitDamage="3"/>
      <unitPlacement unitType="harbour" territory="United Kingdom" quantity="1" owner="British" unitDamage="3"/>
      <unitPlacement unitType="factory_major" territory="United Kingdom" quantity="1" owner="British" unitDamage="10"/>
      <unitPlacement unitType="harbour" territory="Southern Italy" quantity="1" owner="Italians" unitDamage="5"/>

Cheers...

Hey Good Idea !

I really like the "sedate" part

I'll have to make another condition for it. Might as well whack those Flags while I'm at it lol. Think that's it for now. Need to check my notes. Might be a placement or two I wanted to change.

Don't whack those flags, just combine them into a single trigger. The .png are already there. Just delete the renoveUnits/placement stuff to sedate that "Need to" feeling.

Cheers...

well something is off. Because i just tested in UHD and didn't show up in the objectives tab but in WWII 2nd edition it does.

This veqryns code in 2nd edition. Trigger is to the right

I'll have to check UHD but it should be the same unless i don't have BM mod inverted for that trigger

Edit
Yea it's not working in UHD but it does in veq's

Edit 2
Here's UHD. BM is inverted. I'll check the conditions

Edit 3
I screwed the condition up

Edit 4
Probably not noticed as G rarely attacks Turn 1 or 2. I still need to fix it

Edit 5
Yea it was a BM thing. Their LL Objectives don't kick in until RD 3.

I'll have to make another condition for it. Might as well whack those Flags while I'm at it lol. Think that's it for now. Need to check my notes. Might be a placement or two I wanted to change.

Thank you for bringing that to my attention.

    <attachment name="conditionAttachment_Russians_1_Convoy_Clear" attachTo="Russians" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.RulesAttachment" type="player">
      <option name="enemyExclusionTerritories" value="125 Sea Zone" count="1"/>
      <option name="unitPresence" value="battleship:carrier:submarine:destroyer:cruiser" count="0"/>
    </attachment>

Russians will never collect because there will always be 0 or more enemies in 125 Sea Zone, so this will always be false.

Cheers...

Just tested, "0" seem to work in this case. Sorry my bad, just disregard what I said.

Cheers...

what is this in reference to ?

Cannot do 'unitPresence' count ="0", as this will always be 'true'. count is equal to or greater than. Have to use invert on count="1" to fund an empty territory.

Cheers...

heh heh I just asked a buddy if I could use his 12' trailer to haul some brush. He said sure.

Then I thought, why don't I just use my pickup instead lol

Can't burn in town or that's what I'd do We used to have a bonfire about once a week in Alaska. Rainforest. Grows back in a week lol

Learn by doing. Even something I perceived as simple had me chasing my tail for a couple of hours this morning. Then when I discovered what was the cause of my little 'bug', I wanted to kick myself down the street.

Stupid, stupid. Stupid is as stupid does. That's me!

Sometimes I surprise myself that I get anything to work.

Cheers...

heh heh

with there not being one for pro Allies, I may have realized I didn't need the trigger and just didn't delete it.

I try to keep stuff clean and have gotten somewhat better but as you can see, I'm not always successful

Edit
Actually I will probably just remove the Flags whenever I get around to working on it again

I had made the option so people such as myself who didn't like them, could turn them off.

I understand about the option, that is a nice idea!
It's the flag dance that was giving me trouble, if the captured unit does not change into the proper players unit, then that would be a bug that would need to be checked. Will test this out later.

I've been able to chop about 2,000 lines of code, and I haven't even started on the fun stuff.

Cheers...

I think it's the way the pro axis turn into whoever takes them over. I can't remember but it seemed as if they weren't changing.

The Flags themselves were something Elk had at the begininng of the project. He decided not to use them as they just take up a placement spot.

I had made the option so people such as myself who didn't like them, could turn them off.

Ok, here's another "Stupid Question". There is a game option to place down "Ownership Flags". If this option is selected, flags appear on all territories designating which player owns these territories.

    <attachment name="unitAttachment" attachTo="Flag" javaClass="UnitAttachment" type="unitType">
      <option name="isInfrastructure" value="true"/>
    </attachment>

What is this for?

    <attachment name="conditionAttachment_GermansRemoveProAxisFlagFinland" attachTo="Germans" javaClass="RulesAttachment" type="player">
      <option name="directPresenceTerritories" value="Finland" count="1"/>
       <!-- Are any of these German units in Finland -->
      <option name="unitPresence" value="infantry:artillery:mech_infantry:armour:aaGun" count="1"/>
    </attachment>
    <attachment name="triggerAttachment_GermansRemoveProAxisFlagFinland" attachTo="Neutral_Axis" javaClass="TriggerAttachment" type="player">
      <option name="conditions" value="Flag:conditionAttachment_GermansRemoveProAxisFlagFinland"/>
      <!-- If German units are in Finland remove the Flag -->
      <option name="removeUnits" value="Finland:Flag" count="1"/>
      <option name="when" value="after:germansNonCombatMove"/>
    </attachment>
    <attachment name="triggerAttachment_GermansPlaceFlagFinland" attachTo="Germans" javaClass="TriggerAttachment" type="player">
      <option name="conditions" value="Flag:conditionAttachment_GermansRemoveProAxisFlagFinland"/>
      <!-- If German units are in Finland replace the removed Flag -->
      <option name="placement" value="Finland:Flag" count="1"/>
      <option name="when" value="after:germansNonCombatMove"/>
    </attachment>

Flags are "isInfrastructure" and so cannot participate or be destroyed in battle, but can be captured like factories and change ownership to whomever owns the territory. So why the musical flag swap and why only for neutral territories?

Cheers...

It just feels like brute force

your conclusion would be correct

Edit
Yea this needs to be revisited at some point. My present time and interest is taken up with EXP.

With the TTy corrections all fixed, it will probably be better to decouple the BM and Oz mods. I don't like having a pile of repos to keep updated but I suppose it'll be for the best.

Any placement change would be a pita but most of those are dialed in as well.

At any rate, it's a ways off. Just remembered crockett used UHD on my recommendation, so I should at least turn off Oz and BM in map options for him as well as any pertinent Notifications.

There just a lot here that seems over worked.

oh there absolutely is. A lot of room for improvement but it works.

Yes, have to have a different unit count for it to work. Think they went with the most likely combinations.

You should check out "Global 40 House Rules" if you really want to see a disaster. Back when I first started

I understand what is being done. It just feels like brute force. What happens if there are more than 3 units. Counting does not work. Plus, all the removeUnits, placement for each territory can be combined for each player.
There is a note telling players that if playing "Oztea 1941" change units to damaged units while damaged units can be placed and then replaced with undamaged units if necessary.
There just a lot here that seems over worked. I once took TWW xml from over 37,000 lines to just over 15,000.
Sometimes this stuff bugs me... I'm going back to watching Wednesday and then maybe some WFF.

Cheers...

yea i think that's probably for the Vichy code for the BM option. I'm not sure but I think it was done the way it was because the units weren't changing at the correct time.

I'm pretty sure redrum did the initial code for it or at least provided an example to the BM guys. I don't remember for sure.

Wow what a tangled mess. The "false" triggers are call by activateTrigger. This so that "removeUnits" can be done to one player while "placeUnits" can be handled by another player. But it uses a count of conditions/triggers. Are there 3 enemy units? Take one put one. Are there 2 enemy units? Take one put one. Is there one enemy unit? Take one put one. So, there are about 10 to 15 conditions/triggers for each such territory to count. Lots and lots of redundant coding. It seems that doing a change territory owner, then changing the unit's ownership to the new owner would be a fasters way of doing this because you don't have to count the number of units to change for each type of unit.

Might take a little time to test, but you could cut the code in half, and it should be simpler to read.

Just some thoughts.

Cheers...