Further Expand & Enhance the AA xml options for tons of upside!


  • Donators Moderators Admin

    We should further expand & enhance the AA xml options to become one of the main foundations of unit options and abilities. There is tons of upside to this feature request / project!

    Many of the xml options available to AAguns can be suitable for any unit, if there were at least 2 additional options added.

    1. Unit option which controls, which units will have initiative during the battle itself. This option would establish the order of fire/rolls during the battles. Maybe call it "battleRollsOrder" or " battleInitiative" and allow it integer values (eg, -20 to +20). Lowest number rolls first, and every unit could have this option or just the ones, for which the battle order isn't logical or ideal if using the default value of 0. This is required since current AA shots are 1st strikes from what I've noticed.

    2. Unit option for "casualtiesReturnFire"= true/false, similar to the bombardment related option but per individual unit. Since current AA shots are lethal 1st strikes to my knowledge.

    3. A Possible 3rd option might be in order, which would give the ability to create custom offensive support attachments to function with this type of attack/defense. Since it appears to be separate from the normal attack/defend type of support attachments, which are currently used by most other units. It looks like "radarBonus" from tech ability attachments covers the defensive portion. So we would need an offensive counterpart support attachment. If someone sees the merit in this idea we can expand it even further to function with some of the other techs abilities.

    The immediate advantages to units, for going in this direction are as follows:

    a. Can assign, the amount of battle rounds this unit will fire/roll via "maxRoundsAA".
    b. Can assign, each unit individual dice sides for defense and offence as needed via "attackAAmaxDieSides" & "offensiveAttackAAmaxDieSides".
    c. Can assign, how many attacks/rolls per battle round the unit will get via "maxAAattacks".
    d. Can assign, if can fire more shots than available enemies via "mayOverStackAA".
    e. Can assign, if hits kill or damage multi hp units via "damageableAA".
    f. Can assign, custom unit type via "typeAA" which gives a lot of added control over behavior of each type.
    g. Can assign, a hit-list via "targetsAA".
    h. Can assign, if unit even fires/rolls via "willNotFireIfPresent".
    i. Can assign, if this unit can launch range sbr attacks via"isRocket" if rocket tech achieved.
    j. Can assign, if the units can move during CM via"canNotMoveDuringCombatMove".
    k. Can assign, "movementLimit". edit: (these are currently not AA only attributes)
    l. Can assign, "attackingLimit" edit: (these are currently not AA only attributes)
    m. l. Can assign, "placementLimit" edit: (these are currently not AA only attributes)

    And a couple more options might be useful as non AAgun units with more thought. But these listed ones, in conjunction with all the other unit options already available would really be super!

    I think, that the creative possibilities for map makers and map modders, would really explode! Not only from the start of the game but throughout the whole game, if via triggers, conditions, custom techs, national advantages, etc...

    This can even solve the moderate luck dilema if done right. Because there already exists an AA specific feature. Which can force these types of units to use Low Luck, while all the other units use dice. Each map using these options could have exactly what it needs to reduce randomness by cherry picking which units roll Low Luck. Or if someone is willing, create an option that forces these units to roll dice while rest of game rolls use Low Luck.

    Oh and by the way, these units can also use the standard attack/ defense types too, if one wants. So tons of ways to get creative with these, if its expanded a bit as suggested.

    Another huge plus, is that all existing maps/mods should remain fully functional and compatible if we go this direction.


  • Admin

    @general_zod Interesting idea. Should be doable but probably a decent amount of work to handle breaking/ordering groups of units based on initiative value. Added to the feature list.


  • Donators Moderators Admin

    Just thought this post should be here too.

    @general_zod said in Map Making Reference Guide (POS2 XML) - Suggestions & Discoveries Corner:

    A discovery that should be at minimum updated in POS2.xml. Or fixed.

    Involves description for "attackAAmaxDieSides" and by extension "offensiveAttackAAmaxDieSides", "offensiveAttackAA" and "offensiveAttackAAmaxDieSides".

    Below is the excerpt from POS2.xml

    "attackAA"   values: the value that an isAA unit will attack at, for shooting at air units before battle 
    
    "attackAAmaxDieSides"    values: sets the dice sides for aa guns.  defaults to whatever you chose above in diceSides or 6 if you did not choose.  All units with the same typeAA must have the same dice sides. Be Warned that all aa attack values (including with Radar and without Radar), MUST divide into attackAAmaxDieSides without remainders, or else there WILL be errors in LowLuck!
    
    "offensiveAttackAA"     values: same as attackAA but for offensive side
    
    "offensiveAttackAAmaxDieSides"    values: same as attackAAmaxDieSides but for offensive side
    
    

    I discovered that, "attackAAmaxDieSides" must be divisible by "attackAA" without any remainders for LL and for dice. This results in very limited functional choices for "attackAA" values.

    eg. If using a d12, the only truly functional values are 1/12=8.3%, 2/12=16.6%, 3/12=25%, 4/12=33.3%, 6/12=50%, 12/12=100%. Since nothing else divides without remainders, effectively 50% to hit, is the highest practical value that can be used for LL or dice.

    If someone wants to confirm it. Use dice and pay attention to actual rolls and their hits. I did this a while back so I'm only 99% sure, since going from memory and a note that I made then.


  • Moderators

    @general_zod On the matter of further expansion, I also think AA stuff should be moved out of the unit attachment, and made into a stand alone attachment, like done for the supportattachment (like now you have supportattachments instead of the old support options in the unitattachments). The main reason is that, as it is, you cannot assign multiple supports to a same unit. I'm particularly thinking about representing units like AA guns, that are both anti-armour and anti-air, thus having two different AA abilities, against armour and against aeroplanes.
    I actually think the move into stand alone attachments, like already done for support, is already quite needed, as the AA settings in the units are already quite too packed, and that would be obious if ever thinking about having supports for AA attacks too.


  • Donators Moderators Admin

    @Cernel
    Yeah, there's many ways these features can be expanded and really get a lot of bang for the coding time.


  • Admin

    @general_zod I kind of wonder why that's the case for attackAA. I'd be interested in someone confirming that.

    @Cernel The problem with doing that is that we'd have to continue to support the existing AA fields within a unit attachment since so many maps use them unless we could script updating all maps to use the newly created AAattachment.