TP, idea for powerslics

[MarkG]

when I discover a new advance, I would like to know which units the advance enables
since there is already a message for units that are made obsolete, why not know which units are enabled(of course the message will not appear only when a unit is made obsolete, but in all cases)?

what does everyone think about it?

[Alanus]

MarkG,

To get the information of which new units are enabled with a new advance, just go to the Great Library...
I have a doubt whether there is a GL button on an advance message (if not, must be easy to fix).

[MarkG]

I wont to avoid clicking on the GL link
of course you can see that you will have to click on a message icon, but at least in the cae of obsolete units, it's "costs" nothing(in clicks )

[LittleWing]

I think it's not a important feature for a normal game, but would be very helpful in scenarios, where techs and units may be completely different.

[skorpion59]

I have to agree with MarkG as I hate wondering through the Great Library. (Just a pet peeve of mine.)

This would be a big benefit to new users. It would help them learn which units are available at what times in the game. It would also help people like myself who tend to play Civ2, Civ2TOT and CivCTP in close proximaty to each other (and end up forgetting which units are in which game.)

If the info came out in a unique messageicon, the people that wanted the info could get it and the ones that don't need it could ignore it.

Just my 2 cents worth.

[TP]

MarkG,


As soon as the SLIC 1.2 documentation is out, I will have a look whether we can use a built-in variable to trigger your idea.

If there is no built-in variable it would be possible of course (by triggering based on the advance just completed) but this would mean to hardcode everything and thus to adapt it to each change of the units.txt. In other words a ModMaker would have to hardcode his/her scenario manually.

Well let's see what the documentation will bring.


TP


P.S. PowerSLICs 2.0 will include a lot of new features and thus it may take some time to complete it. Especially I will work on a custom-install (most likely via Word Macros) allowing a user to select just those features he likes.

[Alanus]

TP,

I came to the same conclusion that, so far, this can only be achieved by "hardcoding" the messages, which is not compatible with other mods (or need to be reworked for every mod).

I looked at the way it is done for "new advance" message with pull down menu of obsolete units, and the build-in variable is something with [action] in it, which seems to be a generic variable which contents may vary a lot depending on the context (it is probably filled by some routine coded in the .exe file). If there is no other built-in variable in SLIC 1.2, there is no chance that we can do something generic using SLIC. And I don't think that Activision will publish their source C++ code...

Wait and see.

[Alanus]

Other suggestions, which comes with the way the new building / unit / Wonder built messages work in patch 1.2.

TP you know the 2 first already.

1. Building Capitol = alertbox instead of plain message, since it is a particular building (move from one city to the new one).
2. Unit build : different message depending on whether you are building a new unit of the same type, because it is alone in the queue (automatic build) or there is something different afterwards (queue not empty). Just to draw your attention before you have built automatically too many units of the same type.
3. (NEW to TP) Have a different icon when you have just built something and the queue is now empty. In 1.2, it is the same message icon whatever is ready (unit / building / wonder). One could imagine having the same icon as Unit / Building / wonder ready, but with a question mark on it (same principle as TP's Queue empty message icon).

[TP]

Alanus,


Thanks a lot. For your idea #1, I have not yet started on this. For ideas #2 and #3, please read the following which will be in the readme for version 2.0:

ad #2:
"City Queue is empty" messages have now own icons, too (depending on whether you have built an unit, an improvement or a wonder). Basically you will get an icon with a building, a unit or a wonder on the left side and a questionmark on the right side indicating in a graphical way "Just built something of type XXX, now what next ?". The same principal (but without questionmarks) is valid if there is still something in the queue to be built.

ad #3:
Do you ask yourself “Why is the city queue empty after building a wonder or an improvement but not after building an unit ?”. Due to this effect, it easily happens that you forget to change the city queue after building an unit resulting in a horde of units which you do not need. That’s especially true for those units where you just need one or two for the whole civilisation (e.g. Bureaucrats). This feature will empty the city queue in the case you have just built an unit. Of course, this feature will not empty the city queue if you have decided intentionally to build a set of units in a city by defining the city queue (e.g. by defining in a build queue to build 2 phalanx, then city walls).


All,


It's more than sad that I have to write this here, but I think it is necessary...

IMPORTANT INFORMATION TO ALL
============================

I hereby state copyrights to PowerSLICs, its features, its code and its ideas for future versions offically announced by TP in the CTP creation forum.

Reason for this is, that I see some MODs with my PowerSLICs worked in or with code stolen from PowerSLICs (e.g. city growth messages) without asking me before or giving me any credits.

That's not something I like at all, in fact it is 100% annoying and does give a good indication of the character of some MOD-Makers.

As I wrote in each of my Readme files since the first version of PowerSLICs was published:

HOWEVER IF YOU SHOULD USE THE WHOLE CODE OR PARTS OF IT IN YOUR OWN MODIFICATIONS OR SCENARIOS, PLEASE BE A FAIR PLAYER AND PUT ME ON YOUR CREDITS. THAT’S ALL I WOULD LIKE TO SEE.

So again, please ask me before you publish a MOD with PowerSLICs or with adapted code and give me credits in your documentation, that's all I want to. Believe me, PowerSLICs is not something which was written in one hour. It contains the effort of many many hours, week-ends and arguments with my girl-friend.


TP
[This message has been edited by TP (edited September 06, 1999).]

[Alanus]

TP,

ad#3 is great, it will prevent from undesired units, and you'll really have the full control of what you want to built. I guess that you will be using the ClearBuildQueue(city) function when the unit.built triggers and city.queue==1 and unit != settler.

Now that you have explored the possibilities of SLIC, the point is to find [good] ideas of using it. On a legal standpoint, I don't know whether one can copyright on ideas only.

Alanus

[TP]

Alanus,


It's even easier - I'll do it by updating Activision's original "Unit Completed" messagebox with an if-then-else syntax.

On the copyright issue, I agree with you that it may be discussable from a legal point of view whether it is possible to protect ideas which will surely be implemented in future versions. However protecting PowerSLICs or part of the PowerSLICs code is possible (with good lawyers being involved).

I wrote the above message because I was angry as hell on those MOD-Makers describing themselves and their MODs as the best things in life and who implement part of my code into their files without asking before or giving credits. In one specific case, a MOD is talking of being compatible with PowerSLICs, but due to a more than primitive implementation of the code, this will most likely not be the case... and guess who is then going to be asked why PowerSLICs does not work :-)

As you can imagine with your own professional background, I neither have the time nor the energy to seriously work against such things. I wrote this so some people do not imitate others without asking the originators before. Hope you understand.

At the end of the day, I may decide to make PowerSLICs 2.00 or higher only available to a specific distribution list. Let's see.


TP

[Alanus]

TP,

Related to your ad #3, yes, it is a good idea to complete the original 'unit built' message.

Another suggestion, which is in line with the previous Improvement message from PowerSLIC 1.71 and below : add a Great Library button on the unit / wonder / building built messages, just by introducing the right Button call in the original messages (5 min to do it).

I made one try yesterday to implement my suggestion about an alertbox when Capitol is built (instead of messagebox). I hope that you didn't start that part already.
It doesn't work yet as I expect , but I'll make some more tries tonight. I'll keep you aware and send you the code for your PowerSLIC 2.0, if it eventually works and if you agree.
I suspect some problems with the [city.queue] counter when the Capitol is involved.

Alanus

[TP]

Alanus,


If you find a good solution for the capitol alertbox idea, I am more than happy to include this in the next PowerSLICs and give you full credits for this feature of course.

On GL link within building messages, I will look into that tonight. As you said, this shouldn't be any issue.


TP

[TP]

Alanus,


Ok, everything works (have not worked on the capitol messages in order not to duplicate work).

If only Activision could give us the SLIC 1.2 documentation so I could see whether features which are impossible with SLIC 1.1 can be done with version 1.2.

Mr. Ogre, do you hear me ? We would love to play with your newest SLIC enhancements....


TP

[Alanus]

TP,

I have continued to work on the Capitol alertbox, less than I expected, and I need to try one more thing before I deliver to you. Here are my findings :

- the [action.1.name] built-in variable which is used in the new unit / building / wonder built is only valid in the context of the new messages. In other words, it is a local variable to those messages. So, one cannot use it elsewhere (in particular following a building.built trigger).

- as a consequence I cannot (so far) have a Capitol alertbox that says what's next. The only thing I can do is to say in the alertbox whether the queue is empty or not.

- library call are inconsistent : you have to use respectively unit.type ; building.built ; wonder.finished as a parameter for LibraryXxx() functions.

- city.queue equals to 1 when the queue is empty (don't ask why not zero). It also equals to 1 when the queue is not empty but you are building automatically a unit of the same type of the previous one. BUT ACTIVISION DON'T CHANGE THIS, now that we know it. That's the way we can empty the queue for the automatically built units.

- there is an alert box when you select a Capitol to be built, but only if you are building it alone. The alertbox doesn't appear when you select the capitol to be put in the city queue. Not very good.

I would request your opinion : do you think that it would then be required to keep the original "building built queue not empty" for Capitol in addition to the alert box (one message + one alertbox >() or just have one alert box that directs you to the city production tab through the eyepoint if you want to know what's next

So, I'm a little bit disappointed, and I would request new features in SLIC :
1. Ability to read what's in the queue (read queue by index) and use these variables, e.g. something like [city.1.queue.2.name] that would mean name of the second item in the queue of city 1.
2. String variables and associated C functions, because if you want to make something a little bit sophisticated, you cannot, unless hardcoding all your messages and all possible combinations. Maybe, it would be easier sometimes to directly code in C...

That’s all for today (but not for tonight).

Alanus