From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1441 invoked by alias); 14 Sep 2004 02:02:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact xconq7-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: xconq7-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 1427 invoked from network); 14 Sep 2004 02:02:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp810.mail.sc5.yahoo.com) (66.163.170.80) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 14 Sep 2004 02:02:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.101?) (sampln@sbcglobal.net@67.121.168.201 with plain) by smtp810.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 14 Sep 2004 02:02:49 -0000 Subject: Re: Morale and opinions From: Lincoln Peters To: Elijah Meeks Cc: Xconq list In-Reply-To: <20040914011617.3398.qmail@web13126.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040914011617.3398.qmail@web13126.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1095127497.28085.81267.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 23:19:00 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004/txt/msg01166.txt.bz2 On Mon, 2004-09-13 at 18:16, Elijah Meeks wrote: > I attempted to use the 'has-opinions' unit attribute > but GDL didn't recognize it. This was some time ago, > and who knows, there may have been a syntax error, but > I ended up resorting to a straight revolt-chance for > my Ogres, Demons, Iblis and other fickle creatures in > Opal. If you could get this to work, that'd be great. > However, any work on morale would leave, I'd assume, > to retreating, and keep in mind that the XConq retreat > still has issues when called in a game that usese ZOC > rules. I wouldn't be surprised if opinions, like so many other things, are described in the documentation but don't exist in the code. > > Also, on an unrelated note, I'd lik to give everyone > my buggy little arena.g, which is not fun* or very > functional. It's meant as a testbed for XConq > item-like units, but I've had a hell of a time getting > the protection tables to do what I want, and swords > keep jumping from owner to owner of their own > volition. If anyone gets a chance to look at it, I'm > specifically vexxed by the protection, especially > setting up armor and shield units to absorb some > blows, thereby representing armor class. One huge bug I see is that you've set up lighter armor to have a lower protection value. As counter-intuitive as it may be, lower numbers actually mean *greater* protection, so that in this game, a guy with leather armor and a small shield is pretty much invincible. The ideal way to handle weapons would be if they had no ACP's and affected their owner via occupant-affects-attack, but the last time I checked, that table only works in Combat Model 1. It might also help if you add a line such as: (set country-separation-min 20) That would guarantee each side some time to arm itself before confronting the other side. Unfortunately, item-like units are going to remain awkward for the foreseeable future. > *Well, there's a certain visceral pleasure in cutting > down farmers and jesters and hunchbacks, and a rather > ironic pleasure in that it's called Arena, but there's > no arena to speak of, but other than that... Maybe I should post my test module for unit control and see how you respond to *that* (it involved necromancers and all sorts of twisted stuff). --- Lincoln Peters Saints should always be judged guilty until they are proved innocent. -- George Orwell, "Reflections on Gandhi"