ModEnc is currently in Maintenance Mode: Changes could occur at any given moment, without advance warning.
Talk:TechnoTypes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
I would suggest making the pointers this way:
[General]→MyEffectivenessCoefficient
INI File | Section | Key | Value Type | Default Value | Adds to list |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Rules(md).ini | Object's ID | MyEffectivenessCoefficient | float | [General]→MyEffectivenessCoefficientDefault | |
Rules(md).ini | Object's ID | TargetEffectivenessCoefficient | float | [General]→TargetEffectivenessCoefficientDefault | |
Rules(md).ini | Object's ID | TargetSpecialThreatCoefficient | float | [General]→TargetSpecialThreatCoefficientDefault | |
Rules(md).ini | Object's ID | TargetStrengthCoefficient | float | [General]→TargetStrengthCoefficientDefault | |
Rules(md).ini | Object's ID | TargetDistanceCoefficient | float | [General]→TargetDistanceCoefficientDefault |
It works fine in tables.
-pd
- It looks much better here because you don't have vector<VoxelAnimation> and similar beasts in Value Type. But upon expanding the table to 100% and adding linebreaks in the middle, the links do fit in. Thanks for the suggestion. //DCoder 11:56, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Slaved and Enslaves
These are both in the Applicable Tags sections of TechnoTypes and InfantryTypes. That wasn't intentional, was it? —Vinifera7 15:38, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- Err... InfantryTypes are descendants from TechnoTypes, so all flags that are read from ini for a TechnoType are by definition read for an InfantryType. Which is exactly what you're seeing, the TechnoTypes table being transcluded on the InfantryTypes page. (If you ask What Links Here, it will tell you that all TechnoTypes-descendants include that flag.) This does not mean the game processes the flag on all types the same, it just means that WW decided to make that flag part of TechnoType rather than individual descendants, which makes sense since SMIN needs to transfer its slaves to YAREFN and back, and this way it's easier. Of course, with WW's code you never know why they did something the way they did... I can take a look at the relevant code if you need any details. //DCoder 16:06, 16 May 2008 (UTC)