16 réponses à ce sujet

[traversc]

Does anyone know what happened to the guy? 

Since the author seems to have fallen off the face of the earth, I was wondering if anyone is going to take up the reins? 

[CID-78]

if someone fall of the face of earth in a community, the project will die/freeze. you simply don't take the freedom to takeover someone project without permission. and you can't get that if he/she is unreachable.

[traversc]

CID-78 wrote...

if someone fall of the face of earth in a community, the project will die/freeze. you simply don't take the freedom to takeover someone project without permission. and you can't get that if he/she is unreachable.

I disagree.  There is no legal reason someone can't do it.  And morally, I don't have any qualms with it, personally.  Of course, it's preferable to get permission, but it's not as if you are robbing anyone, especially if you citation properly.  And it's not like they're available to BE offended, anyway. 

Anyway, I do have an agenda.  I ask because I was hoping we could turn this into a collaborative project.  There are a lot of changes I would like to see made, and I have already made some of them myself.  For example, here are a few of the things I have added on my local version:

-Healers don't try to heal targets using Blood Magic.

-AND command, which makes multiple conditions much easier.  For example:

1) Target of Main -> AND
2) Target is Elite or Higher -> Use Death Hex

[Challseus]

traversc wrote...

Does anyone know what happened to the guy? 

Since the author seems to have fallen off the face of the earth, I was wondering if anyone is going to take up the reins? 

Of course in reality, you can do as you like, but I think that as Anakin has done a lot of work on it, we owe it to him to give him a chance to reply. I mean, how long has it been since the last time you had contact with him? If it's a month, I don't think it's long enough. Now, 6 months to a year, perhaps you can potentially think about making changes to his core submission. Isn't he in school or something? Perhaps he's been focusing on school work before his current semester ends? *Shrug*

Just my opinion...

[anakin5]

Back

I was not busy by school, I just had a pause which could last for ever if I didn't received messages about problem with my mods.

Anyway, I will work on my mod a little bit more. However, I give the guarantee that I will disappear one more time later. That's a reason why my projects are released with full sources.

Everyone is free to use them if you don't heard about me for 2 month or so. If someone do so, he/she can contact me by mail if he need information to take reins.



Talking about improvement in the mod, I will focus on "simple" things. The "AND" command is not a simple things to my eyes so I will not do it. But I have an idea to make people "extend" my mod by creating their own command and scripts, so lets see ...

[CID-78]

AND isn't hard to implement. it would probably require a refactoring of your code into a stack flow, if it isn't already. ie a bit like PLC programming.

the problem would be that it would be harder to see/understand the flow through the nodes.
making it harder for n00bs to grasp.

edit:

looked over the code, well i can see why you don't want todo it. It would require a complete new tactic flow which is alot of work. you can do alot more usefull features in a lot less time.

Modifié par CID-78, 23 mai 2010 - 08:03 .

[CID-78]

Something you should really do, (that goes for anyone scripting)



is when you make a new function to include the "help" text.



You do that by:



1) put the cursor over the function

2) select templates and double click on "Help window comment header.txt"

3) edit the template with your functions information.



if you keep doing that the function help window will work properly and you don't need to lookup the source, very good for the people that hasn't written the code themselves and don't know it by heart.

[anakin5]

I had an idea yesterday which I think is a better solution than the "AND". The idea is to create a command called "Save as secondary target" and also having a menu starting with "Secondary Target -> ...". So that you can remember a target that is valid for a condition and recall it later.

This way, the basic "AND" is doable like this :
[Target : Condition blablabla] => [Save as secondary target]
then
[Secondary target : Condition blablabla] => [An other command]


About commenting. Yes I  should do it. I didn't do it because I was the only person working on these sources. There is so many lines now that I am a little bit demotivated to do it.

Modifié par anakin5, 24 mai 2010 - 11:41 .

[CID-78]

I don't think that's better. it would be limited to how many "save slots" you give them rather then a dynamic stack which would handle the memory automatically. it would however improve your system but it wouldn't go all the way. the only benefit I can see is that if you do the simplest branch conditions you save tactics slots.



ie C1 + C2 do A1

C1 + C3 do A2

here you need one slot less then in a dynamic system, which would require a extra stack command for the branch. But you will limit both logic statement and size of the logic tree by doing this.



The GUI do limit on how you approach the problem.



I can see two ways of implementing a dynamic stack with the current interface.



CONDITION (Logic(AND))

MBR

CONDITION2 (Command)

CONDITION3 (Command2)



or



CONDITION (blank/command)

MBR

CONDITION2 (blank/command)

LOGIC (AND) (blank/command1).

CONDITION3 (blank/command)

LOGIC (AND) (blank/command2).



in this last example the commands should be "modes or calls" on the conditions or the system should halt and execute. this also leave "space" open for the future or more advanced commands. but it uses up alot of extra slots.

[anakin5]

I don't how it is limited by the number of save slots. Do you have an example that require more than one slot ?

Moreover, I see more than one benefit :

First, you can save this target through different tactic cycle and use it later.

Then you can insert conditions between each condition participation to the final "AND" statement.



Having a simple "AND" command will force people to stack conditions one after each other. Also, they will not be able to "save" a target for later use.

[CID-78]

they can save a target. either by building the stack or by using branches. but your right it's easier to "see", reading a stack isn't obvious for the untrained.



okay



A + ((B + C) | (D + E)) or anything involving branches and multiple conditions. sure for each slot you add it need to get more complicated before you need another slot. (atleast if you optimise the flow)



logic keyword: AND,OR,XOR, NOT, and the branch commands (MRD, MPS ,MPP) and you already have jump.



and the more you build with the tactics the bigger and more advanced you want it. so you will want more and more slots and branches. the problem is that the system isn't build for complete AI programming.

[anakin5]

I am lost. In your opinion, how should the tactic settings (in the current tactical interface) looks like to support A + ((B + C) | (D + E)) ? (+ and | are both OR to me...)

[CID-78]

hmm only if you add extra commands: and I was using "+" as AND



first of all the user must change the logic flow to ((B & C) | (D & E)) & A

which gives the same result but might be inefficent if A has low properbility to be true



B -> [Save as secondary target]

[secondary target] ©, Save as secondary target

[secondary target] (true), Jump

D - > [Save as secondary target]

[secondary target] (E), Save as secondary target

---JUMP HERE---

[secondary target] (A), Command



there you have the expression in your system, 7 operations instead of 5 and a need of reworking the expression so that it can work with only two slots rather then three.



you might beable to rework some branches this way aswell. but you will need more slots, if you can do it at all. there will be cases where you need to remember more states.

[anakin5]

The expression can be expanded to lower the number of required slot and to avoid the need of more than one save at a time :



((B & C) | (D & E)) & A = A & B & C | A & D & E



A => [Save]

[Saved:B] => [Save]

[Saved:C] => [Command]

A => [Save]

[Saved:D] => [Save]

[Saved:E] => [Command]



I think such a system is enough for almost 99,9% of players. Until we have a complete script system, their will always be case we cannot set with this system.

[CID-78]

yes with your system not the dynamic stack one which could handle any size of a expression. and that why I suggest it. it will allow to grow to the users demand. while your just make one step towards more advanced users and stay there. and it do allow a simple script system aslong as you add the branch logic.



but our right most users don't need much more.



and you need so many slots to write a full AI that the system would be far from ideal.

[traversc]

Hi Anakin!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Glad that you are back. You are my favorite DAO modder

Anyway, as I said, "AND" command is actually easy to implement, because it is essentially the same as the JUMP command. It's a bit tricky, since you need to make sure if the first condition doesn't fire, then the script skips over the next command.  But it is very possible with a few amount of changes. 

Your idea (saving target) is better... but there is a problem. I've spent quite a bit of time reading your scripts, and your idea idea I believe would require re-writing a massive amount of functions to allow such functionality. Essentially every AT_* function, to allow you to pass along the target from the previous command.

Or I could be wrong, as it's been a while since I've even opened up the toolset.

Also glad that you fixed healing under Blood magic too

Modifié par traversc, 11 juin 2010 - 08:17 .

[brazen_nl]

/necro

So how does Save as Secondary target actually work?

Saved Target is always empty, how do I use it?