Hello dmitri6666,

Был старый глюк: движок вылетал, если маг кастует FARS и его убивают.
На стадии Writing Reports, когда писал описание региона, которое видел
убиенный маг. Вот совет, как это исправить.

Переведите это на английский и пусть местные ето исправляют :)
Если еще не исправлено (надо у них тоже спросить).

> 1) Убрать вызов EmptyHell() из Game::RunOrders()
> 2) Вставить его (если кто-то заботится о памяти) куда-нибудь после
> WriteReport() (например, сразу после battles.DeleteAll()) в
> Game::RunGame().
>
>   Конечно, более "правильным" путем было бы удалять мага из списка
> farseers в момент убийства, но тогда правители начали бы жаловаться
> что маг умер, успев увидеть удаленный регион но не составив доклад об
> этом.

--
Best regards,
  Atlantis                            mailto:mane1538@...

Using Dev=Cpp 4.9.9.2 compiler I have windows xp
What I did by steps:
1.Opened new windows project1 and closed the same
without saving having an empty project 1

2. clicked project....add to project...using only c++
source files add all files from atlantis and
atlantis/standard directories.

3. clicked project...project options...directories....
include directories...added above directories

4. compiled the project

Errors came up as
Linker error undifined reference to 'isaac'
linker error undifined reverence to 'randit'
ld returned 1 exit status
build error Project1.exe error 1

please dont hate spam a non-programing grandfather of 3...hehe

Thanks for the help

WmC

Hello all,
I have read the information on compiling a game of Atlantis, yet I am
having some trouble.  I have CYGWIN as was recommended in the help
guide that I read, yet I am unable to follow the directions exactly.  I
think the problem may be that the author was not 100% fluent in English
Grammer, combined with my low computer literacy.

I would very much appreciate it if someone could write a guide to
compile a game... a very simple, step by step, description which
includes where to save the code, what to type, what to modify, etc.
Basically as though you were writing it for someone as simple as
President Bush.  I am seeking on creating a very small game for a few
friends of mine and my lack of skill is a big problem with doing this.

I know it is a big ask, yet I am sure other people would appreciate it
too.  I imagine it could allow less computer literate people to become
more involved in the game.

Pauly

> Basically as though you were writing it for someone as simple as
> President Bush.

5+! :)

--
Astaroth.

Hello Astaroth,
Sunday, May 1, 2005, 9:57:54 PM, you wrote:

>> Basically as though you were writing it for someone as simple as
>> President Bush.
A> 5+! :)

Yes. Good morning :)

What's about my bug report posted here.


--
Best regards,
  Atlantis                            mailto:mane1538@...

Dear Pauly,

> I know it is a big ask, yet I am sure other people would
> appreciate it too.  I imagine it could allow less computer
> literate people to become more involved in the game.

If you're not up to compiling Atlantis from those instructions, you
should probably just use one of the pre-compiled binaries available in
the Files section of this Yahoo! group.

The problem with getting less computer literate people involved is that
some level of computer literacy (and particularly some level of
expertise with C++ coding) is necessary to customise and run a game.
Given that any suggestions made by the non-computer-literate require
work to be done by someone else, we usually prefer people who aren't
computer literate to become so before trying to "help" with Atlantis
development.

If you just want to play in a game, I'd suggest joining one of the ones
already running.  This will not only find you more people to play with,
but will give you an idea of how Atlantis really works.

Hope this helps,

Steve.

With the creation of a map, you can have cities in a lake.
I had a starting city in a lake, that can't be right.

Sven

Would it be possible to change the Item reports section in the
generated reports to help atlantis clients.

What I would like to suggest is to put the plural name of an item
somewhere in a consistent manner in the item description.
For the moment there are 3 ways to identify an item, with it's
singular name (eg horse), it's plural name (eg horses) or it's code
(eg [HORS]).  However these aren't always consistent.
This becomes rather difficult when parsing reports if all the info
isn't consistently available.
For items like wolf (wolves), grain (grain) or pirates (pirates), the
problems start to arise, ring of invisibility (rings of invisibility)
isn't that easy either.
The chance that you get somewhere in the report a unit with more than
1 ring of invisibility on him is rather slim.

The skill reports add to that.  The skill create ring of invisibility
says "A unit with this skill may create rings of invisibility via
magic." in plural, while the description of such a ring is in
singular: "ring of invisibility [RING], weight 0."

In my opinion, it would be great if the skill reports would include
the code (eg [RING] or [SWOR]) for all the items they could produce
or create and it would be even greater if the item reports could
incorporate there singular name, plural name and code (eg sword
(swords) [SWOR], weight 1.)

Sorry if this appears to be a rant, it wasn't intended to, I just
wanted to be clear.

Sven

I need to add some silver to a player in a game. What is the command in
players.in again?

                                        - thanx - JAW

Reward: 12345
where 12345 is the amount of silver...

Rad


On 5 May 2005 at 9:19, John Woolsey wrote:

> I need to add some silver to a player in a game. What is the command in
players.in again?
>
>                                        - thanx - JAW
>
>
> To Post a message, send it to:   atlantisdev@eGroups.com
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: atlantisdev-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

Thanx

---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Rad Killmer" <radk@...>
Reply-To: atlantisdev@yahoogroups.com
Date:  Thu, 05 May 2005 15:13:59 -0400

>Reward: 12345
>where 12345 is the amount of silver...
>
>Rad
>
>
>On 5 May 2005 at 9:19, John Woolsey wrote:
>
>> I need to add some silver to a player in a game. What is the command in
players.in again?
>>
>>                                        - thanx - JAW
>>
>>
>> To Post a message, send it to:   atlantisdev@eGroups.com
>> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: atlantisdev-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>To Post a message, send it to:   atlantisdev@eGroups.com
>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: atlantisdev-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

ilyatins wrote:
> Would it be possible to change the Item reports section in the
> generated reports to help atlantis clients.
>
> What I would like to suggest is to put the plural name of an item
> somewhere in a consistent manner in the item description.
> For the moment there are 3 ways to identify an item, with it's
> singular name (eg horse), it's plural name (eg horses) or it's code
> (eg [HORS]).  However these aren't always consistent.
> This becomes rather difficult when parsing reports if all the info
> isn't consistently available.

Just ignore everything except the number of items and the item code:

      <n> <some stuff that I don't care about> [ITEM]

is always going to be parsable as <n> of [ITEM], regardless of what the
middle part is.

> The chance that you get somewhere in the report a unit with more than
> 1 ring of invisibility on him is rather slim.

You still need to be able to handle it, though - spoils will give a unit
more than one ring sooner or later.

> In my opinion, it would be great if the skill reports would include
> the code (eg [RING] or [SWOR]) for all the items they could produce
> or create and it would be even greater if the item reports could
> incorporate there singular name, plural name and code (eg sword
> (swords) [SWOR], weight 1.)

Not really. It's very easy to parse things like this, particularly in
high level languages like perl or python. Adding a plural would just be
a hack to make client writers' lives slightly easier.

> Sorry if this appears to be a rant, it wasn't intended to, I just
> wanted to be clear.

Sure, but there are bigger issues which you should consider if you're
going to write a client. A lot of them don't understand 'peas' or 'men'
and some don't even handle an 'all' part (ie. it don't account properly
for an order like "give 123 all men" or "buy all peas").

Anthony

Hello all,

I have a war-3 trade-2 faction that needs a player.
This game is being run by Arno Saxena.

If anyone knows of someone that would like to jump into a war, please let me
know.

Thanks,
Rad

I think it implies that there is a lake in the hex, not that the entire hex is a
lake.  In terms of population tax etc, lake terrain
is treated more like plains than sea if I recall correctly.

> -----Original Message-----
> With the creation of a map, you can have cities in a lake.
> I had a starting city in a lake, that can't be right.
>
> Sven

Hi

just saw this in the CHANGELOG file

-- added the STUDY [skill] [level] option for repeated study. STUDY is
no longer useable with the '@' symbol as a repeating order

so I tested it:

-------order checker-------
unit 609
@claim 50

*** Error: STUDY: cannot study stealth beyond level 0. ***
STUDY STEA 5
---------------------------

-------processed turn------
(no errors)
Unit (609): Claims $50.
Unit (609): Studies stealth.
---------------------------

----next order template----
unit 609
@claim 50
STUDY STEA 5
---------------------------

so its just an error in the order checker it seems.


Pete

Possibly, but you cannot move into a lake.  If you move in that
direction, it shows in your report "... discovers a lake in ..,.." but
you do not actually move to it.

Sven

--- In atlantisdev@yahoogroups.com, "Stuart Sanders" <stuart@p...>
wrote:
>
> I think it implies that there is a lake in the hex, not that the
entire hex is a lake.  In terms of population tax etc, lake terrain
> is treated more like plains than sea if I recall correctly.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > With the creation of a map, you can have cities in a lake.
> > I had a starting city in a lake, that can't be right.
> >
> > Sven

Hello ilyatins,
Tuesday, May 17, 2005, 6:29:34 PM, you wrote:

i> Possibly, but you cannot move into a lake.  If you move in that
i> direction, it shows in your report "... discovers a lake in ..,.." but
i> you do not actually move to it.

So, I think it is not suitable for starting cities!

--
Best regards,
  Atlantis                            mailto:mane1538@...

Hi,

> So, I think it is not suitable for starting cities!

So you were agreeing with me, I misunderstood :-)

Best regards.

Hi Anthony,

> > What I would like to suggest is to put the plural name of an item
> > somewhere in a consistent manner in the item description.
> > For the moment there are 3 ways to identify an item, with it's
> > singular name (eg horse), it's plural name (eg horses) or it's
> > code (eg [HORS]).  However these aren't always consistent.
>
> Just ignore everything except the number of items and the item code:
>      <n> <some stuff that I don't care about> [ITEM]
> is always going to be parsable as <n> of [ITEM], regardless of what
> the middle part is.

That's just it, it isn't consistent, if [ITEM] would always be there,
there wouldn't be a problem.

> > The chance that you get somewhere in the report a unit with more
> > than 1 ring of invisibility on him is rather slim.
>
> You still need to be able to handle it, though - spoils will give a
> unit more than one ring sooner or later.

I know, but currently that is the only way to get the plural name of
an item, and if you have to wait for that to happen, it can take a
long time

> > In my opinion, it would be great if the skill reports would
> > include the code (eg [RING] or [SWOR]) for all the items they
> > could produce or create and it would be even greater if the item
> > reports could
> > incorporate there singular name, plural name and code (eg sword
> > (swords) [SWOR], weight 1.)
>
> Not really. It's very easy to parse things like this, particularly
> in high level languages like perl or python. Adding a plural would
> just be a hack to make client writers' lives slightly easier.

Well, not exactly, there are times when you need to know the plural
or singular name, think of orders parsing.  The only way that it is
possible for the moment is *shiver* hard-coded in the client.


> > Sorry if this appears to be a rant, it wasn't intended to, I just
> > wanted to be clear.
>
> Sure, but there are bigger issues which you should consider if
> you're going to write a client. A lot of them don't
> understand 'peas' or 'men'
> and some don't even handle an 'all' part (ie. it don't account
> properly
> for an order like "give 123 all men" or "buy all peas").


Well, there you have it, how can I know what a "men" is, the item
report clearly shows :
man [MAN], weight.....
So if someone writes in his order BUY 13 MAN, I can check what it is,
if he says BUY 13 MEN, I need to hardcode man,men,[MAN] or parse it
from the report, and with things like men it's easy to find a plural
form consistently in the report, for magic carpet's its a lot tougher.

A more beautifull hack would be:
tribal elf [TELF], tribal elves weigh 10 and can carry 5 weight.
or something similar, just to have a consistent way to get the plural.


If I read this again, it's starting to look more and more like a
rant, so forgive me.  I think I'll just better hardcode everything
into my client.


Best regards,

Sven

Hi Arno,

I also like this idea, and would even like to add something to it.  To
extend the descriptions of the objects (clipper, galleon,...) to have
the same information as in the generated rules, wheight they can
transport, sailors they need, ...

Sven

> I had just a question from Jim Frediani, a player in the game I'm
runing
> (I'm runing v4.0.10k).
>
> He was asking if there could be an argument "terrain" for the show
order
> to recall all information about already known terrain, like movement
> modifiers, basic resources etc ...
>
> I think that's a fine idea and thought it would be interesting for
the
> new engine...
>
> greetings
>    Arno

Hello ilyatins,
Tuesday, May 17, 2005, 8:48:02 PM, you wrote:

>> to recall all information about already known terrain,
All known hexes or all known types of terrain?

>>  like movement
>> modifiers, basic resources etc ...
Advanced resources are very interesting thing. Somewhere on Ceran I
saw mithril in the plains.
I was told there are several different terrains called "plain" with
different advances.

--
Best regards,
  Atlantis                            mailto:mane1538@...

ilyatins wrote:
> Hi Anthony,
>
>
>>>What I would like to suggest is to put the plural name of an item
>>>somewhere in a consistent manner in the item description.
>>>For the moment there are 3 ways to identify an item, with it's
>>>singular name (eg horse), it's plural name (eg horses) or it's
>>>code (eg [HORS]).  However these aren't always consistent.
>>
>>Just ignore everything except the number of items and the item code:
>>     <n> <some stuff that I don't care about> [ITEM]
>>is always going to be parsable as <n> of [ITEM], regardless of what
>>the middle part is.
>
> That's just it, it isn't consistent, if [ITEM] would always be there,
> there wouldn't be a problem.

[ITEM] *is* always there - you'll have either '1 sword [SWOR]', or '2
swords [SWOR]'. That should be enough to let you parse the report.

>>>In my opinion, it would be great if the skill reports would
>>>include the code (eg [RING] or [SWOR]) for all the items they
>>>could produce or create and it would be even greater if the item
>>>reports could
>>>incorporate there singular name, plural name and code (eg sword
>>>(swords) [SWOR], weight 1.)
>>
>>Not really. It's very easy to parse things like this, particularly
>>in high level languages like perl or python. Adding a plural would
>>just be a hack to make client writers' lives slightly easier.
>
> Well, not exactly, there are times when you need to know the plural
> or singular name, think of orders parsing.  The only way that it is
> possible for the moment is *shiver* hard-coded in the client.

There's no need to hard code it into the client - some sort of parsable
text file would be all you'd need, with one line per item type,
including weights, plurals, whatever you needed. If you were really
clever, you could write a script to generate it from the Atlantis source.

>>Sure, but there are bigger issues which you should consider if
>>you're going to write a client. A lot of them don't
>>understand 'peas' or 'men'
>>and some don't even handle an 'all' part (ie. it don't account
>>properly
>>for an order like "give 123 all men" or "buy all peas").
>
> Well, there you have it, how can I know what a "men" is, the item
> report clearly shows :
> man [MAN], weight.....
> So if someone writes in his order BUY 13 MAN, I can check what it is,
> if he says BUY 13 MEN, I need to hardcode man,men,[MAN] or parse it
> from the report, and with things like men it's easy to find a plural
> form consistently in the report, for magic carpet's its a lot tougher.

No - 'men/man' is a generic term for whatever men a unit has. If you
have a unit with 5 HELF and 5 NOMA, 'give foo all men' will give unit
foo 5 NOMA and 5 HELF. Similarly for 'trade', plus a couple of others
that I can't remember. You can also do 'peas', as in 'buy 10 peas',
which will buy 10 of whatever the base peasant type is for the region.

The point is that the plural form of items seems to make your brain
explode, but there are harder things to parse (and handle the
consequences) in player orders.

> A more beautifull hack would be:
> tribal elf [TELF], tribal elves weigh 10 and can carry 5 weight.
> or something similar, just to have a consistent way to get the plural.

No, not really. Now you're putting the weight of the unit and it's
carrying capacity in as well as all the rest of the unit description.
The problem with that is that you're relying on minor features of the
report to give you information, rather than working it out. If all you
need are comma separated things, with a number of things and a code,
then your parsing is far less likely to break.

The other reason that it's bad is that people will likely try to use
your client with old versions of the game (eg. 4.10), and then complain
to you when it breaks :)

> If I read this again, it's starting to look more and more like a
> rant, so forgive me.  I think I'll just better hardcode everything
> into my client.

Again, not necessary. The easiest way to do it is to read everything
from a text file, and (optionally) write it back out again when you're
done. Have a look at Atlantis Little Helper to see how Max does it.

Ideally though you'd contact Max, or another client writer, and offer to
help add whatever features you thought were missing from their client,
rather than reinventing the wheel. Atlantis Little Helper is merely my
personal favorite, mainly because it's the most obviously open source.

Hope that helps,

Anthony

Atlantis wrote:
> Advanced resources are very interesting thing. Somewhere on Ceran I
> saw mithril in the plains.
> I was told there are several different terrains called "plain" with
> different advances.

Yes, Ceran is very silly - it has three different types of each terrain,
eg. plain1, plain2, plain3, in addition to the normal types.

Anthony

> [ITEM] *is* always there - you'll have either '1 sword [SWOR]',
> or '2 swords [SWOR]'. That should be enough to let you parse the
> report.

<snippet>A unit with this skill may create rings of invisibility via
magic.</snippet>
No [RING] in the skill description, same for all the mage skill
reports that create things: Wolves, dragons, undead,....

> There's no need to hard code it into the client - some sort of
> parsable text file would be all you'd need, with one line per item
> type, including weights, plurals, whatever you needed. If you were
> really clever, you could write a script to generate it from the
> Atlantis source.

I could put it in a text file, but there are as many atlantis flavors
as there are running games, I would prefer to get all the information
I needed out of the report, and not rely on a probably soon outdated
textfile.  I would prefer the reports to be consistent.  Generating
it from the atlantis source would mean every game running with it's
own tweaks would have to do that for their particular changes.  You
could have all the needed information in the report, which would be
better.

> No - 'men/man' is a generic term for whatever men a unit has. If
> you have a unit with 5 HELF and 5 NOMA, 'give foo all men' will
> give unit foo 5 NOMA and 5 HELF. Similarly for 'trade', plus a
> couple of others that I can't remember. You can also do 'peas', as
> in 'buy 10 peas',
> which will buy 10 of whatever the base peasant type is for the
> region.

This isn't a big issue, and easily programmed, if it isn't in other
clients it's a mere oversight in my opinion, instead of a "big issue"

> The point is that the plural form of items seems to make your brain
> explode, but there are harder things to parse (and handle the
> consequences) in player orders.

Things which are hard to parse are not really a problem, they are
hard, not impossible.  If you do not have all the info needed,
parsing can be impossible, which is the case with the plural.  You
can't parse it if you don't know it.

> No, not really. Now you're putting the weight of the unit and it's
> carrying capacity in as well as all the rest of the unit
> description.
> The problem with that is that you're relying on minor features of
> the report to give you information, rather than working it out. If
> all you need are comma separated things, with a number of things
> and a code, then your parsing is far less likely to break.

I do not like to rely on a supplied textfile containing most probably
wrong information for that particular flavor of game.  I much rather
parse everything out of the reports, even the "minor features" of
it.  It allows for me to get the correct information, if someone
running a game where he tweaked the dragon to be more powerfull, or
added a special dagger which isn't in the standard code.
But I do agree my proposition is not the solution.

> Ideally though you'd contact Max, or another client writer, and
> offer to help add whatever features you thought were missing from
> their client, rather than reinventing the wheel. Atlantis Little
> Helper is merely my personal favorite, mainly because it's the most
> obviously open source.

For creating bots among other things this won't help me. It's the 2nd
time you are trying to tell me what I should be doing instead of
worrying about the plurals.  To me, this isn't really productive and
it is besides the point.


I think we just have to agree to disagree on this, I clearly want
this, and have a different view on relying on outside information.
You seem to think by supplying possibly false information, I could
get the job done, and you are right in that it is the only way
currently of dealing with the problem.  This post was intended to
remove this particular problem, not to circumvent it.  You also
suggest I should spend my time doing something else, so I guess I
better not ask any questions any more if that is the reply.


Best regards,

Sven

ilyatins wrote:
>>[ITEM] *is* always there - you'll have either '1 sword [SWOR]',
>>or '2 swords [SWOR]'. That should be enough to let you parse the
>>report.
>
> <snippet>A unit with this skill may create rings of invisibility via
> magic.</snippet>
> No [RING] in the skill description, same for all the mage skill
> reports that create things: Wolves, dragons, undead,....

Ah, you're talking about the item reports, rather than the items within
units. Adding the item code just to the initial item report wouldn't be
too much of a stretch, so go for it.

If you're writing a more general parser though, you'll need to deal with
reports as they currently stand. From looking at the game.out file, it
seems that you can go the other way - an item will tell you the skill
needed to produce it:

ring of invisibility [RING], weight 0. Units with create ring of
    invisibility [CRRI] of at least level 1 may attempt to create this
    item via magic at a cost of 600 silver.

wolf [WOLF], weight 10, walking capacity 5, riding capacity 5. This is
    a monster.
    ...
    Units with wolf
    lore [WOLF] of at least level 1 may attempt to create this item via
    magic. This item cannot be given to other units.

dragon [DRAG], weight 250, walking capacity 50, riding capacity 50,
    flying capacity 50. This is a monster. This monster attacks with a
    ...
    silver as treasure. Units with dragon lore [DRAG] of at least level
    1 may attempt to create this item via magic. This item cannot be
    given to other units.

Typically you'll get an item report at the same time that you get the
skill report which allows you to produce the item.

>>There's no need to hard code it into the client - some sort of
>>parsable text file would be all you'd need, with one line per item
>>type, including weights, plurals, whatever you needed. If you were
>>really clever, you could write a script to generate it from the
>>Atlantis source.
>
> I could put it in a text file, but there are as many atlantis flavors
> as there are running games, I would prefer to get all the information
> I needed out of the report, and not rely on a probably soon outdated
> textfile.

Sure, but if you can't do that, an editable text file (potentially
updated with whatever information you *can* figure out) is the next best
thing. Hard coding something into the client should be a last resort.


>>Ideally though you'd contact Max, or another client writer, and
>>offer to help add whatever features you thought were missing from
>>their client, rather than reinventing the wheel. Atlantis Little
>>Helper is merely my personal favorite, mainly because it's the most
>>obviously open source.
>
> For creating bots among other things this won't help me. It's the 2nd
> time you are trying to tell me what I should be doing instead of
> worrying about the plurals.  To me, this isn't really productive and
> it is besides the point.

I think you missed the point - Atlantis Little Helper already does what
you want (parse out items and skills from the report), and it's open
source. All you have to do is figure out how Max does it, and
incorporate that into your program, either directly if you're using
C/C++, or by using a similar algorithm if you're using a different
language.

There's no point in reinventing the wheel if Max has already solved the
problem, and I have no idea what language you're using.

> I think we just have to agree to disagree on this, I clearly want
> this, and have a different view on relying on outside information.
> You seem to think by supplying possibly false information, I could
> get the job done, and you are right in that it is the only way
> currently of dealing with the problem.  This post was intended to
> remove this particular problem, not to circumvent it.  You also
> suggest I should spend my time doing something else, so I guess I
> better not ask any questions any more if that is the reply.

Again you're missing the point - I was offering options for you to
explore, not dictating what you should do.

Anthony

Anthony Briggs wrote:
> Atlantis wrote:
>
>>Advanced resources are very interesting thing. Somewhere on Ceran I
>>saw mithril in the plains.
>>I was told there are several different terrains called "plain" with
>>different advances.
>
> Yes, Ceran is very silly - it has three different types of each terrain,
> eg. plain1, plain2, plain3, in addition to the normal types.

That's certainly one way to go, but would it not be fairly easy to
decouple the resources from the region type entirely? We've done that in
Eressea, and the only place this is decided is in the terraforming
function that creates a new region - to roll the availability and
quantity of resources. Thus, wood, iron, laen, mallorn or rock can
theoretically be found in any type of terrain (although we restrict it
to a few, and it generally can't be found with low skill levels and
never in great quantities). There are not many places in the code that
need to be changed, resources are a fairly minor part of the code.

The upside of it all is that you get a lot more flexible configuration
options without the inflation of region types (plain[123]). And it's
easy to add new resource types, too, if you plan for it in time.

Enno.
--
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

>own tweaks would have to do that for their particular changes.  You
>could have all the needed information in the report, which would be
>better.

> > No - 'men/man' is a generic term for whatever men a unit has. If
> > you have a unit with 5 HELF and 5 NOMA, 'give foo all men' will
> > give unit foo 5 NOMA and 5 HELF. Similarly for 'trade', plus a
> > couple of others that I can't remember. You can also do 'peas', as
> > in 'buy 10 peas',
> > which will buy 10 of whatever the base peasant type is for the
> > region.
>
>This isn't a big issue, and easily programmed, if it isn't in other
>clients it's a mere oversight in my opinion, instead of a "big issue"
>
> > The point is that the plural form of items seems to make your brain
> > explode, but there are harder things to parse (and handle the
> > consequences) in player orders.
>
>Things which are hard to parse are not really a problem, they are
>hard, not impossible.  If you do not have all the info needed,
>parsing can be impossible, which is the case with the plural.  You
>can't parse it if you don't know it.

It's a problem with existing clients, too.  I just loaded a report from
Rad's Kruell game into a fresh instance of ACB, and the first thing I got
was the "what is this, a unit or an item" on the new KLAN (bad choice of
acronym, there, Rad) kyber lancer race.  Then I got another dialog that the
game throws when it doesn't know how to parse the peasants line, which is
three text boxes asking for the code, the singular, and the plural (and in
this case only the plural was filled in.)

If this happens it's an error you as a user can't really fix.  You try to
put in KLAN as the code, and ACB refuses to let you because it's already
seen KLAN defined, usually by an event or battle report.  Sure, the
particular manifestation is probably a bug in the client, but one thing it
shows is that it's more difficult than some want to admit to parse all the
information correctly.

On 18 May 2005 at 15:24, Richard Cooley wrote:

> It's a problem with existing clients, too.  I just loaded a report from
> Rad's Kruell game into a fresh instance of ACB, and the first thing I got
> was the "what is this, a unit or an item" on the new KLAN (bad choice of
> acronym, there, Rad) kyber lancer race.  Then I got another dialog that the
> game throws when it doesn't know how to parse the peasants line, which is
> three text boxes asking for the code, the singular, and the plural (and in
> this case only the plural was filled in.)
>
Agreed, I will change it to KYBL.
Then all the clients will barf again....

Rad

>Agreed, I will change it to KYBL.
>Then all the clients will barf again....

At this point I would prefer you do NOT change it for Kruell, for precisely
that reason.

FWIW, I wasn't offended by the code.

I would rather not change it, but I would if need be.

Thanks
Rad

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Cooley" <pixelcat@...>
To: <atlantisdev@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 7:29 PM
Subject: RE: [atlantisdev] Re: Suggestion for the item report


> >Agreed, I will change it to KYBL.
>>Then all the clients will barf again....
>
> At this point I would prefer you do NOT change it for Kruell, for precisely
> that reason.
>
> FWIW, I wasn't offended by the code.
>
>
>
>
> To Post a message, send it to:   atlantisdev@eGroups.com
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: atlantisdev-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>