Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - Elysium

#31
Outdated / Re: [A14] Miniaturisation Overloaded
August 14, 2016, 03:10:00 AM
Wow, nice job with both the overrides and miniaturisation.  It is good to see such a talented coder making useful mods the entire community can benefit from.
#32
Quote from: SpaceDorf on August 13, 2016, 12:22:34 PM
In my savegame the Breakdowns Update stops the HaulIt Mod from working :(

That is pretty strange since I'm pretty sure haulit just omits the dumb labor and hauling skills from the story traits.
#33
Outdated / Re: [A14] Miniaturisation Overloaded
August 12, 2016, 03:44:39 AM
Quote from: Bucketsmith on August 12, 2016, 03:30:24 AM
I.. know...? That's why I asked?
I realised that if I am going to have to copy the whole machining table to be able to add the bill for an item in my little mod, it might conflict with any other mod that adds something to the machining table.
I instantly thought of notfood's efforts with MFO and wondered if that could be a solution. It would also help 'spreading the news' if I could mention I used MFO in my mod. :)
I'm not sure you even have to touch the machining table.  I know some mods add bills by altering the machining table but I don't think that is the only way.  You can use a recipe maker and target the machining table as a recipe user which seems like a better way of doing things.
#34
Works perfectly for me.
#35
This mod is great but the infusions are far, far too common for my liking.  I can see where the chance values are handled in the source but unfortunately I have no idea how to compile it.  It probably wouldn't be so bad if there were stockpile filters for the stats, but without them and the amount of infusions that occur I find it adds too much micromanagement.  A stockpile filter may be asking too much.  I would be more than happy if the chance was handled in defs but you are a busy man and I'm sure you will add some kind of support when you have time to.
#36
Outdated / Re: [A14] Enhanced Development - 2016-08-02
August 11, 2016, 09:24:47 PM
Oh, I had no idea it was fixed already, there was no mention of it on the forums and your post still says 08-02.
#37
Outdated / Re: [A14] Enhanced Development - 2016-08-02
August 11, 2016, 06:03:59 PM
Bug report for SafeTraps.

http://imgur.com/a/gowZr
#38
Quote from: Etherdreamer on August 11, 2016, 05:34:24 PM
That´s new for me, in fact I ve moded other games, and in those forums they ever said Source it´s different from a release, and mostly you need an "release" not the source.

What time to be alive.
The source is included in the release most of the time because github does this unless you specifically tell it not to, and there is really no reason to do so other than to save a few kb.  In the event of the author of a mod going mia, having easy access to the source is valuable for maintaining a mod.  The source folder is simply the assembly which has yet to be compiled, it doesn't do anything and you can delete it if you want.
#39
Quote from: Fluffy (l2032) on August 11, 2016, 05:11:34 PM
Fixed a bug and implemented a few suggestions/enhancements for Fluffy Breakdowns;

- No longer keeps track of maintenance of buildings that were destroyed (bugfix).
- Add skill gain for repairing (roughly half the skill gain of 'real' component replacement repairs).
- Attempts to check if buildings are used (depends on power on/off or CCL's lowIdleDraw), if not used lower maintenance degrades at 1/3 the normal rate. (if we can't determine if object is used or not, assume it is used.)
- Add ModConfigurationMenu for maintenance theshold, so pawns don't have to run all over the map for a minor repair. Defaults to 90%, keep in mind that at 50% buildings start running the risk of a 'real' breakdown.

In the (near) future, I hope to add some research to increase durability of components, to give late game colonies a bit of a relief in the amount of repairing that needs to be done. It's not hard, just a bit of busy work I didn't have time for today.

These all sound like great additions, nice!
#40
Outdated / Re: [A14] Miniaturisation Overloaded
August 11, 2016, 04:28:40 PM
Quote from: notfood on August 11, 2016, 04:20:34 PM
In case of two same comps being inserted, the last one inserted by Override is the only valid. Rimworld removes the duplicates with a warning.

Help me here. What's more desirable?

Take into account the . is illegal field name for a C# field so I can make use of it to bring some meaning.

I know pretty much nothing about C# so I may not be the most helpful here, but both seem self explanatory and reasonable.  If ingredients.replace will cause some issues with C# then I would suggest using ingredients replace="true", but you are the C# coder here so I really suggest just going with whatever makes the most sense to you as a programmer.

Quote from: Bucketsmith on August 11, 2016, 04:09:21 PM
All right. So I've made my first mod for RimWorld ever.
I'm really proud of having done that, though no code is mine, I simply altered vanilla code and used a bit of code someone else supplied.

It's the firefoam mortar in my signature. When I first had it Frankenstein'd it, it used artillery shells as ammo.
I simply disabled that, resulting in it requiring no ammo whatsoever.
Now, I'm at the point I made some simple unique textures for the mortar and shells, I've got the recipes for shell making all set, but the bill won't show up in the machining table.
Figured out that I would have to make a copy of the Building_Production def file and change the machining table def to add my recipe.
That's where I thought of MFO!
I'm a total scrub at modding, so any chance you could help me through how I'd use MFO for adding that recipe to the machining table?
In fact, would it be possible to go over the rest of the code to see if I could slim it all down with the use of MFO?

Just to be clear I think notsure intends Miniaturisation Overloaded and this new override method to be a seperate mod/utility.  Overrides seems to be an evolution of the efforts put into Miniaturisation which is why it is being discussed here and not in a separate thread.  Also probably because it is still in very early stages.  As for your question I'm not really sure myself to be honest,  I'm fairly new at this as well and I'm only just starting to understand how everything fits together.
#41
Outdated / Re: [A14] Miniaturisation Overloaded
August 11, 2016, 03:46:27 PM
Quote from: notfood on August 11, 2016, 03:40:10 PM
It inserts into the lists if they exist. Only for the lists. In case of the ingredients, you want a replacement. I'll add a keyword to discard any prior set object before trying to insert.

I'm thinking in <fieldname replace>blahblah</fieldname>

So just to be clear here, in the example with the bed, the vitalsmonitor would not be required since it is already added by core, and the two different mods would not overwrite eachothers comps because they were added and not overwritten?
#42
Outdated / Re: [A14] Miniaturisation Overloaded
August 11, 2016, 03:36:01 PM
Quote from: Bucketsmith on August 11, 2016, 08:33:10 AM
So MFO could be used to make personalised alterations to other mods?
E.G. I want EPOE, but I want to get rid of vancidium and make it use plasteel instead, without having to copy over the entire mod?
I would only need to write a little bit of code?

Not only would you not need to copy the entire mod, but you would only need to alter the section of the recipedef that requires vancidium.  Here is an example ( do note that I have not tested this it is just an example )
    <Override.Def Target="MakeAdvancedComponent">
    <ingredients>
      <li>
        <filter>
          <thingDefs>
            <li>Plasteel</li>
          </thingDefs>
        </filter>
        <count>5</count>
      </li>
      <li>
        <filter>
          <thingDefs>
            <li>Component</li>
          </thingDefs>
        </filter>
        <count>1</count>
      </li>
    </ingredients>
    <fixedIngredientFilter>
      <thingDefs>
        <li>Component</li>
        <li>Plasteel</li>
      </thingDefs>
    </fixedIngredientFilter>
    </Override.Def>


Instead of doing:

  <RecipeDef>
    <defName>MakeAdvancedComponent</defName>
    <label>make advanced component</label>
    <description>Make an advanced component.</description>
    <jobString>Making advanced component.</jobString>
    <workSpeedStat>SmithingSpeed</workSpeedStat>
    <effectWorking>Cook</effectWorking>
    <soundWorking>Recipe_Machining</soundWorking>
    <workAmount>10000</workAmount>
      <recipeUsers>
         <li>ComponentAssemblyBench</li>
      </recipeUsers>
    <ingredients>
      <li>
        <filter>
          <thingDefs>
            <li>Plasteel</li>
          </thingDefs>
        </filter>
        <count>5</count>
      </li>
      <li>
        <filter>
          <thingDefs>
            <li>Component</li>
          </thingDefs>
        </filter>
        <count>1</count>
      </li>
    </ingredients>
    <fixedIngredientFilter>
      <thingDefs>
        <li>Component</li>
        <li>Plasteel</li>
      </thingDefs>
    </fixedIngredientFilter>
    <products>
      <AdvancedComponents>1</AdvancedComponents>
    </products>
<skillRequirements>
<li>
<skill>Crafting</skill>
<minLevel>10</minLevel>
</li>
</skillRequirements>
    <workSkill>Crafting</workSkill>
    <researchPrerequisite>VancidiumRefineryTech</researchPrerequisite>
  </RecipeDef>


I don't even know if everything there is required, its possible you may even be able to slim it down more, which actually leads me to a couple questions I have for notsure.  In the above example, I assume the count has to be included as it is a subset of <ingredients> correct? 

Also, in the example below, assume that two different mods target the same properties but both are using your mod.  One would have to assume these overrides would not be in the same override.xml

    <Override.Def Target="Bed">
    <comps>
      <li Class="CompProperties_AffectedByFacilities">
        <linkableFacilities>
          <li>VitalsMonitor</li>
          <li>Dresser</li>
          <li>EndTable</li>
          <li>EndTableLight</li>
        </linkableFacilities>
      </li>
    </comps>
    </Override.Def>


    <Override.Def Target="Bed">
    <comps>
      <li Class="CompProperties_AffectedByFacilities">
        <linkableFacilities>
          <li>VitalsMonitor</li>
          <li>NightLight</li>
        </linkableFacilities>
      </li>
    </comps>
    </Override.Def>


What would happen in this scenario?  Would the end result be VitalsMonitor, Dresser, EndTable, EndTableLight, NightLight all injected into the comps?  If so, is VitalsMonitor even required since it is already defined in the def?  I have to assume it is overwriting the properties in question, and if that is the case I don't think my above example would work unless all of the comps were defined in the same override.
#43
Sorry if this has been discussed before but for training, is it possible to add a bill or some type of mock hunting work type to cause pawns to train independently?  As far as I understand, the way it works currently is they only use these objects if you either force them or they decide to use them for joy.  While this does work fine for the most part, I would love it if I could just set a work priority through hunting or some other work type.  You could also add support for the work tabs mod to prevent pawns from going off hunting when all you really wanted them to do was train.  ItchyFlea's mod https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=10623.msg105052#msg105052 does something very similar to this but I much prefer the way your mod handles training as it actually causes pawns to use their weapons.  I looked into doing this myself but it seems too advanced for my current capabilities.  I don't even know if what I am asking is possible with the way the game works but part of me is hoping it is.
#44
Outdated / Re: [A14] Miniaturisation Overloaded
August 11, 2016, 02:46:20 AM
Wow, great job! The potential impact this could have on the entire modding community is pretty substantial if everyone starts to adopt this method.
#45
Outdated / Re: [A14] Community Core Library v0.14.2
August 11, 2016, 02:08:46 AM
Quote from: Protokohl on August 11, 2016, 01:55:16 AM
CCL is below Core isn't it? As per second link to modload order screencap.

It is below core, however it is not directly below core, or otherwise the second mod loaded as the error indicates.