a very small suggestion for the next patch for ryhleh ( devs plz read )

[Arryn]

Originally posted by Chazar:
Umh, does UI stand for User Interface?

Yes.

[PvK]

I've mentioned this idea before, but I think ideally, most or all units who are dismissed without pay, or who retreat and are eliminated due to no-retreat-province, or retreating mercenaries...

... should be remembered, grouped by compatible type (hopefully no paladins mixed with undead, or iceclads with hot abyssians), and occasionally reappear in the form of either good event reinforcements for the lucky (not necessarily for the side they originally served), or as independent attacks on provinces, or as new mercenary bands.

PvK

[Arryn]

Originally posted by PvK:
I've mentioned this idea before, but I think ideally, most or all units who are dismissed without pay, or who retreat and are eliminated due to no-retreat-province, or retreating mercenaries...

... should be remembered, grouped by compatible type (hopefully no paladins mixed with undead, or iceclads with hot abyssians), and occasionally reappear in the form of either good event reinforcements for the lucky (not necessarily for the side they originally served), or as independent attacks on provinces, or as new mercenary bands.

An interesting idea ... that I suspect would be extraordinarily hard to code. You get points for original thinking though.

[PvK]

Sounds easy enough (and fun enough) to code, to me...

The tricky/annoying part would/might be deconflicting incompatible types for the new Groups.

PvK

[ July 12, 2004, 17:27: Message edited by: PvK ]

[Arryn]

Originally posted by PvK:
Sounds easy enough (and fun enough) to code, to me...

The tricky/annoying part would/might be deconflicting incompatible types for the new Groups.

IMO, the tricky part is what's involved with the "remembering" aspect of your proposal. I think you underestimate the data structures that'd be needed to do this.

In light of what I've previously posted on this subject, were I the responsible dev, I'd first code a basic (and no-cost) "dismiss" functionality (to close the existing hole in the game's design) and then, later, enhance the dismiss functionality (in one or more ways as per various suggestions) in the form of a new "feature" added to that basic function. It's the principle of stepwise refinement. Build complex systems up from simpler ones. It's easier to do than biting off a big task in one chomp. Nibble around the edges ...

EDIT: the "deconflicting" aspect should be an inherent property of the aforementioned data structure(s). IOW, once you've stored all the relevent info regarding the unit(s) to be disbanded, then conflict-resolution should be automatically derived (inherited) from the data structure when you go to apply the event that accesses that data later on. Fundamentals of modern OOD/OOP.

[ July 12, 2004, 17:55: Message edited by: Arryn ]

[PvK]

Sidestepping to reality, with IW as the dev team, it depends on whether or not they already have a way to categorize units into appropriate/compatible types. I can't think of any evidence that they have any such categories - my guess is the existing "themed" mercenaries and independent province attacks and reinforcements are all hard-coded.

Even so, it seems to me the hard part would not be adding a (object-oriented or not) method for categorizing units itself, but creating one that works for all unit types, assuming none already exists.

It seems like the tactical AI could also benefit from a method which knows to separate units with dangerous auras from units without invulnerability to them.

Anyway, recording units and putting them in Groups by compatible type for later use sounds pretty straightforward to me... though I don't know what data structure they use. If it's a massive array with all kinds of ancient spaghetti attached, maybe it would be a pain.

Most we can do about such code details is speculate, though. I mentioned the idea because it sounded like the _main_ obstacle was lack of a fun idea for what to do about disbanding units, so I thought I'd mention what sounded fun to me.

PvK

[Stormbinder]

Originally posted by Kristoffer O:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stormbinder:
I don't. In fact custom UI programing is one on my specialities, and I don't mind doing it.

For real?

I don't program much, but to me it would be more rewarding making a change that made the game more fun to play and as I rarely am bothered by the UI in dom2 I would prefer a new interesting feature.

The 'dissmiss' however would fall under features in my book, as it is something that would affect the game play.

---

Exactly.