SciFi Mod

[Suicide Junkie]

It will do facilities as well. Just run it on a facilities file, and it will do the gridding thing on whatever matches up.

Costs, and abilities mainly, since facilities don't have size/supply usage/hitpoints/etc.
The Tech gridder only modifies lines that match what it is expecting, and copies everything else: you don't have to worry, the facility-specific entries will not cause any problems.

Tech areas - they don't really apply for gridding purposes ...
However, the gridder will latch into the "number of tech req" field and the whole thing should work... it would create a slew of identical-cost tech areas...
Just be sure to set the naming scheme to something that will not create any duplicate names.

(IE: use one of the 'complex' naming schemes)

-----

In the next Version of the tech gridder I'll add tech area cost support.

[TranscendentJedi]

BeenAssimilated and I have recently decided, that to simultate the nOnlinear rising costs of new technology, especially for top-of-the-line equitment such as that used in research facilites, to use a system of compound interest for computing the costs and benifits for most facilities (possibly components). If anyone has any suggestions on this please respon.
Suicide Junkie, I assume that you are still working on the tech gridder (Version .50), and so I suggest, that if you think this is a good idea, to add a fourth option for finding the cost of components. I don't think we will be using the advanced naming system because of time and computational constraints (plus the fact that it would take forever to research) and cap everything at level XX or lower.

[BeenAssimilated]

Additionally, please advise us of the best way to contact Atrocities for the Star Trek Mod and NASY Shipsets and pictures. Thanks for all your support.

[ June 29, 2003, 03:56: Message edited by: BeenAssimilated ]

[Captain Kwok]

Originally posted by BeenAssimilated:
Additionally, please advise us of the best way to contact Atrocities for the Star Trek Mod and NASY Shipsets and pictures. Thanks for all your support.

Just send him an e-mail. He'll respond shortly if his spider bite wasn't too serious.

[Suicide Junkie]

Originally posted by TranscendentJedi:
BeenAssimilated and I have recently decided, that to simultate the nOnlinear rising costs of new technology, especially for top-of-the-line equitment such as that used in research facilites, to use a system of compound interest for computing the costs and benifits for most facilities (possibly components). If anyone has any suggestions on this please respon.
Suicide Junkie, I assume that you are still working on the tech gridder (Version .50), and so I suggest, that if you think this is a good idea, to add a fourth option for finding the cost of components. I don't think we will be using the advanced naming system because of time and computational constraints (plus the fact that it would take forever to research) and cap everything at level XX or lower.

The multiply factor is compound interest style.

For techs with only one dimension the complex and simple naming schemes are the same.
1,2,3,4,5 ...

For the second dimension, the complex scheme names them
1-1, 1-2, 2-1, 2-2, 3-1, 3-2, 3-3, etc
While simple schemes add them together to get:
2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, and 6 respectively.

Duplicated names in the components or facilities file are perfectly OK, but duplicates in the techarea.txt will cause serious referencing problems.

[TranscendentJedi]

Originally posted by Suicide Junkie:
The multiply factor is compound interest style.

The good news is that stupid mistakes are easily fixed, right? (I thought I was pretty good at math! ) I hope I can keep these lapses in thinking to a minimum.
Two more questions about the tech gridder:
1. Each time I try and use it it adds four tech area requirements instead of one. How do I fix that?
2. I'm trying to use the gridder to increase the amount of resources a mineral miner makes the same way it increases cost, but it doesn't do anything to the amount of minerals mined (even though it does replace the variable in my description). Yes, I was sure to uncheck the box.

[ June 29, 2003, 19:15: Message edited by: TranscendentJedi ]