Conquer Club

deleted

Thumbs up from me!

So changes in the XML can now be suggested in this forum?

OliverFA wrote:So changes in the XML can now be suggested in this forum?

The bigWham wants all suggestions posted in here so I did.

isaiah40 wrote:

OliverFA wrote:So changes in the XML can now be suggested in this forum?

The bigWham wants all suggests posted in here so I did.

Cool!

+1 for support, particularly since I could see this being of use in Research & Conquer for a potential revision if one of the techs doesn't work out.

Liking this and a bump is needed.

Hoping XML updates are being considered soon and that this one and the others listed in here will be added

I like this. Can this not already be done with the conditional borders?

chapcrap wrote:I like this. Can this not already be done with the conditional borders?

Not yet, no... dolomite's tried already with the Krazy Kingdoms map

BUMP!

This seems like a logical extension of Conditional Attacks. I will Sticky this.

+1 here

It would simplify things alot. I am all for it!

+10 here, this would be a very useful addition and I'm surprised the conditional borders code wasn't implemented with it as a default.

-=- Tanarri -=- wrote:+10 here, this would be a very useful addition and I'm surprised the conditional borders code wasn't implemented with it as a default.

That does seem odd. I'm for this cuz it seems like the next logical step, but I'm also curious why it wasn't done in the first place.

agentcom wrote:

-=- Tanarri -=- wrote:+10 here, this would be a very useful addition and I'm surprised the conditional borders code wasn't implemented with it as a default.

That does seem odd. I'm for this cuz it seems like the next logical step, but I'm also curious why it wasn't done in the first place.

The CBs where given when the foundry cartoes went on strike when we still had lack as the boss. This may of been a bit of a rushed job as we have had problems with them since. Labs map (first map with CBs) got locked to solve an issue and most maps since have also had problems which I think have all been solved now, touch wood.

koontz1973 wrote:

agentcom wrote:

-=- Tanarri -=- wrote:+10 here, this would be a very useful addition and I'm surprised the conditional borders code wasn't implemented with it as a default.

That does seem odd. I'm for this cuz it seems like the next logical step, but I'm also curious why it wasn't done in the first place.

The CBs where given when the foundry cartoes went on strike when we still had lack as the boss. This may of been a bit of a rushed job as we have had problems with them since. Labs map (first map with CBs) got locked to solve an issue and most maps since have also had problems which I think have all been solved now, touch wood.

Krazy Kingdoms has actually run into a problem with them recently. It seems there's some sort of problem with the code reading the XML in certain circumstances as an AND instead of OR when there's two conditional borders on the same territory.

what if?

Region A + Region B - will let you assault Region C from Region B (conditional border)

and

Region F + Region B - will let you bombard Region C from Region B (conditional bombardment)

could they coexist together?

Kabanellas wrote:what if?

Region A + Region B - will let you assault Region C from Region B (conditional border)

and

Region F + Region B - will let you bombard Region C from Region B (conditional bombardment)

could they coexist together?

My understanding based on something I read regarding Krazy Kingdoms when it was in development is the current code will have issues with what you've described above, aside from the bombardments obviously not being supported yet. I think dolomite was initially going to have two different conditional borders based off the same territory but the XML didn't end up supporting it. I could be wrong though, you may wish to get his feedback to confirm one way or another.

It's so unfortunate this will never be implemented due to the powers to be focusing in on useless site "nice to have" updates just for the sake of change!!

isaiah40 wrote:It's so unfortunate this will never be implemented due to the powers to be focusing in on useless site "nice to have" updates just for the sake of change!!

isaiah40 wrote:It's so unfortunate this will never be implemented due to the powers to be focusing in on useless site "nice to have" updates just for the sake of change!!

I don't think that's true.

Right now bigWham's focus is on making improvements to attract and retain new users, but in the future almost any suggestion is possible.