Traits that are bugged in 1.2 with fixes. Part 1: Scarred, Farmer, Trader

[player1]

player 1, are you the guy from the civ forums that made the patch suggestion mod?

yes

[therother]

Okay, using the rules (in this order) that I think Zrave is suggesting above:

1. If (bug, Fix) = (1,2), then (bug, Fix) reset to (0,0)
2. Parse battlemap triggers - no trait if Bug = 1
3. If Bug = 1 then Fix = 2
4. If Bug = 0, then Bug = 1)

And (1,2) is the maximum level for (Bug, Fix)...

If so, then these are the outcomes I expect from a few senarios:


If this is accurate, then I'm much happier. Although it is still penalising the AI, as the AI will normally fight far more A/Cs than the player. My preference, given the current situation with the AI, would be to penalise the player in situations such as this.

[player1]

Consdering that scarred is buggy for autocalc, maybe something like this could be a quick-patch

;------------------------------------------
Trigger battle1
WhenToTest PostBattle

Condition GeneralHPLostRatioinBattle < 0.7
and GeneralHPLostRatioinBattle > 0

Affects BattleScarred 1 Chance 30
Affects Brave 1 Chance 15

;------------------------------------------


Added GeneralHPLostRatioinBattle > 0 prevents getting Scarred in autocalc battles in which general didn't got injured at all. Same condition for manual cointrolled battles is not problem considering that general would be dead, for =0 anyway.

[player1]

Actually, when I think about it GeneralHPLostRatioinBattle > 0.15 is probably the best option.

For autocalc that means generals which lost more then 1hp.

7hp*0.15=1.05
9hp*0.15=1.35
11hp*0.15=1.65
13hp*0.15=1.95

That should leave enough room for autocalc to award scarred not to often.

For manual battles that just means that general which have 1hp left won't get checked for scarred trait (no big deal).

[Zrave]

I ran a test of the scarred bug player1 has just described and he's right on the money. So much for the theory that the double trigger bug was due to a "battle" pass and a "strat" pass, the autocalc engine uses its own ruleset.

My test was as such:

trait1 -> GeneralHPLostRatioinBattle > 0

trait2 -> GeneralHPLostRatioinBattle < 1

A tactical battle without general engaging gave me two points of trait1 and no trait2. the same battle with autocalc gave me no trait1 and one point of trait2. This means there was no engagement, because for only trait2 to be awarded the ratio had to be exactly 0, which by the tactical ruleset would mean dead.

As for fixing it, how about this:

;------------------------------------------
Trigger scarred1
WhenToTest PostBattle

Condition GeneralHPLostRatioinBattle < 0.3
and GeneralNumKillsInBattle > 6

Affects Battlescarred 1 Chance 100

;------------------------------------------
Trigger scarred2
WhenToTest PostBattle

Condition GeneralHPLostRatioinBattle > 0.7
and GeneralNumKillsInBattle > 6

Affects Battlescarred 1 Chance 100

[player1]

;------------------------------------------
Trigger scarred1
WhenToTest PostBattle

Condition GeneralHPLostRatioinBattle < 0.3
and GeneralNumKillsInBattle > 6

Affects Battlescarred 1 Chance 100

;------------------------------------------
Trigger scarred2
WhenToTest PostBattle

Condition GeneralHPLostRatioinBattle > 0.7
and GeneralNumKillsInBattle > 6

Affects Battlescarred 1 Chance 100

100% chance?
No thanks

Personnaly, I think that my variant
0.15 < GeneralHPLostRatioinBattle < 0.7
is just closer to the rules.
Barely changes things for manual, while making autocalc don't give weird results.

[Zrave]

the 100 chance is a typo left over from my testing triggers, again a victim of no edit button and not willing to double post. Of course it would be reduced to 30% as usual.

The triggers work like this:

In battle mode, trigger 1 will go off like we would want it to in a normal scenario. Trigger 2 will likely never go off unless the general can get X kills, in the proposed case 6, without losing at least 30% of his health - I viewed this scenario as unlikely, but the numbers may need adjustment.

In autocalc mode, the reverse is true. Trigger 2 will go off like we would want it to, and trigger 1 will likely never go off.

Another important thing is that the two triggers will never go off simultaneously, so you can't "double" up.

My proposition has two faults:

1) The unlikely case your scenario can rack up a high number of kills without losing much HP, he'll get battlescarred, and if we can adjust that number to satisfaction I'm willing to live with the ocasional fluke.

2) If your general gets severely hurt but never reaches the desired number of kills, he won't get scarred even though we would want him to.

That being so, I think that it is a viable alternative to your proposition, to be compared and contrasted for a consensus solution.