Scripting problems

[Makanyane]

I'd realised a while ago about needing the export from SettlementTurnEnd (had temporarily forgotten - been round in so many circles)

but same thing applies to that so if its

monitor_event SettlementTurnEnd SettlementName Rajah
   and I_CompareCounter Rajah = 1
   and GarrisonSettlementRatio < 0.8
   and not SettlementBuildingExists > militia_barracks
  if I_SettlementOwner Rajah = vandals
      and I_FactionBesieged vandals
         set_counter Rajah 2
    	 console_command add_money vandals, 1000
         console_command create_unit Rajah "semin" 1
terminate_monitor
  end_if
end_monitor

it works

monitor_event SettlementTurnEnd SettlementName Rajah
   and I_CompareCounter Rajah = 1
   and GarrisonSettlementRatio < 0.8
  if I_SettlementOwner Rajah = vandals
      and not SettlementBuildingExists > militia_barracks
      and I_FactionBesieged vandals
         set_counter Rajah 2
    	 console_command add_money vandals, 1000
         console_command create_unit Rajah "semin" 1
terminate_monitor
  end_if
end_monitor

with building check moved inside 'if' doesn't work - so 'if' statement breaks link to the returned information from the event????

if that is general principle it might help explain other problems, as I've probably got ifs checking a lot more that they are meant to be, I was trying to reduce monitors by having more things as ifs inside, might not be the way to go!

[Bardo]

'if' statement breaks link to the returned information from the event?

Yes. The information returned by the event is only used by the conditions of the event (the main condition plus the additional "and" lines).
With "if" statments you can only use conditions that starts by "I_", because they do not need any reference.

I agree it seems you win some efficiency in the scripts when you reduce the monitor conditions by using "ifs" instead, because the "if" is only checked when all the other conditions are true.
However, I guess that the conditions of the monitor are also checked in order, I mean that the 2nd condition should not be checked if the first is already false (this is how they usually work in other programing languages). If this is true, I suggest to place the conditions that are easy to check first, and conditions harder to be checked at the bottom. Although I have not verified it.

[Squid]

Not quite, most programing/scripting language make a choice about they want their language to "shortcut" and/or connectors by default, which only evaluate extra conditions if required.

Take VB for example it doesn't use shortcut connectors if you use a simple OR between condition, you need to use ORELSE in order for it to shortcut the condition after it. Meanwhile c/c++ users are typically taught to use the shortcut && and || by default. So really it may or may not be impelemented as a shortcut connector and unless you check you really don't know.

[Makanyane]

thanks for responses

though Squid, you lost me after first paragraph!

Re Red Spot's earlier question

also GarrisonSettlementRatio < 0.8, does that work??

not so sure it does now, it seemed to be when I first tested it but have gone back to test on a simple end of settlement turn trigger and it now doesn't seem to be doing anything.

EDIT: think we might be using the wrong bit for that docudemon entry is

Identifier: GarrisonToPopulationRatio
Trigger requirements: settlement
Parameters:
Sample use: GarrisonSettlementRatio > 0.35
Description: Calculate the ratio of soldiers to civilians
Battle or Strat: Strat
Class: GARRISON_TO_POPULATION_RATIO
Implemented: Yes
Author: Guy

writing it as

and GarrisonToPopulationRatio < 0.1

definitely works and goes on straightforward ratio, eg: if population is 5000 that will only trigger if less than 500 men are in the garrison troops.

.....goes away to re-design script again......

EDIT 2: just realised; that makes most sorts of calculation useless unless you also set it according to which unit size user is using.

[BozosLiveHere]

That's why we have the UnitSize trait and scripts in EB. Check our campaign_script to see how we handle it.

[Dol Guldur]

Might as well post this here - does anyone know how to create a new advisor message that will appear without having to click the advisor portrait first? I've never really looked into this area much. Everything works fine, but that advisor will not open automatically. If I change the verbosity to anything other than 0 it does not appear at all when triggered...I just cannot see any difference between my version and those that do open automatically...

I will post the code if necessary.

[Monkwarrior]

Might as well post this here - does anyone know how to create a new advisor message that will appear without having to click the advisor portrait first? I've never really looked into this area much. Everything works fine, but that advisor will not open automatically. If I change the verbosity to anything other than 0 it does not appear at all when triggered...I just cannot see any difference between my version and those that do open automatically...

I will post the code if necessary.

I have the same problem, but sometimes the message is open and sometime (the most) not. From my experience it seems to me that it is not possible to do it when the advisor appears at the faction turn start, and I feel that it is due to some interference of the incoming faction messages (the images falling from the top). When the advisor appears directly after some event or circumstances (city captured, for example) then the message appears with the typical simulate click orders.