Moderator: Cartographers
natty_dread wrote:I guess you could take a look at the XML guides, all the XML features should be listed there...
viewtopic.php?f=466&t=23382&start=0
Off the top of my head, the most notable things we have now are:
- Killer neutrals (territories that reset to neutral when held for 1 round)
- Losing conditions (territories you need to hold to stay in the game)
- Starting positions (you can set territories as starting positions)
- Reinforcement adjustments (adjust the usual 1 for 3 territories bonus)
DiM wrote:are triggers possible in the xml?
DiM wrote:if it's not possible now is there a chance it might be in the future? or are the xml updates dead in the gutter?
DiM wrote:i mean there's only been a single update in 2.5 years so things don't look that good...
DiM wrote:edit// one quick question about the supersize maps. what conditions does a map have to meet in order to qualify for a supersize exception?
does it need lots and lots of terits or can it have few terits but lots of beautiful artwork on the side?
DiM wrote:edit2// back to xml. random xml selection and random rules are possible?
for example a map might have several xml files and each time a game is initiated a random xml is chosen.
DiM wrote:edit3// i keep remembering things.
12-16 player games. still a dream or it might actually come true at some point in the future?
DiM wrote:hi, i've been gone for a long time and i've got no idea what updates (if any) have been done to the xml.
last time i was here great things were in discussion and from what i remember lack even promised to add some of the features requested by mapmakers.
where could i see a list of such xml features?
from what i remember bombardments and decay where the last things added.
DiM wrote:@natty. thanks for the answers. to be honest i'm rather disappointed as i'm unable to finish any of my old projects because of missing xml features
MrBenn wrote:DiM wrote:@natty. thanks for the answers. to be honest i'm rather disappointed as i'm unable to finish any of my old projects because of missing xml features
Which specific features were you hoping for? Hopefully lack will show the foundry some more XML-love in the coming months...
DiM wrote:MrBenn wrote:DiM wrote:@natty. thanks for the answers. to be honest i'm rather disappointed as i'm unable to finish any of my old projects because of missing xml features
Which specific features were you hoping for? Hopefully lack will show the foundry some more XML-love in the coming months...
a long long time ago there was a thread with xml suggestions. i posted there pretty much everything i wanted. i don't know if it still exists.
cairnswk wrote:DiM wrote:MrBenn wrote:DiM wrote:@natty. thanks for the answers. to be honest i'm rather disappointed as i'm unable to finish any of my old projects because of missing xml features
Which specific features were you hoping for? Hopefully lack will show the foundry some more XML-love in the coming months...
a long long time ago there was a thread with xml suggestions. i posted there pretty much everything i wanted. i don't know if it still exists.
DiM, i think this is the thread you're after.
viewtopic.php?f=127&t=103961&hilit=xml+modifications
DiM wrote:...
i'm actually talking about the original xml suggestion thread: http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=127&t=17885
cairnswk wrote:DiM wrote:...
i'm actually talking about the original xml suggestion thread: http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=127&t=17885
Good, you've found what you're looking for,
Victor Sullivan wrote:cairnswk wrote:DiM wrote:...
i'm actually talking about the original xml suggestion thread: http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=127&t=17885
Good, you've found what you're looking for,
It's a shame XML Modifications II doesn't have the nice approval process with the [Yes] [No] [Maybe] tags.
-Sully
DiM wrote:Victor Sullivan wrote:cairnswk wrote:DiM wrote:...
i'm actually talking about the original xml suggestion thread: http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=127&t=17885
Good, you've found what you're looking for,
It's a shame XML Modifications II doesn't have the nice approval process with the [Yes] [No] [Maybe] tags.
-Sully
what's really a shame is that almost none of the hopes and promises found in the initial thread have been fulfilled.
WidowMakers wrote:lol. welcome back DiM
Users browsing this forum: No registered users