EDU-matic: Automatic unit balance/EDU generation system

[LegionaryCohort]

Could it be that the Round function is actually defined as Round(double,double,int)? I haven't looked at the source code yet, but that would explain why the compiler has issues here...

LegionaryCohort

[Aradan]

Nah, Round is defined as "Round(Number, [NumDigitsAFterDecimal as Long])", at least in Excel '03 and '10, which I've been working on.

Where did you get that function definition?

[LegionaryCohort]

Truth be told, I was just guessing

Anyways, that would definetly explain the issue, since it says could not find Round(int,int,int). I'll see wether I can fix it myself...

LegionaryCohort

[fightermedic]

hi there
i've run into a strange problem and need help
regardless of what i define in the armour tab, the edu-matic always spits out arm-ug-lvl1 as 0 arm-ug-lvl2 as 1 arm-ug-lvl3 as 2 and arm-ug-lvl4 as 3
could you look into it? not sure if i'm doing something wrong or if this is a bug
here is the file:

[Aradan]

Is this with the latest version I sent you? If so, that's by request of that certain mod team.

[fightermedic]

yea it's with that version, i see why they would want it that way when they are using armour upgrades for unit reforms
thanks for the information

oh and while i'm at it, a little reminder: don't forget to add custom attributes and legion names for the next version

[Aradan]

It's on my to-do list.

[fightermedic]

greetings aradan
might i request a small change that should only require a very small fraction of your valuable time to implement?
would it be possible for you to allow negative armour values for horse types?
i'd very much like to be able to have them for unarmoured horses (with 0 armour as a minimum if the overall unit armour would be negative of course)
thank you

and a second idea for the future:
shouldn't armour reduce the defense value like shields do? if you ever find the time to implement that, it would be most awesome it shouldn't even be too terribly difficult to implement, since it only should require one more column in the amour material section
(or if you feel like everything short of perfection is not worth your time: additionally to the above, one more line besides Bodypart Coverage Importance and Bodypart Coverage Weight could be added, this could be called Bodypart defense handicap or somthing like that, in this case the armour material should modify how much % of the handicap applies with the most heavy material allowing the full modifier... (e.g. full plate armour for shoulders -> big handicap to defense - but the material is only hardened leather -> negative modifier somewhat reduced)
keep on rocking

[Aradan]

greetings aradan
might i request a small change that should only require a very small fraction of your valuable time to implement?
would it be possible for you to allow negative armour values for horse types?
i'd very much like to be able to have them for unarmoured horses (with 0 armour as a minimum if the overall unit armour would be negative of course)
thank you

Will do.

and a second idea for the future:
shouldn't armour reduce the defense value like shields do? if you ever find the time to implement that, it would be most awesome it shouldn't even be too terribly difficult to implement, since it only should require one more column in the amour material section
(or if you feel like everything short of perfection is not worth your time: additionally to the above, one more line besides Bodypart Coverage Importance and Bodypart Coverage Weight could be added, this could be called Bodypart defense handicap or somthing like that, in this case the armour material should modify how much % of the handicap applies with the most heavy material allowing the full modifier... (e.g. full plate armour for shoulders -> big handicap to defense - but the material is only hardened leather -> negative modifier somewhat reduced)
keep on rocking

That is already factored in. Armour adds mass (depending on the mass of the material and the coverage weight of the bodypart) and for every point of extra mass, the defence skill is decreased by a certain factor (cell C33). So heavily armoured troops get defence penalties. By decreasing the "ExtraMassPerSkill" value, you increase the penalty for each point of mass.

[fightermedic]

That is already factored in. Armour adds mass (depending on the mass of the material and the coverage weight of the bodypart) and for every point of extra mass, the defence skill is decreased by a certain factor (cell C33). So heavily armoured troops get defence penalties. By decreasing the "ExtraMassPerSkill" value, you increase the penalty for each point of mass.

indeed? oh
i did think that something like this might be the case but couldn't figure out how it works
thanks for changing the horse armour thing!

[fightermedic]

bug alert!

ElseIf CatCategoryName = "Handler" Or CatCategoryName = "Special"

the underlined part was missing in recruitment and upkeep cost calculation... creating irritating type missmatch errors when creating handler units.. nasty nasty bug

[Aradan]

Thank you, fixed all instances of "CatCategoryName" where "Name" was missing.

[Kylan271]

I am stuck on defining upper and lower back parts of the body. Is lower back from the hips to shoulder blades,and upper from shoulder blades to neck??? How do you define them? Appreciate your work!!!

[Aradan]

What you said, more or less, though the specifics are up to you. You can give lower back a smaller coverage percentage value and have it mean the very lowest part of the back, or give it a high coverage value and have it mean 3/4 of the whole back, etc.

[Kylan271]

Appreciate the swift reply. I understand I can assign values according to what I define body coverage wise,but had to know what your values were based on? It is dependant on the one who assigns the data,in this case yourself.

In the core data of EDU basic,they have variables,ie hardy value(1) etc,how are they assigned to unit costs? Is that a multiplier or added 'cost per man'(5) etc?

[Aradan]

Yes, it is dependent on the one doing the assignment, though there are obviously some 'logical rules'.

Atm attributes like hardy etc do not add to the unit cost, cost is determined by armour, weapons, class, category, cultural/factional bonus etc. The attributes resulting from unit specialities are considered bonuses.

[Kylan271]

Wow you are faster than a bear into a honey jar...^_* . I understand how they are assigned now,thanks. I thought they added cost.

I am trying to adapt your EDU data to RoN mod. If these variables were a cost add on,how would best they be assigned?

[Aradan]

The 'fairest' way to do it, if you wanted to penalise someone for being able to recruit units with such attributes would be to have a cost multiplier for each attribute, eg being 'hardy' would add 5 percent to the total unit cost, etc. The unit cost already includes everything else (unit size, skill, etc).

[Kylan271]

Ok,appreciated.


Updating a query

Just noticed Camels are missing?????? I have not worked on camels until now and found oopsie....not there.

Secondly the Sagaris/Pick,hmmm possible a sica/1h axe cross? 3atk/3chg/1def ,Y(ap) as example?

[iluvatar77]

greetings
is it possible to use EDU-matic to modify the eEDU of a mod? or only for the vanilla EDU?