DANG IT UBER YOU BROKE EVERYTHING

Sorry stuart, I'm going to have to agree with everything that Sorian has said in this thread so far. You should have worked off of the PTE. Also going off on a rant of sorts (Joke or not) in the general discussion about your mod being broken just seems a tad bit silly.

I dunno about you all but I just make the mod crash and blame someones else his mod. Way easier....

Imagine what community relations would be like if the devs did this.

"DANG IT COMMUNITY, UR VIDEO CARDS KEEP FREEZING"
"WHY DID YOU PAY FOR SO MANY KICKSTARTER GOALS???"
"COMMUNITY YOUR ABUSING VANGUARDS, STAHP"
"STOP FLAMING YOURSELVES"
"OUR SERVERS ARE CRASHING WHAT HAVE YOU DONE?"

Eh, to be honest, I agree with their change, and just wish they implemented it when they first added it to the game long ago in the proper place which they now moved it to.

Just gotta deal with it. Meh. Now after I am done recording some games, I need to completely rebuild my mod from a fresh install and using cmd to isolate .jsons all anew.

What change? What?

Make better dev tools, then you can update all your mod's jsons quickly.

took me all of... a second... to rebuild anti-popcorn.

takes way longer getting it onto github and to PAMM. Maybe I should automate that too...

Maybe you should publish your tools. I know how to go about making one, but its more work for me than probably just remodding, as I run that cmd to build a new blank mod REALLY fast...

Look at the new vanilla build. The .jsons for fabricators. Their "can assist other blueprints" has been moved from the units .json to it's tool (buildarm) .json. I am unsure of others, but if you do a forum search, a list of things got moved. I will try to edit this when I find it.

btfo

Way ahead of you

https://forums.uberent.com/threads/jsonshadow-tool.63320/

It is geared towards mods that are frequently rebuilt (I rebuild anti-popcorn every time there is a balance change, which lately there has been a LOT), and it does have its limitations. I'm actually in the process of building a far more sophisticated tool for this kind of stuff, but it won't be ready probably for a couple months thanks to university interference.

I think cola_colin built a similar tool as well that, while a bit more verbose, is probably less finicky.

edit: @cola_colin 's TransformPA https://forums.uberent.com/threads/rel-transformpa-a-tool-to-generate-balance-mods.65525/

My code-oriented ones https://forums.uberent.com/threads/grunt-init-mod-templates.56862/ You can look at the git repos for almost any of my server mods to see examples of how they are used.

Well this explains a lot. TY

right, but clearly if you remove or change the reclaim_type or assist_layer field, the server should reject the json and load instead the vanilla one no?

So why are commanders not able to reclaim stuff on ladder games?

This thread appears to be a touch more dickish in tone than usual; lets not fall into LoL or EVE:Online territory here , please?

@sorian @jables @tvinita :- I think I remember jables mentioning some specifics, such as save/load, that did not receive as much the testing you would have liked during the PTE stage. I'd be quite happy gathering up a "dedicated" group for testing any new features, if that would be any use to you?

So basically, now build arms have the assist layer tags and can assist buildable items tags, and not the unit itself.

Also, multiple projectile weapons are now controlled by a"projectiles_per" tag, and weapons using it now use multiple muzzles like the alternating variants. All units basically now have 1 tool and multiple muzzles, instead of multiple tools to accomplish simultaneous fire.

Because the lack of a field doesn't invalidate it's format and reading. It simply interprets lack of a mention of it, as a default-no or such. maybe it should default to yes in the engine as expected behavior by default would be to assist? @sorian

projectiles_per_fire. It's not required, grenadiers and gunships (at least) still use multiple copies. But since neither are favored right now they don't cause load problems.

Oh, no I meant in the engine, to assume no field means true by default or... or maybe it defaults to false because it expects a field to allow it in the first place.... idk...

...but either way, I didn't mean to make by default all of them. I meant to make the game where having no fields specifying assistance allows assistance. If you didn't want assistance to be possible, you would include that tag, but some mods don't have it and the expected normal behavior is to be able to assist anyway.

If that is too difficult to change, I can understand though. To be honest, the next best thing is to change the base_build_arm .json only to assist:true or whatever. If there is a base build arm. Come to think of it, I don't think there is. Meh. Stuart could just use fresh files and quit his whiney whining...

Them toys.... You gotta keep an eye on them....