Page 1 of 1

Why did you take away OR logic?!!!

Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2022 2:59 pm
by mordachai
For a glorious, if brief time, your engine managed to support OR -

I could specify that a tech needed 2 of 4 links to make it viable, and it worked!

Now we're back to "everything needs everything" :'(

So much smarter to have:
1. OR logic
2. NOT logic

NOT would BE AMAZING at being able to say "exclude the following races from this tech node" -
As it is - having only AND logic and "exclusive" logic - i.e. "list of races for which this node is allowed" makes for a poorer game design and player experience.

We cannot make intricate, smart tech trees that can help the AI be less dumb (by excluding them from techs that they normally shouldn't have, e.g. if they have a good racial tech, they should NOT research the lesser alternatives -- which making those exclude them - would do the trick).

Re: Why did you take away OR logic?!!!

Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2022 7:17 pm
by Erik Rutins
We did not take it away. As far as I know, "2 of 4" is still quite possible and how the random tree is now working. There were some earlier bugs that were preventing it fully working as intended.

Re: Why did you take away OR logic?!!!

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2022 1:35 am
by mordachai
Erik Rutins wrote: Mon Sep 26, 2022 7:17 pm We did not take it away. As far as I know, "2 of 4" is still quite possible and how the random tree is now working. There were some earlier bugs that were preventing it fully working as intended.
I guess I preferred the default to remain 1, rather than "all listed" (as it did briefly, in 1071).

I'm testing now if 1 of 2 works, and 2 of 4, and so on. Hopefully all of that does work properly.

Re: Why did you take away OR logic?!!!

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2022 12:48 pm
by Erik Rutins
mordachai wrote: Tue Sep 27, 2022 1:35 am
Erik Rutins wrote: Mon Sep 26, 2022 7:17 pm We did not take it away. As far as I know, "2 of 4" is still quite possible and how the random tree is now working. There were some earlier bugs that were preventing it fully working as intended.
I guess I preferred the default to remain 1, rather than "all listed" (as it did briefly, in 1071).

I'm testing now if 1 of 2 works, and 2 of 4, and so on. Hopefully all of that does work properly.
I'm really not sure what you're talking about. The data for research projects should allow you to define just 1 prerequisite path or more than one, as you wish.

Regards,

- Erik