loyal icon

[TL]

Well, really, since the only loyal units are ones that are put there by scenario designers no there's not much implementation actually required. If you've got an icon for it there's nothing stopping you from adding it to loyal units. (Still, I agree this would be a cool addition to mainline campaigns as well).

[vicza]

Well, really, since the only loyal units are ones that are put there by scenario designers no there's not much implementation actually required. If you've got an icon for it there's nothing stopping you from adding it to loyal units.

But still, there can be some problem, because creating of loyal units is not unified.

So, if it's just loyal unit, w/o any other traits, macro LOYAL_UNIT is used.

If he has some other traits, it's setting explicitly:

Code: Select all

        [unit]
            description=Haldiel
            user_description= _ "Haldiel"
            type=Horseman
            x=23
            y=24
            side=1
            [modifications]
                {TRAIT_LOYAL}
                {TRAIT_STRONG}
            [/modifications]
        [/unit]

Besides, enemies can have loyal units using the same LOYAL_UNIT macro:

Code: Select all

 {LOYAL_UNIT 2 (Sea Orc) 16 18 (Bugg) ( _ "Bugg")}

and I doubt they need any "loyal-icon" -- let enemy leaders care of them themselves.

vicza: something in bronze without anything extra was made by megane earlier in the tread.

Indeed, it was. And summarizing all of them, I'd say, I'd prefer his one (the Haldiel has) or yours one the thief (next to Kalenz) has.

[turin]

The obvious solution : the {LOYAL_UNIT } macro should be abolished. It is an abomination.

[vicza]

It is an abomination.

Why?

[turin]

Why?

Because I don't think macros shouldn't be used to replace one tag. Don't use a macro to make a unit, just use the [unit] tag. It makes it clearer what you're doing.

Plus using macros all the time just encourages sloppy WML - I've seen someone use {UNIT } to create a unit, then store the unit (using {STORE_UNIT }, of course!), give him traits (with another macro)*, and then unstore the unit. That expanded to about 100 lines of WML. Just using the [unit] tag would have been about 10.

Macros just make the code seem shorter, they don't actually make it shorter. That's my main problem with them. If you want your code to just look shorter, do this:

Code: Select all

[unit]
side,type,x,y,description,unit_description=2, Sea Orc, 16, 18, Bugg, _"Bugg"
[/unit]

It has the same effect (and is just as clear, if not more) while not encouraging idiotic macro usage like I described above.

*: Actually I don't remember exactly what they did - I think it was give traits, but I'm not sure. In any case, it was something that was trivial to do inside a [unit] tag.

[Lim-Dul]

By the way - is it just me or is the heart icon - nice as is is - a bit off to the right?

[Iris]

Why?

Because I don't think macros shouldn't be used to replace one tag. Don't use a macro to make a unit, just use the [unit] tag. It makes it clearer what you're doing.

Plus using macros all the time just encourages sloppy WML - I've seen someone use {UNIT } to create a unit, then store the unit (using {STORE_UNIT }, of course!), give him traits (with another macro)*, and then unstore the unit. That expanded to about 100 lines of WML. Just using the [unit] tag would have been about 10.

Macros just make the code seem shorter, they don't actually make it shorter. That's my main problem with them. If you want your code to just look shorter, do this:

Code: Select all

[unit]
side,type,x,y,description,unit_description=2, Sea Orc, 16, 18, Bugg, _"Bugg"
[/unit]

It has the same effect (and is just as clear, if not more) while not encouraging idiotic macro usage like I described above.

*: Actually I don't remember exactly what they did - I think it was give traits, but I'm not sure. In any case, it was something that was trivial to do inside a [unit] tag.

There is a simpler solution:

Code: Select all

{LOYAL_UNIT (Foobar Lord) (King Foobar) ( _ "King Foobar") 1 10 10}
[+modifications]
    {TRAIT_RESILIENT}
[/modifications]

[JAP]

By the way - is it just me or is the heart icon - nice as is is - a bit off to the right?

Yes it is, you have god eyes to notice
I made it so because of the strange irregular form the orb thingy has.
If you try to position something that small in dead center in front of it, a couple of pixels from the orb will show up on the right side but none on the left,
so i thought the best solution was to shift it one pixel to the right.

[turin]

There is a simpler solution:

Code: Select all

{LOYAL_UNIT (Foobar Lord) (King Foobar) ( _ "King Foobar") 1 10 10}
[+modifications]
    {TRAIT_RESILIENT}
[/modifications]

Does that work? I wouldn't have expected

Code: Select all

[unit]
(stuff)
    [modifications]
    (more stuff)
    [/modifications]
[/unit]
[+modifications]
(even more stuff)
[/modifications]

To have the same effect as

Code: Select all

[unit]
(stuff)
    [modifications]
    (more and even more stuff)
    [/modifications]
[/unit]

[JAP]

Its starting to feel like am spamming these but there quite fun to make
In this one i used a different solution so the heart is centered.

vicza: In this one i tried to use the best from meganes picture and the best from that of my hearts you liked.
I am quite happy whit this one

[mihoshi]

So far I liked a simple "minus" icon most. It looks cool and in theme with crowns.

Btw, loyal mark can be made in "stealth" way, so it will not noticed by those that doesn;t know what too look for For example, loyal units get a black border around movement orb.

As for macros, is it possible to make a WML, that browses through all units and adds repsective trait icons to them?

[Iris]

...

Indeed my code doesn't work. Here is the correct code:

Code: Select all

{LOYAL_UNIT (Foobar Lord) (King Foobar) ( _ "King Foobar") 1 10 10}
[+unit]
    [+modifications]
        {TRAIT_RESILIENT}
    [/modifications]
[/unit]

As for macros, is it possible to make a WML, that browses through all units and adds repsective trait icons to them?

Of course, but that would cause useless run-time load. It's plain better to stick to the [unit] declaration/appending syntax when creating units:

Code: Select all

{LOYAL_UNIT (Foobar Duke) (Duke Foobar) ( _ "Duke Foobar") 1 11 11}
[+unit]
    overlays=misc/loyal-icon.png
[/unit]

[unit]
    type=Foobar Count
    description=Foobar Count
    user_description= _ "Foobar Count"
    x,y=12,12
    side=1
    overlays=misc/loyal-icon.png
[/unit]

At the moment LOYAL_UNIT doesn't enforce any specific icon, by the way.