Event, Monarch and Leader Tag ranges

[Jester]

I dont think a renumbering is needed. Ideally we should stick with the system that paradox uses, but just assign additional ranges to be used by the different tags and such. While this would result in numbers for one country not all being numerically in order it would make things much easier. In addition it makes it much easier to reference original paradox events when they still have their original numbers. We don't need to reinvent the wheel, just add onto it and then keep track of these numbers and be consistent.

Late,
Jester

 

[Norrefeldt]

I dont think a renumbering is needed. Ideally we should stick with the system that paradox uses, but just assign additional ranges to be used by the different tags and such. While this would result in numbers for one country not all being numerically in order it would make things much easier. In addition it makes it much easier to reference original paradox events when they still have their original numbers. We don't need to reinvent the wheel, just add onto it and then keep track of these numbers and be consistent.

Agree.

Saying that renumbering WILL cause problems is far too strong.

It is not, it WILL cause problems. I have put work from all modders present in this forum into EEP, and no one that I know of can write 200 lines of code without at least one error, even if they are careful. That goes even for the veterans, Isaac Brock, Twoflower, Garbon, Sun_Zi_36, Jinnai, former EEP-Inquisitor Crook, and myself If we do this, and I'm certainly not the one to decide, we have to be aware of this.

 

[unmerged(15559)]

It is not, it WILL cause problems. I have put work from all modders present in this forum into EEP, and no one that I know of can write 200 lines of code without at least one error, even if they are careful. That goes even for the veterans, Isaac Brock, Twoflower, Garbon, Sun_Zi_36, Jinnai, former EEP-Inquisitor Crook, and myself If we do this, and I'm certainly not the one to decide, we have to be aware of this.

Is so!

Seriously, I pretty much broke down how it could be implemented without major problems. The work itself is simple, and any problems caused would be minor and easy to fix when compared to adding new events. It would take a long boring amount of time, and one would have to give it the same level of dedication as a paying job. Now, do I think we have the level of commitment and dedication to meet the conditions error free? No, that's why I went to the trouble of spelling it out. In some ways it would take more effort than the merger itself. And furthermore, I know it can be done because I've done similar work before (monthly)! Its a royal pain in the ass, that's why I ended up hiring a contractor to write a database, so I wouldn't have to do that crap anymore! So there! Rant Over!

Now that I've got that out of my system, can we do it? Yes we can. Would the required investment be worthy of the return? I don't think so.

I will now meditate on page 17 of the Karma Sutra to purge myself of these negative energies. "Lets see...I need to place my right leg at a 45 degree angle to..."

 

[unmerged(2456)]

You're correct...no one can write that many lines of code without an error...but no one is writing lines of code...just replacing numbers....after doing all the current monarch and leader ranges, all one needs to do is go through the events searching for "monarch" or "leader"..if they find one, check which country it belongs to, check the old number then referance that to the new number and replace.

And paradox's system was haphazard...it was done on a first come fist appointed serries which creates some files with huge lists and some with none at all hardly, which isn't fair and not always accurate...it also makes huge problems if when we drop those tags in favor of new ones, which we have done and are likely to do again.

And I have started renumbering and if no one else keeps it up, i intend to.

All i need is to know which new monarchs leaders are in from the last AGCEEP release if each country choses not to update it themselves (but i do need to know right now as since i'm working on it now, i'm the one who's writiting the new more easily designed standard)....

FE i know the beta release for 1,07 added new leaders for portugal...are those already in AGCEEP or not?

Or if we get the fantasy granda events done before the nest release, a new list of monarchs would be nice...don't worry...if its not done by this release it will be before the non-beta release of AGCEEP is done, if i can atleast know the changes or if they're willing to do them thereselves...i will post the unused ids from each range as i finish sections...i'm up to AUV now, but i have a problem as i don't know what the backup file is for................

 

[unmerged(15559)]

So the Pure Evil Genius squares off against the Undertaker...this is beginning to get a Pro-Wrestling feel to it. :rofl:

I'm beginning to see signs of motivational leadership here. Perhaps Norrefeldt is trying to get us up in arms, so someone will come forward with a finished product, just to spite him.

 

[Norrefeldt]

So the Pure Evil Genius squares off against the Undertaker...this is beginning to get a Pro-Wrestling feel to it. :rofl:

Indeed I'll soon show you my special trick, it's called 'Writing database menace' and is a REAL pain, slow and monotonous..
I'm just pushing Jinnai, spuring him to get it done, for the pleasure of showing me it can be done!!!

 

[unmerged(2456)]

Anyways, what are the backup leader and monarch files for?

 

[Norrefeldt]

A suggestion for the leaders: since there are 58500 numbers left, we could move everything above Paradox range, it's up to 20.000, that would save a lot of work.

PS. Just got a bug report for a wrong ID in Havard's Anjou sequence, I made him renumber all fifty events, and this was the second or third ID typo. He's hardly a novice scripter... (So you know what you are up against Jinnai )

 

[unmerged(6159)]

It is not, it WILL cause problems. I have put work from all modders present in this forum into EEP, and no one that I know of can write 200 lines of code without at least one error, even if they are careful. That goes even for the veterans, Isaac Brock, Twoflower, Garbon, Sun_Zi_36, Jinnai, former EEP-Inquisitor Crook, and myself If we do this, and I'm certainly not the one to decide, we have to be aware of this.

As Tarleton has pointed out, with complete change logs and version control, and all the other software development infrastructure this can be easily avoided. But it's a royal pain in the neck, as I'm sure Jinnai can attest if he's started logging all of the renumbering changes he has made.

I don't think a renumbering is needed. Ideally we should stick with the system that paradox uses, but just assign additional ranges to be used by the different tags and such. While this would result in numbers for one country not all being numerically in order it would make things much easier. In addition it makes it much easier to reference original paradox events when they still have their original numbers. We don't need to reinvent the wheel, just add onto it and then keep track of these numbers and be consistent.

This is a great summary, and I agree heartily.

 

[unmerged(2456)]

Isaac Brook:
Like i said, that can cause problems in a dynamic tag-changing eviroment.

But now to the point of this post. Which country is AUV? There are monarchs for Sulu and Magindanao, but the tag is reserved for Bajpur.

 

[Jester]

I really don't think we should be renumbering everything. This is going to cause numerous small bugs, and some sort of conversion chart will need to be maintained so that whenever Paradox changes any event/leader/monarch in the Vanilla version we can figure out which one it is in our version.
I agree that a more cohesive system would be nice, but unless Paradox renumbers the Vanilla version in the same manner I really don't think a complete renumbering should be implemented.

Why not organize the numbers range after the paradox numbers instead ? that way we keep the Vanilla versions ID numbers in place but just add on them with the unused numbers that we have systematically organized. This seems like it would be the best compromise.

I know Jinnai said he would be working on this and I beleive he has the Monarchs renumbered, and I applaud his effort and determination, but he is running in to realizing that all the events with sleep and wake monarch commands have to be changed. This is quite a bit of work with much room for bugs to pop up. When he gets to renumbering event files he will run into many many issues with events that trigger other event#s being changed.

If it really comes down to it, I think this should be voted on, and not approved just because Jinnai wants to do the work. If only for the reason that we would not have common reference numbers to compare to the Vanilla version.

Late,
Jester

 

[richvh]

I really don't think we should be renumbering everything. This is going to cause numerous small bugs, and some sort of conversion chart will need to be maintained so that whenever Paradox changes any event/leader/monarch in the Vanilla version we can figure out which one it is in our version.
I agree that a more cohesive system would be nice, but unless Paradox renumbers the Vanilla version in the same manner I really don't think a complete renumbering should be implemented.

Why not organize the numbers range after the paradox numbers instead ? that way we keep the Vanilla versions ID numbers in place but just add on them with the unused numbers that we have systematically organized. This seems like it would be the best compromise.

I know Jinnai said he would be working on this and I beleive he has the Monarchs renumbered, and I applaud his effort and determination, but he is running in to realizing that all the events with sleep and wake monarch commands have to be changed. This is quite a bit of work with much room for bugs to pop up. When he gets to renumbering event files he will run into many many issues with events that trigger other event#s being changed.

If it really comes down to it, I think this should be voted on, and not approved just because Jinnai wants to do the work. If only for the reason that we would not have common reference numbers to compare to the Vanilla version.

Late,
Jester

Not to take anything from Jinnai, but I'm the one who completely renumbered the monarch files over the weekend, and am working on the monarch references in the events (about 1/3 through those.) I'm not touching event numbers, just monarch numbers, so your last point in the next-to-last paragraph is a non-issue. Just having renumbered monarch files helped Zan Thrax get past a consistent CTD in his Aragon AAR.

Why did Jinnai's renumbering scheme get stickied if it wasn't official?

 

[Jester]

Not to take anything from Jinnai, but I'm the one who completely renumbered the monarch files over the weekend, and am working on the monarch references in the events (about 1/3 through those.) I'm not touching event numbers, just monarch numbers, so your last point in the next-to-last paragraph is a non-issue. Just having renumbered monarch files helped Zan Thrax get past a consistent CTD in his Aragon AAR.

Why did Jinnai's renumbering scheme get stickied if it wasn't official?

I am not sure why it got stickied, as it does not seem to be unanimously agreed upon at this point, and now it turns out that you are the one that is auctually redoing it so I don't see any reason that it should be stickied.

Sorry about giving credit to Jinnai Richvh, I got confused but you are the one embarking on this renumbering quest.

Those CTD that your renumbering fixed were quite possibly also fixed by me in my next patch release with just minimal ID# juggling as opposed to renumbering every monarch in the game.

So you are not planning to renumber the auctual events? just leaders and monarchs I guess?

Late,
Jester

 

[richvh]

I am not sure why it got stickied, as it does not seem to be unanimously agreed upon at this point, and now it turns out that you are the one that is auctually redoing it so I don't see any reason that it should be stickied.

Sorry about giving credit to Jinnai Richvh, I got confused but you are the one embarking on this renumbering quest.

Those CTD that your renumbering fixed were quite possibly also fixed by me in my next patch release with just minimal ID# juggling as opposed to renumbering every monarch in the game.

So you are not planning to renumber the auctual events? just leaders and monarchs I guess?

Late,
Jester

It seems that Jinnai started to do it, but I have no idea how far he got. I started renumbering them on my own using his stickied Monarch ID thread as a standard, then when I mentioned I was doing it on a thread here, he contacted me. I haven't commited to renumbering the leaders, and won't renumber events unless there is a standard to work to.

I have a copy of the savegame with the CTD, so either you can send me your changes or I can send you the savegame to see if your changes fix the CTD.

 

[unmerged(6159)]

I am not sure why it got stickied, as it does not seem to be unanimously agreed upon at this point, and now it turns out that you are the one that is auctually redoing it so I don't see any reason that it should be stickied.

There's at least 3 of us opposed to renumbering the Paradox monarchs.

 

[unmerged(2456)]

Yes there were a few people opposed to renumbering them. but most seemed indifferent....

 

[unmerged(2456)]

And yes richvh deserves a lot of credit for renumbering stuff...the monarch section is much harder than the leader section, but ultimatly will still be easier than renumbering events which REALLY do need to be redone more than anything.

 

[richvh]

And yes richvh deserves a lot of credit for renumbering stuff...the monarch section is much harder than the leader section, but ultimatly will still be easier than renumbering events which REALLY do need to be redone more than anything.

Whether or not my work ultimately gets used, I'm turning up bugs in events while searching for monarchs to replace. (See the thread Monarchs that I started.) Outstanding issues:

1. In the Fantasy Byzantine events file, two monarch IDs not in the vanilla monarchs.byz, are referenced, but there is no AGCEEP specific monarch byz.
2. In the Albania specific events file, there's a wakemonarch for Hassan Bey that is commented out because the ID is left as xxx. Hassan Bey is in the AGCEEP monarchs.alb file, but I don't know enough about Albanian history to know if his ID should be inserted and the line uncommented.
3. In the England specific events file, in the Glorious Revolution event, the wakemonarchs and sleepmonarchs are taken from a mix of monarchs.eng and monarchs.sco. (for the Stuart pretenders, James II and James III (the Old Pretender) from monarchs.eng are slept, and Charles III, Henry IX(? not sure of regnal # in scotland file) and Edgar Francis from monarchs.sco are slept; for the historical branch, William III and Anne are woken from monarchs.eng, George I is woken from monarchs.sco, and George II and George III are slept (!) from monarchs.sco.

Oh, and if my work isn't going to be used, then Jinnai's Monarch ID list should be replaced with one that lists all assigned ID ranges, and which tag they belong to.

 

[richvh]

There's at least 3 of us opposed to renumbering the Paradox monarchs.

Isaac, I'm not quite sure what you mean here. Do you mean "never change the ID of a monarch from what Paradox assigned" or "don't make changes to the monarch files in the Paradox monarch folder"? If the latter, I agree, as doing so would make the vanilla game buggy. What I did for monarch files not already in the AGCEEP distribution, where they existed in the vanilla distribution, was to make copies of them in the AGCEEP folder and renumber the copies.

 

[unmerged(6159)]

What I meant was that all of the monarch IDs assigned by Paradox should be left alone - they should remain assigned to whoever Paradox assigned them. This means that we will not have to have copies of monarch files that have not been altered in the mod, we can use the Paradox files and not worry about ID conflicts. Whether we renumber monarchs with Paradox IDs in files that have been changed is a matter of much less concern to me, although I still think it's not a great idea. (They could be referenced in future Paradox events). Renumbering monarchs who do not exist in the Paradox files seems like a good thing to do (to me).