Ranven said:
I wonder if this is possible to keep ladies for wood/high/dark elves and humans and dwarfs with exclusion the rest.
What I turn in last and what is in the final mod are likely to be two different things.
What I turned in is all I can comment on; anything else is speculation or gets pushed back, or someone considers it a fight.
I don't really have time for fighting; if they want it, its there, if not, its not my place to force it down anyone's throat.
I provided 2 and only 2 kingdoms ladies for
empire
not dwarf
High Elf
not chaos dwarf --> it looks like the skin for female dwarf will be removed and reassigned to something undetermined*
(or maybe just reserved for patch 1, to give more time for modeling)
Chaos but if Nameless feels its a role playing violation he can certainly remove them, but if so should adjust script_initialize_aristocracy accordingly
not Tomb Kings
not Lizardmen
not Night Goblins
Araby
not Orcs
Bretonnia
Dark Elves
not Skaven
Kislev
not Beastmen
Nippon
not Vampire Counts (as no female vampire skin exists as yet, although a virtual skin is reserved in the prejudice table if ever implemented)
Wood Elves
That's the 18 kingdoms that exist in game.
So if the old style was 20 ladies per kingdom, it used to need 360 kingdom ladies. Now it uses 18 kingdom ladies, but I had no permission to "waste" 18 heroes on ladies. It certainly was yet another source of friction. Perhaps 18 ladies is too many; perhaps it is enough. The main thing is to disable the script that drives courtship of NPC to NPC called from simple_triggers as a background task, so the other lords don't scoop up the now rare ladies and that script_initialize_aristocracy never assigns any of these as wives instead of sister/daughters that can be married off to the player.
I really wanted to see the rest of the team fight for diplomacy instead of considering it a sudden huge burden. I think if some of diplomacy is turned off, it won't bother the people that hate it and if that means something someone else likes wont be there, less harm is done. After all, the alternative was to have none of it at all, which is how it would go if there isnt consensus.
As for me, I can turn off as much of it as needed; its harder to enable something than disable it. For that matter, I could critique any number of things, but ultimately the only purpose to adding art, or code -- which is a special case of art, is to add something practical. Otherwise we should all play Native, and avoid changes to the game. I'm cool with putting fewer features in so long as what stays in is liked. If it leads to a great deal of contention I'm cool with walking the code away, some or all of it. Its not my mod.
EDIT: I've discussed with Nameless Warrior and I think we have a solution going forward to salvage the parts of Diplomacy that all the team liked while reducing the number of features that some of the team found problems with. I'm perfectly satisfied to not feel code has to be all or nothing, just like any other art has to be all or nothing. I am not the same category of art critic as some of the more volatile team members; if I'm plutonium at least sometimes I shine. Its not about me anyway; its about finding the right mix of capabilities, some of which were expected to have on/off toggles accessible by the user so they could customize their experience according to their willingness to take risk or sense of conservative "I don't trust changes".
Some things were delivered as place holders, and expected to demonstrate how a schema works, such as bandit spawns. As you'll recall, bandit spawns were not well working in 2016. Never forget that instead of complaining about the color of paint, a house first starts with primer. If not a house, than consider an automobile. We're not at war; I simply delivered all the code that needed to come
from me, and now its a function of removing the parts that don't fit. This is a process that doesn't need me to drive it.
This isn't an aside to Ranven, just to the person that needed it. If Nameless has a specific need that I can fulfill, and I have time, it will surely be done. But I did my part, and if I'm to be a bit player I played my bit. I don't really see what the fuss is about otherwise, but I expect the persons not happy don't understand the code. Nameless does understand it, and can be a better judge of what is right without further change, what was just a placeholder anyway, and what wasn't needed and can be safely turned off -- perhaps for patch 1, or left off for the next year. It's still not my call. I just have a layer of contribution. I fight for my layer. Anyone that wouldn't fight for their own layer isn't worth submitting one -- they don't believe in what they do enough to fight for it. I respect fighting to keep bad code etc out -- just like I'd fight a bad model if it was seriously handicapping something. Its better for me to say I gave my layer, whats done with it is out of my hands.
Except I think sometimes even Nameless didn't see how simple it was to give the person(s?) complaining what they
said they wanted,
without making it all or nothing.
I think he knows what to do.
We should trust him and leave it at that. Its HIS mod. We
each added
layers. But he's the
head chef in the kitchen. Let him cook. That's why I'm not in discord -- it just seemed a place for fights. I have more important things on my schedule than
dev pvp.