Slitherine

Hi

The titel says all

I am making a custom campaign. In a special scenario during the campaign, you shoul be able to decide whether you like to go to scenario A or B in the following. How can I realise that in my custom campaign (campaign.pzdat). Any ideas?

Best regards

Ranta

Maybe the answer is in the BarbarossaBNoW_decisive PZBRF file. You have a choice of going to Kiev or Rush to Moscow. There is an id line that you put the map name in quotations, then a shortened name with a button prompt.

AgentX is right, that's the place to look.

Basically, you define a value for each option in the briefing file and just leave the field for the ID of the scenario that follows empty in the campaign file.
The field will then be filled with the option you pick during the briefing, and you will in turn be taken to the campaign branch with that ID.
It's actually pretty straight forward.

Unfortunately, the system appears to lack a few possiblities that were present in PGForever - for example, the options that supposedly cost prestige in my campaign don't have any effect - there doesn't appear to be a command to substract prestige any longer.
Too bad Rudankort has gone missing, I bet he could shed some light on the issue.
I hope he's only taken a well deserved vacation and will be back, though.
_____
rezaf

there doesn't appear to be a command to substract prestige any longer.

Are you saying setting a negative prestige action doesn't work? I was sure I checked that and it did.

El_Condoro wrote:

there doesn't appear to be a command to substract prestige any longer.

Are you saying setting a negative prestige action doesn't work? I was sure I checked that and it did.

Yeah it works - I've used it already.

Well, correct me if I'm mistaken, but these prestige actions can only be called during scenarios, right?
What I was referring to is that, in PGF, you can have a pick in a briefing file that will substract prestige - like "paying" prestige for taking Gibraltar before Sealion 40 to get Sealian plus with Italian help.
_____
rezaf

^ You're right - these are triggers during scenarios. What you want to do may still be possible if done in the campaign.pzdat but I haven't tested to see if a negative value will be accepted.

El_Condoro wrote:^ You're right - these are triggers during scenarios. What you want to do may still be possible if done in the campaign.pzdat but I haven't tested to see if a negative value will be accepted.

No, that wouldn't work either.
Because you define the prestige reward for a decisive victory, for example, and then the ID of the next scenario or leave it blank for the ID to be filled in by a briefing file.
It would be necessary, however, to give one option less prestige than another option...
_____
rezaf

rezaf wrote:Basically, you define a value for each option in the briefing file and just leave the field for the ID of the scenario that follows empty in the campaign file.
The field will then be filled with the option you pick during the briefing, and you will in turn be taken to the campaign branch with that ID.
It's actually pretty straight forward.

Looking at what is in the BarbarossabNoW_decisive.pzbrf, I am not sure what you have described is correct, unless I've misunderstood you. The bit about an empty field in the campaign.pzdat is what is confusing me.
The id= string matches a scenario label from the campaign.pzdat (Rush to MoscowNoW or KievNoW). I would assume the game just takes the radio button label and runs the scenario with that label and details.

If that is correct, the starting prestige and the prestige reward will determine what the player starts off a scenario with.

*sigh*

Ok, let me spell that out slowly, hopefully I'll be able to get my point across then.

Let's take a look at the Barbarossa example you picked.
It goes like this in the campaign file: (I replaced the TAB separators with semicolons for better readibility in this context)

This means:
BarbarossaNoW is the ID of this campaign scenario.
BarbarossaA.pzbrf is the corresponding briefing file.
Barbarossa.pzscn is the scenario file.
HERE IS THE EMPTY COLUMN. Normally, this column would spell out the ID of the scenario that follows when you win a decisive victory. It's left empty, because the victory briefing file from two columns later will fill it with the ID of the option you picked.
AND NOW WE HAVE THE IMPORTANT COLUMN. It contains the prestige we get for winning a decisive victory.
So, you see, NO MATTER WHAT WE PICK, we get 1320 prestige. We can reduce this number, or even put a negative one, but it will apply regardless what you picked in the briefing option.
So if option A is "Pay 1500 prestige for the help of the Italian fleet" and option B is "Just directly launch the mission", how would I make A net 1500 prestige less then B?
Comprende?

The next column contains the briefing file, which needs to return the ID if we left the column for the following scenario empty. Then we get the same trinity of columns for maringal victory and for loss. And that's it.

Any further questions?
_____
rezaf

If I look through the html code in html it would make sense to refine a line so that it would look like this:

<p>
<button type="radio" name="NextScn" id="Rush to MoscowNoW" prestige="100">Moscow</button><br/>
</p>
<p>
<button type="radio" name="NextScn" id="KievNoW" prestige="-100">Kiev</button>
</p>

The question is if the game logic can parse more then the id identifier and if, what keywords are used and which values are accepted.

@rezaf: thank you for your explanation. I see the blanks you're referring to. Thank you, also, for working definitions of the words 'arrogant', 'rude' and 'condescending'. It would have been just as simple and not wasted your time to say "Look for the blanks on the BarbarossaNoW line". No further questions - not for you, anyway.

El_Condoro wrote:@rezaf: thank you for your explanation. I see the blanks you're referring to. Thank you, also, for working definitions of the words 'arrogant', 'rude' and 'condescending'. It would have been just as simple and not wasted your time to say "Look for the blanks on the BarbarossaNoW line". No further questions - not for you, anyway.

You tried to counter my point three times, obviously not even bothering to really look into the issue and sum up the numbers yourself and you're calling me arrogant?
Ah well, fair enough, not even worth getting into an argument about.
_____
rezaf

Just to be clear, I said "I wasn't sure" and "[this] is confusing me". I was trying to understand. Now I understand, so thank you. If I responded to my students who ask how to understand something that I was teaching them in the way you did (sigh, comprehend?, any other questions?) I would get a similar reaction.

thanks a lot guys, this helped me a lot