Talk:Statstrings - Revision history

Markus Ramikin: /* A simple and complete list of available syntax anywhere? */ new section

2015-01-26T12:36:32Z

A simple and complete list of available syntax anywhere?: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:36, 26 January 2015
Line 71:		Line 71:
	reactions: [50, 59]		reactions: [50, 59]
	[[User:WurmD\|WurmD]] ([[User talk:WurmD\|talk]]) 04:29, 13 September 2014 (EDT)		[[User:WurmD\|WurmD]] ([[User talk:WurmD\|talk]]) 04:29, 13 September 2014 (EDT)

			== A simple and complete list of available syntax anywhere? ==

			Maybe I'm blind, but I can't find it either in the readme or on this wiki; this article seems more showing off favourite personal setups than actually documenting the basics. For example, the article never explains what d: stands for. A comprehensive list would be good to have.

WurmD: XcomUtil.cfg substituted by XcomUtil_Statstrings.rul in OpenXCOM1.0 ? with different sintax?

2014-09-13T08:29:46Z

XcomUtil.cfg substituted by XcomUtil_Statstrings.rul in OpenXCOM1.0 ? with different sintax?

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:29, 13 September 2014
Line 30:		Line 30:

	I've added another example. Please feel free to alter it if you can improve on the language. [[User:Off the Rails\|Off the Rails]] 04:01, 11 October 2012 (EDT)		I've added another example. Please feel free to alter it if you can improve on the language. [[User:Off the Rails\|Off the Rails]] 04:01, 11 October 2012 (EDT)

			== XcomUtil.cfg substituted by XcomUtil_Statstrings.rul in OpenXCOM1.0 ? with different sintax? ==
			Below are the current contents of XcomUtil_Statstrings.rul

			Should we add into this wiki page examples with this sintax as well? (or substitute all exemples to this sintax altogether

			# Based on XcomUtil by Scott Jones and BladeFireLight
			# See http://ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Statstrings
			# These are the default statStrings from XcomUtil.
			statStrings:
			- string: "x"
			psiStrength: [~, 30]
			- string: "P"
			psiStrength: [80, ~]
			- string: "p"
			psiStrength: [60, 79]
			- string: "K"
			psiSkill: [60, ~]
			- string: "k"
			psiSkill: [30, 59]
			- string: "b"
			bravery: [60, ~]
			- string: "c"
			bravery: [~, 10]
			- string: "w"
			strength: [~, 25]
			- string: "Snpr"
			firing: [60, ~]
			reactions: [60, ~]
			- string: "M"
			firing: [70, ~]
			- string: "m"
			firing: [60, 69]
			- string: "Sct"
			reactions: [50, ~]
			tu: [60, ~]
			- string: "R"
			reactions: [60, ~]
			- string: "r"
			reactions: [50, 59]
			[[User:WurmD\|WurmD]] ([[User talk:WurmD\|talk]]) 04:29, 13 September 2014 (EDT)

Off the Rails: signed

2012-10-11T08:01:06Z

signed

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:01, 11 October 2012
Line 29:		Line 29:
	== Example ==		== Example ==

	I've added another example. Please feel free to alter it if you can improve on the language		I've added another example. Please feel free to alter it if you can improve on the language. [[User:Off the Rails\|Off the Rails]] 04:01, 11 October 2012 (EDT)

Off the Rails: /* Example */ new section

2012-10-06T17:57:18Z

Example: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:57, 6 October 2012
Line 26:		Line 26:

	Very useful article, thanks guys. [[User:Spike\|Spike]] 13:35, 1 February 2009 (CST)		Very useful article, thanks guys. [[User:Spike\|Spike]] 13:35, 1 February 2009 (CST)

			== Example ==

			I've added another example. Please feel free to alter it if you can improve on the language

Spike: New section: Useful

2009-02-01T19:35:02Z

New section: Useful

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:35, 1 February 2009
Line 22:		Line 22:
	c d:80-		c d:80-
	t d:80-		t d:80-

			== Useful ==

			Very useful article, thanks guys. [[User:Spike\|Spike]] 13:35, 1 February 2009 (CST)

Mannon: /* Edit for clarity */

2008-08-01T22:56:49Z

Edit for clarity

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:56, 1 August 2008
Line 17:		Line 17:
	:I can help with that, it's actually very simple. Single character strings accumulate. But any string with more than one character will end the search right there and no further strings will be added to the name. The strings are parsed in the order they are written in XcomUtil.cfg--[[User:Mannon\|Mannon]] 15:42, 1 August 2008 (PDT)		:I can help with that, it's actually very simple. Single character strings accumulate. But any string with more than one character will end the search right there and no further strings will be added to the name. The strings are parsed in the order they are written in XcomUtil.cfg--[[User:Mannon\|Mannon]] 15:42, 1 August 2008 (PDT)

	::Here's a related tip. If you really want multi character string that will not end statstrings you can still do it, it's just counterintuitive. You have to split each character of your string. For example if you wanted "Sct" for anybody that had high TU's. You just do each letter individually with the same criteria and keep the lines together in ~~you~~ strings so they won't get other stats between them. I did this with an older version of my StatStrings, but ditched it for character space. (I don't like having to chop down long last names to use my strings.) Example below.--[[User:Mannon\|Mannon]] 15:55, 1 August 2008 (PDT)		::Here's a related tip. If you really want multi character string that will not end statstrings you can still do it, it's just counterintuitive. You have to split each character of your string. For example if you wanted "Sct" for anybody that had high TU's. You just do each letter individually with the same criteria and keep the lines together in your strings so they won't get other stats between them. I did this with an older version of my StatStrings, but ditched it for character space. (I don't like having to chop down long last names to use my strings.) Example below.--[[User:Mannon\|Mannon]] 15:55, 1 August 2008 (PDT)
	// Will produce "Sct" for any soldier with 80 or more TU's and will continue to accumulate strings after.		// Will produce "Sct" for any soldier with 80 or more TU's and will continue to accumulate strings after.
	S d:80-		S d:80-
	c d:80-		c d:80-
	t d:80-		t d:80-

Mannon at 22:55, 1 August 2008

2008-08-01T22:55:43Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:55, 1 August 2008
Line 16:		Line 16:

	:I can help with that, it's actually very simple. Single character strings accumulate. But any string with more than one character will end the search right there and no further strings will be added to the name. The strings are parsed in the order they are written in XcomUtil.cfg--[[User:Mannon\|Mannon]] 15:42, 1 August 2008 (PDT)		:I can help with that, it's actually very simple. Single character strings accumulate. But any string with more than one character will end the search right there and no further strings will be added to the name. The strings are parsed in the order they are written in XcomUtil.cfg--[[User:Mannon\|Mannon]] 15:42, 1 August 2008 (PDT)

			::Here's a related tip. If you really want multi character string that will not end statstrings you can still do it, it's just counterintuitive. You have to split each character of your string. For example if you wanted "Sct" for anybody that had high TU's. You just do each letter individually with the same criteria and keep the lines together in you strings so they won't get other stats between them. I did this with an older version of my StatStrings, but ditched it for character space. (I don't like having to chop down long last names to use my strings.) Example below.--[[User:Mannon\|Mannon]] 15:55, 1 August 2008 (PDT)
			// Will produce "Sct" for any soldier with 80 or more TU's and will continue to accumulate strings after.
			S d:80-
			c d:80-
			t d:80-

Mannon at 22:42, 1 August 2008

2008-08-01T22:42:54Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:42, 1 August 2008
Line 14:		Line 14:

	I'm not quite sure how some strings override others.--[[User:Schnobs\|Schnobs]]		I'm not quite sure how some strings override others.--[[User:Schnobs\|Schnobs]]

			:I can help with that, it's actually very simple. Single character strings accumulate. But any string with more than one character will end the search right there and no further strings will be added to the name. The strings are parsed in the order they are written in XcomUtil.cfg--[[User:Mannon\|Mannon]] 15:42, 1 August 2008 (PDT)

Schnobs: /* Edit for clarity */

2007-10-23T22:10:19Z

Edit for clarity

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:10, 23 October 2007
Line 4:		Line 4:

	:I didn't realize that was taken verbatim right out of the code file. If you're looking to have machine-readable examples, or examples right out of the file, feel free to revert it; my apologies. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft\|Arrow Quivershaft]] 13:16, 22 October 2007 (PDT)		:I didn't realize that was taken verbatim right out of the code file. If you're looking to have machine-readable examples, or examples right out of the file, feel free to revert it; my apologies. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft\|Arrow Quivershaft]] 13:16, 22 October 2007 (PDT)

			I tried to come up with an explanation of the syntax, but... Maybe someone whose english is better than mine should try his hand at this.

			An entry consists of two parts:
			*first, the statstring that will be added to a soldiers' name. It can be anything you like, but should better be short.
			*second, the condition to trigger that string (like k:30-59), which itself is made up of two parts: a one-letter handle for the stat (like r for reactions or b for bravery), and the experience range.

			Note that these are ''ranges'': lower boundary, dash, upper boundary. Either one can be omitted if the range should be open-end. So 30-50 means "from thirty to fifty", -25 means "anything below 26" (and is equal to 0-25) and 60- means "sixty or higher" (equal to 60-255). 42, unsurprisingly, would mean "a value of exactly 42".

			I'm not quite sure how some strings override others.--[[User:Schnobs\|Schnobs]]

Arrow Quivershaft: Response

2007-10-22T20:16:29Z

Response

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:16, 22 October 2007
Line 2:		Line 2:

	The "default configuration" example was literally the default configuration, copied verbatim from the xcomutil.conf file as it comes in the archive. Are you sure that this is valid syntax? Even if the pluses work just as well, I don't think we should present a "default conf" that has already been tampered with... --[[User:Schnobs\|Schnobs]] 12:13, 22 October 2007 (PDT)		The "default configuration" example was literally the default configuration, copied verbatim from the xcomutil.conf file as it comes in the archive. Are you sure that this is valid syntax? Even if the pluses work just as well, I don't think we should present a "default conf" that has already been tampered with... --[[User:Schnobs\|Schnobs]] 12:13, 22 October 2007 (PDT)

			:I didn't realize that was taken verbatim right out of the code file. If you're looking to have machine-readable examples, or examples right out of the file, feel free to revert it; my apologies. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft\|Arrow Quivershaft]] 13:16, 22 October 2007 (PDT)