Shamough wrote:I took his two numbers and used the difference between them in a single random roll.
. . .
IF you have free VARIABLES to play with then you can roll a single time
Some Var Z = Random 1 to 100
Ok, I think I understand what you were trying to do, but why does each event have a Random 1 to 100 and not a test against a variable in your version then? This is what I see on your map V2_1:
![Commodities event.jpg](./download/file.php?style=46&id=3409&sid=aaffe3186da7993a8e3c68a8858c15c3)
- Commodities event.jpg (15.46 KiB) Viewed 203115 times
I agree that the way that wsherrick has done it is a bit confusing for simpletons like me. To me the ranges seem to indicate he is trying to get an event that will fire every year as you said. He talks about it in
this post (and before and after in that thread. But if that's what you were intending to do, why did you simplify them and not keep the ranges that would be necessary to test a single roll (now a variable 1-100) while always getting a result?
Funny thing is, as far as I got with the original map, out of the 5 years I played when the event was active I had two different Commodity events fire. Maybe I was just lucky!
![Mr. Green :mrgreen:](./images/smilies/icon_mrgreen.gif)
Forcing it to test every year will make the map easier if you get the big bonus earlier. Also, I am not sure that the Derailments event should be included in the likelihood with the Commodity ones, how is it related? Also Commodities 2 has only a 23% chance in the original.
About the map degradation, I was letting you know about this in case you didn't know, hoping it can save some headaches in the future. If you already knew about it, sorry. This is my goal: test thoroughly with a copy of the original while recording ALL corrections, then applying them all at once with one save to make a beta map for upload. If it goes through one or two corrections before the archives this is acceptable. The whole idea is to limit the number of saves, and I don't think for purposes of small corrections it is worth re-doing all events on a virgin map. As it is uncorrected in the archives, this map is close to the limit of looking degraded. If the corrected version could avoid the badly noticeable effects that would be nice.
Why don't you make one of the islands in the river the new territory (Area 52, could be called the name of one of the islands unless you want that name)? This way the ugly borders wont show up when you first load the map. I am unsure what happens to hidden territories, I am assuming their variables still work too, could be a possible option. Don't want to be picky, but when correcting maps, I think leaving loose ends is a failure. Well done on your effort on this one. Thanks!
Gumboots, did you look at the second link I put in my last post? (This post is by you, Hawk.)
Hawk wrote:2) This explains the color degradation. Every save reduces the file size, hence degrading the color just a little each time, even saving with a different name.