Page 1 of 1

Reinforcement Bleed on Destructable Command Posts

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2018 9:48 pm
by Robobermann
I'm wondering about the destructible command posts for SWBF2 (including AT-ATs, Hoth Shield Generator, and AT-TEs). For some reason, unlike in the first SWBF, they do not contribute to a loss of reinforcements. I found an interesting variable called "ValueBleed" which I'm assuming causes reinforcements to bleed, but the value on this variable for destructible command posts is no different than for normal command posts. My question is, if possible, how can one make destructible command posts cause reinforcements to bleed in SWBF2?

Re: Bleed on Destructable Command Posts

Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 7:14 am
by Marth8880
I'm pretty sure CP bleed is enabled for CPs that are added with the :AddCommandPost function.

Re: Bleed on Destructable Command Posts

Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 9:41 pm
by Robobermann
Marth8880 wrote:I'm pretty sure CP bleed is enabled for CPs that are added with the :AddCommandPost function.
I've been testing on Hoth and I am trying to get AT-ATs to have reinforcement bleed. I can say with a certainty that :AddCommandPost does not give the intended effect (or any change at all) with this code:

Code: Select all

    cp1 = CommandPost:New{name = "CP3"}
    cp2 = CommandPost:New{name = "CP4"}
    cp3 = CommandPost:New{name = "CP5"}
    cp4 = CommandPost:New{name = "CP6"}
    cp5 = CommandPost:New{name = "CP7"}
    cp6 = CommandPost:New{name = "imp_walk_atat"} --also no effect when name = "VehicleSpawn_21"
--cp7 = CommandPost:New{name = "imp_walk_atat"}
    
    conquest = ObjectiveConquest:New{teamATT = ATT, teamDEF = DEF, textATT = "game.modes.con", textDEF = "game.modes.con2", multiplayerRules = true}
    
    conquest:AddCommandPost(cp1)
    conquest:AddCommandPost(cp2)
    conquest:AddCommandPost(cp3)
    conquest:AddCommandPost(cp4)
    conquest:AddCommandPost(cp5)
    conquest:AddCommandPost(cp6)
--conquest:AddCommandPost(cp7)


Is there a way I can find out the actual name of the command post inside the AT-AT?