FreeOrion

Say something like "... further increases ..." instead of "... increases the size of increased ..."?

One of the increases needs to be improves, or similar, yeah, good catch, as written it's both clunky and unclear, I don't mind clunky if it's the only way to be clear but but together is bad.

_________________
Mat Bowles

Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Yeah, I'm okay with that.

_________________
Resident code gremlin
Attached patches are released under GPL 2.0 or later.
Git author: Marcel Metz

I'm brushing up the documentation of the english string table and have not even the remotest idea what the author of theNEW_ASTEROIDS_NAME comment is trying to say to me. So Geoff, speak up. What substitution values of the %1% and %2% placeholders? And why should I care about internals on how an asteroid belt is generated as a translator?

_________________
Resident code gremlin
Attached patches are released under GPL 2.0 or later.
Git author: Marcel Metz

I assume you're asking about:
I don't know why this comment in the stringtable is telling you about syntax for effect scripting, and I don't know what the author of that comment did in scripts in general... But I think I've seen in relevant test games something like "Systemname II remnants[/quote], so I guess %1% would be the system name, and %2% would be a numeral for the planet number. Not sure though.

Yes, that's the comment in question.



Well, I asked you because you added this comment in the first place (git blame says so) with the commits c2fcafa5, and a4d24919. No intermediate predecessor of the those commit for those lines was of any help either so I'm just asking here. The commit itself is complete irrelevant for translators and more helpful for people, who want wo use UserString inside the FOCS script.

_________________
Resident code gremlin
Attached patches are released under GPL 2.0 or later.
Git author: Marcel Metz

I can't find those commits my git client fu is failing but I'm fairly certain that comment was put in at the same time Geoff fixed the planet creation effects ages ago when Sloth and I were messing around making nebulas work properly and the planet naming just wasn't working right.

It's also in the process of being revised in some way by either Dbenage-CX or LGM-Doyle as part of the asteroid renaming thing but I can't find that PR either, I think I need more coffee.

We are a bit bad when it comes to documenting things in the right place, but I like having an explanation for a weird key with parameters with that key myself, especially given it can be used in multiple different effects.

_________________
Mat Bowles

Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

That, or you need to take a nap (more healthy! ).

I plan to add the # StarTypes, # PlanetTypes, and # PlanetSizes keys in the stringtables (# PlanetEnvironments already done in a previous commit), but in the same time, to reorganize/rewrite each article that contains "Increases value on planets per population, by planet size/star type/planetary environment or habitability" description stuff, in order to be more easy/convenient to read.

But prior to that, I want to know if you think it's a good idea or not, and if it's yes, if the rewrite is clear enough (or if it could be better), and if the english syntax is OK^^.

Thanks.

Ex:

_________________
I release every updated file under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license.

IMO definitely an improvement.

Agreed.

I've been toying with the idea of a very clearly worded 'planet size' page and then using that in all those places where the bonus is based on planet size, I think "hostile planets get a bonus equal to twice planet size" is clearer than what we have but also having the summary would help.

From my end it's partially inspired by thinking of increasing the number of costs that are partially determined by size, I already did artificial planet, terraform and gaia, I'm thinking that Space Elevator might benefit from that as well.

But improved clarity in the way population growth and the various tech interactions definitely needs to be a documentation priority.

_________________
Mat Bowles

Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

I'm still updating the comments.

What is the functional difference between a 'bout' and a 'round' in combat events? Reading the code didn't gave me any insight.

_________________
Resident code gremlin
Attached patches are released under GPL 2.0 or later.
Git author: Marcel Metz

adrian_broher, the description in the code and the description in game are not consistent. Bouts in the code are the same as rounds in the game descriptions.

In the code/programmer perspective:
[*] round: 1 ship/planet fires all its weapons. There are as many rounds as there are attacking ships/planets.
[*] bout: all ships/planets fire all their weapons once. The number of bouts is fixed at 3.

In the game/player perspective:
[*] round: all ships/planets fire all their weapons once. There are 3 rounds.

Aye, until now I'd not encountered 'bout' as a term, and wouldn't want to introduce it, if it's in en.txt it needs removing, consistency in terms—especially terms that confuse new players, is important.

_________________
Mat Bowles

Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.