|
|
Post by sprealty on Oct 29, 2024 20:43:50 GMT -5
Adding the object into the game in this configuration allowed me to fill the washing machine, but then I had no interaction and the machine didn't show as full. Just acted like it was empty. I zipped up the item and the interaction tuning package, can you take a look and let me know what I'm missing? drive.google.com/file/d/1qEnlcw-dKO6-rHbjpQj6A--rhdv0fYVc/view?usp=sharingEd: I also tried adding the interaction tuning into the WM package and it didn't seem to change anything. |
|
|
|
Post by CatDevPete on Oct 29, 2024 20:51:39 GMT -5
Got it. Object tuning and sim data added to the washing machine object package with the same instance ID. I also went ahead and used the swatch -> tuning tab to remove the default one and insert the sprealty: version, and applied to all swatches. Then I added the object state tuning, changed the ID for "wash clothes", went back to object tuning, changed the ID for the full state (all) and saved. Nice! Hopefully that means that the object definition for all the swatches should be associated with your object tuning. For step 3, add in the object state tuning 'laundry_WashingMachine_Values_Capacity_Full' (TuningId: 175917). Also make its name & TuningId unique. There'll be a line: <T>175875<!--laundry_WashingMachine_Wash_Clothes--></T>You'll want to replace that with whatever the tuning for that looks like now. Assuming you've named it something like "sprealty:laundry_WashingMachine_Wash_Clothes", it would now look like: <T>14797528950875759216<!--sprealty:laundry_WashingMachine_Wash_Clothes--></T>
Note, the "<!--sprealty:laundry_WashingMachine_Wash_Clothes-->" is not important, you can remove that. But it's good practice to have it in so you know that you've made that change, and what it's associated with. Also, always save. 😼 Edit: Disregard, I can see you've already done all this 👍 |
|
|
|
Post by sprealty on Oct 29, 2024 21:20:46 GMT -5
Got it. Object tuning and sim data added to the washing machine object package with the same instance ID. I also went ahead and used the swatch -> tuning tab to remove the default one and insert the sprealty: version, and applied to all swatches. Then I added the object state tuning, changed the ID for "wash clothes", went back to object tuning, changed the ID for the full state (all) and saved. Nice! Hopefully that means that the object definition for all the swatches should be associated with your object tuning. For step 3, add in the object state tuning 'laundry_WashingMachine_Values_Capacity_Full' (TuningId: 175917). Also make its name & TuningId unique. There'll be a line: <T>175875<!--laundry_WashingMachine_Wash_Clothes--></T>You'll want to replace that with whatever the tuning for that looks like now. Assuming you've named it something like "sprealty:laundry_WashingMachine_Wash_Clothes", it would now look like: <T>14797528950875759216<!--sprealty:laundry_WashingMachine_Wash_Clothes--></T>
Note, the "<!--sprealty:laundry_WashingMachine_Wash_Clothes-->" is not important, you can remove that. But it's good practice to have it in so you know that you've made that change, and what it's associated with. Also, always save. 😼 Edit: Disregard, I can see you've already done all this 👍 Yep, did that and saved. I think I also managed to do step 4. Sadly the object is now broken, when I put laundry in it remains visibly empty and offers no interactions beyond "upgrade". I zipped the object and interaction tuning files and put them on google drive, there's a link in the post just above these two. If you have a moment, I'd really appreciate you taking a look and letting me know where I went wrong. TYIA! |
|
|
|
Post by CatDevPete on Oct 29, 2024 23:14:15 GMT -5
Yep, did that and saved. I think I also managed to do step 4. Sadly the object is now broken, when I put laundry in it remains visibly empty and offers no interactions beyond "upgrade". I zipped the object and interaction tuning files and put them on google drive, there's a link in the post just above these two. If you have a moment, I'd really appreciate you taking a look and letting me know where I went wrong. TYIA! Sure thing, I'll take a look later in the day 👍 It's just unfortunate that the washing machine involves managing its capacity state, which complicates it. If it were a lot more simple, you could just add the interaction under the super affordances list & be done with it. |
|
|
|
Post by CatDevPete on Oct 30, 2024 9:52:01 GMT -5
So, I don't think you've done anything wrong so far (aside from the "washing machine test.package" still having the original 'wash clothes' tuning). But trying it from my end as well, I've not gotten the custom tunings & states to work with the washing machine either. I suspect there is a lot more involved in the state management for the washing machine than I originally thought, and simply trying to swap out the object state tuning with your own doesn't really cut it. It's a bit beyond my skill (and time tbh) to continue down this path, so I've done a bit of brainstorming on how else you can go about achieving this. I think the best way forward for now is basically having your own custom interaction tuning for 'wash clothes' being the one with costs, but also have the original 'wash clothes' tuning for the 'free' interaction. Then adding in a test to both in order for the washing machine to determine whether it should use charge a cost to the sim or not. There's two possible ways to go about it: 1. Test against a state/statistic. I've at least experimented with doing a test against a washing machine upgrade, and can confirm it works. But, I've not had success creating a custom state & getting that to work with the interaction. 2. Apply a venue blacklist/whitelist to the wash clothes interactions. I've linked an example package that should work, it basically makes the clothes free tio wash on residential venues, and cost money on everywhere else. drive.google.com/file/d/1jhbLNenxrWfVNv4x9Qi7rFWqkbZ-MZxV/view?usp=sharingNavigate near the bottom of each, and you'll see something like the following. <V t="zone">
<U n="zone">
<U n="zone_tests">
<V n="venue_type" t="enabled">
<U n="enabled">
<V n="whitelist" t="specify">
<U n="specify">
<L n="whitelist">
<T>28614<!--Venue: venue_residential--></T>
<T>208182<!--Venue: venue_rentable_universityHousing--></T>
<T>229251<!--Venue: venue_residential_tinyhome--></T>
<T>252380<!--Venue: venue_residential_HauntedHouse--></T>
<T>239458<!--Venue: venue_rentable_vacation_generic--></T>
<T>149495<!--Venue: Venue_Penthouse--></T>
<T>173833<!--Venue: venue_Rentable_Jungle--></T>
<T>103675<!--Venue: venue_rentable_cabin--></T>
</L>
</U>
</V>
</U>
</V>
</U>
</U>
</V>
|
|
|
|
Post by sprealty on Oct 30, 2024 18:43:45 GMT -5
So, I don't think you've done anything wrong so far (aside from the "washing machine test.package" still having the original 'wash clothes' tuning). But trying it from my end as well, I've not gotten the custom tunings & states to work with the washing machine either. I suspect there is a lot more involved in the state management for the washing machine than I originally thought, and simply trying to swap out the object state tuning with your own doesn't really cut it. It's a bit beyond my skill (and time tbh) to continue down this path, so I've done a bit of brainstorming on how else you can go about achieving this. I think the best way forward for now is basically having your own custom interaction tuning for 'wash clothes' being the one with costs, but also have the original 'wash clothes' tuning for the 'free' interaction. Then adding in a test to both in order for the washing machine to determine whether it should use charge a cost to the sim or not. There's two possible ways to go about it: 1. Test against a state/statistic. I've at least experimented with doing a test against a washing machine upgrade, and can confirm it works. But, I've not had success creating a custom state & getting that to work with the interaction. 2. Apply a venue blacklist/whitelist to the wash clothes interactions. I've linked an example package that should work, it basically makes the clothes free tio wash on residential venues, and cost money on everywhere else. drive.google.com/file/d/1jhbLNenxrWfVNv4x9Qi7rFWqkbZ-MZxV/view?usp=sharingNavigate near the bottom of each, and you'll see something like the following. <V t="zone">
<U n="zone">
<U n="zone_tests">
<V n="venue_type" t="enabled">
<U n="enabled">
<V n="whitelist" t="specify">
<U n="specify">
<L n="whitelist">
<T>28614<!--Venue: venue_residential--></T>
<T>208182<!--Venue: venue_rentable_universityHousing--></T>
<T>229251<!--Venue: venue_residential_tinyhome--></T>
<T>252380<!--Venue: venue_residential_HauntedHouse--></T>
<T>239458<!--Venue: venue_rentable_vacation_generic--></T>
<T>149495<!--Venue: Venue_Penthouse--></T>
<T>173833<!--Venue: venue_Rentable_Jungle--></T>
<T>103675<!--Venue: venue_rentable_cabin--></T>
</L>
</U>
</V>
</U>
</V>
</U>
</U>
</V>
I really appreciate your help and yeah I agree, that's a better method. Is there any way to keep it paid on residential rental (ie: for rent) apartment common areas? Or is that accounted for under the venue_residental tier? |
|
|
|
Post by CatDevPete on Oct 30, 2024 20:48:16 GMT -5
I really appreciate your help and yeah I agree, that's a better method. Is there any way to keep it paid on residential rental (ie: for rent) apartment common areas? Or is that accounted for under the venue_residental tier? Not sure, to be honest 🤔 I don't think it will work at the moment since I realise it's missing "<T>341299<!--Venue: venue_MultiUnit--></T>", but even with that I suspect they would be applied under the lot type allocation (as in, they'll still be free even in the common area). If so, you might want to do a search in the XML tunings around "zone" or "zone_tests". See if there's anything in the other tunings that might differentiate the common area from the rental lots. At the very least, some snippets to help you out. Take a look at the tuning for "mailboxWall_PayBills" (tuningId: 134811), it whitelists "<T>341299<!--Venue: venue_MultiUnit--></T>", but also has a section that looks like this: <V t="test_set_reference">
<T n="test_set_reference">352604<!--TestSetInstance: testSet_MultiUnit_isTenantNotOwner_HomeLot--></T>
</V>
Which might be something worth adding in to try. Use the tuning as a guide on how to apply it to the test on your own custom tuning. Aside from that, there is also another one around, <T n="test_set_reference">352605<!--TestSetInstance: testSet_MultiUnit_isTenantNotOwner_CurrentLot--></T>So, you might want to play around with them both. See when you add them into the tests, which one might get you the result that you want. In fact, I daresay that doing a search in the XML for "<T n="venue_type">341299<!--Venue: venue_MultiUnit--></T>" may be your best bet, since that will highlight tests related to For Rent's rental lots. |
|
