Old deck builder after some cleaning

[foolosopher]

@gmzombie
Yup, moving slowly the cards from asm to c is right on targer, especially now that we have the necessary space. I 'll probably help on that once I am done with fixing draft and see what I can do with sealed. Anyway we generally need to plan the next steps, as it seems that there will be some work needed to stabilize all recent changes and decide where we go next. Also better move this discussion in the "The near future of Manalink 2.0 (or 3.0)" topic.

[Mok]

Hi, I think I've found a bug with this latest patch. Having the new slot for entering keywords is just great, but I've seen that after using it, basic lands disappear from the card list even if that field is cleaned (with CANC or DEL). May you confirm?

Yup, a simple bug. Deleting search text left string "**" which was of course skipping empty or single word rules. Attached only deckdll source and dll.

[Mok]

could you become a bit more specific, I know that IDA and PE can list available functions, why do we need the naming part?

Without it, you'll simply continue what was done so far. Blind changing, moving in the dark, changes that are short term gain, long term fail. You'll move one function doing something and already assume you know everything about it while the same parameters/globals/arrays will be used differently in dozen other places. In my opinion what the project mostly lacked is the patience of the coders. You want too many things too quickly without understanding how it actually works. Someone discovers how to do something and it's soon all over the place without actually checking if it's correct or not. But no matter, it was only my leaving suggestion/rant Have fun in your own ways.

[Gargaroz]

Apart from the "rushed things" that Mok mentioned, that worst aspect of the Manalink developmente in all these years is the absolute lack of documentation : the Wiki is incredibly poor and you're forced to ask each single developer to get every tiny bit of information, or dig in a C code with very few notes (I'm to blame for this too).
Although this is normal in a way, I'm not to too fond of constantly mailing anyone with request as "How could this work ?", "Where is this varible / code / function / structure ?", I'll prefer a complete Wiki and then asking directly for the most obscure / complex stuff.

[foolosopher]

I know what you mean, When I was trying to do anything, I would spend more time searching around the forums to gather relevant info than actually developing. I think this was one of the main problems of Harry P. but anyway let's say that we are more "results oriented" . We also have have a nice group of testers and bug hunters and players are quite understanding . But seriously, Mok brought a lot of changes, which he explained in the various forum topics but we should move that info to the wiki. For my part, I could copy paste that text in a topic in the wiki and then try to add some glue between to make it more readable (don know if I need certain priviledges).
About, renaming and moving cards, I plan to take gmzombie's renamed cards and move them to c, after I finish with draft and maybe sealed, unless we come up with another plan. But due time... (comments welcome))

[Gargaroz]

The original plan of Mok is still the best choice : a full C version of Manalink will be the greatest result we could expect, will be portable and we could introduce more features. It will require a lot of time, I think, I wish I could contribute but I'm still too n00b in C and I know almost nothing of ASM

[stassy]

Anyone can edit the wiki so go ahead

[Dave]

I agree with mok's vision to completely examine magic.exe before any changes were made.
But saying this, when i have absolutely no knowledge of asm at the moment, is a bit lame...
So i have just begun my journey in asm. Which is recommended anyway for programmers, since asm is to any program language as Latin is for most european languages. If/when that goes well, i'll try to help where i can. My first guess would be the deckbuilder, since it is just a small piece of Magic.

[gmzombie]

anybody notice that some artifact cards don't get taken out when you un click the artifact button. some examples for me are blightsteel colossus, bottle gnomes, blinding souleater, brass herald but there are more? anybody else get that?

Also i agree with moks vision as well. im currently trying to create a list of those subs together with all the current cards coded in the magic.exe too. when i get done with that i will put it up to discuss and to check to see if i got anything wrong..which im sure i will as im only going off educated guesses based on what is in the sub or jmps out of the sub to another func. Further more moks deckdll asm is pretty documented if you take a look inside the .asm which is great.

[RanDomino]

Ok, I consider beta version of manalink stable enough to move on. Thanks, if was funny couple of weeks revisiting the project on which I wasted so much time once

THANKS!!!

Sorry that I didn't fix old "sealed deck" mode, but it was hardly usable anyway and I consider it too boring to fix just for fixing sake (fixing 2k limit there won't make it usable).

Actually my sealed deck mode seems to be working better than ever. All the new cards seem to be in at the proper rarities, and the AI doesn't only make mono-green decks as it was in the last version I was using. I actually lost a sealed pod the other day, even.

[0rion79]

Hi all. I'm opening here an important discussion about the Legendary subtype. Even if now it is no more an official "creature type", in my opinion there is still the need to be able to filter legendary creatures among creatures especially to build EDH decks and to interact with minor cards, as Captain Sisay.
After a brief look to latest files, I've seen that it is enough to modify the menus.txt file under the voice @CREATURETYPES, increasing it from 224 to 225 and adding "legendary" or whatever to have the deckbuilder to accept it. The only problem is that in our new CSV there is no ID for legends. Subtype 1 & 2 are already taken by true creature types, while I can't figure out if the new columns for creature types are active and may be used for this purpose. In case, it would be enough to create a new ID for legendary type (and for other special kind of spells, as Equipment, Shrine, Planeswalker and Arcane, if we want) to use the old deckbuilder to easily browse among those kind of cards.
Imho, it should be done else the only alternative is to use openoffice or similar programs to open the CSV and do a manual search among those files.
Let me know...