CoreImprovements.xml

I think the original name for town was going to be a Trade Guild

So far I've not noticed no problems with the internal name as such.

Its not a problem, there is no tech reason why an internal name has to match the display name.

Sorry to insist

I'm not worried about the matching names, i'm worrying about the description and the "provides" that doesn't match...

Is a TradeGuild assigned to agricultural and financial purposes ?

It's fine for me if it's fine for you.

Yes, the town itself is devoted to agriculture and financial pursuits. These files are relating to the in game when you upgrade your starting level 1 city to a level 2.

From there you choose

Town --- InternalName="TradeGuild" --- DisplayName --- Base Town --- which gives you gildar bonuses and agriculture bonuses

Fortress --- InternalName="Fortress" --- DisplayName --- Base Fortress --- which gives you production bonuses and better unit levels

Conclave --- InternalName="Conclave" --- DisplayName --- Base Conclave --- which gives you research bonuses and better "magic" things

These are the names they provide and there are no conflicts within the program that I have found and I've delved into deeply these internal names and such (I created 85+ buildings duplicating nearly all the buildings)

By your post I'm confused on what you are wanting here.

No prob.

I thought there was a mismatch or mistype. (I still think there is but I think I'll fail to convince you and you failed to convince me)

Last try :

Don't you find weird that TradeGuild (a building that could have existed in game) match with Base Town when Fortress match with Base Fortress and Conclave with Base Conclave(that does make sense)

On top of that, TradeGuild would be the following entry of Town in alphabetical order.

Sorry to bother. No need to reply if you think I'm totally wrong. I just had a hunch that an entry has been forgotten.

If tradeguild never have existed and finally describes a "Town" and no one complains and game works good, I'm fine.

Regards

In FE when they first introduced the three building levels I believe that that were going to call a town a trade guild instead. After playing with the name, they decided to change the name altogether. There are no mismatching involved since it was all done a few years ago. This is probably why the artifact of the internal name being called a trade guild, since it was easier for them to change the display name versus the Internal Name especially for all the things that refer to town. Deeper in the code mind you they do refer to a town, but this is to the labeling system and to not intermix these names I'm sure that is another reason they chose a different internal name here than town.

In the beta for FE a trade guild did exist in the game, and it changed in a later iteration of the game when they did the 3 different city specializations. So, if there are artifacts and name mismatches in the internal names, I've yet to find a problem.

Changing a variable name in code is a pain. While you could just do a find-and-replace, you would need to do so in every file in which that variable is used, and you'd need to make sure that whatever name you replaced it with doesn't conflict with any variable names in any of those files. You would also need to make certain that all of the variables whose name was changed by the replace function actually referred to the specific variable whose name you wanted to change. If you don't find all instances where that variable name is referenced, then in trying to 'correct' an 'error' in the variable-naming scheme you've introduced bugs in your code (which may or may not show up as bugs in the final software, depending on what exactly that variable affects - in the case of the Town/Trade Guild, I would expect that this is common enough that if something were missed, problems would show up in the game). Moreover, in the case of multi-person programming projects, you would need to let anyone who had a reason to make use of that variable know that its name changed, and you would need to change its name in every part of their code.

Simply put, changing the internal name just so that the internal/display name scheme is consistent with the other city-type internal/display name schemes is too likely to be more trouble than it's worth, and would probably result in even more work after implementing the change to hunt down all the bugs that changing the name introduced.

Got it !

Thanks