Some stuff while I still remember them...

[snowblizz]

Yeah, I'm too lazy to use the Trak, it's late and all. (I'll probably keep adding to this as I run into stuff)

An issue I have is that if I give a model an absolute of 2 options, in my example a Dreadnaught that has 2 arms with weapon options. However if I do this I can't swap the weapons out after I've picked the initial 2 weapons. I have to give the option of carrying 3 weapons to be able to swap 1 weapon for another one. This is rather odd, though not visible to the player. And I'm not sure if it can "bug" in some way resulting in loopholes. Or if I split it into 2 equipmentSlots arm1 & arm2, then each must be set to 2 for the swap to be available.

Oh yeah, also I'd like some way of saying "can't take these two together", exclusivityGroups will do this but allows one to swap it for another weapon on the exclusivity groups list.
The "multiple replacements" and/or requirements I guess would be it. Again the dreadnaught has an auxilary storm bolter that can be upgraded to a heavy flamer, but this weapon needs to be removed when the combat weapon/storm bolter arm is replaced with another weapon arm.

[IBBoard]

So the "replace" button doesn't work? Hmmmm, odd. It seems to work for other things, but maybe it is an oversight in the UI and how it handles things. A specific file or detail of the steps will make it easier to track

As for the "multiple replacements", that sounds like an odd combination. Putting the two arms in one group and putting the storm bolter/heavy flamer/other arm in a second group (so some arms are in two groups) should prevent you taking the other arm with a storm bolter/heavy flamer, but wouldn't let you quickly swap the two for the one.

[snowblizz]

Well, normally the replace does work. Eg. if I have a single model and want to replace one option with the other. Get the Space Wolf file from the datagroup. Take a look at the Rune Priest option. If you change the psych1 & psych2 options to 1 instead of 2 it should have this behaviour.

An interesting problem I also just found now while making a Blood Angel datafile. Both Blood Angels and Space Marines have an option where assault marines (with jumppacks) can swap them out for a discounted transport option. I guess it could be solved with having the units have contained units, the transports, with a "local" cost? When we support contained units at least.

[snowblizz]

Been thinking a bit.
For some units it would make sense to have some kind of top level "container". I just noticed eg for Blood Angels there is a Sanguinary Priest entry of 1-3 independent characters that you can individually pick weapons and stuff for. Also one of these can be a special character. It would be nice to be able to make a Sanguinary priest unit, that then uses the Corbulo and Sanguinary priest as members. Sort of like UnitMembers but for more than just the stats. I'm thinking vehicle squadrons would benefit from this if you cna makes something clever as I asked for some time ago, the ability to have eg Killa Kans, make the options for one, and then the higher level container could say 1-3 of these. Maybe something that those blasted every guy can have unique options could take advantage of as well. It would be A LOT cleaner to write the equipment restraints for 1 model and then say between 4-9 guys of this one.
At least for Apocalypse formations this would also be needed I think, as they need a cost.
IG Platoons with a "Platoon" containing 2-6 squads, command squad and support squads.
I also notice Flames of War is closely built like this but I'm not sure how the game works in particular.

Edit:
Random thought.
We may need to support negative points for equipments and possibly units.