Single Player modding/mapping and the UMP

[DCoder]

Example1:
rulesmd.ini > ENGINEER.DeploysInto=something
mpmwmd.ini > ENGINEER.TechLevel=-1
IE will occur in Mega Wealth mode.

Example2:
rulesmd.ini > ENGINEER.DeploysInto=something
mymap.yrm > ENGINEER.Strength=200
IE will occur when playing on mymap.yrm.

: Moved typeselect mods (can select both dogs and all 3 engineers as same type) to mp overrides to fix broken campaigns. Seems the game thinks more buildings exist when DeploysInto= is abused.

My first inclination is to only set the DeploysInto linking logic in multiplayer game mode files.
Unfortunately, there are probably several maps that modify the infantry in question (Dogs, Engineers, and, in Purple Alert, SEALs).
The single player maps could possibly be modified for the UMP (so that the linking issue is still fixed), as they are all being included anyway to fix other bugs.

If there is an abundance of multiplayer maps where infantry linking is impossible, then perhaps infantry-linking should be outlawed, or at least the modder will have to think carefully and make the user well aware of potential crashes on custom maps.

At the very least, mappers need to be implored not to modify those infantry that are frequently linked (Dogs/Engineers, although as I said, modders might link additional infantry units). Unfortunately that could curtail modmap moddability.
What the UMP instructs people to do should be the standard community practice.

DCoder is a good person to reflect on this, as is anyone working on single player mod/mapping, or indeed multiplayer mapping.

My thinking is that Dogs should be side-exclusive, like the Amph Transports are in CannisRules. They can be visually differentiated also, so they can logically be treated as different units.
Engineers, on the other hand... Well, the main problem as I see it is allied engineers coming out of all destroyed ConYards. There really is no solution for this, short of using the Technician for that purpose, and making him significantly different from the Engineer...

As you see, my suggestions are really ways to avoid infantry linking rather than work around the problems it creates. That is my choice uless PD manages to track down this IE to something rules-fixable...