refactor: Update legacy code with UnitIndex

[OH296]

---

Summary by cubic

Replaces obj_ncombat's legacy per-role counters and big_mofo gating with the UnitIndex system so unit tracking and battle narration come from a single source.

Refactors

• Battle text in Alarm_1.gml builds role summaries from player_unit_index using role_count, plural_string_role, and sum_roles; dreadnought counts include Venerable dreadnoughts.
• The battlecry speaker is chosen by a role priority list, with a named unit pulled from the index.
• Ship boarding and ship demon summon battles route through the standard Roster/collect_role_group path; the duplicate scr_ship_battle script is removed.
• scr_roster populates player_unit_index via add_to_index; legacy counter and big_mofo updates are dropped from scr_roster and scr_civil_roster.

Migration

• big_mofo, important_dudes, and the per-role counters are no longer maintained; anything referencing them must read from player_unit_index instead.

^{Written for commit 2c3e3b5. Summary will update on new commits.}

[cubic-dev-ai]

2 issues found across 9 files

Confidence score: 5/5

• In scripts/scr_UnitGroup/scr_UnitGroup.gml, sum_roles uses roles instead of the required _roles naming convention; rename the argument and its loop references to keep local-variable style consistent.
• In scripts/scr_UnitGroup/scr_UnitGroup.gml, plural_string_role uses role and use_x instead of _role and _use_x; update the arguments and all references to satisfy the naming convention.

Prompt for AI agents (unresolved issues)

Check if these issues are valid — if so, understand the root cause of each and fix them. If appropriate, use sub-agents to investigate and fix each issue separately.


<file name="scripts/scr_UnitGroup/scr_UnitGroup.gml">

<violation number="1" location="scripts/scr_UnitGroup/scr_UnitGroup.gml:547">
P2: Custom agent: **Code Quality Review**

The new `plural_string_role` arguments violate the required local-variable naming convention. Rename `role` and `use_x` to `_role` and `_use_x`, and update their references.</violation>

<violation number="2" location="scripts/scr_UnitGroup/scr_UnitGroup.gml:551">
P2: Custom agent: **Code Quality Review**

The new `sum_roles` argument violates the required local-variable naming convention. Rename `roles` to `_roles` and update both references in the loop.</violation>
</file>

<sub>Reply with feedback, questions, or to request a fix.

Re-trigger cubic</sub>

[cubic-dev-ai]

0 issues found across 2 files (changes from recent commits).

Confidence score: 5/5

• Automated review surfaced no issues in the provided summaries.
• No files require special attention.

<sub>Requires human review: Auto-approval blocked by 5 unresolved issues from previous reviews.

Re-trigger cubic</sub>

[cubic-dev-ai]

1 issue found across 3 files (changes from recent commits).

Confidence score: 3/5

• In objects/obj_ncombat/Alarm_1.gml, _dread_count excludes the Venerable <dreadnought> role while the Venerable Ancients advance is active, undercounting dreadnoughts and potentially causing count-dependent behavior to diverge from the previous dreadnoughts counter — include the venerable role in the count or retain the established counter.

Prompt for AI agents (unresolved issues)

Check if these issues are valid — if so, understand the root cause of each and fix them. If appropriate, use sub-agents to investigate and fix each issue separately.


<file name="objects/obj_ncombat/Alarm_1.gml">

<violation number="1" location="objects/obj_ncombat/Alarm_1.gml:79">
P2: When the 'Venerable Ancients' advance is active, dreadnought units carry the role "Venerable <dreadnought>", so _dread_count only counts base Dreadnoughts and undercounts vs the old `dreadnoughts` counter, which counted both (scr_civil_roster.gml:548-556). This changes the armoured-division check `_dread_count + predators + land_raiders > 3` at Alarm_1.gml:228 and the `_others -= _dread_count` at line 206, so a force of only Venerable dreadnoughts no longer triggers the armoured-division narration. Count Venerable Dreadnought units as well (e.g. via role_groups(SPECIALISTS_DREADNOUGHTS)) so the index count matches the previous counter.</violation>
</file>

<sub>Tip: Review your code locally with the cubic CLI to iterate faster.

Re-trigger cubic</sub>

[cubic-dev-ai]

1 issue found across 1 file (changes from recent commits).

Confidence score: 3/5

• In objects/obj_ncombat/Alarm_1.gml, the mismatched VenerableDreadnought lookup excludes venerable dreadnoughts from formation narration and role totals, producing incorrect battle reporting; use the indexed Venerable Dreadnought key.

Prompt for AI agents (unresolved issues)

Check if these issues are valid — if so, understand the root cause of each and fix them. If appropriate, use sub-agents to investigate and fix each issue separately.


<file name="objects/obj_ncombat/Alarm_1.gml">

<violation number="1" location="objects/obj_ncombat/Alarm_1.gml:79">
P2: When a battle roster contains venerable dreadnoughts, this lookup uses `VenerableDreadnought` instead of the indexed `Venerable Dreadnought` key, so `_dread_count` excludes them from formation narration and role totals. Add the separator when constructing the venerable role name.</violation>
</file>

<sub>Tip: Review your code locally with the cubic CLI to iterate faster.

Re-trigger cubic</sub>

[cubic-dev-ai]

0 issues found across 1 file (changes from recent commits).

Confidence score: 5/5

• Automated review surfaced no issues in the provided summaries.
• No files require special attention.

<sub>Requires human review: Auto-approval blocked by 4 unresolved issues from previous reviews.

Re-trigger cubic</sub>

[cubic-dev-ai]

0 issues found across 1 file (changes from recent commits).

Confidence score: 5/5

• Automated review surfaced no issues in the provided summaries.
• No files require special attention.

<sub>Requires human review: Auto-approval blocked by 4 unresolved issues from previous reviews.

Re-trigger cubic</sub>

[EttyKitty]

/review

[cubic-dev-ai]

All reported issues were addressed across 1 file (changes from recent commits).

<sub>Tip: Review your code locally with the cubic CLI to iterate faster.

Re-trigger cubic</sub>

[The-Real-Nyx]

I was kinda in rush so don't take my suggestions as absolutely correct or anything as I might've overlooked something.

[OH296]

I was kinda in rush so don't take my suggestions as absolutely correct or anything as I might've overlooked something.

All good, all the points are valid in one way or the other

[cubic-dev-ai]

All reported issues were addressed across 1 file (changes from recent commits).

<sub>Tip: Review your code locally with the cubic CLI to iterate faster.

Re-trigger cubic</sub>

[cubic-dev-ai]

All reported issues were addressed across 1 file (changes from recent commits).

<sub>Tip: Review your code locally with the cubic CLI to iterate faster.

Re-trigger cubic</sub>

[cubic-dev-ai]

0 issues found across 1 file (changes from recent commits).

Confidence score: 5/5

• Automated review surfaced no issues in the provided summaries.
• No files require special attention.

<sub>Requires human review: Auto-approval blocked by 3 unresolved issues from previous reviews.

Re-trigger cubic</sub>

[EttyKitty]

This is a code collapse. I'm not going to nitpick, because this is better than what was. A net positive.
If there are no bugs with this - it's fine. And I'm bad at spotting bugs with my eye on GH.