Team:
Thomas.berubeg: XML
Elda King: XML
Python: Death900
C++: Death900

Any of our avid fans (i'm looking at you T_F, xmen510, and Ghandi_rules) willing to help? start to learn XML, Python, or c++, or unit modeling. i would recomend startin to mod the XML, though.

So post here if you have anything you want to do. (starting to make the civs would be good)

You can set me up at Python and C++. I'm more comfortable with C++ though, as I just started learning Python. I've almost set up my computer to use the SDK and I have yet to discover where to write in the python files.

I wish I could, but I would likely crash the whole system if I tried anything. I am absolutley horrible with anything to do with programming. Couldn't even get a good handle on Basic in school.:sad: Sorry to say that I am really only an Idea Man. I really wish I could help you out though. Sorry.

I Don't know how to do anything beyond XML, which i learned while making this mod. It's not hard to do...

I'll see about XML, but I'm not particularly adept at programming.

Programming is not particularly difficult to learn. I mean, thomas and Elda both knows programming, but i bet they don't know ^^

XML IS programming, IMO. It's a declarative language, ok, but still you have to learn the specific syntax for civ4. And simply by putting some text in a file you are able to change something in civ4, which is quite something when you think about it. C++ and Python is about the same, it's just that the syntax is more complex and the languages are much more powerful (and more error-prone). The only true learning about programming is learning to use the APIs (ok well maybe not for Object-Oriented, but that is something else).

You should really try some C++ tutorial if you want to learn the basics (i think C++ is good to start with, but if you want to make something heavy it can gets pretty hard to maintain), but be sure that it makes abstraction of OO cause you'll bang your head all over the place.

I don't know if i consider XML real programming, though... if it is programing, its a much loighter form than C++ which i've almost gotten around to starting to learn.

I learned at school that XML, and HTML, and the such, aren't programming languages, but descritive languages, because they don't run by their own (just have info to be used by other programs). But I do know a bit of programming, I learned LISP scheme (a old language, but still used - the GIMP uses it, for example) at school, and next week we should start C. But I don't think I could just go to Python or C++ now, including because I'm too busy to start learning it. Last year I thought I didn't have enought time for a lot of things, now I know I had plenty of time...

I learned at school that XML, and HTML, and the such, aren't programming languages, but descritive languages, because they don't run by their own (just have info to be used by other programs).

Python isn't run on it's own either, but it's still a programming language. In fact, it's closer to a scripting language due to its synthax. What really makes a REAL programming language is the ability to create functions (or method, for OO). Anyway, we're not going to debate what's a programming language or not ^^.

But I do know a bit of programming, I learned LISP scheme (a old language, but still used - the GIMP uses it, for example) at school, and next week we should start C. But I don't think I could just go to Python or C++ now, including because I'm too busy to start learning it.

The only difference between C and C++ is that C++ is OO, with all that implies for the synthax. Orignially, C++ was only an extension for C to make it OO, but it became a separate language as the concepts of OO evovled. Nowaday, most of the new programming language (Java, C#, Python) have the same or nearly the same synthax as C and C++. But, i do understand that learning the concept of OO can be time-consuming and I don't recommand it if you're too busy. But when you understand it all, it's damn cool to use!

i thought microsoft didn't want people to use C++ anymore... though i may be wrong

Microsoft would prefer that people use C#, but the number of software made in C++ is too much for Microsoft to stop supporting C++ and they know it. And a big difference between C++ and C# is that C++ is way faster at execution then C#. You wont see any games made in C# (or even Java) because games rely too much on execution time and CPU power. The time lost with the use of the Just-in-time compiler of C# would be better spent in AI calculation in games. However, C# tends to be used more and more for office software because C# gives more power to user interface and is easier to maintain. There's a lot of thing that is done easily in C# that in C++ would take a of work.

In term of execution time, here is a little list of language that i know:
Assembler: used on very low level nowadays, such as chip programming. It is very fast because it is the native language of a computer. That language is directly translated to 0 and 1. The drawback is that it is very hard to understand what is written and it's non-intuitive and that every type of processor and OS has it's own assembler. Code written for an intel processor won't work for an AMD processor. Early games were made with this. I'd bet that Civ 1 was made in assembler. I'm not sure if it's still used for games on portable console, though I really doubt it.

Kobold: very old language. I don't know it personnaly, but i do know that most banking system use it because it is very secure. And it's fast enough. But hard to maintain.

C/C++: used for higher level use, such as games and simulators. More intuitive and maintainable then assembler. Still has a good performance and gives space for more powerful concept such as OO. The code is translated to assembler so that the computer understands it.

Java: even higher then C++. you will rarely see games made with this since it's plateform independant. Any code you write in Java can be run anywhere if there is a Java console installed. The problem with this is it's slower then C++. What is done at compile-time is that the code you write is translated to an intermediate language (not assembler) that is then red at runtime by the Java console and executed. That Java console adds a new layer that makes execution slower. Instead of code running directly on the computer, it is run on a virtual computer that is the Java console. Pretty twisted, but very useful for office softwares. Used more and more since it can be run everywhere.

C#: about the same level as Java. It is plateform independant too, but Microsoft only support that "plateform independant" thing in Windows... go figure. As for Java, you need the .NET Framework installed to run C# code. What is done at compile-time is that the C# code is translated to an intermediate language like Java, but at runtime that intermediate language is compiled Just-in-time (JIT) to assembler. Some people claims that this method is faster, but i haven't seen any difference between C# and Java. The main advantage between Java and C# is that C# has a more intricate knowledge of the Windows plateform and is thus preferred over Java for software destined to Windows.

Hope i haven't been too technical, but i just love what i do ^^

so this is your profession?

Yup :D Software engineer that is. It's not only programming, but that's a big part and I really love it :D

I told you before... I'm 13 and cannot programme.

My assembler teacher learned C at 8 and thought that was too slow so he learned assembler on his own. Well, ok, that guy is really geek, he reprogrammed his own stereo cause he didn't like the sound of it, but still it shows that age is nothing. You only need to want to learn.

I've got the Complete Recordings for the soundtracks of the first two movies and the normal soundtrack for the third, so if you need music (for leaderheads, cutscenes, or just background), I've probably got what you need.

i have the normal soundtrack for the three movies, but thanks.

wait, how much more is the complete recording? can you cut that apart to make leaderhead musics?

thanks,
thomas

The Complete Recordings are every minute of music from the Extended Edition of the films (though the ROTK one hasn't come out yet, sadly). I have a full seven hours of LOTR music in iTunes.

EDIT: Don't know about cutting it apart, I'll look for an mp3 editing program.

Wow! where did you get that? :eek:

thanks :D

Amazon.com. Cost me $112 (I think) for both. It's totally worth it, and indescribably awesome.

can you give me a link?

Here (http://www.amazon.com/Lord-Rings-Fellowship-Complete-Recordings/dp/B000BNI90O/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2/002-7253364-0276815?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1187714399&sr=8-2) you are. It's actually $126 for both, with the Amazon discount for buying both at once.

thanks... it's more monety than i have, but, i'll keep it close by, and hope for christmas :goodjob:

(It was all of the money I had at the time too!)
I've also done an attempted extrapolation of the lyrics from both versions. They're far from complete (they don't even have translations!), but they work.

you know the list of civs, right? can you try to find good themse for each civ? (30 seconds to two minutes)

do you have the normal soundtracks too?

Yeah, I do, though I never listen to it.
I'll check the list and come up with some stuff. I'll post it there (though sadly you can't upload mp3's to CivFanatics).

You can upload it on a upload site and let t.b download it and then close the upload...[/PIRATE VOICE]

I've been looking for a non-image-only upload site - where might I find one?

filefront.com

Thanks. I'll use that to upload the file with the diplo music.

Any task which I can help out with? Would like to contribute something to the Civ names and leaders.

Well, any help is welcome, but I'm afraid we already done the civs and leaders... But give ideas of improvments to our current list, if you have any, we may change something.

Mithril should only be mined whith dwarwen mines...

Mithril should only be mined whith dwarwen mines...

Nah. The dwarves in LOTR had a monopoly on mithril by geographical accident: Khazad-dum held the only known deposits. That won't be true on randomly generated maps.

It should still be a very rare resource, though.

maybe given by a specific wonder?

Then the monopoly would occur anyway.

Very rare resource, maybe increase mine building times on a mithril vein?

maybe... we'll see when we get to that.

But the dwarwes did wake up the balrog when mining, we could make that as an rare event for the mithril mine...


One thing that would be cool is building a city inside peaks... The dwarwes did that.

Maybe Dwarven settlers can move on peaks, and can only build cities on peaks or hills. However, anyone (if they're at war or have Open Borders) can move through the peak-city then.
Maybe Mithril could be a resource occurring on Peaks only, and we could give all workers a Tunnel ability to make peaks passable (like a road, except on a mountain).

Well, maybe a special late worker can move on hills and build a tunnel network, maybe those mines can work like a city?

My thought was that [all] workers could have a 'build tunnel to' action that would take a while - it would allow passage on Peaks and allow cities to be built there.

i was hopeing for a hilly/ mountainy city set that could be used for the dwarves. if we don't get that, well, i'll try to figure out if it is opssible to build cities on peaks.

Peaks should be impassable, the passes by the mountain chains shoud be hills. The tunnels are a good idea, but any idea of how to make that?

probably add a worker action that has some link to the SDK or Python. I could then make the unit able to go on peaks. Should be doable.

That's a radical idea - I'd be impressed if anyone pulls it off. It does, however, compromise the defensive properties of mountain ranges - I've relied on them to hold back or hinder my enemies more than once.

Maybe only dwarves should be allowed to build cities on peaks, but as soon as the city is built, that spot becomes passalbe to all (with a greater defense bonus). if the city is razed, the units doing the razing are omoved to a square next to the mountian.

if the city is razed, the units doing the razing are omoved to a square next to the mountian.

Or killed, as the subterranean halls and tunnels collapse around them. It would make the dwarves very tough in war, if razing their mountain cities was a suicide mission - though of course, the cities could be captured and kept like any others.

Truly, there were very few mountain passes on LOTR and the Silmarillion. If we make mountains passable, places like Mordor or Gondolin would lose their appeal. Perhaps we could make one special promo that allowed the unit to pass over it (like Flying, for Eagles and such). Maybe a dwarven worker should be able to build roads on it (very, very difficult and slow), so anyone can pass. But I'd prefer to keep the normal system.

But a tunnel city would be cool though... And its only the dwarwes who could build those cities... So a special abilitie?

But a tunnel city would be cool though... And its only the dwarwes who could build those cities... So a special abilitie?

something given only to dwarven settlers and workers.

Yes, something like that...

Yeah, that would be cool.
Maybe just give the Dwarven workers the Tunnel ability, and give the settlers the ability to found cities in tunnels.

Interesting thought - Dwarven cities in tunnels have to be 'expanded' by a worker when they're ready to grow from some particular size (like 6).

that's good. i like it. (only those on peaks, of course)

Great, though hard. If we manage to do, it's included.

Another idea for civ-specific cities - if elves found a city on a forest tile, the forest stays.

Another idea for civ-specific cities - if elves found a city on a forest tile, the forest stays.

i don't think that should be hard to do... i think it's in the XML. i'll ask Kael.

so, the answer from Kael:
Another idea for civ-specific cities - if elves found a city on a forest tile, the forest stays.
So, as the title says, is this possible in the XML? (is this something that you've done already?)

Not directly. That actually occurs in the SDK (when a city is built the feature on the tile is removed) so an XML change wouldnt do it.

But in python you could add a function to onCityBuilt so that if an elven city is built a forest is added to the tile.

Before you implement consider the idea from a function (non-flavor) perspective. What you are saying is that all elven cities are +1 hammer and +50% defense. Thats a pretty significant boost. If you were going to do it I would at least recommend removign the elves ability to build walls and other defensive buildings.
we'll have to ask Death900, but it's not a too great priority, so it can wait until the end...

I think it should be doable. I have no real idea about it though, since I still have to go tru the SDK and Python.
Man, I wish there was 36 hours per day :cry:

I don't think elves should have cities in forests. For example, in the First Age most Noldorin cities were on hills, not on forests, Círdan lived in a Harbor (probably there was no forest there), Thingol lived in a underground palace; later, Eregion was not a forested region, nor Lindon; the elves of Mirkwood also lived mostly underground; Rivendell was in a valley, surrounded by forests, but not in a forest actually. Only in Lórien and Ossiriand the elves had dwellings in forests (except for small bands of elves, that would rather be the population that works that tile).

maybe we can have some of the elves have forest cities.

lol, you really want those elves in forest cities, do you thomas?

i just think it would look good :mischief:

Well, we already have the Lórien palace, and I think it would be unbalanced, unnecessary, hard, and inaccurate. Better let elves as they are...

at best, we can have a city art that looks like forest.

What I was thinking more was that if an Elf city is founded on a forest, the forest stays, but if it's not founded on a forest, there's still no forest.

Yes, that perhaps would be logic, but as has been said it would be unbalanced and quite hard for a trivial change... Except if we give each race a native feature, with bonuses and so, but that would be even harder.

Yeah, you can take the forest bonuses off, I just meant keep the forest there as in it shows the graphic, and when you mouse over it says 'city ... forest'.

Perhaps we can get graphics for cities that include trees and such for elven forest, much easier, no need to change python or such...

Yeah, I think that should do.

There are some Elvish arboreal city graphics already available (courtesy of Woodelf (http://forums.civfanatics.com/member.php?u=32561), funnily enough...):

http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=6046

http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=2755

http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=2754

http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=2753