Version 0.87 released! Download (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=8321)
Filefront mirror (http://files.filefront.com/Merged+Mod+080zip/;11593785;/fileinfo.html) Mirror not updated to 0.87 yet.

Hi all!

For your downloading pleasure, here is merge of several quality mods and some minor tweaks. Major features include Wolfshanze's Mod, Dale's Combat Mod, the Better AI mod, Influence Driven War and the BUG mod. See the full feature list below! Remember to download Wolfshanze 2.85 (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=9497), as it is the "graphics base" of this mod! See installation instructions below.


New in 0.87:

-Updated to Wolfshanze 2.85. I have intentionally left out the water planes and the UAV. Movies and sounds are now supported, but optional. Read the installation instructions below!

-Updated to BetterAI 0.41 (except for the aircombat model, as I use a custom model).

-Updated to Unofficial Patch 0.21 by Dresden.

-Integrated BUG Mod 3.5. This was a big job!! Thanks to EmperorFool for much needed support with this. Make sure you read the installation instructions below!

-Assimilation mod by Kael (more options for custom games)!

-Bombardment bug from DCM 1.7 fixed (bombarding from friendly territory).

-Latest version of Inquisition by OrionVeteran included (101E).

-Various Python bugfixes from 0.86.


Modders: Sourcefiles for the Merged Mod 0.83 can be found here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=8568). Not updated to 0.87 yet.
---------------------------------------------------
Full feature list:


New Units:
-Huge graphical upgrade from Wolfshanze’s mod.
-Lots of new ships from the Wolfshanze mod.
-New aircraft from the Wolfshanze mod.
-New siege weapons from the Wolfshanze mod.
-Partisans, see below.
-Enola Gay nuclear bomber.
-Anti Air gun.
-Anti Tank gun.
-Inquisitor.
-Stealth Fighter.
-Advanced Jet Fighter.
-Close Air Support Bomber.
See screenshots below!

New Techs:
-Muskets from Wolfshanze's mod.
-Air Superiority from Wolfshanze’s mod.
-Jet Propulsion.
http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/8481/airtechsui6.jpg

New Options for Custom Games:
http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/4839/optionsuz1.jpg

Gameplay changes:
-New, more realistic, Aerial Combat logic.
-Randomized Invisibility. Sub spotting is no longer a certain. Move your sub spotters around to improve their chances of spotting, or use air units to do real sub spotting.
-Manhattan Project is now a National Wonder. All Civs must complete this to build nukes.
-All features from Dale’s Combat Mod can be selectively switched on or off. All ships and aircraft take advantage of the DCM features (ranged bombardment, Air bombing missions).
-Partisans appear after city conquest on the defender side, after the defender has discovered Rifling.
-Inquisitors can remove non-state religions from your cities.
-Defensive terrain reduce damage from air units.
-Spawning Barbarian ships may hold raiders (warrior, axeman or similar).
-Cultural bonus to tiles when winning combats or pillaging. This allows you to gain enemy territory for your own civ, without conquering cities!

Links to original mods:
Wolfshanze mod (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=249129)
Dale’s Combat Mod (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=257210)
Influence Driven War (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=188007)
Partisan mod (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=240656)
Inquisition Mod (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=249392)
Pirates Mod (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=239332)
Air Forces Mod (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=239144)
Random Invisibility Mod (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=277940)
Culturally Linked Starts (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=290694)
Road to War Mod (http://forums.civfanatics.com/forumdisplay.php?f=265)
Specialist Stacker (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=273795)
Attitude Smilies (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6363731&postcount=162)
More links coming for the newest added components!

See release notes below for further details.


New Aerial Combat Model:


In my Merged Mod, I have used the air units from the Wolfshanze Mod as a base. To this base, I have added three more air units (and there's also an Atomic bomber from Dale's Combat Mod). This pushes the roster of air units in the game to this, grouped by 'generation':

Airship

Early flyer (a special, unbuildable unit)
Early fighter
Early bomber

Fighter
Light Bomber
Bomber
Atomic Bomber (a small nuke unit, which is killed upon use)

Jet Fighter
Close Air Support Bomber
Jet Bomber

Advanced Jet Fighter

Stealth fighter
Stealth bomber

New units: Close Air Support Bomber, Advanced Jet Fighter, Stealth Fighter. The Jet fighter in-game represents 3rd generation fighters, like the Mig-21, the F4 and F5 and others. Graphically, most of these are represented by the existing units from Wolf's mod. The Advanced Jet Fighter is 4.5 generation fighters, i.e. what most countries use today. F-15, F-16, Mig-29, the Eurofighter and Su-27 represent these.

New Technology: Jet Propulsion. Introduced to allow for a longer progression of air units. Air units now transition from biplanes->propeller planes->jet aircraft. For the fighters, this means that it's Early Flyer -> Early Fighter -> Fighter -> Jet Fighter -> Advanced Jet Fighter. For bombers, it's Early Bomber -> Bomber -> Jet Bomber. The Light Bomber can upgrade to either Jet Fighter or Close Air Support Bomber. Check out the tech tree in-game. Nothing can upgrade to either the Stealth Bomber or Stealth Fighter. You need to build these units from scratch!

All in all, there are twelve 'regular' air units that the player can build and use. That's seven more than the standard game. Six of the units have the ability to intercept attacking units. With so many air units, I really felt constrained by the existing aerial combat model, and so I have developed a new model. Read on below:

The basic concepts of the original model are reused - there is still an interception check, five combat rounds, combat odds and damage dealing. However, the way each element is calculated has changed:

* The way evasion works has changed - all air units have a base evasion value - and this affects the interception chance of each interceptor against the other units. Evasion is no longer a separate check done before the interception test. So an early fighter has a 70% chance to intercept an early bomber, but only a 30% chance to intercept an advanced jet fighter (and if it manages to intercept, it will most likely lose big-time).
* Combat odds are still calculated using current strength, but the interception value may give a bonus. This means interceptors gains a small bonus against bombers (which have zero interception), but also a small bonus against units with a lower interception value. Combats between equals are still a 50/50 venture.
* The potential for dealing damage will vary, depending on the opponent. A fighter can do 34% of damage to another fighter (so three wins are required), while only doing 24% of damage versus a jet bomber (so it basically needs to win all five rounds of combat to shoot down the jet bomber, the odds of which are quite small).

In essence, my new aerial combat model simulates a need to have aircraft from a similar or better generation than your enemy to defend yourself.


Screenshots:

Take it to the skies with new Advanced Jet Fighters and Stealth Fighters!
http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/624/fightersbh0.jpg

Rain death on your enemies from the Close Air Support Bombers!
http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/322/casxo3.jpg

Custom graphics for different civs!
http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/6154/air2mf1.jpg



Previous releases:

New in 0.83:

- New units: Close Air Support Bomber, Advanced Jet Fighter, Stealth Fighter. The Jet fighter in-game represents 3rd generation fighters, like the Mig-21, the F4 and F5 and others. Graphically, most of these are represented by the existing units from Wolf's mod. The Advanced Jet Fighter is 4.5 generation fighters, i.e. what most countries use today. F-15, F-16, Mig-29, the Eurofighter and Su-27 represent these.

- New Technology: Jet Propulsion. Introduced to allow for a longer progression of air units. Air units now transition from biplanes->propeller planes->jet aircraft. For the fighters, this means that it's Early Flyer -> Early Fighter -> Fighter -> Jet Fighter -> Advanced Jet Fighter. For bombers, it's Early Bomber -> Bomber -> Jet Bomber. The Light Bomber can upgrade to either Jet Fighter or Close Air Support Bomber. Check out the tech tree in-game. Nothing can upgrade to either the Stealth Bomber or Stealth Fighter. You need to build these units from scratch!

- The air units have been grouped into Jet Aircraft and simply Air Units.

Most of the graphics of the above two points are from the Modern Warfare Mod! Thanks to Snafusmith and others who contributed.

- New Air Combat routine to better handle all the new units. It's pretty advanced. Suffice to say that the combat results are realistic, while still keeping to the spirit of the game. Read more below!

- Introduced the extra sea damage from air units from the Air Forces mod. This is to add greater variety to the air units. Air units with iAirCombatLimit of 70 and above will be lethal to ships, while keeping the limit of 70 against other targets.

- Randomized Invisibility by NP300. This one is totally awesome! Units that can see invisible units has a chance to spot, and it's not 100%. Some XML variables in the GlobalDefinesAlt have been introduced to control this. Also, there are now two different kinds of invisibility for subs, so that nuclear powered subs are more stealthy.

- Culturally Linked Starts by Jean Elcard. It's an option for custom games at the bottom of the options panel. Civ's with similar historical starting locations will begin the game near each other, but not in a predictable direction from you.

- Now supports Wolfshanze 2.84, except movies and sounds (to keep download below CF's 10 MB limit). I have intentionally left out the water planes and the UAV.

- Integrated Better AI 0.37, which also includes Solver's 0.19 Unofficial Patch.

- Supports up to 40 civ games by default.


New in 0.80:

-Now supports Beyond the Sword 3.17.
-Now supports Wolfshanze 2.83, except movies and sounds (to keep download below CF's 10 MB limit). I have intentionally left out the water planes and the UAV.
-Now supports Dale's Combat Mod 1.7.
-Integrated Better AI 0.36, which also includes Solver's 0.19 Unofficial Patch.
-The Barbarian ships have been removed, as 3.17 does a fine job of this on it's own.
-Supports 36 civ games by default.
-Giant Earth Map (GEM) by Armandeus, based on Genghis Kai's map. It a real beauty!!!


New in 0.74:

-Now supports Wolfshanze 2.73, except movies and sounds.
-Updated with Bhruic's Unofficial Patch, 1.21.
-Includes a new interception routine for the AA unit. It will now damage incoming aircraft, but cannot turn them away. The new interception routine also affects normal aircraft, so XML values have been adjusted to compensate. Biplanes can no longer intercept jet bombers! Please provide feedback!
-Includes four "new" barbarian naval units. You will now actually see barbarian ships spawn in the oceans! This is purely an XML modded feature, and please provide feedback!
-Killed two different crashbugs.

New in 0.60:

-Now supports Wolfshanze 2.69 graphics, including three new leaders.
-Updated with DCM 1.5, including the revised Manhattan Project.
-Added Influence Driven War (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=188007) by moctezuma. When winning combats, pillaging or taking cities, your culture will spread to the plots involved with each victory. It is thus possible to win territory, without actually taking cities! I have left out the city resistance part, since I already have the Partisan Mod, which I prefer. Please note that none of the special combat features of DCM give this culture bonus, ONLY regular land attacks, pillaging and conquering cities give this bonus. Please note: Combined Arms Stack Attack does NOT give this bonus. I haven't figured out how to merge those two functions...
-Added Specialist Stacker (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=273795) by Johny.
-Tweaked the population reduction effects from Dale's Air Bombing. The population cannot be bombed below 6.
-Added support for 34 civs by popular demand.

New in 0.51:

-Now supports Wolfshanze 2.68
-Added the Pirates Mod (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=239332). The few barbarian ships that DO spawn, will now hold some land units which will land and plunder. Also, this feature will hopefully be used in later events.
-Added the Inquisition Mod (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=249392) (without Limited Religions). You can now remove all non-state religions from your cities.
-Tweaked the AA-unit. Base interception is now 15%, and the units are immobile (zero movement).
-Modified the population reduction effects from Dale's Air Bombing. The population cannot be bombed below 8.
-Added the REDUCED_MAX_AIR_DAMAGE_FROM_PLOT from the Air Forces Mod (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=239144) from Gedemon/The Lopez. The change means that terrain and/or city defense is now taken into account when the max damage from air attacks is calculated. It follows this formula:

iAirCombatLimit - (REDUCED_MAX_AIR_DAMAGE_FROM_PLOT / 100 * Terrain Defense Modifier) = Max Damage

Example:
Say you are attacking a unit in the open. The defense from open terrain is zero, so there's no change. The maximum damage you can dish out is limited to the aircraft model. In Merged Mod and Wolfshanze, the Jet Fighter and Light Bombers can kill units entirely, because they have the variable iAirCombatLimit set to 100, which means the maximum damage is 100%. Now, if you're attacking a unit in a forested plain, there's a 50% defense modifier. The maximum damage you can inflict over several bombing runs is now calculated (still using the Jet Fighter as an example) as 100% - (40/100 * 50%) = 80%. So if a unit is hiding in terrain, which gives it coverage, it can no longer be wiped out by the Light Bomber or Jet Fighter! The value of 40 is a default variable, declared in GlobalDefines.xml. Most bombers have had their iAirCombatLimit values increased a little to balance this new feature.

Air missions and aircraft in Merged Mod:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=172948&d=1207055237

New in 0.4:

-Updated to match Wolf's 2.65 (should also work with 2.66).
-Airships do not require Oil, as per the vanilla BtS.
-The airmissions from DCM become available as airunits become more advanced.
-Two new units: Anti-Aircraft Gun and Anti-Tank Gun, borrowed from the Road to War mod. They are available with Artillery and Industrialism, and do not require any resources to build. Both units are defensive, but should not be much trouble for infantry or artillery to take out. They are intended to bite back against their natural adversaries, though! Please give feedback on these two units! :)

Screenshots of the two new units:
Anti Air Gun (http://img153.imageshack.us/my.php?image=antiairtz7.jpg) - Note that it also gains 50% against air, it's just listed below the helicopter bonus.
Anti Tank Gun (http://img153.imageshack.us/my.php?image=antitankbs9.jpg)

---------------------------------------------------

New in 0.31:

-Updated the MM to match Wolfshanze's 2.63. You need to download his most recent version to get the correct wolfshanze.fpk file.

---------------------------------------------------

New in 0.3:

-New DLL, which finally incorporates all of Bhruic's 1.11 changes.
-Adjusted bombardment range and accuracy for some of Wolfshanze's ships.

---------------------------------------------------

New in 0.2:

-Ranged bombardment now works, for both siege and naval units.
-All airbomb missions from DCM works.
-Fighter engage missions also works.
-The Enola Gay has been added back in. It is available with Fission and Air Superiority.
-The bugs relating to specific models from Wolfshanze's mod have been fixed.
-Archery bombardment has been made less effective (I hope).
-Horse Archers (Horsemen) cannot bombard.

---------------------------------------------------

Installation:
Please read these instructions carefully!

1. Download the Merged Mod from the link at the top of this page.
2. Extract the archive, including subfolders, to your \CIV\Beyond the Sword\Mods folder. IMPORTANT: Directory name must be Merged Mod 0.87!
3. Download Wolfshanze's mod, and copy the wolfshanze.fpk into the Merged Mod\Assets folder. This is essential - that .fpk file holds all the new graphics! Without it, a lot of units will appear as red domes, and choosing the new civ leaders will cause the game to crash.
4. If you want the movies and sounds from Wolfshanze's mod (purely optional, the game will run fine without them), copy these two directories:
\CIV\Beyond the Sword\Mods\Wolfshanze\Assets\Art\Movies
\CIV\Beyond the Sword\Mods\Wolfshanze\Assets\sounds
Copy them to the similar locations in the Merged Mod 0.XX folder, and click 'Yes' to any write-over prompts.


Any feedback is welcome!

---------------------------------------------------


I've used Notepad++ (http://downloads.sourceforge.net/notepad-plus/npp.4.7.5.Installer.exe?modtime=1200342660&big_mirror=0) and WinMerge (http://downloads.sourceforge.net/winmerge/WinMerge-2.6.14-Setup.exe) for this job, and if you want to get into mod-merging, I suggest you take a look at these little gems. ;)

I've wanted someone to do this for a while...

Will a Wolfshanze update convert automatically to this mod the same way, or you will have to update along with Wolfshanze?

Hi arstal

The answer is: It depends. It depends on what Wolfshanze decides to update. If there are only graphical updates, I'd assume that you could just replace the wolfshanze.fpk file. If there are new units and other stuff, a new build will be required.

I've waited on doing this, both until Dale had completed his DCM (I wanted to get CASA included), and also until Wolfshanze seemed satisfied with his mod. So the DCM is at version 1.3, and Wolfshanze's mod is at 2.6.

Cant wait to give it a try. I like Wolfshanze mod a lot and I have to say that I also missed partisans since Civ2 so it might be a good idea to bring them back :goodjob:

Actually I have a few more questions regardign the mod you combined:

- can we still add/remove features from the combat mod (like archer bombardment etc)
- if I have Wolfshanze mod instaleld already do I just add other files on top of it to make it work?
- can we disable/enable partisans before starting the campaign?

Actually I have a few more questions regardign the mod you combined:

- can we still add/remove features from the combat mod (like archer bombardment etc)
- if I have Wolfshanze mod instaleld already do I just add other files on top of it to make it work?
- can we disable/enable partisans before starting the campaign?


Thanks for your interest! :)

1. Yes, as per Dale's own instructions, you can still switch his features on or off.
2. No, I would strongly suggest that you create a separate library for this combination. That also means keeping a duplicate of the 275 MB .fpk file on your hard drive.
3. No, the partisans are not easily switched on or off. I wouldn't know how to do it, other than recreating this combination without the partisan component.

This is my first attempt at modding anything in CIV4. I'm not a programmer, but I'm just very good with handling complex data and using logic. ;) It's basically an exercise in identifying what parts to edit, what parts to keep and what parts to add.

By the way, this mod uses the GameCoreDLL from Dale's mod.

SO to install it you would need BTS patched to 3.13 then install Combat mod and Partisan mod in the same folder (?) and where do you put the dll file and that Wolfshanze file?

I will give it a try tonight as it sounds VERY promising!

Just so you all know, this has my blessings.

Oh... and I may never be "satisfied" with my mod... I'm always tinkering... but v2.6 is a pretty good one! I have a new update in the oven... changing the HRE to the Austrian Empire.

Oh, and even if all I do is nothing more then a graphical update, there will still need to be some XML changes (more then just a FPK update)... as ANY graphical update I do usually involves at least a change in the unitart.xml and civart.xml files.

Good combination though.

SO to install it you would need BTS patched to 3.13 then install Combat mod and Partisan mod in the same folder (?) and where do you put the dll file and that Wolfshanze file?

I will give it a try tonight as it sounds VERY promising!

No, no, no! :) It's much easier than that. First, you need BTS patched to 3.13. Then you just need to unzip my download into a new folder (mine is just called Merged Mod) in the Mod directory of BTS. All files should unzip into the proper directories. Then, copy wolfshanze.fpk from his mod (from that mod's assets folder) straight into the assets directory of the Merged Mod directory. Launch the game, go 'Advanced' and select 'Load a mod'. In the list you'll see the Merged Mod. You're then good to go! :goodjob:

Just so you all know, this has my blessings.

Oh... and I may never be "satisfied" with my mod... I'm always tinkering... but v2.6 is a pretty good one! I have a new update in the oven... changing the HRE to the Austrian Empire.

Oh, and even if all I do is nothing more then a graphical update, there will still need to be some XML changes (more then just a FPK update)... as ANY graphical update I do usually involves at least a change in the unitart.xml and civart.xml files.

Good combination though.

Thank you for the ok, Wolf! :)

No, no, no! :) It's much easier than that. First, you need BTS patched to 3.13. Then you just need to unzip my download into a new folder (mine is just called Merged Mod) in the Mod directory of BTS. All files should unzip into the proper directories. Then, copy wolfshanze.fpk from his mod (from that mod's assets folder) straight into the assets directory of the Merged Mod directory. Launch the game, go 'Advanced' and select 'Load a mod'. In the list you'll see the Merged Mod. You're then good to go! :goodjob:

hehehe, thats what I meant - I just didnt say that clearly enough haha.
Do I have to manually replace the core.dll or is it done automatically?

Apreciate your help - in return I will play your mod and hunt the bugs all evening long tonight haha:crazyeye:

It's all auto, except for that monster .fpk file! :) Thanks for the help, happy hunting! I hope you don't have too many issues! ;)

Ok, seeing that you dont have the time to test your mod I have done it for you last night :lol: got to modern times on epic speed without any major problems.
The game plays really well and as soon as I start next war I will be able to test everythign else I havent done so far (ranged bombardment/bombing missions/partisans) Now the game did crash once but I was able to reload it using the save from same trun so I guess it was just something random rather than error in your work :goodjob:

Now, a few things I had to ask as I have never played Dale's combat mod so I am unsure if the issues are from his mod or maybe yours:
- wonders/buildings/specialists dont show culture bonus? Although I am quite sure they still provide it.
- courthhoue doesnt provide spying bonus anymore?(used to be +2)
- is archer bombardment is supposed to destroy forrest/jungle ? I gotta admit helped me out a bit before I got iron working and had to clear a few squares haha:confused:

So in general GREAT JOB, no errors, no CTDs, pure fun :)

P.S: Would you consider releasing a version with Enola Gay in it? (maybe as optional unit or something)

Hey, thanks a lot, Krysiak! :goodjob: I don't have that much time to devote to computing these days, so it might be a while before I get a chance myself to try these mods out. So your testing is much appreciated!

On to your questions:
1. I think this a CVGameCore.dll issue. DCM will not work without the .dll that Dale programmed, but I'm not sure if he's included Bhruic's unofficial patch? I just raced through the DCM thread, and there's no mention of whether or not he's based his DCM on 3.13 clean, or 3.13 plus Bhruic's work.

2. The same as above. Brhuic's patch fixed display issues with both espionage and culture values for building popups. Try checking the city screen, that should show the correct values by the buildings on the left side of the screen.

3. This must be an issue with DCM. I would suggest turning archery barrage off (I know I will be doing that anyways), or maybe test it using a clean download of DCM. If that bug persists, you should notify Dale.

4. On that nukebomber: I'll look into it. I know that Wolfshanze has adjusted the technologies around flight slightly, and the nukebomber might have to be tinkered with so it works as Dale intended it to. And I don't know how to make a unit optional, other than keeping two separate unit files, so it's either in or not. :)

Well for now everything works Like a dream so no need to modify anything but I will keep you updated if I find any bugs. I hope you will update the mod sooner or later as in the past I wasnt able to play game without Wolfshanze mod - now I cant imagine playing without Dale's mod and Wolfshanze hehe!
Anyways I saw that Dale' is planning something special for his next version so maybe it would be worth waiting a few weeks before adding anything - knowing his work to date it will be worth the wait :goodjob:

Thanks for putting it together - it adds a lot to Civ4 and will keep many of us happy untill civ5 is out :lol:

You're more than welcome! :)

Yeah, I saw Dale's little appetizer, so I probably won't mess with anything for now. I've posted a question over in his thread to clear up the mystery of culture/espionage. I know Wolf included Bhruic's mod in his mod, and I would really like to get a fix for this. I don't know how to tear the .dll apart, or I would just fix it myself! ;)

The issues with buildings not displaying culture properly are indeed directly linked to Bhruics fixes... which are obviously NOT included in Dale's Gamecore.DLL file... I would also suspect the 34-Civ options found in LtBob's DLL which I use are also not in Dale's Combat Mod, so, once again, I would suspect this feature of the Wolfshanze Mod would also not be in this merged mod.

I suspect Dale's Combat Mod DLL doesn't include either Bhruic's or LtBob's fixes, so the gamescreen and gameplay enhancements from Bhruic, along with the 34-Civs and the Nuclear Fallout options found in the Wolfshanze Mod are all missing in this merged mod, because you're basically choosing the Dale Combat mod enhancements over the enhancements found in LtBob and Bhruic's patches.

Right. What sort of applications do I need to open up those .dll's? I might give it a shot to cut and paste from Bhruic's patch, if it's not overly complicated... I do want to include the best feature from both features.

Darn. I've done a bit of testing tonight, and it looks like there are some of the airbombing missions which don't apply to the units which require them... I'll have to look more into this.

Darn. I've done a bit of testing tonight, and it looks like there are some of the airbombing missions which don't apply to the units which require them... I'll have to look more into this.


Yup I was about to say that there seem to be quite a few problems in the modern era (unfortunately) no bombing missions are available on the planes except for the one to destroy units 9even the one for destroying fortifications is gone) plus there seem to be some problems with bombing using fighters.
Also there is no ranged bombardment on ships and artillery.

On the good side opportunity attacks work fine, and partisans work fien as well - and they are mean as hell :sad:
I wonder if the problems with bombing missions are caused by the dll?

No, it's an XML issue, and I'm on it. I've got ranged bombardment working, and I know how to fix the airbombing. I'll be pretty busy over the weekend, so I'm not making any promises as to when I'll be done editing.

Sorry!

No big deal - I am away for the weekend myself so wont be pushing hehe
If I find anything else I iwll let you know but for now I think it is only the bombardment and missions.

P.S: You are god :king:

Thanks for the compliment. The real compliment is to Wolfshanze and Dale, though, but I sure appreciate it anyway.

Well, I've spent a little time at work fixing this. :) There's a temporary download location at [Link removed]. Just replace this file (CIV4UnitInfos.xml) with the same file in the merged mod\assets\xml\units folder. Ranged bombardment and all the airbombing missions should now be available. I haven't tested it, though, as I'm at work. ;)

I've also added back the code for Dale's nukebomber. It's supposed to be buildable at the same time as the normal bomber. It's a one use and out unit, it's basically based on the ICBM unit. I won't give any guarantees to this, though, because I can't remember if I left the proper graphics for it in the 0.1 beta release.

Oh, and this should work with your previous savegames, as it's pure xml changes. I will hopefully be able to release a new beta over the weekend, where I hope Wolf will have squashed the bug in his mod. I'm also curious about adding the revolutions component, or some variation of it to this mod.

Have fun! :)

Bad news!

If I replace the file with yours then the game crashes on start returning code about bad file and: bad class unit atomic - so I guess bomber causes the problem here...

I'm having a HECK of a time squashing this bug... well, it's EASY to squash if I just remove units, but I don't want to lose good models.

Specifically, I have found these models to be culprits:

German:
Dreadnought (Helgoland by Snafu)
Pre-Dreadnought (Brandenburg by Matt)
Submarine (Type VIIC by Matt)

English:
Pre-Dreadnought (Canopus by Matt)

If the above models are removed from the mod (XML removal is enough), then the problems terminate and are solved.

Of course, I don't want that to be the end solution... I'm still working, but you might want to double-check your mod... go into World Builder with Germany, check civilopedia and see if all looks okay... then add all Industrial techs and check the civilopedia again.

Okay... Mamba just pointed-out something I had missed and/or couldn't see... I had an error in my UnitArtStyles XML which kept getting duplicated for a few entries, so not a problem with models at all.

The problem is now SOLVED (at least on my end). I'll upload a fixed version later today.

Anyways, I'm sure my error carried over to your mod, so be sure to get the newer version when I upload it later today.

Thanks for the heads-up! I just looked through the file, and I see what's wrong. I've done the edits myself now. :)

If it doesnt work maybe try removing Enola Gay? :cry:

0.2 released!

New in 0.2:

-Ranged bombardment now works, for both siege and naval units.
-All airbomb missions from DCM works.
-Fighter engage missions also works.
-The Enola Gay has been added back in. It is available with Fission and Air Superiority.
-The bugs relating to specific models from Wolfshanze's mod have been fixed.
-Archery bombardment has been made less effective (I hope).
-Horse Archers (Horsemen) cannot bombard (intended).

Ninja2 once again you are a god!
Tested everything in WB and everything seems to be working fine: bombing runs/enola gay/rangd bombardment and archer bombardemtn.
I will do a bit of "extensive" testing while on the plane tommorow :crazyeye:

And Wolfshanze just updated again (looks like just a minor change from Holy Rome to Austria- but changing CivInfo alone causes crash)

Sorry, but I'm on a role... I have a couple more changes planned for Austria coming soon.

Hopefully, everyone is having fun using this compilation! If no bugs turn up :please:, I plan to expand this mod a little further.

For the next release, I will look into compiling a new CVGameCore.dll to include all of Bhruics Unofficial Patch changes. I will also edit the range/accuracy values as per Wolfshanzes suggestions.

Did notice another issue with archer bombardment, but might be a DCM issue.

Archers can attack ships.

Yeah, I think that's intentional. I personally don't care much for the whole archery bombardment, but I know some players requested that Dale put the code in. I prefer to switch it off.

Didnt have much time to play on the weekend but I did a bit of testing while on the plane and everything seems working fine this time so congratulations on fixing the bugs ;-)
:goodjob:

Cant wait for further expansions to the mod !:eek:

Yeah, I think that's intentional. I personally don't care much for the whole archery bombardment, but I know some players requested that Dale put the code in. I prefer to switch it off.

Wasn't so much the archer bombarding, but the archers almost killing a Privateer that annoyed me. A Catapult- ok, I can buy that a bit, but not a bunch of arrows taking out a warship.

Well balancing is not easy but I would not call that a major issue as archers are gone by the time most nations expand their fleets. One thing possible to do to solve the problem would be to add a severe negative modifier for archers bombarding naval units?

Wasn't so much the archer bombarding, but the archers almost killing a Privateer that annoyed me. A Catapult- ok, I can buy that a bit, but not a bunch of arrows taking out a warship.

Was this with 0.1? Because in that version, the archery bombardment precision value was missing. I'm not sure how the game interprets this missing value, but I could imagine all sorts of weird results if damage is divided by precision, and the precision was read to be a zero. Maximum damage every time, perhaps? At any rate, the precision value IS there in 0.2.

By the way, I'm compiling a new dll as I type this!:)

Well balancing is not easy but I would not call that a major issue as archers are gone by the time most nations expand their fleets. One thing possible to do to solve the problem would be to add a severe negative modifier for archers bombarding naval units?

See, this is where I can't help. I simply have ZERO coding skills. I can merge stuff (and edit easy things), not create new stuff... :sad:

Hey Ninja2... just wondering... is this your website? (http://askaninja.com/) :lol:

Hehe, no way man! :) Don't have time to keep a website, and if I did --- it wouldn't be about ninjas! :D

One another note...0.3 is now released! Yes, and I'm quite proud. My first foray into compiling and stuff, which I really know nothing about. The excellent guides on this forum, as well as Dale's pertinent marking of his code has made this possible. So go ahead and check it out!

Hehe, no way man! :) Don't have time to keep a website, and if I did --- it wouldn't be about ninjas! :D
Actually, it's not ABOUT ninjas... it's just asking a ninja for his viewpoint on things.

One another note...0.3 is now released! Yes, and I'm quite proud. My first foray into compiling and stuff, which I really know nothing about. The excellent guides on this forum, as well as Dale's pertinent marking of his code has made this possible. So go ahead and check it out!
Sorry... I don't mark my code... even though I'm a wolf, I've been housebroken... marking is bad.

One issue I see right now- Austria is still Holy Rome.

Yes, I haven't updated to Wolfshanze's 2.63, so it's really a non-issue! :) Updating to 2.63 is not a priority at the moment, but eventually I'll get around to it.

QUESTION: Does the game work with the latest wolfshanze.fpk from 2.63? If not, I'd better make updating a higher priority...

Tonight I will give your mod a try in multiplayer !
Should be good fun ;-)

I think there might be issues with stack attack and multiplayer, so be aware of using this option. You might want to check with Dale.

I used the latest version, thinking you updated to it. It works but no point in using 2.63.

I did notice something funny- some German units all had red octogons over them, blocking out their view.

I'll play Wolfshanze once and see if it's your mod or Wolf's that's the cause, thinking its yours though.

From the sound of things, you guys don't need old Wolf and his mod anymore... http://forums.profantasysports.com/images/smiles/SAD2.GIF

Good work Ninja.

I used the latest version, thinking you updated to it. It works but no point in using 2.63.

I did notice something funny- some German units all had red octogons over them, blocking out their view.

I'll play Wolfshanze once and see if it's your mod or Wolf's that's the cause, thinking its yours though.

Yeah, I think that's my mod acting up. I guess I need to update my XML files, whenever Wolfshanze updates his.

From the sound of things, you guys don't need old Wolf and his mod anymore... http://forums.profantasysports.com/images/smiles/SAD2.GIF

Good work Ninja.

On the contrary. See above! :) And my mod doesn't work at all without your mod, so no need to feel abandoned! ;)

This looks really good!
Can I just make a point that the Attitude Icons isn't from us at BUG. It was originally by Porges who made and coded it for vanilla, so credit should go to him.

This looks really good!
Can I just make a point that the Attitude Icons isn't from us at BUG. It was originally by Porges who made and coded it for vanilla, so credit should go to him.

Roger that, I've included his name in the original post. :)

Tonight I will give your mod a try in multiplayer !
Should be good fun ;-)

How did the test work out for you? I'm curious to hear... :)

Well unfortunately I didnt get to start multiplayer campaign yet (it will be tonight instead) but I have finished my first epic campaign with your mod and oh my oh my I have to say that having A bomb/bombing missions and ranged merged with Wolfshanze mod and his units might be a sole reason of me being single again in no time :sad:

One thing I have to mention which caused me to go :confused: is when my fleet of 3xheavy cruiser 2xdestroyer carrier and two liberty transports closed in on a coastal city and got fired upon due to opportunity fire, the problem is they got fired upon by longbowman who dealt stinging damage to my ships LOL
Everythign else is tip top - I will report on the multiplayer game when it is started ;-)

Turn off ARchery barrage and that problem goes away.

It's those annoying red dots that mess me up right now.

[...]
- can we disable/enable partisans before starting the campaign?
[...]
No, the partisans are not easily switched on or off. I wouldn't know how to do it, other than recreating this combination without the partisan component.

This is my first attempt at modding anything in CIV4. I'm not a programmer, but I'm just very good with handling complex data and using logic. ;) It's basically an exercise in identifying what parts to edit, what parts to keep and what parts to add.

To disable the Partisan Mod open the CvCustomEventManager.py file located in Merged Mods\Assets\Python dir.
Now search for the lines:
import CvPartisanEventManager and CvPartisanEventManager.CvPartisanEventManager(self )
and change them to:
#import CvPartisanEventManager and #CvPartisanEventManager.CvPartisanEventManager(sel f)

Thats all :) and its save game compatible.

It's those annoying red dots that mess me up right now.

What units have red dots? I know Wolfshanze has changed some units from 2.6 to 2.63, and I'm guessing it's those changes, as I haven't updated my XML files since 2.6. Wolfshanze is cooking something new (again :p ), so I'll probably wait for him to update, before I update again.

If you still have the 2.6, you can just moved the wolfshanze.fpk from that build into the assets folder. If you don't have that file anymore, you could try this one (http://files.filefront.com/Civ4+BtS+WolfshanzeMod+261zip/;9592643;/fileinfo.html) out, it's the 2.61, which might work better.

@GIR: Thanks for the tip! :)

A bunch of medieval German units had it. I didn't have time to do huge testing- but it was German units.

What it looks like is that there are some red octogons over the middle of the units, covering them up. Gameplay is unaffected, but it's an eyesore.

A bunch of medieval German units had it. I didn't have time to do huge testing- but it was German units.

What it looks like is that there are some red octogons over the middle of the units, covering them up. Gameplay is unaffected, but it's an eyesore.

Havent seen them on my german units based on Wolfshanze 2.6 so maybe they are just a new addition??? I will test tonight and see If I get them too

Was just on the Merged mod, not on Wolf's version. Tried back compating, will try later.

Hmmm, I will test it tonight.
NInja - we are still using files from Wolfshanze 2.6 arent we?

v2.6 introduced the German Pre-Dreadnought SMS Brandenburg... no changes to Germany in v2.61 or v2.62... v2.63 changed German Knights and Heavy Foot Soldiers (Maul)... as I used the old German ones for Austria and gave Germany new Knights and Heavy Foot Soldiers.

The only future plans I have right now for v2.64 would be some minor tweak on subs and a few new unit models (Mikasa and some Austrian troops).

Then again, I might go on a bender and add a 35th civ like Poland or something (can you add a civ without deleting a civ?).

v2.6 introduced the German Pre-Dreadnought SMS Brandenburg... no changes to Germany in v2.61 or v2.62... v2.63 changed German Knights and Heavy Foot Soldiers (Maul)... as I used the old German ones for Austria and gave Germany new Knights and Heavy Foot Soldiers.

The only future plans I have right now for v2.64 would be some minor tweak on subs and a few new unit models (Mikasa and some Austrian troops).

Then again, I might go on a bender and add a 35th civ like Poland or something (can you add a civ without deleting a civ?).

Mikasa would be a nice addition!

Also Poland would be great! I can only imagine swarms of hussars, heavy spearman then later on cavalry 7tp/Vickers tanks and some nice planes...
If you need some help with gathering info let me know I wouldn't mind helping out (too bad I cant make models or I would hand them to you on a plate) :sad:

Mikasa was a pet project of mine and I crammed it down Matt's throat (he was nice enough to comply, thanks Matt for putting up with me). So OF COURSE it's going to get added in... I don't think anybody would be asking for Pre-Dreadnought models if I didn't push so hard for them (Brandenburg and a new Canopus were both pushed by me as well).

As for Poland... dunno... I added Austria because I was sick of the HRE stealing German cities and I thought the Austrians got gyped. So ditching the HRE in favor of Austria was an easy choice for me.

On the matter of Poland, there's already a Poland mod I could borrow from (credit being given of course), the matter I'm not sure of is if I can add a 35th civ, or if the game is hard-coded for 34 civs (meaning I have to ditch a civ to add a civ, which I wouldn't do for another Euro civ). I have to double check that then see if I have the patience to do all the XML code changes that would be needed to add another civ.

In other words, v2.64 might be small (sub change, a few new models) or bigger (adding a new civ alltogether). Also, there is NO TIMETABLE... maybe it will show-up this weekend, or maybe take a few more weeks... no idea... I've only added Mikasa on my end to date, but I'm certainly not releasing a new mod just for that! Depends more on my mood and freetime.

Yeah, I haven't updated any XML since 2.6. I will have some free time tonight, maybe I'll take a look at it again, and just make the whole thing compatible with 2.63... 2.64 will come in due time, and I can just update again.

Yeah, I haven't updated any XML since 2.6. I will have some free time tonight, maybe I'll take a look at it again, and just make the whole thing compatible with 2.63... 2.64 will come in due time, and I can just update again.
Going from v2.6 to v2.63 will mostly focus on the change from HRE to Austria, including unit leaderhead changes, civ changes and some unit changes.

Update!

Check the first post, v.31 now matches Wolf's 2.63.

Update!

Check the first post, v.31 now matches Wolf's 2.63.
Wow... even all the Austrian changes?

Yeah, the xml changes took about 20 minutes to do. Winmerge is really a great little tool for this.

I'm now getting the red splotches on everything.

I'm now getting the red splotches on everything.
Well, maybe you should just stick to the Wolfshanze mod! ;)

Hehe...

Ninja... you are testing these releases for stability, right?

I am for now until this is fixed. Especially if you put in Poland. BTW what would be their UU? Hussars? Lancers?

Unique building?

I am for now until this is fixed. Especially if you put in Poland. BTW what would be their UU? Hussars? Lancers?

Unique building?
May well get done... I just have to figure-out if I can add a 35th civ or if I have to sacrifice one to make room. Winged Hussars to replace Cuirassiers most likely. Gotta check on the building thing.

I'm now getting the red splotches on everything.

Okay, this HAS to be because the wolfshanze.fpk file is not in the right folder. You need to copy it from the Wolfshanze mod asset folder to the Merged Mod asset folder.

As for testing -- obviously I don't play an entire game for each release, as I don't have time for that. But I do start up a couple of games with pretty much everything on random. I then enter the WB and check a couple of odd things, particularly new units.

Lets say Wolf that I do the extensive testing haha ;-)

As for Polish unique building it could be some special courthouse (although there are too many of them)
or THE BEST option would be special stable as we pride ourselves when it gets to Polish horses, and Cavalry tradition a few centuries old!

Ninja, I'm playing merged mod at the moment as Bismark. Good game and good combination. It's snakey contients so the Wolfshanze naval era will be good with stack attack.

It's snakey contients so the Wolfshanze naval era will be good with stack attack.
Dang... now I'm getting naval-eras named after me? Is that historically accurate? :lol:

Wolfshanze if you are really thinking about adding Poland maybe look if you could include that into the Mod:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=238021&highlight=poland

Faction looks very nice and the units as well. if you want to make your own from scratch then consider the units found here as they are beautiful:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=236188&highlight=poland

Just my two cents :D

Ninja, I'm playing merged mod at the moment as Bismark. Good game and good combination. It's snakey contients so the Wolfshanze naval era will be good with stack attack.

Cool. Keep me posted if you run into any issues! :)

Ninja, I just completed a full game. Stable with no glitches.

Also a great game.

After first loving DCM, I'm now wondering about the power of opportunity fire. It seems overpowered, but on the other hand it might be a case of changing tactics to exploit it.

For everyones' information, I am watching closely the discussions in the Wolfshanze thread and the DCM thread. I will make a larger update, once Dale has ironed out his bugs, and Wolf has made a new update, which hopefully will adjust the presence of airunits, interception levels and add some new models.

I am also seriously considering adding an anti-tank gun unit, which will afford civs without access to the ressources for tanks some defense. I will also still consider adding a flak unit, again to allow the poorer civs a defending chance. These will basically be modelled on the machine gun, in that they can only defend, and will suffer penalties against units which they were not meant to fight. I haven't figured out what's best - make a generally weak unit, with large bonuses to fight their designated opposing unit, or a stronger unit with penalties against other units. However, rest assured that on both accounts, these units will not be uber-powerful, even against their natural adversaries. Graphically, the ones from Road to War will make do.

I have also already made a working mod to work with Wolf's 2.64. I have made some effort to balance the Wolf's airunits vis-a-vis Dale's airbombing missions, so that the more advanced aircraft, the more missions become available. No aircraft, however, are allowed all mission types. Otherwise, the Jet fighter would simply become THE best unit, and I want people to still need bombers. Furthermore, the light bomber and the jet fighter are now also lethal.

:cooool: , Ninja2! (I'll keep an eye on you.);)

Given history, I'd combine the flak/anti-tank gun into one unit perhaps?

Keeping an eye on this mod.

Combining AA and anti tank would make the unit a bit too strong as a multipurpose unit so I would vote against it - unless you can put your hands on model of German 88's then you could make average power unit with small bonus against tanks and AA. Best option would be to make low power AA machine gun with big bonus against planes (but low power so it wont deal too muvch dmg against other units) and then some kind of small caliber anti tank gun something along the lines of pak 38 - again low/average power with big bonus against tanks.
Both units should be slightly lower power than infantry to ensure that nations wont spam these units as a general all purpose defense unit...

The legendary 88 of Germany is NOT how I intend to model this. That unit would almost qualify as a Unique Unit in its own right! :D

I'm thinking more along the lines of having this AA unit able to inflict damage to some degree, but not outright kill airunits. I don't think there's much historical basis for ground based AA to completely halt a bombing raid, so I'm inclined to go with damage.

I haven't yet completely made up my mind on the AT. I'll have to look closely at the tech tree to see when it would be appropriate, if at all.

The legendary 88 of Germany is NOT how I intend to model this. That unit would almost qualify as a Unique Unit in its own right! :D

I'm thinking more along the lines of having this AA unit able to inflict damage to some degree, but not outright kill airunits. I don't think there's much historical basis for ground based AA to completely halt a bombing raid, so I'm inclined to go with damage.

I haven't yet completely made up my mind on the AT. I'll have to look closely at the tech tree to see when it would be appropriate, if at all.

I totally agree - both units are meant as "poor versions" so they shouldn't be able to kill all their opponents. Now taking of anti tank unit I know we are limited by the models available (unless you have a modeler who could help us out) but we can go with either anti tank gun OR anti tank rifle which would be cool as well and maybe easier to model?

On the back of the debate in Wolf's thread, I went ahead and implemented the AT and the AA units. They are basically copies of the ones found in The Road to War official mod. Currently, they are both placed to be available with Artillery + Industrialism. I have not yet balanced them, so I don't know if they are "just right" yet when used in combat. The AA-Gun and AT-Gun upgrade to SAM Infantry and AT Infantry, respectively, just like Machineguns can also upgrade.

I also updated the rest of the mod to be in sync with Wolf's 2.65 version, however, I decided to remove the oil requirement for Airships again.

Now, the question is... does anyone want to play around with this yet to test the two new guns? What I need more than anything is some feed back on them to see if they are overpowered. I'll do some testing myself, but you know, the more the merrier... If anyone wants it, I can upload it tonight. You'll then need to upgrade to Wolf's 2.65 to get the .fpk file.

Last, I'm also still waiting on Dale's testing of his new dll. I need his source code to compile a new dll for my mod.

Well if you upload the file I can do some testing over the weeknd, no time to play right now unfortunately :(

Anyways thanks for impleenting that - I think if balanced right it will add a lot to modern times warfare :goodjob:

Release!

0.40 has now been released. What's new:

* Compatible with Wolf's 2.65. Requires the Wolfshanze.fpk-file from that mod.
* Airships do not require Oil (like the vanilla game).
* The airmissions from DCM become available as airunits become more advanced.
* Two new units: Anti-Aircraft Gun and Anti-Tank Gun, borrowed from the Road to War mod. They are available with Artillery and Industrialism, and do not require any resources to build. Both units are defensive, but should not be much trouble for infantry or artillery to take out. They are intended to bite back against their natural adversaries, though! These units still need balancing, so please provide feedback! If they are too tough, I want to scale them back. :)

I don't suppose you could include the source files for the SDK changes, could you? I'd like to include some other SDK mods (Pirates, Water Animals, J's Improved Cultural Borders, etc) to the mod.

I might have time to make a separate downoad of the source tonight, so it's coming. I also have Pirates on the slate down the road... :D

Just curious... what powers the Zeppelins' engines? Wheat... Corn... Coal? :mischief:

You should really ask Firaxis that question...

Like I've tried to state a few times - some amount of resources must be assumed to exist in each civ, regardless of their access to that resource on any given turn. Think stockpiles, black market trading, I don't care how you abstract it. It's exactly the same as iron. Even if you cut off a civ's source of iron, damaged swordsmen are still able to regain their strength. Where DO they get the iron to replace the weapons? ;)

It's the same as the helium they put in the zeppelins... just because you can't see it, doesn't mean it isn't there! :lol:

@ Xenomorph: Did you ever update Gedomon's Air Force Module?

EDIT: Here is the source (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=8568) for Merged Mod.

Problems with the AA unit

- I think it ties in to tanks, which isn't a great idea
- 40% interception rate is way too high

Personally, if I ever did a FLAK unit, I would give it 10%... 1 in 10 bombers being intercepted by ground fire is about what you're going to get (and that's generous). Turning back nearly half of all bomber attacks completely is simply ridiculous.

It's the "turning back" thing I don't like about AA interceptions... damaging is one thing, the stopped attack is too much, and 40% is incredibly high for FLAK.

I believe the actual % of USAAF planes hit during bombing runs over Germany by FLAK were probably more like 1 in 20.

Personally, if I ever did a FLAK unit, I would give it 10%... 1 in 10 bombers being intercepted by ground fire is about what you're going to get (and that's generous). Turning back nearly half of all bomber attacks completely is simply ridiculous.

It's the "turning back" thing I don't like about AA interceptions... damaging is one thing, the stopped attack is too much, and 40% is incredibly high for FLAK.

I believe the actual % of USAAF planes hit during bombing runs over Germany by FLAK were probably more like 1 in 20.

Is that just a wild guess? The RAF turned to night bombing in WW II because of the high kill rate on their bombing runs. I reckon what did Nazi-Germany in was the sheer amount of bombers sent in on missions. (I'd agree that fighters 'd be more effective, but they lost air superiority around 1941-'42, taking in account all fronts.)

@ Xenomorph: Did you ever update Gedomon's Air Force Module?
Yea, I managed to get that working with my mod. Thankfully, there wasn't a whole lot of SDK code to figure out and he had his changes nicely labeled, so it only took a couple of compile attempts.

Would you know how to change it so that bombers don't abort their missions if attacked by flak? Like the mod allows air missions to continue, if the interceptor is shot down?

Problems with the AA unit

- I think it ties in to tanks, which isn't a great idea


What? I don't understand... :confused:

Would you know how to change it so that bombers don't abort their missions if attacked by flak? Like the mod allows air missions to continue, if the interceptor is shot down?
Not really. I just figured out how to integrate his code into the game without it crashing. Can't say I've payed a whole lot of attention to how well it worked. :p
I'll start up a game in the Industrial age and see if I can't get some air wars going to test it out.

Just so you're aware, RtW contains some SDK code to make AA units function correctly. :)

Similar tech requirements. I think the flak guns should just require artillery.

As for the anti-tank guns, they should require less then the AT infantry, since the AT infantry are stronger.

Thanks Dale. I'll see if I can figure out how to port that over. Any hints? :)

Arstal: AT infantry has the same requirements as in Wolf's mod, which as I recall is Rocketry. And Rocketry requires Flight + Artillery. So AT infantry is still two techs up from the AT Gun. I might ease the requirements for flak to artillery + assembly line, I actually thought of that while planning this. Bear in mind, this is just the first attempt, though.

Is that just a wild guess? The RAF turned to night bombing in WW II because of the high kill rate on their bombing runs. I reckon what did Nazi-Germany in was the sheer amount of bombers sent in on missions. (I'd agree that fighters 'd be more effective, but they lost air superiority around 1941-'42, taking in account all fronts.)
I don't make wild guesses about WWII, what I stated was based on fact.

The reason the RAF turned to night bombing has nothing to do with FLAK and has everything to do with the Luftwaffe being a lot more effective in daylight. Remember, the RAF abandoned daylight bombing even before the US was involved in the war, and at a time the Luftwaffe was still very-much effective... in other words, the RAF turned to night bombing, because the Germans were deploying a very effective counter (ie: fighters). The best thing the Germans could do in the early part of the war when the RAF switched to night bombing was FLAK... which the RAF really wasn't all that scared of. Just because the RAF switched from daylight to night, don't assume the reason was FLAK... the reason was that the Luftwaffe was still very much intact in 1940/41 before the US entered the war.

The RAF rolled their eyes at the US when they entered the war and said they would bomb in daylight... they in-fact insisted that the Luftwaffe was too dangerous and would destroy the USAAF. American strategy was very differant then British though... the British didn't have effective targetting devices and simply relied on mass-bombing "in the general vicinity" of the target... something you can do at night... because night bombing is very innacurate to do anyways in WWII, so the British just dumped a lot of bombs anytime they were over a city.

American strategy was very differant... they had the (at the time) top-secret Norden Bombsight... which was (theoretically) incredibly accurate... but required daylight bombing... the Americans also had the heavily armed and armored B-17 Flying Fortress, which they believed could fight it's way through any fighter force (this was later proved wrong, but hey, that's what they believed at the time).

The British had experience of over two years of fighting the Germans before America entered the war and were sure that the Luftwaffe was too dangerous to face in daylight... the Americans had the Norden Bombsite and the B-17 which they insisted needed daylight and could fight it's way through the Luftwaffe. Most of the American casualties in the bombing runs over Germany were caused by the Luftwaffe... not by FLAK. The Luftwaffe was so effective in stopping American bombers, that at one point the Americans almost gave-up daylight bombing, much like the British had... it wasn't until long-range fighters such as the P-47 and P-51 came along that the Luftwaffe was finally beaten-down (with other fighters), that once the Luftwaffe threat was eliminated, the Bombers had free reign (with or without FLAK).

In other words, the history of WWII itself, proves the points I've been making all along... it's the fighters that determine control of the skies, not ground based FLAK... it was the fighters of the Luftwaffe that the British feared and switched to night bombing for... it was the fighters of the Luftwaffe that nearly forced the Americans to do the same... it was not until the long-range fighters of the Americans showed-up to shoot-down the Luftwaffe when the Allied Bombers began to enjoy a free-hand over German skies... regardless of FLAK which was (statistically) a non-factor in the war (see Berlin).

... Most of the American casualties in the bombing runs over Germany were caused by the Luftwaffe... not by FLAK.

Below is a quote from Wikipedia on the Second Raid on Schweinfurt. This raid was carried out in 1943, and it was well berfore the introduction of the long range P-51 fighters. So, accompanied by only short range P-47 fighters, the B-17's were making UNESCORTED bomber runs over the targets:

In the final tally, fifty-nine Flying Fortresses were shot down over Germany, one ditched in the English Channel on the return flight, five crashed in England, and twelve more were scrapped due to battle damage or crash landings (more by AA-guns than by fighter aircraft), a total loss of seventy seven B-17s. 122 bombers were damaged to some degree and needed repairs before their next flight.

Notice that it specifically states that more bombers were lost to AA than to enemy fighters. If this quote has any truth to it (and I can't judge that), then I can't understand that you persist in saying that flak was an ineffective counter?

Because you keep harping one specific incident, not the trend of an entire war. You're also speaking of an 'unescorted' bomber run, which you're highly innacurate on. The run was escorted for most of the way... you're being very selective of what you quote... here's what you didn't quote from the same article:

For hundreds of miles inbound to the target area, the B-17 bomber formations were attacked again and again by large numbers of Luftwaffe fighters. A Spitfire escort protected the aircraft over the English Channel. They handed over to fifty P-47 Thunderbolts who accompanied the raid as far as possible. Over Walcheren twenty Bf-109s attacked the escort fighters. German losses were five destroyed and four damaged while no U.S. planes were lost. At Duren, thirty Fw-190s attacked the bombers. Another twenty Fw-190s later joined the attack. During this battle, several B-17s were lost, as well as at least one P-47. German losses were six Fw-190s. At this point, the Thunderbolts had reached the limit of their range and had to return home.

The Schweinfurt run was escorted... it wasn't escorted the entire way... there were three hours without escort for a run that lasted (from start to finish) for the better part of an entire day. The escorts did manage to keep most of the enemy off the formation for the majority of the run to and from the bombing run.

I can assure you, if the run was "unescorted" as you incorrectly stated, the fighter casualties would have greatly outstripped the flak casualties... that's just a simple fact.

Most importantly, you completely neglected (for reasons I can only imagine) the CONCLUSION that was made in the same article you quoted, and what the whole article was about... THE IMPORTANCE OF ESCORTING A RUN! You don't develop long-range escort fighters to protect from FLAK you know... so if you're going to pick-cherries out of an article, do us a favor and let folks read the more important part of the article, like what I quoted above (about how well the run was escorted) and the logical conclusion of the article here:

The USAAF learned the importance of a fighter escort with sufficient range, recognizing the vulnerability of heavy bombers flying in daylight against interceptors. Such very heavy losses could not be sustained, and unescorted daylight bomber raids deep into Germany were suspended until 1944.

The conclusion of the article you quoted from clearly states they need long-range escort fighters... the reason is because of enemy fighters... the USAAF suspended operations beyond escorting fighter range until they had long range escort fighters... the reason? ENEMY FIGHTERS... you don't escort because of FLAK... you escort because of enemy fighters. The article didn't conclude they would suspend bombing because of FLAK, they said they were suspended because of enemy FIGHTERS... a conclusion you neglected to qoute.

Stop cherry-picking to support your cause... I read the same article, and it's clear what is stated... if there's one thing I know it's USAAF history. The Schwienfurt raid proved the whole point about gaining air superiority... it's taught in all Air Force Professional Academys.

Simply put, FLAK casualties will always outstrip fighter casualties if the run is either escorted or there are no enemy fighters... I'm sure most of the bombing runs over Berlin suffered more FLAK casualties then fighter casualties... that's not because FLAK was more deadly then fighters, that's because no fighters got through to the formation. In the case of Schweinfurt, the run was escorted most of the way and back again... casualties would have been much greater by enemy fighters if (as you incorrectly stated) the run was unescorted.

You're looking at a statistic and drawing completely wrong conclusions. The USAAF looked at the same results and decided to suspend operations because of enemy fighters, not because of enemy FLAK... are you saying your conclusions on the run are better then the top military generals of WWII?

:hmm:

Is that just a wild guess? The RAF turned to night bombing in WW II because of the high kill rate on their bombing runs. I reckon what did Nazi-Germany in was the sheer amount of bombers sent in on missions. (I'd agree that fighters 'd be more effective, but they lost air superiority around 1941-'42, taking in account all fronts.)

As you can see, I never questioned the effectiveness of fighters; I merely wondered if the 10% AA success rate (if I'm not mistaken, this is used throughout BTS) was accurate.

I take it, from your usual extremely eloquent posts, it's a fair guess. So let's stop :deadhorse: and close the subject.;)

As you can see, I never questioned the effectiveness of fighters; I merely wondered if the 10% AA success rate (if I'm not mistaken, this is used throughout BTS) was accurate.
I've mentioned it before... if I were to make an AA unit, I'd give it 10% int.

This is getting really old... I am NOT saying that fighter escorts are useless, nor am I trying to ignore the importance of either long range fighters, air supremacy in general or anything else that's mentioned in that article!! But you seem to repeatedly point out that flak was almost a non-issue for both the RAF and the USAAF, I am just pointing to facts which show that flak IS dangerous, and they DID take their toll on bombers.

Right now, CIV4 in it's released form cannot accurately depict flak units, since bombers are totally turned away if intercepted, which is not very realistic. I am trying to DO something about that, you just keep saying that flak didn't matter, so I pretty much shouldn't bother about that and just go conquer some oil and build a damn airforce. Each to his own, I guess.

Right now, CIV4 in it's released form cannot accurately depict flak units, since bombers are totally turned away if intercepted, which is not very realistic.
Statistically, FLAK didn't do in WWII what would/does happen in Civ4 with FLAK units... turn entire attacks away... and I can assure you, that 40% of the Schweinfurt Raid was not turned away by FLAK, as you would have modeled in Civ4 with your AA unit.

I've been trying desperately to stress the impact of FLAK for those that don't seem to have a firm grasp of its historical impact. I never once said FLAK is worthless or can't shoot anything down... I've been repeatedly stating it won't do what it does in Civ4... FLAK is neither a counter nor something that will save you from destruction via the air... yet, despite my repeated stressing of this point, you went ahead and put in a 40% turn-back unit... which is why I've been trying to stress my point all-along. Seems to me folks either don't get it, or they don't care and just want safety from the ground.

Flak causing a 40% turn-back ratio is simply insane to a high degree. Certainly this is a case of 'Each to his own', I guess.

Now... if it's possible, to make a FLAK unit that only damages but does not turn back, and it has a more reasonable INT rate... say between 10% and 20%, then I'm all for a FLAK unit (see, I don't think they have no place at all)... my problem is and always has been the "turn-back" factor. Bombers that have been completely turned-back from FLAK in WWII is definately no more then 10% (and probably less) of any strike force.

If there's a way to make a FLAK that damages, but does not turn-back, I'd include it in the Wolfshanze Mod myself... with a reasonable INT rate (10%-20%).

P.S.
Ninja... not upset with you, I just talk straight, so if I sound abrubt, it's just the internet! Also, you'll really like my next "surprise" unit in the Wolfshanze Mod... it will be an answer for you that you will enjoy!

Right now, CIV4 in it's released form cannot accurately depict flak units, since bombers are totally turned away if intercepted, which is not very realistic.

I disagree: in my WW II in the Pacific Bristish syle game I built up my airforce enough, so that if a Bomber does get turned back because of AA/fighter interception (and indeed, they take damage too), I just send in the next... and the next... and the next - until I'pounded away their defenses enough to send in the ground troops. Very realistic - IMO.;)

(About Wolfshanze: don't mind him - he just keeps going on and on... even after he's made his point!):mischief:

For the record, I did not know how the flak unit that I introduced would work out. I didn't realize that would turn away the entire bombing run, before I tested it. I've stated as much when I released it, that the unit probably wasn't balanced. 40% IS too high, especially given that there are promotions which increase it even more. However, if I CAN (and that's a big if) make it work so that it doesn't STOP the bombers, only damage it, I probably won't reduce the intercept percentage. Bombing runs to flak-protected targets would nearly always suffer attrition, I would think.

Only if the Flak hits. (If it does, the Bomber in question is damaged and you get a message stating the mission failed.)

BTW, with air superiority (or luck) you can also damage Flak/defending fighters.;)

Hmm. My idea was to tie Flak into the Bunker building.

I don't know if this is possible, but perhaps say the Bunker causes damage to every air unit that attacks, at a rate of (1d100)-80, results under 0 = 0.

20% of the units would get damaged, but air attacks would get through, and damage would be light.

Would that work well?

Hmm. My idea was to tie Flak into the Bunker building.

I don't know if this is possible, but perhaps say the Bunker causes damage to every air unit that attacks, at a rate of (1d100)-80, results under 0 = 0.

20% of the units would get damaged, but air attacks would get through, and damage would be light.

Would that work well?
If that would work, I'd be absolutely fine with that... would it work?

I don't know much about the workings of buildings. However, what you're suggesting is basically the same as giving a unit a 100% intercept probability, with a maximum damage to enemy units of 20%. The key thing (again) is to allow the enemy bomber to continue on it's mission, regardless of it being intercepted. Or did I misunderstand the suggestion? :)

I figure intercepts that do 0% damage would be the same as a failed intercept. Have it do the damage after the bomb damage was what I was thinking.

Bombing mission, damage check (with 80% probability of no damage- if possible I'd have it do a 1d10, then do damage if a 10), then dish out damage to the aircraft.

This would also help your own fighters in interception (flak worked best as a compliment to your own air force I think) as a fresh aircraft would beat a damaged one usually.

Is that possible?

I understand the concept, which I think is sound... I don't understand how to implement in Civ4... would need help with this.

I actually think this would be a better option then a FLAK unit if it could be made in the way described... AAA shouldn't be a unit that goes running around out in the woods and countryside... they should be assigned to cities for static city defense against the air, and they shouldn't be something that needs to be eliminated by an attacking army to capture the city... all things that a building city improvement that offered AAA would be/do.

Question is... how do we do it, and could it be done?

I'm beginning to like this building idea. For once, Wolfshanze, I agree with you :p, that AA shouldn't litter the countryside, but be restricted to cities. I am really busy these days with RL, but I hope to have some time during the week to look into this.

Warning: If I drop off the face of the earth all of a sudden, that will be because I am becoming father of twins very soon... I have a 2-year old daughter already, so I'll be busy!!! :D

Warning: If I drop off the face of the earth all of a sudden, that will be because I am becoming father of twins very soon... I have a 2-year old daughter already, so I'll be busy!!! :D

Congratulations !!

I'm beginning to like this building idea. For once, Wolfshanze, I agree with you :p, that AA shouldn't litter the countryside, but be restricted to cities. I am really busy these days with RL, but I hope to have some time during the week to look into this.
Whatd'ya mean "for-once you agree with me?" I thought the merged-mod was about 90% based on the Wolfshanze mod! Sure, we've disagreed on the AA thing to-date, but I view that as one issue... surely we agree on more then we disagree on! If you agreed with 100% of everything I think, I'd worry about you!

Warning: If I drop off the face of the earth all of a sudden, that will be because I am becoming father of twins very soon... I have a 2-year old daughter already, so I'll be busy!!! :D
Congrats man... ain't parenting great? I waited till I retired from the military to start a family, so I have some young ones running around myself.

@ Xenomorph: Did you ever update Gedomon's Air Force Module?
After going through the code, his mod does not allow bombing runs to continue after interception. I'm pretty sure I've seen a mod that does that, though. Anyone know what that might be?

Dale mentioned that RtW does that, and I checked last night. He's correct, in RtW, bombers are damaged while doing runs, but the missions are not aborted. I can't find the source code anywhere for RtW, though, so I was unable to look in the code.

One nice thing about Gedemons mod, I think, is the way that terrain works as modifiers for bomb damage. So units which are in the open will be more vulnerable than units in forests, hills or cities.

Whatd'ya mean "for-once you agree with me?" I thought the merged-mod was about 90% based on the Wolfshanze mod! Sure, we've disagreed on the AA thing to-date, but I view that as one issue... surely we agree on more then we disagree on! If you agreed with 100% of everything I think, I'd worry about you!

;)


Congrats man... ain't parenting great? I waited till I retired from the military to start a family, so I have some young ones running around myself.

Thanks! (to mice as well!) :) Yeah, it's loads of fun. My twins are boys, so in about a decade or so I'll need to set up a small permanent gaming network at home! Gonna be great! :D

Dale mentioned that RtW does that, and I checked last night. He's correct, in RtW, bombers are damaged while doing runs, but the missions are not aborted.

Hey, that's cool!:)

Now, someone needs to figure out a way to move that code into the Epic game, and a solution can be made that will satisfy everyone.

I don't suppose you could include the source files for the SDK changes, could you? I'd like to include some other SDK mods (Pirates, Water Animals, J's Improved Cultural Borders, etc) to the mod.

I spent a little time yesterday, and added the Pirates Mod to the mix. How did you test to see if it works as intended? Will the Raging Barbarians setting affect the number of pirates? :confused: I played +200 turns without seeing a pirate ship. This was on a duel map with only two civs, though, and Raging Barbs was off.

If you use the world builder to add a vessel that can carry passengers (like the galley) on the barbarian side, it should automatically place some units inside the vessel when you place it in the world.

Thanks. It works as it should! :)

Any feedback is welcome!

Well, here you go:


-Adjusted bombardment range and accuracy for some of Wolfshanze's ships.


Why?


-Horse Archers (Horsemen) cannot bombard.

Again: why? Shooting and withdrawing is basically what Parthian tactics were all about.


The mod is good to go - however, you unfortunately still need to download Wolfshanze's mod to grab the huge 275MB .fpk file. That keeps this mod download to a modest 5 MB.

You should call this Almost Merged Mod then. (Having to DL one mod just to be able to use another isn't what I'd call merging.)

Bombardment ranges were adjusted, because I didn't know the difference between a pre-dreadnought, protected cruiser or a galleon! :D The first attempt simply had some rough numbers in it, and with guidance from Wolfshanze I adjusted those values better to reflect history.

The Parthian Shot has nothing to do with bombardments in the game. And even it had been, it would be a little ridiculous to allow ALL horsemen this ability, and not just parthians.

If CFC allowed huge uploads, I'd consider including Wolfs' .fpk-file. Since 10 MB is the limit, I felt this was a reasonable solution.

Thanks for the feedback, though! :)

Dale mentioned that RtW does that, and I checked last night. He's correct, in RtW, bombers are damaged while doing runs, but the missions are not aborted. I can't find the source code anywhere for RtW, though, so I was unable to look in the code.

One nice thing about Gedemons mod, I think, is the way that terrain works as modifiers for bomb damage. So units which are in the open will be more vulnerable than units in forests, hills or cities.

The code for RtW will be out soon, so no need to worry there. :)

If CFC allowed huge uploads, I'd consider including Wolfs' .fpk-file. Since 10 MB is the limit, I felt this was a reasonable solution.
You could use FileFront which is FREE and UNLIMITED. It's what I use too.

Or do what I do and leach off your friend's FTP. :D

Well, with my upload speed, 275 MB takes close to 5 hours, given perfect upload conditions. I couldn't really be bothered, unless it really bothers someone else! :D

Just wondering.. does this mod works with JKP1187´s New Random Events?

(http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=6176956#post6176956)

Thank you!

Just wondering.. does this mod works with JKP1187´s New Random Events?

(http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=6176956#post6176956)

Thank you!

I...... can't say for sure, I haven't tried jkp's events. So it's really hard to say. You could try, though... and please report back! ;)

Alternate download for the.fpk file added, see first post.

I...... can't say for sure, I haven't tried jkp's events. So it's really hard to say. You could try, though... and please report back! ;)
No need, I already merged them. This is using the latest events.

[EDIT]See updated version of the file in my following post.[/EDIT

No need, I already merged them. This is using the latest events.

Just got it, thanks!

On the Events when putting it in, when starting the game I got a warning message about Modern armor info class being incorrect

Thanks for sharing the file, Xeno! :)

On the Events when putting it in, when starting the game I got a warning message about Modern armor info class being incorrect
Can you give me the exact error message?

Tag:UNITCLASS_MODERN_ARMOR in Info class was incorrect:
Current XML File is xml\events/Civ4EventTriggerInfos.xml

It looks like you botched a slash.

Tag:UNITCLASS_MODERN_ARMOR in Info class was incorrect:
Current XML File is xml\events/Civ4EventTriggerInfos.xml

It looks like you botched a slash.
Nah, Civ4 always displays stuff like that. I forgot to change the name of UNITCLASS_MODERN_ARMOR to UNITCLASS_MAIN_BATTLE_TANK, since Wolf changed the internal and external names of that unit. Anyway, I fixed it.

It works fine now.

One criticism- should WWI Early Bombers be able to do strategic bombing raids, and kill civilians? I Dresdened a town with WWI Bombers. Don't think that's too historical.

After doing some more research, I really think Early Bombers shouldn't be able to drop enemy populations at all. The most casualties I saw from a WWI bombing raid was 95. That's not exactly a pop point. I'd say remove the destroy enemy buildings missions altogether.

Merged Mod 0.43 released!

See first post for update. :)

EDIT: This release was withdrawn.

download isn't working asof now- though could be a problem with CFC.

Yeah, there seems to be a problem with uploads/downloads. I've mentioned it to Thunderfall.

If you don't mind, can you put a backup file somewhere for the interim?

Version 0.50 released!

Check first post for details. This is a biggie. :)

Good news! Will check it out ASAP!:goodjob:

One question: how can I do this?

I want to undo the bombing population change you made, but I can't find CvUnit.cpp

Also, I'd want to take the airbomb buildings mission away from the Early Bomber.

Figured out how to make Jet Bomber lethal bombard.

One question: how can I do this?

I want to undo the bombing population change you made, but I can't find CvUnit.cpp

Also, I'd want to take the airbomb buildings mission away from the Early Bomber.

Figured out how to make Jet Bomber lethal bombard.

The simple answer is to just use the old dll-file. But I thought you didn't like the side effect of building bombing - that population got killed? The alternative is to get the source files for my mod (which I can post, if you're interested), download all the stuff from the SDK tutorial and start editing the C++ files. This is not a simple task. ;)

To remove the building bombing mission, find the Early bomber in the unitsinfo.xml. Then put a zero in whatever DCMAirBombingMission has a value of one, and bombers are back to original CIV4 abilities.

Hello

I must be doing something really wrong here, no change there I'm sure.

I have just downloaded the 0.50 version and as I had already grabbed the 2.67 version of Wolfshanze's mod I simply copied, as instructed, the FPK file over to the assets folder of the merged mod.

All is well, up to that point.

Then I load up the mod, via the Civ IV mod chooser and all seems well.

However when I start a game it looks great but there the UI is totally missing. The keyboard shortcuts work and I get the pop-ups of what to build etc but no UI.

I exited and then loaded up Wolfshanze's mod and that works fine, trying a new game or a previously saved one.

Starting up and running BTW with no mods is fine also.

The only mod that I have running all of the time is the BUG mod and, as that runs fine with Wolfshanze's mod, I can't see that as being the problem. Or could it be the smiley faces that is included in this mod as standard be a conflict with the BUG mod..?

Any ideas please as to where my UI is gone...?

EDIT: Looks like I was right, that is amazing for sure, removing the BUG mod then allowed the UI to appear and all seems well.

Well, the BUG mod might be the issue. I've modified the interface a little bit, and BUG also modifies the interface. Merged Mod might indeed be incompatible with the BUG mod.

It does seem that the BUG and merged mod aren't able to work together without some work, if indeed that is possible.
As it is I have removed the BUG mod so that I can evaluate this merged one.

Thanks for your work in creating and sharing this work with us :)

Edit : Will I need to download the 'fix' attached in post no 146 as since then your 0.50 version has appeared, and might already include it...?

You're welcome! :D

I still have not included any new events. So if you want to use those events that Xeno posted, and which really are from jkpk1187, you should add those files to the Merged Mod directory. I can't remember off the top of my head if any merging work is required, though. If you're prompted to overwrite anything, you should say no and consult Xeno. :)

The simple answer is to just use the old dll-file. But I thought you didn't like the side effect of building bombing - that population got killed? The alternative is to get the source files for my mod (which I can post, if you're interested), download all the stuff from the SDK tutorial and start editing the C++ files. This is not a simple task. ;)

To remove the building bombing mission, find the Early bomber in the unitsinfo.xml. Then put a zero in whatever DCMAirBombingMission has a value of one, and bombers are back to original CIV4 abilities.

You got it wrong. My complaint wasn't that population got killed, it was that the early bomber did it- which was unrealistic.

Tried Lokolus's Earth 1942 WW 2 scenario with Merged Mod: loaded OK, but when examining the map in Worldbuilder I noticed Spanish Marines display as purple silhouettes and Japanese Battleship are all red (though all details are visable).:confused:

PS: I mention this, cause I'm contemplating a WW II scenario based on Merged Mod.

How do those two units look in the Worldbuilder, if you start up a Merged Mod game involving Spain and Japan? If they look ok, it's the scenario... if they are messed up, I've made a mistake somewhere. I have no experience with scenario files, so I don't know what could be wrong here, unless I've made a mistake.

There are two missions the early bomber has. Removing them both, hopefully that doesn't break things.

How do those two units look in the Worldbuilder, if you start up a Merged Mod game involving Spain and Japan? If they look ok, it's the scenario... if they are messed up, I've made a mistake somewhere. I have no experience with scenario files, so I don't know what could be wrong here, unless I've made a mistake.

Can't check right now, but Lokolus only uses standard units. It may be a graphical issue though, as I don't have a high end comp; units in FfH and LHs in CIV Gold mods also sometimes show up incomplete. If no reports of this phenomenon have been mentioned before, I might still make a scenario - as I really like the additions from Wolfshanze's and Dale's mods - and send/post a test version when ready. (May take some time though, as I'm presently preparing a GEM version; after that's finished, I want to do a WW II Europe version. Will get back to you.);)

Question:

I am considering adding Influence Driven War to the mix. Good/bad idea?

What does it do?:confused:

Good idea.

So you have Francis I for Austria now Ninja?

What does it do?:confused:
You should check out the thread in the COMP forum. It's made by moctezuma. The best feature is that it adds your culture to a plot when you win a battle, or when you pillage a plot. So you can actually conquer territory, without conquering cities. There's also a militia event upon conquering cities, regardless of tech, ages and so on. Not as tough as GIR's partisans, but I need to consider pros and cons of having both partisans and militia at the same time.

So you have Francis I for Austria now Ninja?
Yes I do. It's a great looking leaderhead!

I did, I did! (Couldn't find it tho...) Sounds like a "Yeah!" to me!:)

Alright, alright! Here's a link (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=188007) for ya'! :p

Question:

I am considering adding Influence Driven War to the mix. Good/bad idea?

I think it would be an excellent add-on. Still, do you know if the slowdown issue mentioned on the thread has been fixed?

Checked it out and now I remember I've seen it added as a modcomp before. Don't remember experiencing any slowdown in performance or gameplay (but I'm no expert, so...). So, "yea"!;)

Ninja2 you should make a tutorial on how to merge mods

Question:

I am considering adding Influence Driven War to the mix. Good/bad idea?

avain in Quot Capita found that it doesn't work well with DCM. It seems that the IDW just doesn't happen. Grave in HiTM said he had no problems merging them, but when I play HiTM I don't see the influence driven messages on screen.

Edit; stack attack affects IDW , but the rest of DCM doesn't. I usually play Quot Capita with stack attack off because IDW is so good,but recently I've been wanting stack attack back to make wars even harder (and play on noble !!)

BTW

Ninja2 you should make a tutorial on how to merge mods ... good idea

avain in Quot Capita found that it doesn't work well with DCM. It seems that the IDW just doesn't happen. Grave in HiTM said he had no problems merging them, but when I play HiTM I don't see the influence driven messages on screen.

Edit; stack attack affects IDW , but the rest of DCM doesn't. I usually play Quot Capita with stack attack off because IDW is so good,but recently I've been wanting stack attack back to make wars even harder (and play on noble !!)

BTW

... good idea

Thanks:goodjob::):D

Thanks for the encouragement! :)

Currently, I simply won't have the time to write up a quality tutorial. And I don't want to do only a so-so write-up. Maybe in a little while...

Updated to 0.51 to keep up with Wolfshanze. This might be the last update for a while, as our twins will be born tomorrow! :woot:

Congrats in advance!:goodjob:

Ninja2 !!!!

well done job!!! i will dl this mod and try it :)

can you please add with the new release your source code ? i like the additions youve made.

anyway!

i wish you,
much happiness with your twins!

we hebrews have a saying on this occasions:

MAZAL TOV !
it means good fortune.

keldath.

Congrats- you're going to stay busy for a while then...

Has anyone else been having stab problems with this mod? I tend to crash frequently.

I did some tweaking with the text files, but I don't think jet bombers will cause problems in the classical age.

Yes I have crash problems, and it starts right after I hit the classical age also.

Doubt it's anything to do wi