Moding and Editor Question Thread:

I’ve opened this Thread for myself, and for other people who have Question about Moding and the Editor they would like answered.

I have tried looking at the Tutorials, and while they proved very helpful, I still have some unanswered Questions.
So I will Post them here, and :) hopefully someone who knows the answer will see them, and Reply.

First Question:
Can someone tell me how to add new Terrain, and City Graphics to a Scenario?

In the folder you create for your scenario create an art folder inside the art folder create a Cities folder \Conquests\Scenarios\Your Scenario\Art\Cities. for terrain \Conquests\Scenarios\Your Scenario\Art\Terrain.
The files you place in those folders will then be used as long as the biq scenario search properties is set to your scenario folder.

In the folder you create for your scenario create an art folder inside the art folder create a Cities folder \Conquests\Scenarios\Your Scenario\Art\Cities. for terrain \Conquests\Scenarios\Your Scenario\Art\Terrain.
The files you place in those folders will then be used as long as the biq scenario search properties is set to your scenario folder.

Thanks, I'll try it right away!!!

Second Question:
How do you Open .pcx Files?

You need to have an image editor that recognizes the pcx format. PCX information here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCX). Photoshop, paintshop pro and the GIMP all can open and edit PCX files. Microsoft paint cannot.

I have a question, what exactly is a palette and how does it affect civ?

A palette is a given, finite set of colors (256 for a pcx) for the management of digital images (that is, a color palette). Civ uses the palette to determine alpha (transparancy)colors. Because a PCX is also a compressed image allowing smaller file sizes it became a popular format for games.

Is there any way to get around the Sub Bug?

Sure do not flag any units as "invisible". However the so called sub bug works to the advantage of any civilization with war weariness in their government type.

The sub bug is half the fun with using invisible units! I use it a lot in my African Cold War scenario, to the desired effect (i.e., creating lots of wars due to government x stumbling upon an insurgent group commanded by state y)

What about this: giving all the units both the “Invisible and See Invisible tags?”

The AI would use Invisible Tagged Unit more Aggressively then regulars, but at the same time would be able to see them thus probably avoiding the “Sub Bug.”

Has anyone tried this, and seen what the AI would behave like?

It would probably build strong offensive/defensive land units even more in proportion to improvements than it does already...

And....
Would :confused: that be a Good Thing, or a Bad Thing?

What about this: giving all the units both the “Invisible and See Invisible tags?”

The AI would use Invisible Tagged Unit more Aggressively then regulars, but at the same time would be able to see them thus probably avoiding the “Sub Bug.”

Has anyone tried this, and seen what the AI would behave like?
If every unit has both the invisible and see invisible tag then you have negated the purpose and might as well not use them.
I do not envision the AI using them more aggressively.

The only other thing you could do about is give all the "sub" units hidden nationality. But that's practically a bug in itself since the AI will the go star-crazy hunting them down, "see invisible" or no.

Hide Nationality doesn't entirely work anyway - if you see a unit belonging to someone else with the HN flag, you can't contact them.
If an Artificial Idiot controlled player sees it, they'll be able to contact you.
And they hunt down HN units with the first available see HN flagged unit, but that might just be in my tweaked out mod.

first available see HN flagged unit, but that might just be in my tweaked out mod.

see HN flag??

There is a detect invisible flag, however I have never seen a "see" hidden nationality flag. Are you using a cracked editor?

No, I wasn't paying attention and put the wrong thing down.
Though it would be a nice addition, a flag that allows you to see the owner of units with HN.

Do's the AI still Auto Raze even with the No Raze Patch?

I have installed the Patch and while there seens to be less Razing overall, the AI keeps destroying the same couple of cities every time I playtest.

These Cities both have a population of 2, a culture of less then 20 and are just one square away from another City.

Do's this couse a Auto Raze that the Patch can't prevent?

Well I have to say you made a mistake with the no raze patch. When properly applied the AI cannot raze in fact when the human player captures a city the pop-up that gives you the choice to either raze or keep the city does not even come up and you have to keep the city yourself. Although I have to wonder why you would place cities so close together impeding their growth and shield production.

Actually I am using the No Raze patch that comes with TCW Fifties.

There are 2 executable files included perhaps you are not using the correct one.

No, I'm :confused: pretty sure that I installed the correct one.
I followed El Justo's Readme instructions for every step.

no, you obviously did not.

no, you obviously did not.

You know I wanted to say that but decided to be nice.

There were Two files called Civ3Conquest, and Civ3Conquest 2.
Your Readme said that I should or the Civ3Conquest file if I had C3C, or the Civ3Conquest 2 file if I had Civ Complete.
It also said that I should rename the File I Originally have to; its Name + Original, as a Backup.
Finally it said that the Name of file I add should be exactly the same as the Name of the my Original file.

look inside of your Civilization III/Conquests folder and find the [c3c] icon. click "rename" and "copy" and then add on the "ORIG" suffix to it (ie your backup). find the patch in the TCW Fifties folder that corresponds w/ the version you're running and then right click that file, hit "rename" and then "paste". lastly, "cut" that file and paste it into the Civilization III/Conquests folder.

look inside of your Civilization III/Conquests folder and find the [c3c] icon. click "rename" and "copy" and then add on the "ORIG" suffix to it (ie your backup). find the patch in the TCW Fifties folder that corresponds w/ the version you're running and then right click that file, hit "rename" and then "paste". lastly, "cut" that file and paste it into the Civilization III/Conquests folder.

I already did all of that, but for some :( reason the AI is still able to Raze Cities.
But I'll try again, maybe it will work this time.

you're doing something wrong then...b/c it works for all of us.

One question Redwall when you capture a city do you have the option to keep the city or raze it?

Um, BK, I've been using the patch for a quite a while with complete success and I always get that option??? Iow the patch has not allowed a single AI razing to my knowledge (I was testing with a second or third age MEM game) but I still had the option to raze.

abandon, yes - autoraze, no :)

Yes to both of those but also the ability to raze. :)

well, i don't get the option to raze upon capture (autoraze). however, i can abandon the city...which imho isn't razing, it's abandoning :p it's semantics though :D on a sidenote, i've never seen the AI "abandon" a city w/ the patch in place.

We were talking about that in the no-raze thread, it appears the AI does not know how to abandon (I'm with you on this def) anyway so the patch doesn't affect this area. I'm not following you on the other, it sounds like your autorazing everything?? :p

just to prevent confusion though, in my book (and I'm not saying these are absolutly correct defs) autorazing is when you have razed a city without the option to keep it ie. size one, 0 culture
razing is when you have the option to keep it but destroy it anyway ie. size 6,100 culture

The latter is what I'm refferring to when I say that I have the option to raze. :)

don't raze me, bro :lol:

correct re the patch's non-effects on abandoning. it's still an option w/ a right-click.

agreed on the auto raze specs. and since this seems to be the primary mode of razing by the AI (ie inability to "abandon"), i guess i just de facto refer to all razing as auto razing :D

Well against the flow thats rather interesting. When I use the no raze patch I never see the option to keep or raze a captured city it just is automatically kept.

Yes, I've seen you say so several times and always wondered. Atm it makes basically no difference since I don't raze when the AI can't but it doesn't sound right.

Does anyone else have/not have this option?

One question Redwall when you capture a city do you have the option to keep the city or raze it?
No...

I Repeat:
Do Cities with No Culture, and a Population of One get Auto-Razed?

No the do not if your no raze patch is working correctly.

You don't NEED to replace the exe, you know... you can place the patched exe NEXT TO the conquests.exe in the same folder, rename it to anything, for example ridemymagiccarpet.exe or ilikeeatingstrawberries.exe, and it will WORK... trust me.

really?

.

Yes. I'm using two exe files, one for regular playing (epic games), one for my personal "Stahlgewitter" WW2 PBEM with my friends.

I have made shortcuts to each file, "Civ3 Conquests" and "Stahlgewitter". You could also provide a "MyMod.exe" with your mod, for example a "The Cold War.exe".

:)

well, i'll be :D good to know. thanks :cool:

np, mate, but I already mentioned that in the noraze thread...

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6224574&postcount=88

:crazyeye:;)

i don't read all the threads, dude :p

No the do not if your no raze patch is working correctly.

Look, all I know is that I have done Every thing you have suggested.

I don't get even get the option to Keep or Raze a City when I capture it.

But, when I or the AI capture a newly founded City, or a City that has No Culture, and a Population of 1-2, it always gets Destroyed/Auto-Razed...

Edit: Redwall, that has nothing to do with the noraze patch, it's part of the game. Anytime you capture a city sized 1-2 <10 culture it is autorazed, patch or no.

Thanks, that all I was trying to :) Find out.

I’ve just read in another Thread that you can preplace roads on water using the editor.

Not the interesting question is; Do these roads still make Trade Links?

In the Scenario I’m working on all Air and Sea Trade is turned off to speedup Turn/Load Time.
Now; this has caused some problems, even the Suez and Panama Canals cause a break in trade that there is no way of getting around.
If I were to build roads across the Canals, would a Trade link be Restored?

An interesting idea as far as trade. One thing about it though is that it does not allow land units to cross as a bridge nor does it increase ship movement IIRC.

Yes, I know that :( it does not allow the crossing land units.

My Idea is to create some sort of regional export/import relationships.
The USA would for example import its oil and natural gas from Venezuela or Canada, while most of Europe and Asia would buy oil and gas from the Middle East and/or Russia.

It does allow trade links, but the drawbacks are the artificial idiot can't use them, and if yo build a road from one empire to another overseas to make a trade route, harbours stop working.

He said he turned off sea trade anyway.

My bad then. Didn't notice that.
But other than that, it's still more or less the same. Roads build over water make a trade route.
About the only other thing they do is increase commerce slightly if in a city radius. Other than that, they're pretty much useless.

Is there any way to make Improvements/Wonders increase Corruption?

Increase corruption? It is bad enough already :p Anyway I also have a question...why do land units have 'ignore sea' on? I cannot figure out why :lol: I tried ferrying a checked and unchecked unit and they where the same (Maybe an AI thing??).

Increase corruption? It is bad enough already :p Anyway I also have a question...why do land units have 'ignore sea' on? I cannot figure out why :lol: I tried ferrying a checked and unchecked unit and they where the same (Maybe an AI thing??).

Where in the Editor is "Ignore Sea"??

-Oz

Maybe he means the ignore terrain cost part. Though I've never actually seen any land unit with coast, sea or ocean selected in there.

Almost all the land units have "ignore sea" selected. I do it too (just because I'm superstitious like that), although I haven't seen any negative consequences when it is not done.

Almost every unit has ignore sea checked even ICBMs :lol: The newest units do not have it checked (Sams, Crusaders, modern paratroopers, etc) even the cruiser is unchecked but the battleship and every other ship of the era have it checked.

Question:
Is it possible to give every Civ its own unique City Graphics?

AFAIK no, the game only has a limited number of culture sets, Asian, European and so on. Until we learn how to add more without breaking anything, there's just those citysets.

Yeah, there's one set of city graphics per Culture Group and only 5 Culture Groups - the bane of many a modder. :(

-Oz

Yeah, there's one set of city graphics per Culture Group and only 5 Culture Groups - the bane of many a modder. :(

-Oz
A huge bane and plague upon modders. The ability to only have 5 culture groups not only effects the city graphics but also diplomacy.

A huge bane and plague upon modders. The ability to only have 5 culture groups not only effects the city graphics but also diplomacy.

How :confused:???

How :confused:???

Civs are slightly more likely to react favorably to other Civs of the same Cultural Group - rather like the real world.

Best,

Oz

Question:
Is it possible to give every Civ its own unique City Graphics?

For fixed maps: Yes and no. The city graphics can be set partly or completely to transparency and a resource with the unique graphic of the city can be placed on the city location. With this methode different city graphics in a special culture group are possible. As the graphic is a resource, only one image for for each city-tile is possible and modifications of that graphic must be done with other means (Industrial or Ancient City Sprawl-graphics and cultural city-graphics for other eras). The SOE-City graphics are partly using this methode.

Ozzy nailed the how, the culture groups are more favorable to civ's of the same group. The second thing effecting this is favorite and shunned government. What would be nice is if the flavours worked for diplomacy also so you could set one civ's reaction to another from 0 - 100% unfortunately it does not work that way.
Yes Civinator's work around does work but being limited to a city the size of a resource also has it's drawbacks.

Question:
Can you bribe a enemy Capital?

Yes
I've done that before, but it's generally not as likly to come over.
And even then, I had to bribe them several times before they finally gave in.

Hi, I asked this in the wrong thread before, but can you use blender to create models for CIV III? And is it possible to make flavor units correspond to units that are already in the game normally, simply replacing some of the models for the different civs, without permanently changing anything?

Question:
Is it possible to capture Settlers, and then use those captured Settlers to found new cities?

Hi, I asked this in the wrong thread before, but can you use blender to create models for CIV III? And is it possible to make flavor units correspond to units that are already in the game normally, simply replacing some of the models for the different civs, without permanently changing anything?
You can use blender to make units, modles is misleading because C3C uses 2d storyboards to make the unit. Not sure what you mean by that second half. Anytime you mod the game it is a semi-permanent change and you should do so by saving the biq with a unique name and making a folder in the scenario's folder to hold all the custom artwork units and text files.
Question:
Is it possible to capture Settlers, and then use those captured Settlers to found new cities?
The Settler has no attack and no defense so they should be capturable however I have noticed in epic games when you capture a settler they turn into 2 workers so I think there is something in the hard coding.

Actually, its on the general tab in the editor. You can set the captured unit to whichever unit the settler becomes.
I've never tried making it generate settlers though.

Yeah, any unit with a population gets turned into x "captured units" (where x=population cost), instead.

Intriguing. I thought it was just 2 units, not populations cost.
I think I'll experiment with this a bit, and see what happens.

Settlers get turned into 2 units due to their pop. cost of 2. Likewise, Workers get turned into 1 unit :)

Derf, I see problems with changing the captured unit from worker to settler. But then we are limited to only one possibility in that area. I should have remembered that because I had changed that before and it also effects the "unit" that can be presented in negotiations.
Virote that is very interesting I never thought to think how population cost effects that.

Derf, I see problems with changing the captured unit from worker to settler. But then we are limited to only one possibility in that area. I should have remembered that because I had changed that before and it also effects the "unit" that can be presented in negotiations.
Virote that is very interesting I never thought to think how population cost effects that.

@Derf & BK - A captured Settler is automatically turned into two workers. That having been said, I keep hearing that only the unit in the #2 slot (i.e., the Worker) can be traded.

Best,

Oz

I can confirm that this (the 2nd slot=trading thing) is wrong :)

What if I make the Settler cost only one population?

Then you would only gain one worker when capturing it (and it'd probably make the game really unbalanced!)

I can confirm that this (the 2nd slot=trading thing) is wrong :)

So what criterion makes a unit tradeable? :confused:

I can confirm that this (the 2nd slot=trading thing) is wrong :)
You are correct
So what criterion makes a unit tradeable? :confused:
People thought it was the number 2 slot because the worker by default occupies that slot.
In the general settings you can set the default captured unit which is also tradeable.

People thought it was the number 2 slot because the worker by default occupies that slot.
In the general settings you can set the default captured unit which is also tradeable.

So BOTH the #2 slot and the "Enslave" result unit are tradeable? (We really need to differentiate between "Capture" and "Enslave" here ...)

It is not the number 2 slot but the unit assigned as the default capture unit. If the "enslaved" unit results in is set to worker then it is trade able.
Unless I am missing something.

I don't think that I properly explained my intention, I want to make a Settler style Unit and preplace it in Barbarian Encampments.

When the AI captures the Encampments, it should use the Settler to found a New City on the same spot.

This could be used to represent the conquest, and assimilation of indigenous tribes and people.

Under the regular rules Civ's that are expansionist have a higher chance of getting a settler from a barbarian camp allready.

Your talking about something completely different.
Those are Goody Huts, not Barbarian Encampments!!

Well you could always place goodyhuts then. However as to whether or not barbarian settlers can be captured I do not know. Do a quick test by setting a biq to debug mode and add some barbarian settlers to the map and see what happens.

Well you could always place goodyhuts then.

The problem with using Goody Huts is that thay are random, even the Expansionist Civ's don't :rolleyes: always get Settlers.

However as to whether or not barbarian settlers can be captured I do not know. Do a quick test by setting a biq to debug mode and add some barbarian settlers to the map and see what happens.

I'll :goodjob: do just that tomorrow, will report the results.

You cannot capture Barbarian Settlers by default - they will also turn into workers. You can, however, make a new Settler, make it available to everyone, but require a resource not available on the map (or, a resource which will be available at a later date, but by this time, have this "Settler" upgrade to another unit)

Just remember to keep the Settler's population cost as 0! (although you'll need to flag is as "join city" if you want the AIdiot to use it, not that they'll ever use it to join cities anyway!...)

A question have I.

Civ X and Civ Y have access to the same tech. Said tech enables Building x and Building y. I would like Civ X to be able to build Building x but not Building y, while having Civ Y able to build Building y but not Building x.
My question is: what are all the possible ways of doing this (if any)?

Thanks in advance. :)

A question have I.

Civ X and Civ Y have access to the same tech. Said tech enables Building x and Building y. I would like Civ X to be able to build Building x but not Building y, while having Civ Y able to build Building y but not Building x.
My question is: what are all the possible ways of doing this (if any)?

Thanks in advance. :)


I don´t know, if I can tell you all possible ways of doing this, because I don´t know everything. But I can tell you how I did it in CCM (Civ Complete Mod) and another much more complicated way how to achieve the same result. :)

In CCM I wanted that the two machinegunners, that are available with Civ Complete (the German and the US-one in the PTW Extras) are beeing autoproduced by buildings that are available with the tech "Totalitarism" as they have much better defense values as the normal infantry units.

I gave the Germans an Era-None-Tech called "German Flavour" which let them build a very cheap special building, the German flag.


http://www.civforum.de/attachment.php?attachmentid=200109&stc=1&d=1215637573


Then I set the building, that should produce the US-machinegunner for 30 civs to be available with the tech "Totalitarism" and to go obsolete with the Era-None-Tech "German Flavour" that is only available to Germany.


http://www.civforum.de/attachment.php?attachmentid=200116&stc=1&d=1215637988


Then I set the building, that should produce the German-machinegunner, to be available with the tech "Totalitarism" and with a German flag-building as perequisite. Now both buildings are visible on the techtree.


http://forums.civfanatics.com/uploads/58536/Era3.JPG


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

A more complicate way with the same result would be, to give all the other civs also an flag with a special era none tech that is needed as a perequisite for the building that should be available for 30 civs.

A small advantage of that methode is, that now the standard-building for 30 civs can go obsolete with a technic in the future.

Then I set the building, that should produce the US-machinegunner for 30 civs to be available with the tech "Totalitarism" and to go obsolete with the Era-None-Tech "German Flavour" that is only available to Germany.

Could you have also set the German Machine Gun Factory to go obsolete with an Era None "US Flavor" tech, rather than have it require the German Flag? Would that have allowed a German Machine Gun factory for Germany and an American one for the US (and everyone else)?

all of my biq files got switched to civ3QEdit.document files will it still work right? it even affected my zipped backups!

Could you have also set the German Machine Gun Factory to go obsolete with an Era None "US Flavor" tech, rather than have it require the German Flag? Would that have allowed a German Machine Gun factory for Germany and an American one for the US (and everyone else)?

In that case you have to give the "US Flavor" tech to 30 civs. Otherwise these 30 civs (or any civ that doesn´t have the "US Flavor" tech) would produce both buildings. :)

Those flags could be very useful.

Do you mind if I use them.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=182728&d=1215883255

Those flags could be very useful.

Do you mind if I use them.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=182728&d=1215883255

Of course you can use them. I use your excellent graphics, too. :)

But these flags are not only useful for graphical reasons. There is a lot of power in that idea I presented here. With these flags/national symbols each civ can receive its own civ-traits - even civ traits, that don´t exist with the normal Civ 3 game. Think of cheap wonders, that give these flags to every city of a civ and these flags can have every combination of options that is possible with civ 3. Additionally they are perequisits for civspecific buildings and wonders. This is one of the central ideas of my mod. :)

Of course you can use them. I use your excellent graphics, too. :)

But these flags are not only useful for graphical reasons. There is a lot of power in that idea I presented here. With these flags/national symbols each civ can receive its own civ-traits - even civ traits, that don´t exist with the normal Civ 3 game. Think of cheap wonders, that give these flags to every city of a civ and these flags can have every combination of options that is possible with civ 3. Additionally they are perequisits for civspecific buildings and wonders. This is one of the central ideas of my mod. :)

I do like the idea alot and will probably implement in my game as soon as I figure out unique units for the 31 civs and a way to implement them with some balanced.

Could someone help me figure out a way to differentiate between the attributes for "mountains" and "snow covered mountains"? Specifically, I want to make the snow-covered mountains impassible, but leave the regular mountains open for exploration and mining.

My thought was to add a new kind of terrain to the editor list, but I don't know how to do that. (I don't want to just "rename" one of the existing types, because then I loose that type for other areas of the map.)

Thanks in advance!

Could someone help me figure out a way to differentiate between the attributes for "mountains" and "snow covered mountains"? Specifically, I want to make the snow-covered mountains impassible, but leave the regular mountains open for exploration and mining.

My thought was to add a new kind of terrain to the editor list, but I don't know how to do that. (I don't want to just "rename" one of the existing types, because then I loose that type for other areas of the map.)

Thanks in advance!

You can't really add new terrain types - just LM. Your best bet would be to either (a) make mountains impassable and use LM Hills terrain for passable or (b) set all terraform bonuses for snow covered mountains to zero. That will at least keep roads and mines etc. from being built there. (You can even rename and use snow-covered mountains for this.)

Best,

Oz

Speaking of snow covered - is there actually any differance? I've never got around to finding out.

Unfortunatley, Snow-capped Mountains use the rules of the normal mountains, not their own set of rules, like LM terrain. Just another "hardcoded" feature :(

Unfortunatley, Snow-capped Mountains use the rules of the normal mountains, not their own set of rules, like LM terrain. Just another "hardcoded" feature :(

Yes, but they are a different graphics set and (as I mentioned above) could be swapped for any other set. A likely candidate for most modders might be swamps: use the snow-covered gfx and make them, i.e., impassable. Remember, it's just software, labels and gfx. At least that part's not hard coded. :)

Best,

Oz

Some terrains, like snoopy's, have more terrain types than the regular ones. Like, for instance, a "plataeu" terrain, and "ancient forest" and such.

Some terrains, like snoopy's, have more terrain types than the regular ones. Like, for instance, a "plataeu" terrain, and "ancient forest" and such.

:confused: I use Sn00py's Greener Terrain and there are no such terrain types. Are you certain you aren't thinking of a mod using Sn00py's terrain with LMs?

It could be they're only in a certain set of his graphics, and not the greener, which I also use.
Do you know which version it is? I'm curious to see these graphics myself... particularly the plataeu one.

Here's a pic:

And also, it may not be sn00py's. It is used in Rhye's of Civilization.
The ancient forests one is used in Warhammer.
There is also a forest hills one:

Thank you for your help. Since I have to sacrifice one of my other terrain types, I chose to use tundra - however I'm having a hard time locating the files to replace. "irrigation TUNDRA.pcx" is easy enough to spot, I can't find the right tundra files to replace.

i dont understand what you are asking.

I am asking what are the file names for the tundra tiles. I don't see anything like a "tundra.pcx" or the transitional artwork between tundra tiles and other tiles.

EDIT: and while you are at it, could I have the file names for the transition art between snow mountains and other tiles? I'm having a hard time locating those too.

Actually, I cant find those terrain graphics either.

And for your edit, i have absolutely no clue.
(could you tell that i am not a very proficient modder? ;))

Well, thanks for trying. Hopefully someone else who knows will show up and enlighten us.

On a completely unrelated note:

For the pink transparency color, do you know what kinds of things can go wrong to prevent it from showing up as transparent? For example, I found some cities (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=2297615&postcount=2) that I really like, but the "transparent" background is still showing up. I'd ask the creator directly, but it doesn't appear like he's been active in a long time.

hmmm...
i like those cities too.
do you have gimp or another photo editor progam?

I've got both Gimp and Photoshop. I tried playing with it in Photoshop a little in order to fix it, but I didn't figure out how to make it work.

I don´t know, if I can tell you all possible ways of doing this, because I don´t know everything. But I can tell you how I did it in CCM (Civ Complete Mod) and another much more complicated way how to achieve the same result. :)

In CCM I wanted that the two machinegunners, that are available with Civ Complete (the German and the US-one in the PTW Extras) are beeing autoproduced by buildings that are available with the tech "Totalitarism" as they have much better defense values as the normal infantry units.

I gave the Germans an Era-None-Tech called "German Flavour" which let them build a very cheap special building, the German flag.


http://www.civforum.de/attachment.php?attachmentid=200109&stc=1&d=1215637573


Then I set the building, that should produce the US-machinegunner for 30 civs to be available with the tech "Totalitarism" and to go obsolete with the Era-None-Tech "German Flavour" that is only available to Germany.


http://www.civforum.de/attachment.php?attachmentid=200116&stc=1&d=1215637988


Then I set the building, that should produce the German-machinegunner, to be available with the tech "Totalitarism" and with a German flag-building as perequisite. Now both buildings are visible on the techtree.


http://forums.civfanatics.com/uploads/58536/Era3.JPG


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

A more complicate way with the same result would be, to give all the other civs also an flag with a special era none tech that is needed as a perequisite for the building that should be available for 30 civs.

A small advantage of that methode is, that now the standard-building for 30 civs can go obsolete with a technic in the future.

Thank you very much, Civinator. I may try it that way. :)

Well, thanks for trying. Hopefully someone else who knows will show up and enlighten us.

On a completely unrelated note:

For the pink transparency color, do you know what kinds of things can go wrong to prevent it from showing up as transparent? For example, I found some cities (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=2297615&postcount=2) that I really like, but the "transparent" background is still showing up. I'd ask the creator directly, but it doesn't appear like he's been active in a long time.

I think that you have to copy the image in GIMP, then set the backround transparancy color to magenta (which is the color civ uses for transparent).
Here is the link to a GIMP tutorial: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=241250
if this doesn't tell you, then i can't. I just downloaded GIMP yesterday, and am trying to figure out how to work it. ;)

I get the issue with the 'pink' every now and then when edit or paste another graphic into it, find when reset palette (load one created from a civ3 specific graphic that does work) it goes away ... somehow the 'pink+green' gets messed over when edit every now and then.

I tried following the tutorial, but I couldn't get it to work. It was a bit confusing to me.

JSnider - could you clarify what you mean by the palette reset?

I would go to the tutorial and references part of the forum and look around there for a tutorial on how. i'm not exactl the guy you should be asking.

HERE'S (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=2637435&postcount=2) a rather thorough Gimp tutorial.

-Oz

And scroll down for Photoshop and Jasc HERE. (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=83122)

-Oz

Ahh, thanks Oz. I needed that too.

Issue with palettes (in Paint shop Pro) is that when edit and existing civ graphic the magenta gets shewed and for some reason lets the base terrain come through. What I normally do is say for forest (et al) is insure i have a palette saved from a good pcx into PSP then mod the file and then load the palette back in before save ... has worked every time.

Thank you for the help everyone! I figured out how to fix the graphics! (Not exactly through the tutorials, but the pointed me in the right direction. The key in Photoshop seemed to be defining the first two spots on the color table during the conversion to Indexed colors - not after.)

Sharing the product below for anyone who wants to use these cities. I'll also post this on the original thread.

Ahh, good work (do you mind if i just call you wizard?). Those tutorials are helping me out as well. I am finally being allowed to post new UNITS!!! *cackles softly*

Sure, you can call me that.

What kind of new units are you making?

Oops. I typoed. I ment download new units. i still haven't found out how to make new ones yet.

I want to make a some Flag Leaderheads, for that I need to modify pcx and flc Files.

I will use GIMP to modify the pcx's, but I'll need to use a diffrent Program for the flc files.

Can some one suggest a good Program that can read, modifiy and create flc's?

Preferably, one ;) thats Freeware or Shareware.

For flag leaderheads RAD Video tools (http://www.radgametools.com/bnkdown.htm)will work.

Is it possible for an improvement to produce negative production or culture?
I have it in my mind that it is, but since I can't actually recall any instances in which I've seen this, I thought I'd double-check.

Also, while I'm here:
Say a city has a building that increases luxury output by 50%. A second building is built in the city; it's also supposed to increase luxury output by 50%. The two buildings now exist side by side. Is the result cumulative? Or does the second building's function cancel out the first?

It's non-cumulative, and you can have negative effects yes :)

hi, newb here. can i ask you guys a question? how do i add a new civ to my scenario?

I only have civ III and i noticed that theres an add button in the civilizations category so i created new civs. it worked fine and i can also pick out the civs i recently created but as i start the game, only 16 players are there. how do I expand it to 17+ players in-game?

When you say you have only civIII do you mean only vanilla?
I opened the vanilla editor and it is the same as the conquests one concerning increasing the number of Civilizations available.
Go to rules / edit / world sizes. There you can adjust the number of starting civilizations world size and distance between civs. Remember unless you want a crowded world you should also adjust world sizes if increasing the number of available civs.

It's non-cumulative, and you can have negative effects yes :)

Ok, thanks!

I have more questions already:

Untradeable Tech Y requires untradeable hidden (no era) Tech Z. Civ A begins the game with Tech Z, while Civ B does not. Without Tech Y, will Civ B be able to advance to the next era?

Given the above, assume Tech Y is in Era 2. Civ B has the 'Scientific' civ trait. Upon entering Era 2, could Civ B have been given Tech Y for free?

Also, assume Civ B builds the Great Library. If either Tech Y or Tech Z are owned by two other civs, could Civ B be given Tech Y or Tech Z for free?

Is there any way to mod diplomatic actions? I'd like to create a "poacher" unit (or tech) that allows you to steal food from enemy cities.

Is there any way to mod diplomatic actions? I'd like to create a "poacher" unit (or tech) that allows you to steal food from enemy cities.

Nope, sorry, can't be done.

-Oz

Does anyone have a link to a terrain creating guide, or know of a program I can use to make my own terrain?

Specifially, I'm looking to create some space terrain where the space is a land tile, as opposed to the space being an water tile like in Vadus' Space Empires (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=71552). I tried just renaming the WOOO.pcx files but the xdgc.pcx type ones are messing me up.

I have more questions already:

Untradeable Tech Y requires untradeable hidden (no era) Tech Z. Civ A begins the game with Tech Z, while Civ B does not. Without Tech Y, will Civ B be able to advance to the next era?

Given the above, assume Tech Y is in Era 2. Civ B has the 'Scientific' civ trait. Upon entering Era 2, could Civ B have been given Tech Y for free?

Also, assume Civ B builds the Great Library. If either Tech Y or Tech Z are owned by two other civs, could Civ B be given Tech Y or Tech Z for free?

Just in case anyone in the know about these things didn't see this a couple months ago... could anybody help me out here? That would be swell. :)

1. Yes.

2. No.

3. No.

Era=None techs are AFAIK exempt from the Great Library etc. - but more to the point, a tech which a Civ cannot typically acquire essentially doesn't exist for that Civ. This is why we refer in modding to "individual tech trees". E.g., in (1), B cannot acquire Y, so Y is "invisible" to B.

Caveat: I can't recall what happens if a tech "W" progesses from Y, i.e., does W then need to be made an optional tech, but this should be an easy test to set up.

Best,

Oz

:goodjob: Thank you Ozymandias! I appreciate your help.
Now, back to my tech trees... :coffee:

Does anyone have a link to a terrain creating guide, or know of a program I can use to make my own terrain?

Specifially, I'm looking to create some space terrain where the space is a land tile, as opposed to the space being an water tile like in Vadus' Space Empires (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=71552). I tried just renaming the WOOO.pcx files but the xdgc.pcx type ones are messing me up.

Hi plastiqe !
What about Weasel Op`s "Terrain Templates"?

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=3181736#post3181736

You will need a graphics program which is able to handle indexed pcx-files (PSP;Photoshop;GIMP...). You can `copy and paste` your own terrain graphics with the help of it. Read Weasel Op`s text on the linked thread.
I CAN NOT help you further .... Sorry , man (or woman)
EDIT:
Oooops I forgot : there`s a ton of other templates on that thread posted ! Look out for them too !

I'm trying to limit the number of a particular unit that can be built by each civ. I have some questions concerning how I'm going about this, and I'd like to know if anyone knows if this will work / work the way I want it to:

On the general settings page, I set 'Cities Needed to Support an Army' to 1. Back on the units page, I've selected 'Army' under Unit Abilities for my unit. Will a civ now be able to build the same number of that unit it has cities?

For this unit, 'Army' under AI Strategies is unchecked, and Transport Capacity is set to 0. Will this unit act as and be used (by the AI) as just a regular unit?

Would there be any complications in having this unit in the game as well as an actual army unit?

Would there be any complications in having several units like this?

I'm trying to limit the number of a particular unit that can be built by each civ. I have some questions concerning how I'm going about this, and I'd like to know if anyone knows if this will work / work the way I want it to:

On the general settings page, I set 'Cities Needed to Support an Army' to 1. Back on the units page, I've selected 'Army' under Unit Abilities for my unit. Will a civ now be able to build the same number of that unit it has cities?

For this unit, 'Army' under AI Strategies is unchecked, and Transport Capacity is set to 0. Will this unit act as and be used (by the AI) as just a regular unit?

Would there be any complications in having this unit in the game as well as an actual army unit?

Would there be any complications in having several units like this?

I think that the AI might behave with that unit the same way as they would an army... You would have to make them cost less because the AI wouldn't build them as often as one would think.

Remember that you cannot give units flagged "army" an attack or defense value...

Remember that you cannot give units flagged "army" an attack or defense value...

Oh that's right. Oh, well. It was a good idea, though. :(

I have a question:

How do you make some techs in the tree invisible to some civs and researchable to others?

I have a question:

How do you make some techs in the tree invisible to some civs and researchable to others?

By having an ERA=NONE tech assigned to a Civ, then have it be a requirement for the tech in question.

-Oz

Thanks, Oz.

Remember that you cannot give units flagged "army" an attack or defense value...

Oh... darn.
Well, thanks, Virote & Meteor Man.

Does anyone know of any other ways to achieve something like this (to limit the number of a particular unit a civ builds to just a handfull)?

Oh... darn.
Well, thanks, Virote & Meteor Man.

Does anyone know of any other ways to achieve something like this (to limit the number of a particular unit a civ builds to just a handfull)?

I'm afraid you'll have to have an improvement or small wonder produce the units at a rate which suits your desired limitation.

Best,

Oz

The coastal fortres is allways destroyed if an enemy ship bombards the city successfully where it was placed. So what will happen if the coastal fortress was created by a wonder (place coastal fortress in all cities). Will every turn the first bombardment by a ship be prevented or will any naval bombardment be prevented (as the building is always "recreated" by the wonder)?

The coastal fortres is allways destroyed if an enemy ship bombards the city successfully where it was placed. So what will happen if the coastal fortress was created by a wonder (place coastal fortress in all cities). Will every turn the first bombardment by a ship be prevented or will any naval bombardment be prevented (as the building is always "recreated" by the wonder)?

I don't know the answer but (hint,hint) this should be easy to test, with one Wonder, two coastal cities, and one Battleship.

Best,

Oz

Alot of answers can be gained by using a Battleship. Think about it.

Remember that you cannot give units flagged "army" an attack or defense value...
You can't? Really? I wouldn't be so sure... However, there's no guarantee it has an effect in game.

once you flag a unit as an army, the editor automatically blacks out the a/d values thus rendering them unadjustable.

:mischief:Which editor ?

Well, I had a try at giving a unit flagged as army attack and defense values in the current version of Steph's editor, which doesn't have the option to do so disabled. Unfortunately, the game crashes when such a unit is engaged in combat. :(

I'm afraid you'll have to have an improvement or small wonder produce the units at a rate which suits your desired limitation.

Best,

Oz

Well, how much of an effect does shield cost have on the amount of units a civ will create? Will the AI actually be discouraged from creating high cost units and opt for low cost ones instead? Or would the difference in cost be the only noticeable factor in how many of each type of unit is created (For example, A civ builds a number of two types of units, otherwise identical but one type taking twice as long to build as the other, would the civ build roughly twice the amount of the lower cost units as higher cost ones)?

I'm hoping to create two sets of unit lines: one of lower social class, lower stat units and one of higher social class, higher stat units. My plan is to have forces composed mainly of the former but with some of the latter, and I'd really like to find a way to do this without having to resort to unit producing buildings.

Oh dear. :shifty: I'm afraid it's time to exhume THIS HOARY OLD THREAD (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=62138) yet again.

It's lengthy because it's in-depth, with a lot of fine Civ minds having input and running tests.

Happy Hunting,

Oz

:eek: I was almost afraid to ask that last question. But somehow I knew you'd be able to point me in the right direction! :goodjob:

I'll have a read through that thread. Thanks!

Hi, me again! :shake:

Question: How do draftable units work? If, for example, two units are flagged as draftable, and both units are available to a civ at the same time, what happens when the draft button is pressed - which unit gets drafted?

Question: What's the deal with the 'Other Characteristics' section of the Improvements and Wonders page? I know a civ with the 'Militaristic' trait will experience a golden age if it builds a wonder flagged as 'Militaristic'. But what about improvements? Is there a difference between when a militaristic civilization builds a militaristic improvement versus when a non militaristic civ builds it?

As usual, any and all help is much appreciated. :)

Hi, me again! :shake:

Question: How do draftable units work? If, for example, two units are flagged as draftable, and both units are available to a civ at the same time, what happens when the draft button is pressed - which unit gets drafted?
I think the unit which costs the most is drafted, although I'm not too sure...

Question: What's the deal with the 'Other Characteristics' section of the Improvements and Wonders page? I know a civ with the 'Militaristic' trait will experience a golden age if it builds a wonder flagged as 'Militaristic'. But what about improvements? Is there a difference between when a militaristic civilization builds a militaristic improvement versus when a non militaristic civ builds it?

Some traits can build certain buildings at half-price, should the buildings have their trait flagged. These traits are militaristic, industrious, religious, scientific, agricultural and seafaring (so, not commercial or expansionist). For example, the Barracks is flagged with Militaristic, so a Militaristic nation such as Rome would be able to build the barracks half price. Likewise, from what I remember, Harbors are Militaristic and Seafaring, so the Vikings would be able to get them at (I think) a quarter of their original price :)

I think the unit which costs the most is drafted, although I'm not too sure...

Well, I suppose this can be tested easily enough.

Some traits can build certain buildings at half-price, should the buildings have their trait flagged. These traits are militaristic, industrious, religious, scientific, agricultural and seafaring (so, not commercial or expansionist). For example, the Barracks is flagged with Militaristic, so a Militaristic nation such as Rome would be able to build the barracks half price. Likewise, from what I remember, Harbors are Militaristic and Seafaring, so the Vikings would be able to get them at (I think) a quarter of their original price :)

Excellent!
I notice one of the wonder flags is 'pays maintenance for trade installations'. Perhaps this is the purpose of the commercial flag?

Many thanks!

I notice one of the wonder flags is 'pays maintenance for trade installations'. Perhaps this is the purpose of the commercial flag?

No - the flag is independent of the trait. Technically, a flavor flag should make a Civ more likely to build that improvement; IIRC it also halves the cost, although I'm not certain this is true in all cases :hmm:

Best,

Oz

No, RedAlert is right; the maintenance will be paid for any improvement with the "Commercial" flag.

EDIT: Also, I don't think these flags affect the likelyhood of the improvements being built, either... :hmm:

EDIT: Also, I don't think these flags affect the likelyhood of the improvements being built, either... :hmm:

It does if the flavor is checked, like flavor 1 or something...


EDIT: my bad. I just figured out what you were talking about. oops.

No, RedAlert is right; the maintenance will be paid for any improvement with the "Commercial" flag.

EDIT: Also, I don't think these flags affect the likelyhood of the improvements being built, either... :hmm:

Right: I thought he was talking about the Commercial Traits flag vs. the Wonder flag.

-Oz

Virote got it. I'm sorry for the confusion, I should have worded that better.

I'm trying to limit the number of a particular unit that can be built by each civ.
I'm hoping to create two sets of unit lines: one of lower social class, lower stat units and one of higher social class, higher stat units. My plan is to have forces composed mainly of the former but with some of the latter, and I'd really like to find a way to do this without having to resort to unit producing buildings.

I suppose I'll probably need to test this myself as well, but, trying a different approach, would giving these units a population cost do anything for my goal here?

On another topic: population pollution - What's that? How does it work?

I suppose I'll probably need to test this myself as well, but, trying a different approach, would giving these units a population cost do anything for my goal here?
Probably not. It will limit those units' production, sure, but it won't limit the AI trying to build them, and the effects will be that the AI drives its cities' population into the dirt, which is I doubt what you'd really want.

On another topic: population pollution - What's that? How does it work?

Once a city gets to size 3 (which is a population of 13 or higher), the city will produce pollution (which I would assume is relative to the amount of citizens in the city, although I don't know too much about this). The improvement flag "removes population pollution" decreases this pollution down to 1 (i.e., still pollution, but not nearly as bad as what it could be!)

Probably not. It will limit those units' production, sure, but it won't limit the AI trying to build them, and the effects will be that the AI drives its cities' population into the dirt, which is I doubt what you'd really want.

Hmm... good point. Drat.

Once a city gets to size 3 (which is a population of 13 or higher), the city will produce pollution (which I would assume is relative to the amount of citizens in the city, although I don't know too much about this). The improvement flag "removes population pollution" decreases this pollution down to 1 (i.e., still pollution, but not nearly as bad as what it could be!)

I see. Thanks again!!

Once a city gets to size 3 (which is a population of 13 or higher), the city will produce pollution (which I would assume is relative to the amount of citizens in the city, although I don't know too much about this). The improvement flag "removes population pollution" decreases this pollution down to 1 (i.e., still pollution, but not nearly as bad as what it could be!)

So would it be of no use to have multiple of these improvements in one city?

So would it be of no use to have multiple of these improvements in one city?


I probably shouldn't be answering any questions here, but I believe so.

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

Say Building A becomes obsolete with Tech B, and Tech B allows Building B.

- Will Building A still be buildable having researched Tech B?
- Will Building A, having been built in a city, still exist in that city, having researched tech B?
- Do the effects of Building A cease having researched Tech B?
- Say Building A is required to construct Building B. Will this work?

Say Building A becomes obsolete with Tech B, and Tech B allows Building B.

- Will Building A still be buildable having researched Tech B?
- Will Building A, having been built in a city, still exist in that city, having researched tech B?
- Do the effects of Building A cease having researched Tech B?
- Say Building A is required to construct Building B. Will this work?

Damn! I edited the post instead of quoting it!

- No, once it's become obsolete you can't built it.
- Building A should disappear... But sometimes it stays (see test with more than 256 buildings with my editor). However, I think that even if it stays, it has no effect.
- Yes, the effects cease.
- I think in that case you can never build Building B[/

Damn! I edited the post instead of quoting it!

- No, once it's become obsolete you can't built it.
- Building A should disappear... But sometimes it stays (see test with more than 256 buildings with my editor). However, I think that even if it stays, it has no effect.
- Yes, the effects cease.
- I think in that case you can never build Building B[/

I believe Steph is correct on all counts.

-Oz

Not in the last one, I think. I'm pretty sure you can build an improvement if it requires an obsolete improvement in the city...

Only if the improvment IS in the city.

Damn! I edited the post instead of quoting it!

- No, once it's become obsolete you can't built it.
- Building A should disappear... But sometimes it stays (see test with more than 256 buildings with my editor). However, I think that even if it stays, it has no effect.
- Yes, the effects cease.
- I think in that case you can never build Building B[/

I see you're still getting used to your new-found powers! ;)
I'll re-edit that post.

Thanks for the answers! :)

I believe Steph is correct on all counts.

-Oz

Not in the last one, I think. I'm pretty sure you can build an improvement if it requires an obsolete improvement in the city...

Only if the improvment IS in the city.

Well, I guess there's one good way to find out...

Wyrmshadow has done great ww2 units and i wanted to use different leaders and armies in my mod.
Does anyone know if it is possible to have different armies for different civ?
Perhaps with different culture.
Can i use command lines like this in the pediaicons.txt:
#ANIMNAME_PRTO_Army_CULTURE_American
Armee1
#ANIMNAME_PRTO_Army_CULTURE_European
Armee2

In my mod, I have a generated army that is virtually useless, and then you can upgrade it to national armies for no cost.

general,

that is a good question and one worth investigating :)

i've had trouble in the past trying to plug in civ-specific armies that are spawned only (ie can't be built). i realized that the 'build army' unit set in the editor precluded me from plugging in these civ-specific units...but to try the culture entry would be worth a shot imho.

here's my basic take on army units in civ3 --

armies in civ3 are a strange thing imo. by this i mean that they can be game breakers in terms of balance, especially for the human player (this is why i never have them able to be built in any of my projects, too powerful and exploitative for the human). of course, this is only one man's opinion...but in my time of civ3, i've come to find that there are some defficiencies w/ the default setup of the army units.

my first observation about the ineffectiveness of armies was discovered when we were developing TCW back in '05. I_batman always used to point out to us how crappy the AI would be w/ its armies and especially how it loaded them up. it would put the strangest of units into these precious army units and we would all be like wtf? so this led us to restrict which units could go into the army units (via the 'foot unit' flag). this went a real long way for us in terms of cajoling the AI into actually loading decent units into their armies.

piggybacking off of this method, i took it another step w/ TCW 50s. we resticted which units could go into the armies and we had them available only through the GLs. spawning armies via the 'battle created unit' is not good as the game engine is set up to never spawn another 'battle created unit' again until that first one is 'expended'...now, by 'expended', i mean that it has to either be killed off, disbanded, or 'cashed in' for --as per default civ3-- an army unit or to rush a wonder/building. my civ friend MarineCorps was the one who originally pointed this out to me a few years back and it was quite a revelation :) anyhow, knowing this, i've reverted back to this default civ3 setup for all of my projects (although AoI v3.0 did not have this arrangement - it was discovered after it was published).

the last major point regarding the armies is to chop down its transport capacity to only one. now, this sounds crazy...but read me out :D we ramp up the HP value of the actual army unit. it is normally the equivelent of three infantry units (each inf = roughly a division and the army unit = roughly a corps).

i can write w/ great enthusiasm that the above setup has worked marvelously. the AI gets these army units are about the same rate as the human, it loads the same types of units into them, and it has roughly the same strength as ones loaded up by a human. and to cap it off, we've seem outstanding AI useage of the army units once we implemented all of these changes (TCW 50s). there were a few times when i saw an enemy army unit baring down on my cities and i was truly terrified. when was the last time we could all say that? :p

El Justo:

I've come up with two ways to "help" the AI as well as add additional "armies" to a mod in the FF mod:

First of all, Armies are auto-produced by the Military Academy SW, which no longer has the "build armies without a leader" flag, so ALL factions get armies eventually.

Secondly, I've added a group of Alignment-specific Small Wonders (good, neutral, evil), which could just as easily be culture-specific if you wanted them to, that produce special "army" units.... These "armies" are actually single units, but with massive Attack, Defense and HP values (somewhere in the neighborhood of 27,27 and +8HP) that used Munits and basically had the same combat capabilites as an army unit, but not quite. I did have to use the "foot unit" flag to keep the AI and human players from loading these "army" units into their actual armies (In one playtest, I lost over a dozen high-powered modern units to a single AI army with 2 of these "army" units loaded into it)....

Those SW also had the "increased army size" flag enabled.

Steph:
Yes it's a good idea. Does the AI use it? In my mod each faction has only one small wonder to upgrade units.

Thank you El Justo & Hikaro
I will try the settings you've suggested for armies but i think i will not use auto-produced ones because i already have 256 buildings/wonders in my mod and it would be difficult to find one city improvement available to all faction. I will try the lines that i wrote above for the pediaicons.txt file

Steph:
Yes it's a good idea. Does the AI use it? In my mod each faction has only one small wonder to upgrade units.

I don't know... How could I tell?... Wait... Do you mean we can actually play our mods, instead of just preparing it ;)?

Seriously, I've not played long enough to see many armies on the field, they are supposed to appear late in game.

thanks, Hikaro. sounds like a nice format.

on another note - i'm wondering if one of the keen minds here in this thread would care to deliver some discourse on the workings of the United Nations wonder in the default Conquests game. been a while since i've played a non-modded game...thanks in advance :)

I think it just enables diplomatic victory

i knew that; i should be more specific -

roughly, how long after its built does an 'election' take place? Virote noted that he thinks it's 11 turns but he wasn't sure altogether.

Very sorry if this is a bump, but I am utterly hopeless on how I should do this.

Is there, somewhere, a program that can help with placing tech icons and such, or maybe a picture format of some sort that would help?
Thanks, and sorry for the bump.

There is a tech tree builider in my new expanded editor (link in my signature) that is really helpful to place tech icons

Thanks Steph. I'll try your editor.

Wyrmshadow has done great ww2 units and i wanted to use different leaders and armies in my mod.
Does anyone know if it is possible to have different armies for different civ?
Perhaps with different culture.
Can i use command lines like this in the pediaicons.txt:
#ANIMNAME_PRTO_Army_CULTURE_American
Armee1
#ANIMNAME_PRTO_Army_CULTURE_European
Armee2
Just for information: i've tried these lines in pediaicons.txt and it did not work :sad:

Hi,

ok how can i make a civ specific tech?

I've seen it done, is it something to do with flavors?

Tanks in advance

First, you need to create a non era tech, let's call it "Rome".
Then, in the civilization page, you give this tech as a starting tech to the civ that will have this specific tech tree.

And last, you create your tech, and use the non era as requirement.

So if you want Rome to have "gladiator" instead of "Drama" for instance, you create a "Gladiator" tech in era1, make "Rome" a prerequesite of this tech, make "Rome" a non era tech, and give it to Rome civilization only.

The drawback is that it's not possible to trade the tech with a civilization that could not research it, and also anytech that would have the "gladiator" as prerequesite will also be specific.

If you are using my editor, you can see in the tech page which civilizations have acces to each tech, and in the tehc tree builder, you will also see the civ specific tech trees.

It can be useful to check you set everything correctly.

In-game there are buildings that make X number of citizens happy and Y number of citizens content. But in the editor I see only an option of happy citizens. Can someone explain?

They all only make unhappy citizens content; they can't actually make and citizens "happy".

Really? Wow. So... are there any improvement tags that do make actual happy faces?
I'm assuming then that "Unhappy faces" = Content ---> Unhappy.

I'm not entirely sure on unhappy faces - they may effect happy faces as well as content, so I dunno.

Really? Wow. So... are there any improvement tags that do make actual happy faces?
I'm assuming then that "Unhappy faces" = Content ---> Unhappy.

IIRC it's only luxuries that do Content->Happy. Having a surplus of "content" faces just means you have a lot of content people.

Unhappy faces make citizens unhappy, until you run out of content citizens. Then they make happy content (but after you have one citizen made content from an unhappy face, the next one will make that citizen unhappy, as there is now a content citizen again.

Note that I'm basing this on what I remember from years of fanatical playing, and didn't actually perform a test to verify this this morning.

Thanks to you both! I understand better now.

A couple more questions from me:

1) Resource appearance ratio and disappearance probability - what precisely do the numbers mean?

2) Civ E can research tech e and civ M can research tech m. Techs e and m occupy the same coordinates on the tech tree. When playing either civ, which tech will be visible, and which will be 'underneath'?

A couple more questions from me:
1) Resource appearance ratio and disappearance probability - what precisely do the numbers mean?

Disappear: if 100, resource unit has 1 chance out of 100 to disappear each turn (and to reappear somewhere else!)
For appearance, see details here. (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=69502)

2) Civ E can research tech e and civ M can research tech m. Techs e and m occupy the same coordinates on the tech tree. When playing either civ, which tech will be visible, and which will be 'underneath'?
It would require some testing. I believe the last item will be on top (in the order in which they appear in the editor).

A couple more questions from me:

1) Resource appearance ratio and disappearance probability - what precisely do the numbers mean?

I find the civconquests help program to be very helpful in this area. If you have a question about what a button does, then look it up in the help screen. ;)

Disappear: if 100, resource unit has 1 chance out of 100 to disappear each turn (and to reappear somewhere else!)
For appearance, see details here. (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=69502)


It would require some testing. I believe the last item will be on top (in the order in which they appear in the editor).
I find the civconquests help program to be very helpful in this area. If you have a question about what a button does, then look it up in the help screen. ;)

Thanks, Steph and Meteor Man.
I'll test the tech tree sometime and will post my results.

I have a question:


I want only certain civs to be able to build specific wonders, for example, only Egypt and Isreal can build the Pyramids. In order to do this, I made it so these two civs can build a civ-specific wonder at the start (made possible by non-tradable, no-era techs called "Egypt" and "Isreal"). These specific wonders cost nothing and are available at the start. They put a certain building in every city. This certain building alows the creation of the Pyramids only in the cities that have that building (all Egyptian and Isreali cities).

However, even though the civ-specific wonder is available at the start, the AI won't build it. Even halfway through the game the civ-specific wonders are not built. I know that someone (i forget their name I think it was embryodead) used this principal in MEM (the Mideival European Mod) and it worked perfectly. Does anyone know how I can get the AI to biuld their civ-specific wonders?

I just gave them the era-none tech and made it a prerequesite for the wonder itself. As long as it's attractive enough to the AI (immediate use, not just the enabling of other wonders), it will usually work.

but can't a wonder only have one prerequisite tech? I want Pyramids to be available with Masonry.

Does the wonder only put buildings into cities or does it do other stuff as well?

It produces one culture. I tried this to get them to build it.

Try making it cheap:1 shield.

You can make a flavor. Call it Buildings or something and set it to 100%, then give that Wonder this flavor, along with the Civ, and that should help. Sometimes it seems buildings that produce production will definitely get built, or perhaps a happy / content face would assist.

I have seen the same problem myself, it is strange indeed.

Tom

Or have a tech called "Pyramid", very cheap, requiring Masonry and Egypt non-era tech.

Or have Pyramid requires the "Pharaoh" government, which require Egypt non-era tech.

Or have Pyramid requires a resource that requires Egypt non-era tech, so only Egypt can see it.

You can make a flavor. Call it Buildings or something and set it to 100%, then give that Wonder this flavor, along with the Civ, and that should help. Sometimes it seems buildings that produce production will definitely get built, or perhaps a happy / content face would assist.

I have seen the same problem myself, it is strange indeed.

Tom

But then the human player can build it. Thanks for the thought though. I have tried.


Try making it cheap:1 shield.

I did, but it doesn't help.

Or have a tech called "Pyramid", very cheap, requiring Masonry and Egypt non-era tech.

Or have Pyramid requires the "Pharaoh" government, which require Egypt non-era tech.

Or have Pyramid requires a resource that requires Egypt non-era tech, so only Egypt can see it.

I tried the first one, but then I had to make a load of new techs...

I like your last idea. I will try it. Thanks everyone! ;)

EDIT: But wait, then this can't be used for the random map secenario I'm making becuase the resource will be placed randomly around the map and not under the Egyptian's Capital. Grr.. any help?

Flavors are not what determines if the human can build it or not. It only tells the AI that the building should be built 0 through 100% of the time if it is available.

If you don't want human to build it, it would have to be restricted to non-human civ's some other way, flavor does not change any of that at all.

Tom

I know, I use flavors a lot. They certainly can help with making some civs more inclined towards certain buildings. I wish there were flavors for units.

EDIT: But wait, then this can't be used for the random map secenario I'm making becuase the resource will be placed randomly around the map and not under the Egyptian's Capital. Grr.. any help?
Try the government and give it to Egypt at start.

Either have Egypt and Israel share a government type, or consider leaving the Pyramids to Egypt and give Israel something else (Temple Mount, Tabernacle, Ten Commandments, etc.), otherwise wonder sharing gets really tricky unless limited to governments.

But then they can't change governments, and I want them to be able to. This is just a mod of an epic game.

I'm creating a mod where a large number of civs will be limited to a relatively small area for at least a couple of eras - roughly half the game. The civs will probably only be able to establish at most about 5 cities each during this period. I am aware of a tendancy with AI and human player alike to establish large empires, taking out civs early, et cetera; something that would seem to me to be that much easier given the geographical situation I have described. That's a problem. Such expansion would be almost entirely ahistorical during the mentioned eras, and with that in mind I want to do what I can to limit it. My question, then, is: what can I do to help preserve the existence of the civs in the situation described and discourage empire building during a period of about two eras? Off the top of my head I would think measures such as allowing for various types of defensive improvements, and increasing corruption/decreasing optimal city number would be a start. Could anyone offer any more extensive suggestions?

If you are ready to reload from time to time, you could use my expanded game system.

It allows changing the poduction in food / shields / commerce of terrains, the food required by each citizens, the max size of cities, the number of optimal cities, etc. with each era. Or make some terrain impassable / unfitted for cities in the first era, but not in the latest one.

You can make it so that in the first eras, the cities are much more difficult to built / maintain

And to prevent early conquest, you can give a very strong bonuses to the first walls, and make them obsolete when you reach some era.

Another method is like CCM epic mod: make settlers in the first two eras only available from Palace auto production. You can set it at a low rate.

Making units more defense-oriented, making offensive units more expensive relative to defensive units. Also, making units enslave into sacrifice-able units may also make players want to keep the AI in the game for longer, if only to increase the amount of sacrifice victims they can gain.

However, what you must remember is that if you're forced into not attacking in the early part of the game, that may make the game less fun.

My question regarding leaderhead flc files:

How does the game determine which flics are used in each era? How can I make a normally four-era leaderhead instead be dual-era, in which the leaderhead is ancient for the first two eras and medieval for the last two eras?

(never mind the static images like the advisor files... I have that taken care of already)

My question regarding leaderhead flc files:

How does the game determine which flics are used in each era? How can I make a normally four-era leaderhead instead be dual-era, in which the leaderhead is ancient for the first two eras and medieval for the last two eras?

(never mind the static images like the advisor files... I have that taken care of already)

Under the civilizations tab, and in the Animations portion in the lower left corner, pick the era you wish to set the leaderhead for... and change the Forward and Reverse Filenames.

So if you want the first 2 eras to be the same, set the appropriate Flc file in these first 2 eras, and do the same for the other eras.

Tom

Thanks a ton!

ı wonder if this thread can be made like the newbee questions thread in the general forum . ı have tons of questions to ask , yet have internet access only 3 days a week . My threads quickly look like spamming for the post count and stop receiving replies .

on the other hand what does attack 2 and 3 in INI files do ? if ı have flcs for them and my unit of 3 moves with blitz is next to 3 enemy ones , will my infantry use machine guns in one attack , grenades in the second , bayonet in the third ?

You can have 3 attachs , 1, 2 and 3.
If you have only 1, then it shows only 1.--> 1, 1, 1
If you have 1 and 2, it shows 1, then 2, and then it replay 2 until end of the battle --> 1, 2, 2, 2, 2
If you have 1, 2 and 3, it loops : 1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3

But this is for each attack. If you have blitz it will change nothing.
Ex: if you have MG, grenades, bayonet as 1 2 a 3 and 2 MP with blitz
first attack will show MG, grenades, bayonet , MG, grenades, bayonet
second attack will zhow MG, grenades, bayonet , MG, grenades, bayonet

until one of the two units (yours or the ennemy's) die.

thanks , you have saved me from trying at home and trying to figure out what was going on . ı am a slow learner , such threads increase my game playing time !

finally installed the Irfanview , checked the units_32 pcx file where it says "This is the only the true icon sheet , all others are a mistake or a delusion " and right in the middle are the dinos . Where is the game to use them ?

that file is 14 by 24 squares . How do ı increase the size of it ? Can ı make it say a 24 by 24 ? Or do ı cheat and use one already enlarged? ı have one example that should have between 1300+ and 2400 icons on it .

talking of such large numbers of units is there an upper limit on the number of additions ?

The unit32 are mostly used when you placed units on the map in the editor.

You can enlarge it if you wish. I don't know the upper limit. I have one with room for 6000+ icons, and it works.

ı have always thanked to answers to my questions , ı wouldn't want to give it up though this subforum has a well justified angle against spamming . So here is my belated thanks . And further desire to learn ; before everybody starts playing Civ5 never to return

A:
[/QUOTE]Units converted from legion and chariots of war, credits to Paradox Entertainment (they made the graphics) and Slitherine Software (http://www.slitherine.co.uk) (they made the game)
57 ancients units from Legion and Chariots of War (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=88018&page=1&pp=20)[/QUOTE]

ı am just into adding units , going around in old threads and the like ı tried a few of those ancient units and the two zips ı have have only Flics . Do ı copy and paste INI files or should ı look for them in the normal downloads section ?

B:

it always irritates me to see spearmen and the like surviving to 2000AD .The easy way of course they should change their image just like the worker gets a pair of pants , does anyone know a good Molotov cocktail thrower ? Also if ı make an unit , say the swordsman obsolote , say by the musketman , but the swordman doesn't have the upgrade option , it won't be produced at all after the discovery of the gunpowder , is that correct ?

A: you need to create an ini for them: take something similar like the spearman and work from it.

I didn't include an ini as there are several options (ex: two deaths) to choose from.

B: yes, the swordsman will not be produced after gunpowder is discovered (unless of course it is autoproduced by a building)

For B, the Swordsman will be built if you don't have the resources for the Musketman.

ı appreciate the answers

something ı hadn't come across yet in my unit tests ; and yes the barbarians can kill the Kong . All ı know about the DY-100 is that it was the ship of some racist who got a proper lesson in a Trek movie . What causes the pink rectangle at the Southeast corner ? Is it something that ı , the newbie at the flavour unit mania level , can fix ?

ı was testing a galley attacking a galleon . To realise boarding ı omitted ranged attack and rotate before attack for the galley : yet the galleon also didn't rotate to open fire .Galleon fights normally with everything else . Should ı give ranged attack to any ship ?

ı appreciate the answers
All ı know about the DY-100 is that it was the ship of some racist who got a proper lesson in a Trek movie . What causes the pink rectangle at the Southeast corner ? Is it something that ı , the newbie at the flavour unit mania level , can fix ?


There was a submarine that had the same problem that I saw some time ago.. it's a pallette issue. Easy to fix though, post the link for DY-100 and I can correct for you, and upload it to the thread.

There was a submarine that had the same problem that I saw some time ago.. it's a pallette issue. Easy to fix though, post the link for DY-100 and I can correct for you, and upload it to the thread.

That's why I always call him a Gentleman and a Scholar :)

Heres the fixed FLC's for the DY-100:
246877

I'll pull a 5 year bump on the original thread and post it there also :cool:

That's why I always call him a Gentleman and a Scholar

Thank you.

But everyone has seen, I have a quite Non-Gentleman side also :devil:

This thread should be stickied.

ı would second Bowsling's suggestion as it would have given less anxiety to me to offer my thanks to anybody that find a solution to my problems , even to the extent Tom2050 went in bumping . Writing this before checking the thread of DY100 , ı would be really sorry if he was roasted in fire or acidboarded for the trouble . Thanks .

It's no problem, in general, bumps are fine if they add something relevant to the unit or thread. I posted in both so that way if someone goes to download the DY100, they have a greater chance of spotting the correction.

Heres the fixed FLC's for the DY-100:
246877 [...] But everyone has seen, I have a quite Non-Gentleman side also :devil:

Shhhh! :shifty: Ix-nay on-way e-thay ar-way imes-cray ...

- :Dz

Thought I'd move this question over here to see if I can get an answer.

Is there a way to put civs in locked allliences in which the allies aren't grouped together for allied victory?


Sure. Just have the Locked Alliances, but make the Victory type Individual instead of Coalition.

Right but then I still have to ally things in a bunch. I need to have it so that civs A and B can be locked allies with civ C but a A and B are not allies.

The set up in my scenario is there are eight playable civs and two AI only civs. Non of the playable civs are allies. AI civ A is allied with every civ except AI civ B who is enemies with everyone. If the AI civ B ever reaches the capital of AI civ A then they win and everyone else loses. Therefor players have to work together to protect AI civ A while still competing to defeat eachother by conquest, diplomatic, space race or cultural.

This is not possible, I'm afraid...

Weak :(

Is there at least a way to add more alliance groups so that each one can be locked against AI B but not in a group together?

No again, I'm afraid :(

really should be a better diplomacy setting in an editor for a game as diplomacy oriented as civ.

Leaders in my scenario can't build armies for some reason. I have build army checked in the special actions box. In fact its an exact duplicate of the leader in the standard game. Whats going on here?