Fixed borders mod
for Rise of Mankind

WARNING: This thread has been deprecated. The latest version of Fixed Borders (3.1) is not available as standalone RoM modmod, since it's been included in very popular Afforess' A.N.D modmod.

Version 1.0.1 (for RoM 2.4)
Version 2.0 (for RoM 2.5x)
Version 3.0b2 (the latest) (for RoM 2.8)

Requires Rise of Mankind (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=273373), Civ IV BtS 3.19


I've always had problem with culture dependent borders in modern times. So in my mod - they are not changeable by culture, only by military occupations and city trading (in modern times, which means specific civics needed).


Units have new command "claim territory" that you can apply in an enemy territory. You claim it, next turn the plot is inside your borders. In order to recapture it, enemy must place his forces on that plot and do the same ("claim territory").


When capturing cities, you get all the territory that the city 'provides' to its original owner. So when you're at war with someone and capture all his cities, you will get ALL his territory, up to the last plot (there's only one exception to this rule - the tiles that are not 'provided' by cities, but claimed by force can remain in the old civ, but for sure they can't go to other neighboring civ that is neutral in war). In order to keep all this territory you need only the military force. No neighbor of his that is at peace with both sides can benefit from the war. If someone wants that territory – he must declare war and capture it or trade for it (city trading, like in normal game).


During a war, if a tile has more of your tiles surrounding it than the enemy’s, it is claimed automatically, if no enemy units are defending it. This makes the borders less shredded at the end of war.

Additional thing about borders around cities - every tile next to a city ALWAYS belongs to the owner of that city. This is an additional feature that could be good for plain BTS also, but with fixed borders it is a must (when a non-fixed-borders-civ captures a city of a fixed-borders-civ, it can have a lot of problems with that city, which is very soon completely surrounded by enemy tiles).

Before having modern civics, the game acts as before (i.e. the culture defines borders) and once a player has the necessary civics all of his territory becomes ‘fixed’, no one can take it by culture means anymore and his units get the new command to execute when in enemy territory (‘claim territory’). The player still culturally expands his borders over unoccupied territory and over nations that don’t have fixed borders (think of the Roman Empire that enforced its own borders, but influenced the surrounding tribes that had no solid state formed).


The civics that switch between ‘fixed borders’ and cultural borders are defined in XML as of this version (this however has a drawback - savegames from plain RoM are not compatible with this mod ). By default, the following civics enforce fixed borders (you can change this in CIV4CivicInfos.xml):

CIVICOPTION_GOVERNMENT
- CIVIC_REPUBLIC
- CIVIC_FEDERAL
- CIVIC_DEMOCRACY
- CIVIC_COMMUNIST
- CIVIC_FASCIST

CIVICOPTION_POWER
- CIVIC_VASSALAGE
- CIVIC_PARLIAMENT
- CIVIC_PRESIDENT

CIVICOPTION_SOCIETY
- CIVIC_NATIONALIST

CIVICOPTION_ECONOMY
- CIVIC_PLANNED
- CIVIC_CORPORATIST

CIVICOPTION_RELIGION
- CIVIC_STATE_CHURCH

In order to have fixed borders, a player must have AT LEAST ONE of these civics options selected.


AI has been thought to use ‘claim territory’ in favor of pillage and to prefer to claim the tiles close to its cities (plus to give priority to resource rich tiles).



Changes from version 3.0b1:
- AI switches to Fixed Borders civics as soon as it can (priority among civics kept, just added one civic with fixed borders to be a must)

Changes from version 2.0:
- converted to RoM 2.8
- fixed borders civics defined in XML
- tiles adjacent to a city always belong to the owner of the city
- GUI: on leaderhead/civ mouse hover, info whether the player has fixed borders displayed

Credits:

Of course zappara (http://forums.civfanatics.com/member.php?u=39704) for his brilliant mod Rise of Mankind (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=273373) (which includes many other mods and credits; see Rise of Mankind thread)

Download ver 1.0.1 (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=11690)

Download ver 2.0 (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=11764)

Download ver 3.0 (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13590)

This sounds like an improvement over an already excellent mod! It seems to fix one of the BTS weaknesses. I am looking forward to trying this! Does it also work with ROM 2.5?

Does it also work with ROM 2.5?

No. I never switched to RoM 2.5 myself, I liked the 2.4's civics much better, so I played and modded that.

But hey, give me one weekend and it will work :hammer:

playing ROM 2.4 immortal huge marathon with fixed borders mod.
My enemies apparently have achieve that status in the medieval. Their tiles have got very high culture values. So I am no longer able to gain tiles with culture. I haven' achieved that state yet.
Is it now impossible culturally conquer cities?
What happens if you switch back to other civics. Do the culture values swap back to their normal values for each tile?

playing ROM 2.4 immortal huge marathon with fixed borders mod. My enemies apparently have achieve that status in the medieval. Their tiles have got very high culture values. So I am no longer able to gain tiles with culture.

That's right. I use culture to fix the borders. So you'll in fact see that the owner of a tile always has 99% or 100% culture in that tile. You can't take it by culture expansion anymore, only by using military forces ("claim territory" order).


Is it now impossible culturally conquer cities?

It's not impossible, because culture in cities still works the same. But I suggest turning that option off (when starting the game) because RoM itself has much better solution for that - city revolts (which are affected by culture, angryness, health, military presence in the city and much more), so simple city cultural flipping is made obsolete in my opinion.


What happens if you switch back to other civics. Do the culture values swap back to their normal values for each tile?

Yes. In fact, when switching to "non fixed borders" civics, you'll loose all the territory that doesn't belong to you "culturally" (i.e. you claimed it with "claim territory"). This represents (in real life) the period of dissolving of an empire, when you don't have enough strength to rule your own lands.

No. I never switched to RoM 2.5 myself, I liked the 2.4's civics much better, so I played and modded that.

But hey, give me one weekend and it will work :hammer:

:goodjob::goodjob::goodjob::goodjob:

can't wait!

It's not impossible, because culture in cities still works the same. But I suggest turning that option off (when starting the game) because RoM itself has much better solution for that - city revolts (which are affected by culture, angryness, health, military presence in the city and much more), so simple city cultural flipping is made obsolete in my opinion.

This is interesting! Never thought of it that way. As I like to play builder-style I was planning to take over some cities culturally. The fixing of the borders already in medieval age surprised me and now forces me to change my strat, as all of my neighbors have fixed borders.
Already curious if the revolutions can work out in my favour then...

Having played this now a bit, I found the following issues in my game. There are 2 big AI countries Ethiopia and Egypt, which are at war with each other.
1.) Egypt sent forces deep into Ethiopia territory and claimed land there, but each turn the land is lost again because of the rule that surrounded lands go back to the owner of the more tiles. This issue seems to be minor and could possibly be fixed by making the AI only claim territory if it owns so much land nearby.
2.) There are stretches of "abandoned land". Egypt owns land stretches near Ethiopian cities even though there is no Egyptian city anywhere near. This seems to have been cause by a revolution in an Egyptian city while Ethiopia did not have fixed borders. Egypt just kept the tiles. Perhaps this can be fixed by implementing a random chance of any owned tile not near any own city to lose its fixed status.
3.) Perhaps the take ownership action should be limited to allow taking ownership only near own cities or near own other tiles. This would override the suggestion in 1.
4.) If one civ with fixed borders conquers a city of another one without fixed borders and the original owner conquers the city back, it does not get back its tiles.
My overall impression is that the fixed borders mod is a very good idea and concept, that can be a great playing experience, if these issues could be addressed. These comments are just my impressions from less than 1 full game. Hopefully others can tell there impressions as well.

Having played this now a bit, I found the following issues in my game. There are 2 big AI countries Ethiopia and Egypt, which are at war with each other...

Could you post a save game or at least some screenshots? It will be much easier for me to understand the problem (and to fix it).

Moved to the RoM forum.

Interesting addon, I'll try it as soon as it's available to 2.5!

What about the Influence Driven War concepts? Are they gone?

What about the Influence Driven War concepts? Are they gone?

Yes, if the loser unit's owner has 'fixed borders'. There's no use of culture transfer if borders are fixed. But until a fixed borders civics is selected IDW works the same as before.

Now I'm thinking (in new version) to keep the Active city resistance part of IDW, even after fixed borders are reached, but I'm not sure yet. Culture transfer for field combat will be off for sure (after fixed borders reached).

Here are some screenshots:
rom2.4_fixed_750ad.JPG shows the abandoned lands. The green city is in revolt state but the situation with the surrounding land stays the same after the revolt state is over.

rom2.4_fixed_750ad_2.JPG shows how the AI claims land and loses it when it moves to the next tile

rom2.4_fixed_750ad_3.JPG shows a "possibly new issue": The culture value of the city tile has been set to a very high value. See bottom left of the screenshot. The mouse was over the violett city tile.

rom2.4_fixed_760ad.JPG shows that after peace has been negotiated, the unit is keeping a resource far away from its cities. Is this intended?

1.
Egypt sent forces deep into Ethiopia territory and claimed land there, but each turn the land is lost again because of the rule that surrounded lands go back to the owner of the more tiles. This issue seems to be minor and could possibly be fixed by making the AI only claim territory if it owns so much land nearby.


Hmm, yes, I noticed this thing myself. The problem is that I taught AI to use the pillage type of units to claim land, and those units are usually fast ones, they pillage and move on. I will try to switch to defender units, they should claim the land and stay there to defend it. I already made a priority for AI to claim tiles close to its existing borders, but apparently it needs to be stricter. Tiles far inside enemy territory should be claimed only if they hold a valuable resource, but then some defenders should stay there definitely.

2.
There are stretches of "abandoned land". Egypt owns land stretches near Ethiopian cities even though there is no Egyptian city anywhere near. This seems to have been cause by a revolution in an Egyptian city while Ethiopia did not have fixed borders. Egypt just kept the tiles.


This seems OK to me as it is. Think of a rebels (in real life) who took only one city but didn't organize themselves enough to take the surrounding lands. The laws of big and organized Egypt are enforced in that territory until the rebels send armies to conquer it.

3.
Perhaps this can be fixed by implementing a random chance of any owned tile not near any own city to lose its fixed status.


No, the idea of fixed borders is that you never lose a tile, except by military occupation or trade. Like UK owns lands in Cyprus or Falkland Islands, without any real cities there, but with strong forces to defend it.

4.
Perhaps the take ownership action should be limited to allow taking ownership only near own cities or near own other tiles. This would override the suggestion in 1.


Again, it is OK to take some tiles far away from home, but apparently AI does this too much. I'll try to restrain it only to valuable resources, but not to completely ban it.

5.
If one civ with fixed borders conquers a city of another one without fixed borders and the original owner conquers the city back, it does not get back its tiles.


Yes, well....this seems rather fair to me (in the 'fixed borders mod' way of thinking :crazyeye:). Culture is strong and affects people and countries, but only until organized military forces and solid states come into play. So if you lost some territory to a more organized country, it will be much harder to take it back (until you organize yourself).


6.
rom2.4_fixed_750ad_3.JPG shows a "possibly new issue": The culture value of the city tile has been set to a very high value. See bottom left of the screenshot. The mouse was over the violett city tile.


This seems to be an obvious bug. I'll try to investigate more and fix it for the next version.

7.
rom2.4_fixed_760ad.JPG shows that after peace has been negotiated, the unit is keeping a resource far away from its cities. Is this intended?

Yes, this is exactly why I allowed claiming of territory deep inside enemy lands - you brake in and take what you need, if you're strong enough. After that you must defend it or lose it. This is how I wanted AI to behave all the time (regarding points 1 and 4)

Any idea as to when it'll be updated to 2.5? I'd love to play it as I've suggested ideas like this before, but never had the coding ability to do it myself.

Wow, this mod looks amazing.
I can't wait to implement it when it's updated to 2.5. It'll make the modern era more realistic with actual countries instead of just areas of culture, which doesn't dictate boundaries anymore.

Any idea as to when it'll be updated to 2.5?

This weekend, if I fix the problems with the overheating of my new graphic card :wallbash:.

In the meantime - post what civics you'd like to trigger the fixed borders (in 2.5 it's a completely new system).

Thank you very much for addressing each point in detail!


2.
This seems OK to me as it is. Think of a rebels (in real life) who took only one city but didn't organize themselves enough to take the surrounding lands. The laws of big and organized Egypt are enforced in that territory until the rebels send armies to conquer it.

Hm, but this has a disadvantage. In this case I as the player would have to declare war to 3 different nations just to take over one city with the land that belongs to it.
Originally I understood that the main purpose of the fixed borders mod is to keep cities and their tiles together.

Another interesting case is if the vassal is the owner of the city and superior country owns the lands around it. Perhaps the superior would like to "donate" the land to its vassal, or at least "let them work the tiles" so they do not starve.

Originally I understood that the main purpose of the fixed borders mod is to keep cities and their tiles together.


Well, the main purpose of fixed borders mod is actually the opposite - allow countries to own lands independently of cities. This is an advantage for advanced nations, but of course - disadvantage for poor ones.

In this case I as the player would have to declare war to 3 different nations just to take over one city with the land that belongs to it.

Same as above - land doesn't belong to a city if the land's owner is not the same as the city's owner. If you wanted to conquer Andorra (tiny city in Europe) and the surrounding lands - you'd have to declare war to Spain and France as well (or to be satisfied with the small city only).

Maybe a small mod can be made (independently of this mod) - to make the surrounding city tiles (only in the small 3x3 square) always belong to the same nation as the city. You can't build a city within 2 tiles of another one, so it could work.


Another interesting case is if the vassal is the owner of the city and superior country owns the lands around it. Perhaps the superior would like to "donate" the land to its vassal, or at least "let them work the tiles" so they do not starve.

Donating (or in general - trading) land in any way other than city trading is really impossible for AI. It would be perfect if you could negotiate a borderline before signing a peace deal or trade some tiles for money, but it's very hard to implement. Maybe in Civ 5.....

I do not share your opinion but as it is your mod and your work I accept your conclusion.

Sorry, I found another issue:
Make a privateer, go to a country, with which you are at peace and do not have open borders agreement. Claim land there.
Stay there and plunder as long as you like.
They cannot attack your privateer, because they would have to declare war on you.
Of course they have no idea to who the privateer belongs in that foreign sea near their coastline that just claimed the sea for country X. ;-)

Ending the joke back to serious: Hidden Nationality units should probably not be able to claim land.

For the civics, maybe the only ones that can affect it are power and government type. I think Democracy on in the government type should fix borders, and Senate, Parliament, and President in the power column. Just my opinion. I feel that those best define the "government" who defines the borders.

Sorry, I found another issue:
Make a privateer, go to a country, with which you are at peace and do not have open borders agreement. Claim land there.
Stay there and plunder as long as you like.
They cannot attack your privateer, because they would have to declare war on you.
Of course they have no idea to who the privateer belongs in that foreign sea near their coastline that just claimed the sea for country X. ;-)

Ending the joke back to serious: Hidden Nationality units should probably not be able to claim land.

:D
OK, it'll be fixed in next version (as you suggested - hidden nationality = no claiming).

Good job :goodjob:.

Are you working on a RoM 2.5 version of your modmod and if so do you have a timeframe when it's going to be ready?your mod is a great thx

Are you working on a RoM 2.5 version of your modmod and if so do you have a timeframe when it's going to be ready?

Yes, it's almost finished. I'll put it through some testing this weekend and on Monday you can expect the release.

As one of the architects of the new civics, I'd suggest these civics to allow the fixed borders.

Parliament
President
Liberal
Nationalist
Marxist
Planned
Corporatist
Regulated
Green

The rationale is that political borders were arguably created around the Enlightenment when nationalism and imperialism were strong. So basically, the border rules change when the civilization becomes a nation.

As one of the architects of the new civics, I'd suggest these civics to allow the fixed borders.

Parliament
President
Liberal
Nationalist
Marxist
Planned
Corporatist
Regulated
Green

The rationale is that political borders were arguably created around the Enlightenment when nationalism and imperialism were strong. So basically, the border rules change when the civilization becomes a nation.

I agree for the most of this. But I must add Communist, Fascist, Federal in govt type (fascist is a must and the other 2 follow closely). On the other hand, I think Liberal society should not do it. Everything else seems fine.

OK, so - there's the new 2.0b version, for RoM 2.5x. It's labeled 'b' because I haven't played it myself yet, I'm still using v1.0 and RoM 2.4. But it should be stable, AI auto play didn't show any problems in several games.

Wow, this looks really cool! I just finished a game where this would have been perfect; I was on the 23(28?) player standard Earth map as Inca, had all of South America and the CA and TX coast locked up, the Native Americans controlled the rest of North America... My one TX coastal city was getting culturally swamped by the Native American capital and a city in Florida. I ended up spending a ton on espionage to cause constant riots to keep my workable tiles, and eventually had to go to war and take the Florida city not because I wanted or needed it but for the culture, so I could work my tiles in TX. It would have been much easier (and more realistic) to be able to declare war, send my armies to the tiles I want and take them... Could've probably gotten the Natives to sign a peace treaty much quicker if I never took a city. That damn war ended up costing me the game; it gave England time to get its act together and fracture my budding religious victory.

The installation instructions for the 2.5 version are the same, right? Unzip to the Assets folder inside the RoM mod folder, rewrite existing files? I'm gonna try it out tonight, I'll let you guys know how it goes.

I'm not able to download the version 2.0b

it says "you do not have permission to access this page"

help !!!!!

I'm not able to download the version 2.0b

it says "you do not have permission to access this page"

help !!!!!

"This file is in the moderation queue"

Apparently - an admin must approve my file.... so wait a few minutes, hours...days...I don't know. It's not up to me :(

"This file is in the moderation queue"

Apparently - an admin must approve my file.... so wait a few minutes, hours...days...I don't know. It's not up to me :(


Ah ok, i will wait so :D

and i will give feedback ;)

"This file is in the moderation queue"

Apparently - an admin must approve my file.... so wait a few minutes, hours...days...I don't know. It's not up to me :(

I hope it doesn't take too long...:crazyeye:

Ah time, the price we pay to ensure that no malicious code gets put on the forums :)

Well, the main purpose of fixed borders mod is actually the opposite - allow countries to own lands independently of cities. This is an advantage for advanced nations, but of course - disadvantage for poor ones.

Same as above - land doesn't belong to a city if the land's owner is not the same as the city's owner.

Well, in the real world this may be true, but in CivIV this leads to a big problem: how do i feed the population of a city without any workable tiles?

In reality i would ship some food in, but in CivIV this is not possible. So the wish for realism colides with the games programming.

And declaring war on 3 other nations just to get some food for the city, well... ;)

Ah time, the price we pay to ensure that no malicious code gets put on the forums :)

The file was already moderated! :)

Hello,

can you alter the mod in a way that you would have no cultural borders on the sea, but that cities can just take what they want from the sea ?

Please also explain briefly what have you modified to make your mod.

can you alter the mod in a way that you would have no cultural borders on the sea, but that cities can just take what they want from the sea ?


If this were implemented how could I determine to which city a tile belongs, if it is equally distant from 2 enemy cities?


Please also explain briefly what have you modified to make your mod.

1) I added a_lot_of_culture to all the tiles a player owns once he has the necessary civics. Culture spreading from the cities works the same, but amount of that culture can never exceed the one that fixed borders provide. Effectively, all the tiles you owned at the moment of becoming a nation (the moment you switched to specific civics) will become yours permanently.

2) Units have new order, which when executed simply adds a_lot_of_culture to the tile they are on and, if necessary, remove a_lot_of_culture from the current owner of the tile.

3) When capturing cities, I give the occupator all the tiles which are closest to this city and belong to the defeated nation (this is done only if the occupator has fixed borders). Giving of the tiles is done again by adding a_lot_of_culture in those tiles to the occupator and, if necessary, removing a_lot_of_culture from the defeated guy. The algorithm for this closeness determination is not so simple as it sounds, it takes care of the previous owners and real culture, plus a_lot_of_culture that can be added by previous occupations.

In the text above: a_lot_of_culture = 10000000.

I am playing RoM 2.52. When can my units claim enemy territory? Is it only after I get one of the fixed boarder civics? So far I have not been able to claim any territory this way. Also both times I have played with this mod I have had a CTD in the Renassiance Era.

When can my units claim enemy territory? Is it only after I get one of the fixed boarder civics?

Yes. But watch out for the version of this mod. 2.0b has a bug in GUI that shows different icon for this order (like a spy with a deadly mask), but the order still works normally. In ver 2.0b2 this is fixed; the icon looks like pillage and the descriptive text is corrected.

Also both times I have played with this mod I have had a CTD in the Renassiance Era.

Could you please post a save game or two, just prior to CTD? I'll try to fix it as soon as I find the problem, but so far I haven't got the CTD myself (and I played 10-15 games with ai autoplay).

Since I am not getting any new icon I must have installed it incorrectly which may also explain the CTD.

Also got a CTD in Renaissance Era. Playing with RoM 2.52 without 50 Civ Addon.

Crash is 100% reproducable. Attached the Save for you. Just end the Turn and it will crash.

I reinstalled you mod but still don't get anything. I am assuming there is a conflict somewhere between the mod I am working on and yours. When I get mine working I will try yours again :)

Also got a CTD in Renaissance Era. Playing with RoM 2.52 without 50 Civ Addon.

Crash is 100% reproducable. Attached the Save for you. Just end the Turn and it will crash.

I tried your save, but it normally ends the turn (and at least 10 next turns). I tried it with RoM 2.52 and RoM 2.5. In both cases I used the downloaded version of my mod (2.0), just to be sure.

- Do you use the 2.0 version of Fixed Borders? (the other one is for RoM 2.4)
- Did you configure RoM in any other way (by editing .ini or XMLs)?
- Did you add any other mods?

..........

I tried your save, but it normally ends the turn (and at least 10 next turns). I tried it with RoM 2.52 and RoM 2.5. In both cases I used the downloaded version of my mod (2.0), just to be sure.

- Do you use the 2.0 version of Fixed Borders? (the other one is for RoM 2.4)
- Did you configure RoM in any other way (by editing .ini or XMLs)?
- Did you add any other mods?

- yes, i use 2.0 of fixed borders
- no, i did not
- no, i did not

for the moment i play a game without fixed borders. so far no crash, but then i am not in the renaissance era yet.

it is strange that you not got the crash with my save. i tried a couple of times to end that turn, and got a CTD every time. but it seems that those CTD's are heavily system-related. some people get CTD's all over the place with the diferent versions of RoM and mod mod's, others don't.

My System:
Core2 Dual E8500 @ 3,16 GHz
ATI HD4870 1024 MB
4 GB DDR2 RAM (1066)
Windows XP Professional SP3

[B]4.

Again, it is OK to take some tiles far away from home, but apparently AI does this too much. I'll try to restrain it only to valuable resources, but not to completely ban it.

Couldn't you just make it so, that you have to be on tile for a few rounds - say 5 or 10 - before it becomes yours?
That way you slow down the rate the AI (and others) can claim lands, and you already have to wait some rounds in order to get full "fortify" bonus.

I'm now well beyond the point where my last game crashed. so far no CTD. i guess it was the fixed borders mod then...

well, it's not that important, but i think it is a nice mod which makes the game more realistic and interesting. looking forward to try the next version, if there will be one :)

I'd rather have the whole game use it, and have it cost money for each little square, as the creator, do you think that would be easy to implement just by changing the XML?

for the moment i play a game without fixed borders. so far no crash, but then i am not in the renaissance era yet.

it is strange that you not got the crash with my save. i tried a couple of times to end that turn, and got a CTD every time. but it seems that those CTD's are heavily system-related. some people get CTD's all over the place with the diferent versions of RoM and mod mod's, others don't.

My System:
Core2 Dual E8500 @ 3,16 GHz
ATI HD4870 1024 MB
4 GB DDR2 RAM (1066)
Windows XP Professional SP3

This is still bugging me :wallbash:... Can you try on your system to load that save without my mod? (it should load, it's compatible with plain RoM). If you get the CTD again, at least I'll know it's not my mod.

I'd rather have the whole game use it, and have it cost money for each little square, as the creator, do you think that would be easy to implement just by changing the XML?

I was thinking to do that myself, but the costs would be too high then, even if I charge only 1 gold per tile.

To compensate this, maybe I could lower city or civics expenses. Or the other idea is to charge 1 gold only for military occupied tiles, the culture ones are free (or let's say payed by city maintenance).

I'll think of this a little more when I start the new version.

And for your question - no, you can't do it in XML only :(. But I could expose the price that I'll use in SDK so you can modify it if you want.

I was thinking to do that myself, but the costs would be too high then, even if I charge only 1 gold per tile.

To compensate this, maybe I could lower city or civics expenses. Or the other idea is to charge 1 gold only for military occupied tiles, the culture ones are free (or let's say payed by city maintenance).

I'll think of this a little more when I start the new version.

And for your question - no, you can't do it in XML only :(. But I could expose the price that I'll use in SDK so you can modify it if you want.

It will be ok if you set fractional number for cost pe tile (for example 0.1 gold per tile)?

well bump, Big fat cross should be free, but i never liked the idea of continual expansion like that, it just never made any sense to me, and paying for borders does, it gives a reason to tool back the science slider instead of having it 100% all the time too, I think even 1 per tile is fair. may want to even increase the price for time scale

has any1 tried this mod with rom 2.6?

well bump, Big fat cross should be free, but i never liked the idea of continual expansion like that, it just never made any sense to me, and paying for borders does, it gives a reason to tool back the science slider instead of having it 100% all the time too, I think even 1 per tile is fair. may want to even increase the price for time scale

yes, in the next version there will be some costs for tiles definitely. just need to find the right value for the game to be balanced.

has any1 tried this mod with rom 2.6?

it'll not work as it is now. i'll probably make a new version soon, and it'll be for 2.6.

Man... u guyz keep surprising me. What a good idea!

Looking forward to your 2.6 version
Keep up the good work!!!!

This would be great as a stand-alone mod, or a mod component.

Dexy,
are you going to update 2.62 version soon? Please do
I think this is best idea ever! I have always hated cultural based borders in modern
times..

Awesome idea, and something ive wanted since the day Civ 4 came out. Another mod making Civ 4 what it should of been when it came out.

I know how to install RoM for example, just unzip to BTS mods, but I'm not sure how I install a mod for a mod, can someone tell me please? Do I just unzip it anywhere into Civ4/BTS/Mods/RoM? or somewhere else?

Also, can I install this and keep playing my current game or would I have to start a new one before installing?

Add me as another person interested in this mod for 2.6...

I'd also be interested in the SDK src as I'd like to implement some ideas that you don't seem fond of- and even look into doing it for Vanilla BtS. :)

but I'm not sure how I install a mod for a mod, can someone tell me please?

Also, can I install this and keep playing my current game or would I have to start a new one before installing?

a quote from the installation instructions:
"Just unpack the archive in the RoM assets folder, so that you overwrite the dll and a few python/XML files. If you have RoM 2.5x saves, they will be loadable when you install this mod."

hope this clarifies it a bit ;)

Dexy,
are you going to update 2.62 version soon? Please do


Add me as another person interested in this mod for 2.6...


Aahhhh.... sorry guys.... but I don't think I'll be making the new version soon. Probably not until autumn 2009 (the thing is that the surfing season has started here and all the free time is spent on the beach; if I play Civ, it's just for an hour or two per week, and for the new version to emerge it takes a lot more)


I'd also be interested in the SDK src as I'd like to implement some ideas that you don't seem fond of- and even look into doing it for Vanilla BtS. :)

Sure, no prob. I'd be glad to have more and more people involved in the mod, making it better and better.

Aahhhh.... sorry guys.... but I don't think I'll be making the new version soon. Probably not until autumn 2009 (the thing is that the surfing season has started here and all the free time is spent on the beach; if I play Civ, it's just for an hour or two per week, and for the new version to emerge it takes a lot more)

But Autumn 2009 is almost finished :D - oops wrong hemisphere :lol:

But Autumn 2009 is almost finished :D - oops wrong hemisphere :lol:

:D good point!

OK, let's be more precise: I'll not be making new version of the mod at least until October 2009 AD.

I'd also be interested in the SDK src as I'd like to implement some ideas that you don't seem fond of- and even look into doing it for Vanilla BtS. :)

OK, here's the v2.0 src (sorry for the delay, I promised the src a week ago, but my PC died suddenly). Only the changed C++ files are here (compared to ROM 2.52 src).

Code follows the original civ style, including the lack of comments :cool:, but if u have any questions, feel free to ask.

Thanks! Will take a look at it. I haven't done any modding for Civ4 before so don't expect too much from me. :)

I'd love a version of this that begins at the start, rather than later in the ages,
curses, oh well,

I'd love a version of this that begins at the start, rather than later in the ages,
curses, oh well,
I'll see what I can learn and maybe we can have multiple versions.

I'd love a version of this that begins at the start, rather than later in the ages,
curses, oh well,

If you know how to change the DLL, than this is a micro change: just change the method bool CvPlayer::hasFixedBorders() to return true when you think it should (in your case always).

i honestly don't but i would like it to work with 2.6x anyway.
ultimately I would love to see a system where by you could allocate squares to a city instead of just to your general property, giving a better representation towards 'territories' the dissadvantage of which claiming territory farther away from a city costs more and more, this would also fix any problems with trading cities with the AI.

it might also be advantageous to make sure this mod cannot be used against ocean tiles,

I wonder what you could use culture for after this mod is implemented though..

What I would like is to be able to give back to my vassals the territory my culture stole before the fixed boarders came into effect. Especially those I can't work from my cities :)

What I would like is to be able to give back to my vassals the territory my culture stole before the fixed boarders came into effect. Especially those I can't work from my cities :)

This will be quite easy to implement for human player. However, for the AI to use it....... :crazyeye: impossible. Anyway, I'll probably put it as an option in the new version, so you can use it at your own risk.

The best would be if we could change the diplomacy, so you can trade territory and gain / lose relation points for that. Well, maybe in Civ 5....

This will be quite easy to implement for human player. However, for the AI to use it....... :crazyeye: impossible. Anyway, I'll probably put it as an option in the new version, so you can use it at your own risk.

The best would be if we could change the diplomacy, so you can trade territory and gain / lose relation points for that. Well, maybe in Civ 5....
so there isn't a way to link a particular tile to a city?

so there isn't a way to link a particular tile to a city?

Sure there is a way, just I don't know what you need it for exactly.

Currently, a tile holds info about all the nations that have culture in it and the distance to cities that influence it. If it is in the same distance from 2 or more cities, than you can't know to which city it "belongs". But you can modify the code to keep this info as well.

I'll not be making new version of the mod at least until October 2009 AD.

Couldn't you anticipate it a little? I really liked this mod, but I only played with it one time...

Couldn't you anticipate it a little? I really liked this mod, but I only played with it one time...

dexy is a surfer so naturally there will not be any coding while there are good waves.

Hi

This mod look awesome. I see that the author don’t want to do anything with the mod before October this year, so any chance it works with ROM 2.71, or have anyone made an adaptation to ROM 2.71?

Tore

Sounds like a good idea, can you or someone inform me on what specific techs I need to get the "military borders".

This mod sounds interesting but is incompatible with 2.71. It also would be very very difficult, if possible, to update it without the authors help. A lot of the XML for the civics are out of date. The python is also obsolete. Best of all, the modmod uses a custom CvGameCore.dll. This is not a problem unless the author doesn't plan on continuing to support his creations. He did release his sources but they "lack... comment[s]" so it would be almost impossible to update them, as RevDCM has been updated since, and we've had a patch that altered the SDK, so his code would be way, way out of date...

So basically, this modmod is finito until/if the author comes back.

Good mod. A fan of not expanding political borders with cultural influence. I mean, american culture dominates these days, doesn't mean we'll flip!

So basically, this modmod is finito until/if the author comes back.

I'll BE BACK!!! :scan:

I see that RoM has evolved so much since the last time I've played CIV.... I'll have to invest a lot of time myself to re-make this modmod for future RoM versions.

And I promise next time I'll put some comments so someone else could use the source code. I just didn't expect people liking it that much, I made it basically for myself :cool:.

So I'm back to enjoying the good weather here, coding is still a few months away. By the time I get to it, RoM 2.71 will be a history probably. So you can expect fixed borders 3.0 for RoM 2.95 :D

Drat, I just came here to check on the status and maybe put a request in modmod request thread for Afforess to add it into his modmod- until I saw Afforess's post that is. :(

Oh well, I hope for you, dexy, that the surfing weather stays good! :)

Ah, you won't believe the luck you got. I hurt my foot very bad a few days ago, so I'll be stuck in the chair for some time (i.e. no surfing, hell, not even walking for now :mad:).

So I'm back in the game.... but... the game's changed a lot! I tried playing the new RoM 2.71 and 2.8beta...and bad news folks - I got crashes all the time. Plus the AI is so slow now that even with just 10-15 civs in the ancient era I wait ~1min for the turn. So basically this mod is not playable for me (and to create a mod I must be able to play at least).

Today I switched back to RoM 2.4 (yes, I have the old version!) and it runs smoothly.

I hope the new 2.8 will fix those problems as announced in many threads (RevDCM 2.6 should be the key), so I can 'upgrade' and mod it.

To conclude - wait a few more days for RevDCM 2.6, then a few more days for Zappara to include it in final RoM 2.8 and then a few more days for me to do my work. Yes, it's 3 x few more days, but I can't give you any better offer right now.

@dexy: sorry to read about your foot- that sucks! What did you do to it?

On the higher version getting heavier, what are your system's stats? I have thought of going back to an older version but I just like the new stuff too much, especially Afforess's changes.

@dexy: sorry to read about your foot- that sucks! What did you do to it?

Twisted ankle, 3rd level (the worst), while playing basketball. I have to use cruches even to go to the toilet. At least one more month of house arrest :mad:. But hey, that should be just about enough for a new mod version to be developed :)

On the higher version getting heavier, what are your system's stats? I have thought of going back to an older version but I just like the new stuff too much, especially Afforess's changes.

My sys is not that bad, DualCore 1.6GHz, 2GB RAM, Radeon 512MB graphics. But still, the AI is way too slow (compared to previous RoM versions). I also like the new stuff (yes, especially Afforess's changes), but the speed is just unbeareable. Hopefully all this will be fixed with the new RevDCM that will come out soon (they worked on the speed a lot).

Twisted ankle, 3rd level (the worst), while playing basketball. I have to use cruches even to go to the toilet. At least one more month of house arrest :mad:. But hey, that should be just about enough for a new mod version to be developed :)Ouch! Did you tear any tendons? I did that back in high school when I was ~16 years old. It was really painful and sucked for school since I carried all my books in my book bag- I couldn't even remember my combination for my locker or even which locker I was assigned at school. :|

My sys is not that bad, DualCore 1.6GHz, 2GB RAM, Radeon 512MB graphics. But still, the AI is way too slow (compared to previous RoM versions). I also like the new stuff (yes, especially Afforess's changes), but the speed is just unbeareable. Hopefully all this will be fixed with the new RevDCM that will come out soon (they worked on the speed a lot). Sounds like the CPU might be what is a bit to slow- mine is 2.2 GHz and Windows Experience Index says that it rates 4.9 out of 10 and the next lowest rated item is my memory at 5.7 (4 GB of RAM). Have you tried playing on a Tiny(Duel) map? That might make the game playable at least for testing development. I personally like using Large maps but I start getting too many CTDs later in the game so I stick to Standard.

RevDCM is acknowledged as the slow point in the whole affair?

RevDCM is acknowledged as the slow point in the whole affair?

No. Go try RevDCM vanilla. It runs only a tad slower than BTS.

The real hog is all the extra units and buildings that RoM adds. It starts to eat up lots and lots of RAM and CPU for pathing finding, etc.

Ouch! Did you tear any tendons?

I guess so. I'm not an expert, but 3rd level should be about that. Luckily no bone fractures.

Sounds like the CPU might be what is a bit to slow

Yeah, the CPU and the slow mem. But to upgrade that I need to change my MB as well, and that's just too much just to be able to play RoM.

Have you tried playing on a Tiny(Duel) map? That might make the game playable at least for testing development. I personally like using Large maps but I start getting too many CTDs later in the game so I stick to Standard.

Yes, smaller maps and less civs make the thing faster and more "CTD-resistant". But I just love large maps and a lot of civs in the game; better to play a full old version than a new one like that.

RevDCM is acknowledged as the slow point in the whole affair?

Actually the BettarAI part of it. Good news is that they acknoledge that and they announced the fix in new version. They also merged in the CAR mod, which should give us around 15% additional speed.

I guess so. I'm not an expert, but 3rd level should be about that. Luckily no bone fractures.Yeah, according to WebMD you did tear:Grade III injuries involve the complete rupture of the ligament with immediate and severe swelling, ecchymosis, an inability to bear weight, and moderate-to-severe instability of the joint. Typically, patients cannot bear weight without experiencing incapacitating pain.Yeah, the CPU and the slow mem. But to upgrade that I need to change my MB as well, and that's just too much just to be able to play RoM.Money doesn't grow on trees, huh? :)Yes, smaller maps and less civs make the thing faster and more "CTD-resistant". But I just love large maps and a lot of civs in the game; better to play a full old version than a new one like that.I guess the play on my computer isn't as compromised and I can stand Standard maps. :)Actually the BettarAI part of it. Good news is that they acknoledge that and they announced the fix in new version. They also merged in the CAR mod, which should give us around 15% additional speed.Well, Afforess is already using CAR so I won't see anything, but having it already in RevDCM should be good. :) I have been thinking about doing the static buildings and other things to lower the weight in RoM. That should help too.

Twisted ankle, 3rd level (the worst), while playing basketball. I have to use cruches even to go to the toilet. At least one more month of house arrest . But hey, that should be just about enough for a new mod version to be developed Ouch! Being a basketball player I have twisted my ankle many times so I know how it feels.:cry: I hope it does not take to long to heal. :)

Announcement:

The work on new version 3.0 for RoM 2.8 has officially started! :hammer:

Can't wait! Then I can't wait for Afforess to put it in his version 1.4.1 or whatever. ;)

Guys, check out my new signature ;)

Wonderful! But before I download, how is the python handled? Is it in the ini.XML config or what?

how is the python handled? Is it in the ini.XML config or what?

I avoid python coding as much as I can (I hate how much it slows down the game :mad:). So 99% of the mod is in the dll. There's only one small change in one of existing python files (RevUtils), no special config needed, just overwrite the old file and use whatever plain RoM uses for config.

I avoid python coding as much as I can (I hate how much it slows down the game :mad:). So 99% of the mod is in the dll. There's only one small change in one of existing python files (RevUtils), no special config needed, just overwrite the old file and use whatever plain RoM uses for config.

Okay... then is the DLL merged with afforess's SDK too or is it just your changes?

is the DLL merged with afforess's SDK too or is it just your changes?

Just my changes (on top of RoM 2.8 of course). That's why it's just a modmod, not a modmodmod :)

I think you should collaborate with Afforess to merge the two DLL's since his modmod pack has been declared essential by almost every RoM player, but your modmod is also essential (to me at least) so it would be wonderful if you get his current 1.4 SDK and merge them or if Afforess gets your source and merges them.

I think you should collaborate with Afforess to merge the two DLL's since his modmod pack has been declared essential by almost every RoM player, but your modmod is also essential (to me at least) so it would be wonderful if you get his current 1.4 SDK and merge them or if Afforess gets your source and merges them.

I guess it's not too hard for Afforess to include yours into his next beta installer?

Or you can have sources forwarded to Afforess for his AND modmodpack of most modmods created here so that he can merge in your changes to other SDK modmods :). Whatever makes you comfortable and I think Afforesss will be flexible about it as long as your changes are easily "turned off" if a player doesn't want your change in the pack Afforess is creating.

I guess it's not too hard for Afforess to include yours into his next beta installer?

Or you can have sources forwarded to Afforess for his AND modmodpack of most modmods created here so that he can merge in your changes to other SDK modmods :). Whatever makes you comfortable and I think Afforesss will be flexible about it as long as your changes are easily "turned off" if a player doesn't want your change in the pack Afforess is creating.


The merging of my mod should be easy now, I have every piece of my code surrounded with comments ("dexy - fixed borders mod", "start" and "end"). But for now, unfortunately, I don't support turning off fixed borders (and why would I, if it is the single component of the mod).

I'll talk to Afforess, if he's willing to use my mod, I can create new version that can be switchable (on / off) in the XML, so he can merge that.

BTW, all current C++ sources are included in the mod download.

Having a "fixed borders" option on the custom game screen would really make my day :D

The merging of my mod should be easy now, I have every piece of my code surrounded with comments ("dexy - fixed borders mod", "start" and "end"). But for now, unfortunately, I don't support turning off fixed borders (and why would I, if it is the single component of the mod).

I'll talk to Afforess, if he's willing to use my mod, I can create new version that can be switchable (on / off) in the XML, so he can merge that.

BTW, all current C++ sources are included in the mod download.Let me be the one that hopes the changes stay in the DLL so Afforess's ModmodPack and RoM don't become even slower and more memory intensive. Awesome job! :goodjob

BTW: How is the ankle?

Any chances of making other SDK/Python modmod's Dexy? We have lots of good ideas here, and just need talented coders to make some things happen. I'm only learning Java/C++ right now, so my skills are very limited.

BTW: How is the ankle?

Ah, still not functional :mad:. It's getting better day by day, but very slowly; I'm still using crutches to walk.

Any chances of making other SDK/Python modmod's Dexy? We have lots of good ideas here, and just need talented coders to make some things happen. I'm only learning Java/C++ right now, so my skills are very limited.

Tell me what you have in mind particularly. I'll tell you my opinion and answer on a modmod request basis. I'll try to help and do my work for the community :king:.

And I myself already have 2 more ideas that I have to implement:

One is almost finished: Surround and Destroy mod (your units on tiles surrounding the attacked tile will give your attacker additional bonuses).

The other is not started yet, I'll put the idea on the forum soon - trying to get some feedback before I start coding. It's about introducing Dark Ages (as opposed to Golden Ages).

The other is not started yet, I'll put the idea on the forum soon - trying to get some feedback before I start coding. It's about introducing Dark Ages (as opposed to Golden Ages).

I had exactly the same idea, a few months back, but no ability to code it. If you could make this, that would be awesome. I posted an idea like it, adding corruption, so that larger, older Empires would be harder to hold in the future ages would collapse in the RevDCM forum (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=331028)...

But I would love to see Civilizations enter a "Dark" age. That would be awesome.

Does this mod have a conflict with IDW?

Does this mod have a conflict with IDW?

No, it doesn't.:)

Does this mod have a conflict with IDW?

Not quite a conflict, but there are some changes to IDW that I deliberately coded: a civ can't loose a tile if it has fixed borders by the means of culture; so, if a battle is taking place in a fixed borders civ's tile, IDW has no effects (no culture transfer); the same applies for pillaging inside fixed borders. In tiles where fixed borders are not applied (due to civics selection) IDW works as before.

is this now compatible with afforess's modmods?

is this now compatible with afforess's modmods?

It's in his 1.5 beta.

I have been meaning to ask - How does this mod work with the spy action Spread Culture?

I have been meaning to ask - How does this mod work with the spy action Spread Culture?

No conflicts at all.

City plots have retained old behavior (culture-wise). That's why you can still see in the city screen percentages of each civs cultural presence, no matter fixed borders or not.

So you can still get city flipping from culture (although I recommend turning this option off, now that we have revolutions). And of course you have cultural rev effects, the same as before fixes borders.

Thanks. I use cultural spread when I am not at war with a neighbour and they are not (yet) a vassal of mine :)

I use fixed borders now for 3 games and it just doesn't feel right the AI doesn't reclaim the land I got from them but rather than using its super-power-military to stop me it sits in its city waiting for me to steal more land. Annoying :/ I understand they also capture land once they have state_church, too but that's not often.

Humans prioritize on that, getting most of the land around enemy cities, + their res but don't have to pay maintance. And as I said, if you play start as minors I have only seen the egyptias to have a like "100000123" point tile once.

If they lose land due to claim territory they dont prioritize on undoing it by switching to the right civs. They just build military in masses. Perhaps claiming territory should only be able if the one you like to claim from has the possibility to claim (back) as well. That might help--- and/or claiming should require at least 2-4 turns and more than 1 unit (I claimed all territory in the screenie with one unit). If territory isn't controlled by military regularly it should decay over a few turns and then shift back again to the once cultural owner...


Btw. Your fixed borders gave me very special great wall graphics... (and look at the aztec capitals stats on the left btw.)
http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=234052&stc=1&d=1257939021

the AI doesn't reclaim the land I got from them but rather than using its super-power-military to stop me it sits in its city waiting for me to steal more land. Annoying :/ I understand they also capture land once they have state_church, too but that's not often.

I agree, AI needs to be taught to value fixed borders civics more. I haven't played RoM 2.8 a lot (low PC config :( ), so I couldn't balance it right.

But once AI gets the right civics, I guess it does OK, right?


Perhaps claiming territory should only be able if the one you like to claim from has the possibility to claim (back) as well.


No, this makes the difference between advanced states and weakly formed ones.


If territory isn't controlled by military regularly it should decay over a few turns and then shift back again to the once cultural owner...


It actually does, under some circumstances. If you are at war with the other civ (during peace no border should be changed, ever) and it has fixed borders and your tile is surrounded by more enemy tiles than your own.


Anyway, tnx for the feedback, I'll try to improve the mod in next versions for sure.

I agree, AI needs to be taught to value fixed borders civics more. I haven't played RoM 2.8 a lot (low PC config :( ), so I couldn't balance it right.

But once AI gets the right civics, I guess it does OK, right?



Maybe you should add a section of the code in CvPlayerAI, so the AI will value "Fixed Border" civics more.

Maybe you should add a section of the code in CvPlayerAI, so the AI will value "Fixed Border" civics more.

The work on this has started :cool:

The work on this has started :cool:

How about adding option in the latest merge with Dom Pedro's diplomacy to get back those tiles with > 10 mil ? Like the contested territory in Europa Universalis

How about adding option in the latest merge with Dom Pedro's diplomacy to get back those tiles with > 10 mil ? Like the contested territory in Europa Universalis

Not sure if it's possible. How would you make the interface for this? Selecting which tiles to offer, which to demand?

Not sure if it's possible. How would you make the interface for this? Selecting which tiles to offer, which to demand?

Well, I was thinking that this might go the same way as trading cities... in the diplo screen add another entry "Land" with city list and a simple set of trading rules like:

for war ending/peace treaty trading if culture in city > 10000, trade all occupied in 3 tile radius , else 2 tile radius. Option available starting from same prereq as option to occupy tile with military unit.

for peaceful negociation, assuming occupied tiles can be distinguished by culture value > 10 mil, trade as above but only those tiles in 2-3 city radius that have been occupied.

Cost for negociation should be a fixed multiplier (more expensive as closer to city) + additional culture over 10 mil that has been added in the mean time to that tile

How about it? Can this be done?

Well, I was thinking that this might go the same way as trading cities... in the diplo screen add another entry "Land" with city list and a simple set of trading rules like:

for war ending/peace treaty trading if culture in city > 10000, trade all occupied in 3 tile radius , else 2 tile radius. Option available starting from same prereq as option to occupy tile with military unit.

for peaceful negociation, assuming occupied tiles can be distinguished by culture value > 10 mil, trade as above but only those tiles in 2-3 city radius that have been occupied.

Cost for negociation should be a fixed multiplier (more expensive as closer to city) + additional culture over 10 mil that has been added in the mean time to that tile

How about it? Can this be done?

I was thinking more about trading specific tiles, since you will be occupying random territory, close or far from the cities. So how would you specify just the 2 tiles from 2 different cities (you want one for the resource and the other for that connection to the other ocean)? They'd have to be marked on the map somehow. For humans to do it - maybe, but very hard. But for AI :crazyeye:.....impossible.

I agree with you, it would be the best if you could draw a line specifying the new border when offering peace, but for that maybe Civ5 will have an answer.

So how would you specify just the 2 tiles from 2 different cities (you want one for the resource and the other for that connection to the other ocean)?

I didn't say that... the way I see it, AI would be asking for ALL land ocuppied in a 2-3 tile radius from 2 different cities, regardless how many... however the cost weight would be accordingly to number of tiles and extra culture on each.

Someting like base gold per tile multiplied by no of tiles plus sum of culture excess for all tiles.
So, AI pops up with offer to pay that quantity of gold or gold per turn for ALL occupied land from city A and from city B, for example.
If the tile is farther than the AI city can use, it should be worthless.

the way I see it, AI would be asking for ALL land ocuppied in a 2-3 tile radius from 2 different cities, regardless how many... however the cost weight would be accordingly to number of tiles and extra culture on each.


Yes, that seems more reasonable (coding-wise). I'll have to look in the code and see how difficult it will be.

It can even be an option without fixed borders. For instance, if your city is low-cultured and close to highly cultured friendly city, the border can be placed so that your city has a lot of tiles taken away, while your friend can't use it anyway. This is a reasonable trade then.

Yes, that seems more reasonable (coding-wise). I'll have to look in the code and see how difficult it will be.

Btw, please see if this is mergeable with Dom Pedro's diplomacy that Afforess added. Would a separate MLF be recommendable here?

Maybe you should add a section of the code in CvPlayerAI, so the AI will value "Fixed Border" civics more.
The work on this has started :cool:

...and done! Check out ver 3.0b2.

...and done! Check out ver 3.0b2.

Did you change anything other than CvPlayerAI? I'm lazy and don't want to winmerge anything I don't have too. ;)

ignore this - as i said I have not had my coffee yet.

Did you change anything other than CvPlayerAI? I'm lazy and don't want to winmerge anything I don't have too. ;)

Just that one (.cpp & .h)

Just that one (.cpp & .h)

Okay, I got that merged then.

I don't want to scare you, I haven't done enough testing to definitively prove it, and it's 3 am here, so I could be crazy...

I think I caught a reoccuring CTD with Fixed Borders. How do I know it was fixed borders? I loaded an autosave up, saved it as a WBS, and turned off the Fixed Borders in the WBS, and reloaded it. Then, I ran the game again. No CTD.

I looked at the code while debugging, the CTD. I need to do more digging, but my preliminary results showed that for some reason, a unit with no moves left was still some how allowed to call functions that allowed it to do actions that require movement, like pillaging. (The FAssert(CanMove) was screaming at me...)

As I said, this is very preliminary, I will do more testing tomorrow (Rather, today, but in 10 hours), and just thought I should tell you. Perhaps you could skim your code and see if there is a chance one your functions could allow a unit to call an action, even without moves? I'm sure it's just a stupid error...

Disregard, I've found that the same error still exists without Fixed Borders.

There seems to be some problems with fixed boarders. The attached happened because of wars. When Babylon became a vassel I gave them their cities back but yellow is territory which is still mine.

There seems to be some problems with fixed boarders. The attached happened because of wars. When Babylon became a vassel I gave them their cities back but yellow is territory which is still mine.

The yellow territory was not their land originally, you claimed it in the progress of advancing with your armies and/or closing in on neutral territory which will fall to yours if its touched by I think more than 4 tiles of your territory.

The yellow territory was not their land originally, you claimed it in the progress of advancing with your armies and/or closing in on neutral territory which will fall to yours if its touched by I think more than 4 tiles of your territory.

No it was their land before. Sometimes I did raise a size one city and got its 9 tiles but in the case of the Babylonians it was all their territory before. I had forgotten about the claim territory option :)

There seems to be some problems with fixed boarders. The attached happened because of wars. When Babylon became a vassel I gave them their cities back but yellow is territory which is still mine.

If you have a save game just prior to the conquest it will be a huge help.

If you have a save game just prior to the conquest it will be a huge help.

I don't unfortunately. When you conquer a size 1 city which automatically gets destroyed, you get claim to all 9 squares, design or bug?

I don't unfortunately. When you conquer a size 1 city which automatically gets destroyed, you get claim to all 9 squares, design or bug?

Design.

Not sure anymore...

It was a bit of a surprise when I got the archeology event from some barbarian city I had destroyed in the tundra which was nowhere near my civ :)

I don't unfortunately. When you conquer a size 1 city which automatically gets destroyed, you get claim to all 9 squares, design or bug?

I get only the one ruin tile then - for one turn I think - that is when I have no organized religion yet, though.

I get only the one ruin tile then - for one turn I think - that is when I have no organized religion yet, though.

If you raze the city, it is normal only to get the one tile ruin. If you keep it, you get a minimum of the 8 tiles around it.

Yes but he says he destroyed it automatically AND had 9 tiles. I didn't experience that. That means he has other setup of fixed borders or its a bug.

Yes but he says he destroyed it automatically AND had 9 tiles. I didn't experience that. That means he has other setup of fixed borders or its a bug.

Oh, then I think that's a bug... I should read more carefully.

I have a question about the possibility to trade Land as above has been stated it would pick random.

Couldn't Land Trade be defined on the points a tile already has?

So, if Player 1 has over 1000 points on one tile - or any tile above that - he knows the tile which is about to be "bought" first is always the one with the highest points.
As the player has the information which tiles he is about to buy
(there should be 10 tiles buyable in 10 turns, the worth of a tile for AI is defined by 100 gold minimum+a tenth of the points of the last four numbers of the worth of the tile [avoids the millions problematic])
he can adjust the borders expansion better. The AI's purchases (if it uses the option) also would be "natural" and not broken.

Yes but he says he destroyed it automatically AND had 9 tiles. I didn't experience that. That means he has other setup of fixed borders or its a bug.

I looked again, it was not a barbarian it was another civ's size 1 city, does that make a difference?

I looked again, it was not a barbarian it was another civ's size 1 city, does that make a difference?

I don't know. When I razed a civs size 1 city (and it was their last city with palace, too)
only dominance over the ruins remained after that. Dont know if you have more culture around the ruins maybe it connected to each other (fixed borders!) at your game.

I've never played RoM with city razing option, since there's abandon city mod which is very similar, but more useful.

I'll have to test this behavior more.

I guess the final outcome should be: you get the same territory (all tiles belonging to the city) no matter if you razed the city or not (of course only if you have fixed borders).

I did not have the choice of raising it or not, it was a size 1 city and after my victory against its defenders it was a ruin.

I have two former 1 pop barb cities that gave me 9 tiles of my culture 1000 years ago.

this only happens when running this modmod(the game doesn't crash or anything it just pops up saying what it does at the top).

what im asking is that, what does it mean?

this only happens when running this modmod(the game doesn't crash or anything it just pops up saying what it does at the top).

what im asking is that, what does it mean?

The message is coming from Afforess' mod Sea Monsters. There is something wrong in the assets/config/init.xml file at the line mentioned.

oh, ok. thanks.

I have a question: could it be modded that claiming territory costs some gold? Like a negative instead of positive pillaging value formula attached to the claiming. The sum could be a fixed one or a sum connected to the value of others already having culture there. In my games I now claim what I get but I manage to hold off settling others there. Even at war they can't settle in my territory that is unrealistic. The AI doesn't go there and just claim the land like I do. Btw. if enemy has fixed borders, too, the claimed tiles get assimilated very next turn again if surrounded by culture, so the AI would never ever be able to get a whole continent or any large area I claimed completely. That is not plausible unless you have to pay a huge amount of gold to do so, slowing down the process in the early stages. You still could claim important coastal strongholds like ancient nations did, but claiming something means to invest peoples power, time, equipment etc. - represented by some gold. I'd say 10-20-40-100-500 gold per claimed tile is a good amount, defined by aera of course, if possible.. just some thoughts.

I'd love to see claiming territory cost money to execute, with the cost increasing based on the distance from the nearest city, multiplied by the harshness of the terrain. I'd also like to see a nation with dynamic borders have some way to push back and take fixed territory, representing insurgency and asymmetric warfare, but I guess that'll have to wait until the Fixed Borders 2.0.

Consider this a wishlist idea. :p

There have been other suggestions for the claimed tiles to cost money per turn (until your real culture spreads there).

I might implement both costs (per turn and upon claiming) as different XML properties, so everyone can customize the game according to his needs.

For the AI and its claiming - I know of the problem. I was lazy when coding it, so I "stole" a part of AI pillage intelligence (in order not to create new from the scratch). So if I increase the claiming more, AI will pillage less. I hope to have time to fix this issue as well.

There have been other suggestions for the claimed tiles to cost money per turn (until your real culture spreads there).

I might implement both costs (per turn and upon claiming) as different XML properties, so everyone can customize the game according to his needs.

For the AI and its claiming - I know of the problem. I was lazy when coding it, so I "stole" a part of AI pillage intelligence (in order not to create new from the scratch). So if I increase the claiming more, AI will pillage less. I hope to have time to fix this issue as well.

So how do I get rid of territory I don't want. I still end up with territory from destroying a barbarian city, it had pop 1 and I didn't get the option to keep it. I was using "claim territory so my workers have safe passage to resources in those areas. Pity I did not save a screen shot from my last game to show you.

I think I am asking for an un-claim land action and button.

Hey Dexy, I have encountered a bug. No huge one, though.
If you move a warrior on a field and it is "red" (has no move points left) and then you move an explorer on the same field (is "yellow" as it has one move left) and then group them, you can claim territory, an explorer can't do that normally but the action possibility of the warrior goes over to the explorer if they are in a group. I hope you understand the situation, here is a screenie to it as well: http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=237060&stc=1&d=1260650812

to wich directory do I unzipp the "src" file to?

Hey Dexy, I have encountered a bug. No huge one, though.
If you move a warrior on a field and it is "red" (has no move points left) and then you move an explorer on the same field (is "yellow" as it has one move left) and then group them, you can claim territory, an explorer can't do that normally but the action possibility of the warrior goes over to the explorer if they are in a group.

OK, nice catch ;).

I understand the bug. I'll try to fix it, but don't expect a new version just for this, since it is a very small bug and doesn't affect the gameplay much.

BTW, next ver should include better AI claiming, but this is far from completed yet.

to wich directory do I unzipp the "src" file to?

If you don't want to use the src folder to create your own dll-based modmods, you can safely delete it (or place it wherever you want); it's not needed for the mod to run.

Dexy, there seems to be a rare CTD bug from Fixed Borders. Os79 documented it (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8724582&postcount=292), but I have seen it myself too.

I believe it's the last CTD bug RoM has, so it would be nice to get it Ironed out.

Dexy, there seems to be a rare CTD bug from Fixed Borders. Os79 documented it (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8724582&postcount=292), but I have seen it myself too.

I believe it's the last CTD bug RoM has, so it would be nice to get it Ironed out.

Well, if it's THE LAST ONE, I better get my iron and start ironing! :D

After playing with this mod a few times I think there a couple of smallish problems with it. One is an exploit that the humans can use and the AI does not consider. The other is too do with relations with other civs especially your vassals.

Looking at the second one first. It would be nice if you could un-claim land. This would result in one of the following.

If adjacent to a vassals land becomes owned by that vassals.
Otherwise becomes unowned and let the civ cultural engine work it out :)


As you can see from the attached image I have claimed huge tracts of land and sea. The simplest solution would probably be to increase the cost of claiming plots, if not at war, based on distance from your nearest city.

It would also be nice if the AI would claim sea resources just outside their current boarders.

There are a few problems with it, definitely. That's why in my Earth 28 game, I allegedly own half of Asia due to aggressive purging of barbarians! It also renders culture almost completely useless and, as you say, strangles vassals and causes other problems.

It's a good idea, but it needs some work doing on it.

OK, I've seen a lot of complains about Fixed Borders (here and in AND mod as well) and I must admit that I agree with most of them. I'd like to have time to make it perfect, but unfortunately this is not the case.

For the next version (whenever it is done; i can't promise any dates) I was thinking of something like this:

Instead of paying gold for claimed land - each turn you'd automatically lose any tile that has neither your culture nor your units on it. When you lose it, the player with the highest culture in the plot would get it or, if no culture existed, it would become unowned. This will make tiles farther from cities more difficult to maintain, especially in early times (without airlifts and fast supply roads). Also, the infamous "razing of barb cities" problem will be resolved.

However, the "fixed" part of the mod will remain, in the following way: if you own the tile by culture or by claiming it and keeping unit(s) on it, no one can take it from you without fight or trading (trading cities, not tiles for now).

what about something much simplier: 'claim terriroty' just reduces the amount of enemy culture (culture of civs you are at war with) on a plot. it can only be used if the tile your unit is on is in cultural range of one of your cities.

the reduction formula should work percentual (i.e. reduces enemy culture on tile to 95% of previous value) and a static cut off (i.e. if the percentual formula would reduce foreign culture by less than 10 then the formula is not applied and just 10 culture is subtracted).

furthermore one could argue if forts could expand borders like cities too. since they do not generate any culture the borders would be fixed at radius 1 for them.

what about something much simplier: 'claim terriroty' just reduces the amount of enemy culture (culture of civs you are at war with) on a plot.


Well, this is just what I don't want to do - culture would still define borders, just a new way of generating it would be introduced. This doesn't work for modern times - no monument or library can match the strong infantry and tanks when it comes to controlling land and resources. Also, the borders wouldn't be fixed during peacetime, since normal culture would still flip tiles.


furthermore one could argue if forts could expand borders like cities too. since they do not generate any culture the borders would be fixed at radius 1 for them.

These are my thoughts also. Forts could be used as micro cities, when it comes to defining borders. Will think about this more.

Well, this is just what I don't want to do - culture would still define borders, just a new way of generating it would be introduced. This doesn't work for modern times - no monument or library can match the strong infantry and tanks when it comes to controlling land and resources. Also, the borders wouldn't be fixed during peacetime, since normal culture would still flip tiles.

True, No monument can match troops But your troops are sometimes outmatched by the strong will of the inhabitants answering with fierce resistance!

when you understand culture = nationality (in a city tile it's even called so) it's quite consistent with modern times. with plebiscites like after the world war II in europe some borders were changed according exactly this: culture. ok, the borders in the east were determinated by other aspects (but still since several cities changed their owners too it's not inconsistent either).

anyway, you cannot deny that nationality plays a significant role in determinating todays borders.

another aspect of nationality/culture is that you can't use enemy roads. i always understood this as the inhabitants of these tiles being uncooperative, granting you no support but resistance instead thus slowing your troops down. so it would be most convenient if you need much longer to claim territory with huge culture than territory with very little of it. in addition to this i would even go so far that a very high culture on a tile should even hurt enemy troops passing through it. but that's just me i guess.

the only thing about culture that is a bit strange is how strongly it spreads in territory beyond your borders, in that i agree. especially if you have no trade or any other agreement with your neighbors. in that case it should not spread in your opponents territory at all! with open borders agreement and good diplomatic relations culture spread on foreign territory could come up to 50% of normal culture rate. also foreign culture should never spread on tiles with a foreign fort so they can be used to fix ownership. so change that about culture and you'll have your fixed borders.

when you now imagine you could diminish enemy culture on tiles with military this will effectively result in claiming the land by repressing foreign populations resistance. furthermore you would have forts to claim territory beyond your cities domain.

i think you should consider to adapt cultural (nationality) borders behavior to the idea of borders you have instead of making a completely new mechanics for them.

Instead of paying gold for claimed land - each turn you'd automatically lose any tile that has neither your culture nor your units on it. When you lose it, the player with the highest culture in the plot would get it or, if no culture existed, it would become unowned. This will make tiles farther from cities more difficult to maintain, especially in early times (without airlifts and fast supply roads). Also, the infamous "razing of barb cities" problem will be resolved.

or this. but beware if you want to diminish culture on tiles you will be forced to go throgh every tile of the map and check for every nationality each turn. this can mean quite a lot of performance on large maps with many civs i guess.

I will greatly look forward to a revision of fixed borders. Culture fading away if you're not occupying or producing culture is a brilliant idea :)

I will greatly look forward to a revision of fixed borders. Culture fading away if you're not occupying or producing culture is a brilliant idea :)

I agree, it is a very good solution to my main problem with fixed borders.

True, No monument can match troops But your troops are sometimes outmatched by the strong will of the inhabitants answering with fierce resistance!

when you understand culture = nationality (in a city tile it's even called so) it's quite consistent with modern times. with plebiscites like after the world war II in europe some borders were changed according exactly this: culture. ok, the borders in the east were determinated by other aspects (but still since several cities changed their owners too it's not inconsistent either).

anyway, you cannot deny that nationality plays a significant role in determinating todays borders.

another aspect of nationality/culture is that you can't use enemy roads. i always understood this as the inhabitants of these tiles being uncooperative, granting you no support but resistance instead thus slowing your troops down. so it would be most convenient if you need much longer to claim territory with huge culture than territory with very little of it. in addition to this i would even go so far that a very high culture on a tile should even hurt enemy troops passing through it. but that's just me i guess.

the only thing about culture that is a bit strange is how strongly it spreads in territory beyond your borders, in that i agree. especially if you have no trade or any other agreement with your neighbors. in that case it should not spread in your opponents territory at all! with open borders agreement and good diplomatic relations culture spread on foreign territory could come up to 50% of normal culture rate. also foreign culture should never spread on tiles with a foreign fort so they can be used to fix ownership. so change that about culture and you'll have your fixed borders.

when you now imagine you could diminish enemy culture on tiles with military this will effectively result in claiming the land by repressing foreign populations resistance. furthermore you would have forts to claim territory beyond your cities domain.

i think you should consider to adapt cultural (nationality) borders behavior to the idea of borders you have instead of making a completely new mechanics for them.

I understand cultural (~national) influence on borders, but in the game it makes them way too flexible. In real life you need at least some kind of negotiations / treaty or war before you change the borders. In CIV they just move as the wind blows - during war and during peacetime.

Another aspect I hate in civ is that your friends (or even allies) get your territory while you are being defeated by common enemy. It's like when in WW2 UK would get part of northern France just because Germany occupied it. Makes no sense to me.

But putting it all together I guess you should just play without this mod. Everything you said is much closer to normal CIV game. Just turn the fixed borders off :cool:.


but beware if you want to diminish culture on tiles you will be forced to go throgh every tile of the map and check for every nationality each turn. this can mean quite a lot of performance on large maps with many civs i guess.

This is not an issue at all. I code everything in C++ and going through all map tiles is nothing compared to just one call to average python method.

This is not an issue at all. I code everything in C++ and going through all map tiles is nothing compared to just one call to average python method.

I have seen badly coded C++ code. I am told by a fairly reliable source that the speed difference between well written C++ and well written Python is not visible without an electron microscope - to mix dimensions up.

I have seen badly coded C++ code. I am told by a fairly reliable source that the speed difference between well written C++ and well written Python is not visible without an electron microscope - to mix dimensions up.

Yeah, Python is incredibly fast, I know. But whoever designed the piece of crap inter-language interpreter used in Civ should be flogged in the streets.

Yeah, Python is incredibly fast, I know. But whoever designed the piece of crap inter-language interpreter used in Civ should be flogged in the streets.

May be, but they did do it quite awhile ago and they probably pioneered some of the stuff which made it ground breaking then.

May be, but they did do it quite awhile ago and they probably pioneered some of the stuff which made it ground breaking then.

IDK, it was only 2004. I doubt it was that earth-shattering. It's just that the programmers of Civ definitely did not optimize their code. For instance, when the game processes new buildings, civics, whatever, instead of saving the object in a variable, they call to find out what the object is... hundreds of times. I re-wrote the civic process, but I haven't gotten around to the buildings, and other ones...

It's not to say that the code is bad, per-se. Just not built for speed.

IDK, it was only 2004.

That was a long time ago, especially in computer technology time. But I agree, I doubt it was groundbreaking, and I do not expect that Friaxis expected that zappara would create Rise of Mankind.

The problem is that all civ modders have to work with an almost six year-old program which is stifling advanced projects.

NOTE: If I sound like I am complaining, it is simply that I am currently drinking.

NOTE: If I sound like I am complaining, it is simply that I am currently drinking.

One of the many things you shouldn't do while drinking:D.




Quick two cents:

During peace, there could be an option to buy territory from a rival allowing someone whose territory is shredded to regain it after war-time
-or-
During peace(if the above is too complicated, as that is how it sounds:(), borders will become the civilization's tiles that are surrounding it(as of now it doesn't do this if the borders are fixed).

For the next version (whenever it is done; i can't promise any dates) I was thinking of something like this:

Instead of paying gold for claimed land - each turn you'd automatically lose any tile that has neither your culture nor your units on it. When you lose it, the player with the highest culture in the plot would get it or, if no culture existed, it would become unowned. This will make tiles farther from cities more difficult to maintain, especially in early times (without airlifts and fast supply roads). Also, the infamous "razing of barb cities" problem will be resolved.

However, the "fixed" part of the mod will remain, in the following way: if you own the tile by culture or by claiming it and keeping unit(s) on it, no one can take it from you without fight or trading (trading cities, not tiles for now).

Good news everybody :D

I managed to find some time this wknd to code the changes mentioned above. The new version is done for my version of RoM (2.4), but it should be easy to port it to RoM 2.8. I'll see with Afforess about including the new version directly into his AND modmod, without releasing standalone Fixed Borders again.

Afforess, here's the src of the new fixed borders. It's all in C++, no python needed. All the XML tags from the version 3.0 (that you already have inside AND) are used in the same way, so no changes there either.

The changes should correct most of the problems people reported. Also, AI has been improved drastically (i.e. I was thinking while coding, rather than just copying the pillage code).

And finally, one of the modifications is that forts act as micro cities regarding culture and borders. However, this component can be used independently of the fixed borders and you'll see in the src separate comments for fixed borders and 'forts as cities'. You can create 2 different (independent) game options - 'fixed borders' and 'forts as cities', so people can use either one of them or both.

In a day or two I'll write detailed info about all changes.

Dexy, still merging the changes... it's a complete PITA, your source code is from 3.17 RevDCM... That only makes a standard merge completely impossible, so I have to hand merge it... grr.

Dexy, still merging the changes... it's a complete PITA, your source code is from 3.17 RevDCM... That only makes a standard merge completely impossible, so I have to hand merge it... grr.

That is why you are a wizard :D. You are deservedly a brilliant modder here :).

Dexy, still merging the changes... it's a complete PITA, your source code is from 3.17 RevDCM... That only makes a standard merge completely impossible, so I have to hand merge it... grr.

I know about that. That's why I offered my help initially, but you clearly said:

"If you give me the source code, I can extract it fine myself (provided it's been commented)"

good luck! :D

OK, here are the changes I’ve introduced in the new version (and that Afforess will hopefully include in his latest A.N.D.):

Units can still claim any enemy or neutral tiles. However, if your civ doesn’t have culture in a claimed tile, you must keep at least one unit on it each turn in order not to lose it again (i.e. if you claim tiles far from your cities, you must keep forces there to keep them). For instance, if you capture and raze a city and move the units away, you’ll lose all the tiles that the city provided.

For each tile, there’s a new info on mouse hover, saying “Owner: CivX”, because now the owner may be the one that doesn’t have the most culture in it (there are no more 10000000 culture points for claiming tiles; culture remains the same, but the real owner is decided based on claiming first, and then the culture).

Forts as Cities:

This component has grown into an independent mod and can be used even without fixed borders.

The point is that all forts (and other fort-like improvements*) really act as cities when it comes to culture and borders. They emit a minimal amount of culture in their adjacent tiles, thus enabling you to have additional territory without units far from cities, as long as you keep the forts under your control. You don’t even need units inside forts, but it’s like leaving a city unguarded. Once forts are captured (in war, like cities), they give the new owner the control of the surrounding tiles. There are some additional rules when a fort shares adjacent tile with a city – then the city is the ‘main owner’ of the tile and you must capture the city itself in order to get the adjacent tile (but the fort you get as soon as you capture it).

* Fort-like improvements are the ones defined in CIV4ImprovementInfos.xml with bActsAsCity=1 (old BtS tag, I haven’t introduced it).

Influence Driven War:

IDW has been slightly altered to support fixed borders and forts as cities. If the losing unit's owner has fixed borders, the tiles can't lose the last point of culture from culture transfer. Also, if a tile has a fort (owner doesn't have to have fixed borders), that tile can't lose the last point of culture. All other culture points (up to the last one) can be transferred and will affect the cities' nationality (if battles take place close to cities).

Finally, AI has been improved in 2 ways:
1. it has learned to build forts outside its borders (giving high priority to far away resources). The old AI then knows to guard those forts with units.
2. claiming of tiles has been improved drastically, AI will try to claim tiles as it advances into enemy territory toward cities.

That sounds great, Dexy. I'm impressed!

I know about that. That's why I offered my help initially, but you clearly said:

"If you give me the source code, I can extract it fine myself (provided it's been commented)"

good luck! :D

Don't worry, my tests seem to show that I successfully merged it. It was a PITA though.

Spoke too soon. I just hit an infinite loop... grr. Time to get VS up.

Thanks for the help...

Any chance of writing that explanation post you mentioned? I need to update the Civilopedia Article.

Thanks for the help...

Any chance of writing that explanation post you mentioned? I need to update the Civilopedia Article.

You mean this http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8904305&postcount=182 ?

Yep, thanks! ;)

dexy, that looks great and really gives borders a better feel for my Civ games.

Does this work with RoM 2.9? Cause' it doesn't seem to be working.

Does this work with RoM 2.9? Cause' it doesn't seem to be working.

It is in my Rise of Mankind Expansion, A New Dawn, as a new game option. I suggest you try it out. The content is all optional. ;)