No raze in WWII Pacific?

I've never actually played the conquest but I did find out during some testing that the AI does raze in the mp version. It has been said though, that they might be prevented from doing this in the single player biq. Can anyone confirm/disconfirm this?

You know, you can also use the no raze patch around here...

Adler

@ Ares: I asked you a question on that thread a week ago. I'm not gonna get on your case though. I know its easy to ignore/forget who posted what and I often don't pay any attention at all.

OK, so no one knows if this biq is modded?

againsttheflow said:

OK, so no one knows if this biq is modded?

Click to expand...

Doesn't matter at all. The biq has no effect on the raze ability.

I don't want to leave Againsttheflow hanging out on a limb here. Ares, this discussion actually started here in case you didn't catch it. This is my question. The point that I was making was that I saw descriptions of extensive tweaking by the original programmer of the scenario and descriptions of the AI taking cities without razing them. I just wanted to know if said programmer had disabled AI razing somehow in it (without playing the scenario myself, which I can't do right now). Then I was going to go back to the No Raze thread and impress you with my discovery. So there. That's what this is about. I have to congratulate Againsttheflow (can I call you Flow?) for persistence, and for moving the threadjack here.

I haven´t looked on city razing in those conquests. But as I said: If you add something to the conquest biq or import the biq or something to the biq, it seems, that the conquest biq looses its special "flair". You can see this, as the hardcoded scientific leader option (enabled in blue in the original conquest biq) is then gone.

There's nothing "hidden" in the Conquests BIQs.
I can be proved wrong, but I'd need evidence. Hope you won't get me wrong - I just want us to arrive at some final conclusion

Regarding the No-Raze:

First of all, to answer the OP, there is no "No-Raze" in WW2 Pacific Conquest. It's rare, but it happens - I had my cities razed by the Japanese (the city switched hands 3 times here then got razed).

There are numerous ways to lower the AI razing, among other things, low corruption / unused optimal city numbers will make it rare. WWII Pacific Conquest civs all have governments with low corruption (Notice that Japanese Monarchy was changed to "Nuisance" setting).

Regarding the Atomic Bomb:

Civinator said:

Here is a try for an explanation by embryodead in another thread: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=5068711&postcount=41

Click to expand...

Well, it was a successful try I have it in my c3c mod right now and it works - on my computer at least, the a-bomb plane & blast looks and works the same way in the Pacific conquest and my mod.

You can see this, as the hardcoded scientific leader option (enabled in blue in the original conquest biq) is then gone.

Click to expand...

Sci Leader uses the standard Leader unit entry, it just needs to have "Science Age" checkbox enabled. Not sure what else could you mean but Sci Leaders work in my mods as well. If you meant the blued "Allow Scientific Leaders", it doesn't disappear in mods

Regarding "programmer help"

It says Ckibler got help from Firaxis programmers which implemented game features specially on his request - but these features, like "Skip turn", bombard target order and AI improvements, became part of the game.

Civinator said:

Transfer the atomic bomb unit of that conquest to another scenario and you will see, that you don´t have all graphics that are working in the WW2 Pacific Conquest.

Click to expand...

embryodead said:

Regarding the Atomic Bomb:

I have it in my c3c mod right now and it works - on my computer at least, the a-bomb plane & blast looks and works the same way in the Pacific conquest and my mod.

Click to expand...

Ok, I'm not trying to start a fight here (I trust you guys wouldn't do it anyway) but we have, gentlemen, a contradiction; and I don't like contradictions. I realize the A-bomb doesn't work like a normal nuke but I think ED has a good explanation why. Anyway this topic (of modded biqs) has been discussed before (and by the same people) I think it's time we decide: is there any evidence for a modded biq that has not already been explained away?

I can come up with two.

1)

Civinator said:

One example is the "skip first turn"-feature, that seems only to work properly for AI-players in that special conquest biq. In SOE, AI-civs flagged with this feature always did move and this flag only stopped human players from moving in the first turn.

Click to expand...

2) Someone, somewhere (so much for definite ) was convinced that any biq in the conquests folder (even other than the conquests) took half the time to load that the same biq took in conquests\scenarios (I believe this inculuded moving the game files)

Again, I'm not rooting for either side. I would like to have nice things like no-raze but that's beside the point.

@Balthazar/anybody: flow or atf or anything like that works. I don't expect you to write out my entire name.

1) "Skip first turn" is human player-only feature. It doesn't work for the AI in Pacific Conquest either - play as, say China, and see how Commonwealth moves their troops on the first turn, Dec. 1941, just fine.

The feature is there to make sure that Japan always moves first. The normal turn order is always human player, then AI players from bottom to top of the list. Japan is at the bottom , so it moves before other AI civs, and human player loses its normal first turn advantage.

The AI turn order is something I learned today... it was probably known, but if not, it seems to be essential for scenario making. Thought it was just like with unassigned players - random, but it's not.

2) Personally I saw no difference with my mods and let this go, though I don't have scenarios that load 30 minutes, only about 1 minute tops. Was this after all confirmed by more people?

As for the NoRaze, Skyer's patch works perfect, though I know it's not the best solution due to legal problems.

embryodead said:

As for the NoRaze, Skyer's patch works perfect, though I know it's not the best solution due to legal problems.

Click to expand...

Not for me, because when I tried to download it my anti-virus program thought it was a virus and went crazy on me before I even opened it. Besides,

Ares de Borg said:

. .you have to use a NoCD exe.

Click to expand...

..which I don't have anyway. Although. . .

BadKharma said:

An unedited executable ie one without the no CD wont allow the patch to write to it. You could open the original executable and hex edit manually following Skyers instruction and not his auto patcher also.

Click to expand...

. . .which I have no idea of how to do. I've been working on a mod that could really use a no raze option; that's why I got so excited when I thought that we'd come across a biq with a no-raze flag. Apparently that's not the case.

The next option is a work-around, so I was very interested to hear that

embryodead said:

There are numerous ways to lower the AI razing, among other things, low corruption / unused optimal city numbers will make it rare. WWII Pacific Conquest civs all have governments with low corruption (Notice that Japanese Monarchy was changed to "Nuisance" setting).

Click to expand...

Now that's useful! Are there any other conditions/flags that will reduce the AI's capability/inclination to raze cities that you know of? I will be eternally grateful...

Balthasar said:

Not for me, because when I tried to download it my anti-virus program thought it was a virus and went crazy on me before I even opened it.

Click to expand...

I can only assure you it's virus free. It works fine but you need a fixed (NoCD) exe which is legally obtainable, but the mods apparently don't like it being posted on this forum. You can always PM someone for help The original exe cannot be edited even manually, as it is wrapped with SafeDisc copy protection software.

Now that's useful! Are there any other conditions/flags that will reduce the AI's capability/inclination to raze cities that you know of? I will be eternally grateful...

Click to expand...

Only that the diplomatic relation (which can deteriorate more and more the longer the war goes - the exact value can be seen in DEBUG mode) seems to affect razing, but you don't have any control over that as a modder.

Placing GWs in each city is a commonly used method but has its limits as well (max. number of buildings, and city size 1). Also good city placement, up to the extreme method that Civinator came up with - of only allowing cities in pre-placed squares.

embryodead said:

Also good city placement, up to the extreme method that Civinator came up with - of only allowing cities in pre-placed squares.

Click to expand...

I'd like to know more about this. Got a good link?

Balthasar said:

I'd like to know more about this. Got a good link?

Click to expand...

type "invisible cities" in search, there's a couple of threads. it's not exactly what I remembered but still.

embryodead said:

Regarding the Atomic Bomb
Well, it was a successful try I have it in my c3c mod right now and it works - on my computer at least, the a-bomb plane & blast looks and works the same way in the Pacific conquest and my mod..

Click to expand...

Hi embryodead,

I wrote try, cause at that time when you posted it, you said you haven´t tested it. It´s great if it´s working in that way.

embryodead said:

Sci Leader...If you meant the blued "Allow Scientific Leaders", it doesn't disappear in mods .

Click to expand...

If I only change one setting of the Conquest Pacific file and rename it (in this case I gave the marine a +1 attack value), the blue writing dissapears.

Here is a screene with the settings of the original WWII in the Pacific conquest:



And here is a screene with the light +1 attack modification of the biq:



The blue writing dissapeared, so nothing else was changed. I use Civ Complete. May be this is a simple mistake, but in this case it would be nice if I could know, why the blued option dissapears.

embryodead said:

The AI turn order is something I learned today... it was probably known, but if not, it seems to be essential for scenario making. Thought it was just like with unassigned players - random, but it's not... The normal turn order is always human player, then AI players from bottom to top of the list. Japan is at the bottom , so it moves before other AI civs, and human player loses its normal first turn advantage.

Click to expand...

Yes, I can confirm this for the "players" setting. The SOE-team set the players numbers in exactly the same way.

Here you go

It's discussed in this thread, I think

againsttheflow said:

Someone, somewhere (so much for definite ) was convinced that any biq in the conquests folder (even other than the conquests) took half the time to load that the same biq took in conquests\scenarios (I believe this inculuded moving the game files)

Click to expand...

This is interesting. I made a post about greatly speeding up the loading times of SOE with this methode and asked there several times about confirmations, if this effect is possible for other biqs too with this methode:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=223067

Until today I don´t know why the SOE biq was speeded up so massively with this methode. Fact is it happened.

So I want to read the thread, you said that "someone was convinced that any biq in the conquests folder (even other than the conquests) took half the time to load that the same biq took in conquests\scenarios".

I hope you don´t mean my thread, so you posted it under a quote with my name. In that case you would be completely wrong as everybody can read in the thread I linked above.

Civinator said:

The blue writing dissapeared, so nothing else was changed. I use Civ Complete. May be this is a simple mistake, but in this case it would be nice if I could know, why the blued option dissapears.

Click to expand...

After quick investigation: Conquests BIQs (or at least the Pacific one) are saved with Editor version 12.06 (unpatched Conquests). Any re-saving of the BIQs updates them to 12.08 format (Conquests 1.22/Civ3:Complete). So yes it does look like a mistake, as saving with unpatched Conquests is likely not to remove the setting. I might install C3C on another computer later and see, wouldn't be surprised if the patch broke something (like the Submarine bug).

I just got the editor file from Conquests CD and can confirm it: Files saved with editor from unpatched Conquests do not remove the "Scifi Leaders" setting when resaving conquests BIQs. Moreover, the 12.06 version adds this setting to all BIQs saved with it, e.g. I was able to resave my own scenario and it now has SciFi Leaders in "blue".

I've uploaded the 12.06 editor to CFC if you want to try it: link WARNING: every time you open the editor, it becomes the default one for all BIQ files - so make sure you delete or rename it after you're done experimenting, or you risk damaging your mods later (I assume something gets lost when you downgrade a 12.08 BIQ to 12.06).

Civinator said:

So I want to read the thread, you said that "someone was convinced that any biq in the conquests folder (even other than the conquests) took half the time to load that the same biq took in conquests\scenarios".

I hope you don´t mean my thread, so you posted it under a quote with my name. In that case you would be completely wrong as everybody can read in the thread I linked above.

Click to expand...

Yes, it was your thread (although I didn't remember at the time). In case you hadn't noticed I didn't remember a whole lot about that thread . I don't know what you mean by completely wrong though. I realize now it's not confirmed but Stormy seemed to think it worked for him too. Unless I missed something.

At any rate thanks for all the explaining ED. It's nice to get all those questions cleared up.