Unofficial BTS 3.13 patch

Bhruic, since people keep asking if they've applied the patch correctly, wouldn't it be a good idea to add something like Blake had for the Better AI mod, where you get a confirmation display when you ALT+mouseover the score? I hope you know what I'm talking about. :)
 
So you're volunteering to test it ori? ;)

Bh

just setting the unit flag to 0? sure I can do that tonight.

Well, I did - the event triggers just fine, of course now the requirement is just having a certain state religion, so this can also be triggered for landlocked civs - but apart from that the event works. From the help texts I suspect that the unit requirement was there to ensure only seafaring civs can trigger it but the game does not allow the check just at the start when implemented in the xml - that check would need to go to python if that was the intention...
 
Well, I did - the event triggers just fine, of course now the requirement is just having a certain state religion, so this can also be triggered for landlocked civs - but apart from that the event works. From the help texts I suspect that the unit requirement was there to ensure only seafaring civs can trigger it but the game does not allow the check just at the start when implemented in the xml - that check would need to go to python if that was the intention...

If it's undesirable to give the quest to a landlocked civ (which I'm not necessarily opposed to, though it does seem a little odd,) The only other suggestion I have would be to make explicit in the text that a specific ship has been granted the quest, and if the ship is lost, the quest is over.

Perhaps the tag: <UnitName>Blessed Sea</UnitName> could be added to <Type>EVENT_BLESSED_SEA_1</Type> under EventInfos to identify the ship to which the quest was assigned? That way, the player would immediately know which of his units was the 'sacred' ship....
 
and the starbase bug in Final Frontier reported on 28 October (and confirmed by ainwood via emal on the same date?
(reported via email to mods and admins)
 
I am confused, I admit. Although I haven't read every post in this thread (and many of those I have read are well above my comprehension) it appears that this unofficial patch has by now had several upgrades and renumbers, so before I try to install it I would like to know :-
1). Does the link in post #1 automatically goto the latest upgrade ?
2). Is the list of changes, also in post #1, up to date ?
3). Is the "extinct civ reappears as that of a new colony" idiocy fixed ?
4). Just exactly what is the download and installation procedure ? By this I mean (a) where should the downloaded file be put ?, (b) what is the full name of "the dll file" referred to as needing backup and then overwriting with the patch?, (c) how to perform that overwriting, and (d) full instructions in great detail suitable for an idiot to follow with at least a reasonable chance of success.

As I've said in another thread (and am rather proud of, so am repeating it here), before releasing 3.13 the developers clearly researched a new technology called "Code of Flaws" . . .
 
1). Does the link in post #1 automatically goto the latest upgrade ?
Yes
2). Is the list of changes, also in post #1, up to date ?
I believe so, yes.
3). Is the "extinct civ reappears as that of a new colony" idiocy fixed ?
Yes.
4). Just exactly what is the download and installation procedure ? By this I mean (a) where should the downloaded file be put ?, (b) what is the full name of "the dll file" referred to as needing backup and then overwriting with the patch?, (c) how to perform that overwriting, and (d) full instructions in great detail suitable for an idiot to follow with at least a reasonable chance of success.

Filename: CvGameCoreDLL.dll
This is the only file you need to worry about. The rest of the files there are for the SDK, which is only useful if you're going to be seriously modding the game (i.e., changing fundamental rules, not just adding a few new units or techs or civs.)

You put it in the folder:

C:\Program Files\Firaxis Games\Sid Meier's Civilization 4\Beyond the Sword\Assets\

The successful candidate will backup his original CvGameCoreDLL.dll first before overwriting it with Bhruic's CvGameCoreDLL.dll file. (You will never regret backing stuff up.)

There's a readme file in the ZIP that includes this info, too, IIRC.
 
Well, I did - the event triggers just fine, of course now the requirement is just having a certain state religion, so this can also be triggered for landlocked civs - but apart from that the event works. From the help texts I suspect that the unit requirement was there to ensure only seafaring civs can trigger it but the game does not allow the check just at the start when implemented in the xml - that check would need to go to python if that was the intention...

What about trying it with iGlobalUnits set to 1? That should require the Civ to have one of the units, but it shouldn't tie the quest to that unit (if my understanding of it is correct).

Of course, this brings up another point... Should I keep the "upgrading doesn't break quests" code that I've already done?

Bh
 
Yes

I believe so, yes.

Yes.


Filename: CvGameCoreDLL.dll
This is the only file you need to worry about. The rest of the files there are for the SDK, which is only useful if you're going to be seriously modding the game (i.e., changing fundamental rules, not just adding a few new units or techs or civs.)

You put it in the folder:

C:\Program Files\Firaxis Games\Sid Meier's Civilization 4\Beyond the Sword\Assets\

The successful candidate will backup his original CvGameCoreDLL.dll first before overwriting it with Bhruic's CvGameCoreDLL.dll file. (You will never regret backing stuff up.)

There's a readme file in the ZIP that includes this info, too, IIRC.

I know I will sound like a complete moron, but when you go about backing up the file, how would I do that? would I just copy it to another folder and then copy it back if I needed to?
 
I know I will sound like a complete moron, but when you go about backing up the file, how would I do that? would I just copy it to another folder and then copy it back if I needed to?

Yes. I create a folder called "originals" that I keep them in.
 
What about trying it with iGlobalUnits set to 1? That should require the Civ to have one of the units, but it shouldn't tie the quest to that unit (if my understanding of it is correct).

Of course, this brings up another point... Should I keep the "upgrading doesn't break quests" code that I've already done?

Bh

As long as iNumUnitsGlobal = 1 works, I will tentatively vote "no", just on the principle that fewer changes are better. If it's something that can be resolved purely through XML tags, then it's an issue with the event coding itself, and that's where the fix should be, I think. (I'd test it myself, but I'm stuck at work...)

Put it this way: if someone wanted to tie a quest to a specific unit and wanted the event to obsolete if the unit was upgraded, it would be nice to retain that flexibility....
 
Nuts. It was such a good solution too.

Oh well. Assuming the iNumUnitsGlobal works, then that's certain a preferable solution.

Bh
 
I know I will sound like a complete moron, but when you go about backing up the file, how would I do that? would I just copy it to another folder and then copy it back if I needed to?

Or even simpler: rename the original file to "CvGameCoreDLL.dl_" - and if you want to go back to the original, delete the patched file and rename "CvGameCoreDLL.dl_" back to "CvGameCoreDLL.dll".
 
As long as iNumUnitsGlobal = 1 works, I will tentatively vote "no", just on the principle that fewer changes are better. If it's something that can be resolved purely through XML tags, then it's an issue with the event coding itself, and that's where the fix should be, I think. (I'd test it myself, but I'm stuck at work...)

Put it this way: if someone wanted to tie a quest to a specific unit and wanted the event to obsolete if the unit was upgraded, it would be nice to retain that flexibility....

I can quite see why you would tentatively vote 'no'. May I also tentatively put another side to the question? While I completely agree with the principle (so, also, if the final decision does not eventually go according to my suggestion, I will be quite content!), I am not convinced that the principle applies in any real or specific instance we actually have before us. I can't think of any instance in which an upgraded unit would not in fact be more able to fufil any demand made upon it, and so the lack of the possibility of upgrading would seem to me to be an oversight, and thus, in consequence, the flexibility that you mention would appear to be something that perhaps ought to be deliberately programmed in as an extra should it really be desired that a particular unit be tied to a specific quest...
 
Yes

I believe so, yes.

Yes.


Filename: CvGameCoreDLL.dll
This is the only file you need to worry about. The rest of the files there are for the SDK, which is only useful if you're going to be seriously modding the game (i.e., changing fundamental rules, not just adding a few new units or techs or civs.)

You put it in the folder:

C:\Program Files\Firaxis Games\Sid Meier's Civilization 4\Beyond the Sword\Assets\

The successful candidate will backup his original CvGameCoreDLL.dll first before overwriting it with Bhruic's CvGameCoreDLL.dll file. (You will never regret backing stuff up.)

There's a readme file in the ZIP that includes this info, too, IIRC.

You could also use the *link removed - see below for updated version* I cobbled together. With this method, the necessary user actions are reduced to clicking the next button a few times. By default, it will also automatically backup the original files before overwriting them with Bhruic's changes.
 
Bhruic,

I was reading through moctezuma's influence driven war thread and in it he mentioned a change he made for attacking with stacks. Right now when you attack with a stack and a unit withdraws from combat (i.e. siege units) that unit is still in the group selection and needs to be manually deselected before continuing the attack.

Moctezuma's change automatically deselects these units. He also put in an exception for blitz units. Would you consider putting this change in your patch?

Thanx again for your much appreciated work. :cool:
 
^^^ I think this is annoying also. Especially in later game when all units have multiple moves, but not multiple attacks. If you have multiple stacks attacking a variety of fronts, sometime i overlook that a stack has multiple units still ready.
 
Nuts. It was such a good solution too.

Oh well. Assuming the iNumUnitsGlobal works, then that's certain a preferable solution.

Bh

If the quest is tied to global units, will it still fail when such a unit is upgraded or all of these units are upgraded? That would be weird, because as Aquatic explained, the upgraded unit should be able to fulfil the quest better than the original unit. I wouldn't even like it if destruction of these units caused the quest to fail as new units can be constructed to fulfil the quest.
 
Good question, but I don't have an answer. My instinctive reaction is to say "no", however. I think that it'll only tie a quest to a specific unit, not in general. So as long as it's not tied to a particular unit, I don't think it'll fail if you don't have any of those units (although you need one to trigger it, of course).

Bh
 
Good question, but I don't have an answer. My instinctive reaction is to say "no", however. I think that it'll only tie a quest to a specific unit, not in general. So as long as it's not tied to a particular unit, I don't think it'll fail if you don't have any of those units (although you need one to trigger it, of course).

Bh

I believe upgraded unit does count towards the quest. In one of my game (with 3.13 but not the unofficial patch) I receive the quest that requires you to build battle fleet that include Battleship, Destroyer, Carrier & certain number of fighters. As I was halfway through the quest I upgraded all the fighter to Jetfighter. And a few turns later I completed the quest. So I guess upgraded unit does count towards quest ? ;)

On another note, do you know how to make the great wall act really like a wall, Bhruic? I mean, is there somewhere in the code that can make the great wall unpassable except at certain point? :D Of course if the worker can get a new task call build wall after that Civ completed the great wall and then can construct that impassable wall/passable gate at any place within the cultural border would be even better. :goodjob:

In Civ3 I managed to do very close to that by modify the mountain tiles into wall tiles (see link in my sig) and then set those tiles as landmark and make them impassable. Of course back in Civ3 you can't add new worker task so nothing can be done there. But now that we can add worker task, perhaps you know of a way to set these changes? I hope I did not go off-topic with this question :p
 
Top Bottom