Breaking Save Game Compatibility for v37

@Art guys:
If I could ask a favor... I need two more sets of these, one for Aggressive Animals (Beasts) and one for Passive Animals (Creatures).

I know ... I can do them. But with all the sudden workload I was hoping I could enlist a little aid.


ALSO:
@DH or anyone else who understands the Spawn Info file better than I currently do (but I may answer my own question rather soon as I go through some code issues):
Are ALL Spawns assumed to be barbarian? If so, if I were to add a tag that allows one to define the Civilization that spawns the unit (requiring either the default of barbarian or the setting of all of them) would someone be willing to help me to implement the xml for that in the spawninfos.xml?

Thunderbrd said:

@Art guys:
If I could ask a favor... I need two more sets of these, one for Aggressive Animals (Beasts) and one for Passive Animals (Creatures).

Code:

			<Button>,Art/Interface/Buttons/Civilizations/Barbarian.dds,Art/Interface/Buttons/Civics_Civilizations_Religions_Atlas.dds,4,5</Button>
			<Path>Art/Interface/TeamColor/FlagDECAL_Skullcrossbones.dds</Path>

I know ... I can do them. But with all the sudden workload I was hoping I could enlist a little aid.


ALSO:
@DH or anyone else who understands the Spawn Info file better than I currently do (but I may answer my own question rather soon as I go through some code issues):
Are ALL Spawns assumed to be barbarian? If so, if I were to add a tag that allows one to define the Civilization that spawns the unit (requiring either the default of barbarian or the setting of all of them) would someone be willing to help me to implement the xml for that in the spawninfos.xml?

Click to expand...

I understand just a little bit - but still trying.

There are 218 spawninfos, but only 217 'treat as barbarian' - do not know what the odd one is but can check if you want. Unless DH knows.

If so, if I were to add a tag that allows one to define the Civilization that spawns the unit (requiring either the default of barbarian or the setting of all of them) would someone be willing to help me to implement the xml for that in the spawninfos.xml

Click to expand...

I am messing around with the Spawninfos file, trying to get it to work on my SEM+ map (different Lat./Long.)- so yes I would be willing to do that to the base file - (adding tags) should not be to difficult.

Also would need some help with which civilization settings. But you have to start some where.

Thunderbrd said:

@DH or anyone else who understands the Spawn Info file better than I currently do (but I may answer my own question rather soon as I go through some code issues):
Are ALL Spawns assumed to be barbarian? If so, if I were to add a tag that allows one to define the Civilization that spawns the unit (requiring either the default of barbarian or the setting of all of them) would someone be willing to help me to implement the xml for that in the spawninfos.xml?

Click to expand...

All spawns are barbarians. I have no idea what the bTreatAsBarbarian does but the one set wrong acts just like the others as far as I can see.

Thunderbrd said:

@Art guys:
If I could ask a favor... I need two more sets of these, one for Aggressive Animals (Beasts) and one for Passive Animals (Creatures).

Code:

			<Button>,Art/Interface/Buttons/Civilizations/Barbarian.dds,Art/Interface/Buttons/Civics_Civilizations_Religions_Atlas.dds,4,5</Button>
			<Path>Art/Interface/TeamColor/FlagDECAL_Skullcrossbones.dds</Path>

I know ... I can do them. But with all the sudden workload I was hoping I could enlist a little aid.


ALSO:
@DH or anyone else who understands the Spawn Info file better than I currently do (but I may answer my own question rather soon as I go through some code issues):
Are ALL Spawns assumed to be barbarian? If so, if I were to add a tag that allows one to define the Civilization that spawns the unit (requiring either the default of barbarian or the setting of all of them) would someone be willing to help me to implement the xml for that in the spawninfos.xml?

Click to expand...

I will do the art.
I am also quite familiar with the spawn xml, but if harrier is enlist-able that would be better, as he might enjoy getting familiar with the xml format and be helpful later on as well.

Good Enough?

if Spawn Infos are reworked, would it be possible to restrict barbarian units now to earth plots? Or to stop spawning once a civ researched Lunar exploration and despawn all barbarians?

Ok... thanks to you both!

I'm setting things up for this project but there's a LOT of barb references in the dll that must be sorted through so this is a project to be patient with.

Thunderbrd said:

Ok... thanks to you both!

I'm setting things up for this project but there's a LOT of barb references in the dll that must be sorted through so this is a project to be patient with.

Click to expand...

This needs to be done right, so patience is mandatory, no rushed and sloppy work, you hear. ^^

Toffer90 said:

Good Enough?

Spoiler :

I forgot to add the alpha channel to fauna, hence the square frame.

Click to expand...

Looks good! The Aggressive Animals (Beasts) are going to be a Dark Dark Green Civ color while the Passive Animals (Creatures) are going to be Medium Green... I don't know if you want to adapt the buttons for that or if it should be necessary to but maybe for the flag icons at least. (Actually... it looks like the flag takes the civ color and plants the mark provided by the iconic pic there on the right... if I'm guessing correctly here.)

Faustmouse said:

if Spawn Infos are reworked, would it be possible to restrict barbarian units now to earth plots? Or to stop spawning once a civ researched Lunar exploration and despawn all barbarians?

Click to expand...

Are we sure we want to stop all barbarian spawning on other planets? There's another way.

For the majority of units currently in the game, you can restrict them, by unit, to Earth. Axemen and Horse Riders wouldn't be able to breath on most other planets/map types so are worthy of such restriction. By this we can ensure that we are restricting spawns until later in the game when the 'barb' civilization has access, due to the overall tech level of other players, to units that CAN exist on the other worlds and thus earlier units wouldn't be spawning on off world locations anyhow (I'll be sure to include a MapCategoryTypes qualifier in the Spawn segment.)

Therefore, on other maps, you could still have some barbs spawning Mech and Robotic units and such that can survive off-world, representing what they always do... rogue factions that have split off from the existing civilizations as antagonists of societies in general. But these wouldn't come into play until players had earned the capabilities themselves.

Toffer90 said:

This needs to be done right, so patience is mandatory, no rushed and sloppy work, you hear. ^^

Click to expand...

lol... no doubt no matter how careful I am we'll still find some quirks to address later.

Dancing Hoskuld said:

Changing the names in the XML files to be what they should be will break saves, but fixing it will make life easier for all modders. Joseph has been the latest modder to have to deal with this sort of thing This is in all files bonuses, technologies etc. Eg the tech Controlled Fire is actually "TECH_THE_FIRE" in the XML.

Click to expand...

Yeah, there are many of these; although not very important to change it would be nice in some of the worst examples.
Fire Making is TECH_THE_FIRE, controlled fire is TECH_CONTROLLED_FIRE

A few examples:

EDIT: These changes are all in the SVN

GAMEOPTION_BARBARIAN_GENERALS

Click to expand...

After the split I'm noticing this may actually be a little more reasonable for some since the main reason its strongly suggested to not be played with now is that it currently makes it impossible to get Great Hunters. Animals will be excluded from the loop on this after the split. So while I don't personally see the point to this option anyhow, at least it won't further inhibit other elements of C2C if it's on.

GAMEOPTION_RELIGION_DECAY

Click to expand...

Alberts2 has done some things to improve this tremendously. Haven't tested it but it sounded like he had addressed the major problems in it.

GAMEOPTION_MORE_RIVERS (confusing and unnecessary)

Click to expand...

It works on maps that use default river placement only and in MY opinion (which is why its an option - this opinion isn't shared by all) such maps have a pathetically small amount of rivers and given the importance of having your cities on rivers in C2C and the frequency of rivers on real world Earth, for those maps, this introduces what I believe is the correct amount of rivers.

There are numerous map scripts that use the default river placement and for me, it was much easier to generate this option than it was to try to figure out how to add new options to the mapscripts to handle this by individual mapscript. Much less work to implement even if I did know fully how to go about it that way.

GAMEOPTION_MORE_RESOURCES

Click to expand...

Exact same arguments and reasoning as for More Rivers. Even more hotly disagreed with by some players, thus even more important to be optional.

GAMEOPTION_FLIPPING_AFTER_CONQUEST (A, IMO, poorly designed feature that seems out of place in C2C)

Click to expand...

If I'm not mistaken, isn't this is the option that allows us to 'liberate' cities for other nations that may have recently owned them and get a strong diplomatic benefit with that civ you've liberated for in doing so? Very real world there.

GAMEOPTION_MIN_CITY_BORDER (I think this breaks city flipping from culture, although I'm not too sure)

Click to expand...

I... do hate this option. Gets in the way of any and all possibility of cultural revolt taking place.

C - Hidden until reworked (fixed)

1. GAMEOPTION_AGGRESSIVE_AI
2. GAMEOPTION_RUTHLESS_AI
3. GAMEOPTION_RAGING_BARBARIANS

Click to expand...

I would actually just completely remove them with no intention on them returning (except raging barbs which I'm not sure really has any problems with it does it?)

Options to be completely removed: Those that cannot be used and will never be reworked. There's a bit of chaffe there from past efforts abandoned that were not removed due to the incompatibility issue. There's also quite a few that are shells for projects I'm working on that I wouldn't seek to remove because they are still WIPs.

Thunderbrd said:

Spoiler :

After the split I'm noticing this may actually be a little more reasonable for some since the main reason its strongly suggested to not be played with now is that it currently makes it impossible to get Great Hunters. Animals will be excluded from the loop on this after the split. So while I don't personally see the point to this option anyhow, at least it won't further inhibit other elements of C2C if it's on.


Alberts2 has done some things to improve this tremendously. Haven't tested it but it sounded like he had addressed the major problems in it.


It works on maps that use default river placement only and in MY opinion (which is why its an option - this opinion isn't shared by all) such maps have a pathetically small amount of rivers and given the importance of having your cities on rivers in C2C and the frequency of rivers on real world Earth, for those maps, this introduces what I believe is the correct amount of rivers.

There are numerous map scripts that use the default river placement and for me, it was much easier to generate this option than it was to try to figure out how to add new options to the mapscripts to handle this by individual mapscript. Much less work to implement even if I did know fully how to go about it that way.



Exact same arguments and reasoning as for More Rivers. Even more hotly disagreed with by some players, thus even more important to be optional.



If I'm not mistaken, isn't this is the option that allows us to 'liberate' cities for other nations that may have recently owned them and get a strong diplomatic benefit with that civ you've liberated for in doing so? Very real world there.



I... do hate this option. Gets in the way of any and all possibility of cultural revolt taking place.


I would actually just completely remove them with no intention on them returning (except raging barbs which I'm not sure really has any problems with it does it?)

Options to be completely removed: Those that cannot be used and will never be reworked. There's a bit of chaffe there from past efforts abandoned that were not removed due to the incompatibility issue. There's also quite a few that are shells for projects I'm working on that I wouldn't seek to remove because they are still WIPs.

Click to expand...

Good feedback.

Thunderbrd said:

Alberts2 has done some things to improve this tremendously. Haven't tested it but it sounded like he had addressed the major problems in it.

Click to expand...

Thats why I listed it there; I think it's so good that I suggest it shouldn't be possible to turn it off. (make it a core feature)
Though this is of course a subjective opinion and someone might hate religious decay, in that case it could of course stay optional.

Thunderbrd said:

If I'm not mistaken, isn't this is the option that allows us to 'liberate' cities for other nations that may have recently owned them and get a strong diplomatic benefit with that civ you've liberated for in doing so? Very real world there.

Click to expand...

When I use the option it makes cities, I founded on other landmasses, to ask if they can join another civ on that landmass every X turns or so throughout the entire game even if my culture is way higher than the surrounding cities.

Thats why I listed it there; I think it's so good that I suggest it shouldn't be possible to turn it off. (make it a core feature)
Though this is of course a subjective opinion and someone might hate religious decay, in that case it could of course stay optional.

Click to expand...

Even if it works and works well I'm not a fan of the option and don't play it. I would prefer to eventually rework the concept in a much more palatable way through the ideas project.

When I use the option it makes cities, I founded on other landmasses, to ask if they can join another civ on that landmass every X turns or so throughout the entire game even if my culture is way higher than the surrounding cities.

Click to expand...

Yeah... I've noticed that too and it can be annoying. I suppose if that's ALL it does then the option pretty much sucks but if the option is used for liberation enablement as well then I think the option should stay available.

Toffer90 said:

GAMEOPTION_BARBARIAN_GENERALS

Click to expand...

1) Allows barbarians to get GGs - a bit OP because all barbarians contribute to this so they get them faster than any other ai.

2) Allows you to get exp from fighting barbarians, even then it is limited to BARBARIAN_MAX_XP_VALUE (ie 40). This is supposed to be a hard limit but there is a promotion you can take to go over it. The Unlimited Exp option apparently ignores it also, not sure why. The limit is there to represent the primitive nature of barbarians so after awhile there is nothing new for fighting units to learn.

3) allows you to get exp from fighting animals, even then it is limited to ANIMAL_MAX_XP_VALUE (ie 20). This is supposed to be a hard limit but there is a promotion you can take to go over it. The Unlimited Exp option again ignores it also even there I would have thought fighters would learn nothing new about fighting humans after awhile. Hunters would learn longer because of their speciality but that is why the promotion to go over the limit should be only for hunters.

Toffer90 said:

GAMEOPTION_RELIGION_DECAY

Click to expand...

Hate this option

2) Allows you to get exp from fighting barbarians, even then it is limited to BARBARIAN_MAX_XP_VALUE (ie 40). This is supposed to be a hard limit but there is a promotion you can take to go over it. The Unlimited Exp option apparently ignores it also, not sure why. The limit is there to represent the primitive nature of barbarians so after awhile there is nothing new for fighting units to learn.

Click to expand...

The unlimited xp option ignores it because its a stupid limitation that the game suffers under. It's nice to be able to use barbs to sharpen your swords indefinitely. Battles with little to no risk are already going to mean less XP so the gradient of reward is already reflective in the risk involved in the battle equating to the amount of xp gained.

3) allows you to get exp from fighting animals, even then it is limited to ANIMAL_MAX_XP_VALUE (ie 20). This is supposed to be a hard limit but there is a promotion you can take to go over it. The Unlimited Exp option again ignores it also even there I would have thought fighters would learn nothing new about fighting humans after awhile. Hunters would learn longer because of their speciality but that is why the promotion to go over the limit should be only for hunters.

Click to expand...

This is going to be a difficult limit to maintain during this split. I'm going to have to think long and hard on how to go about maintaining this. One of the trickier sides of splitting the animals and barbarians in the way the code is currently written in about 30 different spots that assume animals to be barbarians in this case.

Thunderbrd said:

Yeah... I've noticed that too and it can be annoying. I suppose if that's ALL it does then the option pretty much sucks but if the option is used for liberation enablement as well then I think the option should stay available.

Click to expand...

I don't know the details of what it does either; perhaps DH knows?

I think the "nightmare" option ought to disappear too. Just change normal deity to be as if nightmare is turned on, the next two lower difficulty levels (emperor and immortal) made harder with part of the extra penalties of nightmare (to make the jump in difficulty to deity smoother) and every difficulty level below emperor like it is now.

A1. indifferent to it.
A2. Absolutely "Dislike it", to be polite. Never ever want Always On by Default.

B1. And B2. Only 1 should stay. The other needs to be gone for good.
B3. and B4. Use B3. But B4 is Excessive and either needs toned down or Removed.
B5. Axe this *amned Abomination and cast it in the Lake of Fire!

C1. Can see a time and place for it. But rarely use it.
C2. This is an Original RoM Option iirc. And was used to get a captured city back If the conqueror failed to address Culture right away. For a long long time had little relevance with C2C because of Cultures diminished role in the Mod until of late. Bottom line; could probably go and no one would notice.

@Toffer,
Another set coming soon? Or should we all be making lists?

I can think of several that impho should be exorcised as they are no longer relevant and are in fact redundant to the Mod in it's current and developing state.
Example: Need to be completely and forever Removed:
D.1 City limits by Civics
D2. Scaled City Limits
ALL such limits need to be removed from the Mod. Other factors have done what these failed to do. Therefore totally redundant and unnecessary coding. Wasted space.

E. All Trait Options (need to be removed-all of them)
All these options came about from Sgt Slick's Original set that is Not Even in the Mod anymore! Traits them selves can be reworked as they partially have already. And if a player wants a random set that is why we have Unrestricted Leaders Option.


StrategyOnly's Screenshot shows many Options That I've not seen before. Like Maximum Population. When did this get added in? And why?

And finally (for the Moment of course till I think of more) Adv Economy. Isn't this Option still Broken? Iirc it still is. It could go bye-bye too and I would wager no one would notice a difference in their Game play. I stopped using it last year because of it's weirdness. And from in game play and observations the AI plays better with out it too.

JosEPh