Aussie_Lurker
Deity
Thankyou Snarko, I didn't know that. I will place the original file elsewhere then (either that or place the new file in Custom Assets-I ASSUME that this will work?)
Aussie_Lurker.
Aussie_Lurker.
[SDK] Dale's Combat Mod!
- Thread starter Dale
- Start date
Aussie_Lurker
Deity
Well, poor start there. Field Bombardment appears to function well, but got a CTD when I tried to move my stack against the opponent 
. I will try again with some other unit combos.
Aussie_Lurker.
. I will try again with some other unit combos.Aussie_Lurker.
boneys26
BTS Play session tester
Dale said:
Hi Dale hows it coming along? just a quickie when will you be releasing a stable dll? I'm loving the way this looks
Aussie_Lurker
Deity
Hiya Dale. Well so far, no good I am afraid. Thats two for two in terms of CTD's. I think I might wait for a more stable version. Don't get me wrong-just the field bombardment alone is fantastic, but I REALLY want to wait for more stable Stacked Combat!
Aussie_Lurker.
Aussie_Lurker.
Dale
Mohawk Games Developer
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2002
- Messages
- 7,601
I would highly suggest forgetting about the beta1.5 file. 
A. There is a major bug in it that renders any battles where one stack has grunts + flankers a CTD. There were a few others too.
B. The new version has HEAPS of changes. IE: it's now a full mod, new Civ4UnitInfos.xml flags for bombarders, ranged and flankers (so you can have your custom units in the proper slots), and it's generally a lot smoother with correct combat readouts.
I should have this next beta out soon.
Dale
A. There is a major bug in it that renders any battles where one stack has grunts + flankers a CTD. There were a few others too.
B. The new version has HEAPS of changes. IE: it's now a full mod, new Civ4UnitInfos.xml flags for bombarders, ranged and flankers (so you can have your custom units in the proper slots), and it's generally a lot smoother with correct combat readouts.
I should have this next beta out soon.
Dale
Dale
Mohawk Games Developer
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2002
- Messages
- 7,601
Beta2 is currently going through some final tests and then I'll be able to upload it for you guys to play with.
Features of Beta2:
- Full seperate mod (no need to overwrite other dll's or customassets)
- xml flags for Civ4UnitInfos.xml to indicate bombarders, ranged and flanking units (optional flags so only add to units requiring those flags [vanilla units xml file updated and included in mod as an example]) so you can indicate what your custom units are to do in stack attacks (the xml schema file MUST remain with the mod)
- Full combined arms: air, bombarding, ranged, flanking and front line troops all work together on the enemy stack
- Fighters in cities and on carriers will auto-scramble to defend the plot they are stationed on, performing intercept missions for control of the skys and air strikes against ground units
- Animations reflect the entire battle; ranged and bombarding will hold back, other troops will melee and try to break through to the backline troops
- Field bombardment means any unit that can bombard (ie: catapults, artillery) can bombard any other unit in adjacent squares (ie: land bombardment, sea bombardment, coastal bombardment)
- Bombarders required to demolish city defenses before defending units take damage (defenders "hide" in the defenses, so they must be destroyed first)
This is just a quick list of features of Beta2. I have a lot more to add before I'd call it a final release, but we're well on the way.
Dale
Features of Beta2:
- Full seperate mod (no need to overwrite other dll's or customassets)
- xml flags for Civ4UnitInfos.xml to indicate bombarders, ranged and flanking units (optional flags so only add to units requiring those flags [vanilla units xml file updated and included in mod as an example]) so you can indicate what your custom units are to do in stack attacks (the xml schema file MUST remain with the mod)
- Full combined arms: air, bombarding, ranged, flanking and front line troops all work together on the enemy stack
- Fighters in cities and on carriers will auto-scramble to defend the plot they are stationed on, performing intercept missions for control of the skys and air strikes against ground units
- Animations reflect the entire battle; ranged and bombarding will hold back, other troops will melee and try to break through to the backline troops
- Field bombardment means any unit that can bombard (ie: catapults, artillery) can bombard any other unit in adjacent squares (ie: land bombardment, sea bombardment, coastal bombardment)
- Bombarders required to demolish city defenses before defending units take damage (defenders "hide" in the defenses, so they must be destroyed first)
This is just a quick list of features of Beta2. I have a lot more to add before I'd call it a final release, but we're well on the way.
Dale
Aussie_Lurker
Deity
Hey Dale, this sounds FANTASTIC. If it's OK with you, I was hoping to use your upcoming mod as a basis for adding my 'attrition and balanced movement' system-unless you want to do it instead?
Essentially this Mod would have both a python and XML component. The XML component makes land movement a much less easy affair (and thus makes naval movement and scouts/explorers more vital).
Effectively, tundra and desert movement costs would be doubled, and pre-medieval foot units (aside from scouts, explorers, workers and settlers) would treat it as impassable terrain. Similarly, unroaded forests and jungles would be impassable to mounted and mechanized units. Now, I am hoping that I will be able to make flood-plains immune to these restrictions-and am thinking of making hills have only a single movement point cost-but these will be down the track.
Second, I want to use python to add an 'attrition' promotion to certain units if they stray a number of squares from friendly territory. Basically there would be two attrition levels Attrition 1 would have a -25% strength and -20% heal rate, and Attrition 2 would have a -50% strength and a -40% heal rate-thus making fighting deep in enemy territory a VERY risky endeavor!
My thinking behind such a mod is that I am sick of being able to uncover my entire continent before we even get into the AD's. I want MORE mystery, and I think this is the way to achieve it. Anyway, tell me what you think of my idea.
Aussie_Lurker.
Essentially this Mod would have both a python and XML component. The XML component makes land movement a much less easy affair (and thus makes naval movement and scouts/explorers more vital).
Effectively, tundra and desert movement costs would be doubled, and pre-medieval foot units (aside from scouts, explorers, workers and settlers) would treat it as impassable terrain. Similarly, unroaded forests and jungles would be impassable to mounted and mechanized units. Now, I am hoping that I will be able to make flood-plains immune to these restrictions-and am thinking of making hills have only a single movement point cost-but these will be down the track.
Second, I want to use python to add an 'attrition' promotion to certain units if they stray a number of squares from friendly territory. Basically there would be two attrition levels Attrition 1 would have a -25% strength and -20% heal rate, and Attrition 2 would have a -50% strength and a -40% heal rate-thus making fighting deep in enemy territory a VERY risky endeavor!
My thinking behind such a mod is that I am sick of being able to uncover my entire continent before we even get into the AD's. I want MORE mystery, and I think this is the way to achieve it. Anyway, tell me what you think of my idea
.Aussie_Lurker.
Dale, this looks simply awesome!
Your mod has been mentioned in the Rhye's Catapult thread
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=163655
Just a technical question:
Will it be "simple" to implement your mod as combat system into another one,
like Rhye's?
On to combat:
What is the basic concept about tiles and terrain? modifiers?
Where does the fight takes place, on tile of the defender?
Or does it matter what tile the attack comes from
(thus, "two tiles" are involved into the concept)?
Like, you know, horses running down a hill... do they meet the enemy at the border of the hill tile? If yes, perhaps there could be modifier on attack/defence, based on the fact you are attacking or defending, and from and on what tile
If not, and horses run down the hill, go to the plains and THEN starts the fight ("one tile" concept), well, then there is no need for these special modifiers...
Your mod has been mentioned in the Rhye's Catapult thread
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=163655
Just a technical question:
Will it be "simple" to implement your mod as combat system into another one,
like Rhye's?
On to combat:
What is the basic concept about tiles and terrain? modifiers?
Where does the fight takes place, on tile of the defender?
Or does it matter what tile the attack comes from
(thus, "two tiles" are involved into the concept)?
Like, you know, horses running down a hill... do they meet the enemy at the border of the hill tile? If yes, perhaps there could be modifier on attack/defence, based on the fact you are attacking or defending, and from and on what tile
If not, and horses run down the hill, go to the plains and THEN starts the fight ("one tile" concept), well, then there is no need for these special modifiers...
Dom Pedro II
Modder For Life
Aussie_Lurker, units already have a reduced heal rate in enemy territory and an increased one in friendly territory and a base one in neutral territory.
When you talk about attrition from leaving friendly territory, do you include neutral territory, or only enemy territory? I personally would prefer something a bit more sophisticated than simply giving a penalty from being X squares away from your borders.
First of all, I think that the loss should be temporary and should be gradually reduced for each turn spent standing still. This would basically represent stretching your supply lines very thin in an initial thrust but then gradually strengthening them as time goes on. I think, also, that units getting between you and friendly territory should cause big troubles too.
I suggest combining this with c.fe's "magic" mod as I've been discussing elsewhere. I've been working on a mod for this that replaces the word "magic" with "fuel" and so each turn, each unit gets a supply of "fuel" that is then required to move/bomb/airstrike/attack etc. So if you get separated from your source of fuel or if you lose your source of fuel, you're up the creek.
When you talk about attrition from leaving friendly territory, do you include neutral territory, or only enemy territory? I personally would prefer something a bit more sophisticated than simply giving a penalty from being X squares away from your borders.
First of all, I think that the loss should be temporary and should be gradually reduced for each turn spent standing still. This would basically represent stretching your supply lines very thin in an initial thrust but then gradually strengthening them as time goes on. I think, also, that units getting between you and friendly territory should cause big troubles too.
I suggest combining this with c.fe's "magic" mod as I've been discussing elsewhere. I've been working on a mod for this that replaces the word "magic" with "fuel" and so each turn, each unit gets a supply of "fuel" that is then required to move/bomb/airstrike/attack etc. So if you get separated from your source of fuel or if you lose your source of fuel, you're up the creek.
Aeon221
Lord of the Cheese Helmet
Question:
Are air units still stationed inside a city, or do you stack them with your units for operations?
If in a city, how does that work with field operations? No air support?
You should really show this mod to someone in Firaxis.
Are air units still stationed inside a city, or do you stack them with your units for operations?
If in a city, how does that work with field operations? No air support?
You should really show this mod to someone in Firaxis.
Dom Pedro II
Modder For Life
I think this provides a great opportunity to have anti-personnel/armor planes and anti-aircraft plane distinctions.
The Great Apple
Big Cheese
I'm sure they thought of it while designing the game, and rejected it.Aeon221 said:
I quite like the bombardment aspect, however, I'd want to see how the AI coped with it before passing final judgement. One of the big problems with the Civ 3 AI was the AIs usage (or lack thereof) of bombardment. It seems to me it'll be quite a task to get the AI up to a standard where it can use this properly - however that doesn't mean I wouldn't like to see it done, nor do I think it impossible.
I have to say that I don't like the stack-attack idea. I think it'll take quite a lot of the tactical and judgement aspect out of warring. When attacking a city with vanilla combat there is potential for the attack not to be going so well, causing a change in plan. You may only actually attack with 2 of your units before this point happens. If you use stack attack, (correct me if I'm wrong) you don't get this option. Instead you either withdraw, all die, or win, and some of your guys die. It's all a bit quick.
It also seems to add a lot of complexity & mystery to combats with all the flanking boni, multiple ranks, and suchlike. I've never been a fan of mystery in stratagy games - the rules should be clear. While the rules will be there, and probably even easy to undestand individually, when combinations of rules start taking effect it gets hard to see at a glance quite what is going on.
There's also the whole AI problem. I'm imagining it would be alot of work to get it to use these things properly... but I'm sure it's possible.
It also just doesn't seem Civ enough to me! (I know... it's not a very good arguement, but it doesn't)
If Rhye does decide to use this mod in his, complete with stacked combat, then I'll be really quite disappointed, as I think it will spoil the game.
Having said all this I am quite prepared for me to be wrong and this to be the best thing that ever happened to Civ!
Dom Pedro II
Modder For Life
I think it's possible to get the AI to use bombardment properly... I have, indeed, had games where they completely reduced my city's defenses before attacking.
I once had a war going on where the AI came at one of my least-defended frontier cities waaaaay on the other side of the world with about 15 artillery, and about 10 other assorted units. I've never seen the AI make such an attempt before. I've also never seen such a bold attempt fail so miserably
They seem to do it fairly well with artillery and ships, but I have NEVER seen them use Bombers in CivIV. It just doesn't happen for me. They do, fortunately, seem to build a lot of fighters.
I once had a war going on where the AI came at one of my least-defended frontier cities waaaaay on the other side of the world with about 15 artillery, and about 10 other assorted units. I've never seen the AI make such an attempt before. I've also never seen such a bold attempt fail so miserably
They seem to do it fairly well with artillery and ships, but I have NEVER seen them use Bombers in CivIV. It just doesn't happen for me. They do, fortunately, seem to build a lot of fighters.
The Great Apple
Big Cheese
Are you reffering to default Civ 4, or Dale's bombarding arty?
Dom Pedro II
Modder For Life
Default Civ4... it was a very nasty war... that I most assuredly helped incite.
Dale
Mohawk Games Developer
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2002
- Messages
- 7,601
Dom Pedro:
The scope of this mod will not cover supply. That's too high on the micro-management list.
Aeon221:
Air units are like now, not usable for field combined attacks. Though fighters on carriers will be used in an attack. BTW, who at Firaxis should I show?
TGA:
The AI does use both concepts. It was actually quite easy to achieve. I believe stacked attacked (like it is here and in CTP) better represents how battle actually goes. There is true combined arms. There is units assisting each other. Units perform their correct function (arty bombard instead of attack [I always thought that was ****ED!]). Sure, it's a massive step for Civ, but a step that every other game in the world has taken, and it hasn't reduced those games. The final version of this mod will have options to turn on/off each concept.
Dale
The scope of this mod will not cover supply. That's too high on the micro-management list.
Aeon221:
Air units are like now, not usable for field combined attacks. Though fighters on carriers will be used in an attack. BTW, who at Firaxis should I show?
TGA:
The AI does use both concepts. It was actually quite easy to achieve.
I believe stacked attacked (like it is here and in CTP) better represents how battle actually goes. There is true combined arms. There is units assisting each other. Units perform their correct function (arty bombard instead of attack [I always thought that was ****ED!]). Sure, it's a massive step for Civ, but a step that every other game in the world has taken, and it hasn't reduced those games. The final version of this mod will have options to turn on/off each concept.Dale
Dom Pedro II
Modder For Life
Dale said:
Well, I was actually recommending Aussie_Lurker to do that with his mod if he wants attrition/supplies etc.
As long as you eventually provide us the source code to allow for a little merging, I'm cool
You mean fighters on carriers will be used in attacks on carriers or whatever ships happen to be in the stack?
Yeah... Firaxis took the working system they had for Civ3, decided it was broken, and then broke it trying to fix it.
The Great Apple
Big Cheese
That's goodDale said:
Well there is using it, and there is using it wellDale said:
. I can imagine some parts of stacked combat to be quite an art - taking down super-stacks for example. Bombarding in Civ 3 was always a bit fiddly for the human, and I had assumed that coding the AI was why they dumped it for Civ 4.Heh. Couldn't have put it better myself!Dom Pedro II said:
Similar threads
