.

I can make entries for units to build improvements there however it seems the nr. of turns isn't calculated correctly. I thought maybe the unitclass_worker is somewhere linked to mission build with more details to define that.:confused:

Maybe this?
CvEnums.h-
 
Ploeperpengel said:
Defensive Bombardment like in civ3 the archers had.

Just checking on this, 'cuz I can't remember exactly:

How does this work for a stack of units? If there is more than one unit with the "Support Fire" ability defending, do they all do their support fire, or only one? If another unit attacks that plot, can that same unit do another support fire, or does another support fire unit have to take up the task. Likewise, if a plot already had one unit use it's support fire option, can any other unit use the support fire option that turn? Finally, what represents a turn? Is it a player's turn, or the unit's player's turn. In other words, if player1 gets attacked by player 2 and unit X uses support fire, then on player3's turn the same plot is attacked, can unit X still use support fire?

Any other scenarios I should know about? Really, the battle mechanisms are the part I still haven't dug deep into, so this would be an interesting challenge.
 
Gerikes said:
Just checking on this, 'cuz I can't remember exactly:

How does this work for a stack of units? If there is more than one unit with the "Support Fire" ability defending, do they all do their support fire, or only one? If another unit attacks that plot, can that same unit do another support fire, or does another support fire unit have to take up the task. Likewise, if a plot already had one unit use it's support fire option, can any other unit use the support fire option that turn? Finally, what represents a turn? Is it a player's turn, or the unit's player's turn. In other words, if player1 gets attacked by player 2 and unit X uses support fire, then on player3's turn the same plot is attacked, can unit X still use support fire?

Any other scenarios I should know about? Really, the battle mechanisms are the part I still haven't dug deep into, so this would be an interesting challenge.
In civ 3 I think it works like this(If not I'd like it like this-but as suggestion):
Every unit that has the ability gets exactly 1 supportfire shot per turn. A turn would be one gameturn from the players turnstart to his next turnstart. Support fire is a reaction to an attack. Every attack causes one unit in a stack to give support fire and uses it up for the rest of the turn. That means the max support fire one unit can have is 1 from the end of its move until its next movephase.
Hope this helps.
 
Ploeperpengel said:
In civ 3 I think it works like this(If not I'd like it like this-but as suggestion):
Every unit that has the ability gets exactly 1 supportfire shot per turn. A turn would be one gameturn from the players turnstart to his next turnstart. Support fire is a reaction to an attack. Every attack causes one unit in a stack to give support fire and uses it up for the rest of the turn. That means the max support fire one unit can have is 1 from the end of its move until its next movephase.
Hope this helps.

Ok, one more question!

Is a support fire shot an automatic hit, or should it work just like any first strike shot with a chance to miss?

Edit: I lied. Can a unit retreat during the support fire shot round?
 
Ploeperpengel said:
In civ it works like bombardment. A firststrike won't do much difference in WH since so many units have them. I think here too it should work like bombardment.

Ah. That's possible too. I was thinking that it works like a first strike but one that automatically hits, and the other unit can't respond to. But I think collatoral damage would be more fun :P

I'll throw in some other XML values so that it works just like the collateral damage XML values work, but you won't be giving archers collateral damage like normal artillary units. Maybe I'll even find time to spell collateral correctly on my first attempt.
 
Ploeperpengel said:
Heh, yeah collateral damage that was what I thought of too. Archers could cause some but much less than artillery of course:D

in my eyes you need a huge amount of ancient artillery to inflict as much collateral damage as one or 2 regiments of Archers can do in the same time ;) but thats not what we want to discuss :p
 
Lord Olleus said:
Updated it. Do you think you will still have much work on it, graphics/debugging wise?

And thanks for taking so;e of the workload off me ;)

Thanks for that.

I don't think I'm going to do the graphics, since it's so much work and so much chance of causing crashes for such a little thing. The fact that you get a big, red message and even a pointer to the plot I think should be good enough.
 
I don´t know what the others think about this, but I think it would be good that way, so it has some similarities to the Support-Fire concept. That would keep the whole mod more simple and one wouldn´t have to get used to too much new and complex systems.
 
I will open a thread for the Cvgamecoredll. In the first post will be the current file any adds should be merged to that in following posts. This way we can keep track of working versions and preserve them for anyone if problems occur.
 
I would think so. The only problem is if say I were to make a large change, then upload it, then the next person has been making changes all along to their sources and now have to merge my own. However, no matter what you'll have this problem. A program like CVS or SVN could handle many of the merges for you, but I think for the majority of the time we're probably going to be staying out of everyone's way. Lord's mostly creating new code for the spells, which I'm staying away from.

I say see how it goes for now. Also, it's probably important to keep the sources up to date with the DLL's too.
 
I could upload the C++ folders also no problem but I'm not sure if I am up to date with those too. I only received the dll lately but no sources I think it's best you guys upload what you have each time you change anything there too.
And don't hesitate to open another programmers only thread where you explicitly make us python-is-a-snake-idiots shut up to debate problems with the coding:p
 
Give Orcs & Goblins peaceweariness [not started]

I'm intrigued by this idea and wouldn't mind have a look into getting it working if it hasn't been lined up by anyone else yet.

Would the Peaceweariness be like the reverse of warweariness and creates unrest when at peace (so we would have to have a race trait that reduces warweariness by -100% or else no one is ever happy) or gives happiness when at war?

Also what triggers would affect it? (e.g. WW has if UNIT KILLED, WW increases, is there going to be similar triggers for PW?).
 
Hey El Loco Mono. I like the Fur thing, hopefully it will add a little spice to the early game. I've always tried to put myself next to an animal but in a very well defendable position, but now it will be more worthy to actually attack, so it opens up some decisions for the player. I think this might have been able to be done in python (using the onCombatResult python callback). I know you said you were worried that you might go overboard on the SDK stuff :P

I'm wondering if we might be able to make that hardcoded 7 something that can be set in the global defines, that way people can change it without having to recompile.

El Loco Mono said:
I'm intrigued by this idea and wouldn't mind have a look into getting it working if it hasn't been lined up by anyone else yet.

Would the Peaceweariness be like the reverse of warweariness and creates unrest when at peace (so we would have to have a race trait that reduces warweariness by -100% or else no one is ever happy) or gives happiness when at war?

Also what triggers would affect it? (e.g. WW has if UNIT KILLED, WW increases, is there going to be similar triggers for PW?).

Here's what Ploe was saying when I asked earlier:

Ploe said:
Last thing I remember it should be about half the effect of Peaceweariness and only accumulated by turns the orcplayer is not at war at all. I think as soon we have Animosity(psycholgy-chance that orcs fight themselves insteed of the enemy) it would be possible to lose units during peacetime though and I think not being at war with another civ should increase that chance drastically and then would it also be possible to have peaceweariness increased by casualties. I think we need animosity first and put this into a combined package.

What I gathered from that was that the idea hasn't been fully developed yet to be coded :P
 
Back
Top Bottom