[BtS] Dales Combat Mod!

[von Krysiak]

I totally agree, a teaser would be in order, otherwise we might lose our minds over it

 

[Martin79]

Question: Does naval units can bombard land units in your mod (like an artillery free shot)? If not, I would love to see that. That would make amphibious much more fun and navy a bit more usefull.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

Hi Dale, I had some thoughts about naval combat and interceptions in my thread in the main C&C forum. Basically, what I was thinking was that you'd extend the pillage intercept command to intercept any enemy ship that enters your borders. This would solve the "sneaky transports moving past your 10 battleships and landing huge stacks on your homeland" syndrome, making naval power more important.

I have no idea if this is appealing to you, but since you're the main 'combat engineer' here I thought I'd at least throw it your way.

 

[jkp1187]

Not to turn this into a naval combat thread, but perhaps it would be better if the interception was not dependent on entering civ borders, but was just effective over a certain radius (regardless of borders)? And this would scream for stack combat....

Hi Dale, I had some thoughts about naval combat and interceptions in my thread in the main C&C forum. Basically, what I was thinking was that you'd extend the pillage intercept command to intercept any enemy ship that enters your borders. This would solve the "sneaky transports moving past your 10 battleships and landing huge stacks on your homeland" syndrome, making naval power more important.

I have no idea if this is appealing to you, but since you're the main 'combat engineer' here I thought I'd at least throw it your way.

I agree that this idea (or some variant) could be a winner!

 

[Gaius Octavius]

Not to turn this into a naval combat thread, but perhaps it would be better if the interception was not dependent on entering civ borders, but was just effective over a certain radius (regardless of borders)? And this would scream for stack combat....

That's basically what I was thinking, though in a different sense. The naval unit's range would be the radius you mentioned, but it would only be effective over your cultural borders.

Although your idea does intrigue me very much... Might even be better.

 

[jkp1187]

That's basically what I was thinking, though in a different sense. The naval unit's range would be the radius you mentioned, but it would only be effective over your cultural borders.

Although your idea does intrigue me very much... Might even be better.

Well, I've been thinking along these lines for like a year or so now. . But the idea never seemed like it would work right with just individual naval units. With stack combat (esp. with carrier-based air power automatically involved in the fight) I think it has more potential. I like the generic radius more b/c it gives fleets the ability to sit astride sea lanes, making blue water control more feasible. Instead of forcing the player to keep his fleets on the coast, players can focus on having a decisive battle out in the ocean, which is both desirable (less likely that they will be attacking into a coastal square where the defender has the 10% bonus,) and more realistic,

 

[Ambreville]

Dale, I've incorporated your mod into my own project. Thanks. Awesome work here. I did run into an odd thing though.

The target city contains one flak unit, and various fighters and bombers (nothing else -- no ships, no other ground units, etc). This is turn #1 -- the enemy CIV has not yet set its fighters to intercept, so presumably all the enemy air units are on the ground, pilots sunbathing, playing cards, or drinking schnapps.

When I Air Strike this city, I get a message that some of the enemy aircraft (fighters and bombers) have hit my own city -- during my turn -- given that my own ack-ack got damaged and/or damaged the enemy aircraft as well.

Does this have anything to do with opportunity shots of some kind?

-----------------------------------------------------------------

EDIT

I've narrowed the problem to the stack attack feature. I've disabled this option and none of the weird shenanigans happen. I wasn't using stacks, just individual units. No idea what was going on.

 

[Ambreville]

I need to increase the rate at which buildings (and production buildings) get hit when using the corresponding air bomb missions. Unfortunately, I know nothing of python or SDK. Can someone (Dale?) help me locate the coding I need to modify to get what I want? Thanks!

 

[Quetz]

then the first alpha of Age of Discovery II.

Hooray! Can't wait for that

also, that is an excellent idea, JKP.

 

[snen]

When i try to start a new game whatever the type of map it crashes back to the desktop once it finishes loading. Never had an opportunity to try this mod yet, really want to!! any advice would be appreciated!

 

[milka]

why dont die Atomicbomber after Nuke

this bomber can nuke per one tern

i think it is unbalance

 

[Ambreville]

why dont die Atomicbomber after Nuke

this bomber can nuke per one tern

i think it is unbalance

On the other hand it can get shot down by enemy air defense.

 

[Martin79]

Hi Dale,

Can you explain a bit more the mechanics of the CASA? How to calculate de odds, etc?

 

[noid]

I would like to see a bombing mission that could eleminate population, different bombers would have different chances of eleminating 1 population point. The chances shouldnt be higher then lets say 20-30% at most, so that its not overpowered.

2nd thing i find missing is a chance modifier that when enemy attacks and destroys my units on a plot with a fort, and his unit enters the plot, the fort might get destroyed. It would symbolize the fort being destryed due to fighting and the defenders abilty to blow up the fort so that it wont get in to enemies hands.

Doesnt anybody have any thoughts bout these ideas ?

One more thing, my bombers cant seem to destroy railroad improvement, there are many examples of bombers destroying countrys infrastructure (roads, bridges, railroads) please fix this Dale..

cheers

 

[Quetz]

Actually, I love the idea about population bombing.

 

[Ambreville]

Actually, I love the idea about population bombing.

Population reduction already happens as the result of bombing buildings. The way Dale's present mechanics work, it's a heck of a lot easier to reduce a pop 20 city to a pop of 1 than destroying all of its buildings. That's unfortunate. I wish there were some kind of parallel between the number of buildings destroyed and the reduction of population -- for example, if a city has 20 buildings and one gets bombed, population ought to drop 5%, 2 buildings 10%, etc. It's a bit mechanical, but it would make sure that the population reflects the amount of destruction. Once a city reaches 1 and it loses yet another pop, this city should be destroyed. Look at pictures of German cities at the end of WWII, you'll understand what I mean. The current rate at which common buildings get destroyed I think is too low, even in an undefended city. Right now there's no way to turn a city into rubble just by trying to bomb out its buildings.

Bombing production buildings is interesting. I'm assuming odds of hitting one of these buildings are even lower than just trying to destroy any random building. How are buildings identified in the current mechanics as being related to production?? Just curious.

I had no problems attacking ships in port. They get sunk pretty easily in fact -- lots easier than trying to knock down buildings.

Fighter engagement works OK. There is no difference trying to engage an enemy fighter assigned to intercept (thus combat-ready) vs. trying to engage any other enemy aircraft unassigned at the time (just completed a mission or is being repaired). That's too bad. There ought to be a penalty for aircraft caught on the ground (as opposed to those on an intercept mission). I'm not sure that a penalty could easily be implemented because of the way CIV4 conducts air combat. I tried giving various bonuses to one type of aircraft vs another. I couldn't see any difference either way, unfortunately.

Anything in the works regarding that last paragraph??

 

[Dale]

Okay this is going to be a long post. I'm going back to post #291.

jkp1187:

Dare I hope that the next mod might have something to do with naval combat...? Like a 'patrol' order that permits ships to intercept incoming landing craft within a certain range???

There could be something to do with naval. I mean it's only logical, it's the only area I haven't touched yet.

glider1

Big thanks for the high quality of your mod Dale. You're coding and commenting are first rate. Stack attacks and battle effects are cool indeed. Some of your more "active" turn based concepts with regard to battle like pre-emptive strikes are sure to make it into Civ 5?! Look forward to the next version of this great mod.

Thanks for the kudos. As to Civ5, who knows what's going to be in it.

Ninja2

Hi Dale

I feel obliged to tell you that I've included your mod into another modpack. I hope it's alright with you!

The more the merrier. I won't be compiling it with other's work (let their work stand on there own merits), so feel free to do that.

casnorf

It seems to work pretty nicely for us when we play.

There's an issue, especially evident when playing hotseat. It is affected the worst. But in MP the chances of OOS are high when using CivChanger. That will be resolved in the next version.

PSYX

Cool!!! I was succesfully added your mod into my!
All works!

And I translated your mod into russian

Awesome work! I'm glad you like it.

Echo of Celts

Dale,

I don't know if this is intentional, but when I use the Building Bombing Mission and Factory Bombing Mission I get +1 Experience each time whether the mission succeeds or fails.

Also, are archery and ranged bombardment available stand alone? If not how difficult is it to pull them out of DCM. I ask because In my attempts to merge DCM into VDRN I have used the Bombing Mission stand alone and CASA stand alone.

Thanks for letting me know. There will be a fix in the next version. In the meantime, move the experience code (2 lines) from outside the bNoTarget == false check to inside it for both missions.

Ninja2

Question: Have you integrated Bhruic's .dll changes to your .dll?

No, and I won't be.

*whispering* You won't need to use Bhruic's for much longer

Shqype

How long Dale? Because that sounds really promising.

Maybe you can tease us and tell us what you're planning? I wanna know the new stuff "never seen before in Civ."

It'll be a little while yet. I want to finish RtW 1.2 and get something out on AoD first. Maybe a couple of months? Maybe less?

Martin79

Question: Does naval units can bombard land units in your mod (like an artillery free shot)? If not, I would love to see that. That would make amphibious much more fun and navy a bit more usefull.

They surely can. That was one of my main goals, to enable shore bombardment for battleships. Otherwise, what's the point of building them?

Gaius Octavius

Hi Dale, I had some thoughts about naval combat and interceptions in my thread in the main C&C forum. Basically, what I was thinking was that you'd extend the pillage intercept command to intercept any enemy ship that enters your borders. This would solve the "sneaky transports moving past your 10 battleships and landing huge stacks on your homeland" syndrome, making naval power more important.

I have no idea if this is appealing to you, but since you're the main 'combat engineer' here I thought I'd at least throw it your way.

Yes, I had a very similar idea a while back. I hope to have some strong naval changes in the next version.

jkp1187

Not to turn this into a naval combat thread, but perhaps it would be better if the interception was not dependent on entering civ borders, but was just effective over a certain radius (regardless of borders)? And this would scream for stack combat....

It must be obvious to a lot of people that with the active defense systems, and combined arms systems that I've been moving towards this type of combat model for naval. Think of it, there's active defense for air and land, sea's next.

Ambreville

Dale, I've incorporated your mod into my own project. Thanks. Awesome work here. I did run into an odd thing though.

The target city contains one flak unit, and various fighters and bombers (nothing else -- no ships, no other ground units, etc). This is turn #1 -- the enemy CIV has not yet set its fighters to intercept, so presumably all the enemy air units are on the ground, pilots sunbathing, playing cards, or drinking schnapps.

When I Air Strike this city, I get a message that some of the enemy aircraft (fighters and bombers) have hit my own city -- during my turn -- given that my own ack-ack got damaged and/or damaged the enemy aircraft as well.

Does this have anything to do with opportunity shots of some kind?

-----------------------------------------------------------------

EDIT

I've narrowed the problem to the stack attack feature. I've disabled this option and none of the weird shenanigans happen. I wasn't using stacks, just individual units. No idea what was going on.

I'll have to check this out, but thanks for letting me know.

Ambreville

I need to increase the rate at which buildings (and production buildings) get hit when using the corresponding air bomb missions. Unfortunately, I know nothing of python or SDK. Can someone (Dale?) help me locate the coding I need to modify to get what I want? Thanks!

I don't quite get what you mean. The chance of hitting a building is 1-in-number of buildings. It's nothing special. There are two tech tags which give more chances at randomly selecting a valid building in the city, but that's all.

snen

When i try to start a new game whatever the type of map it crashes back to the desktop once it finishes loading. Never had an opportunity to try this mod yet, really want to!! any advice would be appreciated!

Make sure you have BtS patch 3.13 or Civ-Complete. Also make sure you have nothing in CustomAssets folder.

milka

why dont die Atomicbomber after Nuke

this bomber can nuke per one tern

i think it is unbalance

It does die. If the nuke bomber is not dieing then something is wrong. I would suggest re-installing the mod after deleting the entire DCM folder.

noid

Doesnt anybody have any thoughts bout these ideas ?

One more thing, my bombers cant seem to destroy railroad improvement, there are many examples of bombers destroying countrys infrastructure (roads, bridges, railroads) please fix this Dale..

cheers

There is already the chance to destroy population when attempting to bomb buildings. If you miss a building, you'll hit a house.
I'll look into the fort thing, that's not a bad idea actually.
There's many examples of bombing routes, but in reality it didn't do much to affect strategic deployment. It affected the local (plot's) economy but didn't do too much on a grand scale of things.

Ambreville

Population reduction already happens as the result of bombing buildings. The way Dale's present mechanics work, it's a heck of a lot easier to reduce a pop 20 city to a pop of 1 than destroying all of its buildings. That's unfortunate. I wish there were some kind of parallel between the number of buildings destroyed and the reduction of population -- for example, if a city has 20 buildings and one gets bombed, population ought to drop 5%, 2 buildings 10%, etc. It's a bit mechanical, but it would make sure that the population reflects the amount of destruction. Once a city reaches 1 and it loses yet another pop, this city should be destroyed. Look at pictures of German cities at the end of WWII, you'll understand what I mean. The current rate at which common buildings get destroyed I think is too low, even in an undefended city. Right now there's no way to turn a city into rubble just by trying to bomb out its buildings.

See my comments above about the chance to hit a building. As for population, if you hit a building in a city, it's one of four things: civil, commercial, industrial or population. This is totally represented in DCM. If a city has 100 buildings, if you hit a building it's going to be one of the four things. So if the city has no civil or production buildings (in Civ4 terms) then obviously the bomb has to hit something, a house. Therefore the chances to hit a building which houses population is higher in a city with less buildings. See my logic?

Bombing production buildings is interesting. I'm assuming odds of hitting one of these buildings are even lower than just trying to destroy any random building. How are buildings identified in the current mechanics as being related to production?? Just curious.

You specify which building bombing mission affects each building by using the new XML tag I provided for in Civ4BuildingInfos.xml.

I had no problems attacking ships in port. They get sunk pretty easily in fact -- lots easier than trying to knock down buildings.

Fighter engagement works OK. There is no difference trying to engage an enemy fighter assigned to intercept (thus combat-ready) vs. trying to engage any other enemy aircraft unassigned at the time (just completed a mission or is being repaired). That's too bad. There ought to be a penalty for aircraft caught on the ground (as opposed to those on an intercept mission). I'm not sure that a penalty could easily be implemented because of the way CIV4 conducts air combat. I tried giving various bonuses to one type of aircraft vs another. I couldn't see any difference either way, unfortunately.

Anything in the works regarding that last paragraph??

There is a penalty to aircraft on the ground. If an air unit is on patrol, it has the ability to intercept the fighter engagement mission. If there is no air patrol air units (ie: they are all movement used, no mission, whatever) then the fighter engagement mission is guaranteed to succeed because no one scrambled to defend.

I think you've just mis-understood the concept.

 

[Thomas SG]

Hi, Dale.

I put you Ranged Bombardment into my mod and it is working. Cool stuff.

But there are a lots of little bugs. Where to start...?

The damage:

- is much to small. I hit a fresh modern armor with 40 and after a successful hit he still had 39,6

- the damage is also not right displayed. Although I've done 1% damage the message says 0%. And you get most of the time 0%.

The context:

- there is no message in the contextmenu for range bombardment (only in the game interface)

- there is no hint to range bombardment in the pedia too

- even the context in the gameinterface should be improved because it is different from the BTS standard. Following the standard it should be like this:

• range bombardment:

........range: 2
........accuracy: 85%

at the moment it looks like this:

range bombardment: 2
accuracy: 85

So, where can I increase the damage, Dale?

 

[Dale]

Hi, Dale.

I put you Ranged Bombardment into my mod and it is working. Cool stuff.

But there are a lots of little bugs. Where to start...?

The damage:

- is much to small. I hit a fresh modern armor with 40 and after a successful hit he still had 39,6

Look at the unit's XML file and up the bombard damage. The equation is done literally off this value.

- the damage is also not right displayed. Although I've done 1% damage the message says 0%. And you get most of the time 0%.

It's rounded down like everything else in Civ4.

The context:

- there is no message in the contextmenu for range bombardment (only in the game interface)

Do you mean in pedia? It is in the pedia under DCM Concepts.

- there is no hint to range bombardment in the civiliopedia too

- even the context in the gameinterface should be improved because it is different from the BTS standard. Following the standard it should be like this:

• range bombardment:

........range: 2
........accuracy: 85%

at the moment it looks like this:

range bombardment: 2
accuracy: 85

I don't see too much of a problem with this. Change the TXT_KEY file if you want to change it.

So, where can I increase the damage, Dale?

See above.

 

[Thomas SG]

Do you mean in pedia? It is in the pedia under DCM Concepts.

DCM Concepts doesn't exist anymore. But no, I mean something different. Have a look at the third picture - there is no entry of range bombardment. If you look at picture 4 and 5 there is no entry too.

There is only a entry in the gameinterface (so while playing the game)