[BtS] Dales Combat Mod!

[Dale]

Okay gotcha!

 

[Thomas SG]

So, I've done the displayfix for CCV. This is how it looks now. Maybe you need a German translation?

Thanks for help.

 

[Thomas SG]

Sorry Dale, but there is something really wrong! I increased the power of the guided missile cruiser and bombard a modern armor again. And this is the result:

40 -> 13.2 , but the message is still 0% damage. It is a bug. How to fix it?

€: I found the problem but couldn't solve it yet. I made the following test. I used range bombard against the same unit several times.

40 -> 38,0 / 0% -> 34,8 / 5% -> 31,2 / 13%

Do you see what is happening? The damage posted on the screen is the damage from the bombard before!

 

[Ambreville]

re. better chance of knocking down buildings:

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.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?

Well, not really. I'm looking at this from the standpoint of results (since I don't understand how the coding works). What happens is that I send waves of about 15 bombers turn after turn. At best, a stack of 15 bombers might destroy 1 building. More often than not, a fifteen-bomber stack will achieve nothing except perhaps reducing the city's population by 1. All I'm asking is a way to increase the likeliness these 15 bombers will knock out one or more random buildings in a raid. Where's the confusion here? I wasn't concerned about the types of buildings per se. Does this make more sense?

 

[Ambreville]

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 didn't see this. What led me to make the comment is that I had sent a bunch of fighters on Turn #1 of a scenario to engage enemy aircraft. The other CIV hadn't had a turn yet to assign any aircraft mission (incl. interception therefore). So at this point, my assumption was: all enemy aircraft are on the ground -- let's strafe their airfield! Despite the assumption, half of my attacking fighters got either heavily damaged or shot down. There was no flak in the city either. I got about the same result engaging fighters set to intercept.

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

That wouldn't be the first time!

...but I still ask a lot of questions anyway!

 

[Ambreville]

I noticed you had a number of buildings without the bomb target tag. These include mostly special buildings like Obelisks, Wonders, espionage-related structures, and religious buildings. Does this mean they cannot be destroyed at all through air bombardment?

Would it be possible to allow a city's population to be reduced to"0" (therefore destroying it)? This would of course destroy all the above-mentioned "unbombable" buildings.

Something else I'm not understanding: when selecting the bombing mission against random buildings, and the only visible result is a drop in population, does this mean some building actually got hit? (If so, there is no message identifying which building in the city was destroyed.) As I said earlier, it's not very difficult to reduce a big city to a pop level of 1. It's just not clear to me, based on your earlier response, whether some buildings where actually destroyed because all I'm getting is the message: "Your bombs fell astray and killed some population" (or something like that). This doesn't tell me whether some buildings got knocked down and which ones...

Sorry for being such a nag -- my intent is not to spam your thread.

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

EDIT: Any chance you might find a way to include combat modifiers for aircraft that actually work? I'm thinking of something along the lines of Aircraft Type A having some bonus to fight Aircraft Type B, other than interception or range modifiers.

 

[Martin79]

Does killing population has any effect on diplomatic relations? I guess it should. We could have that kind of message on the diplo bord: -2 "You killed civilians in a terror bombing!"

 

[Ambreville]

Does killing population has any effect on diplomatic relations? I guess it should. We could have that kind of message on the diplo bord: -2 "You killed civilians in a terror bombing!"

Do you really think that the rest of the Allies in WWII saw US bombing of German cities as "terror bombing?"

 

[jkp1187]

Does killing population has any effect on diplomatic relations? I guess it should. We could have that kind of message on the diplo bord: -2 "You killed civilians in a terror bombing!"

I disagree with that suggestion. -2 diplo is almost as bad as the penalty for razing a city or using nukes. I think any diplo penalty might be too much here.

 

[von Krysiak]

I agree another -dipl modifier could ruin the balance...

 

[noid]

noid


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.

I must disagree, allied bombings of railroads and railroad nodes during and after the D Day landings played a significant role in allied drive south and west. Same thing goes for soviet offensives in the east, they were always preceded with bombings of nodes and tracks.

However i agree that a abilty to destroy railords in a plot with a single bombing mission would be greatly overpowered. I propose 2 solutions :

1. A really small chance of completly eleminating railroads in any given plot.

or

2. After bombing, the railroad improvement would become a "bombed railroad" improvement for a turn or two and it would resault in decreased functionality. If the enemy has some workers nearby the improvement could be fixed instantly back to its 100% functional state.

 

[Martin79]

I agree another -dipl modifier could ruin the balance...

I guess you are right, but the pop bombing having not effect at all on diplo could also ruin the balance IMO.

 

[Thomas SG]

He, what's wrong with all the others? This is one of the most popular mods and I'm the only one who notice such mistakes? Or doesn't it matter to you? Or can you all fix such small problems yourself?

I as a newbee to SDK and C++ need some help as it seems. Couldn't get it work right.

 

[Martin79]

Do you really think that the rest of the Allies in WWII saw US bombing of German cities as "terror bombing?"

I guess not. But sure the people in Dresden saw it that way. And the decision to nuke bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki (equivalent to the fire bombing of Dresden in terms of causalities) was not popular among other allied countries.

Anyways, my point is only that there a need for some kind of consequences for bombing populations IMO.

 

[Dale]

He, what's wrong with all the others? This is one of the most popular mods and I'm the only one who notice such mistakes? Or doesn't it matter to you? Or can you all fix such small problems yourself?

I as a newbee to SDK and C++ need some help as it seems. Couldn't get it work right.

Thanks for picking up the bugs. It is all going on the list to be fixed for the next version.

 

[Thomas SG]

Thanks for picking up the bugs. It is all going on the list to be fixed for the next version.

That's fantastic, but can't you help me right now? I want to release the next version of my mod in a few days but it would be great to do it without known bugs.

 

[Dale]

re. better chance of knocking down buildings:



Well, not really. I'm looking at this from the standpoint of results (since I don't understand how the coding works). What happens is that I send waves of about 15 bombers turn after turn. At best, a stack of 15 bombers might destroy 1 building. More often than not, a fifteen-bomber stack will achieve nothing except perhaps reducing the city's population by 1. All I'm asking is a way to increase the likeliness these 15 bombers will knock out one or more random buildings in a raid. Where's the confusion here? I wasn't concerned about the types of buildings per se. Does this make more sense?

Okay, from results. If the city you sent 15 bombers to only has a granary, then it becomes a lot harder to hit a "civil building". Why? Because you have 200 buildings in the city and 1 of them is your target range.

As I said, the "chance to hit a building" is 1 in "the number of bombable buildings". That is determined by the XML tags in building infos. So if you have 56 bombable buildings for that mission, then the odds of hitting a certain building are 1 in 56.

The process is:
1. Find out how many bombable buildings for that mission
2. Pick a random number 0-->(number of bombable buildings)
3. Check if that building exists in the city
4. If it exists, destroy it
5. If the unit has more chances to hit a building (defined by the tech infos tags) then repeat 2-4
6. If no building hit (ie: step 4 failed) attempt to destroy population

It's not rocket science.

 

[PAF]

I was hopeing that someone might be able to tell me what my problem is.

As best as I can tell I have installed DCM correctly but it doesn't appear to be working.I have Civ4 Gold edition and BTS.From what I understand there were some minor XML changes with gold that caused some problems with the Total Realism mod and I was wondering if that is why I am having problems.

Things I have noticed that may help.
1) Instead of "Dales Combat Mod" showing as a mod I get one named "code".
2) I don't see the screen that says which components have been turned on or off.
3) I can't change leaders or civ as the button seems to be missing.
4) I thought some remnants of Total Realism might be causing a problem so I did a complete uninstall of everything but still nothing changed.

It is quite possible that I am doing something wrong I just have no idea what, as I am fairly new to civ.

Edit** I forgot to mention that I have updated to 3.13.


I have no clue what is wrong so any pointers would be helpful.

 

[Thomas SG]

[...]
1) Instead of "Dales Combat Mod" showing as a mod I get one named "code".
[...]
I have no clue what is wrong so any pointers would be helpful.

Okay, I'll try my best. I think your installation is wrong! You shouldn't see a mod called "code". Please goto ...\Beyond the Sword\Mods. There must be a folder called Dales Combat Mod and into that folder must be the data of the mod.

So, at the moment it seems to be like this ...\Beyond the Sword\Mods\code
(and other data from DCM in ...\Beyond the Sword\Mods) but it must look like this ...\Beyond the Sword\Mods\Dales Combat Mod\code

By the way - code isn't needed for playing the game - it's for modders only.


Try a new installation.

 

[Ambreville]

Okay, from results. If the city you sent 15 bombers to only has a granary, then it becomes a lot harder to hit a "civil building". Why? Because you have 200 buildings in the city and 1 of them is your target range.

The city this stack of bomber is attacking is a fully grown city, with a population of about 18-20. It contains just about all the buildings that a CIV could build with WWII technology. That's a lot of buildings, and lots of bombers ought to be able to certainly destroy one or more random buildings during every raid. What I'm saying is that this isn't happening. So back to square one -- how do you increase the odds more buildings will get knocked down, regardless of their category, civilian or otherwise? Right now, if you send lots of bombers against a big city, wave after wave, it's very difficult to actually turn that city into rubble (i.e. knocking down all of its buildings). I just don't think it should be like that.

As I said, the "chance to hit a building" is 1 in "the number of bombable buildings". That is determined by the XML tags in building infos. So if you have 56 bombable buildings for that mission, then the odds of hitting a certain building are 1 in 56. (snip)
It's not rocket science.

Based on what the above logic sounds like, the more buildings there are to bomb, the less likely it is you will hit anything. That's completely backward! If there are lots of buildings in a city, it ought to be easier to hit any random building. What I am trying to communicate to you is the fact I am NOT trying to hit a specific building, but rather hit ANY building.

Your coding may not be rocket science, but judging from actual results in the game, I'm sorry to say it doesn't seem to be flying either...