Cargo System Overhaul [OBSOLETE]

[Nightinggale]

• "Treasure Slot" would still be allowed to carry 80 Goods

• "A Civilian Slot" would only be allowed to carry 50 Goods

Do we want to have different capacities for each slot in the same unit?
That can be done, but then I will likely have to write a class for each slot and store an array of those. It should still be fast enough and the benefit of doing that is that we won't be stuck with hard limitations of either number of types in the enum or number of cargo slots.

We would need to make it very clear to the player if the slots aren't of the same size. It also makes the yield loading code more complex.

 

[raystuttgart]

Do we want to have different capacities for each slot in the same unit?

No, bacially the idea is:

If you have no treasure the Ship should not stay half empty.
You can still load "Goods" in Treasure Slots but less.

So at least "Goods" should always be a valid alternative to the optimal purpose.
(Simply in a lower amount.)

See my old concept:
(We should normally always be able to fully use all slots.)

So again, to avoid confusion:

You will always be able to fully fill the cargo slots of your ship.
But to do so, you will need to pay a bit of attention to the type of ship and combine goods to fill the cargo slots efficiently.

A Treasure Ship can always fully be loaded with Treasures.
But for loading other goods you need to combine a bit. And maybe not everything can be loaded.

A Cargo Ship can always fully be loaded with Cargo.
But for loading other goods you need to combine a bit. And maybe not everything can be loaded.

A Slave Ship can always fully be loaded with Slaves.
But for loading other goods you need to combine a bit. And maybe not everything can be loaded.

A Military Transport can always fully be loaded with Troops.
But for loading other goods you need to combine a bit. And maybe not everything can be loaded.

A Civilian Ship can always fully be loaded with Civilians.
But for loading other goods you need to combine a bit. And maybe not everything can be loaded.

So the restricitons should never be 100% strict.
It should have disadvantages though to not use "optimally".

At least not in your concept - because your logic is on sinlge specific cargo slots
My logic was only about the "max slots used" - which is different.

 

[raystuttgart]

Such an XML for CargoSlotTypes should already do:
(Maybe we do not need to make it more complicated.)

So we will always have the "main intended SpecialUnit" (which we can link to UnitInfos) and the alterative amount of Goods.

So each Cargo Slot Type will contain 3 infos:

• Type (name) <--- To be referenced by your Info Array
  
• SpecialUnitInfo (Indirect reference to UnitInfos using SpecialUnitInfo.xml as categorization)
• iGoodsAlteratively (to fill with Goods if not with intended SpecialUnit)

And those "CargoSlotTypes" we then reference again in the "InfoArray" for Cargo Slots at the Transports (also UnitInfos.xml).

<CargoSlotTypes>
          ....
    <CargoSlotType>
        <TypeSTANDARD_CARGO_SLOT<Type>
        <SpecialUnitInfo/> <--- Allows all Units to be loaded as well.
        <iGoodsAlteratively>100</iGoodsAlteratively>
     <CargoSlotType>
    <CargoSlotType>
        <Type>GOODS_CARGO_SLOT<Type>
        <SpecialUnitInfo>SPECIALUNIT_YIELD_CARGO</SpecialUnitInfo>
        <iGoodsAlteratively>100</iGoodsAlteratively>
     <CargoSlotType>
    <CargoSlotType>
        <Type>TREASURE_CARGO_SLOT<Type>
        <SpecialUnitInfo>SPECIALUNIT_TREASURE</SpecialUnitInfo>
         <iGoodsAlteratively>80</iGoodsAlteratively>
    </CargoSlotType>
            ....
<CargoSlotTypes>

-----

Summary:
Should be simpel and clean.

Edit:

Basically something like this:

• A "Standard Slot" would be allowed to carry 100 Goods (and all others)
• A "Cargo Slot" would be allowed to carry 100 Goods (but no other Units)
• "Treasure Slot" would be allowed to carry 75 Goods alternatively (but no other Units)
• "A Slave Slot" would also be allowed to carry 75 Goods alternatively (but no other Units)
• "A Civilian Slot" would also be allowed to carry 50 Goods alternatively (but no other Units)
  
• "A Military Slot" would also be allowed to carry 50 Goods alternatively (but no other Units)

 

[Nightinggale]

I want it to be more flexible, but at the same time it should be easy to use. Let's make a "cargo slot" xml file. Each cargo slot defines cargo capacity and has an InfoArray of which types it can load.

Units then has a list of cargo slot types. This allows full xml configuration and can easily be tweaked for balance later.

The end result is transports with slots where we have full control of what can be loaded in each and how much cargo they can carry.

Example: make a cargo slot, which allows civilians and military and say 75 cargo. A ship can then have say 4 of those. Each slot then acts independently even though they all have the same rules.

How should the slots be configured? We can leave that for balancing. First step is to figure out an implementation where the implementation itself don't have to be programmed again if we decide to alter how slots work. This approach will split the technical design (programming) completely apart from the gameplay balance/functionality (pure xml).

We can make the slots Ray proposed, but it is flexible enough to also make different combinations.


Also I want to avoid using SpecialUnit. I want to add my own type to make sure it's used for this and only this.

 

[modmod]

To define slots individually for first sounded even more restricting than the max ammount for something.

But with:
1. iGoodsAlteratively
2. <SpecialUnitInfo/> <--- Allows all Units to be loaded as well.
is much more acceptable.

Which suggest only some slots gets a special function (but even those can be used in an alternative way).
That have a reality.
(And then concept becames more useful for future purposes.)

So we will always have the "main intended SpecialUnit" (which we can link to UnitInfos) and the alterative amount of Goods.

So each Cargo Slot Type will contain 3 infos:

• Type (name) <--- To be referenced by your Info Array
  
• SpecialUnitInfo (Indirect reference to UnitInfos using SpecialUnitInfo.xml as categorization)
• iGoodsAlteratively (to fill with Goods if not with intended SpecialUnit)

UnitInfos.xml).

<CargoSlotTypes>
          ....
    <CargoSlotType>
        <TypeSTANDARD_CARGO_SLOT<Type>
        <SpecialUnitInfo/> <--- Allows all Units to be loaded as well.
        <iGoodsAlteratively>100</iGoodsAlteratively>
     <CargoSlotType>
    <CargoSlotType>
        <Type>GOODS_CARGO_SLOT<Type>
        <SpecialUnitInfo>SPECIALUNIT_YIELD_CARGO</SpecialUnitInfo>
        <iGoodsAlteratively>100</iGoodsAlteratively>
     <CargoSlotType>
    <CargoSlotType>
        <Type>TREASURE_CARGO_SLOT<Type>
        <SpecialUnitInfo>SPECIALUNIT_TREASURE</SpecialUnitInfo>
         <iGoodsAlteratively>80</iGoodsAlteratively>
    </CargoSlotType>
            ....
<CargoSlotTypes>

But from the example that is not clear (sure):
Are there need an entry (</CargoSlotType>) for all <iCargo> ?
(Even as <SpecialUnitInfo/> <--- Allows all Units to be loaded as well. )

So do they need to match in number, OR can be a lesser number of <SpecialUnitInfo> eg. just define the first X?

 

[raystuttgart]

Let's make a "cargo slot" xml file. ... This allows full xml configuration and can easily be tweaked for balance later. ...
The end result is transports with slots where we have full control of what can be loaded in each and how much cargo they can carry.

Agreed.
We can also give it more functionality to be save.

Example: make a cargo slot, which allows civilians and military and say 75 cargo.
...
We can leave that for balancing.

Sounds good.

This approach will split the technical design (programming) completely apart from the gameplay balance/functionality (pure xml).

Sure, the system can always support more than what we might use.
Just thought we could keep it more simple and reduce effort.

Also I want to avoid using SpecialUnit.

But please check, SPECIALUNITS are already used for Cargo mechanic in XML.

<Special>SPECIALUNIT_YIELD_CARGO</Special> <------ The Unit tells what SpecialUnit it is. (We can us it as it is.)
<SpecialCargo>SPECIALUNIT_YIELD_CARGO</SpecialCargo> <------ The Transport already says what SpecialUnit it can carry (This we would need to replace with the new InfoArray.)

Why can we not use it and adapte the second part for our needs?
We just need it as reference / categorization.

 

[nci]

So without divide (existing) ships; and/or add new ships, like the present "all in" galleon divided into (as new units):

• treasure galleon
• war galleon

Or probably a third as trade galleon it is just restricts.

^This. I believe we desperately need more interchangeable ships with subtle differences for flavor, so that players can choose ships not just based on their needs (boring! restrictive!), but also consciously express preference based on their taste - without hurting colony economy much! The proposed cargo overhaul can greatly help with providing these subtle differences, so that new ships aren't just bland copies of each other.

 

[raystuttgart]

Hi guys,

I agree that this new System may require more Ships.
But we will see what the System can do first - before we discuss about the details of gameplay.

We can simply not make graphical modders like @Schmiddie start working before we know what we need.
Their time is too valuable to waste any of it. Especially since we currently only have 1 experienced graphical modder who is officially in "modding break".

If we had 10 graphical modders that would be a totally different story ...

---

Summary:

Yes, we might create stuff light this

• Slave Ship
• Treasure Galleon
• Troop Fregate
  
• ...

But only if we are capable of doing so (in terms of getting the graphics we need) ...
Meaning only if we have a graphical modder that will do it for us.

No graphical modders ... no Unit graphics ... no new Units ... no new gameplay ...

 

[raystuttgart]

The proposed cargo overhaul can greatly help with providing these subtle differences, so that new ships aren't just bland copies of each other.

I do not disagree at all.

But @Nightinggale and myself are no magiciains (although I was called "wizard" latetly).
Because the rest of the team is currently taking a break.

Thank god we have at least still our supporters @Kendon and @Fürstbischof that help with texts and translations ...
(Otherwise our time for modding would be even less ...)

Does community really not understand how much we are fighting for ressources and support ?
How little time we actually have in our spare time - with jobs and family - to make things like this come true ?

Summary:

Give me great Ship graphics and we might give you Ships.
And no, we will not put grahics in the mod that have broken animations or such things ...

 

[Schmiddie]

We should have in mind that - if techs would be implemented as well - different kind of ships might be required for several ages, e.g. for early and mid game. That means not only 3 but 6 or 9 new ships might be required.

 

[raystuttgart]

We should have in mind that - if techs would be implemented as well - different kind of ships might be required for several ages, e.g. for early and mid game. That means not only 3 but 6 or 9 new ships might be required.

For now, simply enjoy your "modding break" - there is no need to hurry.
We programmers will come "screaming for help", once we really need something.

If you feel you have motivation or existing good graphics for anything like this let us know.
(I would definitely integrate it - once the System is fully implemented and I can accordingly balance such Ships.)

• Slave Ship
• Treasure Galleon
• Troop Fregate

If you have other ideas of yourself, let us know as well.
(With this system we should have a lot of possibilities to include great existing graphics.)

----

But again, enjoy your "modding break".
Then come back with renewed motivation.

The things that @Nightinggale and myself have on the list will keep us busy for at least the next month.
(We should not need many graphics until then.)

 

[historix69]

If you want to make a general Overhaul of Cargo and Transport system, I would suggest to go through all the basic physical and economical attributes as well.

Cargo in general has attributes like volume, weight (based on cargo type's individual density) and value (based on current market value).
- For non-living cargo there are different physical types like (dry) granular bulk cargo, solid and packaged cargo and fluid cargo, but in context of the game this can be ignored since all goods are either solid or can be assumed to be packed into boxes or barrels, e.g. fluids like rum and wine are transported in barrels. Those goods usually can be stacked.
- Living cargo like livestock, slaves, colonists or soldiers may require more space than calculated from their "density". They can be "stacked" on a ship to some degree by (temporarely) adding additional decks.
- The game does not really distinguish between low and high density goods but places them all in kind of abstract Intermodal Shipping Container (= Cargo Slot). In real life you could for example combine low and high density goods to optimize the load of a ship based on available capacity (volume and weight).
- There are all types of value-density combinations like
+ bulky low density low value goods (lumber, grain)
+ low value medium weight cargo (iron ore)
+ high value high density cargo (gold, silver)
+ high value medium weight cargo (gems, tools, weapons)
+ high value low weight cargo (silk, luxury cloth/fur products, spices)
etc.
- Older trade simulation games like The Patrician 2/3 distinguished between Last (bulk) and Barrel goods (where 10-12 Barrel equal 1 Last).


Ships in general have attributes like purchase costs, upkeep (fixed costs + operational costs for crew, reparations, supplies), military value/equipment, speed, enclosed volume, empty weight, cargo capacity (volume, weight).
- (Purchase) Costs for ships in europe in the game differ since purchase costs are calculated using a function of a base price and the number of purchased units of that type. So in the game a new caravel can be more expensive than a galleon. This permanently shifts the cost-value-rating of ship types with each purchase, making even exotic ship types interesting.
- Units in the game do not have upkeep costs. They do not cost cash and do not consume supplies (food, ammo). The costs for a fleet of galleons is limited to the purchase / construction costs. In real life using a well armed high upkeep transport ship to carry low value goods usually results in an economic loss. (However in some situations you have to do this because of strategical (military) reasons.) No upkeep has probably the biggest effect on how players use ships in the game.
- The larger historical war ships (SoL, MoW) could have several hundred up to almost thousand crew members (for a ship with 100+ cannons and ca. 2,000 tons). In the game a colonist / soldier unit represents a group of only ca. 100 persons and uses 1 cargo slot. So very large ships in 18th century could have way more than just a few cargo slots. And on war ships many slots would be filled by crew, equipment and supplies. To be more accurate, the game could feature a sailor profession and larger war ships would require several sailor units as crew to be fully operational.
- The game uses the concept of an abstract Intermodal Shipping Container (= Cargo Slot). In real life there would be different types of ships for low value less protected bulky cargo, for transport in general and for high value well protected quality goods.
- Warships usually do not allow much extra cargo due to all the weight and volume used by guns and weapons, military crew, supplies (ammo), armor and extra strengthened ship structure, ballast, etc. However warships to some degree usually could be converted to transport ships by removing much of the armament and crew. On the other side merchant ships could be armed with additional guns, crew, etc., reducing the available cargo space. Ship carpenters were able to convert most civilian ship types into better armed semi-military or pirate ships. (War/Peace Time Conversion of ship types) In real life you could decide how much capacity (based on ship type) is used for military equipment and combat crew (combat strength) and how much for cargo for each individual ship.


When the number of owned ships is growing from a few to dozens or hundreds, ships are often organized in fleets and convoys to keep a clear organisation and not lose track.
- In the game it is much clearer, easier and costs less clicks to (manually) manage a couple galleons waiting in a city than to go through 3 times the number of small ships like caravels. (The situation might be different if the player automates most or all ships.)
- It might be helpful for the (manual) players to be able to group several (smaller) ships to a convoy/fleet with combined cargo capacity. (Similar to Civ6 corps units.) For example 3 caravels as group could form a 6-cargo-slot unit with attributes different to the galleon. Combining some cargo ships with an escort could result in a new unit with increased military value and cargo capacity compared to the original cargo vessels.


Overall I have the impression that the lack of transportation costs (ship upkeep) in combination with the increasing effort to (micro)manage too many small vessels is responsible for the players to prefer galleons and not use the available ship types as intended by design.

 

[raystuttgart]

If you want to make a general Overhaul of Cargo and Transport system, ...

Please create a new thread for such general and wide spread discussions.

Basically you want to discuss even several totally different concept and ideas at once.
There is no point in such vast discussing in an actual concept and work thread.

1 Concept == 1 Thread
Thus: new Concept == new Thread

Please guys, do not try to hijack concept threads of other people with your own concepts.
Otherwise we will just stupidly discuss in 1000 directions at once and never ever implement anyhting ...

Please, I only ask for a little bit of posting discipline and not throwing everything into one single thread ...
Anything else will simply not allow us modders to clarify concepts and work efficiently anymore ...

Thanks in advance.

 

[historix69]

Sorry when it looked like my post tried to "hijack" the thread. Maybe I added too many details ...

When I read the following lines in the OP ...

How to improve gameplay:

First of all the "Galleon" will not be the "One Ship that rules them all" anymore.
Depending on what you want, you will want to buy / build / use different Ships.

1. Some Ships will be better for Goods (considering costs vs. cargo space)
2. Some Ships will be better for Civilian Units (considering costs vs. cargo space)
3. Some Ships will be better for Transporting Goods (considering costs vs. cargo space)
4. Some Ships will be better for Treasures (considering costs vs. cargo space)
5. Some Ships will be better for Forced Labour (considering costs vs. cargo space)

Each Ship could become a bit more unique and diverse already by its cargo balancing.
(In the future we will of course also change other balancing, like costs and also Promotions.)

... I just had the feeling that some of the mentioned problems with galleons on one side and less attractive ship types on the other side are simply caused by :
- variable increasing ship purchase costs in europe
- no upkeep for ships and so no transport costs
- too much effort to manually manage too many small ships. (quality of life costs)

Adding the new cargo types does not fix these causes, so it seems to be more a workaround to achive something which would otherwise mostly follow by economical rules when implementing real transportation costs based on ship type. That's the main point I wanted to add to your discussion ...

 

[raystuttgart]

Sorry when it looked like my post tried to "hijack" the thread.

Ok.

Maybe I added too many details ...

Way too many things you want to discuss actually - and all unrelated to this very clearly defined concept as well.

... I just had the feeling that some of the mentioned problems with galleons on one side and less attractive ship types on the other side are simply caused by :
- variable increasing ship purchase costs in europe
- no upkeep for ships and so no transport costs
- too much effort to manually manage too many small ships. (quality of life costs)

Again: Different discussions, concepts and threads please.

Please take a look how clearly this concept is defined:
It is only and absolutely only about Cargo System - nothing else.

Adding the new cargo types does not fix these causes, ...

This concept does not want to fix everything at once these because we have separate concepts for these.
I.e. there is a separate concepts for "Upkeep", "Naval Balancing Overhaul", "Naval Promotion Overhaul", "Combat Overhaul" ....

So please, we will and should not discuss 1000 big different topics and concepts at once.
We modders can not work that way. We need to work step by step.

Thus, please create separate threads for your ideas.
We will read them and answer as well.

 

[raystuttgart]

CARGO SLOT SYSTEM
(completely new system)

Ok, after some more internal brainstorming and some more concept design this is the new suggestion for Types of Cargo Slots:

1. Standard (allowing All) <-- Normal Cargo Slot as of now
   
2. Treasure (no other Units) or "full Cargo" (100 on Gamespeed Normal)
3. Slaves (no other Units) or "full Cargo" (100 on Gamespeed Normal)
4. Military (only Units or Professions that can fight) or "low Cargo" (50 on Gamespeed Normal) <--- Can be checked by "bOnlyDefensive" == false
   
5. Civilian (no Treasures, no Slaves, no Military Units, no armed Professions) or "low Cargo" (50 on Gamespeed Normal) <--- Can be checked by "bOnlyDefensive" == true

Comment on balancing:

• 80% of the Slots will be "Standard Slots". (So it is not used to extremes.)
  
• Especially the small Ships will only have "Standard Slots". (Small Ships: 2 or 3 Slots)
  
• Most of the medium to big Ships will have a few of the other Slot Types. (Medium to big Ships: 4 or more Slots)
  
• Thus especially the bigger Ships will thus get much more "diversification".

General Comments:

• We will use this in small but interesting doses.
• The more ships we might have the more interesting it might get.
• Could also become very interesting once we have "Social Progress".
• New Ship generations could then be a bit different than older Ships generations ...

Rule of thumb:

• The bigger the Ship, the more you need to consider "specialization".
• For the small Ships, you will be able to use them as of now.

Gameplay Effect:

• It is not going to completely ruin WTP.
• It is also not going to completely become tedious.
  
• It just adds a little bit more diversification and a little bit more complexity.

Considering Modding:

• We will give you guys a powerful tool though to create a diverse System of Transport Ships of your own.
• Possibilities are there, go wild.

Considering UI / explaining to the Player:

• The slots will be displayed by different colours (either the borders of the filling). The colour coding we still need to figure out.
• Also at Mouse Over at the Unit the Ship will tell you its Cargo Slots. (Using the same colour coding for the Slot Types in text.)
• Colopedia of Units for those Transports will also explain the different Cargo Slots. (Using the same colour coding for the Slot Types in text.)
• In ColoPedia we will also write a Game Concept "Cargo Slot System". (We will explain how it works in detail.)

Considering AI:

Do not worry, we will teach this to AI.
If everything would fail - which it is not - we could still give it "easier rules".

----------

SPECIAL UNIT SYSTEM
(enhanced and getting a bit more usage)

Additionally we already have the possibility to define complete Transport Units as:
(Which is already possbile by "SpecialUnitsInfos.xml")

---- <---- Simply no restriction - for most Units case
SPECIALUNIT_YIELD_CARGO <--- can Transport only Cargo (e.g. Wagon Trains)
SPECIALUNIT_COLONIST_UNIT <--- can Transport only Units (e.g. Stage Coach, or Troop Transporter - both Civilian and Military)
SPECIALUNIT_TREASURE <--- can Transport only Treasures (e.g. pure Treasure Ships)
SPECIALUNIT_FORCED_LABOUR <--- can Transport only Slaves / criminals (e.g. pure Slave Ship)

Technical Remark:
SPECIALUNIT_MILITARY_UNIT will stay in the System but it will not really work for Gameplay because of Miltary Professions.
"SpecialUnit System" can be used for Units only. For "Troop Transports" we can simply use the "Cargo Slot System".

Comment:

• Some existing Units like Wagon Trains and Stage Coaches will be using this.
  
• Otherwise only very few extremely specialized "flavour Units" like Treasure Ship or Slave Ship will use this
• All other Units will not use this System but the Cargo System (with combos of Slots as above)

----------

Summary:

We will actually have 2 Systems to give modders full modding power.
(Existing SpecialUnits and new Cargo Slots.)

• Cargo Slot System for fine tuning of balancing for "Differentiation of Ships"
• SpecialUnit System for creating very specialized "Flavour Units" (considering Transportation)

----------

Considering new Ships:

• We will discuss with graphical modders what they would like to create for us.
• Depending on the graphics we get and the ideas we agree on (internally) we might have more Ships.
• Thus basically the graphic modders more or less decide which new Ships we might get. (But that is not part of this concept.)

----------

@Nightinggale

I hope you like it.
I am of course open for discussing / brainstorming further changes.

But as we agreed yesterday, this is not going to be part of 2.10 (or maybe better call it 3.0 directly ) - we will implement after the next release.
I just posted again, because I might already start to collect some graphics.

Otherwise we are already busy enough with the open todos for the next release ...

 

[nci]

Is this going to be in the next version of WTP? If not, allowing other ships with 3x or more cargo slots besides Galleon to transport treasures goes a long way to make them more useful...

 

[Marla_Singer]

CARGO SLOT SYSTEM
(completely new system)

Ok, after some more internal brainstorming and some more concept design this is the new suggestion for Types of Cargo Slots:

1. Standard (allowing All) <-- Normal Cargo Slot as of now
   
2. Treasure (no other Units) or "full Cargo" (100 on Gamespeed Normal)
3. Slaves (no other Units) or "full Cargo" (100 on Gamespeed Normal)
4. Military (only Units or Professions that can fight) or "low Cargo" (50 on Gamespeed Normal) <--- Can be checked by "bOnlyDefensive" == false
   
5. Civilian (no Treasures, no Slaves, no Military Units, no armed Professions) or "low Cargo" (50 on Gamespeed Normal) <--- Can be checked by "bOnlyDefensive" == true

Hey guys, it's been a while.

Standard is definitely required, particularly in the early game when you have only one or few ships which needs to both export goods to Europe and bring back workers to the Americas. Regarding military ships, let's not forget that those can potentially attack merchant ships and plunder their goods. It would be sad to lose the cargos after having sunk a merchant ship.

Regarding forced labor (slaves, petty criminals), they are already tedious from a gameplay perspectives as things are: they occupy a full tile/slot while producing less and they constantly flee. I'm already reluctant to bring them to my colonies for this reason. At least petty criminals can be "schooled" to indentured servants and later normal colonist, but that's not even the case for slaves, making them totally useless. If as an extra they would need a special ship to be brought to the Americas, I'm certainly convinced I'll never invest on that and simply let them in Europe. Now honnestly speaking, I've always been fine with forced labour being unattractive. After all, I play colonization for the fun of country building, not to feel like Adolf Hitler. I'm only pointing out that those slave ships would very likely rarely be used.

Now this being said, specialized cargo may be interesting in the later game. We would then need to build not just a "civil fleet" but differenciated "merchant fleet" and "ferry fleet". I guess it would need to be play tested to see how it would go.

 

[raystuttgart]

Is this going to be in the next version of WTP?

As I had announced I am taking a break from modding Civ4Col (to focus again on my health).
Also I had never really started to work on this beyond a technical concept.
No other modder had really shown interest to implement this specific concept either.

Summary:

Probably not. Unless somebody picks up the idea and implements his (or her) own solution for it. (Of course I do not mind if somebody uses my ideas.)
Generally I do not know for sure what the other WTP modders plan, since I only check internal modders chats sporadically to say "hi".

 

[raystuttgart]

Hey guys, it's been a while.

Hi Marla.
Nice to see you still around from time to time.