Cross-Platform Editor for Conquests now available! 1.51

[Quintillus]

I think that I may have figured out why the Barbarians are not working if your editor is the last one that I use on a Mod. The Barbarian activity bar is grayed out and cannot be reset, but it looks like it applies a default setting of No Barbarians. My pre-placed Barbarians camps appear, but the land units remain in the camp and do not cause problems. However, the sea unit, the Barbarian Privateer, does spawn and will seek out naval units to attack. The difference in behavior I cannot explain.

Presently, what I am doing is working with either your editor or Steph's editor first, and then doing a final check in the Firaxis editor to get the Barbarians working right. It looks like that might cause problems with some of the other things that your editor does. With scenarios that I am not using Barbarians, then I am not having problems, obviously.

It seems you are correct. The Barbarian Activity bar is supposed to be enabled when there is a custom map, and not enabled when there is not a custom map (as in the Firaxis editor), but due to a bug it was never enabled. And since it defaulted to No Barbarians, that was resetting scenarios to No Barbarians. It will henceforth be enabled and keep the correct value with a custom map, and show Roaming as the default when there is no custom map, as does the Firaxis editor.

There are a few areas where using Firaxis's editor last can pose problems, such as Deepwater Harbours. So it's undesirable to have to choose between two options to use last, where something is lost either way.

Version 0.88, detailed in the next post (and available already via the link if you see this before the next post is ready), fixes this bug, and also has the other updates I've done since 0.87.

My 'map' tab isn't working properly which is a bit of a bummer. I can't see half of it.

Which half of it isn't visible? Do you have a screenshot? It might also help to see know if what specs your computer has, in particular resolution.

 

[Quintillus]

Version 0.88 is now available! It fixes a few things, and enhances scrolling somewhat. Changes:

• Horizontal map scrolling should now work reliably, no matter what platform you are using.
• The Barbarian Activity option now works properly with custom maps, and will not set them to No Barbarians.
• The map now scrolls more quickly if you are moving the mouse wheel more quickly.
• Fixed a display issue where after quick scrolling tiles might not align properly.
• The Adjust Hue option, added in 0.87, now works properly. Previously, it was missing a file that it needed to work properly. The Adjust Saturation and Adjust Balance options are unaffected as they were working previously.

A note on the horizontal map scrolling: After investigation, it was determined that it worked best (though not perfectly) with Java 1.5 (the minimum requirement), and really didn't work with Java 1.6 or 1.7. It didn't actually matter if you were on Windows, Linux, or Mac. Now, it should work with any version of Java starting with 1.5, and work more reliably than 1.5 did in the past.

 

[timerover51]

Version 0.88 is now available! It fixes a few things, and enhances scrolling somewhat. Changes:

• Horizontal map scrolling should now work reliably, no matter what platform you are using.
• The Barbarian Activity option now works properly with custom maps, and will not set them to No Barbarians.
• The map now scrolls more quickly if you are moving the mouse wheel more quickly.
• Fixed a display issue where after quick scrolling tiles might not align properly.
• The Adjust Hue option, added in 0.87, now works properly. Previously, it was missing a file that it needed to work properly. The Adjust Saturation and Adjust Balance options are unaffected as they were working previously.

A note on the horizontal map scrolling: After investigation, it was determined that it worked best (though not perfectly) with Java 1.5 (the minimum requirement), and really didn't work with Java 1.6 or 1.7. It didn't actually matter if you were on Windows, Linux, or Mac. Now, it should work with any version of Java starting with 1.5, and work more reliably than 1.5 did in the past.

Thanks for fixing the problem with the Barbarians.

Given what you and Steph have accomplished with your editors, I cannot help but imagine what the two of you and others on the forum could do it you had the source code to work with.

 

[Takhisis]

Well I'll have to update anyway and see if the problem persists.

 

[timerover51]

Quintillus, your editor only opens SAV files of custom BIQ?

 

[T-mun]

Quintillus, your editor only opens SAV files of custom BIQ?

It can open BIQ, as it has been said on the first page of this thread.

 

[timerover51]

Clarification

Qunitillus, I tried to open the SAV file of a standard, non-modified game, and it would not open it. I got a message saying that "Only BIQs with custom rules supported." I assume that this means that BIQ files with standard, non-modified rules cannot be opened.

 

[Quintillus]

Quintillus, your editor only opens SAV files of custom BIQ?

Clarification

Qunitillus, I tried to open the SAV file of a standard, non-modified game, and it would not open it. I got a message saying that "Only BIQs with custom rules supported." I assume that this means that BIQ files with standard, non-modified rules cannot be opened.

That's correct - both BIQ files, and SAV files when using the Input from SAV option, need to have custom rules. The editor doesn't currently have a way of figuring out the default rules.

I did look at the general conquests.biq file around springtime, and I think it probably would work to fall back to that to load rules if no rules are found. But I haven't added that yet. In 2012 and earlier, I was more uncertain if that would work.

 

[AlanH]

Yes, reading the default biq works fine if there's no custom biq section in a conquests save. I tried it when I was working on a never-completed Mac version of CivAssist.

 

[Quintillus]

I recently remembered an easy-to-use bug tracker I'd heard about a year or so ago, and decided to open a page for this project on it. The idea is that this should make it easier to keep track of both bugs and enhancement ideas. I've already added 20 future ideas/bugs/etc.

One nice thing about this bug tracker is it's pretty easy to use. You don't have to know anything about the technical aspect of the project to submit a bug or idea - just click New Ticket, type in a description, and hit submit.

What does this mean for you? Nothing, if you don't want it to. You can keep posting ideas or bug reports here, and if it isn't possible to do something about them right away, I'll make a note of it there too so I'm more likely to come across it often. However, you could also submit bugs and ideas there yourself. I'd recommend still posting them (especially enhancement ideas) to stimulate discussion.

For those interested, the project is at https://bugkick.com/1797 . Accounts are free, but I believe I'd need an e-mail to invite people to the project, and I'm not sure if you'd be able to see the project after signing up but before being invited to the project (so far I'm the only person on the project). My modus operandi so far is:

- Bugs are things that aren't working as they should
- Proposals are ideas for future enhancement, for the indefinite future
- Enhancements are things that have a decent chance of actually happening (less pie-in-the-sky than Proposals)

Thanks for the conquests.biq confirmation, AlanH. I'll likely be working on that for the next version.

 

[Lee_Dailey]

howdy Quintillus,

i'm ... _really_ unimpressed with that site. [*grin*]

i made an account, but cannot find out how to browse existing projects. i suspect you cannot do so. [*sigh ...*] it looks like the ONLY way to join [or even FIND] a project is to give my email address to the owner of an existing project.

had you thot about using github or sourcforge? they at least allow browsing projects ... [*grin*]

take care,
lee

 

[Quintillus]

howdy Quintillus,

i'm ... _really_ unimpressed with that site. [*grin*]

i made an account, but cannot find out how to browse existing projects. i suspect you cannot do so. [*sigh ...*] it looks like the ONLY way to join [or even FIND] a project is to give my email address to the owner of an existing project.

had you thot about using github or sourcforge? they at least allow browsing projects ... [*grin*]

take care,
lee

That is the major problem with the site - ability to find projects. The thing I liked about it was that once you get to the point of actually reaching a project, it's pretty straightforward and nontechnical as these things go. Not many scary things to fill in that are likely to deter people as I've seen on, for example, Bugzilla projects. But yeah... it would be nice to make it possible to at least view the projects easily, and I haven't been able to find an option for that.

I've considered using something like github. But I'm really looking for something more about bug/feature reports than hosting code. I have been considering making the BIQ-loading parts of the program open source, in case anyone else can find a use for them (I've already shared them with at least one party), which would then qualify for a public repo on Github. Though, it's also a bit less than ideal since I don't use Git on this project (using Mercurial instead, largely since it was easier to set up locally a few years ago, but I'm happy enough with it and have no desire to switch).

Sourceforge, I'm not as familiar with, beyond having downloaded a lot of software from there in the past. Feature-wise, it looks like it might work.

I've done a little bit of work on just making my own desktop program to keep track of this, and manually entering ideas/issues as reported on CFC, though it's not quite functional yet. It may not be as easy (for people other than myself) to keep track of what's on the list, but at least it's easy to chime in via CFC.

 

[Lee_Dailey]

howdy Quintillus,

thanks for the response!

github would make your use of mercurial rather unhandy. [*grin*] i have seen a few references [mostly at mozilla's bugzilla & blog sites] to an interface between the two. i've never done any programming, so my impression is very much at 3rd hand.

sourceforge does seem to be usable for bug tracking. i entered a bug with notepad++ several years ago and it was simple enuf for me to understand.

personally, i would be delighted to see as much of your code go open source as possible. my primary fear is that - as civ3 gets ever older - the knowledge of how the guts work will be lost. just look at what happened with civassist2 ... [*sigh ...*] jeebus, i would love to see an open source replacement for that util - one that doesn't require the oh-so-fragile dot-net stuff.

in any case, thanks for your nifty util! [*grin*]

take care,
lee

 

[Rob (R8XFT)]

Great to see you're still improving and supporting this editor, Quintillus .

 

[AvalancheMaster]

When I try to load any map with it, it quickly runs out of memory. Running on Win7/32bit. Any ideas?

EDIT: Never mind, it was the file that I was trying to open.


Have you tried to implement add/remove era functionality, seeing how it is editable in the BIQ (but apparently with hardcoded check - hopefully only in the editor)?

 

[Quintillus]

When I try to load any map with it, it quickly runs out of memory. Running on Win7/32bit. Any ideas?

EDIT: Never mind, it was the file that I was trying to open.


Have you tried to implement add/remove era functionality, seeing how it is editable in the BIQ (but apparently with hardcoded check - hopefully only in the editor)?

I haven't tried to add add/remove era functionality, since that's already available in Steph's Expanded Editor, and I don't think there's much to add beyond what he's already done.

On a similar token, in most (perhaps all, though I haven't tested every possibility) other cases, if you can't add something, it means Civ3 can't handle it, and in the common cases (workers jobs, world sizes, etc.) I've tried adding additional ones, often via hex editor, and doing so has been unsuccessful. Although it doesn't hurt to ask - there definitely may be edge cases I've missed or didn't think of.

On a more general note, there is still some work being done on the editor, but it's slowed down in no small part because of the other Civ project I've been considering, outlined in my post in the [C3C] Several questions regarding city size and other concepts thread. So far, finally adding worker strength editability is forthcoming in the next version (and it ended up being quite a bit easier to add than I'd thought - should've done that years ago!).

 

[Quintillus]

It's about time for a general update on this project. I considered making a version 0.89 tonight, but want to do a little more testing and perhaps some polishing first.

Work has slowed down, for a combination of reasons. In part it's diversified interests beyond Civ (as well as diversified within the Civilization series), in part life happenings, and in part dabbling in aspects of Civ modification that is outside the scope of this editor. That last part means a new Civ III project. Ideally I'd like to have something ready in a couple months, but with the pace of late, by the end of the year is more likely.

But that doesn't mean there won't be further updates to this. Tonight I've added the ability to relocate cities by clicking a Relocate button and then clicking where on the map you want the city to be. I still need to add a "Relocate with units" option (that's part of the polish I want to add before 0.89), but the idea is that if you decide to resize an existing map a bit, moving a city should be easy, and not require rebuilding the whole thing.

I've also been pondering updates to the user interface. Back when I first created this, I targeted a 1024x768 user interface, because that's what Civ III requires. But that has some downsides, like that if you have a bigger screen, your list of buildings in the BLDG tab doesn't take advantage of that. I'd like to make the user interface adapt to bigger screens better - right now only the map tab really is flexible. I'll also likely switch to a menu interface soon, as there are becoming too many features to keep adding buttons. The former especially will take a lot of time, and likely be a gradual change.

And this got me thinking. The technology I used to create the UI was pretty standard when I started this in 2009. There are newer options these days that, as I understand it, are designed to work better with different screen sizes more easily. For the technically minded, JavaFX is what I'm thinking of. If I'm going to redesign the user interface, that would likely be the easier way forward (and would look better, too), and becoming familiar with it would be a good skill to learn as well.

However, doing so would mean the minimum requirements to run the editor would be higher. There are a couple versions I could target, but the minimum would likely be:

- Windows XP or newer (instead of Windows 98/2000 or newer)
- OS X 10.7 Lion or newer (instead of OS X 10.4 Panther or newer)

I'm not too concerned about the Windows XP part, but rather the OS X 10.7 part. That's a relatively recent version! I don't know what the most common OS X version y'all are running is these days. Is 10.4 still being used?

So, it's time for a poll. If it turns out lots of people are running the editor on Windows 98 or OS X 10.4, things will stay the same. If it turns out everyone is using XP or later, and OS X 10.7 or later, I might as well upgrade from 2004 technology to 2011 technology and make use of the improvements. But I'd like to have some data to base my decision on.

Poll: what operating system (including version) are you running the editor on?

 

[Takhisis]

Windows XP is going out of circulation. I'll be trying some version of Linux soon, so… compatibility would come in welcome.

 

[Quintillus]

Windows XP is going out of circulation. I'll be trying some version of Linux soon, so… compatibility would come in welcome.

It should work in Linux either way (and I do occasionally test in Linux). I left Linux out of the above post because the actual minimum requirement is usually harder to find - for example, I can find which versions of Java common distros support, but actually figuring out what the requirements are across distros is more difficult (as far as I can tell, the editor should currently run on Linux 2.6 or later). And also because for the most part, people who are running Linux are running a relatively recent distro, and thus have the ability to run recent versions of Java.

 

[Balthasar]

I'm using XP, but then, I still have a landline too.