Cross-Platform Editor for Conquests now available! 1.51

[Arcangelus]

Glad to help.
I had extensively modified AoI in previous versions, so as long as the part of the code that removes spaces was active anywhere from 1.19 [The oldest version I still have] to 1.35, I can confirm that the are no side effects from that. The trailing spaces from leader names seem to be a copy-paste issue. Once upon a time I removed those manually on the firaxis editor just to test it and noticed no issue.
I had completely forgotten about the diacritic issue. Nice.
Also, the government issue was probably my fault so you can forget about that one.

As you took the time to download the file, try this:
- Add a unit, say a militia, to the Chinese city of Erenhot (near Peking). Load the scenario as China, and you will find a Japanese unit in the city. Or as Japan, for the same effect. This is similar to the barbarian issue I mentioned in the past, except that I have no idea how to otherwise replicate it. It's not new either (It also happens in 1.35), I simply hadn't noticed before.
The unit in question can't move, any unit produced by the city is "killed" by it (so it can gain ranks), no other unit can enter the city w/o a war. I beleueve there is also a weird interaction in case of war, but I haven't test it.
I have tried to change ownership of the city (say, mexico-japan-china) and creating a chinese unit besides the city, moving the city and then moving both to the original place to no avail.

EDIT: A minor issue. If you try to load a recent file that the editor doesn't find, you get a warning saying so. So far, so good. However, if you then try to open any other file you get a warning about having opening multiple maps simultaneously despite this not being the case. If you continue anyway, it behaves as expected.

 

[SuedecivIII]

Hey, just wanted to thank you for the editor! We've been using negative maintenance in the most recent patch of a multiplayer scenario, and it's a godsend! It allows us to make low commerce starts totally viable, which is important, since multiplayer maps are random! Just choose a government that gives flat GPT instead of multipliers.

Cheers!

 

[Quintillus]

As you took the time to download the file, try this:
- Add a unit, say a militia, to the Chinese city of Erenhot (near Peking). Load the scenario as China, and you will find a Japanese unit in the city. Or as Japan, for the same effect. This is similar to the barbarian issue I mentioned in the past, except that I have no idea how to otherwise replicate it. It's not new either (It also happens in 1.35), I simply hadn't noticed before.
The unit in question can't move, any unit produced by the city is "killed" by it (so it can gain ranks), no other unit can enter the city w/o a war. I beleueve there is also a weird interaction in case of war, but I haven't test it.
I have tried to change ownership of the city (say, mexico-japan-china) and creating a chinese unit besides the city, moving the city and then moving both to the original place to no avail.

EDIT: A minor issue. If you try to load a recent file that the editor doesn't find, you get a warning saying so. So far, so good. However, if you then try to open any other file you get a warning about having opening multiple maps simultaneously despite this not being the case. If you continue anyway, it behaves as expected.

Age of Imperialism always has a place on my hard drive. You are right, there's something odd going on there. The unit should always have the same owner as the city. But I see what you describe. I can even attack Japan's unit without causing war, and if I win, my unit stays outside the city, though a subsequent unit can enter the city.

Looking at the BIQ, I suspect what's going on is a mix-up between player and civilization ownership. The city is owned by Player 10, and Japan happens to be Civilization 10 (counting the barbarians as 1). This probably has been under the radar because it doesn't show up in the (more common?) civ ownership situation.

It does make me wonder if this could be used creatively by scenario creators. "Occupying armies" so to speak. It could be used to allow a city to produce commerce and science, but not units, at least until war is declared. But how would the AI behave is the big question. Would they say remove your forces or declare war? Probably. Would they attack it in a war? Probably, but maybe not.

I see that it takes 3 turns, but I can make them remove the offending unit or declare war (in this case they removed the unit).

I'll fix it in 1.43, but am a little curious whether it could be an unintentional "beature" - bug and feature at the same time.

Interesting re: recent file that the editor can't find. There used to be a minor bug where if you canceled out of the open dialog and re-opened it, you'd get that warning. Hadn't considered that you could still get it via a no-longer-existing recent file.

I've documented both of these in the issue tracker so I'll see them again even if another page is added to this thread before they are fixed.

Hey, just wanted to thank you for the editor! We've been using negative maintenance in the most recent patch of a multiplayer scenario, and it's a godsend! It allows us to make low commerce starts totally viable, which is important, since multiplayer maps are random! Just choose a government that gives flat GPT instead of multipliers.

Cheers!

Awesome, that's great to hear! It's always good to hear about use cases where the editor has been helpful; it wouldn't be worth working on it if no one used it. And the negative GPT feature is one of my favorite "discovered" features.

 

[Quintillus]

I was organizing some disorderly Civilization files on my hard drive today, and found a copy of the original release of the Long Winded Changes mod among those files. No idea where I got it from, but you can find a newer version in post #314 of that thread (the broken download link in the first post points there as well, but it's using the old no-longer-working link style from before CFC migrated to vBulletin 3.x). Anyway, the version I found was a version 2.05 BIC file, which corresponds to the initial release of Civ3, before any patches. And it didn't load up in the editor. Turns out that while a map-only 2.05 BIC did load, when custom rules were enabled that wasn't the case, due to various parts of the BIC not being present.

That had to be fixed, of course.

Not because I actually expect people to be loading up ancient BIC files from late October or November of 2001 in the editor, but because of the goal of full compatibility. And because it proved to be a somewhat interesting challenge. It became evident why some of the BIC/BIX/BIQ structures are the way there were - they were being added to over time, and relatively quickly in 2001 and 2002. Why does Civ3 pay so much attention to the dataLength fields that have occasionally been the bane of my existence? Because it's easier to copy the data into memory by looking there than it is by evaluating a whole bunch of conditions around "if it's vanilla with this patch, do this, if it's vanilla with another patch, do that, if it's PTW, do something else". By looking at data length, and taking C-style memcpy, struct-focused approach, Firaxis was able to have the editor and game automatically handle both older and newer files without adding complexity. The tradeoff is they had to remember to always update those values properly whenever they changed. In a post-2004 world, where the Civ3 file structures are not evolving, this all seemed like extra work for no benefit, but 12.5 years after writing the first code that became this editor, I now see why they did it the way they did.

There were other artifacts of ancient decisions as well. The CULT section initially did not follow the format of 4 header bytes, then 4 data length byte, but had 8 bytes before the data length, with values 33 and 5. What was Firaxis intending those values to be used for? We'll probably never know. Those 8 bytes were removed by the time PTW rolled around. But I do now know why there are two places referring to starting locations, the bit in TILE, and the actual SLOC section - or if not why they're still there, how they came to both be there. I was talking about these on the previous page in the lead-up to the 1.41 update. In the earliest releases of Civ III, there was no SLOC section. The bit on TILE was the only place that starting locations existed, and you couldn't assign starting locations to particular civilizations or players. One of the Vanilla patches added the SLOC structures. But the old ones still had to be supported for compatibility, and apparently Firaxis's editor (and the game?) just kept using the old way of determining whether to draw starting locations, forever and always. And as long as it was the only program creating Civ3 scenarios, it was easier, and with no additional harm, to just leave that additional complexity there than to make a cleaner design by taking it out. Still, if you save an ancient BIC with the Conquests editor, it does add SLOC objects, and I think that's one of the remaining things I need to add to make my ancient BIC to BIQ conversion process successful.

A player starting location, as shown in the oldest version of the Firaxis editor. You can delete it by right-clicking it and choosing to delete it, but cannot assign it to anyone. For some reason, I can't seem to add any, either; the editor plays an "invalid" chime sound when I try. Maybe the first patch fixed that.

I also had some fun firing up the Vanilla scenario editor. I'd always thought it was kind of broken on my computer, as it complains about the default file not being valid when it starts up. It turns out that I have the OG vanilla scenario editor, for the oldest version of BIC I've ever been able to find. And my install process was install from the Vanilla CD, and then install Conquests from the Conquests CD, without installing Vanilla patches in between. It turns out that patches the civ3mod.bic file to the fully-patched Vanilla version 4.01 rules, but does not patch the Vanilla Firaxis editor. So when you fire it up, it complains that the default scenario file is invalid - actually, too new. Toss it an old enough file though, and it's a happy camper. It was interesting to compare the oldest and newest Firaxis editors side-by-side, and see the differences. Would you believe that there was originally only one field on the Difficulty tab? Number of citizens born content.

It's not difficult to figure out how to configure a tab with only one option. Remember, only change difficulty levels where permitted by law.

The oldest editor can also create files fairly well despite being too old to work with its default rule file. In newer versions, there is always a GAME (scenario properties) section. But that wasn't present in the oldest versions. So, I decided to create an oldest-version BIC file with no custom rules, and with the default "No Map" option left enabled. What did it create? A 736 byte (not kilobyte!) BIC file, without any compression. It contained only the BIC header (VER#), and the only modifiable fields were the title and description. Kind of useless, but it was interesting to see what the definitive endpoint of a minimal Civ3 scenario file looked like. And some day, maybe sooner rather than later, this editor will support opening such a file.

It was also interesting to read in the Long Winded thread that the CFC upload limit at the time was 512 KB per file; one version of that mod had unit animation, and weighed in at a bit over 20 MB. Which seems small when today there are mods that are hundreds of megabytes and in some cases over a gigabyte. But when you have a 512 KB upload limit, that's a large mod! Of course, 512 KB is reasonable if you're only looking at distributing a BIC file, even an uncompressed one if the map isn't too large. Still, it was a reminder of how much more digital space cost back when Civ3 was new.

Overall it's been an interesting journey into what Civ3 scenarios capabilities were 20 years ago.

 

[Mithadan]

I feel like I might be blind, but I cannot find the "import rules" function in this editor that I used to use in the Firaxis editor. Can someone (maybe even Quintillius!) direct me to the magic button?

 

[Quintillus]

I feel like I might be blind, but I cannot find the "import rules" function in this editor that I used to use in the Firaxis editor. Can someone (maybe even Quintillius!) direct me to the magic button?

Hi Mithadan! Sorry for missing your post! Those forum alerts could really use a "remind me about this alert in 3 days" function.

The import rules feature in this editor is quite limited compared to the Firaxis one, more so than I had remembered. There's long been an "Export to CSV" option under the "Options" menu, dating back to the 0.6 days IIRC. Since version 0.99, there's also been the ability to import units (but only units) from CSVs, under "Options -> Import from CSV". This does kind of work across scenarios, but requires the units to have the same name. E.g. I can import the exported-to-CSV units from the Mesopotamia scenario into the Great War mod, and units such as the Enkidu Warrior have their stats changed, but Mesopotamia-specific units such as the Tyrian Guard are not added.

That feature was added in response to a request from Kestrel18, with a goal of making it easier to mass-adjust unit stats, which it is fairly well-adjusted to. But there haven't been a lot of requests to expand it over the years, probably due to the Firaxis editor being fairly good at it.

The other check boxes for importing rules are disabled, and alas that's because the code behind them has not been written.

I don't think it's what you're looking for, but there also is the Sav Actions -> Apply Rule Changes option, which lets you update the citizens, civs, rules, and terrains to a SAV file to match the statistics from a "successor" BIQ file. You could use this to vary the aggressiveness of civilizations, change the road movement rate, or change the effectiveness of tax collectors, for example. I'm not aware of anyone having designed a mod around this, but I could see it being used with a once-per-age rule set to create a more dynamic game of Civ, without overburdening the player with rule change applications.

So, overall, I'd recommend the Firaxis editor for this task. But if there's a specific task you're trying to accomplish that it doesn't meet, I'm open to suggestions. I can't say I work on the editor a lot these days, especially now that the C7 project is doing a good job of competing for my Civ attention, but what is added going forward is going to be driven by what's likely to be used (as well as what's feasible from a technical standpoint). Kestrel18's request was a good fit of something the Firaxis editor didn't make easy, but which didn't require a huge amount of time to add, and while realistically I'm probably not going to add the ability to import and export every section very soon, if there's a subset that would be handy, let me know.

 

[Mithadan]

Hi Mithadan! Sorry for missing your post! Those forum alerts could really use a "remind me about this alert in 3 days" function.

No worries, man, it's all good! There's super no rush.

Dang, I was worried to hear that, because I can't get the Firaxis editor to load on my machine (Windows 10 yadda yadda), even the new GOG version I just bought last month. I use the "import rules" function to create multiple BIQs of my personal mod, one with a random map, and others with a world map or parts of a world map, and those either with historical starting locations or five historically located cities already in place. I make all my edits on just one of the BIQs, and then import the changes to the other five or six BIQs. But I haven't been able to do so since I moved onto Windows 10 (I think?), which is another reason (I think?) why I stopped modding a few years ago (I can hardly remember, though).

Anyway, I guess I'll just have to figure out what's wrong with my Firaxis editor (or my computer)! Thanks anyway, though!

 

[Quintillus]

No worries, man, it's all good! There's super no rush.

Dang, I was worried to hear that, because I can't get the Firaxis editor to load on my machine (Windows 10 yadda yadda), even the new GOG version I just bought last month. I use the "import rules" function to create multiple BIQs of my personal mod, one with a random map, and others with a world map or parts of a world map, and those either with historical starting locations or five historically located cities already in place. I make all my edits on just one of the BIQs, and then import the changes to the other five or six BIQs. But I haven't been able to do so since I moved onto Windows 10 (I think?), which is another reason (I think?) why I stopped modding a few years ago (I can hardly remember, though).

Anyway, I guess I'll just have to figure out what's wrong with my Firaxis editor (or my computer)! Thanks anyway, though!

With this additional knowledge about the use case, you might be able to benefit from the inverse option that this editor does have - instead of importing the rules into the map, you can import the map into the rules ("Map -> Import Map"). It works best if you have one master "rules" BIQ, and several maps where the civilization and resource names match what is in the "rules" BIQ, as it uses those names to match up e.g. which resource is on which tile, and which civ owns which city. But the benefit is that if you tweak the rules, you can re-create the rules-with-maps by importing the maps into the updated rules BIQ, and saving separately. Thus it's good for tweaking ("change unit attack/defense/movement on all of the maps associated with my mod without having to manually re-apply it to each one"), but not ideal if you want to e.g. add a whole new resource or units that will be placed on the map, since the new resource/unit would have to be added to each map.

If that does help out some, I'd be interested in feedback. What you describe is something I've long thought there should be more of - rule sets combined with several different maps, since there are a lot of nice maps. There is some of that - the Medieval Europe Mod did a pretty good job of having multiple scenarios with the same or variants of the same rules - but not a ton. But if modders have been using the "Import Map" functionality, I haven't heard much about it; it may be that it's mostly still done via Firaxis's editor when it's done.

And yes, Windows 10 has not been very kind to Civilization III. The game itself, CivAssist II, the Firaxis editor. They all work for some people but not very well or at all for others. I'm still on Windows 8.1 on my main computer in no small part because it just works with Civ III and associated programs, including with the CD versions that don't work with Windows 10 at all. I think the Firaxis editor works for me on my Windows 10 laptop, but I haven't used it a ton there, and I have both the Steam and GOG versions of Civ3 installed so it may be that the Steam one is working for me but not the GOG .

 

[Mithadan]

That is a super good idea! I guess I can also delete the map entirely, using your editor, if the BIQ I'm using (because I already started on it) for the base set of rule changes already has a map in it? Otherwise I wouldn't be able to play on random maps with that BIQ and ruleset, I guess.

Turns out the whole issue is moot, though, because now (all of a sudden) my Firaxis editor does work, and I have no idea why. When I first tried to run it, it gave me an error message for every file in my Terrain Art folder (that was a lot of error messages) and then crashed. Now, however, it works just fine! I just shake my head...

 

[Civinator]

Normally the Firaxis editors 1.00 and 1.03 are working well on my Win 10 pc (even with the GOG installation), so I had these editor problems with Civ 3 Complete several times with win 7 and with win 10. In all these cases, the problems happened after an update of windows 7 or 10 (I cannot say anything about win 8, as I don´t have it) . They were always solved by running the editor as administrator and by setting the compability in windows for the editor to the windows XP service packs 2 or 3.

 

[Vuldacon]

I use Windows 8.1 Pro system 64 and had no problems until a Windows Update caused serious Graphics problems.
I finally corrected the problem by Removing Compatibility setting and Only kept Run as Administrator. .. has worked fine since then.

 

[Ozymandias]

I'm still on Windows 8.1 on my main computer in no small part because it just works with Civ III and associated programs, including with the CD versions that don't work with Windows 10 at all. I think the Firaxis editor works for me on my Windows 10 laptop, but I haven't used it a ton there, and I have both the Steam and GOG versions of Civ3 installed so it may be that the Steam one is working for me but not the GOG .

- 8.1 ? My view is that every other Windows release has been a bug fix for the one before: from Vista ( ) to XP ( ) to 8.1 ( ) to 10 ( ). Which makes me wonder why 10 was widely announced to be The Last Implementation Of Windows Ever - but now we have 11.

- Back to "on topic:" I'm running Civ3 (GOG "Complete") just fine, on 1 laptop and 1 desktop, both Windows 10.

 

[Quintillus]

- 8.1 ? My view is that every other Windows release has been a bug fix for the one before: from Vista ( ) to XP ( ) to 8.1 ( ) to 10 ( ). Which makes me wonder why 10 was widely announced to be The Last Implementation Of Windows Ever - but now we have 11.

- Back to "on topic:" I'm running Civ3 (GOG "Complete") just fine, on 1 laptop and 1 desktop, both Windows 10.

10 was "The Last Implementation of Windows Ever" due to switching to a continually-updated model (including new features). I wanted the stability of not having feature changed arriving without knowing about them, so I stayed on 8.1. Eventually, the marketing benefits of a "new major version" resulted in 11; I'm sure Apple's decision to turn their model number up to 11 played a part, too.

But 8.1/8.0 also differ from Vista in that the major complaint was the user interface changes, not the bugs and software incompatibility Vista had when new. I ran both the 8.0 and 8.1 trials before switching to 8.1, and found that I actually liked the full-screen Start that was so reviled. I can have large icons for my top 15-20 programs, arranged by type ("Internet", "Games and Media", "Programming", "Productivity", and "System" are what I've chosen), and can start moving my mouse to where I know those large icons are before I even hit the Windows key. If I already have one hand on the mouse, I find 8.1's "touch-centric" model actually works very well for me.

So while the message in the "Special Actions Region (SAR)" of previous versions of the editor about potentially adding Metro-style tiles was half a joke, in the end I actually liked them, and the "Startup Widgets" are in part inspired by them. Maybe I'll add a few more of the, I think I wrote down a few ideas for additional ones that I haven't added yet.

I have occasionally had issues with the Firaxis editor in the past, but always had at least one computer where it was working. I think it's working at all of them right now. Never figured out a complete pattern .

(On other editor topics, there will likely be some cross-pollination between this project and C7 over the next few months. Version 1.43 will feature river delta display, which was initially motivated by C7, but which I decided to add here first since I'd been outpacing C7's ability to add integrate new features. If that's still the case, I'm pondering Mithadan's recent questions about importing rules, and trying to remember why I can't do it in the same was the apply-rule-updates-to-SAV-files feature works. I'm thinking that approach might work, in which case that might become a feature, too)

 

[Vuldacon]

Quintillus... I absolutely agree with you concerning Windows 8.1

I seriously liked Windows XP Pro system 64 so I use Classic Shell and also Aero Glass for Windows 8.1
The only thing I had to get use to was the inability to arrange Folders where I want them rather than using what is provided for auto arranging them... There is a Script that will allow manually arranging Folders as we could in Windows XP but the Script disappears when the computer is shut down. Not sure but there might be a way to have the Script load at boot up but I haven't looked into it

I do not even like the word Apps and do not use the "Store" at all... I have everything set up to look and work like Windows XP... I just find my computer easier and faster to use and work with by having it like Windows XP.

 

[Arcangelus]

Is there any particular reason that 0 turn terraforming is not considered safe? In my limited test it behaved as expected: workers were able to create the tile improvement (roads in this case) in the same turn that the order was issued regardless of terrain, consuming its action for the turn. No crashes, and the AI seemed to behave normally. The editor doesn't mind... up until you open the "Worker Jobs" section on any job with a 0 "turns to complete", at which point you are forced to give it a 1-1000 value. No issues beyond that noted.

Fun fact: I use win 8.1 but got so used to not having a "normal" start menu that now I have issues navigating the more classical one. To be fair, I also got used to navigate without that menu altogether and never found a use for the widgets.

Quintillus... Could you add a way to count the total number of cities/units on map? Preferably by civ/player as well, but a simple counting would suffice. I've always found weird that you can get terrain statistics but not one for units or cities.

 

[Quintillus]

Is there any particular reason that 0 turn terraforming is not considered safe? In my limited test it behaved as expected: workers were able to create the tile improvement (roads in this case) in the same turn that the order was issued regardless of terrain, consuming its action for the turn. No crashes, and the AI seemed to behave normally. The editor doesn't mind... up until you open the "Worker Jobs" section on any job with a 0 "turns to complete", at which point you are forced to give it a 1-1000 value. No issues beyond that noted.

Only that no one had tested whether it was safe. The primarily-intended-to-be-used safety levels are designed as follows:

Exploratory: Anything that is known to cause a problem with Conquests is prohibited. If we don't know whether it causes a problem or not, you can try it.
Safe: Anything that is known to be compatible with Conquests is allowed. If we don't know whether it causes a problem or not, it is prohibited.
Firaxis: The same restrictions at the Firaxis editor.

"Safe" is the default (in old versions it was Firaxis). My hope had been that there would be some intrepid users who would try things out on "Exploratory" and either confirm they work, or confirm they didn't work. But you're one of a small number who actually has confirmed something to be working. It turns out that just as I prefer to spend my editor time building features to testing all the values, most modders prefer building their mods to testing values.

I could make "Exploratory" the default, but given the risk of unsuspecting modders breaking their mods, it didn't seem to be a wise decision.

Thanks for reporting back on 0-turn terraforming! I can definitely see how that would be useful, and have moved it into the "Safe" category for 1.43.

Fun fact: I use win 8.1 but got so used to not having a "normal" start menu that now I have issues navigating the more classical one. To be fair, I also got used to navigate without that menu altogether and never found a use for the widgets.

Yeah, I prefer it to the Windows 7 styles ones. I actually switched my Windows 10 laptop to use the Windows 8.1 style full-screen start menu. It isn't a touch screen laptop, I just like the design.

I also have a Windows XP theme on my Windows 10 laptop, though not my 8.1 desktop. It isn't a perfect theme, but it gives it a distinct visual style. Of course, I also had my Windows 7 work laptop looking like Windows 2000 a few years ago, to the point someone asked me circa 2017 if I'd somehow put Win2K on it, and I gave my Windows XP laptop a Windows 95 style visual overhaul in 2008. So it might just be that I like themes that make my computer look like it's running an older version of its operating system than it really is.

I'm not really too surprised to see there's a relatively high number of 8.1 users in these forums, considering it's the last version that allows running the CD-based versions of Civ, as well as that if we're still playing Civ3 when Civ6 is late in its life cycle, we clearly aren't jumping on whatever's the latest just because it's the latest.

Quintillus... Could you add a way to count the total number of cities/units on map? Preferably by civ/player as well, but a simple counting would suffice. I've always found weird that you can get terrain statistics but not one for units or cities.

Yes, that ought to be possible! Hadn't thought much about that but the overall count would definitely help if you're near the 512 limit, by player/civ ought to be doable too, though I'll have to ponder how it should work when there are both cities assigned to a player, and cities assigned to a civ. A unit count should be doable, too. These all fall into the category of "logical extension of what Quintillus thought to add, but items he didn't think of, quite possibly because he doesn't really design scenarios himself." Which means it's great feedback!

Although whereas the 0-turn-terraforming was something I could add super quick, this one I'm going to look at when better rested.

 

[nick0515]

Hi Quintillus, I haven't used your editor before but just had a go at using it on Linux and failed. I am running the latest version of Fedora Linux. I installed the recommended Liberica version of Java 8 full JRE but the .jar file does nothing when I open it. Tried uninstalling java but still no luck. Tried to install the older version of java you have archived but the rpm wouldn't install for some reason.

Any ideas?

Your editor looks awesome!

 

[Quintillus]

Hi Quintillus, I haven't used your editor before but just had a go at using it on Linux and failed. I am running the latest version of Fedora Linux. I installed the recommended Liberica version of Java 8 full JRE but the .jar file does nothing when I open it. Tried uninstalling java but still no luck. Tried to install the older version of java you have archived but the rpm wouldn't install for some reason.

Any ideas?

Your editor looks awesome!

If you run "java -version" from a terminal/command prompt, what does it print out? Might have to be "java --version" depending on the exact Java version. The two most likely causes are that Java isn't recognized system-wide (in theory this should happen when it's installed, but maybe it didn't), or that a too-old version of Java is set as the default (again, you'd think the newer version would become the default, but I've seen that not be the case, too).

It does look like it's been a while since I tested the editor on Linux; at least long enough that I don't have a Linux VM with the editor installed on my main computer anymore. Might have to fix that...

 

[nick0515]

If you run "java -version" from a terminal/command prompt, what does it print out? Might have to be "java --version" depending on the exact Java version. The two most likely causes are that Java isn't recognized system-wide (in theory this should happen when it's installed, but maybe it didn't), or that a too-old version of Java is set as the default (again, you'd think the newer version would become the default, but I've seen that not be the case, too).

It does look like it's been a while since I tested the editor on Linux; at least long enough that I don't have a Linux VM with the editor installed on my main computer anymore. Might have to fix that...

Thanks! Will try that later on and report back. Appreciate your help!!

EDIT:

java -version gives:

openjdk version "1.8.0_322"
OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_322-b06)
OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.322-b06, mixed mode)

java --version gives an error.

Is that the old version issue? Should it be 8. something rather than 1.8?

 

[Quintillus]

Version 1.43

Version 1.43 includes the following updates:

• Added the Ctrl+G shortcut to toggle displaying the grid quickly, without having to go through the Options dialog.
• Add new Unit Statistics and City Statistics. These are under the Map -> Statistics menu (as is the existing Terrain Statistics).
• River deltas will now be displayed.
• 0-turn terraforming is now allowed with the "Safe" safety level, as confirmed by @Arcangelus
• The update checker will now follow HTTP redirects, and thus should start working again.
• Various improvements to compatibility with old BIX and BIC files.
• The CSV Export functionality will no longer fail if a tech has the "None" era.

The Unit and City stats are in response to @Mithadan's suggestions. The city stats looks like the following:

Spoiler :

The Unit stats can be filtered by civilization, and looks like the following:

Spoiler :

I considered having it shrink when switching to a civ with fewer units, but in the end decided it would be preferable to have empty space than to have the window jumping around if you wanted to change the civ whose units were being displayed again.

I'd still recommend using the Firaxis editor for converting BIC and BIX files to BIQ files, but 1.43 will do a better job of that than previous versions, as several edge cases were addressed, and defaults set for data that was not present in earlier versions of the format.