Flying mod

I would have to say no to this because you could then transport entire armies (like 50 to 100 units) over water. What would be the point of transports. It makes naval combat useless. It is a novel mod but changes gameplay too much to be included in the CCP. This is more for a fantasy total conversion mod.

I do think the multiple strike for aircraft could be added. That would make more sense in modern aircraft.
 
SpoiledFruit said:
I would have to say no to this because you could then transport entire armies (like 50 to 100 units) over water. What would be the point of transports. It makes naval combat useless. It is a novel mod but changes gameplay too much to be included in the CCP. This is more for a fantasy total conversion mod.

I do think the multiple strike for aircraft could be added. That would make more sense in modern aircraft.

I have to disagree. I think along with providing a richer Civ4 experience, part of the idea behind the CCP is to make accessable items in the SDK to modders who can do the XML and python, but not the C++. While it might change gameplay a ton for anyone who enables it, as long as no actual Civ4 units are changed then I think it would be fine, allowing easy access to a type of unit that many modders might want to have without changing any gameplay unless specifically enabled.

I would feel differently if we were to make the gunship actually became this new type of flying unit as default with the package, but I don't think that would be the case. I don't even believe that a switch should be included in the game to turn gunship movements on and off like this. Rather, I think that it should be on a list of improvements available to modders who want to use the CCP as the DLL file, rather than having to craft it themselves. With the release, we include a section that goes along the line of "Improvements for modders", which lists off all XML attributes and python functions created simply to help them. One of them would be these XML switches for creating the amphibious unit.
 
I have read his thread and from what I can see its complely controled by XML so it will not break or even alter anything without being activated their. As long as his code is comented and passes mustar then I am all for it.

Spoiled: You realize that its just adding an option XML tag, including all the code changes in the DLL still would have no effect without a new Units.xml and UnitSchema.xml. We should include the new Schema with the accompanying Assets pack, it wont break any existing gameplay and it shows moders ware to put the new tag which is very important for them to know. If we want to include an altered Units.xml with the changes R.Bacon did to the GunShip is another issue. I could go either way on that, the advatage is that is shows off the mod and alows the average user to imediatly see and play many of the new features without having to do any XML activation on their own, it also makes bug testing MUCH more straitforward as you dont have to explicity turn on each feature your testing one by one. On the other hand it dose complicate things for Mod makers by forcing them to deactivate stuff. I recomend we provide both a downloadable Assets file with DLL and Schemas only and also an Assets Pack that contains activated XML files for Debugging and showing off the new features.
 
As other have said. None of this will change anything in the default game. The <bFlying> tag is a boolean tag in the XML, and will be disabled by default. It's up to modders if they want to use it or not.

Personally I think that this mod should have no effect on the rules, or the appearance, of the game without being explicitly told to.
 
From what I can tell the AI is fine with it - if you say a unit can move into the sea the pathfinding just looks in sea plots as well. The AI should be able to use it, however, I'm not sure how much it would. I think you may have to add the ATTACK_SEA unit AI to make it engage in combat with sea units as well as land units.

One potential problem is the easy of exploitation by the player. You could, taking a gunship as an example, find a one square lake in the enemies terratory, and hide in it, pillaging any land around and stopping workers from rebuilding it. The only way to kill it would be with another gunship.

Roger also said there was an unavoidable graphical glitch when the gunship attacks a ship from land - the ship would run over the land plot to engage.
 
AI may be able to use the Unit when built but it is likley not taking the tag into account when it desides what units to build. It should be a rather simple to do something on the lines of

if (Possible_unit_to_build.has_ability(Flying))
Desirability += a whole lot!!!
 
He's just updated it with a funky "always camera zoom" function, which makes the camera zoom option zoom in on defensive battles as well as offensive battles.
 
I remember playing around with modding Civ III to have flying units. I never took it too seriously, my concept model launched me off in a different direction, but I remembered the AI was completely disregarding the new unit.

Impaler[WrG] said:
It should be a rather simple to do something on the lines of

if (Possible_unit_to_build.has_ability(Flying))
Desirability += a whole lot!!!

Yeah, it should be that simple!
 
SpoiledFruit said:
I do think the multiple strike for aircraft could be added. That would make more sense in modern aircraft.

Maybe that could be included for normal planes.
The closer a bomber is based to its target, the more damage it does. This would have to be very carefuly balanced though.
 
Lord Olleus said:
Maybe that could be included for normal planes.
The closer a bomber is based to its target, the more damage it does. This would have to be very carefuly balanced though.
Doesn't really fit. You could add a switch for it, but I don't think it's needed at all - it's a bit fiddly, and I can't see anybody using it much.
 
It makes sence though. If you're closer to your target, then you can do more bomb runs in a given amount of time. Might actual give a use to carriers.
 
Top Bottom