Frequently Asked Questions - (FAQ)
- Thread starter Phillip_martin
- Start date
Ribannah
Fighter Druid
The Jason Score Calculator says:
Does this mean that we're not allowed to see the GOTM19 values (target dates, max score) until we have finished our game?
cracker
Gil Favor's Sidekick
That's sorta what it means Ribby.
One of the reasons we released the Gotm19 score calculator only late in the month and then only in the late spoiler thread was to try to de-emphasize some of the overfocus on the score calculator as a potential decison tool in this mystery game.
Under ideal circumstances, we would like to have players enjoy the game and not spend hours upon hours trying to squeeze the last to grams of juice out of the mechanics that are used to evaluate the game. Some players are trying to use the calcultaor to help them determine which victory condition might be "easiest" on the particular map type; or in some cases the players are trying to determine which victory condition will give them the highest score for playing the game in the way that they predecide how to play the game. Both of the behaviors may be detrimental to the long term mental health and well being of some players.
Late in the month, the leak of the calculator poses less comparative spoiler risk but should still be avoided if you have not already played well into the game.
One of the reasons we released the Gotm19 score calculator only late in the month and then only in the late spoiler thread was to try to de-emphasize some of the overfocus on the score calculator as a potential decison tool in this mystery game.
Under ideal circumstances, we would like to have players enjoy the game and not spend hours upon hours trying to squeeze the last to grams of juice out of the mechanics that are used to evaluate the game. Some players are trying to use the calcultaor to help them determine which victory condition might be "easiest" on the particular map type; or in some cases the players are trying to determine which victory condition will give them the highest score for playing the game in the way that they predecide how to play the game. Both of the behaviors may be detrimental to the long term mental health and well being of some players.
Late in the month, the leak of the calculator poses less comparative spoiler risk but should still be avoided if you have not already played well into the game.
Ribannah
Fighter Druid
Thanks Cracklin,
I was always in favour of this, and have so far avoided any influence from the calculator on my decisions.
I was always in favour of this, and have so far avoided any influence from the calculator on my decisions.
I agree that the best dates are spoilers but early use of the calculator might help the sanity of the players.
Should I want to score high, I'd have to milk the game to be sure I get a high score. Given the calculator, I'd stop when my score would not increase significantly from a turn to the other.
Still I can live with the calculator spoiler decision. To tell you the truth I went to the old calculator page and tried my GOTM 19 score on similar games (Rome and Japan). I could later compare the results and the error margin was only about 15%.
Should I want to score high, I'd have to milk the game to be sure I get a high score. Given the calculator, I'd stop when my score would not increase significantly from a turn to the other.
Still I can live with the calculator spoiler decision. To tell you the truth I went to the old calculator page and tried my GOTM 19 score on similar games (Rome and Japan). I could later compare the results and the error margin was only about 15%.
I see that Ribby and Cracklin have finally kissed and made up. I'm so happy for you two.
--------
If I'm going to milk a game, I would careless about the Jason Scoring System, it will be "cow" award that I should be focusing on.
I'm so happy for you two.--------
If I'm going to milk a game, I would careless about the Jason Scoring System, it will be "cow" award that I should be focusing on.
Isak
Civ4 Scenario Designer
A maybe very dumb question, but here it goes:
Why don't the latest games incorporate the built-in Scenarios path of PTW, rather than require people to overwrite original files?
Wouldn't it be a lot easier to create a folder called GOTM19, and then put all added/changed artwork/text-files etc into that, like as if it was a mod? If the savegame is created with a BIX of the same name as the folder (or a BIX that has the folder name entered in the Scenario Search Path box) it will automatically find the altered files in that folder.
I think it would make the installation procedure a bit simpler too
Why don't the latest games incorporate the built-in Scenarios path of PTW, rather than require people to overwrite original files?
Wouldn't it be a lot easier to create a folder called GOTM19, and then put all added/changed artwork/text-files etc into that, like as if it was a mod? If the savegame is created with a BIX of the same name as the folder (or a BIX that has the folder name entered in the Scenario Search Path box) it will automatically find the altered files in that folder.
I think it would make the installation procedure a bit simpler too
TedJackson
Cunning old Celt
Good question. There must be a reason, right?
Ted
cracker
Gil Favor's Sidekick
You are a reasonably smart guy Isak. You take a look at the process where we have multiple games over multiple months that can use Civ3v1.29 (or PTW or now the Conquests expansion) and you see if you can tell me why the decision needs to be made to swap out the primary file or to place the unit animation in the root /art folder for CivIII?
Isak
Civ4 Scenario Designer
Well, it just seems to me the PTW version, could be handled by having a folder in the Civ3PTW\Scenarios folder called 'GOTM' and then place all the extra artwork and the pediaicons.txt in that folder. Then in the BIX files used to create the savegames, there would have to be a 'GOTM' entry in the Scenario Search Path box, and that way it won't matter what the BIX file is called (so you could name the BIX file GOTM17, GOTM18, GOTM19 etc.)
Every month, the new additions then get added to the GOTM folder and the game would find them there.
I'm sure it can be done, cracker, and I'd be glad to show you how, if necessary. I know that there's no way to avoid overwriting original files in standard CIV3, but I think it's a shame not to use this feature of PtW to make life a bit easier for those who have that.
Every month, the new additions then get added to the GOTM folder and the game would find them there.
I'm sure it can be done, cracker, and I'd be glad to show you how, if necessary. I know that there's no way to avoid overwriting original files in standard CIV3, but I think it's a shame not to use this feature of PtW to make life a bit easier for those who have that.
cracker
Gil Favor's Sidekick
Isak,
You are right on with how I think the Scenarios folders work. The only problem becomes version compatibility. If we load the graphics files like the new units into the scenarios folderd only then the players in PTW will be unable to load and view even more of the games that are played in Civ3v1.29 which currently account for about 40% of the mix.
The design flaw in the ptw implementation is that pointers which locate the unit graphics are located external to the game in the pediaicons file. The pointers that locate some of the leaderhead graphics are internal to the xxx.bic and xxxx.bix files and as such end up internal to the game file. The unit graphics pointer should properly be implemented just like the leaderheads pointer. As it is now, if you implement just one new unit in a game you have to rerelease the whole entire pediaicons.txt file as a seperate task and this is not well thoughtout.
A further complicating factor is that the scenarios folders become mutually exclusive and cannot accumulate graphics changes over time that may have differences from one game to the next
We are beginning to use the scenarios folders in PTW for game specific graphics content but this is primarily to bypass a bug exploit.
For the convenience of the players and to make the graphics available to the players to use in their own games as well as games that can be generated using the free xxx.bic and xxx.bix files that are released after the games are completed, I tested and determined that the only realy solution was to make sure that the files were placed in the root CivIII/Art folder and not buried dow in the pTW folders where they could be in accessible to other version of the software.
You are right on with how I think the Scenarios folders work. The only problem becomes version compatibility. If we load the graphics files like the new units into the scenarios folderd only then the players in PTW will be unable to load and view even more of the games that are played in Civ3v1.29 which currently account for about 40% of the mix.
The design flaw in the ptw implementation is that pointers which locate the unit graphics are located external to the game in the pediaicons file. The pointers that locate some of the leaderhead graphics are internal to the xxx.bic and xxxx.bix files and as such end up internal to the game file. The unit graphics pointer should properly be implemented just like the leaderheads pointer. As it is now, if you implement just one new unit in a game you have to rerelease the whole entire pediaicons.txt file as a seperate task and this is not well thoughtout.
A further complicating factor is that the scenarios folders become mutually exclusive and cannot accumulate graphics changes over time that may have differences from one game to the next
We are beginning to use the scenarios folders in PTW for game specific graphics content but this is primarily to bypass a bug exploit.
For the convenience of the players and to make the graphics available to the players to use in their own games as well as games that can be generated using the free xxx.bic and xxx.bix files that are released after the games are completed, I tested and determined that the only realy solution was to make sure that the files were placed in the root CivIII/Art folder and not buried dow in the pTW folders where they could be in accessible to other version of the software.
Isak
Civ4 Scenario Designer
Ok, fair enough. Lots of 'customers' to think about.
But I can imagine the install process will be a bit intimidating to novice computer users - the DyP mod installation process consists of simply downloading an exe, double-clicking it, and then making sure the path displayed in the install dialogue, points to your Civ3 or Civ3PTW\Scenarios folder. Not much to that, some would say, but nonetheless, just after a new release, I get 20-30 emails a day from people who have problems directly related to an install gone awry
How about providing an alternative for those not interested in loading the regular Civ3 games? I can pm you a suggestion or two if you want (no need to hog this thread for such a discussion, and I'm sorry if I already did).
btw, I'm personally lobbying to get the frickin' Leaderheads out of the bix file and into the pediaicons.txt, but that's a different story
But I can imagine the install process will be a bit intimidating to novice computer users - the DyP mod installation process consists of simply downloading an exe, double-clicking it, and then making sure the path displayed in the install dialogue, points to your Civ3 or Civ3PTW\Scenarios folder. Not much to that, some would say, but nonetheless, just after a new release, I get 20-30 emails a day from people who have problems directly related to an install gone awry
How about providing an alternative for those not interested in loading the regular Civ3 games? I can pm you a suggestion or two if you want (no need to hog this thread for such a discussion, and I'm sorry if I already did).
btw, I'm personally lobbying to get the frickin' Leaderheads out of the bix file and into the pediaicons.txt, but that's a different story
cracker
Gil Favor's Sidekick
Hopefully, you will wake up in the morning and this hangover will have worn off. Having the graphics pointers for the games be installed separately from the game set up is the second worst and most unprofessional programming implementation that I could possibly imagine for a game of this type. The only worse option is some sort of hard coding or non declared numeric sequence access like they had define in Civ3 up to V1.21.Originally posted by Isak
btw, I'm personally lobbying to get the frickin' Leaderheads out of the bix file and into the pediaicons.txt, but that's a different story
Fine if you want to lobby for some sort of external graphics over ride but lobbying to force every game to use some sort of modification of the pediaicons file (which was a kluge in the first place) is totally counterintuitive and will long term result in the maximum inconvenience to the maximum number of players. We already see this as an ongoing compatibility disaster in the alternative langauage (localized) version of the software that basically renders our French, German, Spanish and other language friends as virtual second class citizens when all the US language origin game files will not load and run properly.
We also need to clearly understand the conceptual difference between a xxx.bic/xxx.bix origin mod game and the standards of comparative play that use a starting xxx.sav file where all the game attributes are intended to be preset.
Lobbying for further expansion of the pediaicons.txt goof up just makes it vertually impossible to exchange game files between users unless they fully install a total mod package. This is not very efferctive in my view of the big picture process.
------------------------------
On the 20-30 emails related to installation, I share your pain.
We get to do it monthly and they tend to fall into four very well defined categories that really are not related to the issue of copying and replaceing the one extra itty bitty pediaicons.txt file by hand.
Isak
Civ4 Scenario Designer
I really don't think modifying a txt file is that hard - anyone who has ever submitted any kind of report or otherwise used a text-editor can do it, after all
I have many reasons for preferring external txt pointers to internal pointers. The fact that a text document is searchable, allows for copy/paste, and is a lot easier to track down bugs in, than an unwieldy editor, are some.
Another, more specific case is that we want to include playercreated leaderheads with the dyp mod, but due to the fact that 7 new leaderheads will quickly amount to more than 150 mb of files, we have to make that an optional download. And that optional download then has to include a different BIX, meaning that people with the leaderheads installed will have to use the non-leaderheads version to play online against other DyP players.
In fact, I'm lobbying to get the Scenario Search placed outside the BIX for the same reason, so people can choose whicever terrain mods etc. they want to use in multiplayer games. That is currently not possible - they have to use the one selected by the host.
I think our differences of opinion probably stem from the approach we have to modifying the game. I'm not much into adding one unit here, one improvement there, but would rather see fully-fledged modpacks, and for those, the pediaicons.txt solution offers a lot more than including the pointers in the BIX. It probably makes modding a bit harder, but I'm sure it makes 'using' a lot easier. I've been living inside the BIC for well over a year now, and if this is a hangover, it's definitely the longest one I've had
Btw, a XXXX.sav file contains a BIX/BIC file with all settings intact, so I'm not sure where you're getting at with the conceptual difference between the two
I saw rumours that you'll be releasing GOTM20 in a one file download with all the necessary files included. Is that true? If it is, i'll just crawl right back down under my rock again, and let you get on with work
I have many reasons for preferring external txt pointers to internal pointers. The fact that a text document is searchable, allows for copy/paste, and is a lot easier to track down bugs in, than an unwieldy editor, are some.
Another, more specific case is that we want to include playercreated leaderheads with the dyp mod, but due to the fact that 7 new leaderheads will quickly amount to more than 150 mb of files, we have to make that an optional download. And that optional download then has to include a different BIX, meaning that people with the leaderheads installed will have to use the non-leaderheads version to play online against other DyP players.
In fact, I'm lobbying to get the Scenario Search placed outside the BIX for the same reason, so people can choose whicever terrain mods etc. they want to use in multiplayer games. That is currently not possible - they have to use the one selected by the host.
I think our differences of opinion probably stem from the approach we have to modifying the game. I'm not much into adding one unit here, one improvement there, but would rather see fully-fledged modpacks, and for those, the pediaicons.txt solution offers a lot more than including the pointers in the BIX. It probably makes modding a bit harder, but I'm sure it makes 'using' a lot easier. I've been living inside the BIC for well over a year now, and if this is a hangover, it's definitely the longest one I've had
Btw, a XXXX.sav file contains a BIX/BIC file with all settings intact, so I'm not sure where you're getting at with the conceptual difference between the two
I saw rumours that you'll be releasing GOTM20 in a one file download with all the necessary files included. Is that true? If it is, i'll just crawl right back down under my rock again, and let you get on with work
cracker
Gil Favor's Sidekick
Actually the wise and observant player may have already noticed that all of the game content for Gotm20 was already included in Gotm19.
Some of what you may be chaisng here is from lack of perspective that we end up dealing with players across a wide spectrum from thors who played Gotm19 and are already essentiall set up versus totally new players who have never set up a game versus players who may have played gotm18 in Civ3v1.29 and then did not play Gotm19 but now want to play Gotm20 in PTWv1.21.
Your task in the Dyp which focuses on hcanging teh game into an entirely different arena of play is some what different than oures where we wish to use a that evolving standard game framework with some additions on one side to equilize the umpteen patch versions while adding some unique flavor components that can be different each month.
Some of what you may be chaisng here is from lack of perspective that we end up dealing with players across a wide spectrum from thors who played Gotm19 and are already essentiall set up versus totally new players who have never set up a game versus players who may have played gotm18 in Civ3v1.29 and then did not play Gotm19 but now want to play Gotm20 in PTWv1.21.
Your task in the Dyp which focuses on hcanging teh game into an entirely different arena of play is some what different than oures where we wish to use a that evolving standard game framework with some additions on one side to equilize the umpteen patch versions while adding some unique flavor components that can be different each month.
Isak
Civ4 Scenario Designer
Indeed - it was merely the fact that GOTM19 included files from all the way back to GOTM16 that made me think maybe there's some kind of Campaign thing here, which might benefit from all-inclusive downloads coupled with monthly updates.
Right now it just seems like the new players would have a harder time than the regulars, so my suggestion was simply to do something to make it easier for the un-initiated (GOTM-wise) to join. But apparently you already had that planned, so I'll back down, and try to finish the game for the first time, instead
Right now it just seems like the new players would have a harder time than the regulars, so my suggestion was simply to do something to make it easier for the un-initiated (GOTM-wise) to join. But apparently you already had that planned, so I'll back down, and try to finish the game for the first time, instead
Ribannah
Fighter Druid
Does anyone know what makes the UN council convene?
In my last game I built the UN myself, there was a new vote 10 turns later but not 20 turns later. Is this random or can it be influenced?
Due to a bug (next-page arrow nonfunctional) the game itself (PTW 1.14) has nothing to say on the subject.
In my last game I built the UN myself, there was a new vote 10 turns later but not 20 turns later. Is this random or can it be influenced?
Due to a bug (next-page arrow nonfunctional) the game itself (PTW 1.14) has nothing to say on the subject.
Bamspeedy
CheeseBob
Did you try preventing the other victory conditions? If one of the other victory conditions have been triggered, the vote won't come up.
I thought it was every 11 turns, that could be a factor too. When you completed the UN (or any other improvement/wonder), the game figures that you completed it the turn before (at least for culture, and possibly for diplomatic voting). Notice you get 2 culture from a temple the same turn you completed it.
To avoid spoilers, here are some bogus numbers I'm throwing in, just to illustrate this:
Let's say you complete the UN at turn 300, but the game considers you built it at turn 299, so the next vote will be at turn 310 (299+11). So, between the first and second votes there really was only 10 turns, it may be 11 between votes after that.
This is just a guess, I haven't fully tested it.
I thought it was every 11 turns, that could be a factor too. When you completed the UN (or any other improvement/wonder), the game figures that you completed it the turn before (at least for culture, and possibly for diplomatic voting). Notice you get 2 culture from a temple the same turn you completed it.
To avoid spoilers, here are some bogus numbers I'm throwing in, just to illustrate this:
Let's say you complete the UN at turn 300, but the game considers you built it at turn 299, so the next vote will be at turn 310 (299+11). So, between the first and second votes there really was only 10 turns, it may be 11 between votes after that.
This is just a guess, I haven't fully tested it.
SirPleb
Shaken, not stirred.
As the builder of the UN you are asked whether to hold the vote on the turn when you complete it and then every eleven turns thereafter. E.g. if you build the UN in 1950 then the first vote is in 1950, the next vote in 1961, the next in 1972, and so on. And the F7 screen will show that you built the UN in 1948 even though it was 1950 when you were told it was finished and asked what to build next.
Good years to complete the UN if planning for an election in 2050 include 1754, 1776, 1798, 1820, ... 1930, 1951, 1962, ...
Ribannah
Fighter Druid
Bweh!!! I checked - it seems to be 11 years in reality indeed - a ridiculous interval, must be a mistake by Firaxis. Made me miss a triple victory (not 2050 AD btw).
