Mod Component Request Thread

[alpaca]

While on the topic of culture, can someone make a mod that allows you to pick your culture tile expansions?

Can? I think so. But I doubt it's a good idea. If you want to choose, you already have plot buying.

If you want a quick fix for something similar, create a cheap unit with a culture bomb radius of 0 and reduce the culture bomb cooldown. It's not really the same, but the closest you can get without significant UI scripting

 

[Slowpoke]

Hey good idea! And it's not a severe exploit to use it on the A.I. since you get a severe rep hit from C-bombing.

 

[EscapedGoat]

A lot of people miss foreign trade routes. I have a mod-idea for it, but no modding skills for CIV 5

foreign trade routes could be implemented in the game by letting capitals have trade routes to each other - These trade routes could go between capitals that had open borders (possibly also requiring a road/port connection)

It would be neat if you could have one foreign trade route to each friendly civilization - encouranging peaceful relations. So a small, peaceful civilization with a large capital could reap a lot of benefits from just open borders and trade.

There’s already code in the game for recognizing your own cities connected to your capital, and there is code for recognizing the “trade route”/road mission to city states where you connect your capital to the city state in question, so there should be something one could steal from here?

 

[Bluebird]

A lot of people miss foreign trade routes. I have a mod-idea for it, but no modding skills for CIV 5

foreign trade routes could be implemented in the game by letting capitals have trade routes to each other - These trade routes could go between capitals that had open borders (possibly also requiring a road/port connection)

It would be neat if you could have one foreign trade route to each friendly civilization - encouranging peaceful relations. So a small, peaceful civilization with a large capital could reap a lot of benefits from just open borders and trade.

There’s already code in the game for recognizing your own cities connected to your capital, and there is code for recognizing the “trade route”/road mission to city states where you connect your capital to the city state in question, so there should be something one could steal from here?

On that subject I would prefer if I could have open trade routes without open borders. Can't have their scouts sneaking around to check if my military is on par.

 

[EscapedGoat]

On that subject I would prefer if I could have open trade routes without open borders. Can't have their scouts sneaking around to check if my military is on par.

But that wouldn't make sense - if you are trading with someone, you have caravans or whatever inside their borders it was that way in CIV 4 too.

 

[Valkrionn]

Actually, you could just as easily have multiple levels of open border.

For instance, you could have one level allow A)Trade, and B)Civilian units (And possibly scouts) to pass through your borders. A second level would then allow for military units to pass.

This would still allow scouting, but personally, I see that as a sideeffect of the trade; You gain in one area but lose in another. On the upside, it allows you to continue trade even while obstructing their war effort... Could be invaluable if a large trading partner is at war with one of your allies.

 

[Gedrin]

Is there a mod yet that will automatically rename units as you build them...
Like "8th Warriors", "101st Cavalry" , etc...

If so... which? If not... well this is the request thread

 

[Wolf X]

I'm looking to add a couple simple tweaks to my game. If anyone can help me out and provide the code I'd need to do it I'll just add it myself to another simple mod I use and will be very grateful.

What I'm looking for is the ability to choose "Wealth" and "Research" for production at the start of the game.

Second I'd like to null Great Scientists "Free Tech". I like to play on Standard mode with really slow research but with the rate at which the Great Scientists appear it almost ruins the pace.

 

[Bluebird]

Actually, you could just as easily have multiple levels of open border.

For instance, you could have one level allow A)Trade, and B)Civilian units (And possibly scouts) to pass through your borders. A second level would then allow for military units to pass.

This would still allow scouting, but personally, I see that as a sideeffect of the trade; You gain in one area but lose in another. On the upside, it allows you to continue trade even while obstructing their war effort... Could be invaluable if a large trading partner is at war with one of your allies.

That isn't really a practical difference. They scout you either way and military units will be pushed outside your borders if war is declared.

 

[Ramesses]

That isn't really a practical difference. They scout you either way and military units will be pushed outside your borders if war is declared.

Unless it doesn't.

See, I think this would be a good idea if enemy military units were not automatically kicked out upon declaration of war. Signing a Level-2 Open Borders agreement with anyone is basically the highest form of trust you could ever hope to convey in a game like Civilization. Especially lucrative if you could not sign one-way Level-2 Open Border agreements.

Of course, this is to be reserved for only your most trusted allies (and greatest enemies, who you would want to keep closer than your trusted allies, according to the old saying).

Also, I have a mod suggestion of my own. I'd like to have a quest log that tracks all the requests offered by city-states. While they are recorded in the notification log, I'd rather not have to search through the city growth and technology and barbarian encampment notices just to remind myself of every active quest.

 

[MouseyPounds]

I'm looking to add a couple simple tweaks to my game. If anyone can help me out and provide the code I'd need to do it I'll just add it myself to another simple mod I use and will be very grateful.

What I'm looking for is the ability to choose "Wealth" and "Research" for production at the start of the game.

This should be pretty straightforward; just remove the tech prereqs of those things or perhaps set them to Agriculture. Something like the following XML Mod should work set to OnModActivated/UpdateDatabase:

<GameData>
  <Processes>
    <Update>
      <Set TechPrereq="TECH_NULL"/>
    </Update>
  </Processes>
</GameData>

Second I'd like to null Great Scientists "Free Tech". I like to play on Standard mode with really slow research but with the rate at which the Great Scientists appear it almost ruins the pace.

Don't really know what to do here but I believe both "Harder Free Tech" and alpaca's "Play With Me" mods change the GS bulbing behavior so those would be good places to look.

 

[MouseyPounds]

Also, I have a mod suggestion of my own. I'd like to have a quest log that tracks all the requests offered by city-states. While they are recorded in the notification log, I'd rather not have to search through the city growth and technology and barbarian encampment notices just to remind myself of every active quest.

If you open the mini diplomacy screen with the globe button in the upper right, there is an icon next to each city state with an active quest and the tooltip on those icons tells the details.

 

[Ramstorp]

I had fun the other day. They came with their large army and took Berlin; so I trained like crazy then killed their troops and took some cities. While I trained maybe ten new units the AI trained maybe zero new units. Why?! They should have destroyed me. I realize seeing the same thing in civ4 and colonization2, and it is causing emotional trauma.

So I wonder if this can be changed in the XML --the AI strategies part-- and if someone can point me to some specifics. Thanks!

 

[malcolm01234]

How about new resources for Civ 5 like corn, rice, potatoes, tobacco, tea, etc. I got a lot more ideas for resources just get back to me on it. Also a slave unit requiring a slave market building, and a tradeable slave resource. The slave unit should be much cheaper than a worker but it causes 1 unhappiness per slave unit and uses 1 slave resource. The slave market gives the ability to get slaves and to get slaves you must kill a unit to get 1 slave resource or capture a city to get 1 slave per 2 citizens in the city. To top it all off a slavery technology that you can research at the very beginning of the game that unlocks the slave market, the slave unit, and the slave resource, but does not lead to anything. Sorry its so complicated but I think its a good idea.

 

[Hesha]

I'm sorry, if this is not the appropriate place to post a question like this, but I couldn't find a "General Discussion" thread on Modding...

Anyways, I've been playing Civ V for a couple of days now and I think it isn't as good as Civ 4 was in many aspects, but since I paid a lot of money for it, I'm gonna play it for another while... and there is one thing, that annoys me more than the rest: Melee Gunpowder Units!!! WTH is the logic behind this? Prehistoric archers have a better range/precision/damage than Musketeers/Riflemen/Infantry? I don't think so... and because this is such an obvious absurdity to me I assume that some others stumpled accross this as well... my question would therefor be: Is anyone currently working on a mod that converts all gunpowder units into Ranged Combat Units OR is it even possible to mod this?

Thanks!

 

[Valkrionn]

There have been discussions about that.

Basically, it's an issue with ALL units being ranged; The size of the battlefield must expand (at least conceptually), meaning the new melee would indeed be gunpowder units. The new ranged are actually Aerial units.

It's also an issue with the type of ranged attack depicted; If you notice, it's a bombardment, not direct fire. Rifles are not capable of this.

 

[Hesha]

I see... could you point me to one of those discussions so I can read them to catch up?

So you're basically saying, that the scale of the world map is to big which leads to the distances over which units are firing being to far? I agree - generally - but I think this depends on what you assume to be the actual scale. I mean, obviously the depiction of a) cities, b) land units (and even among those scale isn't true), c) sea units and d) landscape (to leave it at 4 categories, not mentioning features and other examples) all use different scales. If a) cities is the standard for our scales, then the ranges are indeed to long, since even ancient archers can fire accross two metropoles. If we take our scale from the units - not the depicted 12 men, but lets say a regiment - I guess the scale would be okay for catapults, riflemen etc., archers not I guess.

As regards the indirect bombardment... it is depicted, but not reflected by game mechanisms, because you cannot fire over obstacles unless you get the "Indirect Fire" promotion. So blocking that promotion for Riflemen, Infantry and Mech. Inf. would solve the problem, wouldn't it? I mean... after Cavalry becomes obsolete, there would be no melee units left - which I wouldn't mind -, but this would lead to a whole new discussion about the regiment idea in Civ (btw: Where could we lead such a discussion? I am new here and don't want to be spamming the wrong places)

 

[Valkrionn]

I see... could you point me to one of those discussions so I can read them to catch up?

So you're basically saying, that the scale of the world map is to big which leads to the distances over which units are firing being to far? I agree - generally - but I think this depends on what you assume to be the actual scale. I mean, obviously the depiction of a) cities, b) land units (and even among those scale isn't true), c) sea units and d) landscape (to leave it at 4 categories, not mentioning features and other examples) all use different scales. If a) cities is the standard for our scales, then the ranges are indeed to long, since even ancient archers can fire accross two metropoles. If we take our scale from the units - not the depicted 12 men, but lets say a regiment - I guess the scale would be okay for catapults, riflemen etc., archers not I guess.

As regards the indirect bombardment... it is depicted, but not reflected by game mechanisms, because you cannot fire over obstacles unless you get the "Indirect Fire" promotion. So blocking that promotion for Riflemen, Infantry and Mech. Inf. would solve the problem, wouldn't it? I mean... after Cavalry becomes obsolete, there would be no melee units left - which I wouldn't mind -, but this would lead to a whole new discussion about the regiment idea in Civ (btw: Where could we lead such a discussion? I am new here and don't want to be spamming the wrong places)

Honestly I would have to find it. Last such discussion I remember was on the 2k boards, not the civfanatic boards.

Best would be to start a thread here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/forumdisplay.php?f=375

In any case, what I'm saying is that your idea of the size of each tile has to expand over the course of a game. You move from Warriors bashing each other with clubs, to cruise missiles only being able to strike a few tiles away. From small hamlets, to cities like New York. If you do this, modern rifle units essentially become the equivalent of ancient melee units, and they typically fill that role in modern wars; They are on the front lines, even if the front lines are now much farther apart.

 

[Hesha]

Wouldn't it really be the best solution for most of the games problems to lets say quadruple the scale/size of maps?

 

[ashvin.l]

There are somethings that always bothered me about Civ. Most glaring is the notion of democracy.

It is odd that we are ruling the entire empire in a autocratic fashion, while we choose democracy as a "policy".

Social policies, like governments, should be nearly zero sum games. There are some benefits associated with each form of government, but there are downsides too. I feel this should be modeled. I have attempted some of this requirements below.

Also, any kind of DoW, sophisticated movement of troops requires some level of organization. It should not be possible to issue DoW from get go.

I have collected some ideas on these ideas. I have put them in a spreadsheet

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc...NdkxXQlM1UGNqLVE&hl=en&authkey=CNCmo9YL#gid=0