Modding Q&A

[Zefyrinus]

Did you put the '..'. If you note in the MP versions of the conquests how it's done. You could also just copy that path, and then rename whatever scenario folder it is.

Oh, hmm... This is really odd. I tried using both ..\Scenarios\MoveCapital (MoveCapital being the name of the folder that's a copy of the Ancient Treasures folder) and ..Conquests\Ancient Treasures (which is the location of the original folder already contained in the game), and both would just return the same error message, FILE NOT FOUND "#".

Then I tried using ..Conquests\Scenarios\MoveCapital and ..Conquests\Conquests\Ancient Treasures. With both of these, the game would just display the following error message: Missing entry in "text\PediaIcons.txt": ICON_BLDG_Burial_Mound. Now, ICON_BLDG_Burial_Mound is definitely included in PediaIcons in both of those folders, so I don't understand why it's complaining. It's too bad that the error message is not showing what exact search way it's using, so I can't determine if it's really looking in the folder I had intended.

 

[Nathiri]

Show a screenshot of scenario properties please.

 

[Zefyrinus]

Is there just a typo I'm not seeing? Here's another clue to the mystery:

You know in the Improvement and Wonders tab there is a drop-down menu called civilopedia entry? In this menu you choose which of the possible civilopedia entries should apply to the current building. When I'm getting the error message saying Missing entry in "text\PediaIcons.txt": ICON_BLDG_Burial_Mound, only the default civilopedia entries appear in the drop-down menu. But when I'm getting the FILE NOT FOUND "#" message (as I do with the setting in the image above), the custom entries do appear there. So it seems like when I'm getting the FILE NOT FOUND "#" error, the problem is not finding the right PediaIcons text file, but something else.

 

[Nathiri]

Hmm not sure, but if you want to read the folder in Scenarios, the game already looks there first, so you wouldnt need the ..\. That only comes in if you want to search another folder in the root. So you could just have it as MoveCapital with no extra symbols. The ..\ is used for finding another folder like in PTW or in Conquests.

Here is a BIQ I just copied from Conquests with the right search path. It loaded up just fine from Civ-Content for me.

 

[Zefyrinus]

I solved it. It did need the ..\Scenarios or it wouldn't start. But it turned out that the problem was that the unplayable civilizations had nothing filled in under "civilopedia entry" in the Civilizations tab.

But I still have a problem. When you start the game, it crashes when the computer is loading the scenario and it says something about it currently assigning AI players. There is a strange bug in this scenario regarding the colors of the civs, and I wonder if this crash has something to do with that. You see, for civ 1 (Etruria), I've given the first orange color, and for civ 2 (Egypt) I've given the yellow. But the starting locations that I've assigned to these civs don't have the right colors. Instead Etruria appears as yellow and Egypt as light green. Changing colors in the Civilizations tab or removing the starting locations and setting them again has no effect, Etruria still stubbornly takes the yellow color and Egypt light green. I'll see if I can come up with anything more to try...

 

[Zefyrinus]

Now I solved that too. It turned out that custom player data was turned on, and that was interfering. *headdesk* Now I'm finally able to start the game.

Thanks for looking into my problem!

 

[Nanuk]

Has anyone given hidden nationality to settlers and workers, and observed how the AI handles them? I'm at the early stages for a certain unit and want to know if it just ends in misery before I get too invested.

 

[Theov]

Has anyone given hidden nationality to settlers and workers, and observed how the AI handles them? I'm at the early stages for a certain unit and want to know if it just ends in misery before I get too invested.

I have not, but what big differences would you expect?
What unit are you thinking of in the future?
Settlers will still be escorted if flagged as such. Workers are not going far away... Why would they.
The ai uses HN units for exploration and attacking, I dont think HN will change all that much for settlers and workers.

 

[Nanuk]

The idea behind HN settlers and workers would be for very expansive civilizations such as America and Russia, with the caveat that other civs can capture the settlers and workers without starting a war. So if playing against America, and they start building HN settlers which can move much further than regular settlers, you can send your units after them if they get caught out in the open.

But yes, AI will always escort them, which I forgot about.

 

[Bluemofia]

Can be sorta countered with units that stealth attack settlers/workers specifically. The unit can only target those units, unless there are none in a stack.

May or may not be useful for what you are designing.

 

[Nanuk]

I have considered this option, but my main concern is if I want to give stealth attack to early/mid units. I will have to play around with some ideas. Currently I'm workshopping a unit that can enslave defeated units into one of several types. I have seen no documentation anywhere stating it can only be one type, so I'm going to test it and find out. I wonder-if it does work- if it's random or selective like when multiple types of units can be drafted.

 

[Bluemofia]

It is only one type, at least in the default editor.

I've tried very hard to enslave multiple types for The Playground Mod 3.0, for we wanted the Senso units to enslave to whatever they defeat, rather than a set unit. The base editor does not allow you to select multiple units unfortunately.

 

[Shmelkin]

I noticed that if you set the OCN to 1, all AI civilizations build exactly 2 cities and stop expanding.
I'm interested, will they build more cities after raising effective OCN with a forbidden palace? Also, will they still build more cities at important locations, for example at strategic resources?
I also heard that AI will raze all captured cities after reaching OCN, is there a way to avoid it?

 

[Nathiri]

Hmm. Really?

I noticed that if you set the OCN to 1, all AI civilizations build exactly 2 cities and stop expanding.
I'm interested, will they build more cities after raising effective OCN with a forbidden palace? Also, will they still build more cities at important locations, for example at strategic resources?
I also heard that AI will raze all captured cities after reaching OCN, is there a way to avoid it?

 

[Nanuk]

I remember many years ago a scenario, I think one of Snoopy's, had sea terrain that cliff'd off like coastal terrain does. But I can't find it anymore. Were these lost in the GOG and Steam editions? All the CSO.pcx files only have coastal cliffs. Posted is an example, with red circles to indicate what I'm talking about.

 

[tjs282]

I think the 'Sea-cliffs' were an adaptation of sn00py's terrain, made later by someone else, so they wouldn't be in the terrain-packs included in Complete.

Those fir-trees aren't sn00py's, either, IIRC.

Might have been by @pounder? (I think the coastal 'reefs' were pounder's as well...?)

 

[Civinator]

Nanuk, this file was done by CrackedCrystal. I introduced it for CCM 1 in this post: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/ccm1-epic-mod.352057/page-85#post-14114522 and it is a part of the terrain set in CCM 2.

You can find the post of CrackedCrystal and the download of that file here: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/ocean-graphic-extention-of-snoopys-terrain.109362/

 

[Nanuk]

Thank you. I could've sworn they were in an older edition of civ 3.

 

[Civinator]

Very welcome. CrackedCrystal did a great work with this file.

 

[Nanuk]

I'm torn between eye-candy and playable. I'm currently working on the scenario map for the Earthlike version, and trying to stick to 180x180 is problematic. In order to make the land areas for civs native to those regions large enough so they can be successful and formidable in war, I have to distort the map. Unfortunately the 180x180 limits how much land can actually be used if I want to go the full 32 civs. I do plan for some of them dying out during the first half of the game, but at least on rerolls it won't always be the same. Anyways, my question here is how much lag am I saving by using 180x180 instead of 256x256 or even larger? If I'm saving 1 minute or less, I think I will use a much larger map. If I'm saving 5 minutes, maybe more, then I'll deal with the nerve-wrecking alt-history-like placement of some civs.

Ocean size is not a big deal for me, I decided I'll cut down on the Pacific since it's mostly unused space anyways, so I could move the landmass closer to North America to allow more Asia on the left side. Right now I'll have to make Africa huge and place Asian civs on Africa and Australia, which I'm not fond of.

I will be cutting down on lag by other methods as well. Such as limiting trade by several ways, removing building maintenance, making units require population, limiting diplomacy options, etc... I figured making the map smaller would help as well. But now I'm thinking some lag is probably worth it.

Ugh;