Modding Q&A

Well, another question - when setting corruption rate in governments, is communal corruption strictly better than minimal? Or there are situation when minimal is more preferable?
I made Feudalism communal corruption and available at Code of Laws. I reduced Monarchy to minimal. Despite my Monarchy appearing later than my Feudalism and having significantly inferior early game unit support the AI will 100% shift to it from Feudalism. Perhaps low war weariness for Feudalism is the key factor but overall (examing Communism too) I sense that the AI much prefers minimal to communal if other variables are the same. To the extent it can sometimes pick my minimal Monarchy over Communism (and Fascism) despite massively inferior late game unit support.
 
Last edited:
Q: switching corruption to 'off' for a government does not end corruption. So what level of corruption is the 'off' setting? Is it less corrupt than 'minimal'?
Unless you're using a recent(?) Flintlock patch, the "corruption = off" setting is bugged, so shouldn't be used.

For an unpatched .exe, there are other ways to reduce total corruption, e.g increasing the 'number of optimal cities' ("Nopt") for each map-size (= you need to found more towns before you'll get the "we should build our FP" prompt), or reducing the (distance?) corruption slider. But such changes will affect all govs 'equally'.
 
You can also set building like the Courthouse, Temple, and Cathedral to reduce corruption. I find that works pretty well.
 
Apologies, but I can't easily find an answer to this question.

Q: switching corruption to 'off' for a government does not end corruption. So what level of corruption is the 'off' setting? Is it less corrupt than 'minimal'?

I created an all powerful late game Government with corruption 'off' and generous unit support and none of the AI want to pick it. :D
As I pointed out in my, "FUBAR Editor Documentation," (which @Fergei, you might find interesting ;) ) that Flag is broken.
 
I am working on a "house rules" mod to better balance the game. I have been scouring through the forums and different mods for some great ideas. As I am tweaking the guerrilla unit and adding special forces/naval seals I am not sure what the difference between all terrains as roads and ignore movement cost. What does a unit do exactly when given "all terrain" and what do they do exactly when "ignore movement cost".

Also, what is the difference between bombard settings for unit stats (strength, range, rate) and the bombard special order?
 
Last edited:
ATAR means that units will move across all tiles as if using the movement multiplier for roads (which you set in the .biq). So in the base game where roads triple the movement-rate, that means that a unit with M=1 will move up to 3 tiles per turn, M=2 will move up to 6 tiles, etc., even while in hostile territory. This can be extremely powerful, so use it sparingly!

Ignores movement cost for [Terrain] is more limited: that means that a unit will treat the specified Terrain as if it has a move-cost of 1, regardless of that Terrain's actual move-cost setting, e.g. (in the epic game) Hills and Forests cost 2 full movement points, so an M=2 unit which ignores Hills or Forests can travel up to 2 tiles per turn through those terrains, instead of stopping on the first tile. It should be noted that this unit-setting (1) is really only useful when the unit itself has M>1, and (2) only affects movement, not Worker-job times, which are multiplied by the Terrain's movement cost (e.g. using a single Worker, Mining cost-2 Hills will take twice as long as Mining cost-1 Grassland).

Regarding bombard-capable units, the 'Bombard' unit-action is what allows the human player to use that unit's B.R.F values, when the range-value (R) is >0, to make a stand-off attack on a nearby tile/unit (i.e. with no risk of dying).

With R=0, when part of a stack, the unit will bombard defensively, using its bombard-strength-value (B) against an attacking unit's A-value, removing up to 1 HP from the attacker -- or, if it has the ability, do Collateral Damage to buildings when it attacks a garrisoned town -- regardless of whether it has the Bombard-ability.
 
Last edited:
SayHayKid... it can help you to read "Da Rules - Explained" https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/da-rules-explained.210035/

I did, but not all concepts are explained well like @tjs282 did above. For example, it simply states "All Terrain as Roads: Determines if the unit would treat all terrain as if it were roaded.." Duh. That can be inferred from the description. However, I wouldn't have assumed that meant they moved six tiles with a M=2. A couple of guerrilla/commando units I am working on would have been ridiculously overpowered from what I intended.
 
SayHayKid... what it means is that what ever you have Roads set for in the Biq will be what is used for Units that have All Terrain as Roads.
a M=2 means the Unit could move 2 tiles if Roads are set as 1 tile per move, 6 tiles if Roads are set as 3.
All depends on Road settings.
 
I did, but not all concepts are explained well like @tjs282 did above. For example, it simply states "All Terrain as Roads: Determines if the unit would treat all terrain as if it were roaded.." Duh. That can be inferred from the description. However, I wouldn't have assumed that meant they moved six tiles with a M=2. A couple of guerrilla/commando units I am working on would have been ridiculously overpowered from what I intended.
It is very strong.
In my mod, only the Tribe has it.
I have for example the Scout ignore terrain penalties, so they are not hindered by jungles and mountains etc. They can always move two spots.
 
I gave ATAR to my Workers (but kept them as M=1), so that the AI (and I!) would waste fewer turns moving to improve the next-best tile for any given town.
 
Quick question.
What image is the one that's displayed in the building box? I mean the biggish square box with rounded corners in the city screen.
For one unit it's not showing up, but I don't know what to adjust.

Thanks.

w81y8LI.png
 
ProdButton.pcx,located in the city screen folder.
The ProdButtonLiteUp is what makes it light up.

If your ProdButton works for other units, it is not the reason your Elephant Cavalry is not showing. That Button is a simple screen.
Check your Unit Default Flc
 
Last edited:
I think Theov might mean the picture of the unit that's supposed to appear inside that box, rather than the box itself. In which case, isn't that taken from whichever units32.pcx that .biq was using?

i.e. its absence would indicate that a blank slot had accidentally been selected as that unit's icon in the Editor?
 
I think Theov might mean the picture of the unit that's supposed to appear inside that box, rather than the box itself. In which case, isn't that taken from whichever units32.pcx that .biq was using?

i.e. its absence would indicate that a blank slot had accidentally been selected as that unit's icon in the Editor?
Thanks, yeah I mean the unit picture inside.

... hm, I double checked in the editor and it should be the correct one.
I copied in another pic, to make sure it wasnt the actual picture, but that didnt solve it.
Its the number assigned in the editor, no? I have the elephant units in order, so it should work. Its slot 227, the others are 225 and 226.
The build que image is the unit_32 file, are you sure this is the same file?
 
Last edited:
Quick question.
What image is the one that's displayed in the building box? I mean the biggish square box with rounded corners in the city screen.
For one unit it's not showing up, but I don't know what to adjust.

Thanks.


The image in question is a frame from the unit's default.flc, SE direction. I believe it's the first frame (unit32.pcx is not the source). Vuldacon wrote a tutorial regarding centering the unit in these boxes by means of offset and moving the storyboard. If the unit's offset is way off, it may become invisible in these boxes, but can appear normally in the game (if I remember correctly).

In this thread Vuldacon and tom2050 discusses the issue. I use their procedure - apart from using a hex-editor rather than Flicster to adjust the offset in the flc.
 
Yes, the image that shows for the Units on the Production Button is from the Default Flc, not the units_32 file.
If I am remembering correctly, I believe the image is the 2nd frame from the SE direction. You can observe the Ground Shadows on the Units shown on the Production Button and the units_32 file does not use shadows.

There is a problem with the Default Flc and it is probably not due to the Offset.

tjs282... yes, I understood the over all question but the way it was posted conveyed that the problem could be the Production Button.
 
Vuldacon and Jorsalfare in my eyes are correct. This is also the reason why especially planes are frequently not fitting "into the box".
 
Firaxis units use very small, custom frames which is why their stuff fits so neatly in the box. Unit makers tend to use large frames, often the maximum of 240 x 240.

To remake the defaults of thousands of units using Vuldacon's method would be a formidable task.
 
To remake the defaults of thousands of units using Vuldacon's method would be a formidable task.
Yes it would AnthonyBoscia but there are other methods. The method I used was at the time very easy and fast, not to mention accurate but due to the new Computer Monitors with high resolution, it makes it more difficult to use the method I used but it can be done.

Civ3FlcEdit does a good job... you have to have smaller than 240 x 240 frames to make offsets.
 
Back
Top Bottom