Modular civ: What's the difference?

[Pariah]

Call me an ignorant newbie when it comes to Civ 4 modding - but I'm hoping to try my hand at creating a couple of civs, and I'd really like to know.

Why are some creations in this forum labelled "Modular," and not others? Is there a fundamental difference in their gameplay characteristics, or compatibility?

 

[mamba]

A civ is modular when you use the modular approach to editing / creating the xml.

In essence there are two ways, modular (only supported by BtS) and non-modular (any Civ4 version). In non-modular, you add your civ / units / leaders to the standard xml files. In modular, you create new files for your civs / leaders etc. and leave the regular files intact.

The advantage of modular is that in theory you can combine modular mods with each other. In practice you can do so, but it might still require some effort to do so (when the mods include some xml files which cannot be used in a modular way, like new technologies).

As a good examle of a non-modular mod, use the Wolfshanze mod. As a good example for a modular one, use Diversica. When you compare their xml, you will soon note the differences.

 

[cool3a2]

I'd like to add that I found modular mods easier to maintain. Before BtS and modular mods I always checked / updated my files for being up-to-date when a new patch got published for civ4. The problems is, that you overwrite the games default units stats with the unit stats coming with your mod. Now, if your mods files are based on an older version of the units' xml then a patched civ4, you will undo some changes of the patch. This can also happen to buildings and leaders, for example. It depends on what your mod changes. Correcting this also needs some time. This issue can even lead to errors or crashes if certain objects (buildings, units, leaders, civs...) are renamed inside the code, so your mod can become incompatible with new patches of civ4. I never had this problem since I switched to modular mode. On the other side I don't think it is likely that there will be another patch. Or am I informed wrong? However, I strongly suggest to use modular technique.

EDIT: I can also be happy that there was no modular mode at hte time of vanilla civ4 and warlords. The good old time, when I was young... The reason for entering the civ4 modding scene, which was a very good decision, was a partially incompatible mod after some patch...

 

[The Capo]

Also, you can add and remove modules at your leisure as well. Which is helpful if you do a lot of multiplaying.

 

[Pariah]

Thanks fellows! One more thing: what's the latest patch for BTS? I'd prefer my mod (if any) to be up to date.

 

[mamba]

The latest patch is 3.17.

You could also take this further and create your mod based on WoC which allows for an even more flexible and modular format.

As cool3a2 said, modular is easier as you do not overwrite the existing definitions, you just add new ones. This is true as long as you introduce new civs / leaders / units. There are some limits however, technologies for example are not modular as are some other files, and when you want to change an existing definition you still will have to overwrite that.

WoC takes it further, for one it manages to make things like technologies modular as well (so you do not overwrite all existing definitions) and it also introduces 'partial' definitions (for lackof a better word), so when changing a unit, you only chnage that part of its definition you want to change without overwriting the rest. Thus any changes to the rest due to a new patch would still get updated.

I prefer that format, the 'downside' is that you then are tied to the WoC environment, most notably the dll. Whether you want that is up for you to decide.

As long as you 'just' add new civs there will be almost no difference between both formats (the regular modular format would work with WoC too, it does not adhere to the rules if WoC however, so it should be slightly changed for the added flexibility).