Why does C2C even exist if it is not fully developed yet?
My take on stuff
- Thread starter Toffer90
- Start date
Somebody613
Somebody613
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2019
- Messages
- 2,813
I mean, why isn't it commented out, if (and IF) it is non-functional currently?
UNLESS it IS functional already - and I simply didn't reach that point yet.
Which is actually what I said in the first place.
But if it's just a "future artifact" - I do think it'd be much wiser to comment it out for now, because it confuses people with stuff that still isn't there.
That's just my opinion, of course.
The policy button in the civic screen was added in the PPIO modmod. No one thought about commenting it out when PPIO was integrated in core C2C.
We already have the basic xml capability to define policies, but we lack code for displaying any of the policies in-game atm.
I see little reason to comment out this tease button, I won't object if someone else wants to do it though.
We already have the basic xml capability to define policies, but we lack code for displaying any of the policies in-game atm.
I see little reason to comment out this tease button, I won't object if someone else wants to do it though.
Somebody613
Somebody613
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2019
- Messages
- 2,813
And I don't demand it, don't look at me as if I do.
I was just very curious about it myself - and here you said that it's just a project in a beginning stage.
Well, that kinda disappointed me, lol.
You seem paranoid (no offense intended, just my honest impression).
Somebody613
Somebody613
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2019
- Messages
- 2,813
Did you miss the reactions I got from certain guys here about my suggestions being "blindly followed by modders", even though I actually made good points there?
I must have missed that, though it is a common critique thrown at raxo all the time, especially by Joe, so I don't notice it much when it happens.
Your points were ok, though the counterpoint of understanding why it's set up that way before removing it are perhaps better in most cases.
Last edited:
Somebody613
Somebody613
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2019
- Messages
- 2,813
My point about Slavery was actually a fix, not a removal.
Which makes me wonder why do you "need" me to point out such obvious things, lol.
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
Didn't realize we were this much further along on the policy project. Good job! We'll jump on it to complete it eventually.
Somebody613
Somebody613
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2019
- Messages
- 2,813
I really hope so.
More IS more, loool.
Somebody613
Somebody613
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2019
- Messages
- 2,813
This might sound extra-Cheddar-y, but when I see comments like "why hasn't Civ 5/6 learned a thing from C2C, or straight up adopted it" - I feel kinda proud.
Dunno why, just DO.
Dunno why, just DO.
Slavery? I thought you meant the multiple production thing. ^^
Somebody613
Somebody613
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2019
- Messages
- 2,813
That's a newer thing.
The Slavery fix is probably the FIRST thing I asked for after registering, or close enough.
That was quite some time ago already, time FLIES.
colonelflag
Warlord
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2009
- Messages
- 115
Great thanks Toffer90 appriicate it !
Technical note to team.
I've now figured out how to get the base cultures to work without relying on buildingClass for this modmod at least; it will require a few adaptation in dll code that I'll make after v40.1 release.
Instead of using the current CivilizationInfos tags for defining a building for a buildingClass on a civ to civ basis I'm thinking we should simply extend the <FreeBuildingClass> in CivilizationInfos to give the correct culture base to the correct civ when founding cities, the palace is currently the only building used in the <FreeBuildingClass> scheme.
The way the palace is moved when your capital is conquered/razed could also include any other civ based free buildings that are national wonders. A few tweaks here and there and the <FreeBuildingClass> tag can become far more useful.
The only slightly messy thing would be when the palace is built in a city, the other free buildings that are national wonders would have to move with it to keep things consistent and easier on the other code handling these free buildings.
And with that C2C will no longer use buildingclasses in any way that is not easy to replace with regular building definitions instead.
e.g. <FreeBuildingClass> is simple to convert into a <FreeBuilding> tag when we start removing buildingClasses.
These changes I intend on the dll after v40.1 will not change how anything currently functions in base C2C, but it will allow me to get the culture mechanic of this modmod to not depend on buildingClasses.
I could do it all in python for this modmod, but I see an elegant way of doing it with just some minor tweaks in the dll without it upsetting base C2C in any way.
I've now figured out how to get the base cultures to work without relying on buildingClass for this modmod at least; it will require a few adaptation in dll code that I'll make after v40.1 release.
Instead of using the current CivilizationInfos tags for defining a building for a buildingClass on a civ to civ basis I'm thinking we should simply extend the <FreeBuildingClass> in CivilizationInfos to give the correct culture base to the correct civ when founding cities, the palace is currently the only building used in the <FreeBuildingClass> scheme.
The way the palace is moved when your capital is conquered/razed could also include any other civ based free buildings that are national wonders. A few tweaks here and there and the <FreeBuildingClass> tag can become far more useful.
The only slightly messy thing would be when the palace is built in a city, the other free buildings that are national wonders would have to move with it to keep things consistent and easier on the other code handling these free buildings.
And with that C2C will no longer use buildingclasses in any way that is not easy to replace with regular building definitions instead.
e.g. <FreeBuildingClass> is simple to convert into a <FreeBuilding> tag when we start removing buildingClasses.
These changes I intend on the dll after v40.1 will not change how anything currently functions in base C2C, but it will allow me to get the culture mechanic of this modmod to not depend on buildingClasses.
I could do it all in python for this modmod, but I see an elegant way of doing it with just some minor tweaks in the dll without it upsetting base C2C in any way.
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
Outstanding job! I fully support you on that. In fact I'd prefer it if you did this with the core.
When I get it working in the modmod, I will start a branch where I try to do the same in core, the culture mechanic work a bit differently in this modmod so I will try to adapt it in core C2C without changing how it works, if I fail at that I will simply use the exact system from this modmod with all the small changes to the culture mechanic that that will bring. The branch will allow the rest of the team to understand and to try the changes to the culture mechanic a bit easier before merging to master.
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
Fair 'nuff
MToS v0.2.2.18 ▬ Jan. 24.
SVN rev. 11109
MToS v0.2.2.19 ▬ Feb. 03.SVN rev. 11112
- City maintenance is probably out of whack in this modmod now since C2C recently got a reviewed city maintenance code in dll.
- I'll try to rebalance this for the C2C v40.1 release version that is coming soon.
SVN rev. 11115
- Had to include a modified dll to make this work as I wanted atm, it's a final release compiled dll so it is as fast as the v40.1 dll.
SVN rev. 11137
- Probably bugs I haven't caught when trying to adapt it to latest SVN.
- At least the game starts without any error messages and there's no TXT_KEY errors in the pedia index.
- Haven't played more than 10 turns myself though, will see if I have time soon to actually play my own modmod
- Fixed a CTD that happened pretty much straight away if one didn't do AI autoplay.
SVN rev. 11162
MToS v0.2.4.3 ▬ 28.04.20SVN rev. 11167
MToS v0.2.4.4 ▬ 28.04.20SVN rev. 11168
MToS v0.2.4.5 ▬ 12.05.20SVN rev. 11172
MToS v0.2.4.6 ▬ 19.06.20SVN rev. 11183
MToS v0.2.4.7 ▬ 13.07.20SVN rev. 11195
