Posting Civlopedia articles

What do you think about that?

  • Great idea! I will probably use all the time!

    Votes: 12 52.2%
  • Good idea. I might use one or two every now and then.

    Votes: 10 43.5%
  • Bad idea. I think it is a waste of space, and I won't use them.

    Votes: 1 4.3%

  • Total voters
    23

Bowsling

Deity
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
5,000
Location
Ontario, Canada
I just want to know what you guys would think if I posted Civlopedia articles in the forums.
They would be entire Civlopedia articles with in individual txt files to copy and paste into the main civlopedia txt. I would have them done for generic things that aren't in the actual game like crossbowman, Poland, zeppelin, or wool. The paragraph describing the unit would be based on my mod, but I might make a new one on request. I could also improve the in-game articles.
 
I like the idea-I hate writing civilopedia articles, I swear it's the most boring part of modding. Just thinking, would it be a stupid idea if we had a thread with loads of civilopedia texts from loads of mods, to browse for info, how they used buildings and to copy them for the sake of laziness?
 
Having a pre-made Civlopedia entry posted up somewhere would be of great help to any modding; it'd save time on spending all that time typing stuff up.
 
Having a pre-made Civlopedia entry posted up somewhere would be of great help to any modding; it'd save time on spending all that time typing stuff up.

:lol: Or C&P-ing from Wikipedia ... ;)
 
To make it the most useful though, it would probably best used with a link to the avialble unit page (for download), then since the entries are dependent on what the BIQ PRTO entry is (which is irrevelent to gameplay, it would be good to just have the PRTO entry the same as the folder name for ease of keeping things simple. Something as such:

Arch Angel

BIQ PRTO entry:
PRTO_Arch_Angel

PediaIcons.txt entries:
#ICON_PRTO_Arch_Angel
art\civilopedia\icons\units\ArchAngel.pcx
art\civilopedia\icons\units\ArchAngelsm.pcx


#ANIMNAME_PRTO_Arch_Angel
Arch Angel


Civilopedia.txt entries:
#PRTO_Arch_Angel
^
^Description Here
#DESC_PRTO_Arch_Angel
^
^Description Here


It may be best to place it in the Modiki, so a thread would not required constant upkeep by the thread starter, since if that user quits coming around, no more updates would be possible.

Tom
 
I don't really think that the link to a specific unit page is neccesary, nor all the PediaIcons stuff. I'd really just want the civilopedia entry, as that's the part that's hard to do.
 
I don't really think that the link to a specific unit page is neccesary, nor all the PediaIcons stuff. I'd really just want the civilopedia entry, as that's the part that's hard to do.

Agreed, not necessary, but might as well add all of it for those whom many feel the same way about the PediaIcons portion.

The reason for the link to the unit is so there would be a less likelihood for a mass of duplicate entries, and people looking through could easily find the unit that the civilopedia entry is referring to. As for actual descriptions being added for the Civilopedia entries, those could be added as a generic entry, but most modders have specific ideas and entries for theirs, so it's not a big deal either way.

Tom
 
Both pedia content (the text) & the prto code are useful & people should feel free to contribute what they want.

A brief modiki article on the prto / 'pedia code structure would be great.:mischief:

You know,we could go "all the way" :mischief: and include info down to the .biq format file (I know Alexman has the .bic on-line, but I think it reasonable to assume that Steph's got the .biq down very well).

Likewise - a breakdown of the unit.ini file ... :hmm: I bet more will come to mind ;)

Best,

Oz
 
I goona agree with Ozy.
 
Back
Top Bottom