1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

R.E.D. World War II development thread

Discussion in 'R.E.D. World War II Edition' started by Gedemon, Jul 14, 2011.

  1. DeKes

    DeKes Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    5
    Location:
    New York
    Hi I'm not so great at actual modding yet but I'm still working on it. However, after playing your mod I was inspired to try to make an Operation Market-Garden map. If you ever planned on creating a scenario based off of this I would be willing to try to help somehow. Anyway I really like your mod.
     
  2. Skibbi

    Skibbi Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2011
    Messages:
    422
    I was looking at the codes and it appears it makes units and code spawn at selected areas... I thought I only do that in World Builder...
     
  3. Gedemon

    Gedemon Modder Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2004
    Messages:
    9,343
    Location:
    France
    I need to add something in the UI to show the materiel requested for upgrades. I also plan to add a way to excludes some units from auto-reinforcement/upgrade.

    The cost is based on the difference (in hammer) between the old and the new unit.

    The upgrade patch is defined in the table named g_UnitUpgrades. This table is in the RedDefinesUnits.lua file from the Lua folder, but it's only the default version here, it can be redefined in each scenario define file.

    Here is the default table from RedDefinesUnits.lua, note it's a small and "strict" table, only close models can upgrade:

    Spoiler :
    Code:
    g_UnitUpgrades = {
    	[FR_R35] = FR_R40,
    	[FR_H35] = FR_H39,
    	[GE_PANZER_II] = GE_PANZER_II_L,
    	[GE_PANZER_III] = GE_PANZER_III_J,
    	[GE_PANZER_IV] = GE_PANZER_IV_G,
    	[GE_PANZER_IV_G] = GE_PANZER_IV_H,
    	[GE_BF109] = GE_BF109_F,
    	[GE_BF109_F] = GE_BF109_G,
    	[GE_BF110] = GE_BF110_F4,
    	[UK_CRUISER_II] = UK_CRUISER_IV,
    	[UK_CRUISER_III] = UK_CRUISER_IV,
    	[UK_SPITFIRE] = UK_SPITFIRE_V,
    	[UK_SPITFIRE_V] = UK_SPITFIRE_IX,
    	[RU_T34] = RU_T34_76,
    	[RU_T34_76] = RU_T34_85,
    	[RU_IS_1] = RU_IS_2,
    	[RU_LAGG3] = RU_LA5,
    	[RU_LA5] = RU_LA5_V2,
    	[RU_LA5_V2] = RU_LA7,
    	[IT_M11_39] = IT_M13_40,
    	[IT_M13_40] = IT_M14_41,
    	[IT_M14_41] = IT_M15_42,
    	[US_SHERMAN] = US_SHERMAN_IIA,
    	[US_SHERMAN_IIA] = US_SHERMAN_III,
    	[US_SHERMAN_III] = US_SHERMAN_IIIA,
    	[US_SHERMAN_IIIA] = US_SHERMAN_JUMBO,
    	[US_SHERMAN_JUMBO] = US_SHERMAN_EASYEIGHT,
    }


    the default table is used in the Europe 1939-1945 scenario.

    But now here is the upgrade table as redefined in DefinesEarth1942.lua for the earth 1942 scenario, note how T_KCommanderbly has decided to use a bigger table, with more upgrade possible:

    Spoiler :
    Code:
    g_UnitUpgrades = {
    	[FR_AMR35] = FR_R35,
    	[FR_AMC35] = FR_R40,
    	[FR_R35] = FR_R40,
    	[FR_H35] = FR_H39,
    	[GE_PANZER_I] = GE_PANZER_II,
    	[GE_PANZER_35] = GE_PANZER_II,
    	[GE_PANZER_II] = GE_PANZER_II_L,
    	[GE_PANZER_III] = GE_PANZER_III_J,
    	[GE_PANZER_II] = GE_PANZER_IV,
    	[GE_PANZER_II_L] = GE_PANZER_IV,
    	[GE_PANZER_IV] = GE_PANZER_IV_G,
    	[GE_PANZER_III] = GE_PANZER_IV_G,
    	[GE_PANZER_III_J] = GE_PANZER_IV_G,
    	[GE_PANZER_IV_G] = GE_PANZER_IV_H,
    	[GE_BF109] = GE_BF109_F,
    	[GE_BF109_F] = GE_BF109_G,
    	[GE_BF110] = GE_BF110_F4,
    	[UK_CRUISER_I] = UK_CRUISER_II,
    	[UK_CRUISER_II] = UK_CRUISER_IV,
    	[UK_CRUISER_III] = UK_CRUISER_IV,
    	[UK_CRUISER_IV] = UK_A15_CRUSADER,
    	[UK_A13_COVENANTER] = UK_A15_CRUSADER,
    	[UK_A15_CRUSADER] = UK_A15_CRUSADER_MKIII,
    	[UK_VICKERS_MK6B] = UK_MATILDA_I,
    	[UK_MATILDA_I] = UK_MATILDA_II,
    	[UK_MATILDA_II] = UK_M4_FIREFLY,
    	[UK_SPITFIRE] = UK_SPITFIRE_V,
    	[UK_SPITFIRE_V] = UK_SPITFIRE_IX,
    	[RU_T34] = RU_T34_76,
    	[RU_T34_76] = RU_T34_85,
    	[RU_I16] = RU_LAGG3,
    	[RU_LAGG3] = RU_LA5,
    	[RU_LA5] = RU_LA5_V2,
    	[RU_LA5_V2] = RU_LA7,
    	[RU_LA5] = RU_LA7,
    	[RU_T26] = RU_T28,
    	[RU_T28] = RU_T34_76,
    	[RU_BT2] = RU_BT7,
    	[RU_TB3] = RU_PE8,
    	[RU_KV1] = RU_KV2,
    	[IT_M11_39] = IT_M13_40,
    	[IT_M13_40] = IT_M14_41,
    	[IT_M14_41] = IT_M15_42,
    	[IT_CR42] = IT_G50,
    	[IT_G50] = IT_G55,
    	[US_M3STUART] = US_M5STUART,
    	[US_M3_GRANT] = US_SHERMAN_IIA,
    	[US_SHERMAN] = US_SHERMAN_IIA,
    	[US_SHERMAN_IIA] = US_SHERMAN_III,
    	[US_SHERMAN_III] = US_SHERMAN_IIIA,
    	[US_SHERMAN_IIIA] = US_SHERMAN_JUMBO,
    	[US_SHERMAN_JUMBO] = US_SHERMAN_EASYEIGHT,
    	[US_P36] = US_P40,
    }


    for reference, all available units are also defined in RedDefinesUnits.lua, but then again it can be override at the scenario level.

    Maybe not implemented in the map yet, some units where added in the mod after the 1942 map was made, and the Projects were not available then, now I thing the scenario use the default project list, but still the unit list of the time it was made, so some projects are available, but not the corresponding units... Something to fix, yes.

    I plan the Battle of the Bulge, but not *soon*

    Adding a new scenario is not that much difficult, but you'll have to be familiar with WB and ModBuddy first.

    Both method are possible, but I would advice to use only one per scenario... WB is quicker if you want a precise Order of Battle and fixed names, and spawning method is quicker for area spawning (1 center unit and 6 around) with auto-naming...
     
  4. Gedemon

    Gedemon Modder Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2004
    Messages:
    9,343
    Location:
    France
    ho, and for those following the development (very) closely, I've updated the dev v.31.

    New UI screen for game setup, more user friendly I hope.

     
  5. DeKes

    DeKes Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    5
    Location:
    New York
    Cool I was thinking how well Battle of the Bulge would work too with your mod. I look forward to it whenever it comes. I'll keep fiddling around with modbuddy and my map in the meantime
     
  6. ilshur

    ilshur Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2008
    Messages:
    250
    you need to reduce the hitpoints aircraft have. aircraft are incredibly fragile. a bomber attacking a city defended by a fighter should die, more likely than not, unless its an advanced bomber. restructuring the tech of airpower would help too, to increase hitpoints more for advanced bombers, increased strength more for fighters - as tech progresses.



    Furthermore, cities that default heal should cost a tremendous amount in man and material. This would A) make it much more expensive to capture a city (because it drains your resources fast once its taken), and B) the differences in strength and potency versus classes of other aircraft and other units in general needs to be tremendously greater.


    ill take a gander at the exact figures and how it could be exaggerated in a balanced way, but i think the effect of this would be that players would be required to use their units more tactically, and the AI, which has a tendency i think to build mostly fighters, would be more defended against player use (currently, abuse) of air power.

    The nazi's had a worldclass airforce, but at the moment, its literally unstoppable
     
  7. Gedemon

    Gedemon Modder Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2004
    Messages:
    9,343
    Location:
    France
    We're talking of squadrons here, not single aircraft, I've never heard of a squadron entirely destroyed during a mission, and wearing down a bomber squadron out of operation take months AFAIK, the only way to kill a squadron should be by capturing it's base while it's grounded... And that's just how the game works currently.

    Now I may buff the strength of fighters against bomber and heavy bomber if there is a general opinion toward that.

    But remember that to counter bombers and heavy bombers you need heavy fighters. (edit : maybe I should speak to the AI about that, not you ;) )

    "Light" fighters are better to gain air superiority via sweeping missions, and are excellent against attack aircraft.

    On a side note, the AI as been modded to remove it's air units from operation when they are low on health, so maybe it's frustrating to not see a "kill" on those bombers, but they drain resources to heal, and each successful interception is a step to victory :D

    About raising the difference in class with tech progression, I'm against it on first thought, from my game I found there is already a big difference between a normal Hawk-75 and a slightly promoted BF-109E. Or should I lower the difference from combat experience ?

    For city draining resources, I'm unsure, not frankly against it, but it's already difficult to keep your materiel level above 0 without that, I'm afraid it would nerf too much any offensive gameplay... And AI is already bad enough on offense...

    And I don't know how you manage it, but I'm very reticent to send my bombers on attack when I fear there are interceptors facing them because of the drain the bomber healing will put on my precious materiel...

    Now I've added more factories to Germany a few month again and hadn't played a full game with them since on the Europe map, maybe they've too much resources now ? do you feel that you can "abuse" the AI the same way using USSR ?

    And please, keep the feedback coming (everyone I mean), I'm not on fixed positions here, if somethings need to be changed, we'll do it. But not too quickly, I've a feeling of a general balanced gameplay ATM, I don't want to break it in fast change.
     
  8. Gedemon

    Gedemon Modder Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2004
    Messages:
    9,343
    Location:
    France
    And if you want to test some different stats, you just need to edit the NewDefaultUnits.sql file in the "\Documents\My Games\Sid Meier's Civilization 5\MODS\R.E.D. WWII Edition (v 31)\SQL" folder

    example for the Fighter entry:
    Code:
    -- Old Fighter
    INSERT INTO "Units" ('Type', 'Description', 'Civilopedia', 'Strategy', 'Help', 'Requirements', 'Combat', 'RangedCombat', 'Cost', 'Moves', 'Immobile', 'Range', 'BaseSightRange', 'Class', 'Special', 'Capture', 'CombatClass', 'Domain', 'CivilianAttackPriority', 'DefaultUnitAI', 'Food', 'NoBadGoodies', 'RivalTerritory', 'MilitarySupport', 'MilitaryProduction', 'Pillage', 'Found', 'FoundAbroad', 'CultureBombRadius', 'GoldenAgeTurns', 'IgnoreBuildingDefense', 'PrereqResources', 'Mechanized', 'Suicide', 'CaptureWhileEmbarked', 'PrereqTech', 'ObsoleteTech', 'GoodyHutUpgradeUnitClass', 'HurryCostModifier', 'AdvancedStartCost', 'MinAreaSize', 'AirUnitCap', 'NukeDamageLevel', 'WorkRate', 'NumFreeTechs', 'RushBuilding', 'BaseHurry', 'HurryMultiplier', 'BaseGold', 'NumGoldPerEra', 'SpreadReligion', 'IsReligious', 'CombatLimit', 'RangeAttackOnlyInDomain', 'RangeAttackIgnoreLOS', 'RangedCombatLimit', 'XPValueAttack', 'XPValueDefense', 'SpecialCargo', 'DomainCargo', 'Conscription', 'ExtraMaintenanceCost', 'NoMaintenance', 'Unhappiness', 'UnitArtInfo', 'UnitArtInfoCulturalVariation', 'UnitArtInfoEraVariation', 'ProjectPrereq', 'SpaceshipProject', 'LeaderPromotion', 'LeaderExperience', 'DontShowYields', 'ShowInPedia', 'MoveRate', 'UnitFlagIconOffset', 'PortraitIndex', 'IconAtlas', 'UnitFlagAtlas')
    	SELECT	("UNIT_OLD_FIGHTER"), ("TXT_KEY_UNIT_FIGHTER"), "Civilopedia", "Strategy", "Help", "Requirements",
    			"Combat", [COLOR="Red"](30)[/COLOR], (325), "Moves", "Immobile", (8), "BaseSightRange", ("UNITCLASS_OLD_FIGHTER"), "Special", "Capture", "CombatClass", "Domain", "CivilianAttackPriority", "DefaultUnitAI", "Food", "NoBadGoodies", "RivalTerritory", "MilitarySupport", "MilitaryProduction", "Pillage", "Found", "FoundAbroad", "CultureBombRadius", "GoldenAgeTurns", "IgnoreBuildingDefense", "PrereqResources", "Mechanized", "Suicide", "CaptureWhileEmbarked", "PrereqTech", "ObsoleteTech", "GoodyHutUpgradeUnitClass", "HurryCostModifier", "AdvancedStartCost", "MinAreaSize", "AirUnitCap", "NukeDamageLevel", "WorkRate", "NumFreeTechs", "RushBuilding", "BaseHurry", "HurryMultiplier", "BaseGold", "NumGoldPerEra", "SpreadReligion", "IsReligious", "CombatLimit", "RangeAttackOnlyInDomain", "RangeAttackIgnoreLOS", "RangedCombatLimit", "XPValueAttack", "XPValueDefense", "SpecialCargo", "DomainCargo", "Conscription", "ExtraMaintenanceCost", "NoMaintenance", "Unhappiness",
    			("ART_DEF_UNIT_FIGHTER"), "UnitArtInfoCulturalVariation", "UnitArtInfoEraVariation", "ProjectPrereq", "SpaceshipProject", "LeaderPromotion", "LeaderExperience", "DontShowYields", "ShowInPedia", "MoveRate",
    			"UnitFlagIconOffset", "PortraitIndex", "IconAtlas", "UnitFlagAtlas"
    	FROM "Units" WHERE (Type = "UNIT_FIGHTER");
    
    ----
    In red the ranged combat value, what you want to change for air units.

    And in NewPromotions.xml in the XML folder you'll find the stats for each large "class" promotion.

    Also, for reference, the spreadsheet shows the relative strength of each unit class in the "vs" columns.
     
  9. ilshur

    ilshur Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2008
    Messages:
    250
    While i have your attention, and the time to flesh it all out, let me get into a slightly longer form on my thoughts on airpower and how it could be improved:

    I'll take it point by point on conceptual basis:

    Interception:

    Interception radius should be greatly expanded to 5 or 7 tiles from the city it's based in, but only over tiles you own/occupy. As it stands, i have a very murky understanding of the airforce mechanics, but i would be greatly surprised if the radius for vanilla civ5 or your mod was greater than 2 or 3. This is both unrealistic and easy to counter. In reality, fighter squadrons would be deployed against any largescale offensive air movement all over europe, and this should be reflected in the mod. It would also make the AI more easy to configure that it should deploy fighters equally in interception and airsweep maneuvers 95% of every turn, and always in the strongest city closest to 'the front.'

    If the radius is indeed broader, then some other aspect of the mechanics isn't functioning properly. 1 fighter/heavyfighter should be able to intercept 2 enemy attacking bomber/attack aircraft, and deal them significant damage.

    Airsweeps:

    This seems almost a useless feature, because only England ever seems to have fighters set to interception, and even then its less than half the time - and there always seems to be at least 8 or 10 aircraft stationed in london at somepoint in 1940. It goes hand in hand with programming the AI to use its to greater effect, but with the AI not set to intercept, the need for airsweeps is greatly reduced.

    the AI:

    Furthermore, you should only be able to airsweep a city where you can see an aircraft is based - if its not an aircraft set to intercept, then nothing will happen, and you've lost that turns move. If it is set to intercept, a dog-fight will occur, based on strength. The AI should be programmed to mass it strength when on the attack. If its targeting a city within area of a major airforce (3+), it should airsweep that city with as many light fighters as it has, and then bomb to the target city.


    I know it's asking quite a lot, but the AI needs to be taught to mass its strength better, preserve its resources, deploy its units economically, and try to form some kind of 'front', instead of it's tendency to just send literally single units deep into enemy character. This is symptomatic of the regular civ5 engine, but its obvious to any decent human player and transparent to the world that the a well orchestrated military maneuver outperforms as a whole than the sum of its parts deployed separately in a stupid and aimless way.




    On a side note, i tend to auto-fast all battles, because the animation expands the halflife of every turn by a factor of 5 or 10 at minimum, so i sometimes dont see the exact workings of the mechanics because i am not filing away the individual battle reports, but the next game i play, ill be england and make a point of trying to do some air-power evaluations against Germany.



    And maybe its just me, but i never seem to be low on materials. My individual playstyle is relatively light and fast, and on the few games where i've conquered the world, i did it with less than 30 aircraft and 15 armor but had literally i think 100 or 120 fallschirmjager. in my opinion, fallschirmjager are overpowered, and the allies need access to paratroopers earlier, and the the AI needs to be taught to envelop enemy targets with them to 'cut them off' from supplies, or to take out roads behind target cities to prevent reinforcing units.


    This is mainly why i would be in great favor of simplifying certain aspects to make for a more streamlined opportunity to multiplayer, as well, im just really not certain in what manner certain things could be gotten ride of.


    Next longform post: empowering england with more convoys, and a modified mini-eastern seaboard as a neutral city state that gets annexed in 1941
     
  10. Gedemon

    Gedemon Modder Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2004
    Messages:
    9,343
    Location:
    France
    Now that part explain a lot to me :

    Try to deactivate fast battle in your next game. It will take longer, but I'm pretty sure that the other half of the hard implemented AI override I've added to the mod that were not broken by the patch are then fully killed by the use of this option :D

    Try the Stalingrad scenario if you don't want to lose too much time in the animation, and use my "Faster Aircraft" mod.

    The patch .674 have broken the ability to track air attacks on cities, but it still work for attack on land / sea unit. Use the "Allow AI overriding" option, and see how the AI will place it's fighter in interception against your Stukas after 1 or 2 turns of attacks on it's land units... Well they won't last long if you start sweeping them with the Fw-190, but there you'll see it's use, and the power of an more advanced fighter against obsolete ones...

    I'm unsure about the part where I teach AI to use sweep against your fighter (and in the Stalingrad scenario, USSR won't have enough free fighter to do that, they'll be all defending against your bombers) - edit: now I'm sure, that too was broken by the patch...

    On other notes, interception radius is the range of the fighter (minimum 8, 10 or more for heavy fighter IIRC, and even more on the Stalingrad scenario with the promotion to reflect the scale of the map), and every fighter can intercept 2 enemy aircraft per turn already.
     
  11. ilshur

    ilshur Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2008
    Messages:
    250
    what is the name of the fast animation patch?is it in steam workshop? othejrwise plz link to an download
     
  12. Gedemon

    Gedemon Modder Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2004
    Messages:
    9,343
    Location:
    France
  13. ilshur

    ilshur Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2008
    Messages:
    250
    ok, i'll give it a try. i have a savedgame of germany in aerly 1939 from the 1936 format, and i've been playing off of that because all of the economies are more developed, and the ussr in particular has a wealth of infantry that is able to adequetely 'fill the battlespace.



    What would be ideal, though, is for Russia, and to a limited extent, great britian as well, to have some kind of 'militia' unit. it'd attack at half strength, and have lower hitpoints, but it'd have no upkeep and would act as an ablative shield against the onslaught of my advancing highpowered columnes.
     
  14. ottoman4u

    ottoman4u Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2006
    Messages:
    105
    I would like to say that Russia and Britian should get some production bonuses. Britian on planes and boats, and Russia with men and tanks.

    The airwar should be revised somehow. . . not sure how. Maybe bring down their strength, or make them harder to repair would be a start. Also, is there a way to turn up British and Russian aggression? Or maybe make it so they only bomb cities they can take?
     
  15. kelestra

    kelestra Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    93
    Is it intended that interception gives no xp to intercepting fighters anymore???
     
  16. Gedemon

    Gedemon Modder Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2004
    Messages:
    9,343
    Location:
    France
    one of the many things broken by patch .674, I'm still trying to find a way to fix the damage done by that patch.
     
  17. thecivinator58

    thecivinator58 Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2012
    Messages:
    243
    Location:
    USA
    So how will we fix the 356 unit limit?
     
  18. Gedemon

    Gedemon Modder Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2004
    Messages:
    9,343
    Location:
    France
    There are no solution that I like. Except with the release of the DLL or Firaxis fixing the problem, we could switch the map format to scripts instead of Worldbuilder saves, but it would require a lot of work, and will make new scenario more difficult to create.
     
  19. ZeroZeroSix

    ZeroZeroSix Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Messages:
    347
     
  20. thecivinator58

    thecivinator58 Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2012
    Messages:
    243
    Location:
    USA
    :eek: So how much space is left for new units? We could start by getting rid of some of Poland's UU (or just by making Poland playable)
    EDIT:And how would we get firaxis to help?
     

Share This Page