[Religion and Revolution]: Mod Development

[Nightinggale]

Actually that bug only occurs if the scenario WorldbuilderSave is not created correctly in terms of RaR.
(I have explained many times that scenario maps are a bit tricky.)

I missed that you have said that and that mean I'm sure other people miss it too.

But if you want to correct that, that is fine for me.
(It will make scenario making a bit more convenient for new modders.)

I want WB to be able to just save a scenario and then it works without further modding because I think people assume that would work (I did). I have come up with a new solution, one which will work in all cases. WBsave will have a player tag telling that the player is church or barbarian. That way functions like CvGame::getBarbarianPlayer() will work on game init and it will not add another one.

 

[raystuttgart]

Well, as long as your solution does not get too complicated I am fine with that.
(Otherwise please restore source files and DLL as it was before your commit.)

As I said:

1. That issue is extremely easy to fix by editing the WorldbuilderSave.
2. There are a few map generation features in RaR, that might require editing the WorldbuilderSave anyways.

Edit:

Also please pay attention to the fact, that a WorldBuilderSave will not save all data, like a normal save would.

When setting up Church and WildAnimals, the initialization will for example set "alwaysAtWarPeace" (don't know the exact name at the moment).
Also the variables that are stored at the game object with "setBarbarianPlayer()" and "setChurchPlayer()" need to be set correctly.

Such tiny aspects are very important and I am not sure, if they are stored in WorldbuilderSaves.
(Actually I am almost sure that several of those variables will not be stored in a WorldbuilderSave like in a normal save.)

If such things are not saved in the WorldbuilderSave, it is probably much better to just solve this issue as it current is solved:
(Because otherwise we will risk incorrectly initialized Wild Animals and Church which could lead to very strange bugs.)

Simply create the WorldBuilderSave correctly in terms of RaR.
(Which will invoke normal initialization of WildAnimals and Church.)

I missed that you have said that and that mean I'm sure other people miss it too.

No problem.
That is why I am still around so other modders can ask.

It is completely normal that new modders cannot know about all the details of all the years of development of RaR (or in some cases even longer ago in TAC).
(Which is also the reason, why I tried to check every commit to RaR SVN.)

 

[raystuttgart]

@Nightinggale:

The more I think about it, the less convinced I am that messing with the mod is necessary for that.
This is more about "modders not knowing" than "things not working".

If scenario maps are created correctly in terms of RaR, then there are no problems with Wild Animals or Church at all.

It is very important that initialization of Wild Animals and Church is done correctly.

And I really believe that several variables needed for those features to work correctly would not be saved in a WorldBuilderSave.
(So you would need to do some kind of initialization anyways.)

All scenario maps currently contained in the mod should work fine.
(Otherwise we should of course repair them.)

Thus I believe it is better to leave it as it is.
(The current approach will result in proper initialization and has proven to work fine.)

Thus:

1. Please restore sources and DLL to the state before your commit of the fix.
2. Please post about bugs first so we can talk about it before hastily commiting fixes to SVN.

---

I am sorry.

But I am simply not willing to potentially introduce bugs by unnecessary code changes like that.
I would not even have time to test map generation properly.

If you like to do some other solution in RaRE, that is perfectly fine for me of course.

 

[Nightinggale]

The more I think about it, the less convinced I am that messing with the mod is necessary for that.

That's your choice. However I figured all it takes is saving the indexes of those two players in WBsave, just like they are saved in savegames. That takes 18 lines and appear to work just fine.

1. Please restore sources and DLL to the state before your commit of the fix.

Done.

 

[AbsintheRed]

What?? Why?
Straigthforward fixes like this one should definitely included in RaR too.
I hope you will change your mind, and if some things seem stable in RaRE, you guys will include it in the next version of the main mod (I'm sure there will be small further releases every couple months, further bugs/minor issues are always found with mods this huge)

 

[raystuttgart]

Thanks.

My current plan for the next 2 weeks is actually only this:

1. Get the GameSpeed issue corrections of Barthoze tested.
2. Publish Release 2.4.
3. Officially end RaR base project once and for all.
4. Delete RaR SVN space.

If Schmiddie wants to continue RaR base project, he could of course do so and I would simply leave the project to him.
(Schmiddie is the only other official team member, that has stayed in this project over all those years until now.)

If our modmodders get a big common project based on RaR started I will be really happy.
(RaRE or whatever it will be called.)

Good luck and fun with modding.

I'm sure there will be small further releases every couple months, ...

Nope.

Actually Schmiddie and myself had agreed to completely end RaR after Release 2.3.
(We are actually trying to end this project for very long already.)

But then again a few small fixes and improvments slipped into SVN ...
Those will be published in Release 2.4.

Anything after that will lie in the hands of the modmodders.
(Unless Schmiddie changes his mind and will continue RaR base project without me.)

 

[AbsintheRed]

But then again a few small fixes and improvments slipped into SVN ...
Those will be published in Release 2.4.

I don't get it.
Why is this bad? It would probably continue after 2.4 if you guys let it happen.
And then you can always come back to release a next version every couple months.
Would be the same as with the upcoming 2.4 version. No effort or time from you, and the mod still keeps getting better.

 

[raystuttgart]

The discuisson about ending RaR base project has been led way too often already.
TAC base project has also ended years ago and world did not end either.

As I said:

If modders want to continue working on RaR, they can do so as in a new mod project based on RaR.
Then everybody will be happy.

Modmodders will be able to do whatever they want in any way they want.
I will not need to organize or discuss or do quality control or publish or ...

Unless RaR base project has finally ended, I will simply always feel responsible for it.
(Like I had returned again from being "retired" after hearing about bugs in Release 2.2.)

I simply don't have enough time and motivation left to continue RaR.
Please respect that.

 

[AbsintheRed]

My point is, why are you so eager to name a version "final"?
Mods in general never reach a final state, there is always room for improvements/fixes.
I'm sure there will be some further bug findings in RaR. With this move, you guys are destroying the opportunity of those being fixed for your own mod, thus forcing players to use a modmod instead (in which they might not even like the additional content, only seek these bugfixes missing from RaR).
You are in the fortunate position that there are lots of RaR players, and some of them are more than capable of handling the upcoming issues themselves.
Why don't you just release 2.4, and let things flow their way? If you look back a couple months later, and like some of the improvements from the community, you can release those as 2.5.
Noone wants any further commitments from you or Schmiddie, we all know how much you guys contributed. But don't totally cease the development of RaR, there is no reason for that.

EDIT: crosspost with ray

 

[raystuttgart]

Mods in general never reach a final state, there is always room for improvements/fixes.

True, but I have been modding this game longer already than any other modder that is still active.
I am tired and don't have the time anymore due to real life and job.

... and let things flow their way?

Because things simply do not "flow their way".

• I am having lots of discussions with modmodders (and community) about adding their personal wishes all the time.
• I do quality assurance to all commits to SVN all the time.
• I do correct small errors in commits or problems in concepts all the time.
• I do try to properly test every release.
• I do answer questions from community in several modding forums all the time.

...

This has become so much that I could not even continue to program big new features.
(I spent most of my modding time fixing issues or taking care of things.)

But now I don't even have any time anymore for supporting in the background.
(And I am not willing to simply "let things flow" and ruin what we have achieved.)

----

If I would have simply "let things flow" over the last years, I promise you that this mod would be full of issues and bugs and have almost no quality at all
because details like texts, translations, balancing, ... would not have been take caren of !

Modmodders would have committed to SVN whatever they liked without any concept discussion or quality control.
(Others may believe that such an approach can create a great mod. I do not.)

Do you really want to tell me again ?:
"You don't have any efforts and can simply let things flow."

Seriously, let us stop this discussion, before I get pissed.

Decision has been made:

2 weeks from now RaR base project will officially end once and for all.
(Unless Schmiddie changes his mind again and wants to continue the project.)

After that, maybe our modmodders will start a new common mod project based on RaR.
(I would really like to see that. It won't be my business though.)

 

[AbsintheRed]

Obviously not every casual player who comes around RaR should be able to commit anything they like. It would truly cause a total mess, no doubt's there.
But IMO you should trust more in experienced modders' judgement, like Nightingale for example.

Our opinion differs greatly how we should leave a modding project. I would have never closed the RFC Europe development (and my svn is still open), even though I didn't have time for more than a year to improve anything.
I think you are making a mistake, but I don't want to force anything on you guys.
My last post was already a crosspost with yours.

 

[raystuttgart]

Again:

We are closing only RaR base project.
We do allow other modders to use RaR as a base to create a new project.

Everything else has been said.

 

[Schmiddie]

2 weeks from now RaR base project will officially end once and for all.

I don't know if I will be interested in modding Civ4:Col / RaR once again in the future but I know that I have no time and mind modding RaR at this point of time. So I'm completely fine with this decision.

So RaR will officially end in two weeks.

 

[Beetlebug]

Not sure where to put this since everyone is retiring, but is there a way to modify how many troops the King gives you when you agree to go to war in exchange for troops. I would like to put it back to 2 Hessians, 2 Royal artillery and 1 man-o-war.

I know I could decline, but the chance to get a man-o-war before the war of independence is too tempting.

Thanks

 

[raystuttgart]

@Schmiddie:

I did a quick check of things done in Release 2.2.
(I haven't really been playing or testing since then.)

You did some XML changes to Units in Release 2.2 I am not really sure about.

e.g. all the new <TerrainAttacks> and <TerrainDefenses> at Units don't make much sense to me.
(And they are pretty ugly in display when selecting the unit because the list of modifiers is getting very long and confusing.)

But well, maybe I simply don't understand what you were trying to do.
(So I did not revert any of that.)

------

However, you had forgotten our new TerrainTypes and FeatureTypes at several places of your new modifiers, which I now corrected.

1. I added TERRAIN_SAVANNAH wherever I found TERRAIN_GRASS
(It is more or less the same combat wise only with other Yields.)

2. I added FEATURE_FOREST_TUNDRA wherever I found FEATURE_FOREST.
(It is more or less the same combat wise only with other Yields.)

 

[Schmiddie]

The idea was simple: Trying to bring more advantages and disadvantages to all units and trying to make military units much more interesting. To my opinion this works ingame!

And to my opinion the AI now arranges more different military units as before (now the AI also unses much more cavalry and infantry). I know the problem with the display but did not find a solution so far. If it would be possible to reach the result by another way - not problem I'm open minded to that, but I don't fancy to change the entries by my self.

Maybe you remember that we had great ideas regarding the improvement of the military system - but we could not implement them since you suddenly retired from modding... ...the new wonderful looking military pioneer and military surgeon are still waiting in my modding folders...hehe

 

[Nightinggale]

I know the problem with the display but did not find a solution so far.

Once in a while I have been thinking of grouping displays. The problem is that the display is like:
+30% grassland attack
+20% grassland defence
+30% prairie attack
+20% prairie defence

If the display could be just a little bit more clever, it could display
+30% attack on grassland, prairie
+20% defence on grassland, prairie

The problem is that doing that would likely require way more time than I'm prepared to put into it, at least right now. It would be better to figure out some function to call to take care of that and then simply call that function over and over with different arguments. However the big question is how to make a function like that

 

[raystuttgart]

Hm well it is as it is.
Totally reworking this is more than I would like to do anyways.

And of course I know that our New Combat System was not implemented because I gave up.

By the way:

I just saw that I need to do this for Promotions as well.
(Same forgotten new TerrainTypes and FeatureTypes as in XML with Units.)

Did already correct and commit.

1. I added TERRAIN_SAVANNAH wherever I found TERRAIN_GRASS
(It is more or less the same combat wise only with other Yields.)

2. I added FEATURE_FOREST_TUNDRA wherever I found FEATURE_FOREST.
(It is more or less the same combat wise only with other Yields.)

 

[raystuttgart]

Next weekend I will do a last check of DLL sources and XML to see if I find any issues.
I will also try to check my "todo-list" again to see if there is something left on it, that can be done with very little effort and risk.

 

[raystuttgart]

If the display could be just a little bit more clever, it could display

It is not only display.
Vanilla combat system is simply missing a lot of functionality.
(And to my opinion it also has several design problems.)

Trying to abuse TerrainTypes for:

1. Flatlands vs. Forrests
2. Flatlands vs. Peaks / Hills
3. Offensive Combat vs. Defensive Combat
...

was never a good idea or working very well.

For 2 main reasons:

1. The way TerrainTypes, PlotTypes and FeatureTypes are combined in combat calculations.
2. The way Units and Professions both affect combat abilities. (Together with Promotions)

Thus our new Combat System was meant to introduce new functionality and change several aspects (like introduction of more CombatTypes).
(And also add other functionality like "Long Range Combat" and "Collateral Damage" for more interesting usage of artillery.)

But maybe ModMods will one day implement such an improved new Combat System.