RevolutionDCM for BTS

hey bro,

so is see the land of the kangaroo's is keeping you busy ...

that fine, i wasn't upset or anything, by i appreciate your concern :)

well then, i hope everything will be ok with youe RL! thats the most important thing of course.

as for siege - well i played a game lately - after a lot of time, i do play with ranged, but your right, its better be off.

mp...man ive worked so hard this week on it, and i cant get it - now im testings 2.722, hope it will give me some slack :)
im now trying also a regular bbai merged with my own mods xml additions, but that harder to test cause there's no ai autoplay for mp there...im almost desperate of mp in civ4, thought of rolling back to civ3.......:)

afforess has returned to build a new dawn, ive been using his work a lot, its awesome that hes back, it would be awesome if the people will come back sometime, stranger things have happened.
im still here, or at least until a new better civ version comes out, i am a fanatic after all.

great to hear from you as always,
good luck in the exams my friend.
 
hi keldath,

when the 2.722 build was 100% ok (that's to be confirmed), that's obviously a basis to build upon,
or at least a milestone for other releases to check against. something could have happened after that :D
 
I need help with this issue:

It used to read the BtS worldbuilder files just great in Scenario and Custom Scenario modes. I would start games normally with the mod enabled.

But now it doesn't. It says "Failed to read worldbuilder file (followed by the file name)". The weirdest thing is that it used to work but now it doesn't anymore. I need help quick or my vacations won't be as good :P

The weirdest thing about it is that I have a laptop with Windows XP installed and the mod works fine, loads all kinds of scenarios. But in here, with Windows 7, it won't. Maybe it's because of the Windows version? I'm not sure, it makes no sense, if it opens in one it should open in the other!

EDIT: I know the reason why it happens now. I must run the game as administrator to let it load. It's probably due to the location of the publicmaps folder.
 
Was just checking if there are any components that need updating. Has anyone made a version with Advanced Unit Automation 1.6 included ?
 
Two question:
1)I noticed going through the revolutions python files that the list for barbarian types (like Viking) is no longer present. I'm working on a conversion mod and I don't want to miss a python file that I have to edit. The only files I can tell that need editing are RevDefs and RebelTypes. Am I missing any files?
2) During a revolution that spawns a new civ, what happens if there are no unused civs in the game? (ie: All that are in the XML are in the game, but I still have extra 'slots' that can be filled)
 
I posted a question in Revolutions, but I guess RevDCM is not the same as it so the question is best suited for this thread I believe. I am trying to revert the RevDCM civic and technology screens back to the defaults. What do I need to do to do that? The tech screen has some diasble options in game, but not completely. I can't find any civic options in game. Any game options I am overlooking or sdk/python code I should look at?

Update: I've reverted the tech screen back in game with disabling of era color options and the great people tech option. The civics screen can be reverted back to default by simply deleting the python file CvCivisScreen.

I would still like to know how to get rid of the RevDCM starting popup saying which options are enabled. I've searched the python files and can't find it.
 
Hey all, I have a quick question:

In all honesty, is the 2.90 version of RevDCM going to be the last one for a while?

The reason I ask is, I have an XML mod that keeps periodically crashing to desktop with RevDCM 2.72. I'm pretty sure it's not an art bug, but other than that I have no idea that it could be. If I turn python exceptions on, there are tons of them, and my pythonerr2.log says at the end "01:12:57 DEBUG: BugInit - game not fully initialized," so there's obviously something seriously wrong with my xml mod.

At this point, I think the best thing for me to do would be to go through all of my xml files, document all of my changes in a changelog (something that I've been meaning to do for a while now anyways), and hand-edit them into the xml for RevDCM 2.90. That way, there can't possibly be any bugs introduced. (I think bugs have been introduced along the line from me copy/pasting xml files from older versions of RevDCM into newer versions, when some of the core format of the RevDCM xml files have been changed. I've tried to catch most instances of this, such as with the changes to how the revolution parameters are handled in Civ4CivicInfos.xml, for example, but my guess is that I didn't catch all of the formatting changes, so what's probably happening is that the python files are looking to the xml files expecting to find stuff that isn't there. I can fix this by hand-editing in my xml changes into RevDCM 2.90).

The reason I ask whether RevDCM is going to be the last RevDCM update for a while is because I obviously don't want to hand-edit my xml changes in more than once, as it's going to take probably a couple of days at least.

Basically, what is missing from RevDCM (or its subcomponents such as BUG, BUFFY, BULL, BetterAI, etc.) that could be theoretically added in the future? Multiplayer stability I don't really care about. As long as RevDCM 2.90 is stable for single player and already has most of the major improvements of BUG, BBAI, etc. that we are going to see, I wouldn't mind staying with my modified version of RevDCM 2.90 forever, and having it be the last update of my xml mod that I have to do (considering that copy/pasting updating hasn't worked up until now, such that hand-editing seems for me to be the only way I'd consider updating my xml mod in the future).

So, basically, what will I be missing out on if I hand-update my xml mod to RevDCM 2.90 for the last time and stick with this version forever?
 
Zeiter said:
In all honesty, is the 2.90 version of RevDCM going to be the last one for a while?
Click to expand...

chances are it is, there haven't been many updates for quite some time, other than the AUA 1.6 I was asking about a few posts back there also isn't anything new out there (that I am aware of at least)

The reason I ask whether RevDCM is going to be the last RevDCM update for a while is because I obviously don't want to hand-edit my xml changes in more than once, as it's going to take probably a couple of days at least.
Click to expand...

you could just have your changes as modular XML, then you do not need to edit them in every time there is a new release (not that they are that frequent anyway).
 
Eh Mamba and friends
For many years all of us worked thousands of hours on this mod and it's foundation core mods.

It will not be forgotten.

There's one problem now.....

I bought Civ5. If it turns out that the Civ5 SDK does not get released, then work on Civ4 will resume to some extent at some point. What I still have in mind for this mod, is to introduce Afforess's improvements from the AND project where relevant including AUA.

But as it is, Civ5 is such an astonishing achievement after a lot of terrible pain since initial release, that for now all work on this mod has taken a back seat. The AI in Civ5 is much more accomplished than I ever thought possible. It truly is a spectacular achievement to have done with the AI as much as it can do on today's completely inadequate technology. It will be an amazing journey for all of us modders to study the AI in civ5 once the source code is released (if that happens).

From my perspective, Civ5 is a genuine step forward for the civ series even in terms of core game play (with some reservations). Once I learned that the two legends that inspired this very mod, Dale and Jdog5000 are both on the Frankenstein team for Civ5, and also that the developers have adopted some of their ideas and also are listening to them during patch cycles at least to some extent, what can I say! Even the huge double CD soundtrack is great for giving us so much regionally inspired world music to listen to.

A resounding well done to everyone involved in Civ5 up to this point! Everybody involved has their place. Even the ultra negative whingers have their place too! We all love this amazing game.

That said, I think Afforess is probably one of the few modder's on Civfanatics (as well as Jdog5000, Fuyu's, Yakk, Lemmy101, the fresh bloods and anyone else with computer science backgrounds) that will be able to get a grip on how the AI in civ5 works....if the SDK get's released. Support them where ever you can! They might find a way to make the tactical AI even better than it is now. The tactical AI is not incompetent now! It is just that the computer science problem with it is really tricky. Keep in mind that Civ5 is extremely moddable in the XML and there is a lot that can be tweaked even in the AI, so all hope is not lost for Civ5 if the SDK doesn't get released.

So whether anything happens on this mod again, will depend on whether the Civ5 source code get's released. If it doesn't, then this mod will get another update. The point for me is simply that I don't have nearly as much time as I used to a couple of years ago. My time now has to be heavily rationed.

Cheers
 
mamba said:
chances are it is, there haven't been many updates for quite some time, other than the AUA 1.6 I was asking about a few posts back there also isn't anything new out there (that I am aware of at least)



you could just have your changes as modular XML, then you do not need to edit them in every time there is a new release (not that they are that frequent anyway).
Click to expand...

No, I ran into some weird problems with trying to do it that way...like my game trying to refer redundantly to both my modmod and the parent mod, such as with promotions, and getting things super-screwy (such as city raider II leading to both shock and city raider III, when I wanted it to lead only to shock). Note that the vast majority of my XML changes are changes to existing things, not stuff like new units or buildings.

And glider, good luck on your Civ5 modding! You and the others who have worked on RevDCM have contributed more than anyone could ever ask for to Civ4. I don't think it will be the end of the world if RevDCM ends with 2.90, of course. It is already a 99.99999% flawless gaming experience. It will be the end of the world for me, however, if I do this last hand-edit and still end of getting CTDs, lol. But I figure that this has to be a foolproof method if there ever was one.
 
Hey Glider, I don't even own Civ5 (don't have a computer that could run it even if I wanted to), but I do like to browse the forum and I thought what Dennis Shirk posted the other day (in the rants thread of all places :p) would be interesting to you:

No petition is needed. We are actively prepping the DLL, and hope to have more for you shortly once we have it in a good place (and it's almost ready for beta). Our next step is prepping the engine to hot-load the DLL, rather than restarting the entire game when we want to load a mod that uses the DLL.

We'll keep everyone posted.
Click to expand...
(Link)
 
Zeiter said:
No, I ran into some weird problems with trying to do it that way...like my game trying to refer redundantly to both my modmod and the parent mod, such as with promotions, and getting things super-screwy (such as city raider II leading to both shock and city raider III, when I wanted it to lead only to shock). Note that the vast majority of my XML changes are changes to existing things, not stuff like new units or buildings.
Click to expand...

That sounds like it could be Due to the WoC included in RevDCM. Essentially if something is a list, like the promotions a promotion leads to, you cannot remove existing entries of the list (in this case City Raider 3), only add to it in a modular way.

To remove an entry, you need to do that in Assets/XML - as you did by not going modular.
 
Thanks for the help Mamba! Chris yeah thanks for that link. I've heard the murmurings about a source code release for civ5. I'd be kinda shocked if they actually do it simply because of the logic I've been using in my head. If the Civ5 AI is fundamentally different to the Civ4 AI, and if there is no equivalent AI mechanism in the gaming world, why would they release their intellectual property? The only reason would be that they have already developed significant improvements to the AI that would make the release of the source code obsolete, except for a few dedicated modders. I understand why they released the AI code for Civ4 (because there was nothing ground breaking in that code that needed to be kept secret, and that the stacked model of turn based games was coming to an end in any case).

But the dilemma in my mind is that I cannot see how any significant improvements to the AI could be made on today's technology, so I cannot understand why they would release the source code of the civ5 AI in the new world of 1UPT. I guess there is a possibility that they could sue any 1UPT game that used the Civ5 AI intellectual property, but how could they know? The only way they could know is if the reverse engineering dissassembly technology for C++ is so good nowadays, that you cannot hide plagiarism behind a compiled DLL anymore!

Could someone ask Afforess this question and let me know what he thinks?...

Afforess is going to be a major figure in understanding the Civ5 AI if the source code get's released. Keep in mind, that my heart is still with RevolutionDCM, in the sense that so many of the concepts in it are also inside Civ5, so that at some stage this mod will get an update to it from Afforess's hard work since I did the last release early this year. However I would say that multiplayer is unlikely to ever get fixed in this mod unless it turns out that Firaxis are going to keep the Civ5 AI code underwraps for another year or two.

Cheers

EDIT: Another possibility is that the face of gaming is moving so far away from the PC model, that it really doesn't matter about intellectual property on the PC. All of the intellectual property resides inside facebook/mobile/gamebox technologies....If that is the case that is a great outcome for the people who want really advanced AI's on latest technology. Why? Because a desktop computer is the only one that can push the edges of new technology as it emerges, but it is only ever a small market....
 
Well... my guess is the actual theory behind the AI coding is probably not anything mind-bogglingly new. At it's base you're going to see a whole lot of the same techniques, just adapted within the rule set of Civ5. By that I mean the nuts of bolts are still going to be valuation of one action or one plot over another for instance, etc. etc. The overall structure in any particular game by necessity has to be very individualized/specialized around that game's rules that there isn't really a lot of copying even possible other than the very general idea behind it's organization.

I'm rather certain the delay is connected to first that they've been very invested in making lots of core changes in the patching process, and second the technical details of setting the game up to work with the custom DLL (which Mr. Shirk clearly indicates hasn't been done yet). In essence, there is no sense in releasing the source code if it's still undergoing lots of changes in patching. That would only frustrate modders more.
 
glider1,

Any chance of getting a fix to the issue of AI Autoplay stopping every time a revolution event happens? I remember this happening in previous versions, and I thought it was fixed, but it still seems to occur in the newest release. This would be a huge fix that would greatly help with testing.

Many thanks!
 
This week has been glorious! I managed to update my XML mod to RevDCM 2.90. It was actually a lot easier than I anticipated. Instead of doing ALL of the changes by hand (which would have taken FOREVER!), I put each XML into textdiff.com, comparing the new RevDCM 2.90 formats with the formats in my older versions. In the process, I think I caught what was making my previous version CTD. I found that at some point, iRevIdxDistanceMod got moved, relabeled, and re-scaled as iRevIdxDistanceModifier. So I changed that. Plus, my old version was completely missing the BBAI fields for pursuing victory strategies for all of the new WolfRevolution leaders I was using. So I gave all of those leaders values for those fields. I also spotted some changes to the Inquisitor unit and a few other things that I must have missed before. I think the XML parser didn't catch these mistakes before because I was also using old schema files (probably explains why my old version was piling up with python errors and just crashing because of that), so this time I made sure to leave all of the new RevDCM 2.90 schema files as they were (instead of copying whole folders into the new version). And now I'm happy to say that I'm halfway through the Renaissance, dominating as Genghis Khan, without a CTD! I think I'm in the clear!

There remains only one small issue: there are python exceptions every time I build certain units with new unit combat types that aren't in the standard BUG unit naming tab. Thankfully, these python exceptions don't seem to be affecting the game, aside from not allowing me to use the BUG unit naming those affected units (the units get produced with their generic BTS names). But still, I don't like to see python exceptions, and I'd kinda like to be able to use the unit naming with these new unit combat types too.

I thought that adding the new unit combat types like I did below in Unit Naming.ini in my User Settings folder would solve the issue, but it has not. Any ideas on how to get the BUG unit naming to work with these new combat types?

# * f in [f] is one of s, A, a, p, g, n, o, r (see help file)

# Default: ^ut^ ^cnt[n]^ (^ct^)

Default = ^ut^ ^cntu[n]^ (^ct^)

# Enter the user defined naming convention for combat units 'None'.
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatNone = DEFAULT

# Enter the user defined naming convention for combat units 'AIR'.
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatAIR = ^cntu[o]^ ^ut^ Squadron (^ct^)

# Enter the user defined naming convention for combat units 'ARCHER'.
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatARCHER = ^ut^ ^cntu[n]^ (^ct^)

# Enter the user defined naming convention for combat units 'ARMOR'.
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatARMOR = ^ut^ ^cntu[n]^ (^ct^)

# Enter the user defined naming convention for combat units 'GUN'.
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatGUN = ^ut^ ^cntu[n]^ (^ct^)

# Enter the user defined naming convention for combat units 'TRENCH'.
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatTRENCH = ^ut^ ^cntu[n]^ (^ct^)

# Enter the user defined naming convention for combat units 'HELICOPTER'.
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatHELICOPTER = ^cntu[o]^ AirCav Division (^ct^)

# Enter the user defined naming convention for combat units 'MELEE'.
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatMELEE = ^ut^ Legion ^cntu[r]^ (^ct^)

# Enter the user defined naming convention for combat units 'MOUNTED'.
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatMOUNTED = ^cntu[o]^ ^ut^ Regiment (^ct^)

# Enter the user defined naming convention for combat units 'NAVAL'.
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatNAVAL = DEFAULT

# Enter the user defined naming convention for combat units 'AGE_OF_SAIL'.
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatAGE_OF_SAIL = DEFAULT

# Enter the user defined naming convention for combat units 'AGE_OF_STEAM'.
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatAGE_OF_STEAM = DEFAULT

# Enter the user defined naming convention for combat units 'PRE_DREADNOUGHT_AGE'.
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatPRE_DREADNOUGHT_AGE = DEFAULT

# Enter the user defined naming convention for combat units 'DREADNOUGHT_AGE'.
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatDREADNOUGHT_AGE = DEFAULT

# Enter the user defined naming convention for combat units 'MODERN_NAVAL'.
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatMODERN_NAVAL = DEFAULT

# Enter the user defined naming convention for combat units 'NUCLEAR_AGE'.
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatNUCLEAR_AGE = DEFAULT

# Enter the user defined naming convention for combat units 'RECON'.
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatRECON = DEFAULT

# Enter the user defined naming convention for combat units 'SIEGE'.
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatSIEGE = ^cntu[o]^ ^ut^ Regiment (^ct^)

# XML key TXT_KEY_BUG_OPT_UNITNAMING__COMBAT_SPY_HOVER not found
# Default: DEFAULT

CombatSPY = DEFAULT
Click to expand...


Note that all of these new Wolfshanze unit combat types are in the Civ4UnitCombatInfos.xml that I'm using, so the problem isn't there. Although they don't appear in the same order, so might that be an issue? But it looks like they don't appear in the same order in these two files anyways in the unmodified RevDCM 2.90 versions, so that can't be the issue. Any ideas?
 
Have you adjusted the Unit Naming.xml file in the config folder? That is where the unit combat definitions are located, which it uses to look up the settings in the .ini file.
 
Hm, Glider
Don't want to start a debate about Civ V or anything
But you really think the game is that good?
And more importantly, you really think the AI is that much of an improvement from what we have here in Civ IV (with Better BtS AI and RevDCM)?

IMO Civ IV is far superior than Civ V, but that's just my opinion
What everyone can be sure of: Civ IV will always have it's place in the strategy gaming community, and it's totally worth to keep working on RevDCM
I think it's already pretty close to a final version, don't leave it unfinished. Especially not for Civ V
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Loaded mod - But my game is still vanilla BTS?
Replies
1
Views
195
DeepWell
DeepWell
H
Custom music folder troubleshooting
Replies
1
Views
683
<Nexus>
<Nexus>
MantaRevan
Can't seem to find CIV4TraitInfos.xml for trait editing
Replies
7
Views
790
<Nexus>
<Nexus>
D
How to run a mod running under ProtonGE
Replies
1
Views
345
a pen-dragon
A
gavenkoa
BULL hover popup text "Speeds Up ..." on F6 is not shown
Replies
5
Views
428
f1rpo
f1rpo
Back
Top Bottom