RevolutionDCM for BTS

TMIT has a good rant about why the hidden modifiers are terrible, and it would convince you that keeping them hidden is a bad idea, but I can't find his rant. Basically the hidden diplo modifiers were poor design. Please just add that modcomp and let it be that, there are already too many game options as it is, things are starting to look messy, no need to make this an option, and it is a good gameplay improvement adding the modcomp.

Oh yeah. I think I remember the reasons. For instance, normally, players can't see how much damage to the AI's relations spies getting caught has done, when in fact, it has been known to cause up to -10 to diplomacy. There are other stupid ones too. But if you really feel compelled to, you could make it a gameoption easily enough. Just make sure you set it on by default in the XML.
 
Please don't make it a gameoption there are too many options already, the custom game startup menu is already getting messy; aesthetics are important. If you really feel compelled to make it optional, make it an XML option in GlobalDefinesAlt. Making it optional is pointless though, no one is going to want the diplo modifiers being hidden.
 
Please don't make it a gameoption there are too many options already, the custom game startup menu is already getting messy; aesthetics are important. If you really feel compelled to make it optional, make it an XML option in GlobalDefinesAlt. Making it optional is pointless though, no one is going to want the diplo modifiers being hidden.

Well, you can hide game options and force them to be on or off for all your players. Look at the GameOptionInfos.xml. Then you could just hide the diplomatic modifier option and default it to "1" or on. Problem solved...
 
I agree, make them a static addition. Hidden modifiers was poor game design anyway, because it leads to modders having no idea if the AI is broken when it attacks someone weird or if it's working as designed but stupidly.

(Such as attacking the player across the continent instead of focusing on a neighbor)
 
@Afforess and Phungus and Duuk
Well it looks like all of you think that Hidden Attitude mod is good. I'll check it out at the end of the build. If I also concur (looking at it from Jdog's eyes as well as my own), then I'll just add it. Making it an option I agree is too much for what the mod offers. If Jcontrol were to go in, that would of course have to be made an option, and that means more work.
Cheers.
 
Attached to this post is the merge of Jeckel's JCultureControl mod which allows improvements (farms, towns, forts, etc.) to spread borders. This file includes the only the source files and XML/python files that have been changed. The files are updated to RevDCM 2.6 svn version 193. (updated DLL included)
There are still a few problems with the mod with a improvement being destroyed and the culture borders not disappearing correctly which I am trying to fix. However the mod can be completely turned off by editing the Civ4ImprovementInfos.xml file and turning all the options that are surrounded by the <!-- JCultureControl Mod --> comments to "0". Included are the two PDF files that Jeckel included with the mod.
The mod seems to work fine with the RevDCM 2.6 ver 193. If there are any other issues please let me know and I will try to fix, however I will limited access to a computer for the next 2-3 weeks.

When I can I will try to improve this mod more.

Thanks,
 
Interesting, since it allows culture tags in the XML for improvements, it's a modmaker's tool, not a game option, so it doesn't need a game option either. This sounds like a promising modcomp, I'd like to be able to play with it.

I'm all for added tools for modmakers, provided they are stable, optional to use (as is the case here, I can set the values in the XML how I want for LoR), and allow for some sort of coherent improvement of gameplay, and the AI understands it, or it is an irrelvent consideration in terms of the AI. I'd like to eventually see this component added, as it'd be nice to give modmakers this tool to work with. However at this point it needs the bugs worked out, and I need to have confirmation that the AI has logic in it to use it (will the AI build forts if we set a high culture value for forts to spread it's borders?). Until these two conditions are met, I don't think it's ready for integration into the RevDCM core.
 
There was no change to any AI logic, but I presume the AI will continue to use forts as they normally would (i.e. getting far away resources). So this would benefit the AI in that way.
I have not studied this mod too deeply, but it doesn't seem to add culture, but a new concept called Culture Control, this is to allow culture borders without any actual culture. I will be looking into having improvements that have borders to actually spread the standard game culture, instead of this "culture control" that Jeckel created for this mod. If anyone else would like to have a go at it that would be great, all the code is surrounded by "JCultureControl" comments. As I have said I will be away from my normal computer (with the compiler and Civ) for much of the next 2-3 weeks and will not be able to work on it until I return. Be aware that the mod adds 2 new improvements a castle and a citadel that are supposed upgrades from the fort (similar to cottage, hamlet, town upgrades).
Pay attention to the two PDF files which are in the sources folder I believe, they explain the basic functions.
 
There was no change to any AI logic, but I presume the AI will continue to use forts as they normally would (i.e. getting far away resources). So this would benefit the AI in that way.
It would be a serious advantage for the human if the AI was not made aware, or given logic to deal with this. The AI's use of forts is not good enough, I can't support inclusion of this component if it has that big of an affect on the AI-Human balance. Ultimately it's glider's and jdog's call, but I think it's pointless to add what amounts to a human only feature the AI can only stumble into accidentally.
 
@Infantryman
Thanks for the effort, I'll give it a shot at the end to include it but chances depend on how big a deal it is and whether it is truely optioned to be able to turn off. Will look later and have downloaded your effort.

@Phungus and Afforess
A working debug makefile has been uploaded to svn, but unfortunately I have had to revert back to Refar's format and so Jdog's hardwork on the BULL makefile is wasted. I simply do not understand what I am missing. Whatever. It must be simple???? You can do what you like with cximage folder because it is not referred to in the makefile. Please try to recompile at some point with the amended makefile and let me know how you go.
Cheers.
 
@Phungus and Afforess
You can do what you like with cximage folder because it is not referred to in the makefile.
Does this mean we loose some of the functionality of BULL? Would it be possible to include the xcimage code in the final realease gamecore and not the debug gamecore? I don't think anyone is going to need to debug the BULL code, it's irrelevant anyway, but it would be nice to keep the BULL functionality (if there is any) for the final release.
 
@Phungus420
I completely understand what you are saying. However there is a feature which allows culture from cities to overtake culture from improvements (forts) (and it can be turned on/off) this means that even if a player goes and surrounds a civilization with forts, when that civilization expands the culture from cities will overtake the forts and the forts can become part of that civilization. In addition, forts can be set to only spread the border in the tile it sits in, this would basically make forts useful for far-off resources, critical blocking terrain, and forward upgrading/healing bases. Another implementation is to let fishing/whaling boats and oil platforms spread culture to the tile it sits on, this would allow one to set resources far out in the ocean and still be able to access them; which allows for some interesting strategic situations concerning sea power.
I have been hoping for a mod like this for years, but I agree with phungus that it would be much better if the AI could use it better. So even if it is not included with this release, I hope to improve it significantly so it could be integrated with a future release.

@Glider1
Thanks to you and Jdog5000 on all the hard work on this mod. I consider RevDCM essential to my Civilization game. If you can't get it in for this release that would be find, it still needs some work. My next request would be the Era Limit feature, even if it is only editable in the python/xml. I am not familiar with python and BUG enough to integrate it myself, yet.
 
Makefile works, I can now build a functioning debug dll. Seems wrong though not to use the xcimage if it's part of BULL, but i have no idea what it does anyway, and I'm just glad I can build one again. Also nice job in elminating the asserts that you had to always ignore before about looking for NO_RELIGION, and that bizzare path one that said ignore this, glad to see those are gone.

This in the TODO list was done by the way, so you can put an x by it:
Code:
- glider: Phungus says: I couldn't seem to get the "Go to and Sentry" feature to work. When I order a unit to "Go to and Sentry," it dose not move. Regular "go to" works however.The "Naval Sentry" option appears for land units and not naval units The "Sentry Until Healed" appears for sea units and not land units

As far as the bugs me and Infantryman06 found:

  • [*]Rising Seas game option is missing it's text entry, so it says GAME_OPTION_TEXT_RISING_SEAS when starting a custom game
    [*]Inquisitors can be built under all civics, including pasifism
    [*]All units except settlers have an "assassinate" option; selecting this option causes a CTD. This occurs with SS on and assassination off, haven't checked other options.
    [*]I couldn't seem to get the "Go to and Sentry" feature to work. When I order a unit to "Go to and Sentry," it dose not move. Regular "go to" works however.
    [*]The "Naval Sentry" option appears for land units and not naval units
    [*]The "Sentry Until Healed" appears for sea units and not land units
    [*]Python exceptions at game start up when "Start as Minors" selected, see here for more details:
    http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpo...postcount=1884
    [*]Modmakers cannot use Refar's guide to build a debug dll, and thus can't make debug dlls. It is imperative for modmakers to have this ability, it takes about 10 times as much work to build a large mod without the ability to build one.
  • The Options under the Domestic Advisors section in the BUG Mod Options window are missing.

Only one left, and it appears zappara has directed you on how to fix it.

However this assert is still around:
Code:
Assert Failed

File:  CvGlobals.cpp
Line:  3921
Expression:  strcmp(szType, "NONE")==0 || strcmp(szType, "")==0
Message:  info type NO_IMPROVEMENT not found, Current XML file is: xml\GameInfo/CIV4EspionageMissionInfo.xml
It's been in RevDCM for quite a while now, and doesn't seem to cause any problems. Would be nice to remove this one as well, since you guys have eliminated the other erroneous messages.

Edit:
This is an assert I'm getting which is new, haven't seen this assert before. At first I thought it was from an incorrectly assigned unique building, as it looks alot like an incorectly assigned unique unit. But BuildingInfos and buildingClassInfos hasn't changed in the test build of LoR from previous versions. Also no changes have been made to unique buildings in CivilizationInfos. So it can't be that. I double checked this as well, no inconsistencies, every replacement building has the correct building class assigned. Finally this bug occurs as you drag the mouse around the city screen, whereas the incorrectly assigned unique unit assert that looks like this happens at the beggining of your turn. So I think this is an introduced bug, specifically I think it's from BULL, because it seems to trip via the interface, specifically dragging the mouse into the production display in the city screen trips it.

Code:
Assert Failed

File:  CvPlayer.cpp
Line:  6683
Expression:  GC.getCivilizationInfo(getCivilizationType()).getCivilizationBuildings(eBuildingClass) == eBuilding
Message:
 
@Phungus and Afforess
A working debug makefile has been uploaded to svn, but unfortunately I have had to revert back to Refar's format and so Jdog's hardwork on the BULL makefile is wasted. I simply do not understand what I am missing. Whatever. It must be simple???? You can do what you like with cximage folder because it is not referred to in the makefile. Please try to recompile at some point with the amended makefile and let me know how you go.
Cheers.

Excellent. You don't know how many of my projects stalled, waiting for that. That's what I get for using experimental versions, I suppose...

Truly Great Work Guys.
 
@All:

The CxImage stuff is just used for one feature which actually comes from the Hall Of Fame mod. It's used to allow the game code to decide to take screenshots in game. BUG/BULL used this for a feature they call "MapFinder", I'm not exactly sure what this does but it appears to allow you to have some choice into what bonuses and terrain your starting location has ... so the game would regenerate up to 1000 times until you got a spot that matched some pre-defined criteria.
 
@All SVN people
You will notice zillion text files have been updated. I had to choose between doing it by hand manually or writing a merge utility. I did the latter and probably would have been quicker to merge by hand. For any modders out there if you notice this phenomenon, it is time to take a break:

Actual:
<English>Revolution Mod!</English>

Appearance to modders eyes:
<Engeland>Revopollution Man#$</df//fEngeland>

Cheers.
 
I know the answer to this question is probably really obvious, but it's eluded me for nearly a half hour now. I made a mod that uses RevDCM as a base, and when I start a game, I get an erroe message that goes something like this:

"BUG Options - failed creating INI file - "Mods/[My Mod's Name]/RevolutionDCM.ini"

What could be causing this? I thought I followed the merge guide perfectly.
 
At first thought possibly /contrib/CvModName.py needs to be updated to your mod name and details. Give that a try.
Cheers.

I made sure to do that from the start, but I checked it again and everything looked in order, so I loaded it again and got the same problem.
 
Back
Top Bottom