RtW: Add-On Pack 3 BETA for 3.17

[Fagan]

About the param in the file GlobalDefinesAlt.xml my supposition :
- DCM_BATTLE_EFFECTS : If set to 0 you don't have anymore the fog of war graphical effects nor the gameplay effects (food and moving).
- DCM_FIGHTER_ENGAGE : If set to 0 you don't have anymore for airplane fighters the attack option to engage enemy airplanes.
- DCM_RANGE_BOMBARD : If set to 0 you don't have anymore the bombard attack for some units, some ships and artillery.
- DCM_AIR_BOMBING : If set to 0 you don't have anymore the new airplane bombing attacks of factories, ships in harbor and civil buildings.
- DCM_ACTIVE_DEFENSE : Possibly, if set to 0 you don't have units that can bombard that would eventually attack automatically an enemy unit attacking.

No idea what are the other options.

 

[Dale]

<DefineName>DCM_BATTLE_EFFECTS</DefineName>
<DefineName>NUM_GAME_FEATURES</DefineName>
<DefineName>NUM_BATTLE_FEATURES</DefineName>

Scorched earth

<DefineName>DCM_AIR_BOMBING</DefineName>

Airbomb missions

<DefineName>DCM_CIV_CUSTOMISER</DefineName>

Civ Customiser (never used in RtW)

<DefineName>DCM_RANGE_BOMBARD</DefineName>

Artillery ranged bombard

<DefineName>DCM_CIV_CHANGER</DefineName>
<DefineName>DCM_CIV_CHANGER_MODE</DefineName>
<DefineName>DCM_CIV_CHANGER_CHANGES</DefineName>

Civ Changer (the second button top-left)

<DefineName>DCM_STACK_ATTACK</DefineName>

Stack attacking

<DefineName>DCM_OPP_FIRE</DefineName>

Artillery opportunity fire

<DefineName>DCM_ACTIVE_DEFENSE</DefineName>

Fighter active defense

<DefineName>DCM_ARCHER_BOMBARD</DefineName>

Archer ranged attack (not used in RtW)

<DefineName>DCM_FIGHTER_ENGAGE</DefineName>

Fighter engage mission

I would suggest just turning Stack Attack and Scorched Earth off. That's where the crash will be I think.

Also note, with the default RtW options in here, I have not had a single crash with them since AOP2.

 

[Fagan]

Thanks for the information. By default stack attack was already off, for Scorched Earth you mention 3 params, I changed only DCM_BATTLE_EFFECTS wath are the two other?

Also what is "Fighter active defense"? It's that plane fighters defend multiple times in the same turn? That option make air defense very tough and air attack much more efficient and easy, particularly with the new engage enemy plane attack which is a bit too powerful but quite fun.

For the game stability this is complicate, that could depends of the system, the graphic card/driver and so on. My configuration is :
- 2Gb RAM (in fact 4Gb but the OS see only 2) I doubt it's the cause of my problems
- VRAM 512Mb it's not bad I think, I omit mention it all crashes I had was linked to VRAM allocation failure.
- Graphic Card ATI Radeon, well many players don't use this, could be the cause.
- Graphic drivers, latest and certified by MS and ATI but specific to my hardware.
- XP Pro + SP3, in fact SP3 improved a little the thing but not enough the remove the crash I had with the game.

For the second top left button, there's something weird, clicking on it never trigger anything, plus with the same current mod config sometimes it comes back when I load a game when I already play a game but not if I quit the game and load directly the same game.

Anyway, I know how complicate it could be and thanks for the mod, that doesn't remove it that its a great thing.

 

[Dale]

The other two in battle effects are only for modders of scorched earth. Do not change them within RtW! Game Features defines how many different tile features are possible on a tile (fallout, pine forest, snow forest, ice, etc). Battle Features defines how many different types of smoke/fire graphic to use to select one randomly from.

Fighter active defense is where a fighter will actively airstrike a tile when an enemy unit approaches it. The fighter must be in "intercept" mode. So I added the ability of a fighter to not only intercept air units, but also land/sea units as well. The ability of a fighter to defend more than once is not related to this.

One thing I will suggest, a couple of players have had success in placing an exemption on the Civ4 directory for their anti-virus real time scanning (or just disconnect from the internet and close down virus scanner for the game session). Real time scanning nowadays places a LOT of stress on CPU/RAM intensive games (such as RtW).

 

[Fagan]

Ok thank you for the details. I had notice when trying attack an unit close from a town with many fighters, the enemy unit die without I do anything. But I don't think fighters was in intercept mode, I could be wrong about this or it was only artillery actions.

About antivirus, well well, I don't use any. Ha well, I don't install anything but few games and standard os or drivers updates, I rarely use this computer to go on internet and use only firefox.

In fact I continue have the out of video memory error but much more rare and after much longer game sessions. As it is the game is quite playable anyway unlike before.

 

[sangeli]

Well if you're interested, I found a way to completely eliminate culture in all of its manifestations. Even better yet, it allows for static national boundries before war breaks out and dynamic boundries when war breaks out (when your unit occupies a tile it becomes yours). Just tell me if you want to know the details.

Also, does the the beta 2 have a CvGameCore folder?

 

[Dale]

Well if you're interested, I found a way to completely eliminate culture in all of its manifestations. Even better yet, it allows for static national boundries before war breaks out and dynamic boundries when war breaks out (when your unit occupies a tile it becomes yours). Just tell me if you want to know the details.

Also, does the the beta 2 have a CvGameCore folder?

Yeah I've put IDW in for the next Beta.

And yes, source is in Beta2.

 

[sangeli]

Yeah I've put IDW in for the next Beta.

And yes, source is in Beta2.

But its different than IDW. IDW requires actual battles to be fought and requires culture, my mododification doesn't. Here it is:
1. Nothing produces culture and culture in cities is a minimum
2. In CvUnit.cpp make this a public function:

void CvUnit::doMilitaryControl(CvPlot* pPlot)
{
int iMilitaryNeg = pPlot->getCulture(pPlot->getOwnerINLINE());
int iMilitaryCulture = 1000; /*1000 is just an arbitrary number enough to change any plot*/
if (atWar(getTeam(), pPlot->getTeam()) && !pPlot->isCity())
{
pPlot->changeCulture(pPlot->getOwnerINLINE(), -iMilitaryNeg, false);
pPlot->changeCulture(getOwnerINLINE(), iMilitaryCulture, true);
}
}

3. In the function move put:
doMilitaryControl(pPlot);
after:
gDLL->getEventReporterIFace()->unitMove(pPlot, this, pOldPlot);

4. In CvUnit.h put: void doMilitaryControl(CvPlot* pPlot);

5. In CvPlot.cpp in the function calculateculturalowner take out both if (iswithinculturerange)

This way you can make any plot owned by any country, even if there is no city there! For example, instead of having Gibralter as a city, which is expensive, you can simply make two plots owned by the British (one land and the one controlling the strait) and put a fort there instead. However, make sure that every single land plot is owned by a country. This way remote areas, like Britain's malta, gibralter, etc, aren't such a financial burden and allow for full military capabilities. IMO, this feature makes it superior to IDW.

 

[Omathaar]

Sweet, I like that. And that means that obscure places like northern Siberia can belong to a country, even with no city there...that's just cosmetic, but it's fun.

 

[sangeli]

Sweet, I like that. And that means that obscure places like northern Siberia can belong to a country, even with no city there...that's just cosmetic, but it's fun.

Its also good for the middle east because you can set up the correct borders without putting cities everywhere.

 

[Dale]

I have a problem with iMilitaryCulture though. You use a static number. You should get the previous owner's culture and make the plot the same amount for the new owner and zero out the old owner.

Culture has a lot more affect on the game than pure ownership of tiles. It has a military defense component as well as other effects.

To truelly use this you should cancel the old owner's culture and make the new owner's culture the same level.

That's where IDW is superior to this model as culture is transferred to the new owner (battle winner).

How does city anarchy go with yours?

BTW, I'm not trying to be negative, just bring up some points you might have missed.

To be honest, for the base version I won't use either. Leave it simple.

EDIT: Also, what about the case of allies? (eg Germany & Italy). If a German unit goes into a French tile, and then an Italian unit later, does the culture switch in your model? That's another area I think IDW is fairer, because ownership of the tile goes to the player with the most wins (ie: they fought better for the tile). Yes, two allies attacking a tile will have lower culture each than the original owner, but it'll go to the player who fought more for the tile.

 

[sangeli]

I have a problem with iMilitaryCulture though. You use a static number. You should get the previous owner's culture and make the plot the same amount for the new owner and zero out the old owner.

Culture has a lot more affect on the game than pure ownership of tiles. It has a military defense component as well as other effects.

To truelly use this you should cancel the old owner's culture and make the new owner's culture the same level.

That's where IDW is superior to this model as culture is transferred to the new owner (battle winner).

How does city anarchy go with yours?

BTW, I'm not trying to be negative, just bring up some points you might have missed.

To be honest, for the base version I won't use either. Leave it simple.

EDIT: Also, what about the case of allies? (eg Germany & Italy). If a German unit goes into a French tile, and then an Italian unit later, does the culture switch in your model? That's another area I think IDW is fairer, because ownership of the tile goes to the player with the most wins (ie: they fought better for the tile). Yes, two allies attacking a tile will have lower culture each than the original owner, but it'll go to the player who fought more for the tile.

Well, at first I didn't use a static arbritrary number and instead I just transfered all the culture. However, problems arose because the tile just reverted back to the original owner because the culture regenerated. This also might because I tested it on a brand new city. Rethinking it, i'm pretty sure i could use your idea. Still, I'm not sure how culture has anything to do with military defense (might be my ignorance). You should take note that the culture swap does not affect cities. And for your allies question, it only applies when two nations are at war. This means that during peace time you cant use naval unit to take water squares. So, the tile becomes German.

I just realized there might be a problem, spies. However, it shouldn't be a hard fix. Right now though, I'm working on a directional fortification mod so that frontal attacks give a bonus to the defender.

 

[sangeli]

void CvUnit::doMilitaryControl(CvPlot* pPlot)
{
int iMilitaryCulture = pPlot->getCulture(pPlot->getOwnerINLINE());
if (atWar(getTeam(), pPlot->getTeam()) && !pPlot->isCity())
{
if(canDefend(pPlot))
{
pPlot->changeCulture(pPlot->getOwnerINLINE(),
-iMilitaryCulture, true);
pPlot->changeCulture(getOwnerINLINE(), iMilitaryCulture, true);
}
}

This should fix your original concern and the problem with spies.

 

[Dale]

Culture strength in a tile gives a slight natural defense boost in combat. So if your culture has a high culture level in the tile you will receive a higher defender boost in battle. Effectively, if it's your tile you should get a defense bonus knowing where the best defendable spots are etc.

BTW, this is a pretty big concept in Civ4. If you want more info there's a LOT of info on culture and combat in the general Civ4 & BtS forums.

 

[Healz]

Any word on how far you are away from a final release of Add On Pack 3 Dale? Just wondered whether you were getting close as I don't really like mucking around much with betas...

 

[Dale]

Sorry, wife and son's been sick so I've been running the house, which has been eating into my time.

 

[Chamboozer]

Dale, You put Hong Kong in the wrong place. In reality, it is one square to the east of Guangzhou. You put it on the Island of Hainan.

 

[Fin Imperial]

Dale, You put Hong Kong in the wrong place. In reality, it is one square to the east of Guangzhou. You put it on the Island of Hainan.

And China, in open play with settlers, puts Hainan somewhere in Mongolia

 

[Chamboozer]

And China, in open play with settlers, puts Hainan somewhere in Mongolia

Can't blame them for that, but Dale placed the city, not an AI with no access to a historical Map.

 

[ZeeGermans]

Just wanna say thanks for all the hard work on this mod... this is really fun to play and my favorite one thus far.