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

Some thoughts about modding C3C

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Creation & Customization' started by Civinator, May 1, 2016.

  1. Civinator

    Civinator Blue Lion Supporter

    Joined:
    May 5, 2005
    Messages:
    5,893
    3 thoughts about modding C3C, that are used in CCM version 2.00:

    1. The number of strategig resources in modding the C3C mainfiles is not limited to 8.

    In earlier statements about C3C, Firaxis said, they have abandoned the "City View- Screen" for mods and scenarios for an easy fix of problems concerning the images of strategic resources in the city screen, if these resources exceed the eight resources of Civ 3. On the other side, in the epic game of C3C, we can use the "City View-Screen" without any restrictions. My logical conclusion was, that the eight strategic resources are the limit to play the epic game without any problems and this conclusion would fit to the place for strategic resources reserved in the city screen - but this conclusion is wrong:



    The special quality of the screenshot above is, that it is a screenshot of the modded C3C mainfiles and not a screenshot of a mod or scenario located in the C3C Conquests- or Scenarios-folder.

    In the epic gane of C3C, if there are more than eight resources connected to a city, a second icon for the city view appears, holding the strategic resources (blue in the screenshot). The original icon for the city view (and of course the city view itself) still is existing in the epic game. In the epic game there is a screen for the strategic resources (if they exceed 8) and additionally the city view existing. Therefore the question is arising, why the mods and scenarios contained in the conquests- or scenario-folder have to sacrifice the city view. So the city view is not one of the most important options of C3C, I´m wondering, why we have to dispense with the city view, if the game itself shows, that this can be handled, too.

    As the epic game holds many other additional options that I want to use for CCM, the finding, that the epic game can hold more than eight strategic resources without crashing, offers new possibilities of modding CCM, especially in the field of (Advanced Autoproduction) of units.

    2. Improving the autoproduction of units :

    In C3C there is a need for units, that are "not buildable, but upgradeable". C3C opened the way to create such units by buildings that can produce certain units, even units that normally cannot be produced for that civ. The problem is, that there are only 256 buildings available for C3C and this number of buildings is quickly used up, if the autoproduced units cannot upgrade to different other units that are not buildable, but only upgradeable.

    I. Some years ago I showed a way to produce such units using the king-flag.

    A unit unavailable to all civs is autoproduced by a building and now is available to the civ that holds that building. This basic unit now can upgrade to a unit (or more other units for different civs) with the king-flag in the editor.

    One backside of this methode was, that if a unit with the king-flag upgraded to another unit with the king-flag, the new unit didn´t receive the name of the unit, but the name of the ruler of that civ. A heavy Tiger tank that holds the name "ruler" is somewhat ridicolous in the gameplay.

    Another backside of the setting with the king-flag is, that the game is programmed to treat that unit as the last defender of a stack of units. This can become especially pesky, when your workers are slaughtered by a weak attacker and the defending unit in the stack with a high defensive value (per example machingunners) do nothing against that slaughtering attacker, as the defending unit is treated as a king-unit.

    2. ZergMazter some time ago showed another way to treat this problem, using era-none techs in the following way:

    a) An era-none-tech for every civ that should receive such an unit.
    b) The unit (upgradeable, but not buildable) needs that tech as a perequisite.
    c) A strategic/lux. resource as a perequisite, that appears in the techtree, when the unit should be available.

    The advantages of this methode are, that the units can be upgraded several times without the naming problem, as the king-flag isn´t used any longer. Additionally units with strong defensive values, that are upgradable but not buildable, now are treated as normal units, defending weaker units in the stack.

    The old methode using the king-flag should only be used any longer, if there is no strat./lux. resource available in the techtree, when the new unit should appear, or if it makes good sense to treat the unit as the last defender of a stack (per example for aircraft carriers).

    The disadvantage of that methode, that this unit doesn´t appear in the techtree any longer, can be corrected with the following methode of doing the civilopedia.

    Edit: Warning! That methode has a severe backside!
    Second Edit: I think I found the solution of the naming-problem of the units with the king-flag

    3.New possibilities to write the Civilopedia:

    Since the great scenario 1989 of Anthony Boscia we know, that units with their first of the three slot of resources not used, don´t trigger the hardcoded entry of resources in the civilopedia (even if slot two and three are holding resources as a perequisite).

    So it is even possible, to do complete "dummy-entries" for units (and buildings), that show another setting than the setting in the editor and for example to show a unit in a techbox of the techtree, that normally wouldn´t be in that techbox - for example a unit that in reality is an "era-none-tech-unit" but needs a resource that is only available with the tech in the techbox of the techtree.

    Example: Heavy Artillery for the USA in CCM version 2.00

    1. The SW Military Academy produces the unit "Heavy Artillery" that can be upgraded for several civs with the proper resources availavle with the proper techs). The unit "Heavy Artillery" is not connected to any civ by the settings of the unit, but by the ownership of the building that autoproduced that unit.

    2. Upgrading to the US 155mm Artillery with the resource Aluminum available with tech Massproduction. The new unit is shown in the techtree with the dummy-methode I described above and with a working link to the next dummy-unit.



    3. Upgrading to the SPA "M-7 Priest" with the resource Synthetic Fuel, available with the tech Mobile Warfare. The upgrading is possible for all units from Heavy Artillery up to US 155mm Artillery without any naming problems.




    4. Upgrading to the SPA "M-12" with the resource Oil storage, available with tech Total War. The upgrading is possible for all units from Heavy Artillery up to M-7 Priests without any naming problems.




    5. Final upgrade to the SPA "M-110" with tech Plastics. This unit has the king-flag. The upgrading is possible for all units of the "Heavy Artillery upgrading path".



    The methode of writing the civilopedia I have shown, needs aditional entries for the dummy-units in the editor, in the pediaIcons file and the civilopedia. The methode works for all unit entries but the map civilopedia entriy and the general units overview entry. If you click on the last two entries, you will see the following:



    As the number of starting techs in CCM is limited to four (two normal starting techs and one era-none tech for the religion and the other era-none tech for civspecific buildings) entries like the one above can happen, but they are not shown in the normal tech-tree orientated gameplay of the mod. As the link in the lilac box would lead to the next entry with the original era-none tech, I wiped them out with the methode I described above and use the links that are inside the green box of the screenshot above, leading to the next dummy-unit-entry.

    By not using the first slot of resources for a unit, that unit also dissapears from the hardcoded list that triggers the Hyperlink-Overflow-Bug. So the methode of leaving the first slot empty also is a good way to stop that bug. Even if you decide, that a unit needs all three slots for resources and you have less than about 30 units that need that resource in three-slots settings, you don´t run into that bug any longer.
     
  2. Pounder

    Pounder Phaethon was here

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2003
    Messages:
    5,698
    Location:
    Your territory
  3. Pounder

    Pounder Phaethon was here

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2003
    Messages:
    5,698
    Location:
    Your territory
  4. AnthonyBoscia

    AnthonyBoscia Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,535
    If the player has the No-era technology that is required to build the unit, and he also has the appropriate resource, what is preventing him from building this unit normally instead of having it limited to upgrades only?
     
  5. Civinator

    Civinator Blue Lion Supporter

    Joined:
    May 5, 2005
    Messages:
    5,893
    Tony, what prevents the player from normally building the unit if he has the era-none tech and access to the needed resource is, that this unit is an era-none unit. :) This is something different than a unit that has in the needed techbox of the editor the entry "None" (like the warrior and so on in standard C3C). This unit has in the techbox of the editor the era-none tech as needed tech. In my tests the ZergMazter-methode worked (with a minimal exception).
     
  6. Civinator

    Civinator Blue Lion Supporter

    Joined:
    May 5, 2005
    Messages:
    5,893
    Hi Pounder, I cannot see the additional icon for the city view in your screenshot. On the right side of the screenshot I can only see the icon to leave the city screen. On the other side more place for more luxury resources is always interesting. :) I will see how many luxury resources can be hold with the current CCM city-screen.
     
  7. AnthonyBoscia

    AnthonyBoscia Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,535
    This is so bizarre that no one has stumbled across this before, considering how much time people have invested in trying to make limited-build units. This is a great find by ZergMazter and it looks like you will have a terrific solution for CCM (the screenshots look amazing). I did a quick test yesterday as well and it worked great, although now I am curious what the 'minimal exception' is! What is surprising about this is that buildings that are linked to No-Era techs and require a resource can be built normally (a feature I used in my old mod), but I never thought to try a unit.
     
  8. Pounder

    Pounder Phaethon was here

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2003
    Messages:
    5,698
    Location:
    Your territory
    Sorry, my bad, I've got to learn how to read.
     
  9. Samez

    Samez ION GUNNER

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,526
    Location:
    center of nowhere
    Thank you Civinator for concentrating the information- I heard of most stuff posted by you before on different threads but it is the combination of the info that makes one think about the concepts more focused.
     
  10. ZergMazter

    ZergMazter Prince

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2012
    Messages:
    437
    Location:
    US, Florida
    Awesome man. I had to re-read my own post to see what it was all about. I'm glad I shared it. I had completely forgotten about it.

    I'm so excited by your results. You are doing what Firaxis never did for us. I could never mod in such an elite way like some of you here, but I am glad that I can help here and there with the little things I luckily find once in a while.

    Thank you for your efforts civinator. Your 2.0 mod will truly be an epic one. I've been waiting for it's release, and I know people will enjoy the revolutionary changes you will bring to the game. I'm so so excited!
     
  11. r16

    r16 not deity

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    5,048
    as a wannabe modder this thread seems far ahead of what ı can probably achieve but seriously makes me to ask for a stickied thread where one can ask questions of how .

    take the statement "Even if you decide, that a unit needs all three slots for resources and you have less than about 30 units that need that resource in three-slots settings, you don´t run into that bug any longer." Let's say am writing up 100 units that need iron and will use AnthonyBoscia's find . Using None/Iron/Horse or similar . If ı add one other that goes Iron/None/None will that trigger the bug , because there are already 100 units to count ?
     
  12. Civinator

    Civinator Blue Lion Supporter

    Joined:
    May 5, 2005
    Messages:
    5,893
    r16, in your example the only unit with the setting Iron/None/None is the first and only unit, that is shown in the window of the hyperlinks when clicking on the strategic resource iron. So you could add about 30 more units/buildings with the strategic resource iron in the first slot before the hyperlink-bug is appearing. The 100 additional units in your example with the first slot free and Iron in the second or third slot are not appearing as a hardcoded hyperlink in the civilopedia.
     
  13. r16

    r16 not deity

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    5,048
    thanks for the answer and the thread . This is kind of the thing one should know before , instead of discovering the hard way after writing all of them to see the scenario crash . It would be nice if people also were to provide links , say method of Zergmaster so that this thread will become a reference of sorts . Am really hoping for a centralized thread .
     
  14. T-mun

    T-mun King Numa

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,300
    Location:
    France
    I totally second that!
     
  15. Takeo

    Takeo Shogun

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Messages:
    722
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kentucky
    Civinator,
    Could you clarify what you mean by the 'map civilopedia entry'? and also why these two methods won't work?
    Thanks,
    Takeo
     
  16. Civinator

    Civinator Blue Lion Supporter

    Joined:
    May 5, 2005
    Messages:
    5,893
    Hi Takeo, may be a picture explains more than hundred words:





    In those old screenshots of SOE you can see at the end of the list of the units that are in a stack some links to the civilopedia entries of the type of unit. This is meant by the civilopedia entry for units that are on the map of the game. Until now I was not able to jam that link with dummy unit entries. The link is to the real unit and can show some silly results (per example M-7 priests coming with tech Christianity).
     
  17. Takeo

    Takeo Shogun

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Messages:
    722
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kentucky
    Civinator,
    Are you saying you have an M7 Priest unit located in a non-era tech and a 'dummy' M7 Priest that will appear in the tech tree, that are both in the editor under the same name? or are the 2 units named slightly different or have an extra space at the end?
     
  18. Civinator

    Civinator Blue Lion Supporter

    Joined:
    May 5, 2005
    Messages:
    5,893
    Yes, the dummy unit has a space at the end and a different PRTO_Name. :yup:
     
  19. Moosezilla

    Moosezilla Grognard Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,037
    Location:
    Canton of Roaring Waste
    just stopped in for a peek. nice.:cool:
     
  20. Moosezilla

    Moosezilla Grognard Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,037
    Location:
    Canton of Roaring Waste
    Stopped in for a peek.:cool:
     

Share This Page