Vincentz Infinite Projects [VIP MOD]

[pecheneg]

In general, ideally, the "concept" looked like this.
1. Consumables for war are not only fuel, but also ammunition. At the same time, the consumption of resources (steel, etc.) for their production in the world wars was comparable to the consumption for the production of military equipment itself.
2. As for the resources needed for the production of "units", these are not only materials and "fighting animals" – they are also people.
3. At the same time, non-biological resources can, in theory, accumulate indefinitely (if storage locations are available). This corresponds to the historical reality – already in the pre-industrial era, stocks of metal, weapons, etc. were formed. And it could be stored for a very long time. The Graz Arsenal, for example, boasts of accumulations over 400 years.
4. Ideally, some part of the stock should "spoil" every turn. Moreover, it is obvious that, for example, iron should "deteriorate" more actively than bronze, etc.
5.It is equally obvious that the resource cost of units differed dozens of times already in ancient times and the economic model should reflect this. The armored Mycenaean charioteer is a 15-18 kg armor made of bronze, the militia is usually used a kilogram of bronze or less (a spear tip and a dagger). At the same time, there is a leap in the industrial era. There are about 10 tons of metal per tanker = 10 thousand militia. As a result, you can get a historical configuration of armies. To play with which will be, IMHO, more interesting.
6."Free" recruits accumulate only up to the limit proportional to the population, fighting animals – the limit proportional to the number of pastures, etc. This is similar to the model from Civ 5. However, the difference is that the accumulated resource can be exhausted by too active mobilization.
And then there are obvious options: mobilization by reducing the population, mercenaries, upgrading workers, etc.
Quite ideally, the treatment of units is possible only with the expenditure of human resources or/and spare parts, but this is almost extremism

 

[vincentz]

Сombat involves disproportionately high fuel consumption, both for air and ground, and for naval units.
For example, the maximum speed of ships, which has been used for a long time within a few hours, is much more expensive than "normal"/economic.

Adding 1 fuel consumption when attacking. which means attacking AND moving into the tile would cost 2. Makes sense with the above.

Hm... How would you like to set an accumulation limit, mainly proportional to the number of improvements on the tile (oil storage)? Their "option" is that they can be destroyed by aircraft, missiles, etc.

Yeah, I thought about either that or a building in city. The problem with tile improvement is its a rather large calculation that needs to be done, because every tile needs to be checked, and on large maps it would hit performance.

Im thinking about adding the "attack ship/planes/buildings" for planes, maybe artillery as well, as seen in other mods. That way it could either be targeted by military and spies.

 

[vincentz]

In general, ideally, the "concept" looked like this.
1. Consumables for war are not only fuel, but also ammunition. At the same time, the consumption of resources (steel, etc.) for their production in the world wars was comparable to the consumption for the production of military equipment itself.
2. As for the resources needed for the production of "units", these are not only materials and "fighting animals" – they are also people.
3. At the same time, non-biological resources can, in theory, accumulate indefinitely (if storage locations are available). This corresponds to the historical reality – already in the pre-industrial era, stocks of metal, weapons, etc. were formed. And it could be stored for a very long time. The Graz Arsenal, for example, boasts of accumulations over 400 years.
4. Ideally, some part of the stock should "spoil" every turn. Moreover, it is obvious that, for example, iron should "deteriorate" more actively than bronze, etc.
5.It is equally obvious that the resource cost of units differed dozens of times already in ancient times and the economic model should reflect this. The armored Mycenaean charioteer is a 15-18 kg armor made of bronze, the militia is usually used a kilogram of bronze or less (a spear tip and a dagger). At the same time, there is a leap in the industrial era. There are about 10 tons of metal per tanker = 10 thousand militia. As a result, you can get a historical configuration of armies. To play with which will be, IMHO, more interesting.
6."Free" recruits accumulate only up to the limit proportional to the population, fighting animals – the limit proportional to the number of pastures, etc. This is similar to the model from Civ 5. However, the difference is that the accumulated resource can be exhausted by too active mobilization.
And then there are obvious options: mobilization by reducing the population, mercenaries, upgrading workers, etc.
Quite ideally, the treatment of units is possible only with the expenditure of human resources or/and spare parts, but this is almost extremism

This is quite interesting, but would require a lot of work, both coding, and AI considerations. I have the different weapon resources in my mod and thought what to do with them. Maybe I change the requirements to be amount based. But a lot of work

 

[pecheneg]

Adding 1 fuel consumption when attacking. which means attacking AND moving into the tile would cost 2.

Yes, doubling (approximately) fuel consumption is a surprisingly common standard for a very wide range of "units". For example, in the navy, the ratio is ½ -1/2.5 for both predreadnoughts and missile cruisers.
To be fair, there are exceptions. This does not work for types of aircraft bombing from high altitudes and not conducting aerial combat, for example. If you ever decide to bring the mod to an extreme degree of realism, I am always ready to give out details.

Im thinking about adding the "attack ship/planes/buildings" for planes, maybe artillery as well

By the way, the artillery mission of destroying buildings can be given selectively, not to all types. Pre-industrial guns did not work on targets inside the walls, for example. But the mortars of that time specialized mainly in this.

 

[pecheneg]

But a lot of work

Sorry. I am not competent enough in programming to do anything seriously, but enough to imagine the scope.

 

[vincentz]

I am not competent enough in programming...

Me neither. Me neither. Just uninstalled civ because I didnt get a tech splash screen . Checked the code: no python exceptions, no assertions from SDK. Nothing appears wrong. So it had to be the install. Maybe I messed with original files. Better do a clean install. Well............

in the ini there is a setting for turning off intro movies
; Set to 1 for no intro movie
NoIntroMovie = 1

and in the rush, I accidently turned off tech splash screens too
; Set to 1 for no tech splash screens
NoTechSplash = 1

Feeling kinda noop'ish right now ...

 

[pecheneg]

Feeling kinda noop'ish right now ..

Hmm, I felt very stupid about the fifth page of the python textbook (with IQ 137 on student tests). Since then, people who have read it in its entirety scare me a little. In general, wild hordes of ideal non-programmers roam around you (and the night with the textbook is dark and full of horrors, yes).

 

[vincentz]

There was a bug (assert) that kept irritating me (all bugs do I guess). Everytime I would go into civilopedia it came up.
Something about terraininfos out of bounds. Turns out its a bug in the original source code:
void CvGameTextMgr::setBasicUnitHelp(CvWStringBuffer &szBuffer, UnitTypes eUnit, bool bCivilopediaText)

calls TechTypes eTech = (TechTypes)GC.getUnitInfo(eUnit).getTerrainPassableTech(iI);
where it should be TechTypes eTech = (TechTypes)GC.getUnitInfo(eUnit).getFeaturePassableTech(iI);
in the following part:

    for (iI = 0; iI < GC.getNumFeatureInfos(); ++iI)
    {
        if (GC.getUnitInfo(eUnit).getFeatureImpassable(iI))
        {
            CvWString szFeature;
            TechTypes eTech = (TechTypes)GC.getUnitInfo(eUnit).getTerrainPassableTech(iI);

            if (NO_TECH == eTech)
            {
                szFeature.Format(L"<link=literal>%s</link>", GC.getFeatureInfo((FeatureTypes)iI).getDescription());
            }
            else
            {
                szFeature = gDLL->getText("TXT_KEY_TERRAIN_UNTIL_TECH", GC.getFeatureInfo((FeatureTypes)iI).getTextKeyWide(), GC.getTechInfo(eTech).getTextKeyWide());
            }
            setListHelp(szBuffer, szTempBuffer, szFeature, L", ", bFirst);
            bFirst = false;
        }
    }

Its most likely fixed in unofficial patch, but if someone else is annoyed by it, well, here it is

 

[vincentz]

Finally got it to work. Guess it was the python indentation that messed it up (tabs/spaces)
It only shows if oil>0 and not in city screen

                if not CyInterface().isCityScreenUp() and pPlayer.getOil() > 0:
                    szText = u"%c" %(gc.getBonusInfo(gc.getInfoTypeForString("BONUS_FUEL")).getChar())
                    szText += localText.getText("TXT_KEY_MISC_OIL", (pPlayer.getOil(), pPlayer.getOilPerTurn()))
                    screen.setLabel( "OilText", "Background", sColor + szText + u"</color>", CvUtil.FONT_LEFT_JUSTIFY, 12, 120, -0.1, FontTypes.GAME_FONT, WidgetTypes.WIDGET_GENERAL, -1, -1 )
                    screen.show( "OilText" )

    <TEXT>
        <Tag>TXT_KEY_MISC_OIL</Tag>
        <English>: %d1_Num [COLOR_POSITIVE_TEXT](+%d2_Num/Turn)[COLOR_REVERT]</English>
        <French>: %d1_Num [COLOR_POSITIVE_TEXT](+%d2_Num/Turn)[COLOR_REVERT]</French>
        <German>: %d1_Num [COLOR_POSITIVE_TEXT](+%d2_Num/Turn)[COLOR_REVERT]</German>
        <Italian>: %d1_Num [COLOR_POSITIVE_TEXT](+%d2_Num/Turn)[COLOR_REVERT]</Italian>
        <Spanish>: %d1_Num [COLOR_POSITIVE_TEXT](+%d2_Num/Turn)[COLOR_REVERT]</Spanish>
    </TEXT>

 

[vincentz]

Also...

And... look all the way to the right.

 

[keldath]

Wow vicentz,
You code devil!
You work fast !

This keeps getting better n better.
Well done.

 

[vincentz]

Back to the Max UPT drawing board....
AI play by special rules
Also plays really poorly when left on its own apparently. Taken from an AI autoplay.

 

[keldath]

Your doing a upt?

Interesting,many have tried that.
I had thought of a model that might not hinder ai or risk an infinite loop.
I can share my thoughts if u wish.

 

[vincentz]

I have had UPT for a couple of years now
Its based on Era, starting with 3, and expanding by 3 for each era up until 24 at future iirc.
As long as the player can see the tile, the AI sticks to the rules, but if they are in FOW they dont follow the rules.

I think I found the issue though.

 

[vincentz]

I think I found the issue though.

The issue was not a bug, but a feature. Without it, the AI cripples itself, so unfortunately the AI can cheat (preposterous right?!)...

Got some new icons to heal the wound

Red Cross means city is MORE than twice as healthy and happy as it is unhealthy and unhappy.
This results in x2 growth. Thinking about using happiness icon instead, as redcross is taken by one of my guilds

Globe means that the city have aircapacity > 0. Doesn't mean that there is space to park the planes though

Moveicon means there are airlifts available.

Edit... Let me rephrase that with a thousand words...

edit 2 ... and a tiny thing that have annoyed me for a long time, especially playing on 1920x1080 resolution.

the color for "Have moved but can still move" was yellow, and almost indistinguishable from the fortify white indicator. I made it a bit more orange, so its easier to tell the difference.

edit 3... but apparently it not the same as in the banner.

anyone knows where those little dots in the banner is defined?

 

[pecheneg]

Without it, the AI cripples itself, so unfortunately the AI can cheat (preposterous right?!)...

It is believed that the developers have solved the problem of weak AI due to massive cheating at least since "civilization 3".
I'm playing the role of an active, albeit silent fan here. With a new economic model and "rangestrike", a radically improving combat system, a truly innovative mod will turn out. Almost a different, modern game.

 

[vincentz]

Your doing a upt?

Interesting,many have tried that.
I had thought of a model that might not hinder ai or risk an infinite loop.
I can share my thoughts if u wish.

Yes Please share. The system as is, kinda works, but have room for improvement

 

[pecheneg]

By the way, in the order of thinking about the distant beautiful future.
A fairly obvious option for the development of mechanics is the transformation of fuel into a global modifier. On the same principle as science/culture/espionage (with a slider).
The scheme is as follows.
1. fuel is consumed not only by units, but also by the economy as a whole
2. Production and, possibly, commerce depend on the availability of fuel.
3. Fuel consumption can vary in the same way as spending on science, culture, etc. 100% doubles or triples production, less security gives a smaller bonus.
By lowering fuel consumption in the economy, you can free up a resource for units and vice versa. The result will be a realistic model of industrial wars.
The problem is that the AI will go crazy.

 

[vincentz]

I thought about at least use the resources for the powerplants. So if building a coal powerplant, it would reduce coal by 1 etc.
To provide betterAI™ it needs at least 2 of the resource, so it can still build units and other buildings that require that resource.
That way, it also reduces (but not removes) another pet peeve I had, with the different powerplants spamming the build queue in late game.
https://fsymbols.com/tm/

 

[pecheneg]

I thought about at least use the resources for the powerplants. So if building a coal powerplant, it would reduce coal by 1 etc.
To provide betterAI™ it needs at least 2 of the resource, so it can still build units and other buildings that require that resource.
That way, it also reduces (but not removes) another pet peeve I had, with the different powerplants spamming the build queue in late game.

Civilization-3/4, it seems to me, has one fundamental glitch. Expansion, in general, is not motivated, and dominance is an end in itself. At the same time, betting on the same scientific victory in implies relative pacifism. If we make the "search" for resources more or less permanent ...
At the same time (further, just abstract reasoning, I imagine the amount of work that already exists).
1. In a simple version, a unit of coal provides energy for both a small agricultural town and an industrial metropolis.
That is (again in theory and ideally)
Let's say a power plant from X coal produces Y energy. Energy, in turn, serves as a resource for the construction of other buildings. If there is not enough energy, you can build a building called "power plant 2". By increasing not only fuel consumption, but also pollution.
2. There is one more point. In principle, a very wide range of "buildings" and "improvements" required resources. Including system-forming/key ones. I.e., an "iron" farmer, for example, operated with an amount of metal comparable to an average armed infantryman; the smallest horseshoe is 200 grams, that is, a fully shod horse = an average sword. Etc.
As a result, for example, the "style of play" in the Bronze Age with its usually scarce metal was radically different from iron. This is partly "vanilla", but there is a pale shadow of reality there.