My main nomination is faction specific custom units. I'd love to have a way to play around with crazy units in a way that does not mess with the balance of other factions.
My second nomination is the ability to store faction files in /factions/ rather than having them necessarily mixed in with the misc configuration/graphics/stuff files. When you've got a large collection of custom factions (I have about 160) it's hard to keep things organized, and separating things out would help a lot, hopefully encouraging more people to make use of the factionpack. This could be backwards compatible if it looks in /factions/ first, then in the main folder if it does not find the required file in /factions/.
That would be cool, it would be fun to play with. I don't want to make you duplicate work though, so if it's on your roadmap to do another way I'm okay with you counting my nomination as one for the virtual techs thing.[/quote]My main nomination is faction specific custom units. I'd love to have a way to play around with crazy units in a way that does not mess with the balance of other factions.
Putting in a CANBUILDUNIT ability should not be too difficult; it will be obsolete if I do a major tech tree expansion with virtual techs, but that would be much bigger, and I presume you'd like the ability sooner.
How about a rule in alphax.txt to affect the scrambling of needlejets?
1, 25 ; Scrambling {0 = disable, 1 = enable for units with < x% damage}
It is frustrating when a heavily damaged Needlejet scrambles to intercept enemy bombers with no chance to win.
The ability to adjust the type -and output of landmarks in the alphax file.
For instance, changing it so that say the Monsoon landmark gives nutrient+energy instead of just nutrients.
Or even changing the output to zero.
There are still many bugs and unimplemented features that are present in the original game. This makes the decision for my nominations very difficult.
I would definitely need to evalute what features and bugfixes would have the greatest impact with the least amount of work involved.
For instance, changing it so that say the Monsoon landmark gives nutrient+energy instead of just nutrients.
Or even changing the output to zero.
That sort of information needs to be stored somewhere, though, and that means reworking something to make room.
My list of features and bugfixes in order:
Features:
1. Enableing the various probe team options. This would mean getting the Scripts for #DECIPHER, #NODECIPHER, #ADVDECIPHER1, #ADVENERGY, and #ADVENERGY1 working. Fixing ADVDECIPHER1 and ADVENERGY1 would probably require changing the base level of probe team morale.
2. Adding the various potential bonuses to the CITIZENS section of the alpha file. The bonuses are mentioned in the Help.txt file under the heading #CITIZENHECK.
3. Adding a combat defense/attack bonus for Energy weapons versus projectile armor and Projectile weapons versus Energy armor.
4. Adding Commerce penalities to the negative SOCIAL, ECONOMY effects.
5 Adding variables to control the bonus you get from secret projects like the Neural Amp, Dream Twister, and base facilities like Perimeter Defense, Tachyon Field, and Aerospace Complexes.
6. Making the Telepathic Matrix give +2 PROBE instead of +2 Probe team morale.
Bugfixes:
1. Getting the Faction Bonus COMMFREQ working
along with fixing the graphical bug that occurs in the SE faction social bonus/penalty display when using the SOCIAL, TALENT effect. I have attempted to fix the SOCIAL TALENT bug myself but my attempts have made the game unstable.
2. Fixing the road attack combat bonus
and seperating the variables that control the bonuses for Mobile vs. Rough and Mobile vs. Base
3. Fixing the FACTENERGYBON display in the Faction Budget/Economic window (I think it is the F3 shortcut display???).
For instance, changing it so that say the Monsoon landmark gives nutrient+energy instead of just nutrients.
Or even changing the output to zero.
That sort of information needs to be stored somewhere, though, and that means reworking something to make room.
I would've thought the landmark yield info is already stored somewhere? Or is its 'storage' space to small to add info?
Here's a minor one that I don't expect will get much mileage:
A pet peeve I have is hitting the "d" instead of the "s" or "f" when I have made just one terraforming enhancement, and having that be destroyed because the key for Destroy is "d" and there is no confirmation dialogue (as there is when there are two or more enhancements and it wants to know which one to destroy). Can that be changed to "Shift+D" (and have plain "d" be unassigned)?
I've built a road, want a farm, hit the "d" instead of the "f", and the road is destroyed. Or, I have a farm, want to add solar, hit "d" instead of "s", and lose the farm.
How about a rule in alphax.txt to affect the scrambling of needlejets?
1, 25 ; Scrambling {0 = disable, 1 = enable for units with < x% damage}
It is frustrating when a heavily damaged Needlejet scrambles to intercept enemy bombers with no chance to win.
It would probably make more sense to have it be based on the situation; even if it's heavily damaged, it might be better to lose the needlejet than whatever the unit was originally attacking, and depending on the relative weapon strengths it might have the advantage even with damage.
Perhaps have it scramble if either the unit being attacked costs more than it does, or it has a better than 50% chance of winning?
Hmm...I'm not sure the cost comparison of units makes for good gameplay (unless you are playing the Morganites or Spartans).
The combat prediction seems logical and good for gameplay overall. So perhaps the percentage could be an alphax.txt variable so it could be finely tuned. 50% is a good starting point, but that might be too high or too low.
Would it be acceptable to have the probe team targetted tech steal and the decreased survival and success percentage for stealing energy credits count as a single nomination?
Hmm...I'm not sure the cost comparison of units makes for good gameplay (unless you are playing the Morganites or Spartans).Yes. But I am thinking about the inverse situation.QuoteWouldn't you rather lose a 20 mineral interceptor than a 30 mineral crawler?
QuoteHmm...I'm not sure the cost comparison of units makes for good gameplay (unless you are playing the Morganites or Spartans).Yes. But I am thinking about the inverse situation.QuoteWouldn't you rather lose a 20 mineral interceptor than a 30 mineral crawler?
Interceptors shouldn't remain idle while their comrades are being bombed, regardless of their mineral costs. They scramble to defend. That is their duty as air-superiority units. Only Morgan would keep them locked up in a hangar.
It is not the duty of Interceptors to go on statistically hopeless missions, however. So if the chance of winning is reasonable, they take to the skies.
It is not the duty of Interceptors to go on statistically hopeless missions, however. So if the chance of winning is reasonable, they take to the skies.I see your point. But I believe that a highly damaged Needlejet's greatest priority is to get repaired such that it can potently fight another day. It shouldn't sacrifice itself simply because another unit happens to have required 10 more minerals to be built than itself. There is more to the concept of value than mineral investment.Quote from: YitziExcept that in SMAC/X there is no such thing as a statistically hopeless mission. Even if the interceptor will definitely die without doing any damage, it will still prevent the attacker from harming whatever it had originally been attacking. So if the chance of winning is reasonable or it will save a unit more valuable than the interceptor itself, they should intercept.
I see your point. But I believe that a highly damaged Needlejet's greatest priority is to get repaired such that it can potently fight another day. It shouldn't sacrifice itself simply because another unit happens to have required 10 more minerals to be built than itself. There is more to the concept of value than mineral investment.
If I have a crippled 4-row Interceptor and, let's say, a dozen 5-row Sentinels, which type is more valuable to my faction? I'd say the jet is more valuable than the infantry, especially after it is repaired.
A force of 13 Interceptors is ineffective. The jet is valuable due to its rarity in the scenario I depicted.
No, then you have to skip over it every turn. In lategame you don't want the hassle, but scrambling is still useful.
For instance, changing it so that say the Monsoon landmark gives nutrient+energy instead of just nutrients.
Or even changing the output to zero.
That sort of information needs to be stored somewhere, though, and that means reworking something to make room.
I would've thought the landmark yield info is already stored somewhere? Or is its 'storage' space to small to add info?
I think its storage space only holds the names; the effects are hardcoded.
For instance, changing it so that say the Monsoon landmark gives nutrient+energy instead of just nutrients.
Or even changing the output to zero.
That sort of information needs to be stored somewhere, though, and that means reworking something to make room.
I would've thought the landmark yield info is already stored somewhere? Or is its 'storage' space to small to add info?
I think its storage space only holds the names; the effects are hardcoded.
Okay, I reckon its a 'no, for the time being' then. :)
1. Make a moddable number of MAX spotting worms (air\water\land). Cause they doesn't stop appearing after building the VoP @ me :)
2. A scrollable F4 window (like the building window)
3. Stop factions contacting me EVER. only I can speak to them
4. Formers DOESN'T move when in auto mode, ONLY when there IS smth to do
5. (My dream) when I have 100 formers in auto and a former-able square, I noticed that ALL unemployed formers are going to that square. Than when one reaches it and starts to work, ALL the remaining are gone to another square, etc. Make them STOP behaiving like that.
What do you mean "spotting worms"? I think the VoP affects only ecodamage-caused worms.Yes, I mean when they are appearing on ecodamage-caused-appearing fungus squares. There are always at least 64 worms but suddenly when I attack them with the corresponding unit they all are "destroyed" at once, but sometimes I forgwt to dealwith them and onnext turn all the 100500 worms are there in flesh.
I mean that when I'm only hovering my mouse over the build window I can scroll it, using the mouse scroller. The F4 window I can only scroll by pressing the downscroll button on the F4 window with my mouse. So I'd like to scroll it as the build window - when I'm only hovering my mouse over it.Quote2. A scrollable F4 window (like the building window)I'm not sure what you mean here. The building window scrolls only with arrow keys (not by moving your mouse somewhere), and the f4 window also scrolls with arrow keys.
Quote from: YitziWhat do you mean "spotting worms"? I think the VoP affects only ecodamage-caused worms.Yes, I mean when they are appearing on ecodamage-caused-appearing fungus squares. There are always at least 64 worms but suddenly when I attack them with the corresponding unit they all are "destroyed" at once, but sometimes I forgwt to dealwith them and onnext turn all the 100500 worms are there in flesh.
I mean that when I'm only hovering my mouse over the build window I can scroll it, using the mouse scroller. The F4 window I can only scroll by pressing the downscroll button on the F4 window with my mouse. So I'd like to scroll it as the build window - when I'm only hovering my mouse over it.
Oh, sorry - I forgot one more - the air units, when put in On Alert state are NOT attacking any unit, only making a rendevuz with them, flying uselessly around (lurkers also). Ex.: I made a needlejet with psi weapon. In manual mode I can attack a land unit as a Mind Worm, but in On Alert state the needlejet is only flying around. The same for water units.
2. Automated Gravship formers are capable of making changes to sea squares as well as land squares. (Currently they can only automatically affect land, but can manually affect sea.)
3. AI is capable of using Sea Supply and Aerial Supply units effectively.
4. AI is capable of using Aerial Colony units effectively. (This could provide certain AIs a HUGE boost in power...it could make them considerably more competitive.)
5. AI is capable of using Gravship Formers. (Yeah, yeah...but there are some games I've played where this actually could've made a difference.)
7. Add back in the "Inertial Damping" and "Global Energy Theory" techs to balance and expand the tech tree. I already play with these in my own game.
8. Include the sound file fixes for SMAC v2.0 in subsequent patches.
Yeah, I had a feeling that the AI changes might be rather time-consuming and difficult.
On #8, there are five sound files that are incompatible with the final SMAC patch. I remember that the level 5 weapon is one of them; I don't recall the others. Anyway, for some reason, Firaxis encoded those sound files as stereo, while all other files used by the game are mono. Stereo files are incompatible with the final patch. So, just re-encoding those files to mono gets them working again. I already posted the re-encoded files as a small patch in the Downloads section.
Let me know if you need any more info on the #6 bug. It is potentially game-breaking because, if someone has EXACTLY 256 units, it's treated as zero units and (theoretically) could cause crashes. I haven't actually observed this yet though.
That's why the "sleep" order would not prevent scrambling; it still means not having to skip over it every turn, but is different than "hold".Ah, I see now.
The harder-to-implement alternative is to have a "stand down" position that acts like hold position but also prevents air interception, artillery interception, and makes the unit act as last choice for defending.
I'll drop them into ACU too, but.. just testing it seems like my files are working fine (and are larger than yours, I assume mine are stereo). I've attached them to this post to compare if you like.On #8, there are five sound files that are incompatible with the final SMAC patch. I remember that the level 5 weapon is one of them; I don't recall the others. Anyway, for some reason, Firaxis encoded those sound files as stereo, while all other files used by the game are mono. Stereo files are incompatible with the final patch. So, just re-encoding those files to mono gets them working again. I already posted the re-encoded files as a small patch in the Downloads section.
And you want them included in my patches?
Might as well. That's easy enough that I'll put it in 3.4.
QuoteLet me know if you need any more info on the #6 bug. It is potentially game-breaking because, if someone has EXACTLY 256 units, it's treated as zero units and (theoretically) could cause crashes. I haven't actually observed this yet though.
While I suppose it's possible that the script for a unit might look at the number of its unit type, that probably doesn't happen. (And of course if it's not for the unit then it has to take care of the issue anyway because you might just not have any of that unit.)
In any case, feel free to post the bugfixes as a write-in in the vote thread (and get other people to vote for them as well; no write-in is going to get in with only one person's support), and you can nominate others next time.
Sorry, I was wrong about those sound files. (Darn fuzzy memory.) They will work with the final patched version of SMAC, but not the final patched version of SMAX. Hopefully that'll clear up the differing test results.I tested in SMAX, Yitzi version 3.3b.
Sorry, I was wrong about those sound files. (Darn fuzzy memory.) They will work with the final patched version of SMAC, but not the final patched version of SMAX. Hopefully that'll clear up the differing test results.I tested in SMAX, Yitzi version 3.3b.
Listening to them next to each other.. your files also seem cut off and lower quality, mine fades out much more nicely. Compare your and my missile launcher sounds for example.
I've attached them to this post to compare if you like.Attached to that post.
... At 800x600 resolution, a Network Node that is linked to an Artifact has the word "Linked" in the list of facilities. At 1024x768 (and greater?), that notation is not there....I second that. My present solution is to rename the base by adding * at the end of the base name. It is although giving information to other players without infiltration, who know this. And in case I forget to do it, later I may be surprised, that my AA traveled to a wrong base.
Probably too late for this, but yesterday while playing I was reminded of an old thorn in the F4 base display: At 800x600 resolution, a Network Node that is linked to an Artifact has the word "Linked" in the list of facilities. At 1024x768 (and greater?), that notation is not there. It would be nice to have it at all resolutions, even if it is just the word "Link" or "-L".
...In the Goto/"G" screen, it notes which bases are linked, when the unit in question is an AA...Thank you, I will have to use this feature. ;b;
Better late, than never.
I'll submit my 2 wishes, sorry if they were already discussed and rejected.
1. Non-lethal air attacks on land units, except probe teams. Attack by air unit cannot reduce land unit health below 10% outdoor, 50% in base or bunker. Ideally, collateral damage to population from Nerve Gas Pods should still apply. Probe teams can be obliterated, inglourious basterds they are! And probably SAM units must fight to the death.
2. Techsteal is only possible from the base with Network Node. If you don't want to be proberaped, sell NN in vulnerable base. Poor old Zak can't do this, which makes perfect sense! Setting should have different values for probe teams and TECHSTEAL faction ability.
Both features are controlled by alphax.txt.
You mean a "max damage from air attacks" like what happens for artillery?Yes, quite similar to artillery. The idea is to force players use ground troops, cutting chop&drop.
Yitzi, the .exe you released last November (3.5), is that the last version without community requests in it?
And have you an idea of how much work you have to do before your first version with community requests in it is released?
My mistake. Must have interpreted the "b" as a "5" in your latest release.
Does each new version require a clean install? I'm asking because when I switch an old with a new terranx.exe version, I got alphax.txt error popups in a modded version of your work.
Not sure of the right place to post this. Move it if necessary!
I'm playing a SP game with Yitzi 3_4
The drone apparition logic doesn't fit.
Ex: base pop 2 + 1 scout for police + Human Genome Project = 1 talent +1 drone and drone riots !?!
Also sometimes drone riots erupt without change in population, social engineering or number of bases.
Is there anything I should read (like a patch log)? For we use 3_4 in our MP game and I wouldn't like any bad surprises.
Drone control codes? ???
2 things/ideas, small and possibly very large:
Something, that just I thought of, that possibly could be made with not much effort:
- When in base screen, each building item has its minerals displayed as blue boxes. What could be useful, is to quickly view what row length is at a given moment.
It may be obvious for some, or even easy to count, but when the row is like 8,9 minerals or more, it is difficult.
Why is it important?
When rushing, there is a penalty (double cost!) when having less than 10 minerals collected. So when mineral row is 8, I know, that I need to have 2 filled blue boxes in the second row. (8+2), for 9 (9+1) and so on.
Would it be possible to make in easy way something similar like for SUPPORT (...) and PSYCH (...) info added on the buttons there?
Under the mineral rows, there is a label:
TURNS: ...
Would it be possible to add row length info:
... TURNS: ...
[8] TURNS: 3
Actually, this is part of the lower panel, and also some additional info, that is moderately important (making some info more visible).
It would be doable, but not quite as little effort as you seem to think. If you nominate it, it'll probably get its votes doubled, but it's not getting in automatically.
8: If a base is all drones, and some are turned into specialists, an equal number will be turned into
superdrones. If a base is all superdrones and it is supposed to have even more drones than that, "phantom
drones" will be created. Superdrones and phantom drones do increase the number of talents needed to prevent
drone riots. (Thus, there is no way to stop drone riots other than psych, drone control facilities, and
police.) If a base is all talents and is supposed to have more talents, it will create "phantom talents",
allowing a specialist base to still have golden ages.
So as I understand this rule, it has both benefiting of a player action (more golden ages with some conditions) Thanks!
I don't want to tinker with alpha.txt, especially when I'm playing MP at the same time.
I'll take that is the 'new normal' drone situation and, moreover, I'll remember that small planet = more drones.
Actually, this is part of the lower panel, and also some additional info, that is moderately important (making some info more visible).
Drone riots...
I like the drone riots from civ4 so much more. They just make less micromanaging when playing.
If there was some way to mod it into SMACX, it would be quite interesting new gameplay.
Now when you pay enough attention, you can avoid like all of drone riots, but it is so micromanaging.
Something that seems strange. Could be improved.
I <ESC> a MP game before entering my password to look at something else on the web and when I resumed to actually play the turn I got the warning about tampering, even though I didn't open the turn previously.
And the next player got the warning about me playing the turn twice.
Something that always bothered me and could be improved.
When you have infiltrated factions and you get messages on screen telling "The Morganites and The Hive have signed a Treaty" or "X and Y have agreed to combine their forces against Z", you can't read them because, at the same time, base screens open to talk about things produced, drone riots and so on... and after the message has disappeared.
Why not have it written in "M" like "Forest expands near..." and such, so you can access it later?
Is there a way to put an "automatic forests" in the game?
Something that always bothered me and could be improved.+1.
When you have infiltrated factions and you get messages on screen telling "The Morganites and The Hive have signed a Treaty" or "X and Y have agreed to combine their forces against Z", you can't read them because, at the same time, base screens open to talk about things produced, drone riots and so on... and after the message has disappeared.
Why not have it written in "M" like "Forest expands near..." and such, so you can access it later?
Thanks!
I don't want to tinker with alpha.txt, especially when I'm playing MP at the same time.
I'll take that is the 'new normal' drone situation and, moreover, I'll remember that small planet = more drones.
Something not so easy: borderpushes always infuriate me to no end. It would be great to have the option to claim land around newly established base forever. May be not that long distance as it is now in the absence of neighbors, just say base radius+1. But the claimed land (and sea) will change hands only together with the base.
By the way, why sea borders are closer than land ones? The option to control that will be welcomed too. Can make AI sea bases spam less annoying.
Am I the only one dissatisfied with the players placement on the map? How many times did you end on a medium-sized island together with Yang and Marr? I have a feeling the game uses close placement of AI players as a measure to increase difficulty, at least on Transcend. Some control over that would be wonderful.
I'd like to ask what would you think about (and how hard would it be to implement) save grouping ?
I'm not really a gamer. If I play, I rely heavily on saving often.
Yet I'm not good with coming up with names, so tend to go with game proposed name whenever I can.
In AC, this is a problem, as with the default name containing only leader's name and year, it gets quite tedious if I want to roll back a few (dozen) turns, as it's hard to tell then if the save came from new strand or the old one.
So, how hard would it be to and something like "Create a new directory" button to the save dialog and making the game remember the last directory it saved to ?
PS: also, how many of the fixes described in that scient dump posted a bit over 6 months ago (here (http://alphacentauri2.info/index.php?topic=14141.msg64080#msg64080)) are yet to be implemented in your patch ? That is, is there anything in that dump, that's not fixed by your patch (with either similar or different approach) ?
I'm not sure one's open right now - but while we're in here suggesting, I'd like to remind Yitzi for the future about programmable interlude triggers in scenario creation and more flexibility in how the interludes can be made to display as a distant secondary wish. scient always thought it should be doable, and several of us GotM team people have wanted this desperately for years.
-Also, you know about the faction graphics bug in MP/scenarios. I suspect -with my impressive powers of knowing mysterious stuff- sisko feels strongly about that one...