I am fairly certain that I have figured out where the function for the COMMFREQ Bonus exists. The actual test for the faction Bonus COMMFREQ occurs at address 005B3D36. I am uncertain exactly what occurs at this location. The other feaure I would want nominated is to fix the Morale Bonuses from Children's Creches and Brood Pits while a faction has a negative morale score.
Based upon my analysis of the procedure, the effects of brood pits on the morale of Native Life is identical to that of Children's Creches except they appear to provide an additional +1 Morale bonus (including the bugs). The procedure for the visuals controls of the morale bonus starts at 004B3FD0. The procedure for the actual bonuses to morale from these facilities starts at address 00501940. Additionally, it appears as though Children's Creches also give Native Life the same Morale Bonus. However, the bonus from the Children's Creche does not stack with the bonus from a Brood Pit if both exist at the same base.I am fairly certain that I have figured out where the function for the COMMFREQ Bonus exists. The actual test for the faction Bonus COMMFREQ occurs at address 005B3D36. I am uncertain exactly what occurs at this location. The other feaure I would want nominated is to fix the Morale Bonuses from Children's Creches and Brood Pits while a faction has a negative morale score.
COMMFREQ has already been fixed for 3.5. But your nomination of fixing the effect of creches has been accepted. (It's not clear what's even supposed to happen for Brood Pits, AFAIK.)
Based upon my analysis of the procedure, the effects of brood pits on the morale of Native Life is identical to that of Children's Creches except they appear to provide an additional +1 Morale bonus (including the bugs). The procedure for the visuals controls of the morale bonus starts at 004B3FD0. The procedure for the actual bonuses to morale from these facilities starts at address 00501940. Additionally, it appears as though Children's Creches also give Native Life the same Morale Bonus. However, the bonus from the Children's Creche does not stack with the bonus from a Brood Pit if both exist at the same base.I am fairly certain that I have figured out where the function for the COMMFREQ Bonus exists. The actual test for the faction Bonus COMMFREQ occurs at address 005B3D36. I am uncertain exactly what occurs at this location. The other feaure I would want nominated is to fix the Morale Bonuses from Children's Creches and Brood Pits while a faction has a negative morale score.
COMMFREQ has already been fixed for 3.5. But your nomination of fixing the effect of creches has been accepted. (It's not clear what's even supposed to happen for Brood Pits, AFAIK.)
Okay, I'm going for the Research-equivalent of "Stockpile Energy". So being able to translate Production into Research points instead of EC.
Maybe called "Focus Research"? I suggested this in another thread already and am willing to provide the Icon for it. Be it the one I made earlier or another one if you like something different.
An auto plant forest button. This would make life so much easier.isn't it possible to disable all terraform-actions besides planting forest and going full-auto? I thought that should work :o
An auto plant forest button. This would make life so much easier.
The MP faction graphics bug needs fixing -not least so sisko's sig will stop shouting.I don't even know what this bug is :o
a pet peeve of mine:
if I have set a unit to 'fully automate', and it is withdrawn from enemy territory, it stops being fully automated.
I'd love to see some persistence in automation.
The MP faction graphics bug needs fixing -not least so sisko's sig will stop shouting.
How long will nominations be open? It might take me a few days (couple weeks?) to sort through my ideas and discard the stupid ones.....
Is there a way to add a PSI defense only?Yes: Research Eudaimonia and you will have access to Psi Defense.
I can only repeat myself from 3.5's nomination thread:
1. Non-finishing air attacks on land units, except probe teams. Attack by air unit cannot reduce land unit's 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 land units must fight to the death.
2. Techsteal and Kill Prominent Researcher is only possible against 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.
Yitzi, have you incorporated scient's v2 patch into your work? Do you have any plans to?
Feature nomination: Toggle spawning of fungal towers
There might have been a problem with other native life too, but I can't remember and can't test for a little while (away from windows machine).
Second feature nomination: Toggle spawning of any native life unit.
Nominate feature: Set some alphax custom units to be available only to AI players.
Has anything ever been done with user-definable interlude triggers?
Just so you know; 3.5 will allow custom units to be made unavailable and then have a faction bonus making them available again; do you still particularly want the AI-only ones?
Just so you know; 3.5 will allow custom units to be made unavailable and then have a faction bonus making them available again; do you still particularly want the AI-only ones?
Yes please. It would allow us to just dump a load of special units into alphax.txt to improve the AI without affecting human experience.
I'm on the creative end of GotMs, so it's tough for me to go into specifics from a conversation that mostly took place 5.5 years ago on another site in a private folder, but one I think could be made to serve most scenario needs is an option to place a location trigger or several on the map - maybe also specific objects/units, like an alien artifact that has to be escorted back to base x.Has anything ever been done with user-definable interlude triggers?
No; however, that is so broad that it can't be done comprehensively without a parsing procedure, which is a lot of work and would probably hurt performance and isn't worth doing. However, specific triggers (or specific types of triggers such as "on learning a tech" or "on finishing a project") would probably be doable, though it'd still be a bit tricky if it needs to avoid repeats or otherwise store information. Did you have anything specific in mind?
I'm on the creative end of GotMs, so it's tough for me to go into specifics from a conversation that mostly took place 5.5 years ago on another site in a private folder, but one I think could be made to serve most scenario needs is an option to place a location trigger or several on the map - maybe also specific objects/units, like an alien artifact that has to be escorted back to base x.Has anything ever been done with user-definable interlude triggers?
No; however, that is so broad that it can't be done comprehensively without a parsing procedure, which is a lot of work and would probably hurt performance and isn't worth doing. However, specific triggers (or specific types of triggers such as "on learning a tech" or "on finishing a project") would probably be doable, though it'd still be a bit tricky if it needs to avoid repeats or otherwise store information. Did you have anything specific in mind?
The problem we faced when we were trying to figure out how to work story into interludes in early 2010 was that altering the text of existing interludes is easy, but figuring out how to set things up to trigger in the right order made it unworkable. If we had more options, it should make all the difference. "on learning a tech" or "on finishing a project" would be good, too.
(I also have a few other related things on the wish-list, like an option to have multi-page interludes -there's one or two already in the game- and ability to insert art; but mainly, more interlude trigger options.)
sisko can probably elaborate on all this...
Location triggers, then.
I nominate for features:
- A flag to give PSI defender a -/+% modifier by PLANET SE (like attacking already has)
In order to make native life more relevant/usable I've been playing with 2:1 A/D ratio on PSI. However this makes PSI units very weak on defense, with high PLANET they should have a little more chance. It's tricky because alien life also has to be considered...I know non-native defenders are also an option.
- Not sure if it's a bug but N from condensors are treated as bonus and thus exempt from N cap.
- More flags on tech/facilities so that FOP gains on terrain other than fungus can be added. Might be a lot of work for what it's worth, but it has possibilities I think.
Hmm ok based on these I would actually change this a little, Picking two items for native life since I think it's pretty core to the theme of the game.
1) PSI defense by PLANET as a combat variable
2) An option to flatten the curve of amount alien life per fungal pop somehow. Not sure if any others are playing with zero clean minerals but what I find happens is that ecodamage is irrelevant early on, and later on its borderline unmanageable even with picking Green. The game should be this way a bit but it's too extreme like the tech curve issues. I guess there would be two approaches - TECH removed from ecodamage formula or fungal pop size scaling with ecodamage (and ecodamage chance as more of a constant / or a cap on pops per turn...I have to think on this a bit more)
Ok I'll go with something that might be relatively simple?
- a flag to modify the PLANET rating of alien life (0 by default)
This could be changed to make the alien life itself more or less deadly as a sort of difficulty slider (I think the game puts in some hidden modifiers based on turns, difficulty, vs base already that aren't shown on the combat display)
Do you consider AI not polluting a bug?
Good to know. I used Free Drones instead and ran the game about 50 turns. What I saw was that fungus was popping around the AI base however never once did native life spawn - even after a dozen or more pops. I know if a human player had that many you would be getting significant amounts of native life.
Another thing I saw was that the roaming native life seems to scale up with the highest player's TECH (not the fungal pops). Was seeing Locusts of Chiron wandering around in YR 2102. This might be a known fact also.
I may have also discovered a bug while playing around with this. It seems the AI can trigger a second (or more) Global Energy Market victory before the current one has run its 20 turns. I think this will set back the timer to 20 turns from the current turn.
Yea I think the roaming life 'evolving' with TECH is fine.
I'll nominate the Global Energy Market bug then for a bug fix, the other 2 nominations were features
Ok I'll nominate the sliding scale idea I had for SE switching costs I had awhile back.
A formula something like: energy cost = faction population*(number of SE changes)^2
Yea I think the roaming life 'evolving' with TECH is fine.It appears as though the cap for the maximum ecodamage at a base has a relationship to the number of technologies that a faction has discovered. I believe this particular area ignores the free starting technology.
I'll nominate the Global Energy Market bug then for a bug fix, the other 2 nominations were features
Another thing I should note is that forests seemed to grow abnormally fast over the AI fungal pops. Almost always within a turn if not two, and I think sometimes even if forest wasn't directly bordering. Might be related to the native life not spawning in some strange way.
It appears as though the cap for the maximum ecodamage at a base has a relationship to the number of technologies that a faction has discovered. I believe this particular area ignores the free starting technology.
Is it possible to make Infiltration last a set amount of turns instead of it being 'for life'?
Can the amount of drones the spies incite through Drone Riots action be altered? Can their position be altered to that of Pacifist Drones, or potentially even more influental, so that even police couldn't handle them (only Talents)?
Either way, having exact values for each PROBE setting might be a bit much; better to just set the "X points, and each turn subtracts Y points minus Z per point of PROBE" approach.Sure, that should do it.
The amount of the effect could be altered; however, that is not the major limiting factor.If I understood the thread correctly, increasing the "turns until assimilation" value one gets from inciting Drone Riots and playing with drone control code of 16+ should do it. In that case we just need an option to set the value manually.
Either way, having exact values for each PROBE setting might be a bit much; better to just set the "X points, and each turn subtracts Y points minus Z per point of PROBE" approach.Sure, that should do it.The amount of the effect could be altered; however, that is not the major limiting factor.If I understood the thread correctly, increasing the "turns until assimilation" value one gets from inciting Drone Riots and playing with drone control code of 16+ should do it.
In that case we just need an option to set the value manually.
However, I wondered if this couldn't have been made more useful with vanilla rules by moving the effect from Base Drones to Pacifist Drones/Police, making it harder to block.
Some questions for Yitsi so I can make a better decision on what to nominate: how easy/doable are these (and for the rest of you, would you like them too, or not care?)
1) Unity pods: currently the scenario editor allows some choices on what does or does not pop out of them. I would like total control of their contents: items, events, and the chance of each.
If this was only in the scenario editor, I'd be happy enough.
If it could be done for auto-generated games as well, even better. (Tho that would, I guess, mean even more lines and choices in alphax...not sure it that would be a good thing...).
2) A redo of the Unit Design window to eliminate all the scrolling back and forth.
3)Stop the AI from auto-designing units when you get a better reactor. Or have a toggle to disable that annoyance.
4) Territorial boundries in water areas: A) From LAND bases: need to go further - in RL on earth ALL countries are
allowed control of their near-coastal waters (the 12 Mile Limit, etc.) So: any water tiles w/n the (8 tile or whatever)
area from a land base should be checked for inclusion in it's territory. Limits: Distance from the shoreline (this
could be one, or my preference, up to two tiles. This would also give ownership of small lakes inside the boundary.
B) OCEAN bases: Same as current but one or two tiles farther radius from the base. Land w/n a waterbase's territorial
area: The base should have a chance to own small islands and some shoreline. Perhaps make it's claim secondary to
any land base, and in any case not extending past the immediate shoreline tiles (one, or at most, two tiles inland).
5) Ability to adjust the frequency and duration of communication interruptions (solar flares).
6) Ability to restrict where sea bases can be placed: ie.: any water; not over trenches; only over shelf.
Being able to restrict them by water depth (eg. only over shelf of x meters depth or less) would be even more
interesting, but is probably over-kill.....
7) When you turn over a base to an ally, military units auto-move to the nearest base of their faction...what happens to
formers and other NON-military owned by the base given away? Do they go to the ally or just poof? I can't seem to
find them anywhere... If they disappear, that's a bug.
There's a post on CFC wishing there was a way to turn off auto-upgrades when new reactor tech is discovered.
I wouldn't mind never having to delete -a bunch of new default units from the select screen each time- ever again...
Is it possible to get the game to NOT create new designs whenever a new reactor becomes available? For one thing in simple basic designs the higher reactor raises the cost, and second I'm a little bit anal about my designs. It's a pain to go in and obsolete all the new designs I don't want and then retire them to clear the slots. Thanks for any help, and it's hard to believe I ever stopped playing this game!!!
I don't know of any way to stop this. Just before researching a new reactor, I try to upgrade outdated units and obsolete designs that aren't being used. Doing so reduces the number of predesigned new units.
Yitzi, did you take a look at the artillery bombardment code?
- Artillery units can not use their 'Empath Song' special ability, even for artillery duels with Spore Launchers.
In fact, they can't use most of their abilities, such as Dissociative Wave and Soporific Gas Pods.
Nerve Gas Pods work fine for arty duels, though not for bombardment.
- Spore launchers don't benefit from factional combat bonuses (both offensive and defensive) and Gaian psi bonuses when engaged in an artillery duel, at least with other spore launchers.
- Units get defense bonuses against artillery in open ground (flat/rolling tiles), rocky tiles, and fungus tiles. Pretty much the only tiles that do not get the bonus are forests and bases. Not sure if intended.
- Land-based artillery gets +50% defensive bonus against naval units which is not documented anywhere.
- The ship in shallow water gets an altitude bonus against a ship in a trench. scient wanted to fix it, but apparently didn't?
- Land/sea artillery duels last only one round. Discussed here: http://www.civgaming.net/forums/showthread.php?t=7448 (http://www.civgaming.net/forums/showthread.php?t=7448)
- "If you bombard a square when an enemy's artillery unit is nearby, you are counter-attacked, and, having spent 100% of your turn, are effectively dead due to -100% hasty penalty. Wasn't the duel supposed to happen before you bombard a square and spend your turn? Second, sometimes this happens even with friendlies! You can almost certainly reproduce it with two ships near each other bombarding some tile not far away. More often than not it will result in one of the ships being sunk. Third, sometimes you don't even need another ship as even one of them can initiate a duel with itself trying to bombard a tile! I still haven't figured the exact conditions, though." Discussed here: http://www.civgaming.net/forums/showthread.php?t=7421 (http://www.civgaming.net/forums/showthread.php?t=7421) Example can be found here: http://www.civgaming.net/forums/showthread.php?t=7528 (http://www.civgaming.net/forums/showthread.php?t=7528)
- Wild spore launchers often attack each other. May be due to the above bug with friendlies dueling friendlies.
- Artillery may fire from a sea transport via right-click abuse. Briefly discussed here: http://www.civgaming.net/forums/showthread.php?t=7486 (http://www.civgaming.net/forums/showthread.php?t=7486)
- Normally, if your artillery unit does not have Air Superiority ability, it can't damage Needlejets. If, however, there happens to be an arty unit in the stack under a Needlejet unit, and it loses a duel to yours, all the units in the stack, *including* the Needlejets, will be injured from collateral damage. This happens regardless of whether your arty has Air Superiority or not.
I nominate this as a Total Rewrite of Artillery Duel logic.
IMO, we need to establish:
- Whether arty units can have special abilities like Nerve Gas pods & Soporific pods. If yes, how they should be working. My opinion is that they should apply in all combat encounters.
- Which bonuses and penalties should apply. My opinion is that the bonuses from Rocky terrain and Fungus should be the only ones affecting the outcome. The ones in open ground and shallow water (clearly a bug), or against 'naval guns' need not apply, but that is quite subjective. The best way would be to let the players set values for different conditions themselves, if possible.
- Whether or not one-round combat between land and sea arty is a bug. (My opinion is - yes)
- Whether or not using artillery from a transport is a bug (this one needs fixing either way, depending on the decision - there are contradictions in game logic. My opinion is that it should be allowed and that the restriction should be lifted).
- Whether or not using artillery should have a 'hasty bonus' and how it should apply. (My opinion is - yes, as long as the one below gets sorted out)
- Whether or not using artillery should be able to protect nearby tiles from bombardment. (My opinion is - yes, but it should lead to the duel before the bombardment of the tile commences, rather than after)
- Fix the bug with arty attacking friendlies or themselves.
- Fix the bug with being able to damage Needlejets via collateral damage.
Still not a nomination post, but close.
@Yitzi: I overstated what I wanted with the Unity Pods. Nothing new, just control over what already exists.
Unity Pods have an existing list of what can happen when you open one. Some, but not all, of these can be disabled in the Scenario Editor (no vehicles, no Monoliths, etc.). Many cannot be disabled, and the chance of each cannot be modified.
I would like us to be able to choose from that list and for each item/event set the chance of it occuring (including no chance at all).
I do not have any idea of how the game AI sets the chances, it doesn't seem completely random in my tests. Besides there being a different set of choices for sea tiles vs. land ones, there seem to be some other rules involved which I haven't been able to puzzle out.
Finding where all this is located in the code, how it works, and figuring the best way to change it may well become too much time spent when there is so much else to do.
I'll save it for another update.
My nominations:
1) Territorial Boundary adjustments. (mostly larger sea, and more overlap at shorelines)
2) Solar Flare/communication disruption - control of how often and how long.
Bugfixes:
1) Stop AI auto-design of new units with each new reactor DESPITE auto-design being turned off.
2) Non-combat units going AWOL when a base is turned over to another faction.
I'm not sure either, but if you can provide a savegame to reproduce the 100% penalty, that would be good.
I'm not sure either, but if you can provide a savegame to reproduce the 100% penalty, that would be good.
Sure.
http://www.4shared.com/file/2I9dbG0Pce/Aki_Zeta-5_of_the_Consciousnes.html (http://www.4shared.com/file/2I9dbG0Pce/Aki_Zeta-5_of_the_Consciousnes.html)
Suggestion: the duel should trigger before the attacker's turn is spent and instead of tile bombardment.
Also, there is a separate bug, or rather, an inconsistency you might notice in the order of how things are done. You can order a unit to bombard a tile that belongs to another faction, and that does not prompt 'do you want to break the truce' message by itself. If you fail the bombardment roll, your unit loses the turn, and that's it. The message is prompted only if you succeed in bombarding the tile, and the explosion animation is played. If, however, you refuse to declare vendetta, the improvements in the tile are not destroyed, as if nothing has happened.
How it should work - whenever you try to bombard a tile that belongs to another faction, the prompt to pronounce vendetta should appear. If you decline, the attack doesn't happen and the unit doesn't lose the turn. If you accept, you declare the vendetta and make thebombardment roll, with the usual results. If you fail - the unit loses turn. If you win, the improvement in the tile is destroyed.
Also, could you please look at this save file?
http://www.4shared.com/file/VS2MHq9Xba/Combat_vs_air_units.html (http://www.4shared.com/file/VS2MHq9Xba/Combat_vs_air_units.html)
Use the cruiser to attack the wounded foil under a needlejet. Once of your foils (the leftmost one) loses a turn. What could possibly be causing this?
Again, 4shared doesn't work well for me, just attach it to your post right here.Done:
Either way, having exact values for each PROBE setting might be a bit much; better to just set the "X points, and each turn subtracts Y points minus Z per point of PROBE" approach.
More than one round, but not until one is dead. I'm not so sure that's a bug, so I'm not fixing it (except as a moddable feature) without a consensus.The reason to nominate the latter as a feature is that even though I might be able to get a consensus about it on this forum, there might still be people who disagree (I've linked to a discussion on another forum - no consensus was reached there).
Again, 4shared doesn't work well for me, just attach it to your post right here.Done:
Combat vs air units.SAV - for movement bug demonstration
Aki Zeta-5 of the Consciousness, 2102.SAV - for hasty bug demonstration.
Is there a bug tracker thread or something where I can dump bug reports if I encounter any without creating separate threads or nominating them? I glanced at the forum but I see that every bug has a dedicated topic. Maybe there is a wiki entry for this stuff?
Anyway, I nominate 'limited Infiltration' and 'sea vs land combat to the death' as features, and fixing Artillery 'hasty' duels (and maybe some other associated quirks if they are somewhere near that particular piece of code) as a bugfix.
I also nominate wrong timing of truce-breakingprompt for another bugfix.
Based upon my analysis of the procedure, the effects of brood pits on the morale of Native Life is identical to that of Children's Creches except they appear to provide an additional +1 Morale bonus (including the bugs). The procedure for the visuals controls of the morale bonus starts at 004B3FD0. The procedure for the actual bonuses to morale from these facilities starts at address 00501940. Additionally, it appears as though Children's Creches also give Native Life the same Morale Bonus. However, the bonus from the Children's Creche does not stack with the bonus from a Brood Pit if both exist at the same base.I am fairly certain that I have figured out where the function for the COMMFREQ Bonus exists. The actual test for the faction Bonus COMMFREQ occurs at address 005B3D36. I am uncertain exactly what occurs at this location. The other feaure I would want nominated is to fix the Morale Bonuses from Children's Creches and Brood Pits while a faction has a negative morale score.
COMMFREQ has already been fixed for 3.5. But your nomination of fixing the effect of creches has been accepted. (It's not clear what's even supposed to happen for Brood Pits, AFAIK.)
Speaking of bugs: I believe that when negating negative morale modifiers for units in a base with a creche, the game does not use this function, but rather just uses the result from social engineering/faction. Thus, if the unit has the penalty reduced (either because that would put it below 0 or because its home base has a creche), the creche will actually add more than enough to compensate for the negative modifiers.Is it possible to have this particular feature nominated as a bugfix instead of as a feature because of your comment quoted above? I am also curious as to whether or not it is possible to have the Probe Team base morale limits nominated as a bugfix because I have made it function correctly. In addition, I have evidence that another individual thought it was a suspicious as well. The relevalent section of the quote from this individual's comment is below this sentence.
Also, while not technically a bug, the fact that the penalty is halved rounding down means that once you have creches, -1 MORALE is irrelevant (and so is -2 if you don't have command centers etc.).
The first being how Probe teams can never be "Very Green" or "Green". Rest of code relating to Probe team morale seems ok.
Based upon my analysis of the procedure, the effects of brood pits on the morale of Native Life is identical to that of Children's Creches except they appear to provide an additional +1 Morale bonus (including the bugs). The procedure for the visuals controls of the morale bonus starts at 004B3FD0. The procedure for the actual bonuses to morale from these facilities starts at address 00501940. Additionally, it appears as though Children's Creches also give Native Life the same Morale Bonus. However, the bonus from the Children's Creche does not stack with the bonus from a Brood Pit if both exist at the same base.I am fairly certain that I have figured out where the function for the COMMFREQ Bonus exists. The actual test for the faction Bonus COMMFREQ occurs at address 005B3D36. I am uncertain exactly what occurs at this location. The other feaure I would want nominated is to fix the Morale Bonuses from Children's Creches and Brood Pits while a faction has a negative morale score.
COMMFREQ has already been fixed for 3.5. But your nomination of fixing the effect of creches has been accepted. (It's not clear what's even supposed to happen for Brood Pits, AFAIK.)Speaking of bugs: I believe that when negating negative morale modifiers for units in a base with a creche, the game does not use this function, but rather just uses the result from social engineering/faction. Thus, if the unit has the penalty reduced (either because that would put it below 0 or because its home base has a creche), the creche will actually add more than enough to compensate for the negative modifiers.Is it possible to have this particular feature nominated as a bugfix instead of as a feature because of your comment quoted above? I am also curious as to whether or not it is possible to have the Probe Team base morale limits nominated as a bugfix because I have made it function correctly. In addition, I have evidence that another individual thought it was a suspicious as well. The relevalent section of the quote from this individual's comment is below this sentence.
Also, while not technically a bug, the fact that the penalty is halved rounding down means that once you have creches, -1 MORALE is irrelevant (and so is -2 if you don't have command centers etc.).The first being how Probe teams can never be "Very Green" or "Green". Rest of code relating to Probe team morale seems ok.
If the above request receives an affirmative from Yitzi
than I want to nominate targetted probe team tech steal as an option. The basic task of making it function requires an individual to change the jump condition at address 005A0123 from JNZ to JE. After this receives a change, it becomes necessary to realize that the second option of the #Decipher script does not allow an individual to steal world maps.
In addition, I think the script #Stolenothing does not operate as expected.
The second feature I want to nominate, if the previous request receives an affirmative, is the ability to have the scripts #AdvEnergy and #AdvEnergy1 fixed so that they work. My best guess at the moment as to why they do not operate involves the fact that the flag that controls this particular interlock never becomes used at another location. An example of the manner in which these flags are implemented appears at address 005A33C2. This particular address and flag corresponds with the network interlock for stealing technology.
The second option for the #Decipher script always results in the loss of the probe team if the targetted Faction does not have any Technology to steal. This occurs regardless of whether or not you have stolen the world map. I believe the #stolenothing script does not function because it is jumped over if the faction AI does not specific conditions activated before it even checks if the faction is human or AI controlled.Quotethan I want to nominate targetted probe team tech steal as an option. The basic task of making it function requires an individual to change the jump condition at address 005A0123 from JNZ to JE. After this receives a change, it becomes necessary to realize that the second option of the #Decipher script does not allow an individual to steal world maps.
Should it?
Yes it should because every other script in this particular procedure has a jump if equal command in that particular section. That particular command difference is the reason that the script does not appear while you attempt to steal technology.QuoteIn addition, I think the script #Stolenothing does not operate as expected.
How so?
Ok...I'd have to investigate and see what's going on there.
I will then have the children's creche nominated as a bugfix with the expection of the -1 Morale feature. I also want to nominate as a bugfix the factenergy script. The two features I want nominated include the fixing of the AdvEnergy and AdvEnergy1 scripts, and a second option I will announce later.Based upon my analysis of the procedure, the effects of brood pits on the morale of Native Life is identical to that of Children's Creches except they appear to provide an additional +1 Morale bonus (including the bugs). The procedure for the visuals controls of the morale bonus starts at 004B3FD0. The procedure for the actual bonuses to morale from these facilities starts at address 00501940. Additionally, it appears as though Children's Creches also give Native Life the same Morale Bonus. However, the bonus from the Children's Creche does not stack with the bonus from a Brood Pit if both exist at the same base.I am fairly certain that I have figured out where the function for the COMMFREQ Bonus exists. The actual test for the faction Bonus COMMFREQ occurs at address 005B3D36. I am uncertain exactly what occurs at this location. The other feaure I would want nominated is to fix the Morale Bonuses from Children's Creches and Brood Pits while a faction has a negative morale score.
COMMFREQ has already been fixed for 3.5. But your nomination of fixing the effect of creches has been accepted. (It's not clear what's even supposed to happen for Brood Pits, AFAIK.)Speaking of bugs: I believe that when negating negative morale modifiers for units in a base with a creche, the game does not use this function, but rather just uses the result from social engineering/faction. Thus, if the unit has the penalty reduced (either because that would put it below 0 or because its home base has a creche), the creche will actually add more than enough to compensate for the negative modifiers.Is it possible to have this particular feature nominated as a bugfix instead of as a feature because of your comment quoted above? I am also curious as to whether or not it is possible to have the Probe Team base morale limits nominated as a bugfix because I have made it function correctly. In addition, I have evidence that another individual thought it was a suspicious as well. The relevalent section of the quote from this individual's comment is below this sentence.
Also, while not technically a bug, the fact that the penalty is halved rounding down means that once you have creches, -1 MORALE is irrelevant (and so is -2 if you don't have command centers etc.).The first being how Probe teams can never be "Very Green" or "Green". Rest of code relating to Probe team morale seems ok.
The overcompensation could definitely be nominated as a bugfix, but the "making -1 MORALE irrelevant", while poor design, is not a bug and therefore a fix would need to be nominated as a feature. The minimum of Disciplined is clearly intended by the designers...so whether you think it's a good idea or not, it's not a bug.If the above request receives an affirmative from Yitzi
Better clarify whether what I just said counts as an affirmative here.Quotethan I want to nominate targetted probe team tech steal as an option. The basic task of making it function requires an individual to change the jump condition at address 005A0123 from JNZ to JE. After this receives a change, it becomes necessary to realize that the second option of the #Decipher script does not allow an individual to steal world maps.
Should it?QuoteIn addition, I think the script #Stolenothing does not operate as expected.
How so?QuoteThe second feature I want to nominate, if the previous request receives an affirmative, is the ability to have the scripts #AdvEnergy and #AdvEnergy1 fixed so that they work. My best guess at the moment as to why they do not operate involves the fact that the flag that controls this particular interlock never becomes used at another location. An example of the manner in which these flags are implemented appears at address 005A33C2. This particular address and flag corresponds with the network interlock for stealing technology.
Ok...I'd have to investigate and see what's going on there.
The minimum of Disciplined is clearly intended by the designers...so whether you think it's a good idea or not, it's not a bug.I believe it is reasonable to allow this option for individuals that want to play with both Probe Teams that start at the Green Morale Level and the associated features that come with this change. As a result, I believe it might become necessary for me to release a minor update that enables these features if you decide that you do not agree with Probe Teams starting at a Green morale level.
QuoteThe second option for the #Decipher script always results in the loss of the probe team if the targetted Faction does not have any Technology to steal. This occurs regardless of whether or not you have stolen the world map.Quotethan I want to nominate targetted probe team tech steal as an option. The basic task of making it function requires an individual to change the jump condition at address 005A0123 from JNZ to JE. After this receives a change, it becomes necessary to realize that the second option of the #Decipher script does not allow an individual to steal world maps.
Should it?
Yes it should because every other script in this particular procedure has a jump if equal command in that particular section. That particular command difference is the reason that the script does not appear while you attempt to steal technology.QuoteIn addition, I think the script #Stolenothing does not operate as expected.
How so?
Ok...I'd have to investigate and see what's going on there.
I believe the #stolenothing script does not function because it is jumped over if the faction AI does not specific conditions activated before it even checks if the faction is human or AI controlled.
I will then have the children's creche nominated as a bugfix with the expection of the -1 Morale feature. I also want to nominate as a bugfix the factenergy script. The two features I want nominated include the fixing of the AdvEnergy and AdvEnergy1 scripts, and a second option I will announce later.
Would it be feasible to include the additional bonuses for the Citizens as described in the #CitizenHeck section of the help file? This might become my second nomination if it remains a viable option.
The minimum of Disciplined is clearly intended by the designers...so whether you think it's a good idea or not, it's not a bug.I believe it is reasonable to allow this option for individuals that want to play with both Probe Teams that start at the Green Morale Level and the associated features that come with this change. As a result, I believe it might become necessary for me to release a minor update that enables these features if you decide that you do not agree with Probe Teams starting at a Green morale level.
I think it best that we stick with tackling the probe team issues at the moment because that way the workload remains manageable, and we can tackle issues that already exist within the game before adding anymore features that might create additional issues. I am able to help with the probe teams because I have become fairly familiar with that section of the code. I think I will stick with the nominations for the probe teams except for the fact that so many of them have a classification as "features." I had an idea this morning. This idea went something along the lines of the fact that the game already checks a maximum and a minimum morale level for probe teams. Would it become possible to add a variable in alphax that corresponds to the location in this procedure that checks the the probe team morale level before it returns from the procedure? This would allow an individual to set the maximum and minimum morale levels that the game uses while determining probe team morale.Would it be feasible to include the additional bonuses for the Citizens as described in the #CitizenHeck section of the help file? This might become my second nomination if it remains a viable option.
It would be fairly major, though doable at the cost of limiting bonuses to a maximum of 127 and minimum of -128. (I don't think that will be an issue.) We'd have to figure out what each of those bonuses means, though.
I think it best that we stick with tackling the probe team issues at the moment because that way the workload remains manageable, and we can tackle issues that already exist within the game before adding anymore features that might create additional issues. I am able to help with the probe teams because I have become fairly familiar with that section of the code. I think I will stick with the nominations for the probe teams except for the fact that so many of them have a classification as "features."Would it be feasible to include the additional bonuses for the Citizens as described in the #CitizenHeck section of the help file? This might become my second nomination if it remains a viable option.
It would be fairly major, though doable at the cost of limiting bonuses to a maximum of 127 and minimum of -128. (I don't think that will be an issue.) We'd have to figure out what each of those bonuses means, though.
I had an idea this morning. This idea went something along the lines of the fact that the game already checks a maximum and a minimum morale level for probe teams. Would it become possible to add a variable in alphax that corresponds to the location in this procedure that checks the the probe team morale level before it returns from the procedure? This would allow an individual to set the maximum and minimum morale levels that the game uses while determining probe team morale.
Most of the citizens bonuses appear fairly clear except for one.
The efficiency bonus could operate in a similar manner to a children's creches.
The morale bonus could operate in a similar manner to either the children's crèche or command center depending upon what people want.
The Psi Defense bonus could increase the basic base bonus during psi combat.
The commerce bonus appears fairly clear because I have a fairly good Idea where the game calculates the commerce income at each base. I imagine it might operate as a commerce tech for the purpose of that base.
The aliens bonus could operate in a similar manner to biology labs.
The production bonus remains the only questionable bonus because it could mean many different features depending upon the context.
It presently appears as though the calculations for Probe Team Morale start at green.
This appears because the various bonuses for Probe Teams all have (Bonus-1) included.
Was this particular feature intended by you? I do not think it was because it appears in scient's patch from 2010. The bugs from this unusual occurence include:
1. The morale bonus from the PROBE bonus operates in your current version of the patch as (PROBE Bonus[1-3]-1).
I found the location that cause this particular bug. In the latest version of your patch the address of this bug occurs at 004C1DA8. The game only calls this if particular morale check if the unit weapon is a probe team module. This location then proceeds to push 0 and 0 onto the stack as arg 1 and 2 in this particular check. The regular morale check for probe teams is push 0 and 1 onto the stack. This means that the game checks the morale at this point as though the unit had a green morale level. In order to fix this bug you need to change the push command at address 004C1DA8 to push 1.
On another note, I hope this change does not cause this issue to disappear
I also noticed that -2 Morale does not halve the probe team morale bonus from Covert Ops Center because the bonus occurs outside the procedure that controls this feature.
The proper address is 004C1DAB and the correction described above fixes the miscalculation that occurs when the game determines bonuses to Probe Team Morale. This bug appears, for example, when you run Fundamentalist with a faction. The faction should receive a +2 bonus to Probe Team Morale and this bonus would cause a disciplined probe team to reach veteran without any other bonuses. The bug, however, causes the probe team to have a displayed morale of Hardened instead of Veteran.I found the location that cause this particular bug. In the latest version of your patch the address of this bug occurs at 004C1DA8. The game only calls this if particular morale check if the unit weapon is a probe team module. This location then proceeds to push 0 and 0 onto the stack as arg 1 and 2 in this particular check. The regular morale check for probe teams is push 0 and 1 onto the stack. This means that the game checks the morale at this point as though the unit had a green morale level. In order to fix this bug you need to change the push command at address 004C1DA8 to push 1.
You must have mistyped something; 4C1DAB is the middle of an instruction. And which bug is this causing?QuoteOn another note, I hope this change does not cause this issue to disappear
When I get to changing it, I'll make sure (as best I can) that it doesn't cause any unwanted changes in the process.QuoteI also noticed that -2 Morale does not halve the probe team morale bonus from Covert Ops Center because the bonus occurs outside the procedure that controls this feature.
Yeah, MORALE is not supposed to affect probe teams.
The proper address is 004C1DAB and the correction described above fixes the miscalculation that occurs when the game determines bonuses to Probe Team Morale. This bug appears, for example, when you run Fundamentalist with a faction. The faction should receive a +2 bonus to Probe Team Morale and this bonus would cause a disciplined probe team to reach veteran without any other bonuses. The bug, however, causes the probe team to have a displayed morale of Hardened instead of Veteran.I found the location that cause this particular bug. In the latest version of your patch the address of this bug occurs at 004C1DA8. The game only calls this if particular morale check if the unit weapon is a probe team module. This location then proceeds to push 0 and 0 onto the stack as arg 1 and 2 in this particular check. The regular morale check for probe teams is push 0 and 1 onto the stack. This means that the game checks the morale at this point as though the unit had a green morale level. In order to fix this bug you need to change the push command at address 004C1DA8 to push 1.
You must have mistyped something; 4C1DAB is the middle of an instruction. And which bug is this causing?QuoteOn another note, I hope this change does not cause this issue to disappear
When I get to changing it, I'll make sure (as best I can) that it doesn't cause any unwanted changes in the process.QuoteI also noticed that -2 Morale does not halve the probe team morale bonus from Covert Ops Center because the bonus occurs outside the procedure that controls this feature.
Yeah, MORALE is not supposed to affect probe teams.
Hey Yitzi - would fixing the no-tabout junk introduced in the GOG version so users of it don't have to find and implement the workaround be out side the scope of this project? I'm guessing that would be a popular feature, so good for the community, good for the patch project and good for you...
I'm still surprised that trick doesn't introduce a million other problems...
Just for my clarification.
The .txt in the package in downloads IS NOT the .txt used for the patch. The current .txt is in a previous package?
The commerce calculations for a base occur at address 004EB66E.I think it best that we stick with tackling the probe team issues at the moment because that way the workload remains manageable, and we can tackle issues that already exist within the game before adding anymore features that might create additional issues. I am able to help with the probe teams because I have become fairly familiar with that section of the code. I think I will stick with the nominations for the probe teams except for the fact that so many of them have a classification as "features." I had an idea this morning. This idea went something along the lines of the fact that the game already checks a maximum and a minimum morale level for probe teams. Would it become possible to add a variable in alphax that corresponds to the location in this procedure that checks the the probe team morale level before it returns from the procedure? This would allow an individual to set the maximum and minimum morale levels that the game uses while determining probe team morale.Would it be feasible to include the additional bonuses for the Citizens as described in the #CitizenHeck section of the help file? This might become my second nomination if it remains a viable option.
It would be fairly major, though doable at the cost of limiting bonuses to a maximum of 127 and minimum of -128. (I don't think that will be an issue.) We'd have to figure out what each of those bonuses means, though.
Most of the citizens bonuses appear fairly clear except for one.
The efficiency bonus could operate in a similar manner to a children's creches.
The morale bonus could operate in a similar manner to either the children's crèche or command center depending upon what people want.
The Psi Defense bonus could increase the basic base bonus during psi combat.
The commerce bonus appears fairly clear because I have a fairly good Idea where the game calculates the commerce income at each base. I imagine it might operate as a commerce tech for the purpose of that base.
The aliens bonus could operate in a similar manner to biology labs.
The production bonus remains the only questionable bonus because it could mean many different features depending upon the context.
The commerce calculations for a base occur at address 004EB66E.I think it best that we stick with tackling the probe team issues at the moment because that way the workload remains manageable, and we can tackle issues that already exist within the game before adding anymore features that might create additional issues. I am able to help with the probe teams because I have become fairly familiar with that section of the code. I think I will stick with the nominations for the probe teams except for the fact that so many of them have a classification as "features." I had an idea this morning. This idea went something along the lines of the fact that the game already checks a maximum and a minimum morale level for probe teams. Would it become possible to add a variable in alphax that corresponds to the location in this procedure that checks the the probe team morale level before it returns from the procedure? This would allow an individual to set the maximum and minimum morale levels that the game uses while determining probe team morale.Would it be feasible to include the additional bonuses for the Citizens as described in the #CitizenHeck section of the help file? This might become my second nomination if it remains a viable option.
It would be fairly major, though doable at the cost of limiting bonuses to a maximum of 127 and minimum of -128. (I don't think that will be an issue.) We'd have to figure out what each of those bonuses means, though.
Most of the citizens bonuses appear fairly clear except for one.
The efficiency bonus could operate in a similar manner to a children's creches.
The morale bonus could operate in a similar manner to either the children's crèche or command center depending upon what people want.
The Psi Defense bonus could increase the basic base bonus during psi combat.
The commerce bonus appears fairly clear because I have a fairly good Idea where the game calculates the commerce income at each base. I imagine it might operate as a commerce tech for the purpose of that base.
The aliens bonus could operate in a similar manner to biology labs.
The production bonus remains the only questionable bonus because it could mean many different features depending upon the context.
What particular formula(e) would you want deciphered? I noticed you had figured out the formulae for technology research, eco-damage, and base drones.
A brief glance at the procedure I suspect contains the code reveals the following highlights:
1. The very first section of this particular procedure involves modifiers to ecological damage at a base (specifically the PLANET Bonus/Penalty, perihelion, and the percent chance of a fungal bloom at the base based upon eco-damage within the range of 1%-99%). The game then checks to see if the no native life scenario rule is active and jumps if this rule is active. The next section involves various different checks with the map square for bases, the current base position, the presence of fungus, and the presence of units in the square before the fungal pop occurs. This particular section involves the required pre-requisites to the event of Interlude#3 at address 004F6EA5 in scient's 2010 Patch. I also think the game jumps over this interlude if two or more fungal pops have already occured elsewhere. This particular section is followed by the script controls for FungusGrows and FungusGrows2. The last section in this part checks if more than two fungal blooms have occured and than jumps over interlude #5 at address 004F7040 if the previous condition is not met.
2. The next section checks (I think) the number of fungal blooms (jumps if less than seven), the presence, or absence, of the Voice of Planet, and the presence of another condition, and, if these conditions are met, than the game proceeds to allow Interlude #8 to occur.
3. Following this point, the game begins checking to see if the fungal pops cause a fungal tower to appear (the address for adding the fungal tower appears at 004F7143 in Scient's 2010 Patch.) The next area begins a base count and checks the presence of fungus around a base. If fungus is within a certain distance, a specific minimum number of fungal blooms have occured, and the base owner is correct, than mindworms and sporelaunchers will appear. I think the actual location to determine the number of mindworms and sporelaunchers at a base starts at address 004F7396 in Scient's 2010 patch. Another address that determines the number of mindworms and sporelaunchers that appear starts at address 004F74C2 in Scient's 2010 patch. It appears as though the number of fungal blooms and the number of bases controlled by the faction have an influence on the number of mindworms and sporelaunchers that appear. The following section(s) involves the global warming events as caused by ecological damage and fungal blooms.
What section of this code would like the exact formula on? I am not certain I can decipher the formula from all of it, but I can figure out signficant portions of this procedure.
... Is this bug somehow fixed at the moment?
When working with scenario editor and launching a game from scenario, I noticed something in singleplayer. The save file appears to have recorded the faction file name. This can be checked by enabling scenario editor and by trying to relaod a faction. The name is as it should be, and not the one that is in Alpha Centauri.ini
However, when playing multiplayer, the bug occurs.
If the save file has the appropriate string, it might be possible to change the place, where the game gets the file name, and load proper string instead from the ini file one.
What multiplayer encryption has to do with it? Is it possible, that encryption prevents the game from getting the proper string? And then, it takes it from ini file?
Bringing this here, faction graphics bug, as it appears, we may be able to fix it! :
The thread is here:
http://alphacentauri2.info/index.php?topic=3808.0 (http://alphacentauri2.info/index.php?topic=3808.0)... Is this bug somehow fixed at the moment?
When working with scenario editor and launching a game from scenario, I noticed something in singleplayer. The save file appears to have recorded the faction file name. This can be checked by enabling scenario editor and by trying to relaod a faction. The name is as it should be, and not the one that is in Alpha Centauri.ini
However, when playing multiplayer, the bug occurs.
If the save file has the appropriate string, it might be possible to change the place, where the game gets the file name, and load proper string instead from the ini file one.
What multiplayer encryption has to do with it? Is it possible, that encryption prevents the game from getting the proper string? And then, it takes it from ini file?
... Also, the problem seems to be related to it being a scenario, not to it being multiplayer.
... Also, the problem seems to be related to it being a scenario, not to it being multiplayer.
Yet, the graphics bug is in multiplayer.
I concluded the same as Yitzi a long time ago. It's a scenario problem that shows up by far the most in MP, because that's where people are playing a lot of different scenarios in turn.
The above comment shows that we have different approaches. I can point out specific sections if that helps. The section that begins after the game checks for fungus, bases, and units starts at 004F7362. The first few actions put local 10 into Edi, 3 into ECX, and EDI into EAX. It then moves local 2 into ebx, converts a value from doubleword to quadword, divides the value in EAX by 3 and places the remainder into ESI. It then proceeds to negate the value in ESI, subtract and borrow the value from the ESI register, and the game lastly adds ten to the ESI register before it jumps to the address 004F7396. It then jumps if the value in ESI is equal to eight (I think it checks if the units created are mind worms). Otherwise, it begins a series of calculations that first involve the number of bases owned by the faction. It jumps if the value in Edx is equal to or greater than the value in EDI. If it does not jump, than the game begins another equation that involves the number of fungal blooms that the faction has experienced. The above addresses correspond to locations in the game code from Scient's 2010 Patch.What section of this code would like the exact formula on? I am not certain I can decipher the formula from all of it, but I can figure out signficant portions of this procedure.
If you can't decipher the entire formula, then I'll do it when I get to that project.
The above comment shows that we have different approaches. I can point out specific sections if that helps. The section that begins after the game checks for fungus, bases, and units starts at 004F7362. The first few actions put local 10 into Edi, 3 into ECX, and EDI into EAX. It then moves local 2 into ebx, converts a value from doubleword to quadword, divides the value in EAX by 3 and places the remainder into ESI. It then proceeds to negate the value in ESI, subtract and borrow the value from the ESI register, and the game lastly adds ten to the ESI register before it jumps to the address 004F7396. It then jumps if the value in ESI is equal to eight (I think it checks if the units created are mind worms). Otherwise, it begins a series of calculations that first involve the number of bases owned by the faction. It jumps if the value in Edx is equal to or greater than the value in EDI. If it does not jump, than the game begins another equation that involves the number of fungal blooms that the faction has experienced. The above addresses correspond to locations in the game code from Scient's 2010 Patch.What section of this code would like the exact formula on? I am not certain I can decipher the formula from all of it, but I can figure out signficant portions of this procedure.
If you can't decipher the entire formula, then I'll do it when I get to that project.
After a long hiatus to this game, if possible, I would like to request a bugfix/feature which is to increase the 2048 unit limit. I've looked at the readme from the latest file, even scient 2.0 patch or yitzi 3.4, and it seems that this is not fixed (please correct me if I am wrong). I would give this request a 100 on a scale from 0 to 100, nothing else matters!
I really like the wish (nomination) about limitting the infiltration. This would help the game immensely. I understand it is a tricky one because of the extra data. Maybe some small changed version could be passable, like:
- the inflitration ceases after a change in governement policies of the infiltrated player (logically, as it means changing political personnel, and it needs new infiltration). That could be relatively easy to code. The player is reminded of the politic changes already, which is good.
- or the inflitration expires on the 2nd or 3rd council.
- or the infiltration to the bases and units is territorially limitted, for instance for the continent. This seems hard to do.
Smaller issues I tend to alter in my games via exe editting (and I'd like not to have to do so)
- the speed of fungus and forest expansion
- the option to move the blocking of close Drop pods from Aerospace complexes to Tachyon field. If so, it becomes visible on the map for the player and it is better implemented by the AIs. Moreover, the Aerocomplexes are a bit too good for everything.
(my 1st nomination)
I'd like you to look at the Exchange base code. I once tried to correct the bug experienced by many players - the bases are too "cheap" and unequal when exchanged, with no real success. Looking at it again, I see a suspect code.
At adress 14CE49 the program counts the facilities price and adds them to the base price. But, while it cycles through them it seems to make a crucial mistake: for every Nth facility, it adds N*facility cost. This means, that if you have 8 facilities at a base, the 8th one (which is probably the most expensive of them all) will be counted 8 times. Since human players tend to build more facilities than AI, we may have our bug that makes AI bases "cheaper".
Could you please look at it and verify if it is correct or a bug? And, if so, repair the code? Thanks.
Yep, I would say so.I believe this means that you possess some level of knowledge about the values that influence the AI diplomatic response. What information and regions of this particular area do you possess information about?
Heres a question would it be possible to make SAMs? Conventional missiles that would attack air units?
Nominating these two features:
Option to allow a faction +1 Nutrients from forest.
+1 Probe. Same as it is now.
+2 Probe. Same as it is now.
+3 Probe. Units and bases immune to subversion. Bases immune to infiltration.
+4 Probe. Equivalent to Hunter-Seeker Algorithm.
The other infiltration modifier ideas sound like rather a lot of work. Besides, I've never valued probe, which might be because I normally run the University or might just be because it's not that useful.
Alpha Centauri threw a hissy fit when I tried this. It didn't wreck my game at least. I'm not sure what went wrong.Heres a question would it be possible to make SAMs? Conventional missiles that would attack air units?
Not only is it possible, it can be done without .exe modding.
In the #UNITS area of alphax.txt, add 1 to the number at the top (because you're adding another unit), and then add (at the bottom) the line:
Anti-Air Missile, Missile, Conventional, Scout, -1, 0, 0, Orbital, -1, 00000000000000000000100000
(You can change "Anti-Air Missile" to whatever you want it to be called.) That will create a predesigned missile unit with the Air Superiority ability. (You can also change its cost or prerequisite if you want).
I'd nominate infiltration duration scaling with PROBE. It's a fairly weak SE even if you mod out all the free probe morale bossts.
Two variables
1) X, infiltration turn duration at PROBE 0 (PROBE of the target faction, -1 = unlimited, so -1 by default)
2) Y, infiltration turn duration per -/+ PROBE (from -2 to +3)
If duration = 0 then infiltrate would be for current turn only. If duration is negative then immune to infiltration at that PROBE SE.
Example X = 10, Y = 5
PROBE -2 = 20 turns
PROBE -1 = 15 turns
PROBE 0 = 10 turns
PROBE +1 = 5 turns
PROBE +2 = 0 turns (current turn only)
PROBE +3 = immune to infiltrate
Actually if we can nominate one thing only.
I'd nominate to fix a bug where building a Tree Farm/Hybrid Forest can actually increase a city's ecodamage.
I think this occurs in the case where there are many forests and the ecodamage from terraforming is negative. It seems TF/HF half and zero out the negative (bonus). I'm not sure whether ecodamage from terraforming should go into the negative or this is more an issue with the facilities
Alpha Centauri threw a hissy fit when I tried this. It didn't wreck my game at least. I'm not sure what went wrong.Heres a question would it be possible to make SAMs? Conventional missiles that would attack air units?
Not only is it possible, it can be done without .exe modding.
In the #UNITS area of alphax.txt, add 1 to the number at the top (because you're adding another unit), and then add (at the bottom) the line:
Anti-Air Missile, Missile, Conventional, Scout, -1, 0, 0, Orbital, -1, 00000000000000000000100000
(You can change "Anti-Air Missile" to whatever you want it to be called.) That will create a predesigned missile unit with the Air Superiority ability. (You can also change its cost or prerequisite if you want).
Me either, as it worked for me. Did it give an error message?Yes it did.
QuoteMe either, as it worked for me. Did it give an error message?Yes it did.
Something about a bad chassis and some other things mixed in as well.
Actually if we can nominate one thing only. I'd nominate to fix a bug where building a Tree Farm/Hybrid Forest can actually increase a city's ecodamage.I will attempt to isolate the potential location of this problem and report back with my results.
I think this occurs in the case where there are many forests and the ecodamage from terraforming is negative. It seems TF/HF half and zero out the negative (bonus). I'm not sure whether ecodamage from terraforming should go into the negative or this is more an issue with the facilities
Currently, option to disable automatic prototyping does not work at all in multiplayer (TCP/IP). It's really annoying as it constantly screws up custom designs me & my friends like, would be great if it could be fixed.
I think I posted it somewhere else as well but guess this is proper place
Another significant bug: Human players' commlink frequencies are not required to call council, as well as for inviting AIs to attack them.
Be aware that to fix this may require testing, meaning someone to set up a TCP/IP connection with.
Nominated Feature #1: An option in alphax.txt to determine which faction has the Caretaker's cannot-transcend limit, replacing the hard-coded name.
Nominated Feature #2: Some sort of configuration section to allow users to configure facilities/special projects to grant specific "faction"-type bonuses, in order to allow modders to assign abilities to empty facilities and secret projects. So, say, Empty Facility 42 to could be configured to give, say, "POPULATION, -1" as a sort of min-hab-complex, while Empty Secret Project 38 could be configured to give "FACILITY, 42".
Approach 2: It is determined in the faction file that it cannot transcend. This can therefore be applied to more than one faction per game, but counts toward the limit of 8 "standard" boni/mali for the faction.
Approach 3: It is determined in the faction file that it cannot build project/facility/predesigned unit X, and/or cannot build project/facility/predesigned Y and declares vendetta against any faction that attempts to do so. This would therefore take two bonus/malus slots for the Caretakers' "cannot transcend" (one for the Voice of Planet and one for the Ascent to Transcendence), but would be far more versatile for modding.
(Approaches 2 or 3 would probably be significantly easier than 1; 3 would only be slightly harder than 2).
How many such bonuses should each facility be able to have?I'd be quite satisfied with just one.
(Also, be aware that FACILITY, 42 does not work exactly the same as something like the Command Nexus.)Different is, IMO, good (after all, we have a bunch of Command Nexus-type projects already), but I'm not wedded to the faction bonus types and syntax so much as wanting a way to do something interesting with all those empty slots.
Approach 2: It is determined in the faction file that it cannot transcend. This can therefore be applied to more than one faction per game, but counts toward the limit of 8 "standard" boni/mali for the faction.
Approach 3: It is determined in the faction file that it cannot build project/facility/predesigned unit X, and/or cannot build project/facility/predesigned Y and declares vendetta against any faction that attempts to do so. This would therefore take two bonus/malus slots for the Caretakers' "cannot transcend" (one for the Voice of Planet and one for the Ascent to Transcendence), but would be far more versatile for modding.
(Approaches 2 or 3 would probably be significantly easier than 1; 3 would only be slightly harder than 2).
Wow, I actually expected them to be harder than #1, which is why I phrased the way I did. #3, then, since you think it's only slightly harder than #2.
QuoteHow many such bonuses should each facility be able to have?I'd be quite satisfied with just one.
Quote(Also, be aware that FACILITY, 42 does not work exactly the same as something like the Command Nexus.)Different is, IMO, good (after all, we have a bunch of Command Nexus-type projects already), but I'm not wedded to the faction bonus types and syntax so much as wanting a way to do something interesting with all those empty slots.
Does your existing patch fix the multiplayer probe bug?
If a human controlled faction detects one of your probe teams in its city, you (the player who sent the probe) get to decide the other side's reaction.
New idea for infiltration: could sunspot activity have an effect? Temporary interruption for alliances, planetary governorship and the Empath Guild; cancellation for ordinary probe infiltration. You would still be able to install a new infiltrator while the sunspots were in effect.
Actually, the sunspot rules mentioned above, combined with the option to remove enemy infiltration by sending a probe to his headquarters, sounds far more fun than any of the other options mentioned. Would that count as adding room for more data?
Actually, the sunspot rules mentioned above, combined with the option to remove enemy infiltration by sending a probe to his headquarters, sounds far more fun than any of the other options mentioned. Would that count as adding room for more data?
No, it shouldn't. Or if it does, it would be so small as to not be particularly difficult.
Actually, the sunspot rules mentioned above, combined with the option to remove enemy infiltration by sending a probe to his headquarters, sounds far more fun than any of the other options mentioned. Would that count as adding room for more data?
No, it shouldn't. Or if it does, it would be so small as to not be particularly difficult.
I'd say there should be no reaction by default.
But for MP there should be a 'declare Vendetta' option on the commlinks. I think I had mentioned a similar exploit earlier. Since you are default Truce with everyone you can force expel units out of your territory every turn, thus preventing other human players from ever declaring Vendetta. At least until sea or air units usually.
"How should it work? Normally, the reaction is supposed to happen immediately...so for PBEM, what is a better approach than PMing the target and asking him what to select for said reaction?"
Basically, in PBEM, the AI runs a player's faction during other players' turns. This AI can't conduct normal diplomacy, but it does have some influence. Suppose all players are human and the Peacekeepers attack the Hive. The Morganites, who are allied to both players, might very well have their AI declare war on the Peacekeepers. It's not a huge problem but it can get your units expelled from friendly territory. During sunspot activity, it can be a true pain.
To answer your question, suppose the Peacekeepers send a probe into the Hive instead of attacking. The Hive detect the probe. Currently, the Peacekeepers will get a little message asking whether they'd prefer to downgrade relations or to let themselves off with a stern rebuke. Can we delay the message to appear at the start of the Hive's turn?
No. Don't want to replace any nominations. Don't mind arguing pointlessly, though. To continue the example, if Peacekeepers are detected, they can still decide to take the first strike.
I'm not sure, if this was mentioned:
- ability to turn off so-called "mineral unity pod." The one, that gives minerals to the closest base up to completion.
Usually it is tedious to micromanage bases to get the largest amount of minerals one can. Not to mention abusing this feature to instabuild Secret Projects by inserting into building item some very expensive unit/crawler.
Some unity pod outcomes get possibility of turning them off in the scenario editor, but not this one.
Alternative would be to cap minerals at some quantity. 20? 30? or 40? Yet this would not eliminate micromanagement.
Would it be possible to get extra resources out of forests with high planet same as with fungus?