Firaxis - Modding problem MUST be fixed

zulu9812 · June 26, 2002, 11:12

Hello

I've noticed that the number of unit available with each tech might be hard-coded. I added a whole bunch of alternatives to the Knight (horse archer, mameluke, paladin, etc., etc.). I just added the units and icons to the units_32.pcx file: didn't change any of the pedia stuff. Now, when viewing the science advisor for the middle age, the game crashes to the desktop with the message

"CivilizationIII.exe has generated errors and will be closed by windows. You will need to restart the program"

You see, not only have modders created lots of knight-alternatives: there's also a whole heap of WWII tanks, all available with Motorized Transportation as an alternative to the standard Tank. The ultimate goal being that every civ has it's own knight/tank/fighter/bomber/whatever. If, as I suspect, the number of units available with each tech is hard-coded, that plan is buggered.

Does anyone from Firaxis feel like commenting on this? Will this issue be fixed in the June (July? August?) patch?

zulu9812 · June 26, 2002, 13:11

Another possibility is that it might not be the units that's the problem: the upgrade path could be limited to so many units, or it could be to do with the no. of icons (including improvements) per tech, i.e it could just be something stupid like the graphics on the advisor screen doesn't allow for more units. But that's still quite crucial.

Lucilla · June 26, 2002, 17:03

I'd be interested in a solution for that problem, too.
Any comments, Firaxis???

Thrawn05 · June 26, 2002, 22:47

For some odd reason, from what I remember from Firaxis' prior statements on other threads, that the entire unit deal is mostly hard coded because of somthing to do with Infogames.

People have been asking Firaxis to make easier to insert units, but they apprently have no control over this.

I could be wrong.

Perhaps MarkG could give a quick comment.

Barry Caudill · June 27, 2002, 10:15

Quote:

Originally posted by zulu9812
Another possibility is that it might not be the units that's the problem: the upgrade path could be limited to so many units, or it could be to do with the no. of icons (including improvements) per tech, i.e it could just be something stupid like the graphics on the advisor screen doesn't allow for more units. But that's still quite crucial.

You sort of answered it yourself when you said you didn't change any of the pedia icons (previous post). You need to have pedia icons for all of the units in both Small and Large versions. The science advisor, specifically, needs the small pedia icons for the units. Alternatively, you could edit pediaicons.txt and map entries for the icons to other units. I hope that helps.

Speedy

zulu9812 · June 27, 2002, 10:36

Thanks for the reply, Speedy. Thing is, even if there are no new pedia icons, the civlopedia itself creates icons for these units in the form of what appears to be poor-quality screen-shots. On top of that, you don't need to add pedia-icons in order to add units at all. There are plenty of units that other people have made without including any pedia stuff and it works fine. So it can't be that and anyway, why would that crash the tech tree anyway?

If you're right, and not including small icons will crash the game, why is it only after so many units per tech? I've added plenty of units without adding pedia stuff and it's worked fine - up until now, when I've added a whole heap of units available with one tech.

I realise that this issue might only arise if people add a lot of units, which not many people have, but has anyone come across this? Also, can someone confirm whether or not you HAVE to add small icons in order for the tech tree not to crash when adding new units?

zulu9812 · June 27, 2002, 16:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Thrawn05
For some odd reason, from what I remember from Firaxis' prior statements on other threads, that the entire unit deal is mostly hard coded because of somthing to do with Infogames.

People have been asking Firaxis to make easier to insert units, but they apprently have no control over this.

Esqweeze me? Infogrames, the publishers, are stopping Firaxis from giving modding control to the gamer? For what reason? To sell more XPs?

Boy oh boy, am I pissed off now...

Thrawn05 · June 27, 2002, 19:57

Quote:

Originally posted by zulu9812

Esqweeze me? Infogrames, the publishers, are stopping Firaxis from giving modding control to the gamer? For what reason? To sell more XPs?

Boy oh boy, am I pissed off now...

I don't want to start rumers. But I'm pretty shure I'm right... to a degree. I'd wish someone else would chim in to clear this up.

Dan Magaha FIRAXIS · June 27, 2002, 20:07

Well let's just stomp this one down before it gets ugly, there is no truth to that particular theory. There was no publisher mandate to hardcode stuff in the game, nor was it done intentionally to limit the functionality of the core product for any ulterior or underhanded motives.

As for whether there are any plans to address this, Jeff or Mike could answer better than I, and I'll avoid starting any other rumors by not hazarding an educated guess.

Dan

Thrawn05 · June 27, 2002, 20:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Dan Magaha FIRAXIS
Well let's just stomp this one down before it gets ugly, there is no truth to that particular theory. There was no publisher mandate to hardcode stuff in the game, nor was it done intentionally to limit the functionality of the core product for any ulterior or underhanded motives.

As for whether there are any plans to address this, Jeff or Mike could answer better than I, and I'll avoid starting any other rumors by not hazarding an educated guess.

Dan

Thanks Dan. I was getting worried.

But I can swear I saw something like that. But I'll ignore it.

Coracle · June 27, 2002, 20:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Dan Magaha FIRAXIS
Well let's just stomp this one down before it gets ugly, there is no truth to that particular theory. There was no publisher mandate to hardcode stuff in the game, nor was it done intentionally to limit the functionality of the core product for any ulterior or underhanded motives.

As for whether there are any plans to address this, Jeff or Mike could answer better than I, and I'll avoid starting any other rumors by not hazarding an educated guess.

Dan

One issue comes to mind: if you are not in the loop vis a vis decisions regarding Firaxis' future plans on this issue
we have reason to wonder if you WERE in the loop regarding the hardcoding and the "underhand motives" issues.

MarkG · June 28, 2002, 10:24

it was a huge consipiracy. only a few selected people knew...

Mike Breitkreutz FIRAXIS · June 28, 2002, 10:50

Quote:

Originally posted by zulu9812
Thanks for the reply, Speedy. Thing is, even if there are no new pedia icons, the civlopedia itself creates icons for these units in the form of what appears to be poor-quality screen-shots. On top of that, you don't need to add pedia-icons in order to add units at all. There are plenty of units that other people have made without including any pedia stuff and it works fine. So it can't be that and anyway, why would that crash the tech tree anyway?

This crash has already been fixed for the upcoming patch. I didn't know about the problem with the "poor-quality screen-shots" of icons so I fixed that yesterday as well. If you don't create a pedia icon for your unit it will use the default unit icon. At any rate, you should be able to assign the same tech to any number of units in the upcoming patch. However, no more than 6 icons will displayed in the tech box.

And, by the way, Dan was correct. There was no publisher mandate or ulterior motive involved in hard-coding things into the game. That's just what happens when you've got a bunch of programmers working on different parts of a game implementing things in their own way. PTW will have far less hard-coding issues because I'm setting up systems for everyone to use so as to prevent it. Maybe if Oliver Stone were running the show instead of Sid....

zulu9812 · June 28, 2002, 11:06

So we'll be able to have as many units available with one tech as we want?

Yippee!

zulu9812 · June 28, 2002, 11:22

btw, Mike - when's the patch coming?

Kramerman · June 29, 2002, 01:32

Quote:

And, by the way, Dan was correct. There was no publisher mandate or ulterior motive involved in hard-coding things into the game.

Its a trick!
He's in on it, its obvious. We can trust no one. They're all against us!

Kman

P.S. Wow, I never thought I'd get a chance to use the "conspire" smilies. Who would of thought

.

Thrawn05 · June 29, 2002, 21:23

Quote:

Originally posted by Kramerman
P.S. Wow, I never thought I'd get a chance to use the "conspire" smilies. Who would of thought

.

Must be a bad omen. I hope that omen doesn't effect the release date of the next patch.