You don't need the source code to make Civ2 better...

[Mercator]

That text is in the new Game.txt, I presume? So it can be edited? And it looks like a normal Civ2 pop-up?

Excellent!

[Eivind IV]

Yes. In the original game.txt it is under @CITYATSEA and says:

@CITYATSEA
@title=Civ Rules: Cities
It may surprise you to learn that
cities cannot be built at sea.

In the edited one:

@CITYATSEA
@title=Civ Rules: Cities
Sorry, in this game your Settlers don't build cities.

So I guess he's made the settlers think of land as ocean or something. But somehow the irrigate/mine fuction is intact. Beats me!

[Harry Tuttle]

Originally posted by Eivind IV


Halleluja my friends! This guy has managed to create a setler without the ability to build cities. By replacing the civ2.exe and the game.txt in the main civ2 MGE folder by the ones he posted it worked out perfectly in game.

When hitting b for build, you get a message: Sorry, in this game settlers don't build cities(!). This is a great step for civ-kind!

Pope Fairline, can you please beatify this man?

So basically we have Civ 3 Workers. I like this idea, but does this mean settlers of all kinds are outlawed in a game? What if I have a tank with the settler flag?

[curtsibling]

Seems we have a coding genius on our hands!
This man could forment the revolution....

If he can break the coded civ, city and unit
limits in CIV2, that will blow the thing sky high!!!

We should aim for this goal if possible!

But we must be respectful and not swamp him.

[Mercator]

Originally posted by Harry Tuttle
So basically we have Civ 3 Workers. I like this idea, but does this mean settlers of all kinds are outlawed in a game? What if I have a tank with the settler flag?

Um, no. For the thing Eivind verified, the only difference with regular Civ2 is that Settlers (and presumably all units with "settling abilities") can't build cities. Effectively hard-coding something that thus far had to be made a "house rule", preventing the human player from building new cities. Nothing more.

[Harry Tuttle]

Ok, this is still cool though. Think of all those ww2 scenarios where settlers can be used by both sides, just for improvements.

[techumseh]

I agree, Harry. For some scenarios this will be invaluable.

[Broken_Erika]

More civs would solve most of the problems i have with Clash of Monarchs, I'm Having Trouble Even with neutrals as impassible terrain,

[Harry Tuttle]

Originally posted by techumseh
I agree, Harry. For some scenarios this will be invaluable.

Red Front for example. Those Krauts would be able to rebuild those roads.

[Exile]

A--HEM!!!

BY FAR the MOST important change that COULD BE MADE is the 7 civ limit.

IF that could be modified . . . . .

the possibilities are unlimited.

There are a considerable number of scenario situations I've simply dismissed because of this limit.

Worlds without end . . . . .

[fairline]

Wow!

Exile has hit the nail on the head: more than seven civs. Oh, and mix and match domain / unit properties: land-based transports and the like.

[Heresson]

All hail the Estonian guy!

[Sarsstock]

Would it be possible for someone to contact this Skyler fellow and ask him to post on this thread if he thinks any of the things we're talking about are possible?

If Tigey's right in that english isn't his first language might we have somebody contact him in his native language ask him politely as not to scare him off? Between all the frequent posters on this forum I think the odds are good of having somebody that can speak his language fluently.

[Eivind IV]

He's not much of a talker, Chris, so I think it's best to keep him at CivFan as long as we can.

He's cracked the max number of cities alowed placed on a map btw, and it works! I'm so exited! This will change a lot for my grandiose giga map scenarios!

[Mercator]

Are you sure? I think Julius Brenzaida cracked that too once, but it didn't actually work properly, because the city number still only counted to 256, so say, trade routes and unit support would get mixed up.