leaders' character

[AkwaticDudeCity]

How do i change a leader's character? I want to know how i can make a leader from say Militaristic Expansionist to Civilized Perfectionist for example. I also want to know what each term means for gameplay. I think a Perfectionist will build few great cities instead of many mediocre ones. But what about Militaristic, Rational, Civilized Aggressive etc.?
Also, how do i prevent diplomacy between two AI players? I want them to remain at war for ever.
I used to have FW installed where i could edit a lot of stuff in-game and i don't remember when, how or why, but somehow i've decided to remove it. Problem is i can't find the CD and i can't buy it anywhere. Anyone in Amsterdam (or anywhere else) who can help?

thank you

[AkwaticDudeCity]

Never mind. I just figured it out. Now i only need to know the definitions for those terms.

[BeBMan]

To forbid negotiations, insert the following in the events:

@IF
NEGOTIATION
talker=ANYBODY
talkertype=HumanOrComputer
listener=ANYBODY
listenertype=HumanOrComputer
@THEN
@ENDIF

Please note that some players say that this would not work, if so, you have to make separate events like the one above for each civ.
However, in my scenarios it always work fine, so you should try that, it save events space (compared to the other solution)

Have you FW? Then you can change the AI behaviour (aggressive, perfectionist, etc) via the tribe editor. You can also change it directly in the rules.txt, e.g.:

Caesar, Livia, 0, 1, 0, Romans, Roman, 0, 1, 1, 1, Dictator, Dictator,

The bold numbers are the values for attck, expand, civilize, possible entries are:

attack: 1 = aggressive -1 = rational
expand: 1 = expansionist -1 = perfectionist
civilize: 1 = civilized -1 = militaristic

Zero attack for example means somewhere between aggressive and rational...

[AkwaticDudeCity]

Thank you BeBro,

it says in my post that i don't have FW anymore. I know now how to edit the leaders' character, but what does it mean? If i edit a king to be militaristic, what will he do? I only know the difference between Perfectionist and expansionist. A perfectionist will prefer a few thriving cities to many mediocre, the expansionist many mediocre to a few thriving. What about Militaristic vs Civilized and Aggressive vs Rational?
Also, i have included the events text per civ. I only want the two players to hate each other, not the others. I have made it so that the Romans hate the Carthaginians, the Celts hate the Macedonians and the Independents hate the Seleucids. But i get an error. The debug states this piece to be in error:
--------
@IF
NEGOTIATION
talker=Seleucid Greeks
talkertype=humanorcomputer
listener=Ind. Greeks and Allies
listenertype=humanorcomputer
@THEN

@ENDIF

@IF
NEGOTIATION
talker=Ind. Greeks and Allies
talkertype=humanorcomputer
listener=Seleucid Greeks
listenertype=humanorcomputer
@THEN

@ENDIF

@ENDEVENTS
---------
what's wrong with this? All other events are ok, just these two. Why? I tried it, but in the game it works. Negotiations between Seleucids and Independents are impossible. So why this error message?

thank you

[BeBMan]

For the events you posted, please check the spelling. I´m not sure if the humanorcomputer is the same as HumanOrComputer for civ. Perhaps also the civnames are the problem, I don´t know if "Ind. Greeks and Allies" are allowed (perhaps too long, ot the "." is a problem).

Militaristic: prefers to build units instead of city improvements (that would be Civilized)

Aggressive: attacks very...hmm aggressive , instead of the Rational type. I always have the impression that Aggressive tribes attack everything, but Rational tribes attack only if they see a chance to win, just my personal observation...

[Mercator]

The error may very well be caused by the empty line between @THEN and @ENDIF. If that´s not the case you probably misspelled the civilizations´names in some way.

What about Militaristic vs Civilized and Aggressive vs Rational?

A militaristic civ will build more military units, a civilized leader more city improvements. Furthermore, you can give each advance in the technology list a value for how militaristic/civilized it is, militaristic civs obviously choose the more militaristic techs etc.
An aggressive civ will have a more aggressive stance in negotiations and will attack more often.
By the way, I don´t know if the effects of these 3 values have been "analysed" as much as other things.

That´s what I think it is, anyone please correct me if I´m wrong.

[Mercator]

Crap! You beat me to it BeBro.

[Henrik]

Originally posted by AkwaticDudeCity
The debug states this piece to be in error:
--------
@IF
NEGOTIATION
talker=Seleucid Greeks
talkertype=humanorcomputer
listener=Ind. Greeks and Allies
listenertype=humanorcomputer
@THEN

@ENDIF

@IF
NEGOTIATION
talker=Ind. Greeks and Allies
talkertype=humanorcomputer
listener=Seleucid Greeks
listenertype=humanorcomputer
@THEN

@ENDIF

@ENDEVENTS
---------
what's wrong with this? All other events are ok, just these two. Why? I tried it, but in the game it works. Negotiations between Seleucids and Independents are impossible. So why this error message?

thank you

This wont explain the games disliking of your events but you might want to know this annyway:

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10348&highlight=negotiation

[AkwaticDudeCity]

Thank for your help. My events text remains incorrect still.
This is the whole events.txt:
------
@BEGINEVENTS

@DEBUG

@IF
NEGOTIATION
talker=Romans
talkertype=humanorcomputer
listener=Carthaginians
listenertype=humanorcomputer
@THEN

@ENDIF

@IF
NEGOTIATION
talker=Carthaginians
talkertype=humanorcomputer
listener=Romans
listenertype=humanorcomputer
@THEN

@ENDIF

@IF
NEGOTIATION
talker=Macedonian Greeks
talkertype=humanorcomputer
listener=Celts
listenertype=humanorcomputer
@THEN

@ENDIF

@IF
NEGOTIATION
talker=Celts
talkertype=humanorcomputer
listener=Macedonian Greeks
listenertype=humanorcomputer
@THEN

@ENDIF

@IF
NEGOTIATION
talker=Seleucid Greeks
talkertype=humanorcomputer
listener=Ind. Greeks and Allies
listenertype=humanorcomputer
@THEN

@ENDIF

@IF
NEGOTIATION
talker=Ind. Greeks and Allies
talkertype=humanorcomputer
listener=Seleucid Greeks
listenertype=humanorcomputer
@THEN

@ENDIF

@ENDEVENTS
------------
As you can see it is not the space between @then and @endif otherwise the error would be mentioned for the others too. Nor is it the spelling. If it was the spelling, the error would say that the player that's missplelled is not recognized. The program identifies both players. The Seleucids are king id 5 and the Independents king id 6.
It's not the dot in Ind. either. Because i removed it and tried again, but then i get an error that the player is not recognized. So the dot is not the culprit. Also because i tried 'Independent' instead of Ind.', didn't work either.

[BeBMan]

I copied and pasted the two events into my Imperium Romanum, I only replaced the two civ names - and the scenario started without any problems (and debug shows no error). So I assume that there is an error related to the civ names or another unknown problem.

[Gothmog]

AkwaticDudeCity

The tribe name in events must agree with the tribe name found in the Edit King cheat. I usually copy the tribe name in the scenario found there and copy it into the tribe name in events just to make sure they agree.

I'm guessing you're checking the spelling in the rules.txt and not the scnenario itself.

[AkwaticDudeCity]

I had copied the tribe name from Cheat > Edit King > Edit Name and pasted it already. That's not it. The program does recognize the King id, so it's not that at all.
If you want, you can use this events.txt for the Rome scenario yourself and you will see what error message i get. Perhaps then you will understand what the nature of the error is, because i have no idea. The scenario is the standard Rome scenario that's included along WW2 with the regular Civ2. I only have that and CiC.

[Gothmog]

I created the events.txt and ran a trial using the Rome.scn with Cic. I had no errors. What I did see was the trace produced by the @DEBUG statemen. The DEBUG always shows the last 2 statements parsed. If this is what you saw it's not an error. You did state before that you thought the events were working. All you would need to do is remove the @DEBUG.

[AkwaticDudeCity]

Excellent! Thank you very much. That is what i needed to know. Thanks again.

[Marquis de Sodaq]

To address the question of the 3 categories of leader type (e.g. aggressive, expansionist, militaristic): Along with affecting how the civ behaves during game time, these numbers modify the appeal of technologies to that civ. Each tech has a type and a value representing how appealing it is to the AI. This tech "appeal" is modified by the civ's number for that category, and the AI civ will research toward the available tech with the highest modified (i.e. most appealing) value.

For example, gunpowder has the highest AI appeal value of all - no matter what type of AI, they will want gunpowder. Its appeal value will always be higher than that of other techs. Others have very low values (espionage, IIRC). They will be last choices by the AI unless modified upward by the AI having the right quality to do so.

A civ with leader type 0, 0, 0 will follow the tech tree as it is, as no modifications are made to any tech's appeal values.

I've never sat down to expand on this, but I believe the type of tech determines what type of leader quality modifies the appeal value. Maybe it also determines which tech the popup suggests you research, depending on the default values for the civ you chose for your current game. Anybody who has researched this further, feel free to clarify where I am guessing!