[C4:AC] Keeping Civ4 changes?

[Blake]

I agree with the usefulness of a chief organiser, altough it's not urgent. It'll be nessecary once people have started to really dig into the work but at the start all the modders will be learning and the work will be of relatively low quality.

I for one fully intend to start off with a Civ4 Mod to learn the guts of the Civ4 Python Interface. This mod will happen to be C4:AC applicable but I do not wish to be concerned with SMAC correctness. (The mod will be adding Orbitals and Planet Busters and any other cool things I can think of to the Civ4 post-endgame. Since it's a Civ4 mod I can implement these concepts in whatever way I deem most appropriate, aint I the sneaky one?).

I intend to initially split my modding time between Civ4 Python Modding and C4:AC XML modding, mainly since the XML stuff will be easier to get right at first, since the XML stuff will use SMAC as a precise design document (ie changing the techtree to SMAC's). One of the initial tasks would be assinging people to (or should I say, finding volunteers for) changing over the major concepts. Naming and linking the techs, facilities, wonders, terraforming (name and bonuses). This should all be done as true to SMAC as possible, including the internally used names (ie TECH1) or atleast the ordering since all the media (icons and voices) use that naming scheme.
I believe once that is done our goal should be to make the game playable ASAP, even if it's still with all the Civ civilizations and such. In other words, to have the mod stable asap rather than changing too much and having trouble making the changes work together.

[Darsnan]

Originally posted by Blake
I agree with the usefulness of a chief organiser, altough it's not urgent. It'll be nessecary once people have started to really dig into the work but at the start all the modders will be learning and the work will be of relatively low quality.

Someone (or some people) should be ensuring that the various pieces of the C4:AC are all receiving an apporpriate amount of attention at the correct times, so that the various pieces of the puzzle are all ready to fit together at the same time (or at least at the appropriate times).

Originally posted by Blake
I for one fully intend to start off with a Civ4 Mod to learn the guts of the Civ4 Python Interface. This mod will happen to be C4:AC applicable but I do not wish to be concerned with SMAC correctness. (The mod will be adding Orbitals and Planet Busters and any other cool things I can think of to the Civ4 post-endgame. Since it's a Civ4 mod I can implement these concepts in whatever way I deem most appropriate, aint I the sneaky one?).

So what your saying is that this would essentially be a C4:AC v0.1 mod, which is just primarily a coders mod to get the feel of the environment as well as introduce some SMAC variables?

Originally posted by Blake
I intend to initially split my modding time between Civ4 Python Modding and C4:AC XML modding, mainly since the XML stuff will be easier to get right at first, since the XML stuff will use SMAC as a precise design document (ie changing the techtree to SMAC's). One of the initial tasks would be assinging people to (or should I say, finding volunteers for) changing over the major concepts. Naming and linking the techs, facilities, wonders, terraforming (name and bonuses). This should all be done as true to SMAC as possible, including the internally used names (ie TECH1) or atleast the ordering since all the media (icons and voices) use that naming scheme.

I downloaded Python tonight, so I should be able to help in this effort in short order if necessary. As far as the file names such as "TECH1" are concerned, from a coders perspective wouldn't it be easier if the files were renamed to represent what they actually stood for, especially when your having to crosslink them with the various functions (and probably subroutines) associated with each tech? i.e. "TECH1" would be much easier to understand if it was named "Information Networks"?

Originally posted by Blake
I believe once that is done our goal should be to make the game playable ASAP, even if it's still with all the Civ civilizations and such. In other words, to have the mod stable asap rather than changing too much and having trouble making the changes work together.

Substance rather than cosmetics? Well, personally I think that the graphics mods will run a parallel course to the coding, and if there are some graphics mods available to be incorporated at the same time, that we should do both essentially at the same time.

Anyways, it sounds like what your saying is to get "something" out for the coders to play with, then start making adjustments as feedback is received? Can I ask what are the defining boundaries that you will assign to this initial task? Also, what is the initial goal that will trigger all the coders to deliver their input in order to roll the rev into v0.2 (as well as subsequent revisions) so that we can continue to improve the code as a team?

Note that I test systems for a living, which involves signifcant feedback to software groups. I agree with your approach from a coders perspective, however there are other elements involved for our mod that can also be addressed in parallel ( coders pun intended here!). Can you provide input here, or at least give a timeframe as to when you think you'll be ready to roll the rev from v0.1 to v0.2? Finally, any "Best Guesses" as far as when you think, from a software perspective, that the "Final Product" will be ready to ship?

Anyways, looks like you've given this some significant thought. I hope others on the project appreciate this, and are also able to contribute as much!


D

[wgabrie]

Blake is very into this project. Will we even need more programers? I'm really hoping to grab, bribe, steal him later to help me with a Master of Magic mod. I'm just an artist what do I know about programing?

Anyway, that reminds me. How will we divide up the work load anyway? Shouldn't we find out everyone's skill level in detail? And who can be reliable in getting elements done quickly verses people who take a long time but do quality work? Lastly should we have a safeguard against lost work from people who sign up but never reappear?

I've just noticed a third Graphics person signed up. How are we going to decide on jobs? For example I'd like to know who can texture, import/export image formats, who can do 3D? Can we create human figures or just simpler elements like walls, buildings, and background objects? Will the images need to be drawn with a text file, how will we handel that?

So yes we do need a project head.

[cal_01]

Well, my 2c on this issue:

In all of my engineering courses, the thing that is always emphasized is a top-down, functionalities then components design process. Namely, two things have to be determined first:

a) A general consensus on what is the core and functionality of any SMAC conversion. Is it the workshop? Fungus? A sci-fi element?
b) A general plan/outline of how to get that essential core running before tackling other add-on "components" or non-essentials.

I mean, as a first alpha, I'd be pretty satisfied if at least some part of a specified core design was achieved.

(My further 2c on the core components would be getting the basic Social Engineering/factions stuff built in, and doing a basic conversion of all the techs/wonders/facilities (except for the workshop, replaced by premade units for now). It seems easy enough as a preliminary project, and as a proof-of-concept.)

[Darsnan]

Originally posted by Blake
I agree with the usefulness of a chief organiser, altough it's not urgent. It'll be nessecary once people have started to really dig into the work but at the start all the modders will be learning and the work will be of relatively low quality.

OK, the release date (here in the US) is now only 3 days away. I think we should make a decision shortly on a "Chief Organizer" (and whether to have one or not). I am going to vote for having one, and I propose Senethro, since this mod was originally his idea.

Originally posted by Blake
I for one fully intend to start off with a Civ4 Mod to learn the guts of the Civ4 Python Interface. This mod will happen to be C4:AC applicable but I do not wish to be concerned with SMAC correctness. (The mod will be adding Orbitals and Planet Busters and any other cool things I can think of to the Civ4 post-endgame. Since it's a Civ4 mod I can implement these concepts in whatever way I deem most appropriate, aint I the sneaky one?).

To flesh out my comments from the first time I replied to this as well as add some new thoughts/ directions: if we release a "v0.1" mod for people to get a feel for the game mechanics, everyone can then start playing with the game, and possibly finding any bugs in the v0.1 mod. Once the programmer(s) have made enough progress, they then release a v0.2 update that is a slightly improved version with more "flavor", and allow even more playtesting by the community.

The strengths of this approach are as follows:

1) lots of playtesting to ensure the code we've modified is very robust.

2) This allows all the team members to assess the various game interactions/ mechanisms, and get a better idea of what we can and can't implement into the mod from a SMAC(X) perspective.

3) Since it looks like we are going to have more than one programmer on the project, by having updates it would then be a form of "checks and balances" to ensure the code from all sources plays nice together. It would also be a better approach in that this would ensure that there won't be a duplication of effort between the various programmers.

Originally posted by Blake
One of the initial tasks would be assinging people to (or should I say, finding volunteers for) changing over the major concepts. Naming and linking the techs, facilities, wonders, terraforming (name and bonuses). This should all be done as true to SMAC as possible, including the internally used names (ie TECH1) or atleast the ordering since all the media (icons and voices) use that naming scheme.

I plan on getting the game the first day its out, and can start to document these things immediately. Also, if some of the people involved in the mod who can't buy the game immediately and want an example, why I can E-Mail out some of the files so they can start reviewing - just let me know what your interested in reviewing and I'll send you the appropriate file(s).

Originally posted by Blake
I believe once that is done our goal should be to make the game playable ASAP, even if it's still with all the Civ civilizations and such. In other words, to have the mod stable asap rather than changing too much and having trouble making the changes work together.

How about with the first software release we try to include one SMAC Faction? Say if the Graphics group models all the graphics associated with one SMAC Faction, someone updates the Faction.txt file, etc.? We could then all start playing with this one Faction and start providing feedback as far as how this faction behaves in the environment. Then for the next software update we try to include another Faction, etc.? If the team thinks this is a good idea, then I'd say we should opt to mod in the PK's, as they may be the easiest to mod. Also, if we do take this approach, I can include a small scenario for people to play that would be balanced and ensure a good game. This then would provide a common platform for everyone to assess the mods against.


Some other thoughts:

1) How are we going to avoid duplication of effort between team members?

2) When do we apply Firaxis patches to our mod? Should we do it along with an updated version of our mod, or as a seperate entity? Regardless, I think we should all apply these patches at the same time, so we all have exactly the same version of the mod and are providing feedback on a common platform.

3) Editing the 8th Faction: I can start taking a stab at this for the first released version of the mod, if people want. If there are enough graphics people available, then if they could also provide the graphics icons for these, I'd appreciate it.

4) Once the first version of the mod is released we establish a bug thread. This would then be where all bugs are posted, worked on, and resolved.


D

[Blake]

It seems we are reaching consensus .

I don't have much of an opinion on the graphic work other than that any graphics should basically be included as they are completed. The higher priority work should be some terraforming art, unit art (formers, colony pod especially).

I plan on getting the game the first day its out, and can start to document these things immediately. Also, if some of the people involved in the mod who can't buy the game immediately and want an example, why I can E-Mail out some of the files so they can start reviewing - just let me know what your interested in reviewing and I'll send you the appropriate file(s).

Excellent, since I wont have Civ4 for like 10 days I would greatly appreciate the python and XML files (and a directory listing just "dir -S" will do, so I can see other files of possible interest) so I can start documenting the code structure and such.

2) When do we apply Firaxis patches to our mod? Should we do it along with an updated version of our mod, or as a seperate entity? Regardless, I think we should all apply these patches at the same time, so we all have exactly the same version of the mod and are providing feedback on a common platform.

I believe patches will be a non-issue since our mod files will reside in an entirely seperate folder and wont overwrite any firaxis files (thus the patch wont overwrite any of our files). As such a patch at worst will break some code the mod relies on, but it's just a matter of fixing what breaks. So basically we apply the patch right away and make fixing any new bugs the top priority. If people are playing multiplayer games of Civ4 (and I fully intend to) then they'll need to patch right away anyway.

Your idea of modding in a SMAC faction is good, it gets the groundwork done on adding new factions. While I wouldn't say that adding the factions is a high priority, it would also probably be easier than many other jobs, thus some moderatly skilled modders could pick up on the faction work. If some stuff gets done faster than expected because someone takes a special interest, then that's fine.

[binTravkin]

I've just noticed a third Graphics person signed up. How are we going to decide on jobs? For example I'd like to know who can texture, import/export image formats, who can do 3D? Can we create human figures or just simpler elements like walls, buildings, and background objects? Will the images need to be drawn with a text file, how will we handel that?

See my proposal about 'modgroups'..
(if people have forgotten it, I'll repost it here)

(..)and I propose Senethro, since this mod was originally his idea.

So where he is then? I haven't seen him posting here much lately..
He should come and take up the duties!

[binTravkin]

I believe patches will be a non-issue since our mod files will reside in an entirely seperate folder and wont overwrite any firaxis files (thus the patch wont overwrite any of our files). As such a patch at worst will break some code the mod relies on, but it's just a matter of fixing what breaks. So basically we apply the patch right away and make fixing any new bugs the top priority. If people are playing multiplayer games of Civ4 (and I fully intend to) then they'll need to patch right away anyway.

I think there will be issues with patches.
The fact is that most of them fix the most important bugs, which we'll probably want to change aswell (thus pasting the patches into the project). Furthermore, patches often change the .exe itself, which can be even more dangerous potentially.

[Senethro]

Don't worry, I'm here or thereabouts. I'm a bit busy for big organisational posts at the moment but I'm thinking. At some point very soon I'm going to do a big emailing and find out whos available for work, what they want to do and post a big list of jobs. Then I'll play mix and match and get the right people in touch with each other. At the moment we've got a lot of purposeless individuals who are not informed. This is reflected in the forum activity decreasing from the frenzy of the first 2 weeks. Like you say binT, we need groups.

[Darsnan]

Originally posted by binTravkin

I think there will be issues with patches. The fact is that most of them fix the most important bugs, which we'll probably want to change aswell (thus pasting the patches into the project). Furthermore, patches often change the .exe itself, which can be even more dangerous potentially.

According to Markos
here there won't be "big issues" with patches in regards to mod'd modules. However for the sake of our own sanity I think we should take the approach of loading patches seperate from our own mod upgrades, just in case....


D

[wgabrie]

So, where is everyone else? There are 12-13 of us right? Maybe we should have an email list for informing people of the latest direction of the project. Or is the wiki taking care of that? Can anyone of us update the wiki?

Well, I need to get in contact with the Artists soon so we can form an agreement on work distribution.

[Blake]

also, 3rd question down here.

there is a mods directory with each mod having each own subdirectory with the altered/new files

The first thing to understand is that none of our files will get overwritten by applying the patch. The second thing, as a very multiplayer game atleast some modders will HAVE to upgrade the day the patch comes out, so they can continue with their multiplayer games.

So basically what it comes down to is "how to fix it asap?", I believe this mostly involves keeping a clean copy of the xml and python from each patch, then when a new patch comes out, do a diff with the old xml/py. This should reveal any new functions or other changes that we might want or need to update in our own altered files.

The second type of change is in the exe which changes certain game behaivour (especially bugged behaivour), if we rely on that behaivour then the mod might break or not function correctely at times. Sometimes new API functions are made available or old ones depreciated. Firaxis might have some kind of backwards compatability policy on this.

I would agree that when a patch comes out the priority is to update the mod to work with the patch and not add in new features during the updating process (which could complicate things).

Well, I need to get in contact with the Artists soon so we can form an agreement on work distribution.

You could start an art thread for working something out. Ofcourse don't expect too much to happen while people are initially entrapped by one more turn in the Civ4 world...

[binTravkin]

Ofcourse don't expect too much to happen while people are initially entrapped by one more turn in the Civ4 world...

Well, I think most of us need to live that through until we know the game good enough and can proceed to modding..

[Spatzimaus]

To the original point of this thread: (This'll seem a bit tangential, stay with me here. I don't post on Apolyton much.)

I'm making a mod for Civ4, similar to one I did for Civ3, in which the tech tree expands into the future. Many people are doing similar things. In my case, I'm planning on using many of the AC techs, wonders, etc. within the framework of Civ4's rules, and keeping it all set on Earth. Some things have to be changed; for instance, there's no point in adding techs to unlock Rovers, naval vessels, Needlejets, and Copters when those unit types are already in the core game well before the current day. But the bulk of SMAC's content can be added to improve the core Civ4 game.

Creating a Total Conversion of SMAC is all well and good, but there are many things about SMAC that I'm glad have been removed. For instance, the ability to spend money on Secret Project construction, or to switch from SP to SP without penalty. Likewise, I'm glad that Civ3 added the concept of strategic and luxury resources, even if the implementation was a bit erratic. And UUs are something I wish had been in SMAC, if only because after a while all the factions blended together.

My point is this: If you make C4:AC solely as a completely self-contained total conversion, it won't be long until you see people cannibalizing your work to create future mods that tie more closely to the Civ4 game, with all of its changes and improvements. So, work that way from the start; create C4:AC as an EXPANSION to the Civ4 game, extending the tech tree by a couple centuries and adding new capabilities (like the Workshop, or terrain landmarks) along the way. Replace the Alpha Centauri victory with the Transcendence victory. Then, the classic SMAC setup can simply be included as a Scenario, with seven pre-selected leaders, a custom map with different graphics, and some scripted text.

[drekmonger]

[SIZE=1]
So, work that way from the start; create C4:AC as an EXPANSION to the Civ4 game, extending the tech tree by a couple centuries and adding new capabilities (like the Workshop, or terrain landmarks) along the way. Replace the Alpha Centauri victory with the Transcendence victory. Then, the classic SMAC setup can simply be included as a Scenario, with seven pre-selected leaders, a custom map with different graphics, and some scripted text.

Erm.

Neat idea, but---

* as you pointed out yourself a lot of SMAC's early/mid-game tech tree consists of the colonists reinventing the wheel. So there'd have to be two tech trees: one for your extended Civ4 game, and one for the SMAC scenario.

* At end game, Civ1-3 cities are quite capable; probably Civ4 cities will be as well. How many SMAC techs (beyond military) would really make a difference in the game? You'd have to rethink the Civ4 branch of the extended tech tree for balance, futher segragating it from the SMAC tree.

* Futher segragation: many of the SMAC techs are flavored specifically for Planet, it's enviroments and lifeforms.

So really, you are asking for another (almost completely different) mod from a bunch of people looking to recreate SMAC. I'm not one of them, but I think it's safe to say the answer will be "no, thanks."