EU2 source code released

[Dark Scipio]

Nice, btw, we should be able to influence, bribe and fund the different rebel factions, not only the country government.

Anybody know about Brittany in HYW? Would fit well in such a situation.

Supporting rebels would be a huge boost to the gameplay.

 

[MattyG]

YodaMaster,

Another small addition to your wishlist.

A command to which forces a country from any existing alliance into a new, specified alliance. Currently, to form a League of some kind it is very very tricky, force breaking all potential alliances of various members and hoping the ai doesn't place them into another before you can assemble a new alliance which can mimic the given League.

Matty

 

[unmerged(40707)]

I agree with mandead. Factions could be implemented with extended and special tags. Some sort of countries without owned provinces but controlled ones, possible events and focusing only on provinces owned by the country they are fighting. And more than one faction could be implemented for the same country this way (Wars of Religion for France is the perfect example).
With this, we could avoid problems with peace treaties and current setups with owned provinces. Victory or failure could be an event with conditions.
The concept of faction can even be tied to the differenciation of cores between national provinces and other cores (claims, colonial cores, etc) for a country.

Concept could be used for independence wars too.

And, of course, "regular" rebels could remain with same current effects.

 

[unmerged(40707)]

A command to which forces a country from any existing alliance into a new, specified alliance. Currently, to form a League of some kind it is very very tricky, force breaking all potential alliances of various members and hoping the ai doesn't place them into another before you can assemble a new alliance which can mimic the given League.

Yes, this is included in bugfixing current commands that don't work (breakalliance in particular) but your definition adds another level.

We could add the concept of league (kind of super alliance) for better modeling BBwars, for example, but not only.

 

[Canenald]

Above all, I don't think it is possible in any wider extent. I'd doubt they'd have anything against such a concept, though. What makes you think that?

Well, there's already a significant part of EU fanbase that prefers EU2 to EU3. I hope they won't be afraid of modified EU2 killing the sales of EU3 or something like that. Personally, I'd really like to see an EU2 game with some features from EU3.

 

[MattyG]

YodaMaster,

Another addition that only hardcore modders would understand.

In the triggers, see if it is possible to create the following kind of condition:

trigger = {
	region = { owned = 4 value = 342 343 346 348 354 355 441 } 
}

What does this mean?

region would stand for ownership of a number of provinces

owned would mean the actual number

value indicates the province numbers among which those four 'owned' provinces need to be, in order for the condition to be fulfilled.

This is to make it easier than writing out stuff like:

	 OR = {
		AND = {
			owned = { province = 342 data = -1 }
			owned = { province = 343 data = -1 }
			owned = { province = 346 data = -1 }
			owned = { province = 348 data = -1 }
		}
		AND = {
			owned = { province = 342 data = -1 }
			owned = { province = 343 data = -1 }
			owned = { province = 346 data = -1 }
			owned = { province = 348 data = -1 }
		}
		etc etc etc etc
	}

It would then enable a modder to even vary the number of provinces required based on countrysize too, without writing pages and pages of variable drivel. For example:

trigger = {
	OR = {
		AND = {
			region = { owned = 4 value = 342 343 346 348 354 355 441 } 
			NOT = { countrysize = 11 }
		}
		AND = {
			region = { owned = 5 value = 342 343 346 348 354 355 441 } 
			countrysize = 11
			NOT = { countrysize = 31 }
		}
		AND = {
			region = { owned = 6 value = 342 343 346 348 354 355 441 } 
			countrysize = 31
		}
	}
}

Matty

 

[unmerged(40707)]

@MattyG: Good idea
It could be extended to control only (for factions in particular and victory conditions) or owned + control condition.

@Lord Grave: remember post #5 in this thread:

At last, this is not about competition with other Paradox games but life for this beloved "older" title by keeping original spirit of the game (and AGCEEP Mission Statement, of course).
And even if competition arises, Paradox will be winner too...

 

[unmerged(83121)]

It`s long time since I saw any news about this source code modification project, so I just wonder - how does the prospect of this project look now? In regard to community`s ambitions and desires...

 

[unmerged(40707)]

I started with MichaelM. Others should follow and door is always open for motivated C++ developers and artists.

First task was discovering the code and first big achievement is native support of high resolutions (still not perfect) but all aspects of the game will be reviewed with bug fixing, more moddability, extended script engine, little tweaks or heavy changes but in the same spirit as the original game.

Too soon to come back and publish valuable information about ongoing process for now.

 

[Jayavarman]

I started with MichaelM. Others should follow and door is always open for motivated C++ developers and artists.

First task was discovering the code and first big achievement is native support of high resolutions (still not perfect) but all aspects of the game will be reviewed with bug fixing, more moddability, extended script engine, little tweaks or heavy changes but in the same spirit as the original game.

Too soon to come back and publish valuable information about ongoing process for now.

Cool!

 

[MattyG]

YodaMaster

Again, sorry for any duplications ...

Wish List Items:

1. Being able to define in an event the chance for each action to be chosen by the AI.

2. Being able to adjust the frequency of random events occuring (currently its, what, roughly a 40% chance of one happening each year?).

3. Making a new class of event which can be triggered multiple times by the trigger command, or possibly just making it that random events can be triggered by command (as currently they cannot).

4. Having a command that removes from the register that a certain event has fired (pretty limited use, but still ...)

5. Making ai items (not just the whole file) alterable via an even command, ie
command = { type = ai which = war value = 25 }
command = { type = ai which = add_area value = caribbean }

And so forth.


Matty

 

[Garbon]

5. Making ai items (not just the whole file) alterable via an even command, ie
command = { type = ai which = war value = 25 }
command = { type = ai which = add_area value = caribbean }

This seems of the least use, considering how easy it is to swap AIs. That said, a system that just kept one central file might be easier.

 

[MattyG]

This seems of the least use, considering how easy it is to swap AIs. That said, a system that just kept one central file might be easier.

True, its just a lot simpler than having to track which ai file was the most recent one, and so to know which elements to change or not change in the ai file you are now adding, under the current system.

 

[Garbon]

True, its just a lot simpler than having to track which ai file was the most recent one, and so to know which elements to change or not change in the ai file you are now adding, under the current system.

I guess we come from slightly different places as most AIs in the agceep proceed in a rather linear way.

 

[unmerged(40707)]

Many of the proposed items are already in the ToDo list (not a whishlist ). It will be more a matter of time and priorities than real technical difficulty.

 

[MattyG]

Many of the proposed items are already in the ToDo list (not a whishlist ). It will be more a matter of time and priorities than real technical difficulty.

Wonderful.

Is there a place to see the ToDo list?

Also, can we know what kind of a schedule or timetable you have for this project?

For example, will you release versions when two or three new features are available, in order to have them tested by the community? Or are you planning to keep it all in-house until a large number of new features are ready?

Thank you thank you thank you for all the work you are doing on this.

Interregnum and AGCEEP with the new coding and new map will be awesome.

 

[unmerged(40707)]

Post #25 gives a good idea of the ToDo list but I already amended it with ideas (including yours) that were posted on the forum here and there. And we are now able to see in the code what will be feasible and how much time we could need.

There is no real schedule but a new version should be ready before Christmas... for obvious reason. We will see how things evolve and if a first version can be released before but it is too soon to say for now and team is not even complete yet.

And, of course, new version is linked to the new map even if both will remain independent from each other.


Here is a quick summary of already processed enhancements:

Interface:
-Support of high resolutions (big part but not finished)
-Color of scorebars moddable
-Progress bar not displayed on loading screen (consequence of high resolutions support)
-Fixed SPA shield displayed by default on some message boxes
-Shield of country displayed on the foreground in country selection screen
-No shadow associated to flare for shields in country selection screen
-Map zoom with mouse wheel
-Flagname displayed instead of wrong standard shield at the end of the game
-No CTD at the end of the game if hands-off game with no real country (MER in particular)

Script Engine:
-Added discover command
-Added hre command (type = hre which = <prov> value = yes/no)
-Changed event conversions to not target Catholic provinces for CRC countries
-Changed event conversions to not target trading posts

Engine:
-Changed DoF navy morale bonus to 0.5 (same as army bonus) => to be moddable in the end

Miscellaneous:
-Logs files moved to Logs folder
-Cleaning of EU2 install files
-Music without music.ini


As you can see, we have many remaining things to do.

 

[Jayavarman]

-Map zoom with mouse wheel

Can we zoom closer than vanilla EU2? Can we zoom out to see the whole world?

 

[unmerged(40707)]

No... or not yet.

For now, it is only with EU2 available zooms but added more convenient mouse wheel actions with same result as +/- keys.

From information published by Johan on the forum when Inferis was "working" on tbl files, I understood possible zooms were directly included in the map files but I can't confirm.

 

[MichaelM]

I believe the tool used to make the original maps is in the source, enclosed in #ifdef's, so it might be possible for someone to extend it sometime.

Incidentally, I just implemented the ai_chance that MattyG suggested.

Also, one reason the list is so short is that only YodaMaster and I have gotten the code so far. I expect things to speed up in the next few weeks when the rest get approved.