The Complete EDB Guide - discussion

I have just posted a new guide at:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=50439

This thread has been created to discuss this Guide. If you have anything to add, correct, suggest etc. then please do so. Let's make this the best source, the complete source, of "everything EDB" so that none of us need ever go searching around every forum's archives ad nauseum!

The Guide does not seek to define ways in which the information can be used, only to provide that information. So, although we might use certain aspects of it to create a ZoR system (for example) those implications and applications are beyond the scope of this Guide. This file provides only the raw data.

Your input is much appreciated and anticipated.

Excellent, Dol Guldur. If you haven't already, this is another thread talking about some of the limitations of bonuses and recruitment conditionals in edh, you may want to pull the pertinent info out of that and incorporate it into your guide.
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=43442
.

Thanks Epistolary,

Yes, I have read that one - I will think about it; problem is I seem to get conflicting results and I wonder if the patch 1.2 was installed in these tests? Core buildings certainly can have building_present_min_level requirements when I try...the only thing I don't like when you use this requirement for recruits is that the building scroll adds the building level to the end of the text for the effect.

Has anyone found a way around that? More testing needed on both these counts I think.

I will need to test negative "bonuses" as well, I've also noticed that some effects work when the word "bonus" (the second occurence) is removed and will need to work out how it alters the benefit (if it does).

Quote:

---

Quote:
Building Blocks - Requirements

The first line states the requirements necessary to be satisfied in order for the building to be available for construction. All factions reside within the 6 hard-coded cultures, and so this particular building can be built by all factions. Any combination of factions/cultures can be listed. Both visible and hidden resources can be used as requirements as may "building_present_min_level x y" where x is the building type and y the level of that building type. This latter simply requires a certain building to be present in that settlement before the practice_field can become available for construction. The connector "and" can be used to compound requirements, for example:


But strangely enough I cannot specify individual factions (in the requirements section) and get differing descriptions/names for those buildings *within* a single culture *specifically* for buildings present at the start of the game. If you want to build them after the start of the game, it will recognize those different variations, but not for those present at the start (it also loses their graphics). Instead it shows the generic "warning" message and I get (ROMAN) listed in the tooltip. This problem can be solved by just listing the culture (instead of the individual factions) for the the 'required factions' but then that means all factions in that culture can build it. I've had this happen in multiple complexes.

I might also add that negative capabilities vary in effect. Some trade ones do work (in the negative) and some others work in that they reduce positives, but won't carry over into the negative (happiness, loyalty, etc.), but others don't appear to work in the negative at all as far as I have seen (construction cost and time ones at least).

---

I've taken the liberty of transferring your words to the right place :)

Did you look at the tutorial on making building names/factions specific? I did not notice the effect you bring up, but I well may have tested it under the culture and nto the faction as far as the edb building requirement line is concerned. Has anyone else noticed this? I will see if I can get time to test it and look into it soon.

Regarding your latter point - no, I cannot get negatives to work here but I guess the workaround on this is to set the actual construction times and costs as per the lowest faction/culture and then apply bonuses to all factions in possession of higher costs/buildtimes through an effect stated in all their core_buildings.

Dol Guldur.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dol Guldur

I will need to test negative "bonuses" as well, I've also noticed that some effects work when the word "bonus" (the second occurence) is removed and will need to work out how it alters the benefit (if it does).

---

Which ones have you had success with in removing the second 'bonus'? I'd be very interested in knowing.
I *think* I've gotten negative population growth to work only as far as reducing positive population growth bonuses. But at least it's something.

I've made no tests yet on removing the stand-alone "bonus"; some time ago I know it accepted it and produced a result, but mroe recently I got an error on another effect by doing this. It seems some may accept it and others not.

Ah, more testing...

After some basic testing I've added this to the Guide...

==============

Notes on format...

Effects should be coded with a stand-alone "bonus" added before the integer even when there is a "bonus" in the effect's name itself. E.G. population_growth_bonus bonus 1. However, population_growth_bonus bonus +1 also works. Sometimes omitting the "bonus" does work but can cause problems - for example, the building scroll may not display the actual bonus (even though it works), and no negative number can be introduced because the engine looks for either an integer (not a number with a "+" or "-" before it in this case) or the word "bonus".

Negative effects...

population_growth_bonus bonus -5 displayed the expected -2.5 in the building scroll but seemed not to affect the settlement population growth indicator on the settlement scroll.

==========

Bottom line: use bonus; but it does make you wonder why it's there at all? Was there a "penalty" at one time or abandoned?

UPDATE: I meant effects with the "_bonus" element in their name take the stand-alone bonus too. I've added this to explain the other effects...


Farming_level and the armour and various weapon effects sometimes carry the stand-alone "bonus" and sometimes do not.

Trade_fleet, mine_resource, road_level, and the games, races and the four defensive effects carry no stand-alone "bonus" in the EDB file.

Question: what does the "building_factions { x, }" requirement do?

Armour bonus 1 or Armour 1?

After testing these two working options I conclude that...

"Armour bonus 1" is cumulative and acts as we would expect and desire it. That is, it adds 1 to the current armour of the unit (whether that be modified or unmodified armour).

"Armour 1" seems to ensure the armour attribute of the unit is 1 above the EDU stated armour but is not cumulative. But it does not reduce higher armour so it is not setting the armour variable to "1".

Thus:

armour 1 AND armour bonus 1 = 2

armour 1 AND armour 1 = 1

armour bonus 1 AND armour bonus 1 AND armour 1 = 2

Anyone got more insight on this? Here are my test results...

faction_capability / capability / = armour added to unit

armour 1 / armour bonus 1 AND armour 1 / = 2
armour 1 / armour bonus 1 / = 2
armour 1 / armour bonus 1/ = 2
armour bonus 1 / - / =1 (per building)
armour 1 / - / =1 (regardless of number of buildings)
- / armour bonus 1 / =1
- / armour 1 / =1

I'd appreciate any further tests with "bonus" anyone can get around to doing.


Encaitar,

That's a good question and I wish I knew the answer. Testing has shown that it must be used in the same format as the "factions" requirement and seems to some extent to be similar in results (though not always). I thought it might be a means for testing the culture/factional ownership of a building regardless of the current owner - would make ZoR a lot cleaner, eh? - but all my tests failed to prove this or anything: I am quite as clueless about it as when I started, other than knowing it takes the same format as "factions"!

It looks extremely well done and with an excellent layout. Great work, I'm sure it will be very helpful

Thanks Scion,

I only wish I could work out how to print out Org posts in portrait; I always have to resort to landscape ot fit it all on the page without the words being cut off (yes, even using the print format option in the forum).

It may have something to do with code blocks, even though I turn the larger ones into quotes to stop people having to use those horrendous horizontal scrollbars.

The Complete EDB Guide has been updated to include a new Excel resource (available on request - PM me) and a link to a tutorial on adding new buildings and getting the related graphics in-game.

Visit guide at https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=50037

Dol Guldur

There are a couple of questions I'd like to explain here and, if you find them interesting, you can add to the guide. This is part of a research carried out by one of our clanmates, CeltiberoYamamoto.

- Complex conditionals for bonuses:
Bonuses, in the same way as recruitment, can be linked to conditionals, for example hidden resources. This is an example: CeltiberoYamamoto tried to stablish two different types of regions, those with potential of population growing and those without it. He put a new hidden resource called "vida" (life in Spanish ~D ) and gave this bonus:

Code:

---

        governors_villa requires factions { barbarian, ct_carthage, eastern, parthia, egyptian, greek, roman, }
        {
            capability
            {
                population_growth_bonus bonus -2 requires not hidden_resource vida

---

In those regions without this hidden resource, each new level of core building has a more negative population growth bonus, making more difficult the growing.

- More complex building tree for barbarian:
There are several ways to simulate, but they must not be linked to settlement levels, as barbarian settlements cannot reach large and huge cities.
a) Upgrades without new settlement level:

Code:

---

building barracks_celtic
{
    levels muster_field militia_barracks city_barracks army_barracks
    {
        muster_field requires factions { britons, }
        {
            capability
            {
                recruit "barb infantry briton"  0  requires factions { britons, }
            }
            construction  2
            cost  600
            settlement_min town
            upgrades
            {
                militia_barracks
            }
        }
        militia_barracks requires factions { britons, }
        {
            capability
            {
                recruit "barb infantry briton"  0  requires factions { britons, }
                recruit "warband sword briton"  0  requires factions { britons, }
            }
            construction  3
            cost  1200
            settlement_min large_town
            upgrades
            {
                city_barracks
            }
        }
        city_barracks requires factions { britons, }
        {
            capability
            {
                recruit "barb infantry briton"  0  requires factions { britons, }
                recruit "warband sword briton"  0  requires factions { britons, }
                recruit "barb warguard briton"  0  requires factions { britons, }
            }
            construction  4
            cost  2400
            settlement_min city
            upgrades
            {
            army_barracks
            }
        }
        army_barracks requires factions { britons, }
        {
            capability
            {
                recruit "barb infantry briton"  0  requires factions { britons, }
                recruit "warband sword briton"  0  requires factions { britons, }
                recruit "barb warguard briton"  0  requires factions { britons, }
                recruit "astures" 0  requires factions { britons, }
            }
            construction  6
            cost  4800
            settlement_min city
            upgrades
            {
            }
        }
    }
    plugins
    {
    }
}

---

With this solution there are two disadvantages, the building doesn't appear in the building tree (although it seems to be buildable) and it is readily buildable just after the precedent level is built, although this problem can be solved (or reduced) by putting some complex conditionals to the construction.
b) New type of building:

Code:

---

building barracks_celtic
{
    levels muster_field militia_barracks city_barracks
    {
        muster_field requires factions { britons, }
        {
            capability
            {
                recruit "barb infantry briton"  0  requires factions { britons, }
            }
            construction  2
            cost  600
            settlement_min town
            upgrades
            {
                militia_barracks
            }
        }
        militia_barracks requires factions { britons, }
        {
            capability
            {
                recruit "barb infantry briton"  0  requires factions { britons, }
                recruit "warband sword briton"  0  requires factions { britons, }
            }
            construction  3
            cost  1200
            settlement_min large_town
            upgrades
            {
                city_barracks
            }
        }
        city_barracks requires factions { britons, }
        {
            capability
            {
                recruit "barb infantry briton"  0  requires factions { britons, }
                recruit "warband sword briton"  0  requires factions { britons, }
                recruit "barb warguard briton"  0  requires factions { britons, }
            }
            construction  4
            cost  2400
            settlement_min city
            upgrades
            {
            }
        }
    }
    plugins
    {
    }
}
building barracks_celtic2
{
    levels army_barracks
    {
        army_barracks requires factions { britons, } and building_present_min_level barracks_celtic city_barracks and building_present_min_level governor_building proconsuls_palace
        {
            capability
            {
                recruit "astures" 0  requires factions { britons, }
            }
            construction  6
            cost  4800
            settlement_min city
            upgrades
            {
            }
        }
    }
    plugins
    {
    }
}

---

I prefer this solution because the building appears now in the building tree. The conditions for the construction of the army_barracks are now the existence of the city_barracks and a "simulated" proconsuls_palace, made in the same way as a new type of building in the level of city.

Sorry if these questions were obvious :embarassed: , but it seemed interesting to me. :bow:

Monk,

No, I thank you for your contribution. Keep 'em coming.

I was aware of these concepts (even tested the more-than-one-tier-per-level one!) but had not thought of your combination in the first example or of the additional requirement to make the new building appear in the buidling tree: what were the conditions for building the governor_building (seeing as a settlement already has one)?

I don't want to include the application in the EDB guide, only the principles as it were - applications of the principles I will link to though - and I will add your link in with appreciation!

My own tutorial on "changing" the effects of Wonders is an application of the principles; indeed, there's a layer of depth to it I have not added but I really wanted someone else to grasp it rather than me just give it away ;) It's not that hard to get.

Thx again,


Dol Guldur.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dol Guldur

Monk,

No, I thank you for your contribution. Keep 'em coming.

I was aware of these concepts (even tested the more-than-one-tier-per-level one!) but had not thought of your combination in the first example or of the additional requirement to make the new building appear in the buidling tree: what were the conditions for building the governor_building (seeing as a settlement already has one)?

---

Glad to be of help. :bow:
Regarding the governor_building for the barbarian, this was my idea:

Code:

---

building governor_building
{
    levels proconsuls_palace
    {
        proconsuls_palace requires factions { barbarian, }  and building_present_min_level market market and building_present_min_level taverns bardic_circle
        {
            capability
            {
                recruit "Soldurios"  0  requires factions { germans, }
            }
            construction  6
            cost  3200
            settlement_min city
            upgrades
            {
            }
        }
    }
    plugins
    {
    }
}

---

City level is required (no higher) and also some other buildings which are not useful for recruitment, just to delay the construction of this building, simulating the time required for population growing in the other cultures.
What I didn't test was what happens when a barbarian faction conquers a large city from a "civilized" culture. In that case it would be possible to have two different proconsuls_palace, but only the barbarian one would be useful to build the barbarian army_barracks.
I have adapted a kind of ZoR system, but I'm not sure what will be the results in long term after a region is conquered several times by different culture factions, mainly in the case of the AI. :dizzy2:

Yes, complexity is an issue to avoid to make sure the AI works well enough!

Anyone know why a core_building will accept:

Quote:

---

law_bonus bonus 4 requires factions { seleucid, }

---

under faction_capability but not the very same line in the normal capabilities block?

The links don't work for me *(

I have updated the initial post with the correct link. A naughty moderator changed the links on me; but I can't complain as he's done an otherwise excellent job in keeping all the links working ;)

This sounds interesting:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeromeGrasdyke

The plug-ins system is legacy from early in development. The code is still there to allow you to specify building plug-ins, but there is no display for them in the game anymore, which means that you cannot see wether any are built, build new ones through the UI, or look at any descriptions on the campaign map. Certainly the AI won't build them if you were to add some to the game... Best to just stick to buildings and upgrades, really

---

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=43462


So, if these plug-ins work, we would have a nice tool scripting-wise (if we can create/damage them through scripts, that is), as they would be completely hidden, not buildable by neither AI nor the player, but still detectable through scripts. The question is, how to define a working plug-in?

Nice compilation. Most of it I knew, some I didn't (like the faction_capability thing). A few points (well, okay, at least nine):

1) I've heard it said that farming_level bonuses on non-farm buildings don't work unless a farm exists with that level or higher. So a +1 farming_level bonus on a temple does nothing until you build Land Clearance. Interestingly, the farms have their bonuses stated without the "bonus" tag, while the farming temples have it. Could this be related somehow? And what triggers the visible farming development you can see on the strategic map?

2) What does building_factions do? What's the syntax for building_present?

3) Are the limits you state for capabilities the actual limits, or just the limits used in the vanilla files?

4) Have you discovered that the races/games number means anything? I don't think races 1 is any different from races 3, but I'm not totally sure.

5) Negative values, in general, work only to reduce an existing bonus, not to create a new penalty. For instance, a negative law bonus will offset a positive law bonus, but not result in a law penalty to public order or income. A negative trade bonus, however, will reduce income by itself, since there's practically always a trade bonus present on the settlement screen (I think). Likewise tax. I don't know if this is always true, but it holds at least some of the time, AFAIK.

6) The factions { slave, } requirement appears to never be true, as far as I can tell. Rebels use their subfaction to fulfill EDB.txt requirements.

7) The functions of some of the bonuses might be useful to explain:

• Each point in law gives +3% to gross income (farming + trade + taxes + mines), but that bonus is limited to the amount of corruption (see here).
• Each point in farming_level increases the base farming level of the region by one, which increases growth by 0.5% (IIRC) plus income by either 0 or 80 at normal difficulty with normal harvests (see here).
• I've heard that taxable_income_bonus and trade_level_bonus increase taxes and trade by 1% per point.

8) Are you going to incorporate anything from Quietus' guide?

9) I think the max number of hidden resources is 63, not 64.

-Simetrical

Thank you for that useful post.

It is much appreciated.

I've discovered a couple more things myself too - but I cannot update or attend to this just yet as I am too busy :(

The ranges shown are r:tw vanilla ranges.


I will get back to this when I can. Once again, thank you - these are the kind of responses we need!

I've yet to update the Guide, but here are some more things I've been testing...

modifications to buildings' construction times and costs:

The "other" category *does* extend past civil buildings because it includes recruitment buildings. It does not extend to religious buildings (temples) but it seems to include *all* others. What purpose then does the "construction_time_bonus_military" (and its cost counterpart) fulfil? It seems to have no effect.

I also noticed that an odd extra "10%" bonus to construction cost occured when setting the construction *time* bonus high. It occured when setting the time bonus to over 100, but also on 25%. Most weird. This changed when I changed the bonuses so I don't think it was an external effect.

Hi, im new to the org, and want first to thank dol gur for making this tutorial, it really helped me a lot.
I think i found something today while messing with the files:
the faction_capability thing, while very useful, apparently has some setbacks.
i tried to no avail add building conditionals to it but it always ctd on the turn the building with the faction_capability is finished. For example:
trying to do a building that will enable the training of a certain unit in all faction settlements

faction_capability
{
recruit "roman legionary cohort i" 0 requires factions { roman, } and building_present_min_level barracks_roman militia_barracks
}

(this is for rtr by the way)

i may have misunderstood how the faction_capability works, but since the game loads fine and dont accuse any syntax error, i think im right

dark89

I am not sure if I have tested recruitment in the faction-wide section; nor do I see a need for it. What you are doing can be done through building the appropriate level of building in each settlement, and would only take one line of code under the normal (settlement-wide) capability.

If you want to make a certain unit available in all regions when you capture a certain building in a specific region then there is no need to place any further requirements. The unit should become available regardless of the buildings in any settlement - and, besides, telling the game to look for a certain level of building may be causing the CTD : where does it look, after all?

Perhaps you could let me know what you are trying to acheive?

Thinking about this question, I wonder if we could use this type of faction_capability as a sort of "Marius reform". I'll try to explain myself.

This would be a point of development reached by the faction, not the settlement.
For example, if Carthage builds an imperial_palace, this would be the "signal" to recruit more advanced troops in all the carthaginian settlements. The objective would be then to simulate different eras in the game, depending not on the date but on the development degree.

I don't know if this is possible, but it would be wonderful. Any idea? ~D

Oh yes, I have tested something similar. I assigned a unique hidden resource to a region. When it's settlement is captured the faction_capability (listed in the core building) triggers the availability of a certain military unit to all of the faction's settlements. It definitely works.

You see, resources can be tested for.

How exactly does that work ? I haven't really looked into buildings editing and don't really understand

the thing im trying to simulate is a reform of sort just like monkwarrior said, but i want to limit the building of the new units using buildings, for example if i use hidden resources every province will be able to train the new units even the ones that dont have any military buildings, so i want to put the barracks as a requirement.
im not sure if im being very clear, if still dont understand than my english sucks more than i thought

dark89

I believe I am correct in saying that everything you put in that line of code simply fulfills a purpose of testing whether or not the faction-wide bonus will be applied or not. There is no in between. It is either applied globally or it is not applied at all.

thanks for the answer, while it sucks its better to know.

dark89

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dol Guldur

Oh yes, I have tested something similar. I assigned a unique hidden resource to a region. When it's settlement is captured the faction_capability (listed in the core building) triggers the availability of a certain military unit to all of the faction's settlements. It definitely works.

You see, resources can be tested for.

---

I'm interested in this, can you give us an example of it in action?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Epistolary Richard

I'm interested in this, can you give us an example of it in action?

---

These threads may shed some light on the subject:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=50433
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=50439

Yes they do, though I really should point out on that Wonders' thread that you'd better be sure what the exact Wonder effect is, as if it decays you'll eventually end up with a permanent penalty if applying a negation : though, that said, some effects only reduce an existing bonus rather than have the capacity to create a negative.

The principle is there though - you simply designate a resource to a certain region, when the faction captures that region the faction-wide capability kicks in (because it is predicated upon the existence of that resource). You can of course create a different capability for each faction.

To ensure the code is parsed you'll need to place it in a building that must exist at that region's settlement. All non-village settlements must have core_buildings (government buildings) so you can place it in each level of that tree.

It's been heavy going at the Fourth Age but I've managed a small update to the EDB Guide.

1. I have added in that the "other" category of buildings for the cost and build-time bonus seems to also apply to military buildings.

2. I have added that you can have more than 5 levels within each tree...

You can have a building for village, town, large town, city, huge city, large city and even attach more than 1 building to any level.

I've not tested the maximums; I am not too interested in this as I want my building browser to display correctly and that only shows 5 buildings - so unless you make perhaps the village "building" a process (such as representing colonization for example) rather than a physical building it seems messy to me.

3. Upgrades

I'm not sure if anyone knows this but I was wondering the other day why that word ("upgrades") is in the plural. I tested my theory out by putting a second upgrade in that section and it worked!

The implications of this have not fully dawned on me but here is a somewhat silly example of what you can now do...

t1=Palisade
t2=Wooden Wall
t3=Stone Wall
t4=Gold Wall

Let's say you don't want stone walls unless there is a "granite" resource available. Currently, a negative test for this not only blocks the stone wall but all upgrades. So your region with no granite may never build gold walls even if it has a stack of gold...

With the 2 upgrade lines you can now add "Gold Wall" after "Stone Wall" in the Wooden Wall's Upgrades section of code.

This will allow you to build the Gold Wall on level 4 even if it has no stone.

This does need to be explored and tested more. I trust someone with more time will add to this (?).

In other words, we can now leap buildings in a single bound :)

P.S. And no, I have still not worked out what building_factions does - Jerome, please........???? Please?

Ok, one more answer ;) "building_factions" appears to be a condition you can use instead of "factions" in export_descr_buildings.txt; the difference is that "factions" is a condition on the faction who currently own the building, while "building_factions" is a condition agains the faction who originally built the building. Keep in mind that this is old code and probably has not been tested for quite a long time.

Jerome, a big thank you..

Should you ever need any extra coding done you can outsource it to me for just £7 per hour ;)

I'm off to test it...

Initial test (will be updated)

Changed faction creator of roman settlement A to parthia in descr_strat.txt

In EDB added following line under muster_field capabilities (muster_field being a building declared in settlement A in the descr_strat.txt file):

Quote:

---

recruit "east infantry" 0 requires factions { roman, } and building_factions { parthia, }

---

Result (playing as Roman): Building scrolls stated the unit was now available in *all* regions with muster_fields - not just Settlement A :(

Actual unit was not recruitable anywhere though!

Will continue test but would request others also do so. Thx.


UPDATE:


Test: Settlement A has faction creator of Parthia but listed under Parthia in descr_strat....(i.e. they begin with it as well as building it)

Quote:

---

recruit "east infantry" 1 requires building_factions { parthia, }

---

results (playing as Parthia) = scroll displays correctly / recruitment of unit possible

Test (using last EDB code line above): Settlement A has faction creator of julii but listed under Parthia in descr_strat....(i.e. they begin with it but it was built by romans)

results (playing as Parthia) = scroll displays correctly / recruitment of unit possible

Conclusion: either faction creator is of no relevance or building_factions is not functioning as it should.

Updated EDB Guide.

1. building_factions, not that it works yet, can only be used in the capability lines.

2. The correct format and use of the building_present requirement is:

building_present BuildingType

e.g. building_present smith

This will test true if any level of smith is present. So this requirement tests for building types rather than a minimum level of building within a building type.



Anyone else got anything to offer? ;)

First, thanks for this thread and the EDB guide. Very useful.

Second, I had been playing with "building_factions" myself too and I got some results to report. Sort of mixed, I'd say, but some of it seemed promising. The problem is that I'm not getting consistent results for both bonuses and unit recruitment. Seems to work for the former but not, or differently for the latter. Anyway, I'll tell you what I did and see what you guys think and maybe it'll be helpful for someone.

So, syntax like "bonus X requires building_factions {faction A, }" seems to work. Bonus X is only effective when faction A built the structure that grants it.

I used a building that both Armenia and Parthia could build and used this code:

Code:

---

law_bonus bonus 3 requires factions { armenia, } and building_factions { armenia, }
happiness_bonus bonus 3 requires building_factions { parthia, }

---

Playing as the Armenians, I gave the building to the Parthians in descr_strat.txt and the Armenian built it in the first turn. I also placed a large Armenian army next to the Parthian city and used it to conquer it in the first turn too.

Next turn, the structure built by the Armenian was granting them 15% extra law and no happiness, while the captured one was giviing 15% extra happiness and no law bonus. Then, I destroyed the building in the Parthian city and rebuilt it. When it was done it provided 15% law and no happiness.

So, it seemed to work. The bonuses could be granted depending on which faction had built the structure. I suppose that by using syntax like "requires faction A and building_factions faction A", we can preclude the bonuses of captured buildings applying to the capturing faction.

However, I also used the following code:

Code:

---

recruit "east cataphract archer" 0 requires factions { armenia, } and building_factions { armenia, }
recruit "east heavy cataphract" 0 requires factions { armenia, } and building_factions { parthia, }

---

The structure build by the Armenians recruited Cataphract Archers, sadly so did the one captured by them, but built by the Parthians. The latter did not produce Cataphracts.

So, I am confused. It's not exactly that "bulding_factions" has no effect at all over recruitment, as I think Armenians should have gotten the Cataphracts if it were so. Moreover, earlier I had tried:

Code:

---

recruit "east cataphract archer" 0 requires building_factions { armenia, }
recruit "east heavy cataphract" 0 requires building_factions { parthia, }

---

Then, structures built by the Parthians recruited Cataphracts, but not Cataphract Archers, while the converse happened for those built by the Armenians.

I am somewhat lost. I used two slightly different installs (I play a mod) for the first and second run of tests and I wonder if that may have had an inluence, though I sort of doubt it.

That's it. Ideas? suggestions?

I wonder if negative bonuses actually work like they should in BI. Anyone know? It would be nice to give some buildings negative population growth bonuses and some things like that.

One question about hiden resources: Can they be used to disable the recruitment of units? For example, take Rome (the city/province) which has the hidden resource "Rome" that allows First Cohorts to be build. Now, could that be used in a way that it allows only First Cohorts and nothing else to be build? Much like the pre-marius units have the "NOT Marian Reforms" building condition.

hidden resources are static, Marian Reforms are an event and thus not static (they have two separate states: pre and post).

To disable a unit that starts the game recruitable you must have an event; a hidden resource cannot provide this.

The unit's recruitment could be conditional upon the presence of a hidden resource at a certain level of a building, the earlier buildings giving unconditional access to its recruitment. Of course, the player or AI might not want to build the building if it loses the unit but then again it might not want tolose any other bonuses/units that come with that building.

This would be the same as making a unit non-cumulative on a level of the tech tree except that, where the resource/hidden resource is used, it would give you the option of having the unit still available in areas with/without the hidden resource.

I can see little application for this though ;)

Scripts aside, the only aspect of the game that offers timed conditionals is buildings because they have construction times and required upgrades - hence such things as colonization in some ZoR systems.

The purpose is I´d like to have the AI build only Praetorian Guards in Rome, no other infantry.
Now, I could delete all kinds of existing barracks in Rome, but that wouldn´t keep the AI from building them and thus gaining access to other infantry units.

Quote:

---

The purpose is I´d like to have the AI build only Praetorian Guards in Rome, no other infantry.
Now, I could delete all kinds of existing barracks in Rome, but that wouldn´t keep the AI from building them and thus gaining access to other infantry units.

---

Restate: You wish only Praetorian Guards to be built in the city of Rome and no where else - and for that unit to be the only infantry unit Rome can build.

Is that right?

If so, you could require the hidden resource of "rome" NOT to be present in order to build all other infantry troop types in all barrack levels, except the PGs of course who would take the positive conditional.

Or you could simply disallow the building of barracks in Rome altogether, again by making the absence of the hidden resource "rome" requisite for barrack construction. Then simply attach the PGs to a building unique to Rome or to an existing building with the "rome" conditional in the positive.

Quote:

---

If so, you could require the hidden resource of "rome" NOT to be present in order to build all other infantry troop types in all barrack levels, except the PGs of course who would take the positive conditional.

---

That was precisely what I was asking, whether that´s possible ~;)

Angadil,

I am sorry. I did not thank you for your post and testing. I have added a comment in the Guide that testing of building_factions can be found in this thread. Did you discover much more? I think it's not working as it should and may prove a fruitless effort :( Pity.

I have also updated the EDB guide for the new religious capabilties.

Is there any way to have a different requirement for constructing a building for one faction, but not for another? Could I have any form of this that would work?

requires factions { thrace, } and buildingalpha or { macedon, } and buildingzeta

Or maybe is there any other way to have a variation between requirements?

I don't think we can use brackets in the edb file so more complex logical stuff isn't possible.
You could add another version of the building to simulate this behaviour.
Your example would probably require thrace and buildingalpha and buildingzeta as thrace and macedon at the same time is impossible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alpaca

I don't think we can use brackets in the edb file so more complex logical stuff isn't possible.
You could add another version of the building to simulate this behaviour.
Your example would probably require thrace and buildingalpha and buildingzeta as thrace and macedon at the same time is impossible.

---

Yeah, I'm at building complex limit though. So trying to find a way to have different requirements for differnet factions for the same building.

It's really disheartening that the conditionals blow such huge chunks for this, when so much more is so close to being achieved... oh well...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alpaca

I don't think we can use brackets in the edb file so more complex logical stuff isn't possible.
You could add another version of the building to simulate this behaviour.
Your example would probably require thrace and buildingalpha and buildingzeta as thrace and macedon at the same time is impossible.

---

I think you're right about the problem of different conditionals for different factions. But I'm finding other added problems in this regard.

If you remember the question about "invisible buildings" as the symbol for technologies acquired through espionage, I succeeded in scripting the process. I tried to put another "defense" type of building, called barbarian_defense with three levels: wall_tech, stone_wall and large_stone_wall. Although everything worked perfectly, the new walls were not present in the battle field (nor in the campaign). As they don't substitute the former wooden_walls, the new stone_wall is a sort of "phantom" building, that can be destroyed (in contrast with the normal wall).

Thus I had to return to the previous idea, to include the wall_tech building as a requirement for the normal stone_wall. But in this way the barbarian factions are limited to this level, as they cannot upgrade the settlement to large_city, requirement for the large_stone_wall.

I think this problem doesn't exist for buildings that are not present in the battle map, but I need some more testing in this regard.

Yes the undestroyable buildings can be a pain - they are the buildigns that are reflected in a visible presence on the campaign map - but in another way they are good as they give the modder the knowledge that they have some control over what the player may or may not do to certain road, city set ups, etc.

Of course, Monk, the answer to your problem with the walls is to install BI ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dol Guldur

Of course, Monk, the answer to your problem with the walls is to install BI ;)

---

Well, it is said that BI will be available tomorrow in Spain (Spanish)~D
What is the new feature that will solve my problem?
Perhaps an update of the guide for BI (RTW 1.3) would be of great help. ~;) :bow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou

Is there any way to have a different requirement for constructing a building for one faction, but not for another? Could I have any form of this that would work?

requires factions { thrace, } and buildingalpha or { macedon, } and buildingzeta

Or maybe is there any other way to have a variation between requirements?

---

Hum. Well, since EB is using scripts anyway, you could have the script check the conditions you want and add a dummy building when the faction and other requirements match up, then have the building requirement use "building_present whatever" to check for the exact building (as opposed to building_present_min_level, which would also return true for higher levels). Of course, you might still have a building limit problem, and removing the building if the requirement is no longer applicable might be tricky, but the former is reduced from the original problem (or perhaps eliminated entirely if you can have unlimited building entries per complex level), and the latter is tolerable if there's no workaround.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Simetrical

Hum. Well, since EB is using scripts anyway, you could have the script check the conditions you want and add a dummy building when the faction and other requirements match up, then have the building requirement use "building_present whatever" to check for the exact building (as opposed to building_present_min_level, which would also return true for higher levels). Of course, you might still have a building limit problem, and removing the building if the requirement is no longer applicable might be tricky, but the former is reduced from the original problem (or perhaps eliminated entirely if you can have unlimited building entries per complex level), and the latter is tolerable if there's no workaround.

---

That would work for one building, but then to make that differentiation for other ones, we would need a whole new building I would think. We are almost at the limit now, so yeah, I guess we're just screwed in respect to trying to have different building-level-acquisition for different factions. (cries.... again...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou

That would work for one building, but then to make that differentiation for other ones, we would need a whole new building I would think. We are almost at the limit now, so yeah, I guess we're just screwed in respect to trying to have different building-level-acquisition for different factions. (cries.... again...)

---

Maybe test the many-buildings-per-level thing which couldn't be built, but might possibly be scripted in. One complex would do then, if we have a script check each faction-owned province for the combination of buildings you want, and then pop in the building to be used as pre-requisite.

If it works, you may also be able to use the faction_created (or whatever it is called) conditional on it to ensure that new factions don't take it over and use it. If it works, we could theoretically have one building per faction for that complex.

More than one building can be added per level, though I have not tested maximums - nor have I tested it with undestroyables.

And it is my understanding that building_present tests for the building type and not the exact building (so it would test for "barracks" instead of "army_barracks" for example, and result as true if any level of barracks were present).

Maybe you can restate what you want, Monk?

I meant that BI has all 5 levels of wall for Barbarians.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dol Guldur

Maybe you can restate what you want, Monk?

I meant that BI has all 5 levels of wall for Barbarians.

---

Well, in my copy of BI barbarians have only 3 levels of wall and there are no traces of the other two in the different folders.
What I've seen is that it has been eliminated the settlement level limit (I hope), as the barbarians can build proconsuls_palace and even imperial_palace. This is in theory, as I haven't tested this point yet. So it would be possible to assign all kind of buildings to the barbarians.

Monk,

I must apologize. I thought I had looked up the EDB file for barbarian defences - my notes and charts on this particular remained from the PRIMA Official Game Guide which clearly has listed the barbarian wall levels incorrectly.

But yes, you are right that barbarians now have 5 core buildings, which means they can be assigned all buildings.

I'm going to double-check all my walls now ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dol Guldur

But yes, you are right that barbarians now have 5 core buildings, which means they can be assigned all buildings.

---

Yeah, that's the most important point, as you can design completely the construction tree after the hard-coded issues have been eliminated.~:cheers:
Thus, your idea was right, although some modding work is still required.~;)

Aha. I found a way to get a second set of factions into a requirement line in constructing a building, but it still isn't nearly what I would like. The "or" apparently will keep two things together, so this would work:

buildingalpha requires factions { greek_cities, romans_brutii, } or factions { parthia, } and building_present_min_level hinterland_roads roads

I had been unable to get any second grouping of factions to work. So one set can have no requirements, while the second set has some. But this doesn't do a lot, as I was wanting to have different sets for multiple different factions. If anyone has any idea how to achieve this, please let me know. But the above appears to work. The first two factions have no requirements, and work immediately, but the last one, parthia, has to have roads built first before it will be buildable. But once they are constructed you could build it.

Thanks for posting your findings on this, could I ask you to post it or attach (edit) it to your last post at the 'complex conditionals for capabilities and buildings' thread at:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...?postid=642173 which I link to from the EDB Guide?

I will update this all at some point ;)

Thx. again. This is the sort of stuff that needs to be known!

Hello!

As it's not in the guide, I'll post it here:

"trade_level_bonus" only affects land trade. Though I'm not 100% sure, I think a trade level bonus of 1 is equivalent to a road level bonus of 1 concerning income. The difference is that there is no limit of 2 as with "road_level". This could be useful to make land trade more significant compared to sea trade, but it needs further testing. Just my two cents.:bow:

According to what I've heard, trade_level_bonus gives +10% to land trade per level, whereas roads 1 gives +100% and roads 2 gives +200%.

OK, I did another test with RTR:

I gave trade_level_bonus 1 to the academy and started a campaign (M/M) with the Romans. The trade income projected in the settlement details scroll was 707 both when I added the academy or paved roads to the queue.

del. Sorry

The Modding Community may wish to know that I have found a little time to update The Complete EDB Guide to include a small section toward the end on simpler Multiple Temples and how to disable the destruct button for buildings.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=50439

Dol Guldur aka Palantir, Coding Manager: Fourth Age R & D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dol Guldur

The Modding Community may wish to know that I have found a little time to update The Complete EDB Guide to include a small section toward the end on simpler Multiple Temples and how to disable the destruct button for buildings.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=50439

Dol Guldur aka Palantir, Coding Manager: Fourth Age R & D

---

Thanks a lot for the info.

One question though: Does adding the hinterland prefix make buildings undamageable, either?

I assume you mean in the case of riots. I have never seen a building destroyed in a riot - only damaged - though I have not looked into this.

As you know, fixed undestroyables such as government buildings can be damaged right down both in the campaign and the battle-map level - but they cannot be destroyed. Again, I have not researched this side of things to give you any accuracy on the matter.

Any testing and research would be appreciated of course, though I think it serves its purpose as is (as far as I am concerned).

I'm getting some very strange results when testing the use of hidden_resources as a requirement for buildings in 1.5. I can't get any of it to work correctly. If the game has been changed from 1.2 to 1.5 to make it where buildings can't have hidden_resources as requirements, then I will tear all of my hair out I think.

Teleklos,

I have been following your challenges. I am working on an EDB which has been significantly modded (by me) - new buildings, levels removed, levels added..blah blah blah and currently around 44 declared HRs some of which have been used as building conditionals. I have noticed none of the problems you have been having. That is in BI 1.6. We are going to look into porting the current map (and thus the edb) into R:TW 1.5 and will let you know if the buildings do not behave themselves. I am not sure how long this will take as it is but a side project.

Have you been able to determine if these errors occur outside of your own installations? That is, if you send the files to another on your team does the same thing occur even when their game generates the rwm?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dol Guldur

Have you been able to determine if these errors occur outside of your own installations? That is, if you send the files to another on your team does the same thing occur even when their game generates the rwm?

---

I think it is not a problem in rwm generation.
I'm using the same map.rwn generated more than one month ago and I'm changing buildings in edb and descr_strat, as well as units in edu and descr_strat, without apparent problems.
Yesterday, I eliminated six paralel missiles buildings, each one with 4 levels. All the missiles were substituted in descr_strat by barracks, and the campaign worked perfectly with the same rwm.

The problems would come if you change descr_regions, by adding or deleting hidden resources, as this file is used in the map.rwm generation.
AFAIK map.rwm is generated from the files present in base folder, not from those in imperial_campaign (or barbarian_invasion in case of BI).

Another person on the team tried to insert this simple building also, with one hidden resource requirement ("river" - as it is a river port building). Sure enough, the building was able to be built in every single province in mine, but his just automatically CTDs. I guess I just have to recopy all my files and start from a fresh 1.5 build. But I was almost at that to start with - and I think these are the only changes I've made - but I do feel like the problem has to do with my not understanding the way the map generation now works. It seemed so easy in 1.2, but now with the different subdirectories I don't know how to handle it. I've not seen a map.rwm in the imperial_campaign directory yet - and I didn't quite understand monkwarrior's method of creating a rwm file using the prologue (was that right?) and then copying it over(?). Sorry to be a pest about this issue, but there is definitely something that has changed here from 1.2 to 1.5 and I just have to figure out how it applies to the mod files we have. It's too bad changes that were introduced here were not explained really. But you guys are giving me hope that there is a way around it (I just don't see what it is yet) :grin:.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou

- and I didn't quite understand monkwarrior's method of creating a rwm file using the prologue (was that right?) and then copying it over(?).

---

I'll do my best with my poor English.:juggle2:

First: I always work with JSGME. I mean, each change is done "outside" the game, then the mod is activated, I try the modded game and once I exit the game, I deactivate the mod.
Thus, I need a map.rwm in the modded imperial_campaign, just to substitute the vanilla one. If not, I would get instant CTD as the files don't match with map.rwm.

Imperial_campaign: the files are divided in two folders, base and campaign\imperial_campaign. In base folder you have all the files needed for rwm, but I'm not sure if the game is able to generate one in that folder.

Provincial campaign (not the prologue one): I create a new folder in campaign, named as you want (e.g. Data\world\maps\campaign\Teleklos), and I copy all the files in base and in campaign\imperial_campaign. Thus, I've created a provincial campaign named Teleklos. It is necessary to copy, and paste imperial_campaign_regions_and_settlement_names.txt in text folder and rename the copy as Teleklos_regions_and_settlement_names.txt.
Just to complete the work, open campaign_descriptions.txt (also in text folder), copy all the names and descriptions of factions of the imperial_campaign and rename them. Example:

Quote:

---

{IMPERIAL_CAMPAIGN_TITLE}Campaña en Hispania
{IMPERIAL_CAMPAIGN_CARTHAGE_TITLE}Los cartagineses
{IMPERIAL_CAMPAIGN_CARTHAGE_DESCR}¿Quién podría vaticinar que, cuando Dido,...

{TELEKLOS_TITLE}Campaña en Hispania
{TELEKLOS_CARTHAGE_TITLE}Los cartagineses
{TELEKLOS_CARTHAGE_DESCR}¿Quién podría vaticinar que, cuando Dido,...

---

After doing all these changes, you have a complete provincial campaign.
Activate the game, start the provincial campaign "Teleklos" and in the folder Data\world\maps\campaign\Teleklos the map.rwm corresponding to your campaign will be generated.
Now it is enough copying this file and pasting in Data\world\maps\base folder of the mod.

This is the method I use to generate new rwm files.
If you don't modify any file in Data\world\maps\base, the file doesn't need to be changed. (98% sure :inquisitive: )

Good luck!:2thumbsup:

Ok, it seems like that I can do a simple test adding a hidden resource to a vanilla RTW 1.5 building. It seemed to work correctly with limited testing. Here is what I did.

Quote:

---

Ok, here is the simplest way I can think to try out what I'd like to do:

1. I just take the vanilla (totally vanilla) 1.5 files, and open up export_descr_buildings.txt. I insert into the list of hidden_resources a new HR called "not_here".
2. I insert "and hidden_resource not_here" into the requirement line of the three greek theater complex levels.
3. I also reduce the minimum city level to village just to test this out.

I started the game up and it looks like it works. I can't build this in any of my cities now playing as "Greek Cities". Now, onto the second part of the test:

1. I open up descr_regions.txt and put "not_here" as a new resource into the "Rhodes" province only.
2. Without doing anything else, I try to boot up. It loads up the game successfully. But unfortunately it doesn't recognize the new hidden_resource (in descr_regions.txt) yet. I can't build the theaters anywhere, including in Rhodes.
(3. This would *seem* to indicate that the game is just checking the map.rwm file, and hasn't recognized the changes I made in descr_regions.txt.)

So, the next step:
1. I delete the map.rwm file that is inside the "base" subdirectory.
2. Without doing anything else, I try to boot up. This time it works. I can build the odeon in Rhodes, but nowhere else.
(3. Also, it was a little slower loading up this time right when I hit the "Start the Campaign" button - like it maybe was generating the map.rwm file then.)

This would seem to indicate that *using the buildings already in the game* that hidden resources will work very simply like this.

---

But then I inserted an extremely simple building into the mix. One that has worked flawlessly in 1.2 for us.

Code for export_descr_buildings.txt

Code:

---

building hinterland_precursor1
{
    levels precursortype1
    {
        precursortype1 requires factions { all, } and hidden_resource not_here
        {
            capability
            {
                agent diplomat  0  requires factions { all, } and hidden_resource not_here
            }
            construction  1
            cost  0
            settlement_min village
            upgrades
            {
            }
        }
    }
    plugins
    {
    }
}

---

Code for export_buildings.txt

Code:

---

{hinterland_precursor1_name}
Precursors for Type1 Governments

{precursortype1}        Homeland Government Resource
{precursortype1_desc}
This is a marker that this faction can develop a Homeland Type of Government in this province. "Building" this precursor does not produce the benefits of a Homeland Government. It simply indicates that the process required for it can now start by allowing the construction of the actual, functional Government building. Keep in mind, however, that if any other government building, even a damaged one, is present in this province, this will not be possible. The Homeland Government will not become available for construction, even the if the precursor is in place.
{precursortype1_desc_short}
The possibility for a Homeland Government exists for this faction.

---

The only requirement here is for the already tested "not_here" hidden resource. So, I:
1. Inserted the code above into the edb.txt and eb.txt files.
2. Deleted the map.rwm file in the base subdirectory.
3. Booted up the game.

This time, at the same point I hit the "Start the Campaign" button, it is generating the map.rwm file - and pauses for a couple of seconds - and then it KTM's (kicks me back to the new game menu). I can immediately select "main menu" and then go back to the "new game menu" and then to the "imperial game menu", but this time it doesn't have to pause when I hit "Start the Campaign", but instead it very quickly KTM's.

So it seems like the game can generate a new map.rwm when the old one is deleted in the base folder if only new hidden resources are added. But when a new building is added, it can't generate a new map.rwm. That's one way of interpreting what I saw at least - though it might not be correct.

Is my mistake that I'm trying to alter the imperial campaign folder? Do we have to only use provincial campaigns for mods now, like monkwarrior showed how to do?

Again, I can't see the difference with the piece of code I posted yesterday.
The name of the building was new (barbarian_defenses) and also the only level (wall_tech). Moreover the requirement was a new hidden_resource. :dizzy2:
I've done a quick search, just to see if I had put the building in other files, but it only appears in the script and in those related with advice, because there is one new advice thread about the new building.

Sorry if I insist too much, but... is it allowed the use of { all, } in 1.5?
Did you include also the building cards? That wasn't necessary in 1.2 (the roman barracks appeared), but I don't know in 1.5.

When I converted the mod from 1.2 to 1.5, the campaign was a provincial one. Firstly I transformed the mod and, when the campaign was fully functional, I converted it to the imperial_campaign.

I don't know if this is the only way, but it was the way it worked for me.

P.S.: usually the KTM problems give an error message using -show_err. Do you have any?

-Well, I made a UI tree and did include graphics for that precursor1.tga building, in the roman set. But I don't know if that's enough or if they have to be unpacked or something. Again this would be a good place to have some more information about the differences have been introduced into 1.5, but I don't seem to be able to find anywhere that has a really good list of changes like this. It didn't seem to help though from what I could see.
-I expected an error message with the KTM, but I got nothing - no error messages at any time, even though I am using showerr.
-Hmmm. You appear to be right about the "all" thing though. I'm still testing...

edit1: Well, "all" can work on core buildings. So maybe it's tied to the need for building graphics somehow. Gah.

edit2: Now I have added the precursor building and it loads if I only use "roman" in the building requirements line instead of "all", *&* I put images in a new tree under a UI folder with the roman precursor images in it. So I would now say all the problems seem to stem from a requirement of including building images in a UI tree for each new building. I have tested the hiddenresource and the building now appears to only be buildable in a roman province with that HR. Still - the new images aren't showing up in the game itself, just the roman barracks. Gah. But even though they aren't actually showing up, if I remove the images (and make no text changes), it won't even load - it just KTM's. So just having them there at least gets it to create the map.rwm, but I suppose you'll have to pack them to get them to show up.... Further testing - no, this is wrong. It still loads up if I remove them. I'm so tired of messing with this damn thing...

I thought I had a really good handle on what was going on with edb.txt and eb.txt in 1.2, and now I absolutely have no clue what is happening here in 1.5. This is absolutely ridiculous. I couldn't have just gone all stupid all of a sudden, or at least that seems unlikely. Why did things get so difficult now? Was the intent to make things harder on modders? Does anyone claim that 1.5 is now easier? If it is would they point me to some explanation? I'm just very frustrated right now. ~:mecry:

In BI a KTM is experienced if you try to add Carthaginian as a culture to the faction requirements of a new building OR to some vanilla buildings (or levels thereof).

The latter problem is solved by modding the descr_ui_buildings.txt to allow the carthaginian folder to look to other folders.

I have not discovered a way to solve the first problem so I make sure carthaginian always uses the default trees for its buildings. >>> Nikolai solved this later on in this thread...(by changing the DUB file)

I really do not think your problem lies with new buildings or hidden resources, but with the cultural element - but it is interesting that this worked for you in previous versions of R:TW.

In this regard, has anybody worked out what the listing of the alternative temples in descr_ui_buidlings.txt actually does? I played around with it but it did not seem to really matter what I did with it ;)

Some stuff from ages ago which I forgot to add when i got dragged away from Rome by life.

1) "not" conditions on building conditionals can prevent them displaying in the building browser and can cause a problem with graphics display through some kind of related effect.

So a condition like "and not hidden_resource desert" might prevent the building showing in the building browser. Adding a hidden-resource e.g "arable" to all the non-desert regions and changing the condition to "and hidden_resource arable" makes the building appear correctly.

There does seem to be a relation in some circumstances between things going wrong in the building browser and other building issues so i think having the building browser display as correctly as possible is a good sign that you're going to avoid other problems.


2) Building icons displaying correctly.

The initial vanilla factions seem hard-coded to one of the culture types. Inside the pak files are folders for each of the culture types. This means that for example whatever faction you turn the romans_julii faction into in your mod that faction will always look in the Roman folder first for it's building graphics. You can make the game look in other folders as well by using lines in the descr_ui_buildings.txt in the data folder. This has lines like:

eastern barbarian
carthaginian eastern
carthaginian egyptian
greek roman

and makes factions associated with the first culture type look in the folder of the second culture type for building graphics if it can't find a specific one in its own culture folder.

For modding projects it seems to me to be very worthwhile to pair off your new factions with the old in such a way as to keep the numbers in each culture group the same for ease of redirecting these folder swaps.

Vanilla:
7 factions associated with barbarian culture type
3 factions associated with greek culture type
3 factions associated with eastern
3 roman (4 including senate)
2 carthagian
1 egyptian

So for a simple example if you had 7 orc factions, 3 human factions, 3 elf factions, 3 dwarf factions, 2 hobbit factions and an ent faction then make sure you make your new factions on the corresponding vanilla one to make the number of factions in each of your cultural groups match the vanilla numbers e.g use the seven barbarian faction slots for your orcs. Then you can put all your orc buidings in the barbarian folder.

If there were nine orc factions and no hobbits then you could use the vanilla barb + carthaginian cultural factions and still have your orc buildings in the barb folder with a line in the descr_ui_buildings.txt file like:

"carthaginian barbarian"

to make the orc factions built on the carthage and numidia faction slots get their buildings from the barb folder.

This simplifies things and has an impact on some wierd graphic display bugs.

3) Something else i've totally forgotten.

~~~~~~~~~~~

Other stuff.

I was just patching the vanilla game to have a look at teleklos' problem and noted the descr_ui_buildings.txt is no longer in the data folder after patching to 1.3. So it may have all changed with later patchs.

I haven't got to patching to 1.5 yet, though if there have been changes here there might *possibly* have been changes to how the program parses the building conditionals.

I would definitely wonder if Teleklos' problem might simply be the "not" in the hidden resource "not_here". Maybe another word without the "not"?

A bit unlikely I guess.

Also, when i tested it trade bonus increments gave a 10% bonus to both land trade and sea export but not sea import.

The tax bonuses are in increments of 1%.