Creating 0 range (movement) ships?

[+DOC+]

What i am trying to do is enable the construction of 0 movement ships in an attempt to make the AI better at forming trade routes. You may think this is a bit counterinituitive, however, i think the AI Italians and Byzantines in particular are terrible at leaving a ship in their main trade province (e.g. Adriatic and Marmara).

The hope with the 0 range ships is that once they are created they have to remain in the province that they were created in. Unfortunately at the moment when i edit the Dromon to make it 0 range, the game crashes to desktop as soon as once is built...

So, is their a way, or are we destined to wait until the arrival of VI to get decent AI trade routes?

[cugel]

Hi DOC Well, everone is having difficulty with this. I created a "Byzship" with the same characteristics as the galley and speed zero. No CTD and the campaign appeared to work o.k. But, when I tried to add_unit to early.txt to put it at Constantinople, the ship didn't appear (I added the unit description to names.txt in the Loc folder, but there must be other places where you have to enter the unit to get it to appear, I presume. What files did you change)? Is there the possibility of some other syntax error or problem?

As for why the CTD happens, see Wes W's MedMod v.1.6 thread below. He tried the same thing also with no luck and says it's impossible to give the ship range zero. You'll note that he said his modified campaign didn't appear. That, presumably, is because he attempted to insert a range zero ship into the Marmara by adding it to early.txt. It sounds like you simply relied on the AI build probabilities to create one, thus the campaign ran until the AI attempted to build it.

There's nothing we can do about the "clumping" problems apparently, unless Wes or someone can think of something else. I've noticed that the Byz and Italians are the chief offenders in this regard. The English clump in the English channel, but spread out fairly well otherwise and this doesn't seem to adversely affect their trade (because the English channel is a necessary link anyway). Why the Byzantines and others clump their ship in the Straits of Sicily is beyond me. Do you suppose that this behavioral routine was coded by CA programmers for the Italians, for whom the Sicilians would be the chief adversaries? Still doesn't make a great deal of sense, and I think it's a bug.

[Red Harvest]

Quote[/b] (cugel @ Feb. 17 2003,15:48)]Hi DOC Well, everone is having difficulty with this. I created a "Byzship" with the same characteristics as the galley and speed zero. No CTD and the campaign appeared to work o.k. But, when I tried to add_unit to early.txt to put it at Constantinople, the ship didn't appear (I added the unit description to names.txt in the Loc folder, but there must be other places where you have to enter the unit to get it to appear, I presume. What files did you change)? Is there the possibility of some other syntax error or problem?

As for why the CTD happens, see Wes W's MedMod v.1.6 thread below. He tried the same thing also with no luck and says it's impossible to give the ship range zero. You'll note that he said his modified campaign didn't appear. That, presumably, is because he attempted to insert a range zero ship into the Marmara by adding it to early.txt. It sounds like you simply relied on the AI build probabilities to create one, thus the campaign ran until the AI attempted to build it.

There's nothing we can do about the "clumping" problems apparently, unless Wes or someone can think of something else. I've noticed that the Byz and Italians are the chief offenders in this regard. The English clump in the English channel, but spread out fairly well otherwise and this doesn't seem to adversely affect their trade (because the English channel is a necessary link anyway). Why the Byzantines and others clump their ship in the Straits of Sicily is beyond me. Do you suppose that this behavioral routine was coded by CA programmers for the Italians, for whom the Sicilians would be the chief adversaries? Still doesn't make a great deal of sense, and I think it's a bug.

Taking a different tack (bad pun) is there anyway of making the sea in question require two movement units to pass through? That way a range 1 ship would be trapped. I don't think you could trick the game into making it a non-coastal waterway (and that would end up trapping/blocking most boats.

[+DOC+]

Red Harvest,

How can you change the movement cost of the sea in question?

Actually, just had a thought, is it possible to change the sea that Constantinople uses as its port for receiving trade income?? If one could make it the Aegean Sea then we may have lift off as far as the Byzantine trade capabilities are concerned.

EDIT: I agree with everything you say Cugel

[+DOC+]

Ah-ha, BINGO

Looks like the first sea name on the list of a province's neighbours is the one that the ships are created in (i.e. home sea province).

Therefore, by changing Constantinople's to the Aegean or the Black Sea we should be able to make Constantinople develop more useful trade routes

I suppose the same can be said for other problematic provinces.

[+DOC+]

Unfortunately i did get a CTD during a one testing campaign after i changed the order of the sea provinces under Constantinople's "setneighbours:" section of my Early.txt file.

If someone else has the time, could they check this too and see if i'm correct or not and see whether this change causes CTDs? If we can get this to work then the Byzantine's poor ability to form a trade network from the Marmara sea could be somewhat alleviated, at least until VI comes along.

Cheers

[Red Harvest]

Quote[/b] (+DOC+ @ Feb. 18 2003,05:30)]Unfortunately i did get a CTD during a one testing campaign after i changed the order of the sea provinces under Constantinople's "setneighbours:" section of my Early.txt file.

If someone else has the time, could they check this too and see if i'm correct or not and see whether this change causes CTDs? If we can get this to work then the Byzantine's poor ability to form a trade network from the Marmara sea could be somewhat alleviated, at least until VI comes along.

Cheers

You might have to change the graphical location of the port as well to get things to match up. Can't remember where I saw building/agent/etc. locations...I'm still new to MTW mods. There was a coordinate system for it if I recall.

Not sure how you could change the "range" required to traverse a province. Probably can't be done if the movement system is simply a "set neighbor" type association. In that case all sea moves are 1 range and there are only coastal and non-coastal waterways that determine whether or not a ship can pass.

[+DOC+]

Yes the graphical representation of the port would idealy have to be changed to coincide with the moving of a province's port location. However, i don't think it's critical to the game's stability as it is only a graphic. I may be wrong tho?

[cugel]

"Yes the graphical representation of the port would idealy have to be changed to coincide with the moving of a province's port location. However, i don't think it's critical to the game's stability as it is only a graphic. I may be wrong tho?
"

Well, this is getting a little over my head here, but I would assume they have to match. Suppose the ship is generated in the port (moved to the Agean) but the home province is Constantinople as indicated in the early.txt. CTD or other error would seem probable at this point. (I haven't tested this).

Also, didn't I read somewhere that there is some necessary order to the province listings (I presume this includes the sea provinces) and that they have to be listed in the same order everywhere they appear or there's some error? I wish I could remember the context, but I got the impression that the order has to be the same as elsewhere in early.txt. The way this game is programmed there are all kinds of unexplainable errors. For instance, why in hell is the range and ship type for ships described by the same integer(the first number also apparently is used to describe what sea types the vessel can move across and if it's zero the game engine apparently can't deal with it). That's just stupid

[+DOC+]

Quote[/b] (cugel @ Feb. 21 2003,00:07)]Well, this is getting a little over my head here, but I would assume they have to match. Suppose the ship is generated in the port (moved to the Agean) but the home province is Constantinople as indicated in the early.txt. CTD or other error would seem probable at this point. (I haven't tested this).

Also, didn't I read somewhere that there is some necessary order to the province listings (I presume this includes the sea provinces) and that they have to be listed in the same order everywhere they appear or there's some error? I wish I could remember the context, but I got the impression that the order has to be the same as elsewhere in early.txt. The way this game is programmed there are all kinds of unexplainable errors. For instance, why in hell is the range and ship type for ships described by the same integer(the first number also apparently is used to describe what sea types the vessel can move across and if it's zero the game engine apparently can't deal with it). That's just stupid

Actually Cugel, i don't think they do have to match. You see the port coordinates are simply there for graphical representation. If this is changed it'll just alter where the port graphic appears on the map. With regards to the listings in the Early.txt, under the setneighbours: section the first sea province listing actually refers to the province's port. By altering this it's possible to change the sea province that ships appear into.

e.g. by swapping the Sea_Marmara with the Black_Sea under the setneighbours section for ID_Constantinople, i've now got the Byzantines producing their ships in the Black Sea. Highly recommended change btw.

If i can be arsed in the future maybe i'll alter the port graphic, but that's purely cosmetic and not essential. VI will be out soon anyway and AI trade routing should be fixed? I think my CTD was actually related to a bug in one of my crusaders_ files.

[cugel]

"If i can be arsed in the future maybe i'll alter the port graphic, but that's purely cosmetic and not essential. VI will be out soon anyway and AI trade routing should be fixed? I think my CTD was actually related to a bug in one of my crusaders_ files. "

You know DOC, I don't mean to be overly cynical, but I wonder if trade will really be "fixed". Supposedly, from the CA comments we've read, AI factions will now be programmed to build trade networks, and they will be less likely to attack other factions (presumably they mean less likely to provoke naval battles)if that will reduce their trade income. I still haven't heard whether CA will address the other problems associated with the naval aspects of the game.

1. Will the AI still think locally rather than globally? Will it simply calculate the odds in a particular sea province, or will it take into consideration the overall size of the enemy's navy? ("Do I sink this 1 ship fleet that's sitting in the English channel, without considering that there's a fleet of 10 ships also there that will wipe me out next turn")?

2. Will the AI still be highly aggressive in its "home waters", regardless of the overall or local balance of power, or will it consider the possible consequences?

This could be extended to further strategic considerations: (like the possibility of losing its' provinces from land invasion because the enemy has more or better troops next to one of its provinces, or losing a naval war and getting its king cut off from contact with the rest of the empire so that there are big rebellions everywhere).

These are all factors a reasonable person would consider, but the AI doesn't. My guess is that there will be some cosmetic changes to the AI. Enough, perhaps to get me to buy the add-on, but not enough to solve all the major naval problems with the AI.

I'll think it's a major improvement if the AI is simply a lot less aggressive at sea, starting fewer wars of folly.