2 questions: Famous kings and facshields

[EatYerGreens]

Well I definitely learned a few things from this thread!

The meaning of that list of numbers after {SetStartLeader::} is one of the few things NOT documented in the comments within that file. First prize to whoever worked that one out!

Also, I was wrong about the name selection being random and hadn't realised that the names were also being used for all of the princes, which certainly speeds up the rate of cycling.


If the heir attributes are more under the influence of game events (I've read speculation that it's down to the manner in which the user plays and/or an inverse relationship with how successful their faction has become) than this file, the thought occurs to me that maybe their intended role could be in faction re-emergences?

[OldSchool]

Hey macsen rufus-
Thanks for the confirmation on my setup. I've never seen a prince change attributes upon becoming king. If you are able to duplicate that, I would be very interested in hearing about it.


Hey EatYerGreens-
There is also some mis-information about that line in the archives. This is my understanding of it, in case you aren't already aware.
Here is the line in the startpos file:

"SetStartLeader:: FN_HEATHEN 0 - 7 - 1 0 0 0 0 0 0"

The first number indicates which famous king the faction will start with in that era. The numbering starts with 0. The second number indicates how many numbers will follow it. As I said before, the next seven numbers indicate how many kings of each name have existed before the games timeframe. These should all be one less than the number you want that name to start with. The exception is that the name of your starting king should be equal to the number you want him to start with. I guess he counts as existing before the game starts. If you use my lists as an example, if I wanted to start the game with King Michael 1, my line would look like this:

"SetStartLeader:: FN_HEATHEN 2 - 7 - 0 1 0 0 0 0 0"

The 2 is because Michael is the third name in my list (remember, it starts counting at 0). The 1 sets him to start out as Michael I. The last thing to know is that it is more efficient for the game if you leave out the trailing zeroes in that line. So that previous line should really look like this, and will give the same results:

"SetStartLeader:: FN_HEATHEN 2 - 2 - 0 1"

The game will assume zeroes after the last number you put. I put the dashes in those examples to indicate the tabs.

Just for one more example. If I wanted to start the game with King William II and I wanted the first King John to be John V, my line would look like this:

"SetStartLeader:: FN_HEATHEN 1 - 3 - 2 0 4"

It's a convoluted setup, to say the least, and hopefully that all made sense.

[EatYerGreens]

Even better sense than before.

I'd already twigged what the 7 related to, as there was some variation in the values in default file and it also matched the number found in names.txt relating to the first 'n' names for a faction being king names.

Unfortunately, just about all of them had a '0' as the first number, which meant drawing any conclusions as to its purpose was near impossible.

Just to confuse things, the only exception to that pattern was for FN_BURGUNDY, so I was left assuming it was something to do with its special status as a late-appearing faction (forgetting that this also applies to the Swiss, who have a '0' there). Thanks for clearing up that confusion.


One thing I'll need to look at more closely, next time I'm testing mod changes, is to look at the ages of all the faction leaders on turn one (I'm using -ian mode for testing). I want to see if they all start at the same age, or if it's a random mixture.

It IS possible to control the ages of the heirs (only the under-age ones, I think) but not the StartLeaders themselves.

[OldSchool]

Yes, that first number caused me quite a bit of confusion. If you have everything set up correctly, it points to the famous kings list. If you don't, it seems to point to the names list and you might end up with a King Michael Roman numeral @... or something weird.

I read a discussion in the archives that it indicated if the starting king was married (0=married, 1=unmarried). Of course, if you open up high.txt or late.txt, you will see that is not the case and can work out what it does.

I think the marriage of the starting king is determined by if he has any underage heirs or not, but I'm not sure. I wonder if his age can be controlled by adjusting the oldest heir's age? I'll do some testing myself and we can compare results.

-OldSchool

[macsen rufus]

@ Oldschool - next time I spot an heir doing that I'll be sure to pay more attention - I always save every turn so I can go back and have another look at it

I can confirm though that starting kings do not have the same age, but it does seem like they are all under 40yrs old. As a result of a mod I'm playing with now, I had cause to check all the king's ages (you only need to .matteosartori. if you forget to launch with -ian ) I discovered the 40 years thing by trying to set a start date before this (I really wanted to start at "25AD") but this results in kings being aged -65,000 years or so and dying at the end of the first turn I found the earliest I could get away with was to start in 40AD. Evidently kings have to be born on or after "0AD".

Another problem I've found with these very early start dates is that the kings almost immediately decide to stop waiting for a princess and shack up with a commoner. In my mod all my kings have heirs built in, and that doesn't guarantee that the king is "married" when he starts. (Although it might help to have a YOUNG heir, ie 1-2 yrs old, maybe, as I've only given them one, ready to mature in the first few turns.) In the end my mod was changed to a "125AD" start date, and it has stopped a lot of the kings marrying immediately. I haven't noticed if any have appeared as married from the start though.

FWIW: THE single most common mistake I make is when entering a famous king, I forget to put in an entry for the number of kings in the list in the heroes.txt file. So the game looks for an entry in famous kings and is told that there are 0 names there when there is really one. The result is always the same - the starting kings have no names, just "King I" etc !

[EatYerGreens]

Thanks to you both.

The -65,000 thing was funny! But it makes sense for a 16-bit integer going past the wrap-around point (-65536 +/- 40 yrs)


Another curiosity:- playing as the English, there comes a point where a particular succession event turns the dead king's younger brothers (no longer in line of succession) into Royal-blood generals... and it gives them the surname "Plantagenet", which is historically correct.

I lack the knowledge of other nation's histories to realise whether this is paralleled with all the other factions too but I'm willing to guess that it is and await confirmation from those who might know.

Extract from NAMES.txt

// english surnames// english surnames


	["Cromwell"]	{"Cromwell"}
	["Pole"]		{"Pole"}
	["Talbot"]		{"Talbot"}
	["Stanley"]		{"Stanley"}
	["Roos"]		{"Roos"}
	["Mobray"]		{"Mobray"}
	["Grey"]		{"Grey"}
	["Plantagenet"]	{"Plantagenet"}

Co-incidence or not, Plantagenet is the 8th name on the list (or 7th if you count from 0 upwards). However, there is no visible sign of a numerical 'pointer' to this position, so I'm left thinking that it might be hard-coded into the game.

Not having properly played any modded campaigns, to date, I can't vouch for this myself. I'd be interested to hear from, for example, a Middle-Earth TW player where, I presume, all the names have been comprehensively re-worked and one of the substitute names consistently appears on the equivalent heirs, when a similar event occurs. Or does "Plantagenet" (etc.) pop up out of nowhere, in spite of the edits?


It's interesting because the "King Michael Roman numeral @...." error gives us clues as to how the ruler names are constructed from the labels - @[Title] @[forename] @[Roman numeral] with no "embedded but hidden" surname (it seems). Which makes you wonder how/where the (e.g.) Plantagenet thing arises from.

[R'as al Ghul]

Guys I've been following this closely and now I have a question.
Here's my data for Takeda in Samurai Warlords.

SET_FORENAMES::	FN_15	14	10	// Takeda

FAMOUS_KINGS::	FN_15	8
//name	no.	c+1Max7	d	p	a	portrait	vnv
0,		1,	4,	3,	3,	2,	-1,			mightywarrior2
1,		2,	3,	3,	2,	2,	-1,			no_v
2,		1,	4,	4,	3,	2,	-1,			killer2
3,		1,	3,	4,	3,	3,	-1,			church_lover1
4,		2,	5,	4,	3,	3,	-1,			pride
5,		3,	5,	3,	2,	3,	-1,			hardtokill1
6,		3,	3,	5,	3,	3,	-1,			tyrant3
7,		4,	2,	3,	4,	2,	-1,			pious4

ADD_FORENAMES::
"stw_Takeda Shingen"
"stw_Takeda Harunobu"
"stw_Takeda Nobushige"
"stw_Takeda Tenkyu"
"stw_Takeda Katsuyori"
"stw_Takeda Nobukado"
"stw_Takeda Nobutora"
"stw_Takeda Nobutoyo"
"stw_Takeda Nobuzane"
"stw_Takeda Nobutoshi"


SetStartLeader::  FN_15 0  7	1 0 0 0 0 0 1 	// Takeda

To me it all looks good, the names under Forenames are turned into full names in the names.txt. Given the numbering under Famous Kings:: they should appear subsequently but they don't.
Instead this is the line of the Takeda:
Shingen first King and Heirs: Harunobu, Shingen
This is my Addheir line for them

AddHeir:: FN_15	0	13
AddHeir:: FN_15	1	3
AddHeir:: FN_15	1	11

The 3 year old is called Shingen and I don't understand why.
The 11 year old is Harunobu as in the list.

Where's the 2nd Shingen coming from?

R'as