Haha you cheater Pikou, I must say I was thinking you would have done some trick for this picture



Well I nearly finished following your (OVERCOMPLICATED) tutorial. Thx again ^^

Well, don't lose hope. That it may involve legalese does not mean that it is impossible. For example, look at the Fall from Heaven: Age of Ice scenario included in Civilization IV. As far as I know, that scenario/mod was created by fans (though the project lead now works for Stardock, responsible for turning War of Magic into Fallen Enchantress).



So, good work and community support.

The-Cat-o-Nine-Tales wrote:


As far as the question of mods being incorporated into the main game is concerned: We'd have to do a pretty amazing job for that to even be considered (and ideally get a lot of support in the community), and even then I'm sure it would involve some very complicated legal documents to sign our work over to Amplitude.

Thank you ... unfortunately it.s as I suspected - but honestly I hope that someone would say otherwise

Too bad, because some of the mods I.m reading about over here sound amazing, and with a bit of extra polishing and testing by Amplitude would make for an amazing "community-driven" expansion ...

Limith, I'd love to see your code or perhaps design notes. Even if I'd probably not take it over whole cloth, I'm sure it could help me along with design or figuring out some tricks.



As far as the question of mods being incorporated into the main game is concerned: We'd have to do a pretty amazing job for that to even be considered (and ideally get a lot of support in the community), and even then I'm sure it would involve some very complicated legal documents to sign our work over to Amplitude.

Stupid question (since I.m an absolute zero at modding): is it possible or planned that some of these mods will be integrated to the base game ? May Amplitude (legally) and would they consider this ?

The-Cat-o-Nine-Tales wrote:
I'd be willing to help as well.

I've been meaning to implement a cavalry class, create heroes of different classes for each faction, and possibly rework the skill trees so that every race and every class offers both combat and governing bonuses (with a focus on combat on class skills and governing on racial skills) so that there are reasons to prefer, for example, a Vaulters Ranged hero over a Wild Walker ranged hero.

The Cavalry class and hero diversity are next on my to-do list right after the material-dependent special abilities, so if I find time to work on it, I'll share my results.

I have old code with new skill tree design from a long time back before I gave up on modding (not enough free time anymore) if you are interested. Never managed to finish it, took way too long to think about a tree and write flavor text, work out balance. Haven't played EL in ages so the balance is probably way off. Maybe I'll check out EL again and be interested in modding, it's been a while, who knows, maybe the game balance has improved and alternative win conditions are actually different (it felt that aggressive military expansion was the only option to me unlike in Civ V due to the expansion growth penalties not scaling aggressively enough).



If you have scripting knowledge, I'd recommend you write a script to help automate skill tree editing...hm....I might write one if I want to take a break from my other projects. Making new trees took too much time.



Some general design philosophies of my old design:

-Class, Common, and Faction have 2 branches each. Offense/Defense for Class, Pragmatic/Moralistic for Common, and Exploration/Development for Faction. Each faction had a custom exploration branch (military) and development (governing). Pragmatic/Moralistic is a mix of military and management focused on the theme (pragmatic is in more resource extraction and military buildup, at the cost of approval, while moralistic is more "culture" focused on approval, science, and heroes). Offense/Defense speaks for itself.

-You can go down a branch or you can invest heavily into early skills (1st and 2nd circle's skills have 4 levels, 3rd and 4th have 2 levels, 5th has 1)

-The 1st and 2nd circles have a penalty on 3rd skill level while the 4th skill level has a large bonus. Cost of levels is 1/1/2/2

-The 3rd and 4th circles have larger bonuses and cost 2 for each level.

-The 5th circle has 1 level and a major bonus but costs 4 skill points.

-Going down one branch has minor penalties that 'counter' the other branch.

So, with the closed beta for the new mod stuff it looks like this mod will really be able to make headway!



Unfortunately I've a few other projects ongoing that mean that I won't be able to give EL modding my full attention for a little while. I'll jump in when I can and mess about with things, but I probably won't be re-working my existing mods for the new system for at least a week, and That's about when I'd be able to get to work on this group mod.





However, there is a point I am a bit concerned about. Given the (completely reasonable) NDA thingy, I'm not sure we'll be able to share with each other our progress. Maybe if there's a private forum for the beta users, but we certainly won't be able to post stuff here. So I'm thinking we should break up some of the tasks and see how far we can get.



Here's a list of things that I think don't depend on too many others and should be able to be done independently:

• Get heroes that use the models of non-heroes - They don't have to be coded to have actual stats or abilities or capacities or skill trees, I'm just referring to alt-models
• Design/implement skill tree for cavalry/flying heroes
• Design/implement skill tree for minor factions - It should be easy enough to stick these onto 'dummy' heroes just to test them
• recolour/reskin existing heroes to differentiate them - Not sure about what this actually entails, and not something we need to use in the final mod, but something I'd like to know how to do for adding new heroes
  
  

Do you guys have any other things that one person could do without collaboration that would still be able to fit into the final mod?

The-Cat-o-Nine-Tales wrote:
Yes, that's exactly the way I imagined it should be implemented as, and I am confused why it is not. I even feel like I have seen it handled that way in other games (Maybe Civ IV or V), but I'm not 100% positive on that.

I was going to say that it's probably because that the rendering thing can't read simulation descriptors, but then I remembered that heroes have a "Variation" tag that is read for which of their various models they use. Maybe someone just got it working and nobody wanted to change it for fear of everything breaking. That's usually why my code ends up looking like it does.

Oh, I understand that the mapping file is necessary because of the way the game processes the information. What I am wondering about is why the game works that way. I don't have enough programming knowledge to take a guess at that, and from my limited knowledge, it seems like there could well be a file that explicitly names models, loaded as you start the game and then protected from any "outside" meddling by the simulation. After all "Unit X uses model A, Unit Y uses model B, Unit Z uses Model A" would also seem to only call files multiple times, rather than duplicating names.

ZenTractor wrote:
Basically want would be ideal is a complete rewrite of this function so that unit pawns are defined by a tag the unit entity carries, not by the name of the unit. This is something that I mentioned in the modtools-feedback thread, and I hope can be implimented, but I will be the first to say that it's no mean feat to do.

Yes, that's exactly the way I imagined it should be implemented as, and I am confused why it is not. I even feel like I have seen it handled that way in other games (Maybe Civ IV or V), but I'm not 100% positive on that.

The-Cat-o-Nine-Tales wrote:
And I have to agree with Kingsguard: The tutorial for changing models is very confusing. I don't quite understand why there is no "model" tag in the unitbodydefinitions and the itemdefinitions to define the models on an individual basis.

That's because models aren't defined in the simulation. Essentially, what you're seeing in the mapping.xml file is (I suspect) what the game looks like behind the closed doors. The public files are all nice and easily readable because the mechanical processing that reads those files and processes them is all behind those doors. However, Amplitude have given us the Mapping.xml so that we can can do a quick 'hack' (in the coding sense) to get around the limitations of the game.



What the unit pawn change tutorial does is change how the mapping function reads files, and inserts a new exception that looks for game objects that it's trying to draw that have the name "CustomUnit". If it sees this "CustomUnit" attached to its string it redirects the mapping function to look for another 3d model/texture/animation bundle down a different path. It's complicated because you can't have two things with the same name in a program, but you can tell it to look at and load the same file twice.



It might be possible to do a proper rewrite of the public mapping.xml file on our end to enable any custom unit that is appropriately named/tagged to search for the 3D pawn that we want it to, but this is a non-trivial task, and probably beyond my skills as a programmer. Furthermore, we would have to come to a community agreement as to what standard to use if we all wanted custom units. It would be easier with knowledge of how the black-box of the game's file structures and functionality works, but only Amplitude has that.



Basically want would be ideal is a complete rewrite of this function so that unit pawns are defined by a tag the unit entity carries, not by the name of the unit. This is something that I mentioned in the modtools-feedback thread, and I hope can be implimented, but I will be the first to say that it's no mean feat to do.

Pikou wrote:
If you have any feedback to improve the tutorial it will very valuable for us so don't hesitate to drop a message!

Well, before I forget to bring it up again: The ModdingReference.xml example file is missing entries for localization files. I only got it to work in my mod by examining some of the other tutorial example files.



And I have to agree with Kingsguard: The tutorial for changing models is very confusing. I don't quite understand why there is no "model" tag in the unitbodydefinitions and the itemdefinitions to define the models on an individual basis.



P.S. I agree with pretty much everything ZenTractor brought up.

If you have any feedback to improve the tutorial it will very valuable for us so don't hesitate to drop a message!

Goodnight from Normandy everyone,



I was thinking about starting playing back to EL when I remembered that my armies of clones were lead by cloned Heroes...



Am I the only one tired of the Duke Léofric Whitechapel, Duke Léofric Whitechapel II, Duke Léofric Whitechapel III, Duke Léofric Whitechapel IV in the market ?



Thats something I thought the devs would fix during the Early Access but they never did.



Amplitude already have tons of things to fix and to do for the to-become-great game that is EL.



Is there any volunteers down here to make their job easier and to modify some of this names to make the game a little more immersive and to make the heroes as they are supposed to be (unique and badass !) ?



Personnaly I know I will be doing this mod even if nobody join me, but only for my own version of the game (french version)



So If you want this little improvement to be accessible to everyone as I want it to be, just post there and I will give you the instructions you need

Well, in order to get this picture I cheated...

I just changed the unit size of the Ryder unit from UnitSizeMedium to UnitSizeLarge. I can't really share that xD

If you want to use this model for a hero you will have to make some changes to the mapping.xml file.

I hope you will find all the required information in the tutorial starting page 12 > [ATTACH]17027[/ATTACH] (currently version 4)

Pikou wrote:
Hello everyone,

Seeing you so motivated to fix what you consider as a big issue is really mindblowing

We are currently working on other priorities but in order to help I wanted to add my input on the roadmap ZenTractor wrote.



Even before thinking about pallet variation which is, for the moment, not available, you could easily swap models at first.

Kingsguard is currently trying to add a Cavalry Broken Lords Hero. Why not use the Ryder model?

I made a quick change and the result is interesting even if I agree that minor skin change (color or texture) could be even more interesting.



But if we are able to allow those model changes it could be done afterwards without compatibility problems (considering creation of unit is xml only).



The only thing to keep in mind are the limited animations concerning the weapons each unit can carry.



For the skill part I confirm the flying tree is already implemented and only tiny changes are to be done to adapt it to any faction unit.

Cavalry tree is for scratch though. But it is xml only for sure if you stick to simulation bonus or existing capacities



If you need any help or further information please do not hesitate to ask!

Cheers,

Im trying to use that model but I didnt understand what you said about unitbodydefinition



What you show us is exactly what im trying to do x) May you share the file ?

Hello everyone,

Seeing you so motivated to fix what you consider as a big issue is really mindblowing

We are currently working on other priorities but in order to help I wanted to add my input on the roadmap ZenTractor wrote.



Even before thinking about pallet variation which is, for the moment, not available, you could easily swap models at first.

Kingsguard is currently trying to add a Cavalry Broken Lords Hero. Why not use the Ryder model?

I made a quick change and the result is interesting even if I agree that minor skin change (color or texture) could be even more interesting.



But if we are able to allow those model changes it could be done afterwards without compatibility problems (considering creation of unit is xml only).



The only thing to keep in mind are the limited animations concerning the weapons each unit can carry.



For the skill part I confirm the flying tree is already implemented and only tiny changes are to be done to adapt it to any faction unit.

Cavalry tree is for scratch though. But it is xml only for sure if you stick to simulation bonus or existing capacities



If you need any help or further information please do not hesitate to ask!

Cheers,

ZenTractor wrote:
I can already see some vision creep happening. It's probably best to nail down what we want to do with the mod as soon as reasonably possible.



Let's start with what I want to do:



It has been my goal since I started modding to improve heroes in EL. I see the race/class mix as a great way to 'mix and match' heroes within a system with lots of crossovers but a few solid limits. However, EL as released only allows for one class for each race. This works in one direction: if you want an infantry hero, you have three(4 with DLC) races to choose from, ranged has three, and support has two. However, it doesn't work in the other direction. If you want a trade governor, you get RC. If you want an influence governor, you get drakken. There's a much, much more limited choice. By unlocking race and class there are more variations. I want to add a hero classes to the game for every faction so that there is a heroic equivalent to their base units.

Well it seems we have the same goal here : When I started modding my Mounted Broken Lords Hero, what I had in mind was to provide for each unit their heroic equivalent (Dawn officer heroes, Preacher heroes, Wyvern heroes, "Flying bug" heroes etc...)



I wanted to start by renaming heroes because it was the easiest thing to do and it remains quite important in my opinion. I dont want to see those II and III after heroes name anymore !



There are tons of interresting stuff in what you wrote and I totally agree with the fact that Tree Skills MUST be reworked and that each heroes (depending of their race) should be unique.



Im glad to count you in our little "modding team"

I can already see some vision creep happening. It's probably best to nail down what we want to do with the mod as soon as reasonably possible.



Let's start with what I want to do:



It has been my goal since I started modding to improve heroes in EL. I see the race/class mix as a great way to 'mix and match' heroes within a system with lots of crossovers but a few solid limits. However, EL as released only allows for one class for each race. This works in one direction: if you want an infantry hero, you have three(4 with DLC) races to choose from, ranged has three, and support has two. However, it doesn't work in the other direction. If you want a trade governor, you get RC. If you want an influence governor, you get drakken. There's a much, much more limited choice. By unlocking race and class there are more variations. I want to add a hero classes to the game for every faction so that there is a heroic equivalent to their base units.



However, we must work within the context of EL, to ensure that things 'feel' the same, or at least related to the established gameplay.



Let's talk about what we know about EL heroes, and what is established



One can easily note that the class tree is entirely combat related, and that the racial tree is mostly, but not entirely governing related. As such, often the class of a governor never actually comes into play, and the only difference between a BL hero and a Necro hero in a fight are the capacities of the unit body, not the racial tree (ie: available weapon slots and things like dust heal). Hence, for a complete unlock to be a success, one will have to rework the existing trees in some manner, so that there is a reason to put points into the racial tree for a general, and the class tree for a governor.



Another limitation is the fact that there are not class trees for all classes in the game. There is a flying tree used by one minor faction hero, but there is no cavalry tree. If one wants to make a complete mod, then a cavalry tree will need to be created.



There is currently no way to modify models in the game. While one can use an existing unit body and make them a hero, as in kaldir's minor faction hero mod, the unit starts off with the base statistics of the unit, and can only equip the items that that unit can equip. Further, this unit pawn is limited to the same size as the minor faction pawn, but not the same quantity. We can see that this is not the existing pattern with the game, since WW heroes can use magewands, a weapon that their equivalent unit class cannot.



Further, and somewhat related, it is worth noting that heroes usually are a member of a unit type that a faction has a base unit of. ie: the WW hero is an archer, the RC hero is a mounted archer, and the drakken hero is a support, etc. But this is not exclusively true. The Ardent mages have no support unit, and the Cultists have no infantry unit, yet their heroes are of these classes.



Heroes almost always have the faction-specific trait that the units of a faction share. This is subtle, but I think it is very important for identity.

WW heroes have forest rage

BL heroes have dust heal

Vaulter heroes have technolover

Necro heroes are disease resistant (but notably not disease)

Ardent Mage heroes have power through pain

Drakken heroes have heightened learning

Forgotten heroes are stealthed



Slightly less obvious are:

RC heroes are mounted (+2 strategic map move)

Cultist heroes can convert villages (I think?)



I think that keeping these is crucial, since these traits are the very essence of each faction's units.



However, there are some differences. The Vaulter hero has range 4, but their equivalent unit has 3. Vice-versa, WW hero has 3 and his unit 4. Drakken hero has heal, not shared wisdom, and cannot fly. The Necro hero does not get disease.



From this we can surmise that while the heroes should remain similar to their base units, they can be changed for balance reasons, or to create diversity.



Roadmap of the mod



My original plan was as follows:

1: learn how to mod

2: design hero skill trees for all unit types (ie: cavalry and flyer)

3: get models for these heroes up and running

4: assign generic capacities to hero variants (dust boost 3 and army initiative and things like that) - want 3-5 different instances of each class/race combination for variety

5: names and backstories based upon the above factors

6: rebalance existing trees to better suit the new environment filled with diversity



I stalled out at 3, since I discovered that even simple pallet swapping is more or less impossible with out some sort of developer assistance.



A concern I couldn't find a category for:



One of your primary motivations, Kingsguard, seems to be that you dislike heroes having the same name over and over. While simply adding different names is easy, I think it is a fundamentally silly idea to have two identical heroes with identical abilities in game with different names. I don't think that that helps at all.



This is why I first asked the question I did: If a full rework of how heroes work in EL is planned (ie: unlock race and class), then one won't really need want to change the multiple-instance-of names: there will be plenty of variety in the hero market anyway given the large variety of possibilities. However, if the mod is simply a localization change: names and backstories, then it is sensible to change names of existing heroes to increase variety.



Proposed change to existing hero skill trees:



This is a bit off topic, but another thing I've been thinking of: sometimes there are some interesting General abilities in the Faction tree which I never end up getting because they're not in good positions, but the reverse never happens. A Governor hero never ever wants to dip into the Class tree. I think it'd be nice to have a reason to branch out in that direction in order to get a bit of variety, even if it's something minor. Perhaps infantry heroes are better at organising a watch (+vision) or support heroes manage garrison supplies better (-upkeep or +hp regen)

I was only planning on giving each faction the three classes (with the Cultists possibly getting one of each class). However, I'm considering special synergistic skills for each hero class, so that heroes of a class work well with units of their type (additional defense on infantry, "shock" morale damage on cavalry, etc.)

The-Cat-o-Nine-Tales wrote:
I'd be willing to help as well.

I've been meaning to implement a cavalry class, create heroes of different classes for each faction, and possibly rework the skill trees so that every race and every class offers both combat and governing bonuses (with a focus on combat on class skills and governing on racial skills) so that there are reasons to prefer, for example, a Vaulters Ranged hero over a Wild Walker ranged hero.

The Cavalry class and hero diversity are next on my to-do list right after the material-dependent special abilities, so if I find time to work on it, I'll share my results.

Cool to count you in our ranks !



I agree we must work the differences between each heroes to make them really unique.

Im actually working on a Cavalry Broken Lord hero, I need some more test im not sure it is sold in the market (asked Pikou to look at my files)



My ambition is to create a hero of each class for each race...