Leader Optimization Project Mod for 1.06

[lpremus]

If you structure your mod to be in sequence with the file structure of the game then when you unzip it to the starting dir it should automate the copy and pasting.

I don't have my example with me right now but I could show you if you copy the text from the readme file.

[PBBoeye]

Hancock, I would be willing to help you with this. I've done a lot of stuff for HOI2 and other games. I just have to become familiar with this scripting format.

One thing I'd suggest is keeping a standard leader mod, and then also having this randomized mod for those who want it, using the standard mod as the first step - a base for the randomized mod, if you will. That should keep most people happy, especially those who might complain whole-heartedly about the decisions made on the randomized leader mod.

[lpremus]

Doesn't the game in the options screen already have radomization of leader stuff???

[Winfield S. Hancock]

It does have an option to randomize stats, but what we are talking about here is slightly different. Our goal is to portray the uncertainty Lincoln and Davis faced when promoting commanders. Often, generals who had been successful at the brigade and division level werent as successful at higher ranks, handling larger bodies of men. Or, generals who had been mediocre at division command really performed superbly in command of a corps. In the game, once a leader's stats are set (either by taking the scenario as is, or using randomization), they basically keep the same stats as they move up in the ranks. Thus, the player knows to always promote Sherman and Grant, and never promote Hood. What we want to create is a situation where you are taking a chance every time you promote a commander to the next level -- maybe he will work out, maybe he wont, maybe he will be even better. Without this mod, you always know what you get at the next level, an advantage Lincoln and Davis did not have.

[Pdubya64]

One thing I'd suggest is keeping a standard leader mod, and then also having this randomized mod for those who want it, using the standard mod as the first step - a base for the randomized mod, if you will. That should keep most people happy, especially those who might complain whole-heartedly about the decisions made on the randomized leader mod.

I concur. A standard version will most likely suit many people, plus the randomized version for those who would prefer a change of pace.

[PBBoeye]

Without this mod, you always know what you get at the next level, an advantage Lincoln and Davis did not have.

IMO, one of the key points of the mod. Sure, your fav general or two might start off historical, but what if by chance he goes... awry? hehehe

[Nial]

Just a thought. Kinda a-historical for Stoney Jackson to be a 1-star. He was after all promoted to 2-star on Oct. 7, 61 right after the first Bull run. Considering modding him back in as 2-star. If I was a better modder Id create a promotion event for him. But that maybe a bit past my pay grade. Considered just coping and pasting an existing promotion event and changing it to fit him. But not sure whether that would screw other stuff up.

other than that......LOVE your mod. Excellent work....One thing that I am very pleased with is the dedication of this community and the AGEOD team to continualy improve an already incredible game.

Cheers


Nial

[PBBoeye]

Hmmm. I thrashed a unit or two with Dr. Stone and very quickly he was up for promotion. So I don't think it takes much with him; he seems to be on the cusp of promotion anyhow.

Actually, I like it because he has to 'earn' his promotion by kicking some Feds around. Which, given some forces, he does rather well.

[PBBoeye]

Anyhow, just wanted to state that from what I see the v1.06c beta will clash with the Leader Mod. ID numbers for the leaders are off now, as new leaders have been introduced.

[PBBoeye]

Hancock,

I've been thinking that it may be a good idea to use a buffer between existing (and future) AGEod events and leader UIDs. Basically add 200 or 300 to the last current AGEod leader UID and start your leader UIDs from that point. Same idea for the events, maybe even a large gap (given the difficult nature of creating them, maybe like 1000).

I am not 100% sure the game will accept a large gap between the last incremental AGEod-created leader and the first Leader Mod leader UID. I can't see why not - we were able to do that in HOI2, but not sure how it will be here.

But that's the only way I can see around having Leader Mod work overwritten by new patches and changes that are put out, such as the current v1.06c.

Thoughts?

[McNaughton]

Hancock,

I've been thinking that it may be a good idea to use a buffer between existing (and future) AGEod events and leader UIDs. Basically add 200 or 300 to the last current AGEod leader UID and start your leader UIDs from that point. Same idea for the events, maybe even a large gap (given the difficult nature of creating them, maybe like 1000).

I am not 100% sure the game will accept a large gap between the last incremental AGEod-created leader and the first Leader Mod leader UID. I can't see why not - we were able to do that in HOI2, but not sure how it will be here.

But that's the only way I can see around having Leader Mod work overwritten by new patches and changes that are put out, such as the current v1.06c.

Thoughts?

You cannot leave any gaps in the UID, as it looks sequentially from A to B. It is possible though to set up 'dummy' UIDs that are just empty units and models, but take up space in the UID (so you won't have to move units and models around constantly). Every time a new patch is developed some of the 'dummy' UIDs get eliminated.

However, the best bet, to make things simpler, is to do everything in EXCEL format. You then are working with just one file, easy to spot errors and inconsistencies, as well as to move things around and make new UIDs when patches require it.

[PBBoeye]

You cannot leave any gaps in the UID, as it looks sequentially from A to B.

OK, thanks for that verification.

It looks like updating the Leader Mod from version to version could be a royal PITA, which makes me think it is only reasonable to do for each official version. However, at some point Pocus and crew will discontinue the adding of generals, so that is good.

Now let me ask - does this also apply to event scripts? Or could we create our own script file?

That said, having played with the leader mod and without, I might have to switch back to v1.06 because there isn't any real contest between which I prefer....

[Pocus]

Use Excel yes! This is simpler for everybody.

As McNaughton says, you can't leave gap, but we can create dummies UID. Lets say that for Models, UID 699 to 1000 are reserved for official additions (which should not be too numerous now) and that you can start from UID 1001+

For Units, 1087 to 1300 are reserved officially.

As for scripts, you don't have such problems. The name of an even is also the title (to be localized), so as long as you find a unique name, you are safe. For example LeaderAddition1_MyMod is a perfectly valid event name.

[Pocus]

The latest AACW DB can now be downloaded with such a changes.

[Bloody7th]

Hancock:

I'd like to volunteer my services to help with the randomization mod. Is there a list of the promotable generals in question so that I might start researching them?

Thanks!

[PBBoeye]

Dear Lord - I hope you guys can get the Leader Mod setup for v1.06d (or v1.07 or whatever). I absolutely love that thing.

[gbs]

Dear Lord - I hope you guys can get the Leader Mod setup for v1.06d (or v1.07 or whatever). I absolutely love that thing.

I second what PBBoeye just stated..

[tagwyn]

Dear Friend: "ole Burn" cannot be blamed for the late arrival of the pontoons at Fredricksburg. The failure was in the units delegated to ship these pontoons. L3

[Bloody7th]

True enough about the pontoons, but where Burnside failed was in trying to continue with his plan even though the element of surprise was long gone. A better general would have adjusted the plan and not gone ahead with a suicidal frontal assault on a nearly impregnable position.

[Bloody7th]

Does installing 1.06d essentially wipe out the leader mod if you had it installed?

[McNaughton]

Does installing 1.06d essentially wipe out the leader mod if you had it installed?

Yes and no, it will overwrite all of the old generals that were modified, but not touch the new ones added. However, it will overwrite the LocalIdentities file which has the UID which means that there will be problems. Wait until Hancock returns from vacation to sort out his mod, as he is the one with a true understanding of its capabilities.

However, should the mod be ported to the Excel file it would be very easy to correct.

[PBBoeye]

There's a thing to come back from vacation to - "welcome baaaaack!"

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[PBBoeye]

I was only seeing it in [color="RoyalBlue"]328 (Sherman)[/color] and [color="RoyalBlue"]249 (McClellan)[/color]. The others were fixed in the latest file I have.

However, the USA Leaders.sct file has not been corrected on:

I found a little typo in the USA Leaders.sct:

SetName = Mid62' West Division Generals
Apply
CreateUnit
SetType = $uni_USA_TSherman
SetName = T. Sherman
Apply
CreateUnit
SetType = $uni_USA_Hovey
[color="Red"]Set Name[/color] = A. Hovey
Apply

Should be [color="RoyalBlue"]SetName[/color] as for Sherman above.
I/The game got it after starting a new April '61 Campaign and with debug mode on (script parsing error).

Looks like I found two more typos in the USA Leaders.sct

Conditions
MinDate = 1862/01/01
MaxDate = 1862/03/31
EvalUnqUnit = Edward R. Canby;NOT
SelectRegion = $[color="Red"]SouthWest, TX[/color]
PickFromRegList = NotEnemy;NotAdj
GenMsg
SelectRegion = $[color="Red"]St. Louis[/color], MO;CondSkip
PickFromRegList = NotEnemy
GenMsg
EvalRegionSel = NULL

It should be $[color="RoyalBlue"]South West[/color] (split words and without ',[color="Red"]TX[/color]') and $[color="RoyalBlue"]Saint Louis[/color]. Again, the error message is probably only shown with debug mode enabled.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[PBBoeye]

Yeah, but I am not sure the devs would pick up any corrections needed for their files in the Leader Mod thread. All the same, it did reveal a few errors in the Leader Mod files.

[Pocus]

Done, but PBBoeye is right, you should not remark these things in a modding thread.

[gbs]

Are there plans to update this MOD to 1.06d standards??

[McNaughton]

Are there plans to update this MOD to 1.06d standards??

Hancock is on vacation, when he returns I am 100% sure he will get on this.

[PBBoeye]

Thankfully with v1.06d, the devs have given us a defined range where we can start incorporating changes.