Has anything really changed?
 

This is a long post and deals with many topics, and I apologise in advance, the real question is right at the end, so feel free to skip there if you wish.

I'd just like to start by saying that the main reason why I play Space Empires as opposed to all the flashier 4X games out there is the sheer modability of the game, but also because it is so simple to mod, you don't need a degree in programming to mod SE, unlike most other 'moddable' games.
Despite being far more moddable than most games, there were times in Space Empires IV when I found something I wanted to add was impossible within the coding of the game, so when Space Empires V was announced I was very excited by the possibilities of new modding possibilities.
When Starfury came out it looked like there was the possibility of weapon facing for SE5, unfortunately, there isn’t, only damage facing, which seems rather pointless to me without weapon facing and thus very disappointing. Furthermore, I was hoping for some sort of area-of-effect weapons or even arcing weapons that go from ship to ship etc.
From what I've seen of the demo and the forums, none of these things are possible, in fact, I wonder if anything is possible at in SE5 that isn't in SE4.
Indeed, the new features of SE5 have actually made it more difficult for someone like me to mod the game. For example, while moving from 2D to 3D was a necessary step forward and real-time tactical combat presents many new opportunities, it has reduced the scope for customisation. Shipsets are much harder and more complex to make in 3D, so I wonder if we will have the same large resource of high-quality shipsets available for SE5 as we did for SE4.
Further, and more worryingly, the new formula system seems to add an unnecessary level of difficulty to modding, personally I don’t see what was wrong with the old find and replace method of multiple components. Further, I prefer the old, more flexible, method of choosing weapon damage (i.e. 15 15 20 20 10 10 etc.) and am very disappointed to see it go (unless one can still use the old method to determine weapon damage, in which case I would be obliged if someone could tell me how).

The real question is: What options are available for modders in SE5 that weren't in SE4?

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

Most shipset authors for SE4 used normal 3d modeling apps to make their sets, so they will be fine with SE5. It's just the few that used Doga that will have troubles.

If you really want to, you can recreate a damage model like SE4 with iff() structures... I don't see why you would want to though, since most anything reasonable can be modeled as a function.

The SE4 method for components/facilities/etc. was needlessly tedious, prone to random, hard to detect typographical errors in the middle of families. It is a lot easier to manage the components/etc. as families than as individual items, especially for larger families.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

More flexible? SE4 had 20 damage ranges. SE5 has five HUNDRED.

You can do the SE4 system in SE5. It's just a bit more fiddly to create. And if you don't want a perfect match, its easier.

anti-proton beam XII, SE4:
Weapon Damage At Rng := 65 60 60 55 55 50 50 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Same thing, SE5: 65 - ([%Range%] / 2) - iif([%Range%] > 80, 10000, 0).

The difference is you have to do it ONCE in SE5, if you do the forumla properly, and in SE4 you'd have to input it 12 times.

SE5 has a built-in mod loader. SE4 does not.

SE5 has modable damage types, planet types, and unit types. SE4 does not.

SE5 has a much more flexible way of making components available. Want to make it so you can research Physics OR Chemistry to get a certain component? You can do that.

SE5 makes the "Tech grid" approach of SE4 look clunky. If you want to, say make missile damage dependant on one tech, missile speed on another, and missile range on a third, you can easily do that. In SE4 it was a tedious process involving HUNDREDS of components, which meant you could only do it for a few items before the file got too large to load.

SE4's combat speed for ships with Strategic Speed /2. In SE5 you can define combat speed seperately, along with acceleration, turning, etc.

Do I need to go on?

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

Indeed, as a modder I look at SE5 like a kid in a candy store. There's so many things we can play with, I don't know where to begin!

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

I would never have even bought se5 if it weren't for the real-time combat.

As for moddability, It may seem lean now but no doubt down the road you will find yourself swamped with choices for mods/shipsets etc as people who shrugged off the earlier games as primitive take a second look because of the 3d engine.

I know several of my friends have.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

Alot of the AI is exposed to scripts now too.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

Just FYI:

There is an explicit SE4-style damage at range field in components.txt, so you don't have to use the formulae.

<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>Weapon Space At Range Distance Increment := 5.0
Weapon Space Min Damage At Range := 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 0
Weapon Space Max Damage At Range := 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0
Weapon Space To Hit Modifier At Range := 50 45 40 35 30 25 10 0</pre><hr />

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

I was wondering what those fields were for. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

Oh sweet

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

How do you specify which set of values to use? Or does it just add the "modifier" formula to the base value from "damage at range?"

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

This is very heartening, and so are all the other options available, but I must admit my real wish is for more weaponry options (AoE and arcing weapons).

When you say damage types, I assume you are talking about damage to various components and such? Could you make it so only a few specific components are targeted (i.e. a weapon that only destroys quantum and ion engines).

Another question I have then is whether some form of advanced modding or scripting language could be used to modify the game, so as to allow for things normally impossible, such as area of effect weapons, maybe even extra resources or the like.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

Arcing weapons? You don't often fight near black holes...

I did submit a fairly simple proposal for generalized submunitions, which would have allowed you to simulate area of effect, along with "cone of death" stuff, supply stealing shuttles going to the enemy and coming back, chain lightning type stuff and more.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

I'm not sure what you meant about the black holes, unless there is some physics point I'm missing here. I don't think I made myself clear the first time, but I mean the chain-lightning weapons you refer to.
When you say 'submit a proposal', do you mean ask Aaran for it to be implemented? Or have you found a way to introduce them into a game? Please forgive my ignorance, I don't actually own the game yet.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

By damage types I mean things like "half to shields" "skips armor" and the like. But yeah, you could make a weapon type that only targets quantum and ion engines, leaving the other types alone.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

It was a suggestion to Aaron.

Basically, an addition to the damageTypes.txt file that specified additional weapons to spawn/fire when the original shot detonates. Plus formulae to determine what should be targetted and which direction the new weapons would travel in.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

I have another suggestion for Aaron, use XML in the next Space Empires, building 3rd party editors is going to be soooo much easier.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

Hear hear to weapon arcs. I like the directional damage, but I also agree that without directional weapons directional damage is a little out of place.

Also I am failing to see how you can't pack a lot of armor onto the front of your ship and leave your back defenseless. (such as it is in star fury). Allthough the benefits would probably be outweighed by the increased CPU time I think it should be an option.

Directional damage, weapons and armor placement should all be toggle options.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

Is it really limited to 255 systems again? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/shock.gif
Please tell me this is just the limit for the demo version.

Where is the true feature list with the correct values BTW? The SF page can not be right:

Large Galaxy: 100 solar systems with 15 planets each.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

Yes, it is. However the systems are twice the size of the SE4 systems.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

Aye, good. GalCiv II has the same limit of 256 systems, I did not know that before... no problem.

I just like the kind of infinite game, things like Proportions for SEIV. A mod like this would be something I'd crave for.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

Actually its not a 255 system limit in SEV, it may say that in the data file but I know people have made SEV maps that are easily over 255 systems. Since SEV is just an enhanced Starfury engine this makes sense because Starfury you could have like 300-400 systems. The random map generator in SEV however might not like a number higher than 255 so you might have to add new systems by hand.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

I was one of those who was disappointed, that the maximum system number was not higher than 255.
But as I see how the game performs on my Athlon 64 3400+ computer, I think my hardware is much more the limitation. The turn processing time of a game with 255 systems at stardate 2430.0 might be just too long. It reminds of of SE IV on my old P II 233MHz computer.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

I modded in a game of 250 systems. I had to keep maximizing the system view to see the different systems since everything was so compact the systems kind of squished together.

But with that many systems, the End of Turn Processing bug inevitably came up.

I was hoping for more than 255 systems too, but after playing about 100 turns in a 250 system game, I'm pretty sure now that say, a 500 system game would be... unwieldy. I think you'd have to give over large portions of your empire to ministers and give up a lot of micromanagment.

I'd be happy if I could get 250 systems in a game. That would be pretty epic...

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

I have a turn based test game with 203 systems run on minister control till 2402.5 without problems. When did your End of Turn Processing bug show up?

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

I can say for sure that the 255 limit does not exist. I changed the settings.txt to max out at 300 and used 300 for both ends of the range on a large quad. Not sure what the real upper limit for max systems is.

http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/455...emscopynw1.png

Takes the game forever and a day to generate the map and do player placement, though.

I think 300 systems would turn into a micro-managment nightmare!

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

Hmm. The comment in settings.txt must be a leftover from SE4, then.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

Well, out of 4 modded games I played where I only changed the max systems, 3 of them hung around turn 50 with End of Turn Processing.

The more I think about it though, and this is just a wild guess, I think that troops and ground combat cause this issue. I'm not using troops any more (I just glass the planet and recolonize http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif ) and I dont' get the End of Turn processing bug.

Maybe I'll reuse my mod and try a big game again and try and narrow down the issue...

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

i do not use ground forces and my games still hangup on the end of turn processing. i have not played on a small map so did not realize the size may be part of the delay. i have had games start having problems as early as 2401.0 and 2 last until around 2420.0 b4 having problems.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

Never had this hangup on the end of turn processing so far.
So if you use the last savegame and go through it again, will it happen constantly or is it a random hangup?

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

It can be both - but in the majority of cases even repeatable crashes can be averted by switching the AIs over to human control for a turn. Anyway, in theory most of this has been dealth with in 1.09-1.11...

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

I've had the end-of-turn game hanging problem happen several times, during the processing after all players. Now I use autosave for every turn and if it hangs, use CTRL-ALT-DEL to end the game and restart, then I can continue on from the last turn it saved.

But it also seems that the hanging problem only happens if I've played continuously for an hour or two. So I'm getting into the habit of saving and exiting the game every so often and restarting the game. I've also noticed that if I don't do that, the game runs more and more slowly over time.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

Here's another concrete example:

In SEIV, many mods implimented "native" colonization tech- that is, if you started out as a Rock dwelling race, it was harder to research Ice technology, and vice versa.

In SEIV, this took three racial traits. In SE5, it can be handled with three tech areas, WITHOUT any interaction from the player at all. There's no confusion and no extra racial traits.

Re: Has anything really changed?
 

Actually, it is possible to do it without any traits in SE4 too, exploiting the way unique techs work. Check out the Colony Tech Mod 2 over on SEnet.