Mod requests for the devs after release (edited 29/5)

Request #1. Gamemodifiers for DefendableDamage that stack with group size.

Problem: Units with multiple members have no good way to use modded abilities because the ability does not naturally scale with the members in the group. For example, if I have a special ability that says it "deals 5 fire attack and enemy has a 5% chance to lose next turn", this ability will yield exactly the same results if performed by a 1-man unit or a 9-man unit. Because of this, it is impossible to add active abilities to units with more than one member.

We can multiply values with their TroopCount, but it is not the same as having several individual rolls made. Consider an attack that has a 50% chance to miss due to accuracy vs dodge. If a 9-man unit uses this, it will either count as 9 men hitting or 9 men missing. In addition, multiplying by Troopcount is not a viable way to multiply damage because 5 men dealing 5 cutting damage each is not the same as 1 man dealing 25 cutting damage. The attack vs defense formula does not work like that.

Does the UI need change to reflect this? No. We can put in descriptions that the ability stacks with members in a unit, but there is no requirement for the modifiers to display dynamic text. Example: "Each member in a unit attempts to strike the enemy for 5 fire attack".

How is the AI going to interpret it? Given the new priority tags that Frogboy are implementing, and the fact that these units are not going to be swarmed in abilities (we keep them simple) the AI does not need modifying to make things like this work.

Thinking rationally, is it a major code change or a small change - or just an addition? It is a rather big change, because currently all abilities are single-effect. This would need to be rolled as a multi-effect, like Ranged Attacks are. Ranged Attacks have a separate set of modifiers to multiply an ability, and that is troublesome in itself.

How is it going to be reflected in XML tags that we can use? Either as a tag directly in the <Spelldef> called something like <MultiplyByUnitMembers>, or it can also be put inside each gamemodifier. This is a rather big issue because if 9 men are going to roll the same type of ability, there may be huge stacking issues. I would therefore prefer if the tag was put inside the gamemodifier, not the spelldef. That way, we could have an ability that "lowers initiative on target by -2, and each attacker attempts to strike the enemy for 5 fire attack". Note the difference here - the fire attack is rolled for each unit member, but the initiative loss obviously should NOT stack. The tag should not be restricted to modifiers with DefendableDamage.
        <GameModifier>
            <ModType>Unit</ModType>
            <Attribute>DefendableDamage</Attribute>
            <AttackStat>UnitStat_Attack_Fire</AttackStat>
            <MultiplyByUnitMembers>1</MultiplyByUnitMembers>
        </GameModifier>

Does it help anything for the un-modded content in the game? Yes, throwing knives currently suffer from this issue for trained units. The Throwing Knife ability currently deals one single 6 cutting attack strike. This damage is not in any way multiplied by the amount of members in the unit. A 9-man unit using Throwing Knives will deal exactly the same amount of damage as a 1-man unit will.

Note here why scaling abilities with group size is important. Because the cost of each ability scales with the unit size. A single Throwing Knife costs 2 metal - 9 throwing knives cost 18 metal. Therefore, each paid-for knife should get a roll to attack.

And most importantly - how does it help the modder in specific ways and what am I going to do with it? This change is "unlocking the flood gates" for putting special abilities on our trained multi-member units. With the aid of AI priority tags that frogboy are working on, this means we can give units abilities like: "Strike a Mounted enemy for 50% extra damage" to a spearman unit. "All members attempt to strike an enemy target, each hit reducing their moves by 1." to a Warg-rider or a Harasser unit.

The grander purpose is to allow us to create a deeper tactical combat by introducing additional choices in Unit Design AND in combat actions. Specifically, I am going to make 10 standard actions available to all factions, then 1 or 2 for each of my ExpandedFactions in Stormworld.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Edit: Deleted this request. It really is much worse than jshores request below.

NOTE: The request in this reply is largely superseded by this request from jshores: https://forums.elementalgame.com/433089/get;3242322

I believe everything in this request is possible to do as a result of implementing his request, and his request allows for more variations because it is dynamic as well. Which means his request is smarter and should be preferred to implementing this request.

Successfully updated karma reason!

as a side note we should know or at least have an idea of what is gonna be at release and the basic plans

anyway the easier things i needed were

#3

calculation for stats different from "value"

Does the UI need change to reflect this?

no its an internal thing

How is the AI going to interpret it?

ai shouldnt be touched by this, but eventually if we will get more parameters to manipulate with ai behaviour this can help greatly

Thinking rationally, is it a major code change or a small change - or just an addition?

should be very small, probably its partially implemented already

How is it going to be reflected in XML tags that we can use?

it will only allow to use already existing tag as result for calculations

Does it help anything for the un-modded content in the game?

surely it could, allowing other stats to be involved in spells, skills, effects etc

And most importantly - how does it help the modder in specific ways and what am I going to do with it?

it would make possible to create different kind and more dynamic skills, involving various unit status into final result and allowing more interesting traits and skills to be bound to each other, it could also allow to make effects and countereffects for spells and skills manipulating each other

as a final note i think this coudl allow modders(and devs) to slightly manipulate ai behaviour in a simple way (ie adding calculations to ai priorities so that certain spells are less likely if the caster is...[ ] )

a very easy change that opens a great scenario

+1

Successfully updated karma reason!

Request #4 Item prerequisites beyond level restrictions

Problem: Currently, we can only restrict items based on the level of sovereigns and champions. It would be nice to be able to restrict the use of items based on other things such as unit stats (hidden or otherwise) and traits. This would allow modders to create items that require specific paths, specific traits and/or specific unit stats.

Does the UI need change to reflect this?

Not at all, as long as the prerequisites appear in the item hover over just like level requirements do.

Edit: Added the following UI information from Heavenfall's post below:

However, your solution may require UI changes. It needs to treat an item that isn't meeting the requirements as an unequippable item. The item should not be equippable through any of the ways we equip stuff - the "item found" popup, the trade window or store window in various ways. If they don't add tolerance for this new prereq the item is just going to be equippable anyway because the UI says it can be.

Also, small tooltips appearing over the equip buttons and the item in question wouldn't hurt. Ie, item requires Path_of_Assassin_Unitstat. When we hover over item it says "This item cannot be equipped because this unit is missing a prerequisite stat called X".

How is the AI going to interpret it?

The AI should evaluate the prerequisites in the same manner that it evaluates level restrictions. If the AI finds an item it cannot equip due to not meeting a prerequisite, it should go to the inventory.

Thinking rationally, is it a major code change or a small change - or just an addition?

This should be a minor code change that introduces new functionality. The XML should be similar to the level restriction XML.

How is it going to be reflected in XML tags that we can use?

The code for the new functionality should be placed in a prerequisite tag for items and look similar to the prerequisite tags for traits.

Does it help anything for the un-modded content in the game?

It could be utilized in the vanilla game to create items that are specific to certain paths, or that require specific traits. For example, a giant maul that requires the Strength trait, or a venomous dagger that requires the Path of Assassin.

And most importantly - how does it help the modder in specific ways and what am I going to do with it?

It helps the modder by offering new prerequisites for items. I intend to use it to create Path specific gear for the vanilla path traits and custom path traits.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Request #5 Quest Triggers

Give us several more ways to trigger an event. Right now only population, turns and goodiehuts can start a quest. Since quests are also being used to do random events, it makes sense to have them trigger from more factors. For the sake of consideration, these are the specific triggers I think are necessary: Building completed, technology researched, faction killed, quest completed, spell used, city captured, faction power reached.

Does the UI need change to reflect this?

No. Just an XML thing.

How is the AI going to interpret it?

Not any different than any other quest, except that it comes from a different factor

Thinking rationally, is it a major code change or a small change - or just an addition?

It's pretty easy to implement. I am just talking about a simple trigger definition. The only time consuming aspect would be testing them and I am willing to do all of that.

How is it going to be reflected in XML tags that we can use?

<Attribute>ThirdBookOfTheMagi</Attribute>

<UnitClass>SpellLawQuest_001</UnitClass>

The trigger type is simple enough to define within the current structure. We can already define the quest we want to see. Either Attribute or Str would define the tech or building or whathaveyou that is going to trigger it. We already have a great system for quests and events. This would exponentially increase the variety of implementation a quest can have.

Does it help anything for the un-modded content in the game?

Since we are not going to see too many more quests added, not really. But it could have if implemented sooner. And since there is an expansion coming, this would take quests to the next level in terms of immersion.

And most importantly - how does it help the modder in specific ways and what am I going to do with it?

There are alot of diplomatic events I would like to add to the game that I think should already be there. A faction reaching extreme power in a variety of ways should have events unfold that mimic the tales of ancient intrigue. But we can't have any of that, unless achieving things in the game can trigger events and quests. Modders can think of a myriad of awesome things that can happen from faction power getting too high, endgame techs being unlocked or even dark spells being used. The key is to have these rooted in the trigger system, so that a hundred quests have the possibility of happening, leaving the world to feel truly alive and wondrous.

I am working on a ton of quests that are linked to items or locations on the map. But a map gets cleared pretty quickly, so I have a limited space to work with. If I could attach some of these quests to actions that the user is doing, I could add a ton more story. And since it is coming from player action and interaction with other factions, those quests will blur the line between gameplay and storytelling. That is my overall goal and this is how I would best be able to do it.

Successfully updated karma reason!

jshores, I have edited request #2 to indicate that I could reach the same solution using your request instead. It really is a better idea altogether.

However, your solution may require UI changes. It needs to treat an item that isn't meeting the requirements as an unequippable item. The item should not be equippable through any of the ways we equip stuff - the "item found" popup, the trade window or store window in various ways. If they don't add tolerance for this new prereq the item is just going to be equippable anyway because the UI says it can be.

Also, small tooltips appearing over the equip buttons and the item in question wouldn't hurt. Ie, item requires Path_of_Assassin_Unitstat. When we hover over item it says "This item cannot be equipped because this unit is missing a prerequisite stat called X".

Edit: In other words, very similar to how the UI treats an item that a unit lacks a level to equip.

+1

Successfully updated karma reason!

I've added your notes on the UI implications to my post above. Thanks

+1

Successfully updated karma reason!

You guys re my heroes. These are the things that I have been running into for both E:WoM and FE for attempting to mod stuff and it either not working as intended or just being ignored by the program. +1 for both of you guys.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Sending this to the top. I read somewhere else that modding may receive attention in the next week or so. So, get your requests in using the format above.

Successfully updated karma reason!

A tutorial for idiots like myself ._.

Successfully updated karma reason!

cardinaldirection

Join Date 08/2012

+18

Quoting heyhellowhatsnew,

reply 11

A tutorial for idiots like myself ._.

https://forums.elementalgame.com/434652 < third link from the bottom.

Successfully updated karma reason!

This a good place to recommend 'snaking' be added back in?

Request #6. Snaking Development for Cities

Problem: Cities currently cannot snake to forest and river resources. Currently the AI does not take this into account, but thinks it still can snake thus causing suboptimal building locations to be chosen.

Does the UI need change to reflect this? No.

How is the AI going to interpret it? I would imagine AI would naturally accept the inclusion of these buildings and upgrades.

Thinking rationally, is it a major code change or a small change - or just an addition? Not sure. Snaking existed before, so I imagine the code is there for it to exist again.

How is it going to be reflected in XML tags that we can use?

Does it help anything for the un-modded content in the game? Yes. Gives players the ability to experiance the growth of their cities. Also gives AI better cities in which to fight the players with.

And most importantly - how does it help the modder in specific ways and what am I going to do with it? It helps the gamer.

The other major beef I would love is in inclusion of Road Segment construction, (upgradable like outposts, and enchantable from the connected city)

Request #7. Road Segments

Problem: Currently roads are auto-built, always with only a single connection to the road network. There should be a way to build segments of road through the city building queue.

Does the UI need change to reflect this? I don't think so. Roads already build by segment. Although, options for building the roads would need to exist. Also, if the roads are to be selectable so that they can be upgraded then yes, a copy of the outpost code would have to be transposed.

How is the AI going to interpret it? Some sort of weighting would have to be given to the roads and that weighting be reduced for each additional road connected to a city for the AI not to spam production, but also for them not to ignore it.

Thinking rationally, is it a major code change or a small change - or just an addition? I would imagine this to be a fairly large expansion of code.

How is it going to be reflected in XML tags that we can use?

Does it help anything for the un-modded content in the game? Yes. Gives players the ability to have more control over their roads layouts without spamming them.

And most importantly - how does it help the modder in specific ways and what am I going to do with it? It helps the gamer.

Here is my original concept notes:

Have three available levels of road: Path, Road, Highway

Be able to build a PATH through a city queue. When the build is complete, the UI asks you were your 'end' (or 'sink') destination to be. The start ('source') location must be the city where the PATH is being built. The end location must be another city or outpost that you control. The build produces a PATH along the most efficient route, granting +1 movement to units traveling along it.
You may select the PATH, as you would an outpost, and there will be an upgrade button on it. Upgrading puts the PATH back into the queue of the source city, which then upgrades the PATH into a ROAD once complete, granting +2 movement bonus while traveling along its trajectory. This upgrade could be made available with the 'construction' tech.
You may again select the ROAD and upgrade, this time turning into a HIGHWAY, granting +3 movement while traveling along its trajectory. This upgrade can be made available through tech in the military tree....perhaps something like 'mobilization' (if it's a little harder to get than 'construction')

In addition, there can be two more city enchantment spells available that focus on further upgrading all the roads connected to the source city where the enchantment is placed. Naturally this enchantment requires the essence to cast.

Ride like the Wind: Air Spell (perhaps lvl2), granting an additional +1 movement for travel along all roads SOURCED from the enchanted city.
The Golden Road: Earth Spell (perhaps lvl4), granting x2 movement for travel along all roads SOURCED from the enchanted city.
Note that essence availablity may require a tweak to take the new enchantment type into account

(Yes, this means that if you had a city with highways sourced that has 'ride like the wind' AND 'the golden road', units travelling along those roads would gain an addition +8 movment.)

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting GFireflyE,

reply 13

This a good place to recommend 'snaking' be added back in?

I imagine you knew the answer to that question before you answered this:

"And most importantly - how does it help the modder in specific ways and what am I going to do with it? It helps the gamer."

Please don't troll this thread. It's reasonable for us to make modding requests in the modding subforum, and we would 100% support logical gameplay changes submitted in another thread.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting jshores,

reply 14

Quoting GFireflyE,
reply 13

This a good place to recommend 'snaking' be added back in?

I imagine you knew the answer to that question before you answered this:

"And most importantly - how does it help the modder in specific ways and what am I going to do with it? It helps the gamer."

Please don't troll this thread. It's reasonable for us to make modding requests in the modding subforum, and we would 100% support logical gameplay changes submitted in another thread.

Wasn't trolling thank you very much. I take my FE very seriously. Well, serious enough not to troll threads anyways.

Seriously want to have snaking available again. I'm no expert programming, and if there is someone out there that is able and willing and wanting to put together a modular patch then that would be really awesome and appriciated.

Wasn't sure about putting it here because it is a really small change, but since the question was asking for ideas, I figured I'd offer the top two on my list. ....

See https://forums.elementalgame.com/434622/page/1/#3257458; reply #5 for details as to why modding the snaking feature back into the game would be beneficial.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Firefly,

If you're not trolling, I don't think you understand the purpose of the thread. It's not a request thread to modders to make certain mods. It's a request thread to the developers requesting mod functionality we currently don't have.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Frogboy

Join Date 03/2001

+2394

Would anyone object if I just sticky this thread so we can consolidate here?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting Frogboy,

reply 17

Would anyone object if I just sticky this thread so we can consolidate here?

Awesome

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting jshores,

reply 16

Firefly,

If you're not trolling, I don't think you understand the purpose of the thread. It's not a request thread to modders to make certain mods. It's a request thread to the developers requesting mod functionality we currently don't have.

AH!. Yes, I completely misunderstood. My bad.

Saw the modding suggestions and figured it was about making mods.....not about how to open up modding potential....

sorry.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting Frogboy,

reply 17

Would anyone object if I just sticky this thread so we can consolidate here?

Yes please?

Successfully updated karma reason!

DsRaider

Join Date 11/2008

+70

There are a bunch of things I would like to see tweaked to make more modding possible.

1. Roads: Currently trading, road building and caravans are almost completely unmodable. I would like tags so we can create roads between cities in different ways like spells, units, abilities, and treaties. Not just a single tile at a time but also the ability to generate roads between 2 points or cities. I would also like to be able to create custom types of roads with different effects like stat modifiers, resource multipliers, upkeeps, and unique trading caravans. I would also like to be able to modify the effects of caravans with more freedom and without going into the ElementalDefs file. Caravans simply have a <IsCaravan> tag. I would like this opened up so we can use it's component parts like being able to enter hostile territory, producing different types of roads, and other things. This would definitely help with total conversions and adding more depth to trade or road building.

2. Abilities: There are several abilities that I would like to see more open. These include A_EnslaveDefeated, A_Enslave, A_QuestBonus, and UnitStat_ManaFromKills. With each of these tags there is currently no way to change the resources you get from them, or use other tags to accomplish the same thing. I would like to be able to select which resource they produce. This would allow me to create cool new abilities or content like looting. In addition for A_EnslaveDefeated it would be nice to be able to choose which type of unit death triggers it so you can get gold for killing Beasts for instance, and some way to scale UnitStat_ManaFromKills for either the size of the unit using it or the size of the group killed would be nice. Oh yeah and I tried changing the Heroic A_QuestBonus to give research but it is hardcoded to only give either Influence or Prestige, instead of two separate tags this should be one that you can use to give any resource.

3. Races to Factions: When you create a custom race there doesn't appear to be any way to provide custom factions based off that race with a certain building style, spellbook, or other things without editing xml. This appears to happen automatically with the ingame races. I would like to be able to add tags to custom races that determine the spellbook, buildingstyle, wallstyle, and cityhubs of factions based off that race. Having to manually edit each faction based off that race is annoying.

UI: No changes needed.

AI: Depending on how you use the roads editing it might require some changes to the AI. They rest are fine.

Major Change: No

Successfully updated karma reason!

Werewindlefr

Join Date 03/2007

+28

Request #7. Random tags for GameModifier

Problem: It is currently inconvenient to assign a probability for a certain GameModifier to succeed. This makes the creation of abilities which have a change to trigger (as opposed to "triggered every time") difficult to implement in the current XMLs. This also had a history of breaking some of the buildings' intended purpose (adventurer's guild, I'm looking at you).

Does the UI need change to reflect this? Absolutely not. Just write the odds in the spell/ability/building description.

How is the AI going to interpret it? I think the proper use of priority tags can help here. Plus, some things like bash already have random chances.

Thinking rationally, is it a major code change or a small change - or just an addition? I believe it should be achievable with just a small code change - when that GameModifier is executed, roll a random number, ignore the GameModifier if it's below the required threshold.

How is it going to be reflected in XML tags that we can use? I would see a <ChanceToTrigger> tag with a number from 0 to 100. The game rolls a number between 1 and 100, if it's below or equal, the GameModifier is used, otherwise it's ignored.

</GameModifier>
<ModType>Unit</ModType>

            <ChanceToTrigger>25</ChanceToTrigger>
            <Attribute>DefendableDamage</Attribute>
            <AttackStat>UnitStat_Attack_Fire</AttackStat>
        </GameModifier>

Does it help anything for the un-modded content in the game? Yes, by fixing some of the buildings that weren't working as intended in beta.

And most importantly - how does it help the modder in specific ways and what am I going to do with it? Any ability that only has a random chance to trigger? Actually, make "ChanceToTrigger" usable with "calculate", and we can start to come up with pretty awesome things.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I would like t be able to check the state of a champion, sovereign or faction to see if they are dead/defeated. I would also like to be able to check their location on the map.

I'd like to be able to dynamically spawn an object on the map at a specific location based on the result of another event.

I'd like a mod to be able to call and display the line graph stats that are now only displayed at the end of the game.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I love to see these ideas, ideas like these always spring new ideas for changes and its so nice to be inspired

This useless comment brought to you by:
~ Kongdej

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting Frogboy,

reply 17

Would anyone object if I just sticky this thread so we can consolidate here?

Please do!!!

I have no new requests to make on top of the ones that have already made. jshores and Heavenfall have address my largest concerns.

Successfully updated karma reason!

If we can access the code that detects when someone enters your zone of control, or is moving within your zone of control so we can attach triggers to it. Including the first time, the number of times they enter it etc, how long they stay in it, so many options.

Successfully updated karma reason!