[UMC]all-factions-era

[fog_of_gold]

There is a possibility to have every faction of nearly every era included. You just need to download the ageless era. But there are three problems:
1. This era isn't up-to-date/balanced.
2. This era is too big for a lot of players' computer.
3. You have a lot of factions you don't want to have. They could unbalance the ageless era (in your opinion) or spam your factionlist.
So I suggest to add a folder including every mentioned faction into one era. It is, for the first includement, very easy to insert and, as a side effect, the eras spam only with their two eras (xx, xx hero) rather than of their four eras (xx, xx hero, xx+default, xx hero+default).

[Gambit]

Or better yet; if someone made it so that multiple eras could be loaded at once that'd be great.

[Qazerowl]

My Ultima Era, (that I'm still working on...) is kinda like that. However, it breaks your second rule. I like Gambit's idea. I can't imagine that it would be hard to add to the game.

[Iris]

There is a possibility to have every faction of nearly every era included. You just need to download the ageless era. But there are three problems:
1. This era isn't up-to-date/balanced.
2. This era is too big for a lot of players' computer.
3. You have a lot of factions you don't want to have. They could unbalance the ageless era (in your opinion) or spam your factionlist.
So I suggest to add a folder including every mentioned faction into one era. It is, for the first includement, very easy to insert and, as a side effect, the eras spam only with their two eras (xx, xx hero) rather than of their four eras (xx, xx hero, xx+default, xx hero+default).

I fail to see the differences between your suggestion and Ageless Era, in particular regarding the disadvantages of the latter.

[Hulavuta]

Yeah...I kind of agree. The only thing I see is the subtraction of the Era+Default etc.

[fog_of_gold]

[...]I fail to see the differences between your suggestion and Ageless Era, in particular regarding the disadvantages of the latter.

I suggested to make a folder containing every faction. But it isn't up to a special person to include these files, it's up to the developer of the faction(s) to give the right formation of the faction (the most have anyway). The only thing the developer of this era need to do is, to write a that simple code:

_main.cfg:

Code: Select all

[era]
    id=era_UMC
    name=_ "UMC era"
    {RANDOM_SIDE}
    {multiplayer/factions/loyalists-default.cfg}
    {multiplayer/factions/rebels-default.cfg}
    {multiplayer/factions/northerners-default.cfg}
    {multiplayer/factions/undead-default.cfg}
    {multiplayer/factions/knalgans-default.cfg}
    {multiplayer/factions/drakes-default.cfg}
    {QUICK_4MP_LEADERS}
    {~add-ons/factions/}
[/era]

The formation of the factions would need to be:

faction_example.cfg:

Code: Select all

[multiplayer_side]
    id=example_faction
[/multiplayer_side]

And you simply need to add a folder next to your era's folder in the .bz2 file named "factions" and containing the file(s) of your faction(s).

[...]I can't imagine that it would be hard to add to the game.

It isn't, but some eras aren't meant to be mixed with other eras seriously destroying balancing. Also, it can make you have OOS errors because some eras are including new features. Another point is that it'd be work for the coders having no time rather than us having time.

Edit:
Also, there are some eras having the mainline faction but changed. The Ascension - These units go up to level 5 - PR5 is out is a such example.

[pauxlo]

[...]I fail to see the differences between your suggestion and Ageless Era, in particular regarding the disadvantages of the latter.

I suggested to make a folder containing every faction. But it isn't up to a special person to include these files, it's up to the developer of the faction(s) to give the right formation of the faction (the most have anyway). The only thing the developer of this era need to do is, to write a that simple code:

_main.cfg:

Code: Select all

[era]
    id=era_UMC
    name=_ "UMC era"
    {RANDOM_SIDE}
    {multiplayer/factions/loyalists-default.cfg}
    {multiplayer/factions/rebels-default.cfg}
    {multiplayer/factions/northerners-default.cfg}
    {multiplayer/factions/undead-default.cfg}
    {multiplayer/factions/knalgans-default.cfg}
    {multiplayer/factions/drakes-default.cfg}
    {QUICK_4MP_LEADERS}
    {~add-ons/factions/}
[/era]

The formation of the factions would need to be:

faction_example.cfg:

Code: Select all

[multiplayer_side]
    id=example_faction
[/multiplayer_side]

And you simply need to add a folder next to your era's folder in the .bz2 file named "factions" and containing the file(s) of your faction(s).

Nice idea for how to coordinate independent UMCs.

One problem I see with this: Now each player (who installed this "all-faction-era" addon) has an era which contains some factions, but for each player the selection of factions in this era is something else, as this depends on which other UMCs are installed.
If two such players are joining a game, each of them can select factions the other does not have, and we have OOS-errors before the game even started.

[...]I can't imagine that it would be hard to add to the game.

It isn't, but some eras aren't meant to be mixed with other eras seriously destroying balancing.
Also, it can make you have OOS errors because some eras are including new features.

And how exactly does your proposal help against these points?

[fog_of_gold]

[...]Nice idea for how to coordinate independent UMCs.

One problem I see with this: Now each player (who installed this "all-faction-era" addon) has an era which contains some factions, but for each player the selection of factions in this era is something else, as this depends on which other UMCs are installed.
If two such players are joining a game, each of them can select factions the other does not have, and we have OOS-errors before the game even started.

Isn't the whole era+units included from the host? -Anyway, if not, you'd just need to arrange with the people you try to play with.

It isn't, but some eras aren't meant to be mixed with other eras seriously destroying balancing.
Also, it can make you have OOS errors because some eras are including new features.

And how exactly does your proposal help against these points?

What I said is, some eras mustn't be included. And if a developer don't want to have his era included, (s)he won't. You wouldn't be able to include new features anyway if not with units.

[pauxlo]

[...]Nice idea for how to coordinate independent UMCs.

One problem I see with this: Now each player (who installed this "all-faction-era" addon) has an era which contains some factions, but for each player the selection of factions in this era is something else, as this depends on which other UMCs are installed.
If two such players are joining a game, each of them can select factions the other does not have, and we have OOS-errors before the game even started.

Isn't the whole era+units included from the host? -Anyway, if not, you'd just need to arrange with the people you try to play with.

AFAIK the era (= anything between [era]...[/era]) and the scenario ([multiplayer]...[/multiplayer], including the map) are transmitted, but the individual units are not. And even less the unit images.

But, try it out. Make such a "global era" and two test eras (simply as modifications of current UMC eras) with such a folder, make some people download one but not the other and see wether there are any conflicts at game creation.

[Gambit]

the era (= anything between [era]...[/era]) and the scenario ([multiplayer]...[/multiplayer], including the map) are transmitted, but the individual units are not.

That is correct, and it really makes no sense to me. One can easily create scenarios that are larger than a faction so it can't be a size thing. And it can't be because of conflicts because that would still happen if you downloaded the add-on.

In fact you can create units from scratch via WML. Macro-tize that code, and then for all intents and purposes, you've created a [unit_type] that transfers through multiplayer.

[speculation]
I think it used to have a valid reason for being like that, and now it's really just an issue of that there's nobody who feels like fixing it. They've got bigger (cooler) fish to fry.
[/speculation]

[fog_of_gold]

the era (= anything between [era]...[/era]) and the scenario ([multiplayer]...[/multiplayer], including the map) are transmitted, but the individual units are not.

That is correct, and it really makes no sense to me. One can easily create scenarios that are larger than a faction so it can't be a size thing. And it can't be because of conflicts because that would still happen if you downloaded the add-on.[...]

It's properly because this game wasn't meant to be used for UMC.

[...]But, try it out.[...]

Sorry, I can't. I'm not able to use the internet in any games I tested it.

[Iris]

As far as I understand — since I probably need to get more sleep to understand this well — you want to make eras in general more modular and split them into factions at the package level, so that (for example), downloading Era of Myths would pull its factions from the add-ons server, such as Vampires, Wargs and Celestials, separately, so you could as well not download EoM and just fetch the Celestials as a separate faction which you could integrate, via the user interface in some way, into a custom era or "unit set", which you could then select when choosing the settings when creating your MP game.

It is true that Wesnoth was not really intended to support add-ons in the first place, and in particular, it wasn't intended to have a multiplayer mode at the beginning, networked or otherwise, so the whole MP code is a big, nasty hack that's been improved and cleaned up over time. Similarly, the add-ons system is quite convoluted and not very flexible or easy to use at the moment, more so considering that the first kind of add-ons implemented were campaigns, which is whence the server application (campaignd) takes its name.

I have had a first overhauling step related to the client interface in my queue for a long time, although I've been lacking the motivation to clean up my preliminary code and proceed to reimplement the rest of the current code in trunk to clear the ground for new, awesome features. I hope that my personal situation will improve during this development cycle, before we reach beta and I find myself facing the impassable wall that is the string and feature freeze.

Oh crap, I ranted on a tangential matter here.

[fog_of_gold]

As far as I understand — since I probably need to get more sleep to understand this well — you want to make eras in general more modular and split them into factions at the package level, so that (for example), downloading Era of Myths would pull its factions from the add-ons server, such as Vampires, Wargs and Celestials, separately, so you could as well not download EoM and just fetch the Celestials as a separate faction which you could integrate, via the user interface in some way, into a custom era or "unit set", which you could then select when choosing the settings when creating your MP game.

You didn't understand me. A usual add-on era contains its faction in his folder. A bz2 file could look that way:
EOM.bz2
---Era_of_Myths
------_main.cfg
------others
------factions
---------Vampires.cfg

And the _main.cfg file includes {~add-ons/Era_of_Myths/factions/Vampires.cfg}.
My suggestion would make every developer is interested in helping with this project change it to this:
EOM.bz2
---Era_of_Myths
------_main.cfg
------others
---factions
------EOM_Vampires.cfg
Having in the _main.cfg {~add-ons/factions/EOM_Vampires.cfg}

So I simply suggest to make the developers of special factions move their factions into the add-ons/factions/ folder rather than the add-ons/Era_of_Myths/factions/ folder.

offtopic:

It is true that Wesnoth was not really intended to support add-ons in the first place, and in particular, it wasn't intended to have a multiplayer mode at the beginning, networked or otherwise, so the whole MP code is a big, nasty hack that's been improved and cleaned up over time. Similarly, the add-ons system is quite convoluted and not very flexible or easy to use at the moment, more so considering that the first kind of add-ons implemented were campaigns, which is whence the server application (campaignd) takes its name.[...]

That's really interesting to know. It's clear now why the add-ons folder used to be named campaigns.

[Gambit]

Yes but fog_of_gold, that system assumes that all eras are standard faction containing eras. What about eras that add events and what not?

My proposal would be that instead of a drop down, the era selection becomes check-boxes (not radio buttons). And that the game allow us to load as many eras as we want into it simultaneously. Then you could load multiple faction eras (EE+EoM). You could load a combination of event and faction eras (SX+BEEM), or a combination of event eras (GEB+SX). You'd get all the factions and all the events of all the selected eras.

Once that is done it could be expanded from a list of check-boxes to a folding tree. Where each era unfolds to allow you to uncheck or check certain factions within it and another check-box to include that era's events (because some eras have factions *and* events).

And yes I realize I just discussed that in terms of GUI elements. I don't really know a better way to phrase what I mean.

[Iris]

The engine also assumes that add-ons consist on single-dir or single-file packages (add-on-name/ or add-on-name.cfg). Multiple top-level directories would not be handled gracefully, so factions/ would be considered a pbl-less (not publishable) add-on named "factions".

Again, legacy limitations that might make sense remove at some point.