Daemonjax Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 (edited) aye we use googlecode and tortoise svn for modding HOI stuff Yeah, Tortoise is the way to go on windows if your programming IDE doesn't have built-in SVN support (ala Netbeans IDE). There's even a Notepad++ plugin for it. :D @dreadylein I downloaded your patcher, and I plan to use it. I was thinking about what happens when Firaxis decides to change some of these settings... Your patcher would overwrite them, even of the author of the mod didn't want to touch those settings. Wouldn't it be better for the .mod file to only have lines that are changes? Or does the .exe work that way already? i.e. does your patcher expect there to be a certain number of lines in the .mod file? Also, does your .exe rely on the position of binary data? So, when Firaxis puts out an .exe patch, will it break your code until you find the new addresses for the data? Forgive my ignorance, but I don't know how your patcher actually works. ;) Edited October 14, 2012 by Daemonjax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreadylein Posted October 14, 2012 Author Share Posted October 14, 2012 (edited) Atm the patcher will override changes yes, and yes it would be a better way to just give the patcher the changes ;) just hadnt the time yet, thought it would be more usefull to have patcher up and running at all :P The pro of the methode atm is that we use the windows api to do a proper injection into the RCdata secetion of the binary, as long as they dont heavly mod their ini settings we should surivive updates without a problem -> so no we dont rely on a specific version of the binary, only way to stop this would be putting the settings onto another place then just the data section In theory we would just need to strip the settings out of the binary modify the values supplyed by the modfile and reapply it seems like more work :D Edited October 14, 2012 by dreadylein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daemonjax Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 You're right. It's more work. ;) Anyways, what I was hoping to accomplish doesn't seem possible atm. I really just wanted to unshackle the Normal AI. It's so stupid that Normal is unfun for me. But... that looks like it's hardcoded, and the the .exe is 27 megs... I'm not dedicated enough to scope through something of that size. It looks like it's MUCH easier to just modify Classic to be exactly like Normal, and then I'd have Normal with the better enemy AI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreadylein Posted October 14, 2012 Author Share Posted October 14, 2012 (edited) its not hardcoded within the binary, its fetched from the ermm think i saw it in xcomgame.upkbut this wont help atm i guess :/ yes guess it would be a fair bit easier Before you start search something like this in the binary better look out for the editor switch, dunno if they realy stript him or simply killed the args switch ;) and .. i will be honest, yes i know it would be by far nicer to only mod provided lines, but i HATE string manipulation in the scope of a few hundred lines :D oh, nearly forgott it, anyone of you has an idea why the binarie is redownloaded by steam at a little percentage of the people ? Edit: goosh im stupid ;D the ini file is pretty static and .net already provides wildcard handling by regex *blush* Edited October 14, 2012 by dreadylein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daemonjax Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 (edited) the ini file is pretty static and .net already provides wildcard handling by regex *blush* Yeah, .net and java standard libraries are rather great. I've never tried modding any game built on the Unreal engine, but anything programming related I can do. I don't know what you mean by "editor switch". I understand there's a freely downloadable SDK for it, right? I also read it doesn't work correctly with xcom, though. Anyways, I already modded Classic to be a little more like Normal. :P Edited October 15, 2012 by Daemonjax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreadylein Posted October 15, 2012 Author Share Posted October 15, 2012 The Udk engine has his editor built in to the standart binary, its just a commandline args most of the time, if they stript him of complet we are out of luck, if they just stript the handling of the commandline args there could be a chance to reenable it ;)Leftovers of the editor are all over the binary Its quite important as we have no way to proper repack the upk files atm, the udk binarie should be abel to recook and compress them in theoryBut i dont have enough knowledge about the engine himself, just what i read up the last couple days, if they did it proper und realy stript the code himself we will be out of luck i guess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
versengeteriks Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 (edited) moved Edited October 15, 2012 by versengeteriks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkenor Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 (edited) I spotted this official post over at the 2K forum: http://forums.2kgames.com/showthread.php?157581-Regarding-quot-Second-Wave-quot Hey guys, The "Second Wave" settings that some people have found by digging in to the game files was a feature that the team was toying around with, but it was not ever finished by the time the game released. It’s something the dev team at Firaxis is still interested in going back to and working on, but at this point we don’t have any firm plans to share. Edit: Just realised I somehow managed to post this in completely the wrong thread... Sorry about that. Edited October 15, 2012 by Arkenor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreadylein Posted October 15, 2012 Author Share Posted October 15, 2012 hehe np ;)Its an intressting information at all :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anbar Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 *stuff* might be better keeping individual mod notes in a separate thread so this can stay dedicated to the modpatcher itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts