In need of PoP-2.5 or 3.01 module_mission_templates.py file please

[Cracka]

Would someone from the PoP team be a dear and share the module_mission_templates file, i am trying to get death-cam working for 2.5 but i have no module file to work with. Making changes to a native templates file does not work correctly as you would imagine.

I need either the file or the death-cam raw code from 3.01 to implement this properly. I have tried cross referencing the .txt files but have had no luck.


Any help appreciated.

 

[MitchyMatt]

I'd help but I don't have that version anymore. Why not update to the latest patches?

 

[Cracka]

I'd help but I don't have that version anymore. Why not update to the latest patches?

Damn, thats inconvenient. 


Not a big fan of Warband and PoP-3 isn't stable enough for my liking.


Still i managed to get Death-cam working in 2.5 by merging snippets of code out of 3.01 i thought were relevant, but with some rather interesting side-effects. 

I don't get casualty reports or any type of report for some reason. So whatever i did, i must have messed with that and/or left it out completely lol.

I would still like that module file if possible. It will make things a lot less complicated. 


Edit: Oh and i forgot, does anyone know roughly in which part of mission templates file does the report code start ? That is probably the logical place to start fixing this.

Also does IDLE have a function that allows the processing of PY code to raw code or vice-versa ?

 

[MitchyMatt]

You can't mess with the PY code for PoP, they won't release their source code. (I think that's what it means..  )

 

[Cracka]

You can't mess with the PY code for PoP, they won't release their source code. (I think that's what it means..  )

But surely they can release the Death-cam code ? I was sure Madvader shared his PoP-3 DC code for the WB release. Of course this does me no good. I just need it to work with native PoP.

Currently in the process of merging again with some more care. So far the reports code seems intact. I'll get it done eventually, i was just hoping to save time, so i can spend more time playing.

 

[MitchyMatt]

You could message him

 

[Cracka]

You could message him

I would, but he doesn't like me lol.


Also, thank you kindly for all your help on the matter.

 

[Cracka]

Yeah man i did it!!!!!!!

Code could be cleaner, but it works perfectly with the exception of one weird Noldor message popping up for some reason hehe.


What i did was load the original native mission templates file, add the PY death-cam code, build it, then cross-referenced the changes made between the original and the death-cam version, then applied those changes while cross-referencing between PoP-3 and 2.5 respective to which line changes were made and hey-presto it works hehehehehawwhawwhawww ... magic. 

Now if i can just get kill count to work


Edit: After further testing i see there are still some other niggling problems, still for all intensive purposes Death-cam works. Would be nice if i could iron out some of these issues though.

The major problem is that you have to retreat even from a Won battle, though after retreating everything coincides with a Won battle. Other than that, i am getting some "Battle music" playing while in travel mode, which is a little disturbing.

 

[Mad Vader]

You can't mess with the PY code for PoP, they won't release their source code. (I think that's what it means..  )

But surely they can release the Death-cam code ? I was sure Madvader shared his PoP-3 DC code for the WB release. Of course this does me no good. I just need it to work with native PoP.

Currently in the process of merging again with some more care. So far the reports code seems intact. I'll get it done eventually, i was just hoping to save time, so i can spend more time playing.

You could save yourself some trouble by using PoP 3.01 and following performance tips (I presume you get crashes).
For best results, convert all PoP 3.01 sounds to .wav and change sounds.txt accordingly - this should make PoP 3.01 very stable.
PoP 3 has some really cool features that 2.5 doesn't have.

 

[Cracka]

You can't mess with the PY code for PoP, they won't release their source code. (I think that's what it means..  )

But surely they can release the Death-cam code ? I was sure Madvader shared his PoP-3 DC code for the WB release. Of course this does me no good. I just need it to work with native PoP.

Currently in the process of merging again with some more care. So far the reports code seems intact. I'll get it done eventually, i was just hoping to save time, so i can spend more time playing.

You could save yourself some trouble by using PoP 3.01 and following performance tips (I presume you get crashes).
For best results, convert all PoP 3.01 sounds to .wav and change sounds.txt accordingly - this should make PoP 3.01 very stable.
PoP 3 has some really cool features that 2.5 doesn't have.

Saving myself some trouble is exactly why i am here doing this. I could probably mod the whole game into 3.01 with the time i wasted troubleshooting the actual 3.01 release.

A release that requires dozens of tweaks and lowered quality just to perform at a playable level should be a fair indication that there is something inherently wrong with 3.01. That and the staggering amount of bug/crash threads created around it. 

Out of all the versions, Native and modded 3.01 is the first instance i have had instability with this game. So much so that i didn't think a game was capable of producing almost every conceivable error known for a game with such randomness. Even if i could get it to run properly by lowering all my settings and reduce sound file quality, i wouldn't want to do that. I enjoy crisp graphics and superior quality sound of Ogg format. 

If you really wanted to save me some trouble, you could spent a whole 30 seconds and load up the 3.01 or 2.5 module, which i assume you would have access to and relay the code for me. As it stands i have absolutely no intention of ever playing 3.01 again, it has wasted more than enough of my time.

You are right though, 3.01 did have some cool stuff in it, much of which i am craming into 2.5. That is what i love so much about 2.5, it is so incredibly resilient. There is no legitimate tweak or setting that will break it, no amount of save/reload abuse will corrupt it and absolutely no chance of crashing ever, and for that i am very greatful. You guys did an outstanding job putting so much into it while retaining all the integrity of Native. Sadly, all you have to do is sneeze on 3.01 and it collapses under it's own bloated weight, actually you don't even have to sneeze, it will break by itself.   



Haha look at my cute widdle puddy tat!

Can i have a cute puppy next time ?

 

[Mad Vader]

It's really about weak performance on some PCs, so there's no need to over-dramatize. We did all we could to make it run everywhere, including cutting out original Roman architecture for Empire cities to the chagrin of Sysyphe.
Do the .wav conversion thingy (something we didn't know then) and you would be surprised how smooth it runs (hint: you can use the sounds from the Warband version, those are already converted to .wav).
Just do it.

 

[Cracka]

It's really about weak performance on some PCs, so there's no need to over-dramatize. We did all we could to make it run everywhere, including cutting out original Roman architecture for Empire cities to the chagrin of Sysyphe.
Do the .wav conversion thingy (something we didn't know then) and you would be surprised how smooth it runs (hint: you can use the sounds from the Warband version, those are already converted to .wav).
Just do it.

I'm not blaming anyone, i really don't care about it. I'm just glad to have 2.5 and am focusing all my attention on it.

As stated above, i am not going to degrade my gaming experience to compensate for technical/compatibility issues with a mod. Something that shouldn't need to be done. As for performance issues with specific PC configurations, you could be right, but i would hardly call over 100fps on the battle map "weak" performance.

At this point i see you don't genuinely want to help me, so just forget about it. I knew i was asking too much for a small favor like this. 

 

[Mad Vader]

But I'm genuinely helping you, believe it or not. However, it's entirely up to you what to do with the advice. This advice is much better than emailing you the source files (which is impossible and unnecessary, btw).
It's your choice which version you want to play, and, again, it's up to you.

 

[Cracka]

You know that i don't actually need the source files, i just need for you to load the module on your end and relay the DC code, which is information you have more or less already divulged. There is nothing unnecessary or impossible about it.   


If you won't do it for me, then do it for the cute puddy tats ?

 

[grygus]

3.01 is highly unstable?  I have played it off and on since it released, including just today.  I have had it on multiple disparate configurations (OS, BIOS, CPU, GPU all changing) and not witnessed this endless parade of errors myself.  Anecdotes aside, given PoP's popularity before the Warband port ever existed, the claim that it's an unplayable mess seems highly dubious.

 

[Cracka]

3.01 is highly unstable?  I have played it off and on since it released, including just today.  I have had it on multiple disparate configurations (OS, BIOS, CPU, GPU all changing) and not witnessed this endless parade of errors myself.  Anecdotes aside, given PoP's popularity before the Warband port ever existed, the claim that it's an unplayable mess seems highly dubious.

That is really great that it works for you, i couldn't be happier for you. However i don't think the same could be said by myself or (judging by the amount of technical issue threads) about 80% of it's player base. Most people that have reported 3.01 game to run properly have at some stage run into a problem and/or reduced the quality settings in order to do so, and as i said earlier i am not going to entertain that.

This discussion is not even apart of the purpose of this thread, i was only answering a question that was asked. You are most welcome to contribute, but please stay to the point of this thread, being that i need assistance in integrating Death-cam into PoP-2.5. 

 

[grygus]

Yes, obviously 80% of the people could not run it.  That would explain why nobody played PoP and it had no fans until the Warband port.  Your logic is unassailable!  You do realize that those support threads are full of people getting problems resolved, right?  It's not just a litany of bugs that nobody ever bothered to address.

Since you've already been told at least twice that your chosen solution isn't going to work for you (because you're not getting the source code,) I thought that it was contributing to encourage a course of action that would solve what you describe as the root problem.  I see now that you're not interested in help, though, only in receiving what you demand.  I do apologize for misinterpreting your purpose here, and will litter your thread no longer.

Good luck.

 

[Cracka]

Yes, obviously 80% of the people could not run it.  That would explain why nobody played PoP and it had no fans until the Warband port.  Your logic is unassailable!  You do realize that those support threads are full of people getting problems resolved, right?  It's not just a litany of bugs that nobody ever bothered to address.

Since you've already been told at least twice that your chosen solution isn't going to work for you (because you're not getting the source code,) I thought that it was contributing to encourage a course of action that would solve what you describe as the root problem.  I see now that you're not interested in help, though, only in receiving what you demand.  I do apologize for misinterpreting your purpose here, and will litter your thread no longer.

Good luck.

I'm not even going to dignify that with a proper response, so i will just say thanks for the irrelevant outburst of pretentious, preconceived misinformation and thank you for taking your litter with you.