1812 scenario

[Soosh]

I don’t know if it’s just me being stupid, but I just noticed that I somehow don’t have the 1812 scenario. I’ve installed v1.21.04 and then applied the v1.22.01 patch when I bought EiA, but all I’ve got are the 1805 campaigns (classic + alt). Checked the databases folder and there’s two ged files which, I assume, are the 1805 campaigns (eianw001, eianw002).

I’ve noticed in the Mods and Scenarios forum that someone was talking about the standard 1812 scenario that comes with the game, and the release notes mention the very same scenario, too.

Is it hiding from me? [&:]

[pzgndr]

Correct. There are game bugs that need to be resolved for 1812. Like setting up minors outside their country, which is important to get the historical setups accurate. And the victory points weren't working right. I intend to fix the issues and rebuild the 1812 scenario for both classic EIA and alternate EIH as I did for 1805. It's on my To-Do list for v1.22.03, after I get through what I want to get done with v1.22.02, in progress.

If you want, you can always install a separate version of the game and update it through v1.08.07, to get an idea. But it doesn't play well and you can't fix it with the editor.

[Soosh]

So it’s been removed for the time being and I’m not going slightly mad, looking for something that isn’t there. [:D] No worries, I was just wondering.

[Daniel Amieiro]

Hi!
I'm trying a patcher and i am pretty near of one.
I think i can try a 1812 scenario as a test.
Could you give me the data? (oobs, countries, etc). I have the 1812 scenario of EIA (the scenario in 13.0 section of rules).
I do not know if there are some major challenges to code, but
The main doubt is what would happen when i assign bernadotte to swedem and make a new pic for it. I can think all the rest is possible to patch.

Could you tell me what are the main challenges? Perhaps some can be patched, and leave the rest for you .

In my tests, my main issue are with kingdoms. I can do all kingdoms, but if a province belongs to two kingdoms (type 2 countries in .ged) the program behaviour is erratic (taking provinces randomly, not taking the minimun required provinces well and offering the kingdom with lowest country id first). So to work well, a province can only belong to one kingdom formation unless other behaviour being coded. (for example asking which kingdom to create, and if the province are belonging to a actual kingdom, check it, and if this kingdom is still possible, take the province, if not, then ask for destroy old kingdom (returning exceeding provinces as conq unless native) and form another... -> needed for westphalia improvement to C Rhin or to Bavaria going to C Rhin).

Other behaviour not coded are poland ampliation (can be done for any country). This could be most simpler to code. if a province is clicked for kingdom creation, and the kingdom is already created (it's checked already because shows the message "it can't create the kingdom" when it is not created it allows it) instead the program should ask to include it. Even better if kingdowm has more than minimum provinces and a kingdom province is clicked to ask to leave the kindom and return to a conq status (with 1 pp penalty)... It is specially useful for natal provinces that in many scenarios can be excluded for creating a kingdom.

So in 1812, it can be done C of the Rhine or Westphalia, but not both, unless excluding provinces of westphalia from c of rhine. Same for Bavaria kingdom if optional is used. (the EIA 1812 scenario has Westphalia, C Rhine and Bavaria created, i could recreate them, but as a tweak, these can't share commom provinces unless above corrected).

The Bernadotte going to sweden is not needed, because it should be on sweden and removed from france.
There is no automatic corp/general removal. There is an arrival field in the unit struct at 242 offset as a 16 bit signed integer. If this data is less than 1000 it counts the months to arrival from 1805 (or data of campaing), so a february of 1806 arrival is a -1013 value. -7 if unused unit. The 244 offset are the readyness (-5 if not ready like some feudal without provinces, -7 for unused corps). The 246 offset is unused. It could be coded there a go out date, for example. Unit fields has a lot of space (are a 640 bytes struct with 242 bytes used, perhaps 256). I recommend to code in unit the moral of each type of corp in these bytes (256 & up) instead of being a country based morale on tpj file (it could give a lot of special units, for example units with guard cavalry with 5.0 cavalry morale like EIH or a young and old guard units for france). For example, movement is coded in a unit basis (so it could be done a 4 movement corps, and a 3 movement corps whithin the same country)

[pzgndr]

ORIGINAL: Daniel Amieiro
Could you tell me what are the main challenges?

When I was trying to update the 1812 scenario a few years ago, I identified three problems. First, minor forces could not be set up outside their country, which is a problem for France trying to forward-deploy its minor allies according to the setup criteria. Second, the shift in scenraio start dates also shifted arrival dates for leaders and freicorps. Lastly, the game does not recognize starting VPs from the scenario editor for AI players. These issues need some attention in the code for resolution. Perhaps the patcher will help with the dates and VPs, or maybe not; regardless the game/editor should get fixed to handle these.

I know hard-coding changes is not ideal, but I can add code to remove Bernadotte from play in 1810 and add modifiers for Napoleon's ratings per original rule 12.3.7.3. Creating a new Bernadotte leader for Sweden available in 1813 would be good. It's all on my list, if I can get to it.

[Daniel Amieiro]

First, minor forces could not be set up outside their country, which is a problem for France trying to forward-deploy its minor allies according to the setup criteria.

If you use depots, you can deploy minor forces on every zone of the map. Put a depot first, then the minor corp. I think it's not a problem.

Second, the shift in scenraio start dates also shifted arrival dates for leaders and freicorps.

It can be patched, because the minus used in dates are used as relative shift. If the minus in the offset where used as absolute values it would be better because same data could be reutilised . Same for economic phases. If you start a scenario on decembre, it will take the economic phase in february, not march.

Lastly, the game does not recognize starting VPs from the scenario editor for AI players. These issues need some attention in the code for resolution. Perhaps the patcher will help with the dates and VPs, or maybe not; regardless the game/editor should get fixed to handle these.

Actually i can patch VPs. Not tested what happen in game, but these can be patched...

I know hard-coding changes is not ideal, but I can add code to remove Bernadotte from play in 1810 and add modifiers for Napoleon's ratings per original rule 12.3.7.3. Creating a new Bernadotte leader for Sweden available in 1813 would be good. It's all on my list, if I can get to it.

I think i can create a bernadotte leader for sweden (it's in my tests just now) I have to patch the PIC table (where are the PICS stored). I do not know what the code would do with a minor leader in play .
On the other hand, unit removal with a generic rule is better than a patch. If you use a hardcore rule (the unit X dissapears) when other scenario or campaing will be in play (for example unit X being a different thing) it will create a bug. Same reasoning for Napoleon. (it's better to add fields to a unit that if flag N is on unit, then a minus of M on Strategic or Tactical rating will be used..)

I prefer substitute bernadotte for other french general (a 2.2.2 suchet or similar) than coding and exception with undeseable scope. In 1812 scenario a extra 2.2.2 general or no general for france is of no use and doesn't make any significant difference.

[Daniel Amieiro]

Well, i have tried minor leaders.
I can add a leader to a minor with a minor pic.
BUT it can't be placed in the setup phase nor reinforcements. I tried making a lombardy leader with bernadotte pic and it cannot be putted. Not even in Lombardy.

[Daniel Amieiro]

I add a GED testing thread with the files on scenarios

[Daniel Amieiro]

Well GED fixed. It allow to put the General on terrain for minors. But same problem. Only let attach the leader if another leader (your major power leader) is present. If not, says "no leader present".
I'm doing tests with france

[Daniel Amieiro]

Actual result:
Only minor present: Don't let attach

[Daniel Amieiro]

If other leader present:
Let attach. It seems thay if a major leader is present (or at least your country leader is present) it let attach.

[Daniel Amieiro]

PD: It seems that the new pic has some memory management issue. If you play a combat, the minor pic header substituyes de gdpictroop in combat report