View Full Version : baseproduction -3


angeleyes
Aug 24, 2007, 01:45 PM
I engage a lot of (minor) weird things in bts, one of them this one: i think its a graphic thing, in the game the calculation seems correct, but its not OK.

http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/9007/baseproduction3ti2.th.jpg (http://img503.imageshack.us/my.php?image=baseproduction3ti2.jpg)

save (http://forums.civfanatics.com/uploads/63149/Zara_Yaqob_in_rainforest_AD-1380.CivBeyondSwordSave)

hm this should be in bugreports, maybe a moderator can replace this thread...?

Thyrwyn
Aug 24, 2007, 02:42 PM
It will only be a bug if the university actually completes in one turn, because then it is a huge exploit!

I suspect what happened is that you completed something for which there were additional production bonuses (stone, marble, leader traits, etc. . .) . Since those bonuses don't apply to the University, the game is adjusting the overflow and ending up (somehow) at -2 hammers.

-2 *1.5 (forge+Org Rel.)= -3

the # of turns to complete is cost/adj. production, but cannot be less than 1. Any positive number divided by a negative number is less than 1, so 1 is what the game displays.

Like I said - if the Uni completes, it's really problematic. . .

angeleyes
Aug 24, 2007, 03:00 PM
This all is not the case, in the picture you can see the overflow is only 1! As i enter the game, the next turn base production is -4 and there's not one hammer put into the university. Other city's also have too few hammers assigned.

edit: after enter baseproduction of course stays -3, but with 50% multiply it becomes -4....

jray
Aug 24, 2007, 03:34 PM
I'm betting you have two religious buildings from the same religion as the Apostolic Palace owner. There's a bug (or really stupid and undocumented feature... issue yet to be resolved at Monasteries costing two hammers production a turn. (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=239351)) whereby such buildings give you a -2 base hammer penalty.

angeleyes
Aug 25, 2007, 01:10 AM
Thanks, i indeed defied an AP-resolution, and i was suprised that i got angry faces despite the resolution didn't get enough votes.

axident
Aug 25, 2007, 01:16 AM
Thanks, i indeed defied an AP-resolution, and i was suprised that i got angry faces despite the resolution didn't get enough votes.

That's still good to know--that defying an AP resolution is an automatic negative even if the resolution fails!