2 issues for later correction... eventually

r_rolo1 · May 3, 2009

First, the fact that you can get the pop-up asking you to give a city to a civ you haven't met yet. Most of the times it is irrelevant to the game, but as it happened in LHC BtS with Capac to some players, it could had tilted the game a lot ( in that case, by giving acess to a civ that could only be contacted some centuries later and a free espionage center..... ). I don't recall this particular issue being solved in the patch.

The second issue is the fact that lumbermills and preserves in the out side of a river bend are not counted as riverside for effects of the extra 1 C. I don't see any description of why is this like that or devise any rationale for that ( given that all other improvements get the extra coin when they can be built there... if there is any discussion on that, I would love to see it ) ... and I'm not sure if it is a feature or simply a oversight

BwdYeti · May 8, 2009

I always thought it was intentional for Lumbermills, like how you can't build a Watermill there. Like the riverside Lumbermills get the 1C because they can use the river to move lumber, as opposed to the ones at the bend... not being able to as easily? I guess it makes less sense now that I think about it, but either way I don't think it's a problem.

r_rolo1 · May 9, 2009

The issue is that you can't make watermills in those spots, so there is no possible comparation between the two situations. And OFC the "wood through river" doesn't explain why preserves don't get it ....

IMHO it is a coherence issue: all the other improvements that can be built in the out side of a river bend recieve the extra coin, so, unless there is a good mechanics/exploit/realism reason for that that has been pointed by the coders ( I would love to hear one ), I still maintain this in the list of "possible bugs"

eris · May 12, 2009

It is my understanding that no forest qualifies for the extra commerce for being by a river, whether it is on the outside of bend or not, whether it is improved or not. Is that incorrect?

r_rolo1 · May 12, 2009

That is correct.

BwdYeti · May 16, 2009

What I meant was the Lumbermills get the bonus specifically for being on the river. The only specifically on a river improvement is a Watermill, which can't be on a bend, so the Lumbermill bonus not being on bends either makes sense in a way. Other improvements that get a commerce bonus on a bend do so because the base land beneath them does, it's not a trait of the improvement. I agree though that there's no reason why they couldn't have done it the other way, but I don't think it's wrong either.

r_rolo1 · May 18, 2009

Lumbermills ( and preserves ) gain 1 C for being riverside , as any improvement, except when they are in the out side of the bend. That makes them unique, because all the other improvements gain the riverside 1 C as long as they can be built, regardless of where they are built. That is why I called this to attention: it is not coherent with the rest of the improvements, doesn't appear anywhere on the game documentation ( either in the civilopedia or in paper ) and i don't recall any discussion in the forums regarding that or any possible rationale behind this from the devs mouth ( like i said, if someone knows a reason, I would be more than happy to know it )

My opinion is that they made the code of the lumbermills and preserves out of the watermills one and something was left behind, but I haven't looked at the code yet ( to say the truth, I don't even thinked on where to look yet ).

r_rolo1 · Oct 7, 2009

AFAIK this two issues are still unresolved .... too bad

jdog5000 · Oct 8, 2009

1)

I'm not sure I understand, what popup appears asking you about giving a city to a player you haven't met yet? What are the circumstances under which this happens?

2)

Lumbermills and preserves set the XML tag RiverSideYieldChange, where the "RiverSide" phrasing is also what Firaxis used to limit where watermills can be placed. So, it appears Firaxis did this intentionally ... there is no RiverYieldChange tag for improvements like there is for terrain.

The Civilopedia phrasing (English at least) is that these improvements give an extra commerce when "next to a river" while grassland/plains/etc give +1C when "adjacent to a river". They're clearly trying to differentiate between the two cases, but it is quite ambiguous. It's better than the watermill phrasing though, which simply says it "Requires river"!

As for the rationale for why lumbermills and preserves would generate extra commerce "next to" a river, it seems to me to be the same as why unforested grasslands would - proximity to the river increases traffic. I agree coherency there would fit better logically, but it's been this way since the beginning and changing it would be kind of a pain.

r_rolo1 · Oct 9, 2009

jdog5000 said:
1)

I'm not sure I understand, what popup appears asking you about giving a city to a player you haven't met yet? What are the circumstances under which this happens?

2)

Lumbermills and preserves set the XML tag RiverSideYieldChange, where the "RiverSide" phrasing is also what Firaxis used to limit where watermills can be placed. So, it appears Firaxis did this intentionally ... there is no RiverYieldChange tag for improvements like there is for terrain.

The Civilopedia phrasing (English at least) is that these improvements give an extra commerce when "next to a river" while grassland/plains/etc give +1C when "adjacent to a river". They're clearly trying to differentiate between the two cases, but it is quite ambiguous. It's better than the watermill phrasing though, which simply says it "Requires river"!

As for the rationale for why lumbermills and preserves would generate extra commerce "next to" a river, it seems to me to be the same as why unforested grasslands would - proximity to the river increases traffic. I agree coherency there would fit better logically, but it's been this way since the beginning and changing it would be kind of a pain.

About 1)

I'm talking about the pop up that says that X city rightfully wants to join Y civ. I've discovered, via one of the LHC, that this pop up doesn't check if you know that civ. I've attached a save based on that LHC ( I only added the settler and removed some fog to make it clear that it is a pre Astro valid settling spot ... not that it matters much ). Settle on spot and IBT will appear the dreaded message ... X city wants to join the germans, in spite of we not knowing the germans or even have acess to them before optics. My understanding is that the code in this case ( no foreing culture in city tile ) simply checks distances from capitals ( this spot is closer of the german cap than from the Incan cap, as a WB check will show ) ... that, obviously ,in some cases ( like this one, that is a map that came directly from the Fractal script ) is not enough

About 2)

Fair enough... but it would definitely not hurt having a clearer explanation

P.S A screenshot from 1) happening in the same map, from other player.:

Spoiler :

From here

r_rolo1 · Nov 25, 2009

About issue 2) ... Pep described here a similar issue already with UP 1.3 code in here . it looks that this issue needs a deeper aproach than simply block of the pop-up

2 issues for later correction... eventually

r_rolo1

King of myself

BwdYeti

Chieftain

r_rolo1

King of myself

eris

King

r_rolo1

King of myself

BwdYeti

Chieftain

r_rolo1

King of myself

r_rolo1

King of myself

jdog5000

Revolutionary

r_rolo1

King of myself

r_rolo1

King of myself

Similar threads