Unofficial BTS 3.13 patch

I don't dispute your first point, but my concerns in the earlier post were focused on the idea of explicitly barring the AI from carrying out an action that would otherwise be available in human-on-human play. When it comes down to adjusting the rules, I'm favor of barring an action across-the-board (i.e., restrict the ability of anyone to gift missionary units to anyone,) rather than imposing that restriction on just the AI players. (After all, how would a human player react to receiving an unsolicited and unwanted missionary for a foreign religion that he would now have to pay maintenance costs for?)

Using human <-> human interactions as your yardstick is a bad idea, imo. The AI isn't going to be able to "think" like a human, so it's not going to be able to take advantage of things that a human can. In this instance, yes, a human getting a gifted Missionary is going to be able to do a tactical analysis and competently (we hope! ;)) decide what to do with it. He/She is going to know, for example, whether adding that religion to his/her city is in his/her best interests.

The AI does not. The AI is not going to be able to determine "Looks like the human is going for an AP win, so I shouldn't add the AP religion to one of my cities". Or, conversely, the AI isn't going to be able to determine "The human has no real chance of getting an AP victory, so I might as well add the religion so it'll make me immune to AP war declarations". Or any other variation thereof.

Since it's not practical or feasible to add that sort of determination, then treating the AI as if it's going to react like a human is a poor approach. The better approach, imo, is to ensure that the human player can't take advantage of the AI's lack of tactical awareness.

So I'm inclined to think that if (a) is true, then the easiest solution is to eliminate gifting of missionaries for everyone.

That strikes me as severe overkill. Why swat a fly with a sledgehammer when there's a fly-swatter readily available?

At the end of the day, I just believe that it's better to keep the rules even for everyone (human and AI) unless forced up against the wall (as the designers apparently were by vassal states, for instance.)

The number of rule variations for AI vs Human is staggering. I don't say that as a bad thing, because I think in most cases it's used to make the game more enjoyable. But considering how many variations currently exist, I can't see one more breaking the proverbial camel's back.

Bh
 
Does this automatically install the patch. Im currently in the middle of a game using the earth 34 civ mod will this make it so my colonies wont get declared war on as soon as i create them?

I'm pretty sure installing a patch that limits the game to 18 players (ie, the default) will successfully crash any game that's being played with 34 players.

Bh
 
I agree with this suggestion, I will ususally try and get my spy out of the city I am attacking before I start the attack...when I am unable to do this I find it quite frustrating when my spy is constantly on top of the city defenders.

It's worse when one of your spies is the only unit visible on a tile, not in a city, which also contains an enemy stack. True, the enemy shows up as ghosts if you put the pointer on that tile, but in my case my Spy was on a "go to", at the end of a move: at the end of my turn, out sprang a dozen or so marauding Horse Archers.
 
I'm pretty sure installing a patch that limits the game to 18 players (ie, the default) will successfully crash any game that's being played with 34 players.

Bh
I can still play i dont think the patch has an effect though
 
Hi

Is the proposed solution to make the AI refuse to accept gifted missionaires period or only when it is running theocracy?

I can see situations where say you meet a civ and they are being unfriendly to point where they dont want to trade or open borders but not running theocracy so you gift em missionaires get them to change religions and they get friendlier.

Situations like that dont seem any more or less exploitive of a dumb AI than any other things done like making trades or granting tribute or giving gifts or whatever to make em friendly and then taking of advantage of friendly status. Seems more like part of game.

I can also see it as just part of someone who whants religion to spread but doesnt want to micro manage anymore than necessary so gifts the missoinaries and lets AI do all work.

Now if the AI is running theocracy I can see the reasons how it could be exploitive to get around that. So preventing gifting of missionaries to AI's or ANY civ, AI or human, running theocracy I dont see much of a problem.

But prevent gifting of missionaries to AI period, no matter if they running theocracy or not would bug me since it would impact situations that arent related to exploit it is supposed to be addressing.

Kaytie
 
Theocracy = No non-state religion spread = Spreading non-state religions via missionaries in your own cities (gifted or not) is a BUG and needs fixing.
 
It's been in the game since Day1 as far as I know and despite how bad things have been with patches, it wouldn't take this long to fix it if they wanted to.

Well, if it is intended that you can still spread non-state religion under theocracy, then the civic description is a bug and should read:

- no non-state :religion: spread by foreign civs

which means one way or the other, the bug has always been there.
 
Well, if it is intended that you can still spread non-state religion under theocracy, then the civic description is a bug and should read:

- no non-state :religion: spread by foreign civs

which means one way or the other, the bug has always been there.

I think this is just a very minor issue, not even at 'bug' level. However, proper documentation in the civilopedia would be the way I would fix this less-than-bug.
 
Now *cut* the CvGameCoreDLL313.dll and *paste it into a folder somewhere outside of the CIV game folder.

You can't have 2 .dlls in the Assests folder.

JosEPh ;)

That's really interesting... All I've ever done is add the word "old" right before the .dll in the file name as my way of backing up the file. I've been playing for weeks with 2 dll files in that folder with no problems.
 
That's really interesting... All I've ever done is add the word "old" right before the .dll in the file name as my way of backing up the file. I've been playing for weeks with 2 dll files in that folder with no problems.
Actually you can have as many dlls in any directory you like, if you want to have 1000 in there it does not matter, the game will only use the one that is called CvGameCoreDLL.dll and ignore any other dll you have sitting around...
 
Bhruic, I'd like to make a suggestion for a fix, though I'm not sure whether this falls under the category of things you'd normally consider...

When you are attacking a city you can select a unit and hover over the city with the right mouse button held down to see your odds and see the best defender in the stack. However, when you have a spy in the city the spy stays on top so you cannot see the best defender. This is a bit annoying when I want to choose promotions on the attacker so as to counter the best defender. It takes too much brain effort to mentally think of which unit it must be that's on the top. At the moment I just move my spy out of the city while I attack.

Obviously the suggestion I'm making is to make the friendly spy not stay on top when you have a unit selected and hovering over something to attack. I haven't checked but the issue is probably exactly the same outside cities too.

Oh yes, this is a good point. I never thought to suggest it, but this would be a very handy fix. I also think it is annoying to have to move your spy out of the city, just to conduct the siege and see what you're doing.
 
That strikes me as severe overkill. Why swat a fly with a sledgehammer when there's a fly-swatter readily available?

I don't dispute what you're saying in your previous post, certainly not about comparing the AI to humans. (You're right. You can't always do that. I think it is nice to have it as an aspiration, but there's just too many compromises to be made. Maybe in 20 years.) It's just that, in general, I think it's best to attach a problem like this by trying to improve the AI first, then worry about reworking the rules...and when rules are reworked, they should try to be reworked in an objective fashion first before differentiating between AI and Human.

In this case, it probably isn't worth it to go the AI fixing route, true. Too much effort for an issue that's marginal at best.

If it's still worth fixing, like you suggested, it will be easy to do so with a slight rules adjustment. I still argue for making it an across-the-board ban on gifting missionaries just for simplicity's sake. In a multiplayer game that features several AIs and several human players, a human player may gift a missionary to another human, then try to do the same to an AI either because he forgot that that rule had been changed, which results in the human attempting an unworkable tactic that he thought would work, and dissatisfaction for the player. And we all know what that's like....I tried to use a Great Artist to found Civilized Jewelers in my wall Street city once, and found that I couldn't. I was half way to writing a bug report before I realized that I couldn't found it in that city because Mining, Inc.'s HQ was already there, and the two corporations competed with each other.

Now, I'm sure it's true that everyone else here is a far more observent and dilligent civ player than me and wouldn't have made that mistake... :blush: Still, I think it's a good idea to have a policy of changing as little as necessary, and when those changes are made, to make them across-the-board, unless doing so would completely eliminate a necessary feature (as was done with Vassal States). Considering this is one of those things that might be forgotten/overlooked more easily (as with my corporation-founding example...how often do you find it both possible and worthwhile to found both Mining, Inc., and Civilized Jewelers?) I still vote for making it an across-the-board ban on gifting of missionaries.

As an aside, I know there are plenty of variations (e.g., production/food bonuses and the like, certain random events only fire in single player games,) but in terms of pure rules differences -- and here I refer to the 'objective' rules of assuming a unit is X strength versus a unit with Y strength, combat will resolved this way, and tanks can always move 2 squares, while musketmen can only move 1 -- the only one I'm really aware of is the ban on Humans becoming AI vassals.... Are there many others of that nature?
 
I'm getting another offer of a non-corporation resource I already have nine of from someone.
What's a Jewish nation going to do with all these pigs?
 
I didn't get any offers from that save... Was there supposed to be something I had to do to get it?

Offhand, however, I'm guessing the offer was from Elizabeth? If so, that's not a bug - she's a Vassal. You're allowed to request any resource from a Vassal, even if you already have it - a side-effect of that is that they can offer them to you as trades.

Bh
 
I didn't get any offers from that save... Was there supposed to be something I had to do to get it?

Offhand, however, I'm guessing the offer was from Elizabeth? If so, that's not a bug - she's a Vassal. You're allowed to request any resource from a Vassal, even if you already have it - a side-effect of that is that they can offer them to you as trades.

Bh

I see.....
 
That's really interesting... All I've ever done is add the word "old" right before the .dll in the file name as my way of backing up the file. I've been playing for weeks with 2 dll files in that folder with no problems.


Cool.

My way just seemed simpler to me. Less clutter in the Assests folder and the original placed some place outside the game for safe keeping.

And since 2 ppl in a row had asked how to, I just tried to help.

JosEPh :)
 
Top Bottom