| General | Hosted Sites | Civ5 | CivRev | Civ4Col | Civ4 | Civ3 | Civ2 | Civ1 | Misc | Marketplace |
![]() |
|
|
Welcome to Civilization Fanatics' Center. You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to our site features. By joining our free community, you will be able to participate in the discussions, search the forum, send private messages, vote in polls, upload your own screenshots to the gallery, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so sign up today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact support. |
|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 | |
|
Revolutionary
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: California
Posts: 2,596
|
[BTS] v0.21 Discussion thread
Discussion thread for all things related to v 0.21 (which you can get here, at least until the next release).
The most important changes over 0.2 are to ship and plane retreat from threatened cities/forts. The idea is that if the fort/city is lost, the ships and planes are destroyed without a fight so they should get out of the city when there's any real threat. The biggest outstanding question is whether the threat level is right ... losing the units for nothing is bad, but if ships leave to easily they might be hunted down at sea. Quote:
__________________
Mods: Better BTS AI | Unofficial 3.19 Patch | Revolution Mod Pack Components: BarbarianCiv | AIAutoPlay | DynamicCivNames
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Right Wing Liberal
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan, USA
Posts: 956
|
All I have to say is: It's VERY cool seeing the AI dominate its own borders and expand at the expense of weak neighbors.
..until you find out that Mali somehow managed to rid itself of an entire continent worth of enemies and is now gigantic and has nukes while your longbowmen and galleons are still exploring. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Great Engineer
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Denmarkia
Posts: 1,142
|
Why would there be any reason at all for healthy ships (non-transports) to remain at port? Shouldn't it be so the AI never docks its ships, unless they're damaged?
__________________
Merged Mod: A combination of Wolfshanze's 1850-1920 mod, Dales Combat mod, Influence Driven War and GIR's Partisan mod, all built on top of the Better AI! Download "The memory of spectacular failure eclipses that of enduring success."
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Revolutionary
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: California
Posts: 2,596
|
Ships at sea are much more vulnerable to attacks out of the blue than ships in port, both attacks from other ships plus air attacks. Transports also need to be based in ports to pick up troops and launch naval invasions as the AI is currently written ... the escorts assigned to the transports will stay with them in ports as well. This accounts for most of the naval units the AI has sitting in ports during war.
__________________
Mods: Better BTS AI | Unofficial 3.19 Patch | Revolution Mod Pack Components: BarbarianCiv | AIAutoPlay | DynamicCivNames
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Prince
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 463
|
Hi I've played almost a complete game using the 0.21 Better AI up to 1990.
I used the earth map from techtonics and mixed Leaders/Civ. I started in North America with 3 civs and 1 other Civ in S.America. Basically Suielman of the Mongolians has almost vasselised every one in the old world. I particularly like the fact that he has repeatedly declared war on Targets he has a chance of defeating (ie people near by) rather than anyone in the new world even if his relations with us are worse. He even declared war on the germans 3/4 times. Often they capitulate then breakfree, but he'd soon be back to he's now completely taken their land. I managed to get a toe hold in the old word in China and vasselise Julius Ceasar. After Suileman + vassels defeated the last Civ inbetween us, he has now declared war on me and my vassels, although he has a massive army I now have nukes so it will be interesting to see how it goes. I could post a save if needed. The main thing is that the AI didnt bother wasting its time with long range over the sea wars it couldnt win. PS it was on Monarch |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Emperor
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,179
|
Hi guys. I don't know whether this is the right place, but Roland Johansen recommended in his post in this thread to inform you about these 2 rather dubious issues/bugs regarding AI-AI and AI-human relations during certain trades.
Interesting work you are doing here. BTW, since you are attempting to improve navy intelligence, what do you think about the Sea Patrol function (we have a huge debate in the BTS forum).
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Prince
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 463
|
Hey Guys,
I've continued playing the game I mentioned above. Im not too sure if the AI is using its planes at all havent noticed them bombing me. Could be to do with the new plane retreat code ? Also the AI could do with priortising fission a bit more because I've had nukes for about 50 years and no one else has. I think if they get nuked the AI should beeline straight for fission if possible. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
GEM Fanboy
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 210
|
Since I have been using this mod, I sometimes get a message "Unit Cnt True" displayed in the message window. Is this intentional? I cannot duplicate the event though, seems to happen randomly (not very often).
Best Regards, Martin / Ace |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | ||
|
Revolutionary
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: California
Posts: 2,596
|
Quote:
I don't know much about the sea patrol function, I'll read some more. Quote:
Haven't seen that yet, but I'll keep my eyes open.
__________________
Mods: Better BTS AI | Unofficial 3.19 Patch | Revolution Mod Pack Components: BarbarianCiv | AIAutoPlay | DynamicCivNames
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Cheftan
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,288
|
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpo...6&postcount=14
Bwahahahaha! This so has to be fixed ASAP. (the bug is a const-correctness slash enum-turning-into-int override and bad-overuse of a name bug, that results in the attitude of the AI being ignored when trading resources!) |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Revolutionary
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: California
Posts: 2,596
|
Yeah ... that's a pretty remarkable bug. I'll have a new version up with fixes for that (plus a couple other tricks) in a couple of days.
__________________
Mods: Better BTS AI | Unofficial 3.19 Patch | Revolution Mod Pack Components: BarbarianCiv | AIAutoPlay | DynamicCivNames
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Revolutionary
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: California
Posts: 2,596
|
(For those of you wondering what we're talking about, in the BTS SDK there are two functions called AI_getAttitude in CvPlayerAI, one which gets the attitude type towards another player and one which gets the attitude type that corresponds to the integer attitude value. However, for some somewhat complicated reasons, there are circumstances where the programmer thinks there calling one but actually calling the other. In this circumstance, calling AI_getAttitude for player 0 (the human in single player) instead always returns CAUTIOUS since it interprets the 0 as the attitude value. Everything compiles just fine and seems to work unless you're very attentive ... major props to DanF5771 for having the perseverance to locate the problem!)
So I renamed the static AttitudeTypes AI_getAttitude(int iAttitudeVal) function to AI_getAttitudeTypeForVal and found only a couple places which needed to use this new function. There were then 3 places which complained about no longer having access to AI_getAttitude ... CvPlayerAI::AI_bonusTrade CvPlayerAI::AI_civicTrade CvPlayerAI::AI_religionTrade In all three circumstances it really affected trading, both with the human player (who the AI was in effect always CAUTIOUS towards) and in AI-AI trades ... in large games, player 10 and later would have a very easy time trading since others would effectively always be FRIENDLY towards them in terms of trading these three things. For those of you keeping score at home, I fixed the compiler complaints by using: Code:
GET_PLAYER(getID()).AI_getAttitude(ePlayer)
__________________
Mods: Better BTS AI | Unofficial 3.19 Patch | Revolution Mod Pack Components: BarbarianCiv | AIAutoPlay | DynamicCivNames
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Deity
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: the Netherlands
Posts: 4,281
|
I'm glad to hear that you're seriously squashing this bug.
This means that now after the game has been on the market for years, we're finally getting the diplomacy to work as it should have from the start. How weird is that! Think of all the AI-AI deals that have never been realized in all those millions of games because of this bug.
__________________
If in other sciences we should arrive at certainty without doubt and truth without error, it behooves us to place the foundations of knowledge in mathematics. Last edited by Roland Johansen; Jul 21, 2008 at 04:35 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Chieftain
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 93
|
Great Project here! Im looking forward for the upcoming version.
It's actually UNBELIEVABLE that the trade bug hasn't been fixed before. Are You going to include the unofficial patch by solver? Please don't if the drill2-makes-units-immune-to-coll.damage-bug isn't fixed. It makes the game unplayable in my opinion. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Immortal?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 488
|
I want to help work on this.
Do we have a repository yet? |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Revolutionary
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: California
Posts: 2,596
|
Yes and no ... I'm now an administrator for the Better AI sourceforge repository but TortoiseSVN has been causing my computer to bluescreen. Haven't been able to figure out WTF is going on with that yet ... I hope to figure that out over the next week when I finally get some real free time.
__________________
Mods: Better BTS AI | Unofficial 3.19 Patch | Revolution Mod Pack Components: BarbarianCiv | AIAutoPlay | DynamicCivNames
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Warlord
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: London
Posts: 228
|
Sorry for the airhead question, but if I download this better AI from the link provided at the top has it been updated yet to include the trade bug fix?
Many thanks |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Prince
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 463
|
v0.3 ++++++++
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Revolutionary
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: California
Posts: 2,596
|
Yeah, the link is for the latest version of BBAI which is now 0.3 and includes the trade bug fix.
__________________
Mods: Better BTS AI | Unofficial 3.19 Patch | Revolution Mod Pack Components: BarbarianCiv | AIAutoPlay | DynamicCivNames
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
|
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| [BTS] v0.2 Discussion thread | jdog5000 | Civ4 - Better AI | 1 | Jun 30, 2008 08:54 PM |
| [BTS] v0.11 Discussion thread | jdog5000 | Civ4 - Better AI | 8 | Jun 25, 2008 05:02 PM |
| Warring States Scenario for FFH2 v0.21 | fannarh | Civ4 - Scenarios | 2 | Sep 15, 2007 10:01 AM |
| Turnchat Instruction Thread - Wednesday 21 December, 21:00 GMT | Furiey | Civ3 - Game of Democracy VII | 7 | Dec 21, 2005 06:37 PM |
| The Clone Wars (v0.21) - Preview | Pleb | Civ3 - Creation & Customization | 52 | Nov 28, 2003 09:33 AM |