Bug Reports and Technical Issues

[Leoreth]

Well I am saying it seems not very logical to the player that we should loose cities to a respawn because a neighbor civ is unstable.

I find that very logical.

This would mean you can never take any cities in any other civilizations core.
With the current respawn criteria you may loose them at any time because the civ respawns.
Regardless if you are Solid/Stable.
They game becomes unplayable when you are trying accomplish UHVs where you need to conquer cities in other civs cores.
You can design a game which is historically accurate or a game where someone actually plays it.

That is a very dramatic framing of the situation. If you want to control a civilization's core, actually control it? Instead of just a part of it. You are complaining about not having control of something when literally you have made the choice not to control it.

 

[Maggy_domain]

Am I stupid or I can't select the locked modified assets option in custom game ?

 

[SultanRedSnake]

I suspect some losses in translation taking place. First let me try to repeat Leoreth in other words:

No, that's not quite how it works. For a respawn to happen most (but not all) cities need to be held by civilizations that are sufficiently unstable, but once the respawn happens your stability does not matter for determining which cities become part of the respawn.

Translation: If you control all cities in a civ's specified Birth Area and maintain sufficient stability, the respawn won't proc.

This would mean you can never take any cities in any other civilizations core.

No, it means you need to leverage other means of maintaining sufficient stability so that respawn conditions can't be met. To work with your example, you'd have the option to control all of China's core yourself to at least eliminate the variable of another civ's stability influencing the likelihood of a respawn. Yes, there will be a price to pay in the Expansion column, likely a hefty one. You are challenged to compensate in the other columns (Economy, Domestic, etc).

Version #2: This forum is full of players who have won Japan UHV games. There is no "never".

With the current respawn criteria you may loose them at any time because the civ respawns.

See above. Also see the Pedia. *At any time* is not the case. There are specific conditions.

They game becomes unplayable when you are trying accomplish UHVs where you need to conquer cities in other civs cores.

If it's possible to express the sentiment that one might #GetGuud most politely I aspire to someday find it. For real for real from the bottom of my heart this is the certified Reddit definition of a #SkillIssue

Version #2 Again: This forum is full of players who have accomplished UHVs where you need to conquer cities in other civs core area. The game is playable.

You can design a game which is historically accurate or a game where someone actually plays it.

And you can pay for it.

Hot Take - Blizzard Style: You don't *want* what you propose. Leoreth's crafted this infernal machine carefully and lovingly over like 10 goshdarn years now at least in concert with we proud citizens to such an exalted point where we can't even remember when or if any fundamental design problems existed. The challenge factors, aka Why We Game, are already established. The only Shop Talk taking place here concerns fine tuning and fussy fan punch lists.

TLDR; UHV Japan - credit to @Logoncal

 

[Leoreth]

Honestly I wouldn't go that far. This system has been created over a long period of time but that also means it is a compromise of a lot of different concerns that were important at the time. And other changes elsewhere in the game always impact existing systems, so a decision that was right in the past might not be right in the present anymore.

I am saying this because I want to be clear that I am always open to feedback and suggestions because these systems are not perfect and can only improve if I learn about player experiences. But on the other hand that does not mean I have to agree with every feedback I get and take action on it. All I can do is provide my perspective on it.

When running into a question like this it is always helpful to ask:
- is what I am trying to do something that the game is meant to encourage
- am I doing the things the game is asking of me to achieve what I am trying to do

I kept thinking of the situation in your game and was wondering why China would respawn with two cities, one of which is being held by Korea. It is true that you cannot do anything about your vassal's stability and that you cannot take the city from them after the fact, so that would be a valid complaint. But then I started to wonder why there are only two cities in the first place, because certainly the Chinese respawn area is large enough to contain more than two cities. And without looking at the game, the only conclusion I can draw is that you took certain actions to minimize the number of cities in the Chinese respawn area to make things easier for you.

So one question to ask yourself is: does the game want you to make things easier for yourself in this way, or is what you are experiencing perhaps a way for the game to ensure that you cannot make things easier for yourself like that.

An uncharitable read of your request would be to say that you are trying to game the system and the system didn't let you game it, and now you are asking me to make it more gameable. To which my reply would be. Don't try to game the system and engage with it properly, and this issue would not exist, and therefore it does not need addressing.

(I am saying this with no negative feelings by the way - I am trying to be open and transparent here, so please don't read this post as confrontational.)

 

[triplebassist]

I just took a look at the save, and I actually think there is something weird going on. There are, or at least there should be, four cities in the Chinese respawn area.

But Xi'an and Kaifeng aren't breaking away with Beijing and Hangzhou

I'm not that confident in what I know about the respawn mechanics, but I thought all cities in the flip zone are supposed to flip on respawn. Is that not true?

 

[Leoreth]

That does look weird. I will have a look.

 

[Cosmos1985]

I'm not really sure if this counts as a bug per se nor if it's even fixable at all, but automated workers are smarter than they are supposed to be with regards to barb animals (I presume any hostile unit at all). Even if the animal is outside of their vision, they stop their movement - or whatever they are doing - in order to avoid getting in range of it. I was confused why one of my workers suddenly was awaiting orders and used world builder to see that there indeed was an animal nearby. The worker was not supposed to know that though, so to speak.

 

[Leoreth]

Yeah, this part of the code is a bit of a mess. I am sure it can be fixed/improved (when I looked at AdvCiv I think it has been rewritten there) but the last time I looked into fixing it myself I considered it not worth the effort. Probably won't address this unless I can adapt the implementation from another mod entirely.

 

[RustyBrick]

I think that immigration on marathon speed is broken at the moment. My cities, especially my core cities are losing population at an absurd level. I think this is a bug, but if not it's something that needs to be balanced.

Some things I noticed while playing Japan today, but I also noticed it while playing Greece, I just didn't play too long after America spawned.

• Before immigration started Kyoto and Tokyo were at 22 and 20 population respectively, they were down to 18 & 13 by1955, they were also at 20 surplus food the entire time.
• Every 6-12 turns I lose population in 4-6 cities in a wave, but they always occur in my core cities. I owned around 20 cities by the time America spawned, but it never consistently targeted any one of the non-core cities which were all large.
• I think losing two population in each city is too many.
• Almost every American city was ~10-40 percent Japanese, and every city was starving. Omaha had a shortage of -14 food and were 58% American and 38% Japanese.
• America also hasn't grown for the past 200 turns, on the population graph they cycle up and down.
• I noticed that only American city demographics were changing, like all 100% of their nationality. I don't think other new world civs were getting immigration. is that intended?
• Immigration didn't stop before I won in 1988, I think it should stop at some point before then or the digital era.

So basically I lose 2 population in my core cities every 6-12 turns which have 16-20 surplus food. And these guys go off and starve in America.

 

[Leoreth]

Can you share a save of this?

 

[CometHalo]

I think that immigration on marathon speed is broken at the moment. My cities, especially my core cities are losing population at an absurd level. I think this is a bug, but if not it's something that needs to be balanced.

Some things I noticed while playing Japan today, but I also noticed it while playing Greece, I just didn't play too long after America spawned.

• Before immigration started Kyoto and Tokyo were at 22 and 20 population respectively, they were down to 18 & 13 by1955, they were also at 20 surplus food the entire time.
• Every 6-12 turns I lose population in 4-6 cities in a wave, but they always occur in my core cities. I owned around 20 cities by the time America spawned, but it never consistently targeted any one of the non-core cities which were all large.
• I think losing two population in each city is too many.
• Almost every American city was ~10-40 percent Japanese, and every city was starving. Omaha had a shortage of -14 food and were 58% American and 38% Japanese.
• America also hasn't grown for the past 200 turns, on the population graph they cycle up and down.
• I noticed that only American city demographics were changing, like all 100% of their nationality. I don't think other new world civs were getting immigration. is that intended?
• Immigration didn't stop before I won in 1988, I think it should stop at some point before then or the digital era.

So basically I lose 2 population in my core cities every 6-12 turns which have 16-20 surplus food. And these guys go off and starve in America.

Obviously not a bug in the bug forum (I apologize) but I have found it useful when playing as America to switch to despotism after building the Statue of Liberty since I want to best make use of the starving masses to build critical infrastructure for the next wave of starving masses…tbh maybe this is realistic cf. what real 19th century American migrants went through

 

[Leoreth]

After a casual look at the immigration weights I think the issue is that destination cities are both weighted by size and by food and happiness... the idea was that larger cities are prioritised but it can also lead to existing population overwhelming starvation and unhappiness. I could do some blind guess improvements to the logic but it would be nicer to have an actual save to reference and check if the changes help.

 

[CometHalo]

After a casual look at the immigration weights I think the issue is that destination cities are both weighted by size and by food and happiness... the idea was that larger cities are prioritised but it can also lead to existing population overwhelming starvation and unhappiness. I could do some blind guess improvements to the logic but it would be nicer to have an actual save to reference and check if the changes help.

I’m just starting another one, I can send one in if I manage to notice the cities growing into bad starvation

 

[RustyBrick]

I attached the save, but the population graph over 250 turns shows how much America is starving. The save isn't necessarily the worst of it, it's just the last one I took.

I think the issue is that destination cities are both weighted by size and by food and happiness

I think that it also isn't scaled for marathon, but maybe I'm wrong.

 

[Maggy_domain]

After a casual look at the immigration weights I think the issue is that destination cities are both weighted by size and by food and happiness... the idea was that larger cities are prioritised but it can also lead to existing population overwhelming starvation and unhappiness. I could do some blind guess improvements to the logic but it would be nicer to have an actual save to reference and check if the changes help.

I also have experienced a similar migration problem. My capital could sustain 50+ pops, but I had to world-building add them as migration was sweeping the city faster than pops could grow. American greatest cities are all starving too.
In case you need additional material, I also have a fresh marathon game that could be of help:

 

[Matara]

It seems that: 1.Korean is unstable, so its city will respawn to China. 2. Japan is not Solid, so the potential capital of China, which is Beijing, will also respawn. But other cities only require Stable to prevent spawn, so they remain in Japan. 3. Since there are 2 cities prepared to respawn, the respawn actually happens. 4. If Japan holds all China cities, the respawn will not happen. Because only capital will respawn at Stable level, and 1 city is not sufficient to actually trigger a spawn.

 

[Alekseyev_]

Is there a manual/archive download? I'd greatly prefer that over an executable installer.

 

[Leoreth]

You can download the mod from the Github release page directly.

 

[Alekseyev_]

Awesome, thank you!

 

[Force44]

Speed reduction or barbs after building the great wall (still?) did not happen.

(playing as india, first save just completed, second save still no effect)