Single Player bugs and crashes - After the 24th of February 2014

I dont believe this statement, i have had NO MAF's or CTD's ever in PreH?? If you did, where are your posts for the CTD's then??
You do not need to believe.
Grab yourself a giant map and play a session about several hours.
Sooner or later the game exits with a message abaout not being able to address the graphics memory and a suggestion to reduce your graphics settings.
 
IF it's a Graphics added issue start with the graphics added right before SVN 7106 thru 7138. Pull them out and release an SVN with out them to see if we continue to MAF.

JosEPh

This can be done just through the art defines. No need to remove the graphics from the FPKs just edit the art and art style defines that point to them to point at whatever they did before. It can't load what it does not know about:D

edit PS I have not had a MAF on huge since before v33.
 
Peculiar thing about the MAF's i got after V34 is that they always came when the game used 1.8-2.2 GB memory. I have 64bit system and 16GB of RAM; additionally I remember that C2C could use as much as 2.8-3.2 GB before V34.
 
Are you suggesting to 1: introduce the probability function from Great person bar into great general bar, or 2: remove the great general bar completely and integrate GG and GH into the great person bar?
1: I'm guessing it doesn't use probability system as there was no justification for TB to use extra time making the system when he could just tweak the old system when including Great Hunters.
2: This would be quite troublesome to make a balanced feature.

1 naturally.
Why have two different systems for a military and standard great people system when the current military one can use the standard GP rules as well.
 
I prefer the current system where Great Hunters and Great Hunters are based on what does the killing that gives the points towards them. Tbrd just extended the current GG system of getting points from kills to new types of great people. I would not like to see GGs converted to the way other GP are made.

An alternative is to have totally separate counters which work exactly the same as the current GG and have two bars on the screen now one for Great Generals and another for Great Hunters. With Great Admirals (sea and space) and Great Air whatever later.

Why would you want to go from a completely deterministic to probabilistic mechanism?
 
I updated this morning to SVN 7187 and C2C's memory footprint is running at 1.98 GB now. It was, with SVN 7138, running between 2.4GB and 2.8 GB.

We shall see how it procedes.

Also the 1st turn after the Re-Calc I had cities that just finished a build report that I had finished Gunsmith and Paleontology Lab. I was at 700BC Classical Era. I also had a Non Fatal Warning about BUILDINGCLASS_SMELTER_BRONZE (current assets are missing in use class-).

JosEPh
 
I prefer the current system where Great Hunters and Great Hunters are based on what does the killing that gives the points towards them. Tbrd just extended the current GG system of getting points from kills to new types of great people. I would not like to see GGs converted to the way other GP are made.

An alternative is to have totally separate counters which work exactly the same as the current GG and have two bars on the screen now one for Great Generals and another for Great Hunters. With Great Admirals (sea and space) and Great Air whatever later.

Why would you want to go from a completely deterministic to probabilistic mechanism?

Exactly. It can make sense for GPs to birth under a probabilistic method because they rise from the population - there's a lot of random factors in the way they come to be who they are, though those factors are malleable by what the population mostly does for a living and some of the local cultural influences such as wonders.

But Great Generals are derivative of the collective experiences and learning taking place among your units that have been in the field and have seen real action. Those clashes are studied and successes and failures in varying strategy are taught to real up and coming leaders, or have been directly obtained by the new Great Military Person to rise to power by having been a leader among one or more of these units when in the field. These factors are not going to lend themselves towards a probabilistic mechanism.

And from a strategy game perspective - less random, more strategy - is usually the better way to go if ever possible to arrange.

Additionally, what it's basically achieving is a way to say very directly, if 30% of your battles take place with your X units, 10% of your battles with Y units and 60% of your battles with Z units then you will, over the course of the game, be awarded 30% of your Great Military People as X types, 10% as Y types and 60% as Z types. This means that even if you introduce a type that doesn't get a lot of exposure, it should still be possible to angle things so that the player will eventually get one.

On the flip side, the probabilistic method often struggles with providing a sense of 'fairness'. For example, getting a Great Doctor to be birthed is tough (in some games impossible) because there's so little to add Great Doctor points that they can never get more than a few % likelihood of birth.

You suggest that it's somehow a bad thing to introduce a new system because it's 'confusing'. I find this to be its best trait! I don't think I'm alone when I experience a sense of satisfaction in figuring out how something works.

Why would I insult the intelligence of the people following the mod to make a less satisfactory mechanism simply because I'm afraid people won't 'get' the way a new one works? Personally, I believe that, provided there is good reason for it, the more the mod introduces new and unique mechanisms and methods, the more interesting it becomes.

This is a far more intriguing system than the current frustrating randomized GP birth mechanism that has caused more than one player to save and restart and replay a birthing round repeatedly to get the desired results.

Oh... and it's entirely intentional design. How hard would it really be to duplicate the % check used on the normal GP birthing? Really?
 
Exactly. It can make sense for GPs to birth under a probabilistic method because they rise from the population - there's a lot of random factors in the way they come to be who they are, though those factors are malleable by what the population mostly does for a living and some of the local cultural influences such as wonders.

Cant we just add another GH icon underneath the GG one for them??
 
I think he wants a separate bar for GH and a separate bar for GG. I never bother with not using GG or GH to make the XP generating buildings myself so that seems game warping to me personally.

---
Vanilla version 3X (current):
-Tech Adhesives shows 2 tar pit buildings that are exactly the same thing (display issue)
-Wood working does this with wood gather terrain upgrade.
-A freak thing with storms. I had a storm pop up on a square with a unit sentrying on it. I decided to try and see if I could out heal the storm. This worked and the unit managed to regain full health in one turn. I checked the unit the next turn and it was back to taking damage. Only it didn't give me the option of healing the damage again. Passing the turn meant more damage and the healing sentry option was still not available. moving the unit granted the option back. This was odd enough to bother reporting for me.

-I can confirm a CTD (once in two dozen hours and two different games) on giant sized map for that graphical glitch. It was not repeatable so I can only guess its a buffer overflow issue.
 
For example, getting a Great Doctor to be birthed is tough (in some games impossible) because there's so little to add Great Doctor points that they can never get more than a few % likelihood of birth.

This is because I haven't been able to fix the specialist part of the city screen. If I could do that then we could have doctors and lawyers like we should.

Cant we just add another GH icon underneath the GG one for them??

What do you mean by icon?

I think SO wants a separate set of bars for each type and each type be totally separate, so that getting a GG does not increase the cost of the GH you are currently going for. I disagree with the second part and while I know what needs doing to get them displayed it is in the same piece of code as the specialist stuff above.
 
Gathering of points is still the same as your current system.
You kill with hunters you get hunter points.
You kill with military, you get military points.
And when both points reach a threshold, one is born.

This is exactly how standard gp works too.
You build scientific wonders, you get scientist points.
You build artistic wonders, you get artist points.
When total reach a threshold, one is born.

So obviously both are similar systems, but why are the outcomes different where one is based on probability based on points gathered, while the other is based on whichever is highest.
Then the question will be what if it is a tie.

P.S. I didn't insult the intelligence of your players, but even your boss SO himself don't understand it...
 
Gathering of points is still the same as your current system.
You kill with hunters you get hunter points.
You kill with military, you get military points.
And when both points reach a threshold, one is born.

This is exactly how standard gp works too.
You build scientific wonders, you get scientist points.
You build artistic wonders, you get artist points.
When total reach a threshold, one is born.

So obviously both are similar systems, but why are the outcomes different where one is based on probability based on points gathered, while the other is based on whichever is highest.
Then the question will be what if it is a tie.

P.S. I didn't insult the intelligence of your players, but even your boss SO himself don't understand it...

1) One difference to highlight here (and probably the one that's been the most confusing for SO) is that not all assignment points reset once a GMP is born. With GP points, all likelihood ratings reset when one is born. With the GMP system, it doesn't 'forget' all the points that went towards a less frequently awarded type so as to support some balance between a very common type and a much less common type, allowing the less common type a fighting chance to eventually be the one with the greatest value.

Unlike the GP, the assignment points are only a running total of the assignment flavor and should not be confused with the amount needed. One type's assignment points can (and after the first GMP birth often WILL) exceed the threshold amount because that's not the amount that's being tracked to reach the threshold.

When an XP is awarded, 1 pt goes towards progress towards the next GMP birth and another entirely different type of point is assigned towards weighting the next GMP type. They are not the same since it does not reset all assignment points once a GMP is born.

2) There CAN be a tie but only if one type overtakes another will it supercede which type will be born. Thus if my GG have 10 pts and my GH has 9 and the next point will get me a GMP, the GG will be born because even if I get a GH point, it hasn't overtaken the GG and thus become the type that will be assigned. At all times the type that will be born if it were to be born NOW is known to the game system and is expressed in the hoverover info. Only once one type > all other types will it reset the 'next to be born' type with the one that has the most points weighted towards it.



So it's more like this:
You kill with Explorers you get hunter points. You also get overall progress points.
You kill with Combatants, you get general points. You also get overall progress points.
When overall progress points reach a threshold, one is born.
The type born is determined by which type has earned the most points.
The type born will have all its points reset. BUT all others will keep their points. This does NOT mean you are any closer to the next GMP.

Then the amount to get the next GMP will now require more than it did to get the last.

Conversely:
You build scientific wonders, you get scientist points.
You build artistic wonders, you get artist points.
When total reach a threshold, one is born.
The type born is based on a 1-100 random check that checks against the ratio of all types of points gathered.
All points are reset to 0.

Then the amount to get to the next GP will now require more than it did to get the last.
 
Would it be possible to change it to:

Kill animals, get great hunter
Kill people, get great general


????
 
I just updated to the current version 7193 and got a bunch of fatal load warnings, all for heroes.
In v7189 SO moved the heroes out of the unit file into a own hero file.
May i ask to upload said hero file to the SVN?
 
Would it be possible to change it to:

Kill animals, get great hunter
Kill people, get great general


????

Possible but NOT optimal given how we want the system to work for more than the Great Hunter/Great General eventually.
 
Top Bottom