Profile posts Latest activity Postings About

  • Did you know that unhappy citizens are not fed over 1 angry citizen? It's not limited to one I think! If you are interested, I'll redirect you to my finding.
    That way, you may look at the interpretation errors...perhaps.

    I say that to you because you the one who made me learn that bug originally.
    Eek. Yes. I just got the idea without even looking at the function, I had the image of a podium with first, second, third...
    Well, I feel a bit ashamed for not seeing that. 'twas pretty obvious. :blush:
    Thanks for pointing my blunder.
    Glad, I'll be able to continue on my other projects.

    Yep, it rounds down. The game juggles with integers and not float numbers. Most mechanics that involve dividing a number, if there's a modulo it either rounds down or round up depending on what side it favors. Often, it tends to cripple the human player and favors AI. Or gamespeeds, it won't favor. Whatever. Still, I wonder where are defined those truncations...the uncompiled CvGameCoreDLL doesn't show how it rounds.

    Anyways, that's another subject.

    "Gotta admin, I think this discussion belongs in the thread. Anyway..."

    :nono: :lol:
    Thanks. Well, it's just gonna be a code interpretation and that should not be a difficulty because you did an article about it. But I'm stuck after reading the code about how ranking affects WFYABTA denial. If you OR your tech trade partner are lower rank than half of scoreboard, supposedly, WFYABTA denial is lifted (while tech count is still active ofc) until one goes to the upper scale of the scoreboard. I looked at the code and after multiple perusing, I'm still stuck on the contrary statement: Upper scoreboard=WFYABTA lifted. :(

    Here's the appropriate code. Perhaps I was too messed up to see the obvious:
    if (eAttitude < ATTITUDE_FRIENDLY)
    if ((GC.getGameINLINE().getTeamRank(getID()) < (GC.getGameINLINE().countCivTeamsEverAlive() / 2)) ||
    (GC.getGameINLINE().getTeamRank(eTeam) < (GC.getGameINLINE().countCivTeamsEverAlive() / 2)))
    iNoTechTradeThreshold = AI_noTechTradeThreshold();

    iNoTechTradeThreshold *= std::max(0, (GC.getHandicapInfo(GET_TEAM(eTeam).getHandicapType()).getNoTechTradeModifier() + 100));
    iNoTechTradeThreshold /= 100;

    if (AI_getMemoryCount(eTeam, MEMORY_RECEIVED_TECH_FROM_ANY) > iNoTechTradeThreshold)
    Can you help me? You made that WFYABTA article and now I'm stuck between the code interpretation and yours. And testing favors yours, but I'm still in the mud. I beg some help...

    BTW, you should answer back on my profile or I may miss your reply. I don't get notifications for replies within your profile.
    "Seriously, that way, in a couple of turns, you can get a friendly civ while being at war with."

    That's a hoot.

    No, I'm not particularly engaged in the subject. I happened to notice it looking at way back when, so I "reported" it. But the mechanic of restricting the terrain types of resources doesn't strike me as all that important anyway.
    If you are still interested to this particular subject, I may attract DanF (at a opportune moment, because he is busy right now) to the subject.
    Anyhow the bug arises, is there an unbalance stemming from a riverside copper to wish disappearance of them; my guesses it has to do with really too early axes with Mining civs, which would lead to serious problems particularly on multiplayer.

    Indeed, even all the patches, there still are weird little exploits/bugs out there. DanF just found another one really "creepy" : infinite city liberation to a civ with which we are at war. Seriously, that way, in a couple of turns, you can get a friendly civ while being at war with. :crazyeye:
    hey there, i got a question?

    what's with the Noble workbook? I played the first three pretty succesful but i'd love to play more of them. why did you stop making them?
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
Top Bottom