A New Dawn Beta Builds

[Afforess]

It's really amazing how fast patches are thrown out but how about the python errors according to multiplayer OOS ?
Is there any chance to get a fix in the nearer future ?

Believe it got fixed back with Beta 4. If you get more issues, upload save/logs.

 

[Afforess]

Ever had this happen to you with railroads built in your territory and putting up with a cavalry invasion? This needs to be thought through further. I know I said we need to beef up incentive for people to use mounted warfare but there is no need to go overboard lol

I believe using enemy rails is not without historical precedent. IIRC, the Southern states in the Confederated States during the Civil War broke up some of their own rails to prevent supply trains from entering. In WWI, I believe both sides also abused railways. Build more forts and man them, since they have ZoC. You need to change your strategy. You can't just ignore the front lines - you need to man and defend it. The horrors - actually strategy!

Faster growth is always a better thing. Again consider a city that has rampant unhealthyness and NOTHING left to build (minus doctors office / aqueduct) and chooses NOT to build those buildings when in desperate need of them.

Keep in mind the normal human governor, and the "AI Governor" use different code. Turn on the "AI Governor" in the graphic option area, and let me know if it works better.

Was unawere of this; will try it out. It would be an idea to mention that Despotism, Monarchy, and Fascism give fixed borders in the civics screen. Here is another idea (if it can easily be implemented):

They do. They always have. It's like the first line for the civic...

Then we agree to disagree; having free irrigation canals BEFORE the technology was even available to build it (city planning) to spur your civilizations growth early game was awesome. Graveyards, while nice, simply dont compare in that regard. That said as it is, civs that have lots of river tiles in them definitely have too much advantage as opposed to those who start out in the middle of a jungle at the edge of a continent. Thats the only drawback to the river canals approach.

It wasn't awesome, it was OP.

 

[Afforess]

But there is still vassalage civic in military section.

First impressions: the game is not easy any more. It becomes more and more difficult each beta I was doing pretty well on monarch in beta4, but I can't keep the pace on beta5. Generally nice balancing, but the unhealthiness problem becomes ridiculous now. Seems like you can't chop your forrests anymore

I'm impressed with the civic changes: it is not an easy path anymore. Keep up great job!

I also appreciate that the game goes smoothly. Speed improvements is real!

Sounds about right then.

I like your ideas and comments Arkatakor (highly constructive) as I'm sure Afforess does too (and face it, it's what he thinks that counts )
I'm sure I'll have some of my own, when I get this pesky new house sorted out, and can get back to the IMPORTANT things, like playing Civ IV

+1 Agree.

 

[Afforess]

I am having serious issues with the lack of city maintenance costs in my latest game, so I went reading back in this thread and saw some posts alluding to it being nerfed. Is this true? Has city maintenance basically been completely eliminated from the game now? In my last game (beta 5) my city maintenance was actually NEGATIVE and I was creating as many cities as I wanted in the early game. Is this how it is suppose to work or is there a bug or do I have a bad install?

It seems to me one should never have a negative city maintenance cost? And eliminating city maintenance in my opinion would unbalance a whole bunch of buildings (e.g., Courthouse) that affect city maintenance costs.

I haven't seen too many others complain about this so I am wondering if I have a bad install, or if somehow city maintenance has just been eliminated from the game (at least in the early game) and I'm the only one who cares. The way it is working for me now seems very broken. I hope this is a bug or a bad install, not a new feature

City Maintenance should not be negative or zero except in rare circumstances. Upload a save from Beta 4/5 if you want me to take a look.

 

[TheDisco]

City Maintenance should not be negative or zero except in rare circumstances. Upload a save from Beta 4/5 if you want me to take a look.

Unfortunately I trashed all my saves as I just reinstalled and patched again just in case I had some corrupted files. From what I remember though I was the Aztecs and had mostly the base civics except for Monarchy, Slavery, and Charity. Also, mapsize = Huge and gamespeed = Marathon.

My "number of cities maintenance cost" was -7 that I am sure. Is that negative "number of cities maintenance cost" even possible given the above scenario? I think my cities were relatively low population and I might have built a couple sacrificial altars if that makes a difference.

Side note: I also still had the slavery bug where my new cities didn't get the free slave...

 

[Stelmack]

Soo how about that game not working? Unless I missed it somewhere. Not trying to be impatient, just making sure its noticed, as I can no longer play the game. I did install the mega civ pack though, could that be the problem? I heard it had some issues with governments.

 

[TheDisco]

Soo how about that game not working? Unless I missed it somewhere. Not trying to be impatient, just making sure its noticed, as I can no longer play the game. I did install the mega civ pack though, could that be the problem? I heard it had some issues with governments.

I would try it without the mega civ pack maybe? The game is definately working for many of us at least, although there are still bugs being found and balancing is still happening.

 

[Afforess]

Soo how about that game not working? Unless I missed it somewhere. Not trying to be impatient, just making sure its noticed, as I can no longer play the game. I did install the mega civ pack though, could that be the problem? I heard it had some issues with governments.

Mega Civ pack is not for 1.76. Can't use it.

 

[Afforess]

I just fixed the following issues for the next beta, changes are in the SVN, for those who know how to compile DLL's:

1.) Fixed the free specialist issue with new cities
2.) Fixed battles ending before all enemy units are dead (I think!)
3.) Fixed stacks cycling to the next stack after a battle, even when other units in the same stack still have moves left. Now splits the stack apart, with the units with moves left in the larger group. (I hope this fixes it!)
4.) Fixed negative maintenance tooltips and totals. (Can still see negative maintenance tooltips, but you won't earn money from maintenance.)

 

[BrianL03]

For some reason 1.76B5 isn't able to install correctly. I'm doing a fresh AND installation and even though it's pointing to the correct Steam mods folder, I both get an error during installation and the flag doesn't show the correct version. I'm not even seeing the incorrect directory problem like I was having for B4. Any thoughts?

EDIT: Tried just installing to a random directory so I could copy/paste the new files over the old ones and noticed that when the installation error appeared, the new directory was automatically deleted. This probably is what is happening to the B5 files when I install to the correct directory too.

I'm running Win7 if that helps at all.

 

[TheDisco]

I just fixed the following issues for the next beta, changes are in the SVN, for those who know how to compile DLL's:

1.) Fixed the free specialist issue with new cities
2.) Fixed battles ending before all enemy units are dead (I think!)
3.) Fixed stacks cycling to the next stack after a battle, even when other units in the same stack still have moves left. Now splits the stack apart, with the units with moves left in the larger group. (I hope this fixes it!)
4.) Fixed negative maintenance tooltips and totals. (Can still see negative maintenance tooltips, but you won't earn money from maintenance.)

Sounds good! Looks like 1) and 4) hopefully solve the issues I've been seeing. Just in case on number 4) though I did do some more investigating:

The issue seemed to be when you switched from Chiefdom to Monarchy (and I think from Chiefdom to Despotism too). It for some reason added a negative 100% modifier to total maintenance (which left only the "base maintenance" component). According to the civic description for Chiefdom ("No maintenance for cities on home continent") that negative 100% modifier should have been there for Chiefdom but not Monarchy, but it actually was working the other way around (e.g., Chiefdom did have city maintenance but Monarchy didn't)

I'll see how it works now once beta 6 is out...

 

[Smikis]

long time stalker.. seems i never managed to create acc, well its done now

hats off, on excellent beta

as to whole bug reporting, "Bug mod" settings doesnt save in 5th beta, pretty sure it did in 4th
which is bit annoying as every time you load a game you have to change settings for it, to your liking

attempted with quit to windows, quit to main menu, and alt+f4 , neither of those save settings.

 

[Stelmack]

I just fixed the following issues for the next beta, changes are in the SVN, for those who know how to compile DLL's:

1.) Fixed the free specialist issue with new cities
2.) Fixed battles ending before all enemy units are dead (I think!)
3.) Fixed stacks cycling to the next stack after a battle, even when other units in the same stack still have moves left. Now splits the stack apart, with the units with moves left in the larger group. (I hope this fixes it!)
4.) Fixed negative maintenance tooltips and totals. (Can still see negative maintenance tooltips, but you won't earn money from maintenance.)

Reinstalling without mega civ pack worked!

But these changes you just mentioned are what I'm most sought after. Good job on all your hard work!

 

[arroccali]

Hi,

is it just me on in beta 5 you can't see anymore the strength of units when you hover on their icon to build them?
i'm using b5 installed on top of b4 in win7.

 

[Babri]

Hovering over any unit graphic causes the crash. If you go to the units list you will only see 2 or 3 units!

It works fine if you go into a game. It is making my testing take 5 times as long. Since I like to test that the unit graphics work in the pedia first before trying a game.

Interesting. I have not yet reproduced the crash, but when I open the Sevopedia from the mod main menu (beofe loading a game) it behaves oddly. For example it only has 2 units in it! Digging now...

I am facing both of these problems. Afforess please fix them.

 

[Koshling]

I am facing both of these problems. Afforess please fix them.

They are fixed in beta 5

 

[Babri]

They are fixed in beta 5

I have beta 5 installed but I am still facing this problem.

 

[Stelmack]

Hi,

is it just me on in beta 5 you can't see anymore the strength of units when you hover on their icon to build them?
i'm using b5 installed on top of b4 in win7.

I'm only having this issue with calvary and mounted units, but I'm sure it will be resolved in time.

 

[Danei]

I believe using enemy rails is not without historical precedent. IIRC, the Southern states in the Confederated States during the Civil War broke up some of their own rails to prevent supply trains from entering. In WWI, I believe both sides also abused railways.

I agree with this, but does it make sense that cavalry would automatically be able to do this (if infantry cannot)? I don't know how much coding it would require, but maybe instead of the commando promotion automatically being applied to cavalry, a new promotion that only allows use of roads (and treats railroads like roads or ignores them) would be more appropriate for cavalry.

Whereas use of roads makes perfect sense for horse-riding soldiers, use of railroads doesn't, in my opinion; if anything, it would be more difficult to transport mounted armies via rail, not less.

 

[BrianL03]

I agree with this, but does it make sense that cavalry would automatically be able to do this (if infantry cannot)? I don't know how much coding it would require, but maybe instead of the commando promotion automatically being applied to cavalry, a new promotion that only allows use of roads (and treats railroads like roads or ignores them) would be more appropriate for cavalry.

Whereas use of roads makes perfect sense for horse-riding soldiers, use of railroads doesn't, in my opinion; if anything, it would be more difficult to transport mounted armies via rail, not less.

I think the bigger issue is not that enemies are able to use railroads and/or roads, but that they are able to so cheaply. Horsemen in any form give a huge advantage with this ability for little cost down that it becomes an unfair advantage. They're already difficult units to take down, even if you're building Pikemen (I was lucky to have a source of Ivory nearby to be able to make War Elephants), and coupling their high attack ability with Commando makes them into a juggernaut of a unit. I personally find the Commando ability overkill for a unit that already has high movement and high attack. The AI otherwise doesn't build anything else.