A New Dawn Bug Reports and Feedback

[soup567]

I just started a new game with culturally linked starts, using all 39 civs, and it still doesn't seem to be working. Is there anything that causes it to break? I used the RFC Huge Earth Map custom scenario, chose what leader I wanted to be and the leaders for a few other civs, but I don't think that would break it. Why isn't it working? I hate putting all the civs in their correct places with the world builder every time I start.

 

[Afforess]

I just started a new game with culturally linked starts, using all 39 civs, and it still doesn't seem to be working. Is there anything that causes it to break? I used the RFC Huge Earth Map custom scenario, chose what leader I wanted to be and the leaders for a few other civs, but I don't think that would break it. Why isn't it working? I hate putting all the civs in their correct places with the world builder every time I start.

What do you mean by not working? The scenario, does it use preset starting locations?

 

[ravenone]

@Alorente Here's how to change it, Afforess must have overlooked it: In Civ4BuildInfos.xml, find and replace all the times "IRON_WORKING" appears for "FEATURE_FOREST to "BRONZE_WORKING"

I tried this and it didn't change the need for Iron Working and trees being removed to build a cottage.

Is there any other files or places that need to be changed? I changed all I could find in the Civ4BuildInfos.xml file (4 or 5 places).

 

[Afforess]

I tried this and it didn't change the need for Iron Working and trees being removed to build a cottage.

Is there any other files or places that need to be changed? I changed all I could find in the Civ4BuildInfos.xml file (4 or 5 places).

The file you need to look at is in Modules/Projects/Vincentz/Improve.

 

[soup567]

What do you mean by not working? The scenario, does it use preset starting locations?

No, It's random, but I thought that culturally linked starts would overwrite that.

 

[soup567]

Oops double post

 

[astarmrus]

The file you need to look at is in Modules/Projects/Vincentz/Improve.

ok, well I managed to do it, but how make it possible to build cottages without chopping down the forest? Is it like a new feature of 1.72?

 

[Afforess]

ok, well I managed to do it, but how make it possible to build cottages without chopping down the forest? Is it like a new feature of 1.72?

No. It is a Regression.

No, It's random, but I thought that culturally linked starts would overwrite that.

If it has pre-defined starting locations, Culturally Linked Starts will never run, because the starting location code is never executed, simple as that.

 

[AndarielHalo]

Nothing pisses me off more in this game than the lying-ing battle stats and dice roll predictions. They are . COMPLETE AND UTTER ING .

These offenses are EGREGIOUS! It happens in EVERY BUILD of this mod, and probably in the base game.

But my problem is less with the stupidity of the decision to make archers somehow able to defeat TWO armored spearmen, but the stats outright LYING by saying I have a 53% chance of winning.

I have loaded and reloaded this save and re-played this battle. I send in BOTH my spearmen units against ONE barbarian arrcher. They ALWAYS LOSE. BOTH OF THEM.

In fact, it seems like every time I reload and play it out, THE EXACT SAME STATS HAPPEN EVERY SINGLE TIME. THE FIRST SPEARMAN IS ALWAYS KILLED, THE ENEMY ARCHER IS ALWAYS DOWN TO 2.4/3 HEALTH, AND THE SECOND SPEARMAN IS ALWAYS KILLED BY THE LAST REMAINING ARCHER.


Something is severely wrong here. This isn't a case of an enemy unit being better at defense than offense, it's a case of disgustingly inaccurate battle probability statistics and a heaping help of BULL

 

[Stormwind]

Then don't attack with a chance of lower than 95%.

 

[Afforess]

Something is severely wrong here.

I tire of this. You have delighted us long enough. Please post in a reasonable manner, or not at all. The RNG in AND is exactly the same one used in BTS, and the RNG is BTS has been proven to be fair.

 

[AndarielHalo]

The only conclusion I can draw, leaving aside the obvious and 100% proven pro-AI bias, is that the battle statistics are pre-determined BEFORE each turn, so I can reload each new turn autosave and get the SAME RESULT every 4-1,000,301 times, unless I change it somehow to lose in a new way

 

[Afforess]

The only conclusion I can draw, leaving aside the obvious and 100% proven pro-AI bias, is that the battle statistics are pre-determined BEFORE each turn, so I can reload each new turn autosave and get the SAME RESULT every 4-1,000,301 times, unless I change it somehow to lose in a new way

Yes, that is EXACTLY how RNG's work. You should go read up on them.

Also, there is NO Pro-AI bias. If anything, the game is horribly tilted in the humans favor. The human can reload saves to alter the game, use the worldbuilder, and cheat. The AI has no such advantage.

 

[AndarielHalo]

I haven't researched Alphabet yet.

 

[Stormwind]

Theres a game option called "Random Seed on reload" which probably does change the values in the saved game but IDK exactly.

 

[Afforess]

Theres a game option called "Random Seed on reload" which probably does change the values in the saved game but IDK exactly.

Yes, that is exactly what it does. However, the new seed is not random, but is psuedo-random.

 

[Grathocke]

But my problem is less with the stupidity of the decision to make archers somehow able to defeat TWO armored spearmen, but the stats outright LYING by saying I have a 53% chance of winning.

This is exactly what Sid was talking about.

 

[os79]

:coughcough:

What is "RNG"?

:coughcough:

 

[Afforess]

:coughcough:

What is "RNG"?

:coughcough:

Random Number Generator.

Computers can not actually generate random numbers. Computer scientists found the way to create the most fair RNG was to base the future values off of past values. The first random number is generated by a 'seed' value, so, theoretically, you could predict every number generated off of that seed value, to infinitum. This is what Civ uses. It is also how/why multiplayer can go out of sync. OOS errors are when, for whatever reason, the random number generated by each machine was not identical, despite having the same seed value.

Now, with Random Numbers, which Heads/Tails combinations are more likely:

1. THTHTHTHTHTHTHTHTH
   
2. TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
   
3. TTTTTTTTHHHHHHHHHH

Answer:

Spoiler :

It's a trick question, each is just as likely as the other, they all have the same probability of happening. This is why AndarielHalo is mad, as he got a streak of bad numbers. A streak of bad numbers is just as likely as good numbers.

I highly recommend reading up on and learning basic probability, wikipedia is a good resource.

 

[os79]

Random Number Generator.

Computers can not actually generate random numbers. Computer scientists found the way to create the most fair RNG was to base the future values off of past values. The first random number is generated by a 'seed' value, so, theoretically, you could predict every number generated off of that seed value, to infinitum. This is what Civ uses. It is also how/why multiplayer can go out of sync. OOS errors are when, for whatever reason, the random number generated by each machine was not identical, despite having the same seed value.

Now, with Random Numbers, which Heads/Tails combinations are more likely:

1. THTHTHTHTHTHTHTHTH
   
2. TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
   
3. TTTTTTTTHHHHHHHHHH

Answer:

Spoiler :

It's a trick question, each is just as likely as the other, they all have the same probability of happening. This is why AndarielHalo is mad, as he got a streak of bad numbers. A streak of bad numbers is just as likely as good numbers.

I highly recommend reading up on and learning basic probability, wikipedia is a good resource.

Thanks. I got it. I remember reading something similar when reading arguments against "see God did it!" etc, and an arguer posited this exact same explanations of why "blessings" happen. it was purely random and we just sometimes have a long run of good luck due to randomness of events in this universe.

I know the above statements are not precisely the same as RNG but it is still understandable .
Thanks!