If I do that (as in the attached screenshot), I can load the mod without any errors.
Is there an error message in the xml.log?
I hope I haven't made that unnecessarily difficult – I think I might have with some of the XML tag changes.
I've disabled it only for Ancient techs – because there is normally enough room to expand during the Ancient era regardless of the map size. For non-Ancient techs, there is now also a cost modifier based on the sea level. Here's the formula for reference: CvTeam.cpp#L3019
Fortify-heal outside cities has been working like BULL's Sentry-heal since – I don't know, v0.80? The recent change (id 004l) is that the hover text for the button says "Sentry until Healed" instead of "Fortify until Healed" when outside a city. If there is no heal button at all though, then it's not working as intended.
I hope I haven't made that unnecessarily difficult – I think I might have with some of the XML tag changes.
The game seems to run a lot better now when I do AI testing. The performance is noticeably better than prior versions and I'm not seeing the annoying end turn crashes that use to happen a lot.Jeez ...
So in the attached screenshot, I guess all the buttons to the right of (regular) Sentry would be missing? That sounds like a Python crash; anything in the PythonErr.log? And the wrong button in cities is apparently the Sea Patrol button. That mission is right before MISSION_HEAL in Civ4MissionInfos.xml. But correct hover text ...
Any additions to Civ4MissionInfos.xml on your part? Is MISSION_SENTRY_HEAL present (at the end, after MISSION_MULTI_DESELECT)?Jeez ...
Thanks, that's encouraging. The trade issue remains on my radar and I have log output now to investigate when it occurs in my own games (which I expect it will once I get around to playing).
The lack of friendships, also between AI civs, is an open issue. I think it's mainly because bonuses for open borders, shared war and supplied resources are more difficult to attain than in BtS. However, those changes have been in place for a long time. It would be interesting to know which somewhat recent change, if any, has made the AI even more difficult to befriend.
Since v0.94, it's significantly harder to max out the fair trade bonus and +3 is probably harder too. (But +1 and +2 should generally be easier to get than before.)"k"razy good
No such option.
Has been requested (once) before. Do you know how it works exactly in other mods? Is it as if you had agreed to stop trading with the bothersome AI civ? Or does it just suppress trade offers? (For how long?) One concern I have with this option is that the effect would be intransparent. If trade offers are the main issue, then I guess I'd rather have the AI make offers less frequently. I've already made some changes in that vein; e.g. map trade offers should be far less common than in BtS.
Doing this properly should imo involve checking war utility values to avoid suicidal attacks – though the (possible) simultaneous declarations of war by other civs should also be taken into account. I think there is AI code already to discourage the AI from razing the holy city of a religion with many adherents; that would have to be dialed up. Even if I cut corners on the AI, e.g. by letting the AI never raze holy cities and always declare war if a human player razes one, I'd still need to change the city-acquired popup to warn about the consequences of razing, and the option would have to be documented and maintained. (Not saying that it's a Herculean task ...)
On graphics, I'm mostly restricting myself to changes that improve usability. For a graphically enhanced version of this mod, someone else would have to put together some optional archive or create a fork/ mod-mod.
"Cease bothering us" sets a flag such that AI requests are automatically denied. I'm not sure right now if this is reverts after some amount of turns in the original mod, but that could be easily implemented.No such option.
I see. That seems like a good approach for a mod like BULL that has to keep the AI behavior unchanged. And the rule is easy to understand. One could put a little widget on the scoreboard when an AI has been "muted" (it could even look like the mute icon on an audio player), and allow unmuting through a click. Like the Open Borders indicator, which can be clicked to cancel. Could also have a mute button next to the human player's scoreboard row that shuts everyone up. That would be pretty useful for testing (when testing anything other than AI diplomacy).
Sure, that interests me. Also because my plan to move all AI decisions about AI-to-human diplomacy to the start of the human turn would be easier to realize if diplo popups could be created at any time.
In my experience, beginDiplomacy only inserts the CvDiploParameters object into CvPlayer::m_listDiplomacy, from where the EXE later – at the start of the human turn – fetches it (I think through CvPlayer::getDiplomacy) and creates the diplo popup. But I don't think I've tried calling beginDiplomacy during the human turn. Otherwise, the gDLL calls in CvPlayer::contact might work somehow.
That sounds like a much more user-friendly solution than having to go through the diplomacy screen. There should also be a message when auto-declining a trade deal, I don't think Advanced Diplomacy does that currently.
Just out of interest, why do you want to do this? So the AI doesn't act on outdated information?
Thanks, that's encouraging. The trade issue remains on my radar and I have log output now to investigate when it occurs in my own games (which I expect it will once I get around to playing).The lack of friendships, also between AI civs, is an open issue. I think it's mainly because bonuses for open borders, shared war and supplied resources are more difficult to attain than in BtS. However, those changes have been in place for a long time. It would be interesting to know which somewhat recent change, if any, has made the AI even more difficult to befriend.
The Friendly threshold is, effectively, already 1 lower than in BtS (due to the removal of -1 "first impression" on Noble difficulty and above). I'd like to lower it more, but 10 is a much nicer threshold than 9, and, at 9, the symmetry with Furious may have to be broken – the AI already gets Furious quicker than I'd like. Bizarrely, the thresholds are hardcoded in the DLL (I ought to change that). So, since I don't suppose you're using a custom DLL, I can't even recommend adjusting the Friendly threshold. (If all thresholds are too high, then +1 "first impression" through Civ4HandicapInfos.xml could be used as a makeshift measure.)
I've been meaning to add a new modifier: "+1: The enemy of my enemy is my friend" for being the worst enemy (or a war enemy?) of someone's worst enemy. I don't think that's going to be enough to set the balance straight. There don't seem to be many good reasons to like a player.
That's good news. I thought I'd have to sneak calls to CvPlayerAI into the CvPlayer code called by the EXE at turn start.
Yes, primarily. I also don't like to rely on the EXE for validating offers. For example, the EXE doesn't seem to check at-war status before displaying Defensive Pact offers. Moving the code would fix any such omissions. Also, the AI contact timer isn't reset when the EXE discards an offer; i.e. further contact attempts get delayed by the failed attempts.
At the least, I can keep an eye out for popups that don't offer an interesting decision. The pointless deal cancellation popups I mentioned above would be an example. Another obvious case is when the AI keeps peddling some old dead-end tech.
I reckon that game size is a factor (that can partly be "normalized away"), but that there's also a strong personal preference for faster/ slower play. So I could imagine a dropdown menu within the BUG menu that says "AI players offer trades ... Regularly / Rarely / Never". So long as the frequency can't be increased beyond the standard behavior, it's mostly a UI option – the player forgoes opportunities in favor of fewer popups. Still, can't handle demands and pleas this way.
