AND SVN Build Thread

[Rezca]

It depends on latitude, not on presence of ice/snow/tundra. Your city is north enough.

But it also says "Requires Ice or Tundra in city vicinity" in the Civopedia and when highlighting it in the city building list

It matches the Latitude requirement, but not the Ice/Tundra requirement?
Is is an "Or" condition, not a "And" condition then?

 

[JosEPh_II]

This I believe is a C2C adjustment that was made and the Civopedia was never updated to match the conditions.

There is a lot of that because doing the Pedia work is tedious and tiresome and everyone puts it off. Plus i thought there was some pedia display issues with too long of a description too at one time.

JosEPh

 

[Rezca]

This I believe is a C2C adjustment that was made and the Civopedia was never updated to match the conditions.

There is a lot of that because doing the Pedia work is tedious and tiresome and everyone puts it off. Plus i thought there was some pedia display issues with too long of a description too at one time.

JosEPh

Hm... The Civopedia lists both requirements (Latitude and the Ice/Tundra), but in-game it only shows the Ice/Tundra requirement with no mention of the Latitude one. Confusing

 

[SnoopDogg23]

Gentlemen:

This is my first time playing since the Rev66* days where the AI beelining Mathematics was a major issue and pre-Vokayra. I am in the Renaissance on Epic using SmartMap (everyone is pretty equal terrain-wise, having decent terrain as a result of SmartMap) with 12 civs and 3 large lands.

First, Vokayra's tech changes and religion restructuring are definitely more balanced. I love the extra turns necessary to reach Feudalism and start the Medieval Age. I am also impressed by how the religions distributed. The Ethiopians founded Naghualism and Christianity, but other than that, the whole issue of getting to Buddhism was not a big deal and the religions were decently spread out. I founded Buddhism (my personal real-life preference) without having to be cognizant of "waiting" for Judaism. That said, all of the early religions were founded quickly. I note that as an observation, not a criticism. It seems more appropriate that the early religions are founded early.

Second, I can't thank 45 Degrees enough for his efforts in revamping the game engine. Wow, what a HUGE difference (especially for relatively less efficient computers--mine is a 2.2 Ghz single CPU with 256 MB ATI PCI separate graphics card and 4 GB of RAM running XP). The reduction of AI turn time is a big help, and the graphics paging definitely avoids CTDs. Notably, however, the graphics paging slows down game functioning as you go around the map. I'm sure the issue is more a result of my low-memory graphics card than anything else though.

Now for issues: I have attached my savegame from the beginning of my hours-long war with Ethiopia. Holy $*&*! Schneikes do we have some crazy promotions going on. IPEX brought up the same issue last month, but it wasn't responded to in this thread. One fully-promoted Swordsman and one fully-promoted Pikeman appeared out of nowhere. These units didn't fight anyone and weren't leaders. There's no way they could have gained these promotions. Practically, I was able to lure the Swordsman off his square to attack a stray Maceman, which knocked down his HPs sufficiently that my army could destroy him (because a fully-promoted unit doesn't have nearly as many bonuses to attack as defense). And maybe, he didn't succeed on his 8-10 first strike chances. Either way, advantage: Human Player.

As for the Pikeman? He's nasty, and cannot be defeated on a hill city. He slaughters my trebuchets. I am amassing bombard cannons and Elephant Bombardiers--which by the way made my day, what a cool idea--but I feel like it's going to take a Tank to get rid of this dude. What is going on here?

My other issue is more general with regard to combat. I don't know if this is intentional, but for some reason, my units get slaughtered in defense of the AI units. As long as the AI units have one promotion (looks like a placeholder promotion for Ethiopia?), they have 2-7 first strikes and +like 45% on strength. What is up with that?? I repeat, they don't have any other promotions except this odd icon, which the 'Pedia says is a placeholder. Yet, they mow down equal units with superior promotions. I have attached a savegame as proof (yes, I understand in this particular situation my army is not on a square with defensive bonuses, but I had been on hills squares and was still getting beat down). Of course, if the AI units happen to have legitimate promotions, forget it. You're not going to defend against them, and you're not going to beat them.

(Another issue to note: Why are the combat odds so low when two equal units go at it?? Might be related to this issue. Also, if I use a Crossbowman to attack a Swordsman or other melee unit (which the Crossbowman is supposed to defeat), my odds are very low to win, regardless of the terrain. What's up with that?)

Also, along the lines of the above, when the AI attacks, my trebuchets are sometimes first to defend (even though other proper units have full strength). Something strange is going on with the choice of the defending unit in a tile for the human player (not for AI). This is of course entirely unfair, as the AI snipes my trebuchets, like my army is just sitting around eating lunch.

Finally, I am also having the "Lead Troops as a Warlord" issue where there is a delay between the leading of the troops and the promotions being assigned to them (one turn delay). Not sure why that is occurring, but I see it was previously reported.

Other than these combat issues, great job everyone. Very impressive so far. Looking forward to playing more.

Snoop

 

[TomSawyer]

I am well into the space race on my current game. I will grab the latest build once its done.

Kudos again to all those who keep this mod alive and Civ 4 one of the best civ games

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

These units didn't fight anyone

How do you know?

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

Hm... The Civopedia lists both requirements (Latitude and the Ice/Tundra), but in-game it only shows the Ice/Tundra requirement with no mention of the Latitude one. Confusing

Tags are always right, no matter what's written in text, so both requirements are true. Latitude is mentioned in-game only if your city can't build it because of that. I'd bet that peak is ice/tundra terrain. You can see it easily hovering your mouse over the peak.

 

[SnoopDogg23]

How do you know?

Because Ethiopia was not at war with anyone, and the barbarians on the continent were not very active. Not to mention that I have never seen any unit in all of my years playing Civ 4 that had half of the promotions these guys have. Is this normal? IPEX posted about this issue in January.

What about the differences in combat? Is that part of upgrades to AND2?

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

Because Ethiopia was not at war with anyone, and the barbarians on the continent were not very active. Not to mention that I have never seen any unit in all of my years playing Civ 4 that had half of the promotions these guys have. Is this normal? IPEX posted about this issue in January.

What about the differences in combat? Is that part of upgrades to AND2?

Actually there should be no differences. Combat is one of the part of the code which are original of AND and I haven't imported from C2C.

 

[Kryanni]

(Another issue to note: Why are the combat odds so low when two equal units go at it??

Combat odds seem screwed up. I'd be far less inclined to savescum if the odds were actually used, rather than seemingly tilted 30% in the AI's favour. 50% equally matched? I will lose, every time. 80%? Feels like 50-50. Even reloading a 90% (in my favour) match shows I lose much too often. I've never won any fight <25%, while the AI has won (admittedly only a few) <5% fights. This is with the new RNG option toggled on btw (otherwise there wouldn't be any point reloading).

 

[Rezca]

Combat odds seem screwed up. I'd be far less inclined to savescum if the odds were actually used, rather than seemingly tilted 30% in the AI's favour. 50% equally matched? I will lose, every time. 80%? Feels like 50-50. Even reloading a 90% (in my favour) match shows I lose much too often. I've never won any fight <25%, while the AI has won (admittedly only a few) <5% fights. This is with the new RNG option toggled on btw (otherwise there wouldn't be any point reloading).

I was having problems like this in C2C but only when attacking in stacks. The problem apparently was some combat mod they added in but forgot to disable (Since it wasn't working properly I guess) that chose the worst possible unit to enter combat when using a stack. A Shock III Archer would fight that Cover II Archer instead of that weakened Stone maceman every time, and melee units would throw themselves against anti-melee units without fail. The game would display 98% odds or whatever, but promptly suicide the unit against something that counters it instead and the combat logs would display something like 8% or 16%.

Given what 45N said, I doubt this is the cause - but it does sound similar
Might be you're just getting very unlucky (It happens) but who knows? I haven't noticed anything different combat-wise yet myself. Still, after you lose a battle like that don't forget to check the combat log. If you lose like three 90%+ odds battles in your favor, check the combat logs to see if they still present those odds prior to the battle. If the game tooltip displays 85% but the combat logs show something like 22% for the same battle, then something might be up.

 

[Kryanni]

I've been testing with single unit combat, not stacks. The combat logs are in one of the ctrl-tab popup tabs, right?

 

[Rezca]

I've been testing with single unit combat, not stacks. The combat logs are in one of the ctrl-tab popup tabs, right?

I believe so... It's in the same Logs/Combat/Quests window. The first one showing "So and so built this, so and so declared war, you found a new resource, you built this, that got razed..." and the next tab over should be the logs for combat.

It'll display first who is attacking who and the estimated odds for the attacker to win, and then it will go in and show who is attacking and how much damage they're doing.

If the mouse-over is saying like 90% odds to win but the combat log shows it's 7%, then something isn't right. They should both display the same number.

 

[Combat Wombat]

I think "Arctic and City Park" and "Early Buildings" make an essential part of the game. Is there anyone playing without them?
If everyone use these options they could be mandatory and the option could be simply removed, I think.

Maybe Igloo could be just an improvement?

I find both to be totally uninspired and pointless and never use them. They are the kind of "lets stick it in there to have it" thing I associate with C2C. In fact way back when I tried RoM for the first time Early Buildings we're enabled by default and it turned me off the mod for a year when a friend finally convinced me to try it again.

The only thing useful is the idea of a city park (and maybe ice storehouse) which is a major component of many major cities (Central Park, Englischer Garten) and was something clearly lacking in stock BTS. I mean Igloos really? lol did any of you ever play BTS and think wow what this really needs are igloos...

 

[Rezca]

I mean Igloos really? lol did any of you ever play BTS and think wow what this really needs are igloos...

The same could be said about virtually everything else in AND and by extension pretty much every mod that adds new - and sometimes minor - buildings.

The point of Igloos and the Ice Storehouse was to give tundra-locked cities a chance to actually do something in the earlier portion of the game.
No, I didn't play BTS and immediately think of Igloos, but I did wish *Something* was there to help arctic cities. AND's Igloos just happen to do that.

Every addition a mod makes doesn't have to be groundbreaking monumental unique additions. Little things can help too, as long as you don't put too much of those little things in

 

[JosEPh_II]

I find both to be totally uninspired and pointless and never use them. They are the kind of "lets stick it in there to have it" thing I associate with C2C. In fact way back when I tried RoM for the first time Early Buildings we're enabled by default and it turned me off the mod for a year when a friend finally convinced me to try it again.

The only thing useful is the idea of a city park (and maybe ice storehouse) which is a major component of many major cities (Central Park, Englischer Garten) and was something clearly lacking in stock BTS. I mean Igloos really? lol did any of you ever play BTS and think wow what this really needs are igloos...

You Don't have to use them even if the Option is On CW! C'mon man, you're nit picking. And if it allows an AI to develop an Ice or Tundra city, that just makes the AI a bit better opponent, in my book.

JosEPh

 

[cthom]

And if it allows an AI to develop an Ice or Tundra city, that just makes the AI a bit better opponent, in my book.

i'm currently settling a large arctic area just now. think eskimo (or innuit if you prefer). igloos make a realistic option, which just made me think about huskies and sleds...

 

[Noyyau]

I've lost quite a few units to >95% odds myself in recent revisions.

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

r676

• Fixed fishing operation disrupted event
• Added more french translations/corrections
• Fixed bug in pathgenerator
• Fixed victory screen mistakenly displaying Diplomatic Victory when in fact it's turned off by UN Option
• Fixed Pedia displaying Teamwonder (-1) in main menu

Some minor fix, I had to upload these while I try to get rid of some major problems like Assimilation OFF not working and chopping/burning problem. I hope to fix these last 2 problems in the next revision.

 

[Combat Wombat]

You Don't have to use them even if the Option is On CW! C'mon man, you're nit picking. And if it allows an AI to develop an Ice or Tundra city, that just makes the AI a bit better opponent, in my book.

JosEPh

You are taking this the wrong way. I am not say we don't need something for those cities just not something so dumb. Now that being said I can't come up with another arctic type building to replace the igloo for those bonuses but I am thinking hard.