AND2 and SVN Bug Reports - A New Dawn 2 ONLY

[Slarki]

You only need an embassy to trade workers & military.

How is it abusable?

I was referring to my other post.
I meant, building workers for tech trading, that is abusable since a few hammers are not worth 1k research and the AI don't trade workers around themselves. It seems that the unit trading is untouched since rom (?).
For the worker trading bug, I thought it had to do with the free trade agreement because as I stated, I can't trade workers on my own, only if the AI offers a trade. Same thing for ships and rams.

 

[Slarki]

-a forest can grow on a farm
-even if a civ just has one city, bribing cost less then influencing the religion. Maybe there are some numbers wrong?

 

[Afforess]

-a forest can grow on a farm
-even if a civ just has one city, bribing cost less then influencing the religion. Maybe there are some numbers wrong?

1.) I've seen jungle do this too. I will look into sometime this next weekend.

2.) Can you upload a save where you have a spy set up and that shows this case?

 

[aggri1]

-a forest can grow on a farm

... and on windmills and on mines. It appears to me that forest and jungle can spread to any un-worked tile, improved or not. Usually that's really useful as you get an extra hammer out of it, or you can chop it.

 

[aggri1]

I've a question about how EMP SAM Infantry are supposed to behave.

I had a bunker on a mountain top, and in the bunker were stationed a variety of soldiers: modern infantry, modern marines, a walker mech', a special infantry, and a EMP SAM Infantry. I put that last one in specifically to defend against helicopters, since that unit has a large bonus against them. However, when an enemy stack comprised solely of Gunships attacked, all the other units were slowly destroyed, while the EMP SAM Infantry did absolutely nothing. On my turn, I saw that he was still at full health, and was now sharing the bunker with an enemy Gunship (the bunker square was now of the enemy's culture).

Is he just a traitor, or are EMP SAMs broken?

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

I've a question about how EMP SAM Infantry are supposed to behave.

I had a bunker on a mountain top, and in the bunker were stationed a variety of soldiers: modern infantry, modern marines, a walker mech', a special infantry, and a EMP SAM Infantry. I put that last one in specifically to defend against helicopters, since that unit has a large bonus against them. However, when an enemy stack comprised solely of Gunships attacked, all the other units were slowly destroyed, while the EMP SAM Infantry did absolutely nothing. On my turn, I saw that he was still at full health, and was now sharing the bunker with an enemy Gunship (the bunker square was now of the enemy's culture).

Is he just a traitor, or are EMP SAMs broken?

I haven't checked but it could be because it's invisible? Invisible units can't defend against units that can't see them.

 

[Vokarya]

I haven't checked but it could be because it's invisible? Invisible units can't defend against units that can't see them.

Exactly. I think we should take invisibility off the EMP. It doesn't need to be on units whose main job is to defend.

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

Exactly. I think we should take invisibility off the EMP. It doesn't need to be on units whose main job is to defend.

I agree, can you include it in your next update? Thank you

 

[aggri1]

Exactly. I think we should take invisibility off the EMP. It doesn't need to be on units whose main job is to defend.

I agree. If this is indeed the cause of what I observed, then it is indeed absurd that the best defender hid in the bushes (!!!) instead of defending, while his buddies all got slaughtered.

Or, disable invisibility when a unit shares a tile with any non-invisible unit - I expect that that would be rather expensive though compared with the simple alternative of just getting rid of invisibility.

There seem to be quite a few late-era units with invisibility, and if they all suffer from this affliction (inability to defend), then I'd be tempted to seriously re-consider whether they actually need invisibility at all. Does anyone really value that "ability"? I don't think I've ever made use of it with combat troops.

 

[Vokarya]

I agree. If this is indeed the cause of what I observed, then it is indeed absurd that the best defender hid in the bushes (!!!) instead of defending, while his buddies all got slaughtered.

Or, disable invisibility when a unit shares a tile with any non-invisible unit - I expect that that would be rather expensive though compared with the simple alternative of just getting rid of invisibility.

There seem to be quite a few late-era units with invisibility, and if they all suffer from this affliction (inability to defend), then I'd be tempted to seriously re-consider whether they actually need invisibility at all. Does anyone really value that "ability"? I don't think I've ever made use of it with combat troops.

Most units aren't invisible; it seems to be restricted to submarines, late-era ships and a couple of planes, and then the Genetic Soldier, Super Soldier, and Stealth Armor. Those last three are more offensive units than defensive. I think we can leave invisibility where it is after we take it off the EMP SAM Infantry.

 

[aggri1]

Most units aren't invisible; it seems to be restricted to submarines, late-era ships and a couple of planes, and then the Genetic Soldier, Super Soldier, and Stealth Armor. Those last three are more offensive units than defensive. I think we can leave invisibility where it is after we take it off the EMP SAM Infantry.

OK, perhaps I'd been left with that impression because I'd been building a few of these. I am sometimes deploying super soldiers as primary defenders (they have 190 strength don't they, compared with 125 for the walker mech's and 110 for the last infantry, so a considerable advantage), but I don't think I've seen such a stack get attacked yet. I'll be interested to see what happens.

 

[dbkblk]

@devs: While working on the translation platform, i've found a way to semi-automate the importation of english strings. In fact, all we will have to double-click before release a commit and grab the latest translations from time to time. This is very nice !!!
However, for this to work, i need to put the "intermediates" files (individual language XML converted to UTF8) on the SVN server. I'm wondering if this is useful to put them in the main folder or should i put them in a folder "Translations" besides "Sources".

I'm trying to make the workflow as smooth as possible so it will be:
Exportation of new english strings:
Update your file with new tag and english strings or modify the current english strings (don't need to modify others languages) → Start the XML Parser (Export english. It will convert the file to the correct xml format and to UTF8) → Copy the “en” folder to the “Translations” folder → Start the upload tool → Upload (it will actualize the english strings on the server and inform translators that strings have changed. Fortunatly, once i've added the possibility to set arguments on my parser, i'll script that and all you will have to do is to double click and wait The platform is smart enough to automatically grab the latest files directly from the svn server but we still have to export english strings and copy them to the translations folder.

Importation of languages strings (it can work with any language if I add support for it in the parser (5min of work)):
Start the download tool ->Copy translations to the “import” folder in (Assets/XML/Text) → Start the XML Parser (Import All). That part can be fully automated !

I'm wondering if SVN can have a sort of automatic procedures when a commit is done ? For example, I commit and it launch the export script automatically. Is this possible ?

What do you think about the “Translations” folder location ?

 

[Afforess]

@devs: While working on the translation platform, i've found a way to semi-automate the importation of english strings. In fact, all we will have to double-click before release a commit and grab the latest translations from time to time. This is very nice !!!
However, for this to work, i need to put the "intermediates" files (individual language XML converted to UTF8) on the SVN server. I'm wondering if this is useful to put them in the main folder or should i put them in a folder "Translations" besides "Sources".

This would probably be fine, since the user would never see/download that folder normally.

I'm wondering if SVN can have a sort of automatic procedures when a commit is done ? For example, I commit and it launch the export script automatically. Is this possible ?

Yes, I know something like this is possible, I've never done it and have no experience. It's called an svn repository hook, and you can have svn do some sort of action before or after a commit. Google can tell you more.

 

[dbkblk]

Yes, I know something like this is possible, I've never done it and have no experience. It's called an svn repository hook, and you can have svn do some sort of action before or after a commit. Google can tell you more.

Ok. I'll try to look for that.
I still have many small things to fix before to release anything so i'll delay the launch to the next week. You can have a glance of what have been done here: Translation platform.

 

[Slarki]

1.) I've seen jungle do this too. I will look into sometime this next weekend.

2.) Can you upload a save where you have a spy set up and that shows this case?

You don't have to set up a spy. The numbers can be seen from the espionage screen. The same is with influencing a civ and bribing a city. I don't have the old save anymore, but when I checked it with a different city state, it was the same.

Concerning the unit for tech trading, maybe you could make the AI value (x2? maybe)=

 

[macadoshis]

In latest svn revision (730), religions icons (civ's state religion) are missing on the scoreboard.

EDIT

Very strange but there is a problem with the new Steam patch (they disable gamespy and direct ip option). When I revert to the old "exe" file (Civ4BeyondSword.exe) the icons appeared again.

 

[IPEX-731BA5DD06]

Bug - Doesn't mention Parade grounds as giving free experience to units, just say's +2 from city. If you don't have a parade ground built for a city, it won't say anything about getting extra experience from them at all, just gives the list of available, and missing expeince ie no Knights stable, or no garrison. Nothing about the Parade ground, ALL when running the required civic.

Odds of finding your way through the catacombs, are way too high, nearly every AI CITY I've attacked with Catacombs, I've found a 'Secret way" into that city. I still can't enter the city till I bombard it down below 30%, but if I've found a "Not so secret way" into the city, the culture defence won't matter, and I should be able to start attacking.

This works strangely as well, when sending in the Artillery to soften up the defenders, you have to kill the 1st softened defender, before you can send in more Artillery. Yet when you find, and you WILL find a 'Not so secret entrence', your still held out by cultural defences.

 

[Slarki]

Some buildings in the city also can't be searched for "produce happiness/wealth/hammers etc."

I don't know if you have to edit this manually or should it work automatically? In c2c it works fine and they have much much more buildings?

 

[OrlindaT]

In latest svn revision (730), religions icons (civ's state religion) are missing on the scoreboard.

EDIT

Very strange but there is a problem with the new Steam patch (they disable gamespy and direct ip option). When I revert to the old "exe" file (Civ4BeyondSword.exe) the icons appeared again.

Same problem here

 

[mrteverett]

I'm still completing a game from roughly ver 725, but I noticed something odd. One of my cities took a direct hit from a hurricane and "buildings were destroyed" - namely my shipyard and agora. Dealing with other pressing matters, I didn't address the shipyard rebuild until some number of turns later, and the shipyard was no longer on the list of things I could build. I was using different civics, so the agora was no longer an option. I'm guessing that when populating the list of things to be built, these destroyed buildings need to be "unchecked" so they become available again.

I hope I'm not missing something more obvious that was the cause of this.