Bug Report

[AlisAmAn]

Hey there, I'm just wondering if this is a bug or a change in this quest. I can't choose the 3rd option after completing the quest. I definitely own the Statue of Zeus, haven't researched Theology yet and, owning all three pagan wonders, am even still running Paganism. Is it a bug, or is the third option disabled altogether or after the classical era? If so, the description of the quest better be changed.
Other than this, for the first time, I haven't encountered any bugs up until now. The civilopedia and loading tips remain untidy, however. There are too many examples of this. For example, 2 loading tips are present, one which misleadingly says that barbarians spawn in fog of war and the other correctly says that they don't spawn 2 tiles from any unit.
Taking this opportunity, a little suggestion. I really love the barbarian civ mechanic. However, I think that some games may benefit from some sort of a milder barbarian civ option. Currently, A LOT of barbarian civs spawn and, depending on the land, they may spawn as very strong civs thanks to their bonuses. This is nice as such. However, with the number of barbarian civs already spawned in this game, I don't think there will be any land left to colonize come renaissance. So, to keep colonization alive, one may want an option that somehow limits the number of barbarian civs that can spawn. I haven't revealed the map yet, but the great number of barbarian civs that have already spawned will surely leave very little space for colonies. To the starting 12 civs, no less than 9 barbarian civs have already spawned. As an option, one may want to limit this number to 4 or 6.

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

Thanks for reporting! This actually allowed me to locate and catch a longstanding bug (that seems to have first been reported almost a decade ago when I didn't have the skills to find and fix it yet, and completely forgotten since).

As for your suggestion, the barbarians already don't settle on landmasses without player presence - on previously empty landmasses, it gives a decent time to colonize a substantial chunk of land. Elsewhere, as of recent, they are far less likely to settle if pressured by an established player (= can't settle at all if there is any civ's unit next to the city in question).

 

[AlisAmAn]

Thanks for reporting! This actually allowed me to locate and catch a longstanding bug (that seems to have first been reported almost a decade ago when I didn't have the skills to find and fix it yet, and completely forgotten since).

As for your suggestion, the barbarians already don't settle on landmasses without player presence - on previously empty landmasses, it gives a decent time to colonize a substantial chunk of land. Elsewhere, as of recent, they are far less likely to settle if pressured by an established player (= can't settle at all if there is any civ's unit next to the city in question).

Glad to be of help!
Good to know about the barbarian settling rules! The prevalence of barbarian civs depending on the map is good enough then.

 

[TheBirdMan]

Greek workers seems to be able to plant an olive grove on a desert hilltop, and I don't recall it being something I changed. I think it's a "slip".

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

No, it is working as designed. It simply requires hills and is working as designed. The yields on a desert hill won't be amazing though.

 

[TheBirdMan]

Ok, but I guess I'll take the mine instead. Maybe I'll get a good bonus later.

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

Think of it as an earlier windmill.

 

[Elitech]

Thanks for reporting! This actually allowed me to locate and catch a longstanding bug (that seems to have first been reported almost a decade ago when I didn't have the skills to find and fix it yet, and completely forgotten since)...

Hi Walter, with all these beautiful bug fixes, is there any plan for another version release that is not an SVN (i.e. 3.62)?

Thank you,

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

Yes, around Christmas as usual.

 

[AlisAmAn]

Hi Walter, with all these beautiful bug fixes, is there any plan for another version release that is not an SVN (i.e. 3.62)?

Thank you,

I'd also say that, before development is finished completely, it would be nice to somehow have Portugal and Khmer, or anything to represent Southeast Asia, back in as playable civilizations. Portugal itself is not the most inconsequential country in the world and Brazil is just too big to ignore. They don't have to be in the World Map scenario, just playable in regular games.
P.S. Another option, of course, is to have Brazil instead of Portugal, similarly to the USA.

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

For the Nth time, no. There will be no new playable civilizations.

 

[TheBirdMan]

I'd also say that, before development is finished completely, it would be nice to somehow have Portugal and Khmer, or anything to represent Southeast Asia, back in as playable civilizations. Portugal itself is not the most inconsequential country in the world and Brazil is just too big to ignore. They don't have to be in the World Map scenario, just playable in regular games.
P.S. Another option, of course, is to have Brazil instead of Portugal, similarly to the USA.

It will take you only a few minutes to make both nations playable. And an hour or so for each of the nations to make them "useful" in terms of buildings and military units (all "missing" could/should be "stolen" from neighbour nations). And maybe add some city names if you "need" some. It's not near perfect, but it works. Save you work somewhere in one of your personal folders and remember where they are. Then you can reuse it when a new official release comes out. It's more than unlikely, that Walter will change anything for those nations when a new version comes out.

 

[AlisAmAn]

It will take you only a few minutes to make both nations playable. And an hour or so for each of the nations to make them "useful" in terms of buildings and military units (all "missing" could/should be "stolen" from neighbour nations). And maybe add some city names if you "need" some. It's not near perfect, but it works. Save you work somewhere in one of your personal folders and remember where they are. Then you can reuse it when a new official release comes out. It's more than unlikely, that Walter will change anything for those nations when a new version comes out.

I'm in it for the flavour, which means at least 3 leaders, meaningful units, meaningful names, meaningful flags, meaningful great people and their quotes and so on. This requires research of the sort Walter apparently did a lot of. I'm not going to do this myself. It's not a personal strong desire of mine, there are enough leaders and civilizations to play. I just think that RI would be more complete as a historical game with Portugal-Brazil and Vietnam-Cambodia-Thailand-Myanmar in. Just these 4 have a population of ~240 millions between them. The area is rather rich in unique culture too, of course. You have Angkor Wat, Shwedagon Paya, Pha That Luang and so on in the game, but not the civilizations that built these. You also have Cristo Redentor.

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

Please conserve your time and effort writing lengthy arguments - no new playable civs are getting added, period. I know there are civs out there that would be great to have represented, and it goes well beyond just the ones that you've mentioned. None of them are getting added.

 

[TheBirdMan]

This isn't a real bug - but it's sometimes a bit frustrating, when people like me mess around a bit here and there in the files.
In the TechInfos.xlm, we have a tech named TECH_MILITARY_THOUGHT. In the graphic Techtree (F6) it is labeled as Military Science. AND we also have a second tech named TECH_MILITARY_SCIENCE. In the graphic Techtree (F6) that is labeled as Proffesional Officers.

Now would it not be a bit more correct if TECH_MILITARY_SCIENCE was labeled what it says: Military Science. And that we had the Proffesional Officers to do the TECH_MILITARY_THOUGHT???

It's just a suggestion.

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

Why don't you just do a search and replace on your side if it bothers you? You can use any tag you want, like TECH_MILITAER_TANKE or TECH_123 or even SOMETHING_SOMETHING? This doesn't affect anything; I have dozens of tags that don't match their text names at this point.

 

[TheBirdMan]

Usually you tend to have a reason for naming the way you do. But the above example could well be a "slip".

But naming - it's not something I want to change, so I don't do it - not in this case either.

Instead, I have simply added a comment line several places, fx. as below:

<Type>TECH_MILITARY_SCIENCE</Type>
<!-- TECH-TREE: Professional Officers -->

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

The reason was the tech was called that previously. Then I changed its actual name.

 

[Malpdv]

Hi, I have encountered a very weird bug. Game was working normally until a few days ago.

Now whenever I try starting a new custom game, I can't select any of the mod new civs (Venetian, Ukranian, Israel, etc). Neither their leaders or their civs appear in the scroll menu.

I have tried reinstalling but still nothing. Anyone has a clue as to why?

 

[TheBirdMan]

Hi, I have encountered a very weird bug. Game was working normally until a few days ago.

Now whenever I try starting a new custom game, I can't select any of the mod new civs (Venetian, Ukranian, Israel, etc). Neither their leaders or their civs appear in the scroll menu.

I have tried reinstalling but still nothing. Anyone has a clue as to why?

Those nations are not marked as "Playable" (<bPlayable>0</bPlayable>). They are placed in the DerivativeCIV4CivilizationInfos.xlm - nations that might be activated from a revolution. But you can activate them if you change the 0 to a 1 - and if you do, change the next line too <bAIPlayable>0</bAIPlayable>. Just remember, those nations often miss "something", that the normal playable nations have.