Caveman 2 Cosmos (ideas/discussions thread)

[JosEPh_II]

@Raxxo,
Yep Theodora at turn 793 is already into the Industrial era. See screenshots. The City is Theodora's capitol.

And Korea's Caravels and Sloops of War are now making an appearance on my NE shoreline. Trouble is on the horizon and both He and Egypt are still "At War" with me. And neither will negotiate.

 

[Thunderbrd]

All unit upgrades are defined in XML files.
That is to split upgrade lines you just remove certain upgrades for some units in XML.

Putting it in that graphic is all done in python. Quite a cleaver bit of python. It allows you to break the graphs up. Eg "split" the trees at the first gunpowder lines and they will be much simpler. I'll try and find it

I don't think his complaint was about the graphics of that display as much as about the design of the upgrade path structure units actually have making it difficult to chart out on a spreadsheet.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

I don't think his complaint was about the graphics of that display as much as about the design of the upgrade path structure units actually have making it difficult to chart out on a spreadsheet.

Spreadsheets are just a simple tool. Reality and C2C unit upgrades are more complex than they can handle. This does not mean we should change either just for the tool.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Spreadsheets are just a simple tool. Reality and C2C unit upgrades are more complex than they can handle. This does not mean we should change either just for the tool.

Not what I'm advocating. I wanted us to start mapping out the upgrade chains on a spreadsheet. That doesn't mean they should not be allowed to have crossover points, blend points, splits into other lines etc...

If your comment is intended to combat the sense that I'm advocating keeping all units to simple single chains of upgrades and to eliminate crossovers and blends, that's not at all what I have in mind. However we do need to be careful with these so that they don't mess up the AI by inviting units of a particular AI type to upgrade first into a unit with a completely different AI focus, and we do have a lot of points where it currently does, which would be nice to resolve in the process.

As for the graphic, that wasn't at all the point of the discussion. Once you setup units on such a spreadsheet, it becomes the basis for plotting out progressions of all sorts of other tags, such as withdrawal amounts, strengths, movement pts, etc. Just because it's complex doesn't mean that we shouldn't do it and rely on that tool for design. The xml alone makes for a very poor design bible because you cannot get an ease of overview with it. Working with XML alone is like exploring a city on foot where having it all on spreadsheets is like having a map.

You can also more easily spot the direct problems and plan how to address them that we're trying to solve right now, which is that some of the tech rearrangements have created some issues with upgrade paths being lateral or even contradictory.

I also found that there's an issue with having put folk medicine behind soap making when I was playing the game. This sort of thing also becomes more easily discoverable and resolvable once we have the spreadsheets in order.

 

[raxo2222]

10353

Fixed an issue where links would lead to the wrong place if there were more than two instances with the same name. This was mostly apparent inside the civilopedia where for example a link to Bark (Bonus) would lead to Bark (Promotion), or Lighthouse (Building) would lead to Lighthouse (Improvement).

(Thank you @Toffer90 for presenting a solution to this. )

Did you look in game texts, that are in Modules?

 

[KaTiON_PT]

Yes @raxo2222, or at least from what I've checked there are no "Link=literal" stuff.

 

[raxo2222]

Yes @raxo2222, or at least from what I've checked there are no "Link=literal" stuff.

Ah, so that's fine.

Nice to see another ancient bug getting fixed.

 

[strategyonly]

it there anyways to change the color distinction for "path" and "road", they look almost the same and hard to distinguish between them both, thx. . .

 

[strategyonly]

what has happened to the TURN times lately, seems about after the last 10 SVN's the turn times went from 15-20 seconds per turn and that is in the Information era to waaaaay over 1 minute in even the Classical era, and i even went from a huge map to a large, and less cities???

 

[raxo2222]

what has happened to the TURN times lately, seems about after the last 10 SVN's the turn times went from 15-20 seconds per turn and that is in the Information era to waaaaay over 1 minute in even the Classical era, and i even went from a huge map to a large, and less cities???

AI got better - workers were fixed and ai weight was added to buildings, that were part of chain (building requirement, Industrial and later era resource producer, and few more).
Are you playing C2C_World all time? If you were playing other map scripts, then maps got larger since some time ago to match that mapscript.
Buildings got cheaper.
On prince AI will slow down game faster than AI on Noble, as techs/buildings/units are cheaper for AI when player chooses harder handicaps.

30 seconds per turn on Information era was possible only on Duel sized maps and on Noble or even lower handicap, so AI wouldn't expand at all or at least much slower than causal player.

 

[KaTiON_PT]

I wonder if the adding of code to fix that link issue has anything to do with this.

 

[JosEPh_II]

The last several dll commits has made my game unplayable. I was getting 3.5 minute EoT waits. Then it went to 4.5 minutes. Now after the kast 3 dll commits it went to 15 minutes and still waiting until I killed it with ctrl/alt/del task mngr end process. Last update was 10356

There is a post with the save game in the appropriate Bug thread. My Long game is now unplayable. 7 AI on a Large C2C_World map.

 

[KaTiON_PT]

Interesting, @Thunderbrd could you compile the DLL from your side and see if @strategyonly and @JosEPh_II get their past turn times back again?

 

[Toffer90]

I wonder if the adding of code to fix that link issue has anything to do with this.

Probably not as that code is not processed that often, and not once during the end turn process..

 

[Thunderbrd]

Interesting, @Thunderbrd could you compile the DLL from your side and see if @strategyonly and @JosEPh_II get their past turn times back again?

I'm in the middle of working on adding a tag so I can't right yet. Possibly later today.

I'll have to look through the latest commits but I don't recall anything off the top of my head that would indicate cause for a slowdown in the last few months.

 

[KaTiON_PT]

I did manage to process the turn with r10350.

@JosEPh_II try this save with the latest DLL. I managed to process a turn in 8 minutes.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I did manage to process the turn with r10350.

@JosEPh_II try this save with the latest DLL. I managed to process a turn in 8 minutes.

That would mean another gamestate cleanup did the trick to eliminate the infinite loop. I'd add this cleaning step to the normal dll but it would delay processing a lot at end turns unfortunately.

 

[Yudishtira]

That would mean another gamestate cleanup did the trick to eliminate the infinite loop. I'd add this cleaning step to the normal dll but it would delay processing a lot at end turns unfortunately.

Could you put it in and either:
- have it manually triggered by the player when necessary, like Ctrl-Shift-T; or
- allow the player to toggle it on and off in-game?

 

[Thunderbrd]

Could you put it in and either:
- have it manually triggered by the player when necessary, like Ctrl-Shift-T; or
- allow the player to toggle it on and off in-game?

Not really. Not without a lot of study on how to go about doing that at least. The steps are taken during normal processing in the debug run and if a bad unit gamestate is found at any time, it's corrected. It's not a dedicated process of its own but inserted where units are being looped through and considered in other places.

I'd like to hope that eventually, we'll just find the original bug that's causing this rather than spending a few weeks to install a correction device for players.

 

[Snofru1]

I have an issue with the "world" mapscript by @Toffer90 . When I use 100% resources then the map is really full of them, probably around 50% of the tiles have them, which is too much to my liking. When I use 50% then the total amount of resources is OK (in my eyes) but their distribution is very imbalanced, very densely packed in the tropics and nearly nothing in the temperate or polar regions. Some civs will have a great start, others a very bad one. Is there a chance to have them more regularly distributed?
And another thing, the frequency of rivers can be widely chosen between -4, -3, -2, -1, 100%, +1, +2, +3 and +4, but even +4 doesn´t give enough rivers for me, could there be something like +10?