Fall Further 050 Bug Report Thread

While randomly looking through the codebase I noticed a function that doesn't seem to be complete. As far as I can tell it's only used to check the number of owned mana for the purpose of spawning gate creatures for the Khadi. Suggested correction in green.

Spoiler CustomFunctions.py line 1928 :
Code:
	def countMana(self, pPlayer):
		iNum = 0
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_AIR'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_BODY'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_CHAOS'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_DEATH'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_EARTH'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_ENCHANTMENT'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_ENTROPY'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_FIRE'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_LAW'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_LIFE'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_METAMAGIC'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_MIND'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_NATURE'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_SHADOW'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_SPIRIT'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_SUN'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_WATER'))
[COLOR="Green"]		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_CREATION'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_FORCE'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_ICE'))
		iNum += pPlayer.getNumAvailableBonuses(gc.getInfoTypeForString('BONUS_MANA_DIMENSIONAL'))
[/COLOR]		
		return iNum
 
There is a minor inconsistency regarding the Master's Hall. The Hall is available with trade, but it also requires the Master Rancher, which requires Feudalism, which comes after Trade.

It is nothing major, just odd to require a more advanced tech before you can build a building made available earlier in the tree.
 
It turns out you can make the hunter and probably hill giant events work again by removing the following line for the wolf, tiger, gorilla, lion and hill giant entries in civ4unitclassinfos.xml:

Code:
			<bUnique>1</bUnique>

I'm not sure what that's supposed to do, but I haven't noticed anything unusual so far.
 
Those make it so that a Civ needs to have the unit listed in their CivilizationInfos to have it as a valid unit type. I guess events offer you units as UnitClass instead of UnitType, which needs fixed so we can have events offer you a Vampire even though you are Balseraph and you actually GET a Vampire, and not a Freak.

Other than these events, the only way you would notice a change is that the Pedia won't show that Wolves, etc. are available only to the Animal Civilization.
 
The Mercurians appear to be unable to gain angels now. I first experienced this in an FF+ game, but to my knowledge Valkrionn hasn't touched the Mercurian code so I came back to FF to do a test. Patch N, Play Now, Bannor. The only things I did through world builder were to add a bunch of Great Scientists and Engineers so I could do things quicker, and then to provide a barbarian unit to suicide into.

I founded Order, then built a second city and researched Fanaticism. I built the Mercurian Gate in the second city and a Confessor in my capitol. Basium spawned and took over the second city. I created a Barbarian unit, and then suicided my confessor into it. Basium did not gain an angel.

The original time this happened, I also tested multiple Vicars and Stonewardens.
 
I thought Freaks were also Champion, they are Axemen then I assume? Anyway, ya get da point!
Freaks are a non replacement unit these days.
Although. It costs 5 gold to upgrade them into a Swordsman OR Archer. ^.^' Which is kinda nice.
(Since, Freak->Swordsman=+1 base str. And Freak->Archer=+2 def and all that arhcery goodness... Fear my heroic defence archer with stoneskin and hardy..)
 
Question. When the 'Zone of Chaos' event occurs, the one that will optionally mutate one of your units, does this event cut out all the negative promotions that one can potentially get from the Mutate spell? Because i have noticed previously that whenever it happens i never get a negative effect.
 
Question. When the 'Zone of Chaos' event occurs, the one that will optionally mutate one of your units, does this event cut out all the negative promotions that one can potentially get from the Mutate spell? Because i have noticed previously that whenever it happens i never get a negative effect.

I seem to recall getting negative effects from that quite frequently. Perhaps you've just lucky.


In fact, I'm CERTAIN. Yesterday, it happened to a worker. He came out with Mobility I and Withered,
 
I had it happen to a scout just yesterday. He was blessed with poison resistance and cursed with being plagued, enervated and weak. Fortunately he was also enraged so I wasn't burdened with his maintenance cost for too much longer.

I carefully considering that event before saying yes. One bad mutation and your plans for well promoted unit might go right out the window.
 
Something that's always annoyed me.

When you sacrifice a slave, there's a period of about 3 seconds where nothing happens. The entire game just delays for a few secs before the slave vanishes. During that time, you can't select other units, or really do much.

I suspect it's a holdover from the great people, since the Add to Production spell is also used by a great engineer, and he waves his hands about during that period.

Would it be possible to make a different version of the spell for slaves, that doesn't have the pointless delay on it? just an annoyance.
 
When you sacrifice a slave, there's a period of about 3 seconds where nothing happens. The entire game just delays for a few secs before the slave vanishes. During that time, you can't select other units, or really do much.

Hmm, it doesn't do that for me. Neither do great people do any funky hand waving. I'm an impatient person, though, so I play with "quick movement" and "quick combat offense" on, maybe one of those eliminates the animation.
 
That's completely cosmetic. You could also get an animator make a nice "slave gets his butt whooped" animation for that slot if you wanted to see something happen. I doubt anyone would be willing to take the time to work out another approach to that mechanic just to avoid a small delay (though I admit I also find it annoying to wait for it, I also hate waiting to watch the Hawk do a fly-by when I recon)
 
(though I admit I also find it annoying to wait for it, I also hate waiting to watch the Hawk do a fly-by when I recon)

You know, I hate that too. The delay actually keeps me from using hawks every turn to watch enemy movement like I should. But I do find it amusing when you set your recon point on an enemy city and the units there freak out and try to attack your hawk.
 
That's completely cosmetic. You could also get an animator make a nice "slave gets his butt whooped" animation for that slot if you wanted to see something happen. I doubt anyone would be willing to take the time to work out another approach to that mechanic just to avoid a small delay (though I admit I also find it annoying to wait for it, I also hate waiting to watch the Hawk do a fly-by when I recon)

Well, no animation is really needed at all.

Wouldn't it be possible to have a spell that has an identical effect, and just uses python to add hammers to the city without playing any animations?
 
I didn't think that it was likely that the tags you needed would be exposed, but they are. So you could do it with python if you wanted. Would allow you to be more/less selective with precisely what you can rush as well, but to simulate exactly what is done now you would have to remember to take everything into account which the current system does, so bonuses to the actual value gained, limits on what you can rush, modifiers based on gamespeed/difficulty and whatever else might be used.
 
Back
Top Bottom