FfH2 0.21 Bug Thread
- Thread starter Kael
- Start date
Chandrasekhar
Determined
Yeah, summon him earlier so he has space to found a city so he'll convert to the Veil so that he'll like you for destroying the world.
Blakmane
Prince
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2007
- Messages
- 447
exactly.
It's not a case of 'summon him earlier' it's a case of 'WTH he shouldn't have this penalty, ever'
It causes issues if the AI makes relations decisions before it builds a city/converts to the veil. Like in the case in the game shown- he declared war on the veil civs before he had a city, which screwed his rep for pretty much everyone.
Nikis-Knight
Deity
I'm not sure if we need that modifier. It's already reflected in the increasing good/evil modifiers. It just kinda makes evil civs less likely to get along with each other.
Broken Hawk
Emperor
What's wrong with evil civs not getting along? Whenever I play a good civ, I'm just as likely to get attacked or have bad relations with Varn Gosam as I am with a evil civ. 
Edit: Regardless of alignment, every civ is trying to seek out a niche and compete for limited resources. There is bound to be friction.
Edit: Regardless of alignment, every civ is trying to seek out a niche and compete for limited resources. There is bound to be friction.
What I would like would be a general factor for adjusting the weight of alignment ON TOP OF what the AC does, something that could maybe sit in the ini and that any user could easily tweak. Something like, as it is right now is 100, but if you'd like for alignments to be taken into account in diplomacy five times as much, you just set it to 500. Think that's possible?
Kael
Deity
Yes, I'll move all the base alignment attitude modifiers into global defines in 0.22. You will have the following default assignments:
Code:
ALIGNMENT_ATTITUDE_GOOD_TO_GOOD iDefineIntVal 2
ALIGNMENT_ATTITUDE_GOOD_TO_NEUTRAL iDefineIntVal 0
ALIGNMENT_ATTITUDE_GOOD_TO_EVIL iDefineIntVal -4
ALIGNMENT_ATTITUDE_NEUTRAL_TO_GOOD iDefineIntVal -2
ALIGNMENT_ATTITUDE_NEUTRAL_TO_NEUTRAL iDefineIntVal 0
ALIGNMENT_ATTITUDE_NEUTRAL_TO_EVIL iDefineIntVal -2
ALIGNMENT_ATTITUDE_EVIL_TO_GOOD iDefineIntVal -2
ALIGNMENT_ATTITUDE_EVIL_TO_NEUTRAL iDefineIntVal -2
ALIGNMENT_ATTITUDE_EVIL_TO_EVIL iDefineIntVal 2
MagisterCultuum
Great Sage
Could you put the max hero free xp back in the global defines too?
Kael
Deity
@Bringa- No, its just the base attitude adjustment.
@MagisterCultuum- Yeap, I'll put it back in.
@MagisterCultuum- Yeap, I'll put it back in.
Ankhman
Chieftain
I am surprised to see that the relationship between good and neutral becoming worse as the AC approaches 100. I would think that any non-evil civilization would, at the least, not get more alienated towards one another. The reasoning escapes me.
MagisterCultuum
Great Sage
Thank you. In later versions (and especially in mods of FfH) the greater number of available promotions will make this more important.
MagisterCultuum
Great Sage
That isn't a late game attitude change, it is the original diplo penalty.
Ankhman
Chieftain
Looks I was thinking like Bringa. So this adjustment does not change as the AC gets larger? I thought this was the multplier used depending upon what the AC number was.
Kael
Deity
This is just the base attitude, it is consistent throughout. There is also a good vs evil factor that increases as the AC goes up and a evil vs good that does the same thing (so that they hate each other more and more as the AC goes up).
There is no positive alignment from AC rising (good does not like good better). The AC never makes it a more peaceful world, regardless of whose in it, it just makes good vs evil even more likely to have conflict.
Heruwulfar
Chieftain
When I have a (Luchuirpian) Hunter with a hawk and press the Go To Mode (All Units) <Alt+G> button it only selects the hawk. This happens both when the hunter is alone with the hawk or if they are in a bigger stack.
I have a question about path f. Is it necessary download other paths or just f version its fine ?
And where can i find new scenario or maps for this mod ?
Thanks for help i have a good weekend.
You need the base current revision (0.21) and patch f on top of the base revision to be up-to-date.
Some (although not all) of the scenarios/maps are here. There are also references in the main thread.
There appears to be a defect in countKnownTechNumTeams. This function is used to determine if there are any teams that already know this technology, so as to determine if a new team gaining this technology is the first one.
The problem is that there is a check if (GET_TEAM((TeamTypes)iI).isAlive()), which will fail if the team that knows the technology is not presently alive.
In other words, it seems that if the first discoverer of a religion (or any technology that grants something different on first discovery) dies before anyone else learns that technology, the next one to gain it will gain that first discovered effect.
The fix is to change the above line to:
if (GET_TEAM((TeamTypes)iI).isEverAlive())
By the way, yes, this also appears to be a Vanilla/Warlords defect.
The problem is that there is a check if (GET_TEAM((TeamTypes)iI).isAlive()), which will fail if the team that knows the technology is not presently alive.
In other words, it seems that if the first discoverer of a religion (or any technology that grants something different on first discovery) dies before anyone else learns that technology, the next one to gain it will gain that first discovered effect.
The fix is to change the above line to:
if (GET_TEAM((TeamTypes)iI).isEverAlive())
By the way, yes, this also appears to be a Vanilla/Warlords defect.
Crash to Desktop mid to late game.
Playing as Kuriatates on Monarch. Huge map, 16 starting civs.
I enabled Python exception error popups as requested but but i get CtD before it shows me anything. Is there a place i can send my saved game? It's too big to post here.
- feydras
Playing as Kuriatates on Monarch. Huge map, 16 starting civs.
I enabled Python exception error popups as requested but but i get CtD before it shows me anything. Is there a place i can send my saved game? It's too big to post here.
- feydras
Frozen-Vomit
Prince
Some problems/strange things (not really all bugs) from my last game:
- Orthus's Axe disappeared when it's bearer was destroyed by an executionier. Maybe something isn't working correctly with the marksman code.
- I can't lower the armageddon counter with razing Infernal cities. (The counter will rise by 1 when i capture the city and lower by 1 when I instantly raze it. All the cities were size 9 to 14.)
- I sometimes get phyton errors when I kill infernal units or raze infernal cities (attached).
- Frigattes still upgrade to Queen of the Lines even though they seem to be for different proposes now. I guess it hurts the AI if it upgrades their best warships to medium strenght transporters.
- Orthus's Axe disappeared when it's bearer was destroyed by an executionier. Maybe something isn't working correctly with the marksman code.
- I can't lower the armageddon counter with razing Infernal cities. (The counter will rise by 1 when i capture the city and lower by 1 when I instantly raze it. All the cities were size 9 to 14.)
- I sometimes get phyton errors when I kill infernal units or raze infernal cities (attached).
- Frigattes still upgrade to Queen of the Lines even though they seem to be for different proposes now. I guess it hurts the AI if it upgrades their best warships to medium strenght transporters.
Attachments
Similar threads
