FfH2 Bug Thread

[MagisterCultuum]

The Malakim may get more commerce from deserts and fight better there, but in general Grasslands and Plains are still better for them and I wouldn't want them to loose this way to get them. On the other hand, it could be interesting if instead of geting rid of Deserts it caused them all to become Oases.


The Illians are unable to perform Genesis.


The Mazatl don't exist in the main mod.

 

[Shaod]

I realize this is probably a user error or has been covered before, but I couldn't find any information about it. A friend recently installed FFH2 on his computer and certain units are showing up as their Civilization defaults, for example, skeletons are sometimes showing up as BtS Swordsmen, gorillas are showing up as BtS Berserkers. Has anyone else had this problem or have any idea how to correct it?

The latest versions of Civ, BtS and FFH2 are all installed.

edit: this is only sometimes the case though. They seem to fluctuate (on a turn-by-turn basis between the correct units and the BtS units.

 

[Valkrionn]

He most likely has the Frozen Animations options turned on. Tell him to go into graphics settings and turn it off.

 

[Shaod]

I'll let him know, thanks for the extremely prompt reply.

 

[TC01]

This is a scenario bug, but no one has responded to the post in the scenario forum, so I'll repost it here. Deanej reported a bug here in Into the Desert, which occurs after taking Dirage. There was another one that was fixed in the previous patch- this one is not the same one. Anyway, here is where the problem occurs (ScenarioFunctions, line 1547) and what I think is needed to solve it. My FFH patch d has the same problem when I run it, so this is not the same bug fixed in patch c.

 

[Rystic]

If you start off near Pristine Pass, close enough to activate it, it spawns Gargoyles but then throws a Python exception. The next turn it spawns them again correctly. The error is in the function atRangeGuardian.

 

[Izmir Stinger]

Got 2 baron halfmorns while testing a MP game, we started in one of the later eras but it was a test so I didn't pay much heed to the game options

Duplicated in single-player. When you start in the medieval era you start with 2 Baron Halfmorns instead of the longbowman I think you are supposed to have. All the AIs start with the appropriate units, except the Donivello who were given 2 Lucians, but were otherwise correct.

I messed with several different options. It always happened when I started in medieval times.

 

[Breunor]

I put together a list of the unresolved bugs listed on this forum, starting roughly around the installation of .41. It is in this thread:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=8318575#post8318575

Best wishes,

Breunor

 

[ExMachina]

13. Blight's effect from population is halved (so instead of +1 unhealth per pop its +1 unhealth per 2 pop).

There have been reports of blight occasionally skipping the AI and doubling up on the human player. I just played a Bannor game with about 60 blight unhealthiness in a size 17 city, which shows that blight was not giving +1 unhealth per pop. If the game actually was consistently applying the proper amount of unhealth with blight, I don't think there would be any problem.

This change seems more like a bandaid than an actual fix, since blight still doesn't seem to be applying its effects consistently. Is this issue being looked into?

 

[Lone Wolf]

Will the issues with units not "dieing" despite taking damage be fixed?

 

[Neomega]

Will the issues with units not "dieing" despite taking damage be fixed?

I sure hope so.

 

[Breunor]

Will the issues with units not "dieing" despite taking damage be fixed?

Which issue is this?

Best wishes,

Breunor

 

[Kael]

There have been reports of blight occasionally skipping the AI and doubling up on the human player. I just played a Bannor game with about 60 blight unhealthiness in a size 17 city, which shows that blight was not giving +1 unhealth per pop. If the game actually was consistently applying the proper amount of unhealth with blight, I don't think there would be any problem.

This change seems more like a bandaid than an actual fix, since blight still doesn't seem to be applying its effects consistently. Is this issue being looked into?

I went through all the code and I couldn't find a problem.

Will the issues with units not "dieing" despite taking damage be fixed?

Ill need more details about this.

 

[Lone Wolf]

Which issue is this?

When you play with multiple unit graphics, the units which are damaged in combat graphically don't show their damage. An example can be found in the image in that post. Barbarian Javelin Thrower unit is at 0.6/4, yet it's graphically shown as healthy, with three guys representing it.

Xienwolf've said something about that bug here.

 

[Breunor]

I went through all the code and I couldn't find a problem.

Kael,

I respectfully ask you take a further look at blight; we have had no less than 3 seperate blight threads. I admit to being in the camp where I think blight is broken - I had a size 30 city get -65 health or something like that from this; there are people who think it is working as it is supposed to, but that then opens the issue as to whether this is best.

Specifically, larger cities not only suffer more than smaller cities, but they wind up with fewer people also by far. Most of these large cities go to one person often for very long times. So the game has changed - either keep citied ON PURPOSE very small until the blight hits, or ensure that the blight doesn't come. For the Kuriotates, it is now almost akin to a very long anarchy !


Here are links to some of the threads around blight:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=325968&highlight=Blight

This is a fairly large thread, note many people reported blight issues here;

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=329667&highlight=Blight

A small thread, where Emptiness referred people to the prior thread;

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=328902&highlight=Blight

Another large thread called 'Is blight still broken?

Finally, there are many blight posts on this thread.


My personal view is that, in looking at my 'bug' compendium, I would rather that the blight issues be fixed than every other bug put together!

Your fan,

Breunor

 

[Broken Hawk]

The main issue I have with Blight is it always seems to impact only me. Nothing appears to happen with the AI civs. Next time Blight hits, I go into WB and check more carefully.

 

[megamanx06]

I've never really paid much attention to how other civs are affected by blight, but i can say from just my own cities that it is inconsistent. I'll have size 4 cities with 12 sick faces and size 20 cities with 17. (Note that I made up those numbers, but it's very similar to what actually happens)

 

[Kael]

Kael,

I respectfully ask you take a further look at blight; we have had no less than 3 seperate blight threads. I admit to being in the camp where I think blight is broken - I had a size 30 city get -65 health or something like that from this; there are people who think it is working as it is supposed to, but that then opens the issue as to whether this is best.

Specifically, larger cities not only suffer more than smaller cities, but they wind up with fewer people also by far. Most of these large cities go to one person often for very long times. So the game has changed - either keep citied ON PURPOSE very small until the blight hits, or ensure that the blight doesn't come. For the Kuriotates, it is now almost akin to a very long anarchy !

Here are links to some of the threads around blight:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=325968&highlight=Blight

This is a fairly large thread, note many people reported blight issues here;

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=329667&highlight=Blight

A small thread, where Emptiness referred people to the prior thread;

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=328902&highlight=Blight

Another large thread called 'Is blight still broken?

Finally, there are many blight posts on this thread.


My personal view is that, in looking at my 'bug' compendium, I would rather that the blight issues be fixed than every other bug put together!

Your fan,

Breunor

I read the threads. Its very possible I have something wrong but I reread everything and it all looks correct. Though I appreciate people saying that its broke (thats a good first step, and is usually enough to track down these issues) in this case since I couldn't find anything in a code review I will need a save game to check. A save right before blight hits would be ideal.

I've never really paid much attention to how other civs are affected by blight, but i can say from just my own cities that it is inconsistent. I'll have size 4 cities with 12 sick faces and size 20 cities with 17. (Note that I made up those numbers, but it's very similar to what actually happens)

The patch "d" code is this. When blight hits every player gets unheathiness equal to:

1. A random number 0-14
2. Plus the cities population
3. Minus health bonuses from buildings

This unhealthiness goes down 1 per turn until it is gone. This unhealthiness is in addition to any other unhealthiness the city may have already been experiencing.

So 12 unhealth in a size 4 city and 17 unhealth in a size 20 city is not only viable, but probably pretty low for what blight is capable of.

A check you can do to see how many times blight hit you is to check your units health. Blight does 0-24% death damage to units on each strike. So if you get hit twice your units that weren't anywhere near combat should have greater than 25% damage.

 

[Black Attila]

Playing 41d and there are no modmods on my computer this game crashes to desktop when you hit end turn.

 

[Breunor]

I read the threads. Its very possible I have something wrong but I reread everything and it all looks correct. Though I appreciate people saying that its broke (thats a good first step, and is usually enough to track down these issues) in this case since I couldn't find anything in a code review I will need a save game to check. A save right before blight hits would be ideal.



The patch "d" code is this. When blight hits every player gets unheathiness equal to:

1. A random number 0-14
2. Plus the cities population
3. Minus health bonuses from buildings

This unhealthiness goes down 1 per turn until it is gone. This unhealthiness is in addition to any other unhealthiness the city may have already been experiencing.

So 12 unhealth in a size 4 city and 17 unhealth in a size 20 city is not only viable, but probably pretty low for what blight is capable of.

A check you can do to see how many times blight hit you is to check your units health. Blight does 0-24% death damage to units on each strike. So if you get hit twice your units that weren't anywhere near combat should have greater than 25% damage.

You are probably right about the blight, that is, it probably is doing what you are saying. I do think soem people may feel it is too harsh, so I think we should remove it from the bug thread.

May people are reporting unhealth in the 70 + range. I guess the idea is that most cities are grown near the health cap, indeed, if there is a lot of food, most cities are above the health cap in population.

So, if a city has N population, and we assume before blight that they also have M unhealthiness, then after the blight they will have the original M unhealthiness, + N unhealthiness, + a rand(1-15).

Since N and M are usually close, then we wind up with 2N + rand (1-15). This means a size 30 city has a mean unhealth of 67.5 and results above 70 are fairly common. If we are running agranianism and have N at 30 and M at 35, the mean unhealth is 72.5 so the few cases of the unhealth getting above 75 is probably as designed.


This result is devastating for big cities. A size 30 city then has 67.5 unheath - if it was breakeven before the blight, it has a reduction in food of 37.5 - which will cause the city to starve to 1. at 37.5, the blight reduces 1 per turn, so will be devastating for about 20 turns or more.

A size 15 city then will have a mean unhealthiness of 37.5, or excess unhealthiness of 22.5 which reduces 1 per turn - not too bad.

So, in reading through the three threads, I do think the blight is working properly, that is, as specified; but whether this is too much should propbably still be addressed from a design standpoint. My earlier point that it is now best to intentionally starve cities befor the blight (or limit their growth) will operate.


Anyway, it shoudln't take too long to post a test save. I'll just go into the worldbuilder, give myself some ritualists, spread the AV, and get the AC above 30 in my current game. I'll post it soon.

Best wishes,

Breunor