Final 2UC Version - 4.22 (May 31, 2025)

[Tekamthi]

I believe there is no active plan to bring it back.

strikes me to be an in-demand feature... can live without but nice-to-have kinda thing, especially when working in straightforward and expected manner

 

[KungCheops]

So just to expand on this, two things.
1) The build road to feature was found to be responsible for some crash or was otherwise broken/disabled. Whichever case, I believe there is no active plan to bring it back.
2) The route planner mod actually has a feature where it explains why roads have been built according to 3 categories so
View attachment 734091
Main routes were built to connect Cities. Shortcut routes are built to connect different areas but aren't strictly necessary to connect Cities (and I believe this does take into account maintenance). Strategic routes are built to Forts/Citadels, and along borders where they will be used in the event of war (and I'm not sure how much they care about maintenance here).
Perhaps @KungCheops or @L. Vern can elaborate, or point to somewhere else it is explained, if it has been.

Main routes are routes needed to connect cities to the capital. Shortcuts are all other routes between cities (for movement and redundancy). Strategic routes are the rest.
All route types are given a value based on how much movement gain they give, gold from city connection (for main routes) and extra yields from existing towns as well as potential+existing villages.
That evaluation is compared to the cost of the route, if the value is higher than the cost, it will be considered worth to build.
All evaluations are run for both regular roads and railroads, since sometimes (e.g. when playing as the Iroquois), it is not worth it to build railroads everywhere.
Unfortunately there is no way to see if it wants to build a railroad or a regular road in the modmod at the moment.

 

[andersw]

Is this another memory glitch? havent seen this before
The empty "winning" things
version 4.21.1 as Rome in early industrial.
Edit: I guess it was, also had city names disappear but it solved after restart+reload and tactical mode.

Spoiler :

 

[Zuizgond]

Sometimes I feel that civilizations that have a recon unit as unique component is acting weirdly with his recon units when it comes to war.

Spoiler :

Spain is my vassal and we got attacked by Sweden. I don't know why but Spain parked most of his commandos up there instead of defending. Is it because he knows he's behind in technology compared to Sweden?

 

[azum4roll]

I don't think AI can use recon units for war purposes. TacticalAI just ignores them, and they'll probably only explore.

 

[Yngwie]

I don't think AI can use recon units for war purposes. TacticalAI just ignores them, and they'll probably only explore.

Could it be solved by smth like: if auto-exploration button is inactive - exploration value of units is set to minimum? Would recons act as infantry or cavalry then?

 

[azum4roll]

Commandos are pure UNITAI_EXPLORE. They aren't going to do combat regardless.

 

[Zuizgond]

I guess we should put conquistador back to be a replacement of knight instead of explorer.

Also same issue with Polynesia.

 

[FinMc]

I guess we should put conquistador back to be a replacement of knight instead of explorer.

Also same issue with Polynesia.

Giving me flashbacks to a few patches ago where there'd be infinite carpets of the Brazilian unique scout doing absolutely nothing but using up their supply cap so they couldn't make actual units

Nice free industrial era kill

 

[hokath]

I guess we should put conquistador back to be a replacement of knight instead of explorer.

This would just be a partial solution.
If there's a unit that is designed for combat but the AI can't use it, that's a big problem.
I don't know what happens if you give Commandos an option for UNITAI_ATTACK. Paratroopers for example need to work for both AI and human, and they don't have that.
I recall a few versions ago there was a note

Increased desire for recon units to pillage improvements

 

[abolfazl]

Hi. After installing 4.22 I always get a CTD around turn 90-100 especially when city states are taking their turn. I also use some mods besides base VP, is it a mod conflict or just RAM usage? Thanks

 

[hokath]

These logs are empty.
If it always happens ("reproducible crash") then it won't be because of memory. If you zip up your MODS folder with the savefile you can open a github ticket and it can be debugged.

 

[andersw]

Logs need to be turned on also, they are not by default.

 

[abolfazl]

Logs need to be turned on also, they are not by default.

Oh so how should they be turned on?

 

[andersw]

Oh so how should they be turned on?

Thread 'How to enable logging'

Feb 2, 2013

To enable logging, perform the following steps

1. Locate the config.ini file (usually in the "C:\Users\{username}\Documents\My Games\Sid Meier's Civilization 5" sub-directory)
2. Using a plain text editor (such as Notepad) open it
3. Search for the text "ValidateGameDatabase" (it's near the top)
4. Change it to
   

   ; Validates the game database whenever it is changed.
   ValidateGameDatabase = 1

5. Search for the text "LoggingEnabled" (it's just over half way down)
6. Change it to
   

   ; Enable the logging system
   LoggingEnabled = 1

7. Save the changes

The log...

• whoward69
• Replies: 15
• Forum: Civ5 - Modding Tutorials & Reference

• 

 

[AndreyK]

I found myself in a peculiar situation: Brasil - master of Mongolia asked me to DoW or promise not to for 20 turns. I did promise twice already and was thinking to DoW on them as current promise will come to an end, but now (4 turns later) Mongolia wants me to begin a war or promise not to for another 20 turns.
So now I'm going to be promise-breaker in any situation, because if I DoW on Mongolia then I'll break my promise to Brasil, and if I wait 16 turns and DoW Brasil then I'll break my promise to Mongolia.
I think that vassals should not be able to demand such promises.

 

[Recursive]

I found myself in a peculiar situation: Brasil - master of Mongolia asked me to DoW or promise not to for 20 turns. I did promise twice already and was thinking to DoW on them as current promise will come to an end, but now (4 turns later) Mongolia wants me to begin a war or promise not to for another 20 turns.
So now I'm going to be promise-breaker in any situation, because if I DoW on Mongolia then I'll break my promise to Brasil, and if I wait 16 turns and DoW Brasil then I'll break my promise to Mongolia.
I think that vassals should not be able to demand such promises.

That is a fair argument. I'll change it.

 

[Anarcomu]

Alternatively, a civ couldn't ask for such promise if at least one defensive ally has already an ongoing promise (vassal/master and/or defensive pact).

 

[pochesun]

Alternatively, a civ couldn't ask for such promise if at least one defensive ally has already an ongoing promise (vassal/master and/or defensive pact).

vassals and allies are a bit different, would you agree?

 

[Anarcomu]

Not when it comes to defensive response in case of war declaration. In this regard, they are the same.