New Beta Version - April 14th (4/14)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Has anyone tried starting a new game with the 4/16 release and more than 20 City states. Have a bug where I only get 20 city states even though I choose 22, 24, ...

I'm in contact with devs via Github but I was wondering if I was the only one who sees this.

Would very much appreciate it if anyone would do a quick check (very easy using Firetuner/IGE), as I'm rather eager to start playing again after waiting for the new release and after that the hotfix :)

PS: This is with the standard dll, not 43 civ dll as this is supposed to have a hard cap at 20 Minor civs.

\Skodkim
 
Last edited:
Same here. Using 43Civ DLL and Really Advanced Setup. Can not get more than 20 CS, no matter how many I specify during setup. However, I had done a new install on a different PC a month ago, using the 3/2 release and was seeing the same thing. This issue may not be a new as we think?
 
@Dovaj @BornDownUnder

Thanks for the answer but I think you misunderstand me (just made myself more clear in my previous post)

Civ43 dll has a hard cap at 20 Minor Civs. I suspect that the 43 civ dll may have been uploaded as part of the standard VP installation package though but I don't know how to check and so far I haven't heard anyone else that me saying they've seen this problem with the standard dll.

\Skodkim
 
Has anyone tried starting a new game with the 4/16 release and more than 20 City states. Have a bug where I only get 20 city states even though I choose 22, 24, ...

I'm in contact with devs via Github but I was wondering if I was the only one who sees this.

Would very much appreciate it if anyone would do a quick check (very easy using Firetuner/IGE), as I'm rather eager to start playing again after waiting for the new release and after that the hotfix :)

PS: This is with the standard dll, not 43 civ dll as this is supposed to have a hard cap at 20 Minor civs.

\Skodkim

I was just about to make a post about this. I have a scenario with 41 city states and it will not load more than 20 random city states. I loaded the 3-2 version and it works fine, loaded 10-7 version just to check and it works fine. Soon as I load up the 4-16 I cannot add more than 20 city states even with mods disabled besides 4-16 version
 
I was just about to make a post about this. I have a scenario with 41 city states and it will not load more than 20 random city states. I loaded the 3-2 version and it works fine, loaded 10-7 version just to check and it works fine. Soon as I load up the 4-16 I cannot add more than 20 city states even with mods disabled besides 4-16 version
There's a new dll in the bug thread at Github. That fixes it

\Skodkim
 
Lol citystate taking more then 2 turns to set its city.
Also it feels like AI turns are taking a little longer recently.
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.png
    Untitled.png
    6.2 MB · Views: 66
Is there a problem with spies in this new patch. The reason I ask is in my first game to test it out I played on Warlord as Babylon & was miles ahead in science /techs, but once reaching rennaisance kept having them nicked every few turns & never finding out who did it, much to my annoyance. This game I tried America on Prince, having a poor start science/tech wise, & behind everyone. In Medieval when Morocco, who is steaming away in techs reaches rennaisance., & gain my first spy. Obviously this goes into Moroccos capital. Once he is settled there I gain my first tech, then another then another in 15 turns, gaining 46 turns of science. Now I am all for giving a leg up to struggling civs/player, but this seems ridiclous.

I see this all the time on youtube with players playing high levels, though not like this. It seems the higher the level seems to be more what the AI gains in resources whether money or techs, which the player can then nick or buy, & seems strange way to play. I know there is a a far harder military on higher levels, but although a defensive player, seem to cope better on that side of things. Will try a harder level if I can just steal everything.

Should the spying be like this? Because in older patches you had to wait an eternity to steal anything, even if playing as England, with their advantages.
 
I'm very much enjoying the new spying as England (deity, marathon ...). Why build libraries and such nonsense when you can just steal techs faster then you can research them ... Thanks to my research minions (Egypt, Ethiopia, Babylon, Inca, Sweden and France -- I had to get rid of America cause Washington was getting uppity and believing our continent was large enough for the both of us) I'm the undisputed tech leader for the entire game and we are now in the middle of the Renaissance era.
 
I'm very much enjoying the new spying as England (deity, marathon ...). Why build libraries and such nonsense when you can just steal techs faster then you can research them ... Thanks to my research minions (Egypt, Ethiopia, Babylon, Inca, Sweden and France -- I had to get rid of America cause Washington was getting uppity and believing our continent was large enough for the both of us) I'm the undisputed tech leader for the entire game and we are now in the middle of the Renaissance era.

Don't you think it defeats playing on a higher level if you can just steal everything. That makes the game so much easier. I agree with what you are saying, but seems to change the whole aspect of playing.
 
Don't you think it defeats playing on a higher level if you can just steal everything. That makes the game so much easier. I agree with what you are saying, but seems to change the whole aspect of playing.

I'm not saying it's not kind of silly. It is. On the other hand it was equally silly before when you tried to steal something in say the atomic or information era and the estimated time to steal something was listed as being 2,500,000 turns etc. I was sort of hoping for something reasonable. That said I'm not saying that England is a good civ to compare it to or judge this from since it's very much the spying civ, I also went Statecraft (this is also one of the reasons I got rid of America cause it was the only other one that picked statecraft). So I have some extra spying with my previous already extra spying and my extra spying White Tower national wonder. So I'm not saying I'm not stacking the spying here.

I suspect it might slow down a bit in an era or two, or more perhaps to the point when a lot of the AI civs will pick Rationalism (Empiricism) as their third policy tree. Someone will put down Bletchley and that one will be less usable then. If I don't get the great Firewall wonder one civ isn't going to do much research for me anymore, or so I suspect.
 
I'm not saying it's not kind of silly. It is. On the other hand it was equally silly before when you tried to steal something in say the atomic or information era and the estimated time to steal something was listed as being 2,500,000 turns etc. I was sort of hoping for something reasonable. That said I'm not saying that England is a good civ to compare it to or judge this from since it's very much the spying civ, I also went Statecraft (this is also one of the reasons I got rid of America cause it was the only other one that picked statecraft). So I have some extra spying with my previous already extra spying and my extra spying White Tower national wonder. So I'm not saying I'm not stacking the spying here.

I suspect it might slow down a bit in an era or two, or more perhaps to the point when a lot of the AI civs will pick Rationalism (Empiricism) as their third policy tree. Someone will put down Bletchley and that one will be less usable then. If I don't get the great Firewall wonder one civ isn't going to do much research for me anymore, or so I suspect.

I agree it has gone from one extreme to the other. Funny enough it was England I was thinking about when I played the older patch. As you say, England should be great, as this is their ability, but in that patch it took an age to obtain any techs from anyone. Now it seems, even a non spy specialist like America can steal regularly.
 
Something I've been noticing more and more on Immortal. In medieval, I can "fight" the AI just fine, I can sit there kill his units with cbows and then xbows, and prevent him from killing me. But I am finding it very difficult to actually make any key moves or take cities. I just feel like I war and war and war until suddenly its Gunpowder and I'm still on the same line as when I started with Knights on Medieval.

Anyone else feeling that way?
 
Something I've been noticing more and more on Immortal. In medieval, I can "fight" the AI just fine, I can sit there kill his units with cbows and then xbows, and prevent him from killing me. But I am finding it very difficult to actually make any key moves or take cities. I just feel like I war and war and war until suddenly its Gunpowder and I'm still on the same line as when I started with Knights on Medieval.

Anyone else feeling that way?

Yes, but weirdly I view this as a positive? ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom