New Beta Version - June 22nd (6/22)

[Gazebo]

Workers that are under the "route to" mode connecting two cities will prevent you from ending the turn after they reach their end destination city. I'm able to consistently replicate this. Using the hot-fix featuring the movement fix (though I still see issues with it here and there).

Report to github for ilteroi.

G

 

[StugLife]

What could initially look like an incentive to maintain trade routes is overshadowed by an incentive to stay behind in techs/policies for as long as you can - the longer you stay behind the more yields you get from this policy.
Compared to complains about opener or worker policy this self-inflicted handicap incentive is effective for the whole duration of the game - it's not just an early game opener/worker handicap that you get past by and are done with.
And while a number optimizing AI playing progress is doing ok regardless of how or why it gets it's yields this is an artificially backwards way to play, not helped by the fact that it finds its place in a policy tree titled "progress".

I second this. Requiring one to be behind in tech / policies in order to gain the bonus seems counter intuitive and inappropriate for progress.

 

[Txurce]

I second this. Requiring one to be behind in tech / policies in order to gain the bonus seems counter intuitive and inappropriate for progress.

It's a bonus if you're behind, which is often the case with Progress in the early games. And if you happen to be the early tech leader with Progress, you have nothing to complain about.

 

[Gazebo]

I second this. Requiring one to be behind in tech / policies in order to gain the bonus seems counter intuitive and inappropriate for progress.

The idea is that you are taking what others are doing, studying it, and benefiting more from it than they are.

G

 

[StugLife]

The idea is that you are taking what others are doing, studying it, and benefiting more from it than they are.

G

Yeah, I get the bonus part, knowledge through trade and such. It´s just the requirement part which in my opinion contradicts the progress theme. Like at some point during the game you might need to purposefully stay behind in tech to get the full benefit of the policy.

 

[Gazebo]

Yeah, I get the bonus part, knowledge through trade and such. It´s just the requirement part which in my opinion contradicts the progress theme. Like at some point during the game you might need to purposefully stay behind in tech to get the full benefit of the policy.

It is only +3/+3. No scaling. It is not intended to shape gameplay beyond the first 150 turns or so.

G

 

[ilteroi]

Hello! So I started a new Civ game a few days ago and it all was working fine up until today. Usually I like to try and fix bugs and glitches myself but this one is way beyond me. Basically my game progressed up to turn 237, I completed everything I needed to do and then hit "Next Turn". Everything worked fine, turn transitioned all the way up to player 28 (Venice). As soon as it hit Venice I got a CTD (it was either right when or one second after it hit Venice). Therefore I believe the crash has something to do with AI Venice and something it is doing (a troop movement, building construction, etc.) however I am not completely sure. Now, naturally I checked the logs but to my dismay nothing showed up in Database.log, LUA.log, and XML.log (Logs are enabled). So, my only reasonable assumption was that I was dealing with a dreaded DLL error (the only thing I hate more than LUA).

I was able to get to the CvMiniDump file because I knew that would tell me about where the error was coming from and it did. Specifically I think it was sighting the Community Patch (1) file and the CvGameCore_Expansion2 component of it. However, I am not particularly sure with my way around DLL bugs and specifically Visual Studios so I was not able to debug it to be sure (whenever I tried to debug it I was asked to "Set Symbol Paths", not sure what this is). I figure that posting the actual file for you would be the most helpful (I can post logs and mod list if you need as well).

If you could take a look at it and tell me the issue and maybe how to fix it I would greatly appreciate it, also, if you could explain to me how to "Set Symbol Paths" for Vox Pop. so I could work on finding a solution myself that would help as well. Thanks!

https://www.dropbox.com/s/eeecv319zutfaft/CvMiniDump.dmp?dl=0

you need the source code and a matching PDB file to resolve the callstack where it's crashing. easiest way to get it is to pull the latest from github, do a debug build (should work right out of the box with the VC++ 2008 compiler) and drop the resulting DLL/PDB into the Community Patch folder. Now start the game, load the mod, attach the VS debugger, reproduce your crash and you should see exactly what goes wrong. Good luck!

 

[Owlbebach]

Me and my friend still have desyncs with barbarians in MP (every 3-4 turns). I do not have the logs with me right now, but i checked net_message_debug and we have different random seeds there

EDIT: attached logs

Spoiler crappy quote from logs :

Player2 is host, player4 is the other human, that was a LAN game and it does not happen without barbarians

[1044201.812] Net RECV (2) :NetRandomNumberGeneratorSyncCheck(Player=2, RandomNumberGenerator(seed=-1852749798)
[1044201.828] Net RECV (4) :NetUnitSyncCheck(Player=4, Unit=1029, ArchiveDataSize=81)
[1044201.828] DBG: Unit out of sync. Player=4, Name=Warrior, id=1029, X=100, Y=29
Variable Out Of Sync : CvUnit::m_iEverSelectedCount


[1044201.828] Net RECV (4) :NetUnitSyncCheck(Player=4, Unit=1032, ArchiveDataSize=108)
[1044201.828] DBG: Unit out of sync. Player=4, Name=Pathfinder, id=1032, X=97, Y=36
Variable Out Of Sync : CvUnit::m_iEverSelectedCount


[1044201.828] Net RECV (4) :NetUnitSyncCheck(Player=4, Unit=1033, ArchiveDataSize=100)
[1044201.828] DBG: Unit out of sync. Player=4, Name=Pathfinder, id=1033, X=98, Y=26
Variable Out Of Sync : CvUnit::m_iEverSelectedCount


[1044201.828] Net RECV (4) :NetUnitSyncCheck(Player=4, Unit=1034, ArchiveDataSize=108)
[1044201.828] DBG: Unit out of sync. Player=4, Name=Pathfinder, id=1034, X=104, Y=35
Variable Out Of Sync : CvUnit::m_iEverSelectedCount


[1044201.828] Net RECV (4) :NetUnitSyncCheck(Player=4, Unit=1031, ArchiveDataSize=12)
[1044201.828] Net RECV (4) :NetPlayerSyncCheck(Player=4), ArchiveDataSize=123
[1044201.828] Net RECV (4) :NetRandomNumberGeneratorSyncCheck(Player=4, RandomNumberGenerator(seed=-1662005429)
[1044201.828] DBG: Game Random Number Generators are out of sync : local.seed=-2719416295445411814, remote.seed=956557908864126795
local.callCount=37532, remote.callCount=37533
local.resetCount=13, remote.resetCount=13

 

[glider1]

Lots of path breakages every time a unit has to cross a forest or hill. I'm on 6/25 thought this was fixed?

 

[Misaka]

Owlbebach: Using raggin barbarian? well we don't test it. the error of random seed, we get when we play with 3 friend with a diferent spec of pc. we don't try runing the host in the fastest pc yet, if this fix the problem. But playing two player, we don't have any truble. And i dont know if you make you mp_modpack with the lates update, or you download the 6-16-17 beta - Inquisitive Raven Modpack, this version have desync, in 7 hour i will test the version without the issue of moving unit. and if this work i will create a new thread. If you want play urgen xD this version works.
https://mega.nz/#!sAEW2bhI!fy8GqKoMfWCyVLDAo_yMzqlgsybcuRP4PAWrQc2Js8k
if you have truble with this, is not the mod.

If someone can guide me how use "someone said" i will thank you xD

 

[Jarula]

There should be something more for Tradition Encourage more AI to adopt it. Something mildly scaling.
On Diety its all authority and progress. In Europe They really should all be choosing Tradition. when they have like 1 or 2 cities.

Maybe the third one down grant a bonus like make it +2 science for councils. and maybe give the opener +3 +3 instead of +2 +2

 

[Owlbebach]

I do not see this in my game. Recently i had 1/2 of the world playing tradition

 

[Txurce]

Does anyone else have a problem with the frequently "impossible" Open Borders?

 

[tu_79]

What I find impossible is to conquer a coastal city without any navy. This is specially true when I start inland. I can shoot a boat or two with a well positioned catapult, but that's all, I don't even sink a single ship with that tactic (the city is recovered, and their ships can heal again). On the other hand, I've defended a coastal city with just a ranged ship, a cannon and a crossbowman, killing caravels by three at times.

Please, remove siege penalty vs navy. There aren't so many spots from where a siege unit can shoot safely, and even then, any horseman disembarked can cause havoc, as it's difficult to protect the shores with melee units (ranged ships shoot and move, so they can kill any static defense and open the path to mounted units)

 

[HorseshoeHermit]

At line 24608 in CvCity.cpp of the current revision is an identifier iAdjUnitDefense which is only conditionally declared if the preprocessor define MOD_BALANCE_CORE exists.

I found it while assessing a new feature. Should I roll the two-line fix into my branch edits or leave hands off?

 

[Gazebo]

At line 24608 in CvCity.cpp of the current revision is an identifier iAdjUnitDefense which is only conditionally declared if the preprocessor define MOD_BALANCE_CORE exists.

I found it while assessing a new feature. Should I roll the two-line fix into my branch edits or leave hands off?

You can branch off master - either way make an issue on github for me.

 

[kawyua]

Does anyone else have a problem with the frequently "impossible" Open Borders?

Yep basically impossible for me, too. Its quite the problem in my current Brazil game.

Here I've got my super promoted scout and horseman stuck next to a city state. I could move out, but Japan has been constantly threatening me. I don't want to lose them. Still, they are getting outdated. Before this, I lost my pathfinder exploring because it got stuck in Poland's borders for too long - a barbarian camp popped up
=(

Granted, I haven't gotten that far into the game, but ...

4 war declarations huh. I kept asking for borders from my neighbors, but never could. Later, Japan declares on me again.. Maybe that open border diplo modifier was quite important for friendships.

I'm starting to miss the convenience of open borders. Game is entirely okay, but it is a sad chain of events.

 

[Gazebo]

Yep basically impossible for me, too. Its quite the problem in my current Brazil game.
View attachment 473409
Here I've got my super promoted scout and horseman stuck next to a city state. I could move out, but Japan has been constantly threatening me. I don't want to lose them. Still, they are getting outdated. Before this, I lost my pathfinder exploring because it got stuck in Poland's borders for too long - a barbarian camp popped up
=(

Granted, I haven't gotten that far into the game, but ...
View attachment 473410
4 war declarations huh. I kept asking for borders from my neighbors, but never could. Later, Japan declares on me again.. Maybe that open border diplo modifier was quite important for friendships.

I'm starting to miss the convenience of open borders. Game is entirely okay, but it is a sad chain of events.

The AI is much more stingy with open borders, and for good reason. There's zero reason for the AI to give anyone else OB unless they can directly benefit more than the other person. And, a lot of the time, the AI cannot benefit.

G

 

[Txurce]

The AI is much more stingy with open borders, and for good reason. There's zero reason for the AI to give anyone else OB unless they can directly benefit more than the other person. And, a lot of the time, the AI cannot benefit.

That's all well and god, but when I can't reach areas that need defending, despite having no issues with the civs preventing me (transparent diplomacy), it's making the game not fun. I suggest toning it down so that you can't get it only if they don't like you.

 

[Misaka]

i played near of 8 games no more than 200 turn, and every each game compare for example version 3-7, i see the ia its easly outoverrun by barbarian so easly, and they took a lot of turn to clear barbarian near of them, and i see a lot of progres with only with 3 city near turn 160 with 2 camp barbarian and atacking theier city, and lot of autority with 1 city in turn near turn 100, i want to ask is somebody share this opinion with me?