New Version - February 7th (2/7)

[Infixo]

@thothenki For Civilopedia I can tell you that you are loading a Civ that is missing ShortDescription field in DB.
For InGame this error happens when you try to load .lua script that cannot be found, usually wrong file name in .modinfo.
Edit. TradeLogic is the same problem as Civilopedia, bad Civ definition in the table.

 

[acidcircus]

Loving the latest update, I've had 2 of the best games I have had in a while.

I play Epic - King and the only weirdness I have to report is the leading AI getting an ideology quicker than I thought possible such as at around 40 techs, I don't think they have bee lined for it either. It has happened in both games I play and I am at a comparable tech level but take ages to be able to open an ideology after they have theirs.

Other than that extremely happy (as are my empires now), keep up the good work!

 

[Grabbl]

Loving the latest update, I've had 2 of the best games I have had in a while.

I play Epic - King and the only weirdness I have to report is the leading AI getting an ideology quicker than I thought possible such as at around 40 techs, I don't think they have bee lined for it either. It has happened in both games I play and I am at a comparable tech level but take ages to be able to open an ideology after they have theirs.

Other than that extremely happy (as are my empires now), keep up the good work!

I'm not sure if this is your concern, but ideologies are not unlocked via techs usually, but via social policies (you need 18 of them to unlock an ideology, and this occurs earlier than being in atomic era usually). If this was clear to you, sorry.

 

[acidcircus]

I'm not sure if this is your concern, but ideologies are not unlocked via techs usually, but via social policies (you need 18 of them to unlock an ideology, and this occurs earlier than being in atomic era usually). If this was clear to you, sorry.

Ah ok, I thought it was a combination of both!

 

[Moi Magnus]

Ah ok, I thought it was a combination of both!

In practice:
You unlock ideologies after unlocking you 18th policy, tech is irrelevant

The exact rule:
To unlock an ideology, you need to be in the atomic era (with any number of policy), or in the industrial era with 18 policies.

 

[acidcircus]

In practice:
You unlock ideologies after unlocking you 18th policy, tech is irrelevant

The exact rule:
To unlock an ideology, you need to be in the atomic era (with any number of policy), or in the industrial era with 18 policies.

Thanks for the clarification, it makes sense now. I guess I still have some vanilla game mechanics in my head (modern era or 3 factories).

 

[thothenki]

@thothenki For Civilopedia I can tell you that you are loading a Civ that is missing ShortDescription field in DB.
For InGame this error happens when you try to load .lua script that cannot be found, usually wrong file name in .modinfo.
Edit. TradeLogic is the same problem as Civilopedia, bad Civ definition in the table.

Ah! A clue! Thanks, Infixo! I can probably figure out which one through trial & error.

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

@Gazebo , here's a zip file of logs. Darius offered me a DoF, which I accepted, and after around 5 turns (didn't do anything to provoke him, imho) he denounced me (and now he has a "backstabbed" under his diplo modifiers). I exited the game immediately upon being denounced and zipped the files. Hope that's ok.

 

[kawyua]

the ai are just having their mood swings

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

@Gazebo , I've been trying out a full on warmonger game, and in this particular game, both Songhai and Aztecs have just one city on turn 64. Logs and save file included, also attached the safe file from post #208 in this thread.

 

[randomnub]

That happens often with Authority civs, I guess going for the right side but not managing a good early war.

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

Oh, I didn't know that it happens often. Still, seems like a bad strategy, you "only" need to invest in one settler and then that settler can produce other settlers while the capital continues its war efforts. I hope it's possible to tweak the AI's logic to settle more/sooner even when going Authority, otherwise it leaves a tremendous amount of empty space for other civs.

 

[Gazebo]

Oh, I didn't know that it happens often. Still, seems like a bad strategy, you "only" need to invest in one settler and then that settler can produce other settlers while the capital continues its war efforts. I hope it's possible to tweak the AI's logic to settle more/sooner even when going Authority, otherwise it leaves a tremendous amount of empty space for other civs.

Unfortunately one example does not a problem make. I almost _never_ see the AI do this anymore, so the rationale is nigh impossible to pin down.

G

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

Ah, ok. Like I said, I didn't know/think it happened often, but when it did, I wanted to report it so you could maybe figure out what went wrong in this scenario with not one, but two AIs. It's a shame that it seems that it's "nigh impossible" to pin down the reason.

Thanks for the reply.

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

Gazebo, it happened again. I tried a new game to see it will be different (i.e. normal). This time, 3 civs (Aztecs, Songhai, Sweden) had just one city by turn 70. No wars (that I know of), just Aztecs started a war around turn 65. I'll post the logs and savegame in the next few minutes.

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

Logs/save.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

Gazebo, it happened again. I tried a new game to see it will be different (i.e. normal). This time, 3 civs (Aztecs, Songhai, Sweden) had just one city by turn 70. No wars (that I know of), just Aztecs started a war around turn 65. I'll post the logs and savegame in the next few minutes.

Ive seen such thing in previos version too. Rome with only one city, which already had reached 9 population. Cant remember the turns but normally I see them spawning settlers with 4 or 5 pop in capitol. They didnt went authority, instead they took progress.

 

[Deadstarre]

looking at Alhambra right now, 500 hammer cost (+%25 prod cost) and 420 gold investment opportunity. Compare to stables (same tech) - 300 hammer cost for 250 gold investment

Stables: 150 hammers for 250 gold - 1.66 gold to hammer ratio

Alhambra: 125 hammers for 420 gold - 3.36 gold to hammer ratio

it is almost exactly 2x worse of an investment. Because of that coincidence I thought i should ask, was this by design or an oversight?

 

[tu_79]

looking at Alhambra right now, 500 hammer cost (+%25 prod cost) and 420 gold investment opportunity. Compare to stables (same tech) - 300 hammer cost for 250 gold investment

Stables: 150 hammers for 250 gold - 1.66 gold to hammer ratio

Alhambra: 125 hammers for 420 gold - 3.36 gold to hammer ratio

it is almost exactly 2x worse of an investment. Because of that coincidence I thought i should ask, was this by design or an oversight?

Design. All wonders should be quite inefficient, as it is a race. If you get the wonder, the others don't.

 

[crdvis16]

A few observations from my 2 most recent games with this patch-

1) After the early game period of expansion I am having virtually no happiness problems. Late game I am at 100+ happiness. This is from a game as Byzantium where I went wide and my current game as Denmark where I'm more thick. Most of the AIs also seem to be swimming in happiness. Other games I usually had to take into consideration happiness when choosing building priority. These games I am ignoring happiness buildings and often not bothering to trade for luxuries. This seems much different from before so I am wondering if others are seeing this.

2) As Denmark I was at war with a CS so I killed all of its units and pillaged all of its tiles. Afterward I made peace (it was no longer the ally of my enemy) and decided to ask for tribute instead. I got heavy tribute, and then a turn later found that I could get heavy tribute again. I was getting the -600 or so penalty from having gotten tribute recently but my "units near CS" bonus was 1000+. Is this because the CS had no units and my bonus score is based on a ratio of his unit strength vs mine? I was able to demand heavy tribute something like 5 times over 10 turns and then stopped because I was worried it was a bug. At the very least it didn't seem terribly fair.

Just wanted to toss these out there to see if others are seeing something similar- not sure if either qualify as bugs.