1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Really furious!

Discussion in 'Civ5 - Succession Games' started by RRRaskolnikov, Oct 1, 2010.

  1. Iustus

    Iustus King

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Messages:
    609
    Location:
    Sunnyvale, CA
    Here is a new save, I loaded the old (unconverted) one, resaved it, then converted that. (This was on a fresh launch of civ).

    Both the converted saves you uploaded seem corrupt, as I crash loading them. Can you load them yourself? (The deluxe version has no trouble opening saves that have been converted, it only is a problem going the other way).

    -Iustus
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Estarrioll

    Estarrioll Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2010
    Messages:
    49
    Yeah, you're right. I just wanted to adopt some SPs before settling Munich, and took the liberty of choosing them. Full Honor just seems the right policy to adopt since we go for domination and do not build any units.

    No, I'm fine, go ahead. From my point of view, my turn was dedicated to exploring and getting iron, and that is done. So we can go wherever we want to go, I see no "must-have" or "must-do" except iron-mining, of course.

    I'd probably upgrade two soldiers in Berlin and Munich after the first iron mine is done, and go for Grand River with GG (in Munich) assistance. Iroquois troops are far north now, so Grand River is vulnerable, and it's the only source of Hiawatha's iron. We also have two brutes and a scout (just passing) on the front-line between Wu and Hiawatha, they can do some assault as well.

    Thank you so much, hope that the game can be continued now. I can load one of my converted saves, actually. Well, it's quite strange, maybe the script has some hidden flaws, or my game, or my Windows, or something else. :sad:

    And can you imagine, guys, how troubled SGs are going to be after first DLCs are released? :mad:
     
  3. RRRaskolnikov

    RRRaskolnikov Goldfish

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,309
    Location:
    Paname
    Ok, will got the save in the evening and post my thoughts for the incoming turns.

    What I am afraid is that the SG community gets really thin because of this policy (DLC) :shake:

    Cheers,
    Ras
     
  4. Iustus

    Iustus King

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Messages:
    609
    Location:
    Sunnyvale, CA
    I assume you had no trouble opening the save?

    Looking at the save, some random thoughts:

    1) We need to explore south of Vienna, there is almost certainly a barbarian camp there.

    2) Unknown city state in the far east, next turn will reveal who

    3) It might be better to go for Metal Casting/Steel rather than fill quick techs, not certain

    4) We may want to consider befriending all the city states that have iron

    5) If you look at "Military Overview", you will see we have supply for 2 more troops at our current population/city count. Each population point adds one half (giving us 5 total from population), each city adds two (giving us 6 total from cities), plus 5 base.

    6) We could put a city down south to get the iron, but that would cut into our barbarian factory.

    7) There are several nice city spots to the north/ north west

    -Iustus
     
  5. RRRaskolnikov

    RRRaskolnikov Goldfish

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,309
    Location:
    Paname
    Sorry, I didn't get time yesterday for this. Will do in a few hours and finally post a plan.

    A short comment on tech path though: If we do go for steel, we thus bypass any research agreements? Furthermore math wouldn't be more usefull (courts, cats, and coliseums are close to that tech iirc)?

    Here is a rant about those btw (OT but I have dozen of rants about civ5 like that and somehow I will be in better mood if it goes out :)):

    Spoiler :
    those are incredibly bad designed: seriously, they said they wanted civ more newby friendly to attract the larger audience possible, fine, if they want. But this is just wrong. It ofc removes the interesting strategic choices linked with tech trading, slingshoting... but there is worst.
    If you try to do in spirit and do play with research agreements, you quickly realize that you need to basically fill up all cheap techs to be efficient. And of course, it's completly broken asa you get a bit of a tech lead as the AI won't ever refuse a RE and their prices are ridiculous (increase of 100 gold for 4000 more science, yes please)...

    Conclusion about RE: to be efficient you have to be repetitive, dumb, and they quickly kill challenges (because of course the AI even on immortal/deity can't tech properly). So please Firaxis, do something, at least for SP. In MP it's a different story as tech trading was unbalancing there anyway so it's good they tryed something different.
     
  6. Emperor Peter

    Emperor Peter Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    Messages:
    159
    Location:
    Belgium (GMT+1)
    I suggest growing the cap to size 6 (time it with completing the library) and build another settler to get those resources in the north we lack.

    Upgrade a few Brutes to swords and look for an opportunity target (most likely Hiawatha)

    I don't think we're in a hurry to get any new tech so we can backfill some cheaper ones and sign a few more RA to get the expensive stuff. However, if we need something to give us happy :) for after our war/expansion, Coloseums are the best option.
     
  7. RRRaskolnikov

    RRRaskolnikov Goldfish

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,309
    Location:
    Paname
    :mad: [pissed]

    Hum Iustus's save doesn't work here... if someone (Estarioll or Iustus?) is kind enough to try another conversion, it would be very cool... otherwise I will swap myself with someone able to open the last save... :lol:

    Thanks you Firaxis :love:

    edit: oops, it appears I haven't linked Estarioll's report... tsk tsk
     
  8. Iustus

    Iustus King

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Messages:
    609
    Location:
    Sunnyvale, CA
    Did you try both of them? (particularly the second one)?

    As far as research agreements, I do not understand the mechanics of how they work:
    1) Do both civs get the same tech?
    2) If so, does that mean it has to be one they both lack and can both research?
    3) Is the tech predetermined when the cost is decided? (ie, can you figure it out by the cost?)
    4) If so, what happens if you research the tech on your own before the research agreement completes?
    5) Does the research agreement help the civ that has the tech lead or the tech deficit more?

    -Iustus
     
  9. RRRaskolnikov

    RRRaskolnikov Goldfish

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,309
    Location:
    Paname
    I tested the two most recents one (from Estarioll and yours)... I will try again but otherwise just grab the save, I will play after you and before Rusten.

    1) No, and that's the problem. It's a random tech from the one available. It doesn't have to be the same tech for each civ. That's why asa you play with RE, it's best to backfill cheapest techs so u get a free big one. Moreover, the more advanced civ has higher chance to get a big tech, increasing the tech gap. Humans are able to abuse this, while it doesn't seem the AI is.

    And no, the tech isn't decided once the RE is signed. The price increases (it seems so) if you are more advanced (maybe that's the number of techs of each partner which matters). Though I didn't see more than 350 (400 maybe)...

    5) As u guess the more advanced... :D

    Ras
     
  10. Iustus

    Iustus King

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Messages:
    609
    Location:
    Sunnyvale, CA
    I think there is an issue with the conversion script. The converted files are crashing for me, I will contact Gyathaar.

    Here is another save, which crashes for me (for Gyathaar to examine)

    Also added the original unconverted saves

    -Iustus
     

    Attached Files:

  11. Gyathaar

    Gyathaar Warlock Retired Moderator GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    3,753
    Location:
    Trondheim, Norway
    I will have a look at it..

    I assume you are using the version in from the sticky thread? the first version had an issue which would sometimes corrupt saves

    Edit: I tried to convert too.. and the converted version crashes for me too. so there has to be a bug somewhere yes.. will update you when I fix it :)
     
  12. Gyathaar

    Gyathaar Warlock Retired Moderator GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    3,753
    Location:
    Trondheim, Norway
    Hmm.. looks like one of the cities in the game had gotten some kind of memory corruption or something.. it has gotten several binary data values ( with mixed in partially readable letters) where it was supposed to have text strings referring to xml keys for buildings...

    looks like I will have to write code to parse though the data the same way as the game instead of searching for the last entry before walls of babylon so the script still works if such memory corruption has occurred
     
  13. Iustus

    Iustus King

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Messages:
    609
    Location:
    Sunnyvale, CA
    Can you fix the corruption? Which city? (or is it one we have not found yet?)

    -Iustus
     
  14. Gyathaar

    Gyathaar Warlock Retired Moderator GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    3,753
    Location:
    Trondheim, Norway
    I dont know.. ( just assume its the cities that has lists of buildings in them.. since the number of such lists seems to scale with number of cities in a game)

    I am really puzzled with how to parse the data... in all other cases these lists are:

    integer (number of buildings)
    for each building:
    integer (number of letters)
    letters
    integer

    but this doesnt fit for this case where all buildings after broadcast tower is binary strings...

    the corruption is not there in the save from 1280BC, so it happened in the last turnset some time
     
  15. Arathorn

    Arathorn Catan player

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2002
    Messages:
    3,778
    Location:
    Illinois
  16. RRRaskolnikov

    RRRaskolnikov Goldfish

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,309
    Location:
    Paname
    Seconded :thumbsup:

    edit: @Gyathaar: isn't there a threshold on the first integer from which you get binary strings?
     
  17. Gyathaar

    Gyathaar Warlock Retired Moderator GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    3,753
    Location:
    Trondheim, Norway
    the number of strings is the value I expect (1 more than normal without babylon)
    but the string length value doesnt seem to match the length of the following values ..
     
  18. slowcar

    slowcar King

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2006
    Messages:
    818
    Location:
    hamburg, germany
    We should write a petition to Firaxis to employ Gyathaar.
    (well, might get lost around all the other petitions to fix the game)
     
  19. RRRaskolnikov

    RRRaskolnikov Goldfish

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,309
    Location:
    Paname
    They changed the code format of buildings for the DLC version? Is there a pattern between the string lenght value and the lenght itself? Maybe some kind of linear combination? (Bah I will have a look at the save format even if I am afraid I won't be of being of any help... :lol:)
     
  20. Iustus

    Iustus King

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Messages:
    609
    Location:
    Sunnyvale, CA
    Estarrioll, what is your autosave frequency? Do you have some older saves Gyathaar can examine?

    Considering the other bugs I have seen, I suspect it is just true memory corruption. What about just changing the binary garbage to a sane value?
     

Share This Page