Single Player bugs and crashes - After the 24th of February 2014

Thunderbrd said:
Is it possible that when those were first captured they were captured by forts while outside the any city workable radius then once the city expanded its radius they came back around to update the plot?
Click to expand...
I don't understand what you're saying here; are you talking about captured workers or, less likely, resources "captured" by culture.

Thunderbrd said:
I suspect that between that and the game having a mid-game update recently to the new AI might have caused some worker scrambling to react.
Click to expand...
That might be the case; I didn't try to build new workers after the update but I did try to manually move them for some turns and then turning on their automation again. When I did, they went straight to the first resource that was worked by a city to build a fort; when the fort was done they built the proper improvement, when the proper improvement was done they started on a new fort; I think you catch my meaning.

At one moment I had 8 workers building forts at the same time, when there were cities connected by culture that didn't have a single improvement and they didn't even consider to upgrade trail paths and mud paths into roads.
 
@Tbrd
thanks for the tip with selecting individual units.
Works now like a charm!! ;)

In addition my CtD is solved by the latest SVN.
Thanks to whomever fixed it. :D
 
Repeatable hang when loading the savegame in the SVN 7467.

Assert Failed

File: CvGlobals.cpp
Line: 5239
SVN-Rev: 7467
Expression: stricmp(szType, "NONE")==0 || strcmp(szType, "")==0
Message: info type 'ATTACHABLE_CHIMNEYSMOKE' not found, Current XML file is: xml\GameInfo\CIV4EspionageMissionInfo.xml
 
got this at 1 turn (prehistoric start) option Culturally Linked start was off....
Spoiler :

Traceback (most recent call last):

File "CvCultureLinkInterface", line 334, in assignCulturallyLinkedStarts

File "CvCultureLinkInterface", line 349, in __init__

File "CvCultureLinkInterface", line 367, in __initRWCoordinatesList

KeyError: 0
ERR: Python function assignCulturallyLinkedStarts failed, module CvCultureLinkInterface
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "BugEventManager", line 363, in _handleDefaultEvent
File "ANewDawnSettings", line 32, in onGameStart
File "ANewDawnSettings", line 39, in optionUpdate
File "ANewDawnSettings", line 299, in setXMLOptionsfromIniFile
File "BugCore", line 139, in __getattr__
AttributeError: isInfrastructureIgnoresImprovements


loading of same save AutoSave_Initial_BC-50000.CivBeyondSwordSave after restarting game (it gave CTD)
give this :
Spoiler :

Traceback (most recent call last):
File "BugEventManager", line 363, in _handleDefaultEvent
File "ANewDawnSettings", line 28, in onLoadGame
File "ANewDawnSettings", line 39, in optionUpdate
File "ANewDawnSettings", line 299, in setXMLOptionsfromIniFile
File "BugCore", line 139, in __getattr__
AttributeError: isInfrastructureIgnoresImprovements


MSVC tell me this
> CvGameCoreDLL.dll!CvUnit::getDefenderFirstFrontSupportValue(const CvUnit * pAttacker=0x71997e60, const CvPlot * pPlot=0x6c27350c) Line 35696 C++
0xC0000005: Access violation reading location 0x00000476.
 
Rev.7467
In this game size matters turned off and religious disabling turned on after a recalc??

Dropbox

Edit: huh, recalc didn't do it, we loaded an earlier save and did not do the recalc; size matters was still turned off and religious disabling was on.

All size matters promotions are in the game and available for new units but they don't do anything, a unit has the standard strength no matter if they are split or merged.

This did not happen on Rev.7461

EditEdit: Nobles, workboat (classic) and settlers has access to sting bottleneck and bully promotion.
Might be due to the fact that everything seems wrong with this save.

I can double confirm what eel said ↓↓

EditEditEdit:
Has anything happened on this front in the latest revisions?
; Game Options
GameOptions = 000101000001000000010000001000011011010000000110111110011111111011000100000000010011000000100000
 
Thunderbrd said:
Are you sure you're talking about the right type of unit? Not ALL units receive XP from GGs anymore - ONLY combatant units (military units) gain XP from Generals. In just reading this thread I suspect that might be the confusion here. Try building a Combatant and see if it gets the XP from the general. I haven't seen a bug in this recently but I'll run a quick test to make sure of course.
Click to expand...

I've done a quick test. Started a new game, spawned GG, settled him and neither the brute nor the stone thrower get any bonus XP.
 
masaykh said:
got this at 1 turn (prehistoric start) option Culturally Linked start was off....
Spoiler :

Traceback (most recent call last):

File "CvCultureLinkInterface", line 334, in assignCulturallyLinkedStarts

File "CvCultureLinkInterface", line 349, in __init__

File "CvCultureLinkInterface", line 367, in __initRWCoordinatesList

KeyError: 0
ERR: Python function assignCulturallyLinkedStarts failed, module CvCultureLinkInterface
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "BugEventManager", line 363, in _handleDefaultEvent
File "ANewDawnSettings", line 32, in onGameStart
File "ANewDawnSettings", line 39, in optionUpdate
File "ANewDawnSettings", line 299, in setXMLOptionsfromIniFile
File "BugCore", line 139, in __getattr__
AttributeError: isInfrastructureIgnoresImprovements


loading of same save AutoSave_Initial_BC-50000.CivBeyondSwordSave after restarting game (it gave CTD)
give this :
Spoiler :

Traceback (most recent call last):
File "BugEventManager", line 363, in _handleDefaultEvent
File "ANewDawnSettings", line 28, in onLoadGame
File "ANewDawnSettings", line 39, in optionUpdate
File "ANewDawnSettings", line 299, in setXMLOptionsfromIniFile
File "BugCore", line 139, in __getattr__
AttributeError: isInfrastructureIgnoresImprovements


MSVC tell me this
> CvGameCoreDLL.dll!CvUnit::getDefenderFirstFrontSupportValue(const CvUnit * pAttacker=0x71997e60, const CvPlot * pPlot=0x6c27350c) Line 35696 C++
0xC0000005: Access violation reading location 0x00000476.
Click to expand...

The first is because Arabia has not been defined to the Cultural Linked Start python.

The second was introduced with a new option. You need to set the option in BUG by opening BUG and saving it twice and exiting and reloading. You do not have to change the actual value. You may need to clear the C2C cache.
 
Toffer90 said:
I don't understand what you're saying here; are you talking about captured workers or, less likely, resources "captured" by culture.
Click to expand...
I was saying 'captured' plots by new city workable radius expansions. As soon as a plot becomes workable it enters a whole new evaluation where forts are no longer very valuable but outside of a workable radius that's all that would be valid.


Toffer90 said:
That might be the case; I didn't try to build new workers after the update but I did try to manually move them for some turns and then turning on their automation again. When I did, they went straight to the first resource that was worked by a city to build a fort; when the fort was done they built the proper improvement, when the proper improvement was done they started on a new fort; I think you catch my meaning.

At one moment I had 8 workers building forts at the same time, when there were cities connected by culture that didn't have a single improvement and they didn't even consider to upgrade trail paths and mud paths into roads.
Click to expand...
This should also change now since I removed the first few calls to build improvements withholding any attempts to do so until AFTER all cities are connected and all plots that have resources on them are connected to those cities by roads.

Then again, that ONLY works for the workers set to Infrastructure automation, NOT ones set to 'normal' automation which I would advise against using as the way the AI is programmed will never allow for it to be truly optimal for a player. Not without EXTENSIVE from the ground up re-programming to a more decision matrix style AI mechanism. Which would then be very slow... well... probably depending on how it was done.

masaykh said:
got this at 1 turn (prehistoric start) option Culturally Linked start was off....
Spoiler :

Traceback (most recent call last):

File "CvCultureLinkInterface", line 334, in assignCulturallyLinkedStarts

File "CvCultureLinkInterface", line 349, in __init__

File "CvCultureLinkInterface", line 367, in __initRWCoordinatesList

KeyError: 0
ERR: Python function assignCulturallyLinkedStarts failed, module CvCultureLinkInterface
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "BugEventManager", line 363, in _handleDefaultEvent
File "ANewDawnSettings", line 32, in onGameStart
File "ANewDawnSettings", line 39, in optionUpdate
File "ANewDawnSettings", line 299, in setXMLOptionsfromIniFile
File "BugCore", line 139, in __getattr__
AttributeError: isInfrastructureIgnoresImprovements
Click to expand...
Looks like there MAY be something ELSE I've done wrong setting up that option but I wonder after what DH stated... I'll look at it AGAIN to make sure I can't see how there might be some confusion between culturally linked starts and infrastructureignoresimprovements.


masaykh said:
loading of same save AutoSave_Initial_BC-50000.CivBeyondSwordSave after restarting game (it gave CTD)
give this :
Spoiler :

Traceback (most recent call last):
File "BugEventManager", line 363, in _handleDefaultEvent
File "ANewDawnSettings", line 28, in onLoadGame
File "ANewDawnSettings", line 39, in optionUpdate
File "ANewDawnSettings", line 299, in setXMLOptionsfromIniFile
File "BugCore", line 139, in __getattr__
AttributeError: isInfrastructureIgnoresImprovements
Click to expand...
Yeah, maybe still something amiss with that option...

masaykh said:
MSVC tell me this
> CvGameCoreDLL.dll!CvUnit::getDefenderFirstFrontSupportValue(const CvUnit * pAttacker=0x71997e60, const CvPlot * pPlot=0x6c27350c) Line 35696 C++
0xC0000005: Access violation reading location 0x00000476.
Click to expand...
Now THIS is odd... oh... wait... this could be an issue due to the next problem if the shell option of Strength in Numbers is incidentally turned on by the adjustment in enums...

It also indicates I really will need to do some debugging before I can successfully turn that option available (which I already figured... it was part of the first round of combat mod code and only now grows near to xml development. I've learned a thing or two since then and will probably find it easily debugged but I did expect a bug or two in its structure since it has gone mostly untested so far. With the option off there's no activity in those codes so the only way I can think we'd see this problem is due to the enums being changed.)

Toffer90 said:
Rev.7467
In this game size matters turned off and religious disabling turned on after a recalc??

Dropbox

Edit: huh, recalc didn't do it, we loaded an earlier save and did not do the recalc; size matters was still turned off and religious disabling was on.

All size matters promotions are in the game and available for new units but they don't do anything, a unit has the standard strength no matter if they are split or merged.

This did not happen on Rev.7461

EditEdit: Nobles, workboat (classic) and settlers has access to sting bottleneck and bully promotion.
Might be due to the fact that everything seems wrong with this save.

I can double confirm what eel said ↓↓

EditEditEdit:
Has anything happened on this front in the latest revisions?
; Game Options
GameOptions = 000101000001000000010000001000011011010000000110111110011111111011000100000000010011000000100000
Click to expand...
Keep your original save if you can... getting it back right will probably require you reload from when it was saved before that update.

Alberts followed Afforess in removing some game options here... Afforess had assured he'd made certain no bugs were introduced by removing a game option but I had some concerns it may still do so and this report makes it immediately appear to be a result of removing options from the enums stream, thereby changing the options that the savegame has recorded the values on. That will need to be reversed and quickly before it permanently screws up a lot of games running on the SVN. I'll get to work on that right away. I'm not so much advising reverting the SVN to an earlier version... just wait til I update again and return those missing slots to the enums and it should be fine if you're loading a game that hasn't hit the problematic update.

So... take great care at the moment until you see an SVN report from me saying it's taken care of.

eel said:
I've done a quick test. Started a new game, spawned GG, settled him and neither the brute nor the stone thrower get any bonus XP.
Click to expand...
Very odd... I haven't been having this problem at all so far as I can see but I'll actually run another test. What options do you have set?

Dancing Hoskuld said:
The first is because Arabia has not been defined to the Cultural Linked Start python.

The second was introduced with a new option. You need to set the option in BUG by opening BUG and saving it twice and exiting and reloading. You do not have to change the actual value. You may need to clear the C2C cache.
Click to expand...
Is that working to do that now? I'll still review the option codework again to make sure I can't see something off.
 
Hmm.... that's very interesting. Looks like the enums wasn't touched and only the gameoptioninfos.xml file was - I suspect this is the only problem with those options spontaneously changing then so I'm updating that fix to the SVN now.
 
eel said:
I've done a quick test. Started a new game, spawned GG, settled him and neither the brute nor the stone thrower get any bonus XP.
Click to expand...

Well... thank you for the report because it does appear I've broken ALL specialist xps. Some investigation shows that I did overlook a step but trying to implement that step I find I'm still having trouble. (I've no examples of how this should be done for this type of data load so It's going to take a bit of time to work it out...)


And... :mad: I STILL have something wrong with that damned bug option! I REALLY hate these things!
 
Thunderbrd said:
Is it possible that when those were first captured they were captured by forts while outside the any city workable radius then once the city expanded its radius they came back around to update the plot?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was saying 'captured' plots by new city workable radius expansions. As soon as a plot becomes workable it enters a whole new evaluation where forts are no longer very valuable but outside of a workable radius that's all that would be valid.
Click to expand...
Oh I see, no that was not the case. The moment I invented forts every worker, after they finished what they were doing, went to build a fort on a resource inside the workable radius of a city.

Thunderbrd said:
Then again, that ONLY works for the workers set to Infrastructure automation, NOT ones set to 'normal' automation which I would advise against using as the way the AI is programmed will never allow for it to be truly optimal for a player.
Click to expand...
Before the fort spamming bug (which also affected infrastructure automation) the normal automation was totally OK to use, they even built forts in logical places^^. I usually use a mixture of infrastructure & normal automation as well as manual control when things needs to get done fast. It's a hassle not to use the normal automation as there are many tiles without resources that need improvements and they usually know what's more or less best to build.
 
At the start of my current game I had absolutely No Leader traits Option ON of any kind. I updated to SVN 7471 tonight and now I'm asked to pick or remove leader Traits. The Options "list" is off again. (See screenie)

Isn't it DH that keeps saying New Options Must be put at the End of the Option List? Is this not being followed?

Will I now have Revolutions popping up too? Or Divine Prophets, Barb Civs, etc.??? :dunno:

JosEPh :/
 
Toffer90 said:
Oh I see, no that was not the case. The moment I invented forts every worker, after they finished what they were doing, went to build a fort on a resource inside the workable radius of a city.


Before the fort spamming bug (which also affected infrastructure automation) the normal automation was totally OK to use, they even built forts in logical places^^. I usually use a mixture of infrastructure & normal automation as well as manual control when things needs to get done fast. It's a hassle not to use the normal automation as there are many tiles without resources that need improvements and they usually know what's more or less best to build.
Click to expand...

Ok then... I now have a theory from what you just said about what would be wrong. The improvement build AI can be called with a number of turns limit and if forts are coming up cheaper in number of turns to build they MIGHT still really be the only thing they'd be able to build when the initial improvement build calls are made with a focus on less intense # of turns to build. I'll have to find those and unlimit the # of turns call just to enable them to have a more clean evaluation of all options. It's a theory of course... but it WOULD also affect the AI's workers as well so is probably important to uproot.
 
JosEPh_II said:
At the start of my current game I had absolutely No Leader traits Option ON of any kind. I updated to SVN 7471 tonight and now I'm asked to pick or remove leader Traits. The Options "list" is off again. (See screenie)

Isn't it DH that keeps saying New Options Must be put at the End of the Option List? Is this not being followed?

Will I now have Revolutions popping up too? Or Divine Prophets, Barb Civs, etc.??? :dunno:

JosEPh :/
Click to expand...

7472 should've debugged this but I'd suggest not only updating but also going back and reloading from the turn or before that you opened up with 7471. (I didn't start the fire but I did put it out... and I'd say it was a fairly innocent adjustment that very well could've not been problematic in theory.)
 
Thunderbrd said:
Ok then... I now have a theory from what you just said about what would be wrong. The improvement build AI can be called with a number of turns limit and if forts are coming up cheaper in number of turns to build they MIGHT still really be the only thing they'd be able to build when the initial improvement build calls are made with a focus on less intense # of turns to build. I'll have to find those and unlimit the # of turns call just to enable them to have a more clean evaluation of all options. It's a theory of course... but it WOULD also affect the AI's workers as well so is probably important to uproot.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's the case as forts take three time longer than most other improvements (on eons it starts at around 90 turns when invented while other imps. take around 30). Additionally they also build the forts on resources (that are inside workable city radius) that already have the improvement that provide the resource.

It might still be a good idea though.

Edit: I think DH was onto something here: Post
♠
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

raxo2222
  • Sticky
Single Player bugs and crashes v43 plus (SVN) - After January 2023
55 56 57
Replies
1K
Views
81K
Dionysis
Dionysis
raxo2222
  • Sticky
Single Player bugs and crashes v43 download - After January 2023
2 3 4
Replies
78
Views
11K
Korbin
K
raxo2222
Single Player bugs and crashes v42 plus (SVN) - After April 2022
30 31 32
Replies
628
Views
49K
Somebody613
S
raxo2222
Single Player bugs and crashes v42 download - After April 2022
2 3
Replies
51
Views
7K
ATARi144kHz
ATARi144kHz
raxo2222
  • Sticky
Multi-Player Bugs and Crashes, v43 & SVN after January 2023
Replies
4
Views
2K
Thunderbrd
Thunderbrd
Back
Top Bottom