Single Player bugs and crashes v35 plus (SVN) - After the 18th of August 2014

[sunrisereader]

The recent change of C2C_ROUGH_BOMBARD_VALUE_MODIFIER to -25 seemed to have helped a bit, until I stumbled over these three AIs...

Any ideas of what else I can try to change to minimize siege use even more? Feels like we're trying to treat the effects, not the cause.
Would it be too extreme to enforce some national limits on siege unit counts based on number of cities?

Have the AI's that mass build siege engines access to metals(iron/copper) that they need to build most advanced infantery. Is it possible to to take over the problematic ai's so a in depth look can be made into what they can build for that might explain why they prefer siege engines at this point.

 

[Thunderbrd]

While giving them the subcombat is the ultimately correct solution, it will probably cause all sorts of problems. So I suggest these promos should be available to Wooden Ships. (While the divide between wooden and steam ships is not in exactly the right place, it's close enough...)

If you want this to only apply to promos given by buildings, I think I would prefer that too. After all, I was only talking about the three specific promos which the conversation was about.

I guess my point is that the discussion can't be just related to those 3 promos but rather any decision about them sets a precedent for how other things should be handled as well. Since no naval unit has a Melee combat class, how would it be beneficial or even rational to allow them promos that give them benefits against Melee?

If we take a more drastic approach and start looking at opening up that larger can of worms then we need to consider that it IS a larger can of worms. The alternative is to make the promos that only provide benefit against melee inapplicable for naval units. That applies to only one of the three but the rest have significant modifiers to land unit battle and could that be perceived as 'out of place' to players who's units end up with that? Could it cause some confusion for players - sending them to look for what naval units are considered Archery or Riding or Melee?

Have the AI's that mass build siege engines access to metals(iron/copper) that they need to build most advanced infantery. Is it possible to to take over the problematic ai's so a in depth look can be made into what they can build for that might explain why they prefer siege engines at this point.

Interesting point and something I've considered before. It's possible that some AIs end up with larger siege stacks still because while a % of siege weapons is required in a city attack stack, it's also possible (although it really shouldn't be) for those siege engines to evaluate as the best units to fill the rest of the city attack roles.

This is where we would need to get into a much deeper code based fix that separates that role solidly into differing unit AI settings for those city attack siege units. That's the massively huge and complex task I had next on the agenda that has me frustrated to the point of needing a break so as to build up the motivation to tackle that mountain.

 

[Yudishtira]

I guess my point is that the discussion can't be just related to those 3 promos but rather any decision about them sets a precedent for how other things should be handled as well. Since no naval unit has a Melee combat class, how would it be beneficial or even rational to allow them promos that give them benefits against Melee?

If we take a more drastic approach and start looking at opening up that larger can of worms then we need to consider that it IS a larger can of worms. The alternative is to make the promos that only provide benefit against melee inapplicable for naval units. That applies to only one of the three but the rest have significant modifiers to land unit battle and could that be perceived as 'out of place' to players who's units end up with that? Could it cause some confusion for players - sending them to look for what naval units are considered Archery or Riding or Melee?

You make it sound like precedent forces us to do things against our will. It doesn't. We can decide for each promo on its individual merits. Leave any potential larger can of worms unopened, and if someone else opens one, that's their problem.

Ships already share some promos with land units, and it works fine.

If one of these three promos gives no benefits against ships, then we can stop discussing it, since it makes no difference whether a ship has it or not. The point is the benefits they do give against ships are justified and appropriate. (If they were perceived as out of place, that would be a misperception.)

Could it cause confusion for players? No. Players (and note that I include myself) need to take responsibility for our own confusion (nor is it always a bad thing)

Finally, there are more inappropriate promos out there. For one off the top of my head, Dog Workers can get at least one combat dog promo.

 

[dexter_inside]

1) TXT_KEY_BUILDING_BOAR_MYTH_EFFECT has no English translation

2) When changing capital, the Worldview - Slavery does not move together with the Palace. I can build it again for e.g. with a Captive Civilian.

3) Rodnovera spread rate as a non-state religion (at least on Free Church) is crazy fast. All my 70 cities have got it in about 100 turns.

4) EventSigns PlotSigns.removeSign() failed to find a caption for Player X at ... every time Colonist builds city

Some more financial stuff I've noticed, from the financial advisor:

After I moved my capital, thinking the King's Council is disabled, I built it again. Turns out both of them work and feels like I'm cheating to get 10% extra tax.

Also, why isn't the Gaj disabled? I see it producing tax, even if my state religion is Buddhist and running limited religions.

Can somebody please point me to where the Python code of this interface is? I was expecting \Assets\Screens\CvFinancialAdvisor.py but there's no such file...

Edit: I found BugFinanceAdvisor.py that has:

class BugFinanceAdvisor:

	def __init__(self):
		self.SCREEN_NAME = "FinanceAdvisor"
		self.DEBUG_DROPDOWN_ID =  "FinanceAdvisorDropdownWidget"
		self.WIDGET_ID = "FinanceAdvisorWidget"
		self.WIDGET_HEADER = "FinanceAdvisorWidgetHeader"
		self.EXIT_ID = "FinanceAdvisorExitWidget"
		self.BACKGROUND_ID = "FinanceAdvisorBackground"
		self.X_SCREEN = 500
		self.Y_SCREEN = 396
		self.W_SCREEN = 1024
		self.H_SCREEN = 768

I'll try some changes here maybe I can fix this nasty layout.

 

[dexter_inside]

3) It's possible that better developed nations than I've seen in my games reach a point where they keep thinking they need more attack stacks. If they keep seeding new attack stacks it might produce something odd like this. I know the spot in the code under some suspicion for this. But I'd need to see if that's the issue.

Is there any way to tell if they are building all of these siege or if they could possibly be captured? Are they pooling together into many stacks? What's the further behavior of these things?

Just checked in debug, literally everything is MISSIONAI_GROUP + (ACTIVITY_HOLD or ACTIVITY_MOVE_TO_UNIT) + UNITAI_ATTACK_CITY. I can't find any units that show anything else.

Also, all the 40-ish healers and all Guards are UNITAI_PROPERTY_CONTROL. All Town Watchmen (that were not upgraded probably due to costs) are UNITAI_CITY_DEFENSE

Edit: Another thing seems broken, I've noticed a barbarian city at size 1 that is unhappy, and contains Demand - Paved Roads (Hypermarket) that gives 10 unhappiness !!!

 

[Thunderbrd]

You make it sound like precedent forces us to do things against our will. It doesn't. We can decide for each promo on its individual merits. Leave any potential larger can of worms unopened, and if someone else opens one, that's their problem.

It's not that it forces us to do things against our will but when you pull one string on a ball of string like C2C you should take into account all the strings its attached to as well. Establishing a precedent is this sort of act. I'd love to include melee on many early ships. I think it would be appropriate but would open up a lot of other efforts to resolve the adjustment. And if I think about it enough it leads to much larger restructuring efforts if I want to ensure its done right, efforts that would include a lot of AI work unfortunately.

Ships already share some promos with land units, and it works fine.

This is a good point itself. I suppose its not terribly unusual as long as there is some potential benefit from the promo otherwise.

If one of these three promos gives no benefits against ships, then we can stop discussing it, since it makes no difference whether a ship has it or not. The point is the benefits they do give against ships are justified and appropriate. (If they were perceived as out of place, that would be a misperception.)

Right. +5% combat modifier seems to be the underlying 'can benefit anything' effect on I think 2 out of those three. The other doesn't have any benefit. So I suppose that's the main one to look at for enforcing it only qualifies for Land Domains.

Could it cause confusion for players? No. Players (and note that I include myself) need to take responsibility for our own confusion (nor is it always a bad thing)

A fair outlook. Does everyone agree?

Finally, there are more inappropriate promos out there. For one off the top of my head, Dog Workers can get at least one combat dog promo.

It would help to identify those and work to eliminate them from the list available for Dog Workers. I didn't get much time with Dog Workers in my last game to see much along those lines but I do think I noticed withdrawal, pursuit, and attack value promos in there that may need to be eliminated. Note: Dog Workers are absolutely fascinating with the way they interact with invisible hidden nationality attackers since they can see those invisible units. It does change the way the AI reacts when they start getting Dog Workers but I can't confirm its necessarily more beneficial for the AI. It's actually what I wouldn't have expected... they seem to ignore the threat more. Maybe they think they've got them protected or something when they don't... ??? (I'm not attacking their workers because I want them out there building things to raze!)

Just checked in debug, literally everything is MISSIONAI_GROUP + (ACTIVITY_HOLD or ACTIVITY_MOVE_TO_UNIT) + UNITAI_ATTACK_CITY. I can't find any units that show anything else.

Ok, so those would be the attack stack units coming together. Impressive you were able to do this btw. This suggests that many of those units are qualifying as the best potential city attackers when the demand for siege is already met. Which I've suspected for a while now. I may be able to find an effective way to fix that fairly easily actually.

Also, all the 40-ish healers and all Guards are UNITAI_PROPERTY_CONTROL. All Town Watchmen (that were not upgraded probably due to costs) are UNITAI_CITY_DEFENSE

I've noticed it takes a lot of healers to stay on top of disease around the Ancient to Early Classical. That's a reflection of some balance issues I'd like to work on. I imagine the guards are probably fairly effective though they may be town hopping more than is optimal though in a lot of ways that might be a solid strategy if they aren't under a major HN unit onslaught. This would actually be more likely to mean they need overall less than most players will. UNLESS they aren't getting enough XP when trained. And players may also be able to withhold promoting until later techs unlock better property control promos which is certainly something the AI is not programmed to do which could lead to needing more property control units.

Edit: Another thing seems broken, I've noticed a barbarian city at size 1 that is unhappy, and contains Demand - Paved Roads (Hypermarket) that gives 10 unhappiness !!!

@DH

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Edit: Another thing seems broken, I've noticed a barbarian city at size 1 that is unhappy, and contains Demand - Paved Roads (Hypermarket) that gives 10 unhappiness !!!

The Demand - Paved Roads buildings are probably missing a minimum population tag. The Demand buildings aren't working for the player as the "Actual" values of a building don't appear to be calculated for that city so it does not show the effects of replacing the demand buildings in that city. It will be removed.

Barbarians should not be able to build buildings anyway, or at most only a subset. Otherwise they are just a super AI nation, but I have complained about that elsewhere.

edit checked the XML. To get Demand - Paved Roads (Hypermarket) the city must have built a Hypermarket. It is therefore working correctly. Why a pop 1 city barbarian would build a Hypermarket is beyond me.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Keep an eye on city attack stacks now. They should be less willing to build siege units once they believe they have enough because such units should not value as strong to stand in for units like swords and such.

If there's STILL an issue there, a more drastic measure needs to be taken.

 

[Pit2015]

Thief Promotion - False Tooth Poison -50% to avoid capture? Should that be +50%?

 

[Toffer90]

Thief Promotion - False Tooth Poison -50% to avoid capture? Should that be +50%?

Yup, I also found that a lot of promotions with capture stat have it turned upside down; when I was making my promotion modmod.

I'll remember to change that one in my next SVN commit, unless TB beats me to it.

 

[Yudishtira]

Planes should only be able to fly missions from carriers. Currently they can fly them from any ship that can carry them, including transports and iirc wooden ships.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Planes should only be able to fly missions from carriers. Currently they can fly them from any ship that can carry them, including transports and iirc wooden ships.

The question becomes, immediately, how are those ships carrying them? I haven't played that far in a while. I know there are some promos that may enable that but it seems something isn't quite right there that's allowing transports and wooden ships to carry planes in the first place (unless sea planes I suppose).

 

[dexter_inside]

Keep an eye on city attack stacks now. They should be less willing to build siege units once they believe they have enough because such units should not value as strong to stand in for units like swords and such.

If there's STILL an issue there, a more drastic measure needs to be taken.

A few turns later two of those AIs have switched back to building workers and buildings, so that's a good sign. However there seem to be quite a few siege units with the Size Down promotion, does the AI actually split siege units to have more of them?
It would make more sense to do the other way around, since they are threatened by lesser numbers with greater strength... I mean they have enough units to actually make a stand if they get merged two levels up.

 

[Thunderbrd]

A few turns later two of those AIs have switched back to building workers and buildings, so that's a good sign. However there seem to be quite a few siege units with the Size Down promotion, does the AI actually split siege units to have more of them?
It would make more sense to do the other way around, since they are threatened by lesser numbers with greater strength... I mean they have enough units to actually make a stand if they get merged two levels up.

Size Matters AI is very rudimentary. It's not analysis based - just a numbers trick to give the illusion of it. And its another major issue entirely.

 

[strategyonly]

The "era" pictures not working, ?? I just got into the Classical and nothing??

 

[Thunderbrd]

I hit ancient yesterday and it worked. Perhaps its a problem with Classical.

Much like the problem with unit UI disappearing on Camel Riders. Can anyone else confirm this? I have no idea at all how to address a problem like that.

 

[JosEPh_II]

The Demand - Paved Roads buildings are probably missing a minimum population tag. The Demand buildings aren't working for the player as the "Actual" values of a building don't appear to be calculated for that city so it does not show the effects of replacing the demand buildings in that city. It will be removed.

Barbarians should not be able to build buildings anyway, or at most only a subset. Otherwise they are just a super AI nation, but I have complained about that elsewhere.

edit checked the XML. To get Demand - Paved Roads (Hypermarket) the city must have built a Hypermarket. It is therefore working correctly. Why a pop 1 city barbarian would build a Hypermarket is beyond me.

I think the poster was more concerned over the Demand for Hypermarket giving 10 , than a barb city having it. Why do all these Demand items have so much attached? Pop unhappy because they don't have a paved road or hypermaket? And then when they get it they get even madder? Strange population you have there. Very hard to please people!

JosEPh

 

[Pit2015]

SVN will not update, you did something wrong or SVN down?

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

I think the poster was more concerned over the Demand for Hypermarket giving 10 , than a barb city having it. Why do all these Demand items have so much attached? Pop unhappy because they don't have a paved road or hypermaket? And then when they get it they get even madder? Strange population you have there. Very hard to please people!

JosEPh

Most the demand buildings are per population unhappiness usually 0.25-0.5 per pop with a + to counter that caused by too low a population.

They have a Hypermartket therefore they are unhappy they don't have paved roads. There are many pre buildings that cause the problem. Normally the amount of unhappiness from the Market, Bazaar and cars would be making enough unhappiness for the paved roads to be built earlier. There is also a military demand that means that defenses are reduced if you don't have paved roads.

 

[Flinx]

SVN will not update, you did something wrong or SVN down?

SVN down.