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

[T C]

both fixed

Great work, thanks.

 

[Thunderbrd]

End of turn does not go through . .

Found and repaired (I think - testing will prove this.) Pending update to the SVN soon.

EDIT: It wasn't a crash or an infinite loop exactly (one that wouldn't be eventually resolved anyhow) but it did hang the game for a very long time. This fix will probably help tremendously with turn times and the problem pointed out some things that could/should be done to optimize turn times significantly from here.

 

[Thunderbrd]

@T-brd,

While looking at that setting
I noticed this one 4 lines above:

<Define>
<DefineName>PROFILER_ALTERNATE_SAMPLE_SET_SOURCE</DefineName>
<DefineTextVal></DefineTextVal>
</Define>

There is No Value for DefineTextVal. Is this correct? Or should it be 0?

JosEPh

I don't think it's an issue... it's a text define and apparently isn't really used at the moment.

Most upgrades are different units. I can't find a unit for the Great Commander only the Great General.

Yeah, it's not exactly an upgrade in that sense but rather an adjustment to status so really it IS the same unit the way it was worked out. I'd have preferred it be an upgrade to avoid some potential issues but it wasn't necessary apparently.

 

[Toffer90]

EoT freeze between turn 176-177.

Not fixed by latest commit by TB.

View attachment 389045

 

[strategyonly]

What is going on lately in turn times?? last month in Classical era it took around 15 seconds for 8 civ, Large map, now its taking OVER 30-45 seconds??

 

[Thunderbrd]

EoT freeze between turn 176-177.

Not fixed by latest commit by TB.

View attachment 389045

I'm not 10000% sure of the logic here but I have found a way to eliminate this as a problem. I'll try to commit it soon. I'll want Alberts to check the logic on it though.

 

[Thunderbrd]

What is going on lately in turn times?? last month in Classical era it took around 15 seconds for 8 civ, Large map, now its taking OVER 30-45 seconds??

There are certainly some things that can be done to improve on turn times that I've noted here.

 

[T C]

Found and repaired (I think - testing will prove this.) Pending update to the SVN soon.

EDIT: It wasn't a crash or an infinite loop exactly (one that wouldn't be eventually resolved anyhow) but it did hang the game for a very long time. This fix will probably help tremendously with turn times and the problem pointed out some things that could/should be done to optimize turn times significantly from here.

Turn times in my game have improved a lot after this. Thanks.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Yeah, it's not exactly an upgrade in that sense but rather an adjustment to status so really it IS the same unit the way it was worked out. I'd have preferred it be an upgrade to avoid some potential issues but it wasn't necessary apparently.

Well it is causing problems with the XML on actions/outcomes apparently. I changed the order of the XML a bit on the GG to match the other G People, perhaps that will fix the problem.

 

[Hydromancerx]

The Stealth Gunship has a red blob.

 

[Sparth]

The Stealth Gunship has a red blob.

fixed

 

[Toffer90]

@TB:
Merging units that has build up promotions leads to a combined unit that can move with, in the extreme, all the the different build up promotions without loosing them.
If build up action is used again and you move the unit, the system will act as normal (build up prom. get removed).

 

[Thunderbrd]

@TB:
Merging units that has build up promotions leads to a combined unit that can move with, in the extreme, all the the different build up promotions without loosing them.
If build up action is used again and you move the unit, the system will act as normal (build up prom. get removed).

Damn... once I found the issue in upgrading units with buildups I realized this would be a problem that would need to be addressed but it never got from the head queue to paper and was forgotten. Thanks for the reminder.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Well it is causing problems with the XML on actions/outcomes apparently. I changed the order of the XML a bit on the GG to match the other G People, perhaps that will fix the problem.

Outside of the way the xml is arranged for actions/outcomes which could differ and make a difference as a result, xml tag orders no longer matter as they used to.

What's the issue exactly? Out of curiosity?

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Outside of the way the xml is arranged for actions/outcomes which could differ and make a difference as a result, xml tag orders no longer matter as they used to.

What's the issue exactly? Out of curiosity?

see

My Great Commander can (ie. has buttons to - I haven't tried them to see what happens) still abolish slavery or cannibalism in a foreign city that (presumably) still has them. Similarly my military captive has buttons to become a settled slave in that city (I am no longer in slavery).

I have the IS_OWNED in there and did before. It was just in a different order on the GG. The python call back was first.

			<Actions>
				<Action>
					<MissionType>MISSION_REMOVE_WV_SLAVERY</MissionType>
					<ActionOutcomes>
						<Outcome>
							<OutcomeType>OUTCOME_REMOVE_WV_SLAVERY</OutcomeType>
							<iChance>100</iChance>
							<PlotCondition>
								<Is>TAG_OWNED</Is>
							</PlotCondition>
							<PythonCallback>doRemoveWVSlavery</PythonCallback>
						</Outcome>
					</ActionOutcomes>
				</Action>

 

[Stormwind]

SVN revision: pretty recent, about 2-3 days old.

Did The Great Wall lose its ability to prevent barbarians from entering ones own borders? I have build it and there are barbarians entering my territory left and right.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

SVN revision: pretty recent, about 2-3 days old.

Did The Great Wall lose its ability to prevent barbarians from entering ones own borders? I have build it and there are barbarians entering my territory left and right.

They are not supposed to be able to cross your border. If they are inside when it is built they stay inside if outside they stay outside. If they are crossing then it is a bug.

 

[Thunderbrd]

see



I have the IS_OWNED in there and did before. It was just in a different order on the GG. The python call back was first.

			<Actions>
				<Action>
					<MissionType>MISSION_REMOVE_WV_SLAVERY</MissionType>
					<ActionOutcomes>
						<Outcome>
							<OutcomeType>OUTCOME_REMOVE_WV_SLAVERY</OutcomeType>
							<iChance>100</iChance>
							<PlotCondition>
								<Is>TAG_OWNED</Is>
							</PlotCondition>
							<PythonCallback>doRemoveWVSlavery</PythonCallback>
						</Outcome>
					</ActionOutcomes>
				</Action>

hmm... Perhaps another condition needs to be placed here but I'm not entirely sure what. I'll look into how they are redefined to become a commander and what is being reported to python at least.

SVN revision: pretty recent, about 2-3 days old.

Did The Great Wall lose its ability to prevent barbarians from entering ones own borders? I have build it and there are barbarians entering my territory left and right.

DH is right but it would be helpful to get a save that shows one entering somewhere they shouldn't be able to after end of turn. The way this would work now too may not deny barbs from landing from ships.

 

[sunrisereader]

what happens when barbarians are at the border and the border moves to where they are because a city collects enough culture?

 

[olduser]

One building and two units are missing at the moment.

[2592.799] info type 'BUILDING_SEA_FLIGHTLESS_MYTH_EFFECT' not found, Current XML file is: modules\MrAzure\Celebration\Festivals\Festivals_CIV4BuildingInfos.xml
[2596.293] info type 'UNIT_BARREDOWL' not found, Current XML file is: xml\Units\CIV4SpawnInfos.xml
[2599.413] info type 'UNIT_SEAEAGLE' not found, Current XML file is: xml\Units\CIV4SpawnInfos.xml