Single Player bugs and crashes v36 plus (SVN) - After the 24th of October 2015

[JosEPh_II]

One thing I would like to point out the earliest Anarchy periods have all been adjusted for No "real" Anarchy period ie no turns lost to anarchy.

And later Anarchy if set too high get crazy long for the time period when turns are still multiple years.

Imho Anarchy time is not a good modifier for a Leader. No Leaders should affect anarchy time.

Consider that you can have multiple Civic changes in one turn and if you don't have a GP(s) to go into a Golden age the anarchy length can be over a dozen or more turns even on the faster gamespeeds. And having anarchy for 40 to 60 or more turns on the longest GS is not Fun at all. Plus, and this one is a Very big consideration, the AI does Not cope with long anarchy times well at all. We've had periods of time were the AI goes in and out of anarchy multiple times because it does not know how to use a Golden age (player exploit). Nor does it know to Group it's Civic changes for a singular multiple Civic changes anarchy period. This cause many many player complaints, even calling it a bug problem when it's actually a design problem.

JosEPh

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

One thing I would like to point out the earliest Anarchy periods have all been adjusted for No "real" Anarchy period ie no turns lost to anarchy.

And later Anarchy if set too high get crazy long for the time period when turns are still multiple years.

Imho Anarchy time is not a good modifier for a Leader. No Leaders should affect anarchy time.

Consider that you can have multiple Civic changes in one turn and if you don't have a GP(s) to go into a Golden age the anarchy length can be over a dozen or more turns even on the faster gamespeeds. And having anarchy for 40 to 60 or more turns on the longest GS is not Fun at all. Plus, and this one is a Very big consideration, the AI does Not cope with long anarchy times well at all. We've had periods of time were the AI goes in and out of anarchy multiple times because it does not know how to use a Golden age (player exploit). Nor does it know to Group it's Civic changes for a singular multiple Civic changes anarchy period. This cause many many player complaints, even calling it a bug problem when it's actually a design problem.

JosEPh

I agree.

 

[Thunderbrd]

One thing I would like to point out the earliest Anarchy periods have all been adjusted for No "real" Anarchy period ie no turns lost to anarchy.

And later Anarchy if set too high get crazy long for the time period when turns are still multiple years.

Imho Anarchy time is not a good modifier for a Leader. No Leaders should affect anarchy time.

Consider that you can have multiple Civic changes in one turn and if you don't have a GP(s) to go into a Golden age the anarchy length can be over a dozen or more turns even on the faster gamespeeds. And having anarchy for 40 to 60 or more turns on the longest GS is not Fun at all. Plus, and this one is a Very big consideration, the AI does Not cope with long anarchy times well at all. We've had periods of time were the AI goes in and out of anarchy multiple times because it does not know how to use a Golden age (player exploit). Nor does it know to Group it's Civic changes for a singular multiple Civic changes anarchy period. This cause many many player complaints, even calling it a bug problem when it's actually a design problem.

JosEPh

I disagree with some of this and agree with some of this.

I believe that political leaders should reduce anarchy times for civic changes and religious leaders should reduce anarchy times for religion changes.

On faster game speeds, it doesn't seem to make much of a difference but even then enough of a difference to make a turn less or a turn more is a lot. And obviously religious anarchy time mods aren't that impressive unless they kill the 1 round to switch (that's pretty much the same at all gamespeeds right?)

But with a lot of buildings now influencing anarchy times and even education influencing anarchy times, even a -100% anarchy period doesn't ensure no anarchy at all.

I believe that as a penalty it should be used sparingly, so I suppose I agree there. A penalty hurts worse then a bonus helps. -10% vs +10% is not equal. The +10% is a much bigger penalty (and mostly because there's a limit to how far -% can achieve a benefit at -100% whereas there's no limit to how penalizing positive amounts can add up to.)

The AI WAS taught to group its civic changes btw. Not that there's a lot of difference in anarchy times if you lump them all at once. But it wasn't taught to try to strategically use GPs to get a GA for the purpose of being able to freely change civics and that's a tough thing to teach. So difficult in fact that perhaps GAs shouldn't eliminate anarchy at all. But then that would make it a bad idea to go into a GA when you're looking to go into anarchy so perhaps a reduction of 50% anarchy time in GAs might account for things fairly accurately so that its not necessarily a good idea or a bad idea to go into a Golden Age before switching civics.


Keep in mind there is some traditional basis to give traits anarchy mods given that the original Spirituality trait was perhaps the best trait in the game on vanilla for the reason that it originally eliminated all anarchy periods (was then nerfed a bit at bts I think.)

 

[tmv]

If anarchy was no longer eliminated, what would a Golden Age do? Ever since was (almost) abandoned in favor of there wasn't much you could really do with a GA.

In a -dominated mod you could simply increase the income, if you gave additional to the tiles it would hardly be felt because the buildings give you so much more, and if you gave or or or or directly it wouldn't really "fit" with what you are doing with your empire.

I don't think it would be possible to introduce different GA types, where you get more culture or reduced thresholds for city influence for sacrificing a Great Artist, Wonders need less if you sacrifice a Great Engineer etc.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

If anarchy was no longer eliminated, what would a Golden Age do?

Not the anarchy being talked about It is the anarchy adjustments due to traits that is being discussed, I think.

 

[Dionysis]

I started a new game but am finding that when I get a military or civilian captive into the borders of one of my cities, I do not have the option of upgrading them to workers or military units.

In games started after the change slaves should still be able to be upgraded to workers and combat units.

The changes that broke save games moved the XML around this means that only for games started before the change was made would the upgrade not be available any more.

Moderator Action: Moved to the appropriate thread.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Not the anarchy being talked about It is the anarchy adjustments due to traits that is being discussed, I think.

Yes.

JosEPh

 

[Niveras]

I've figured out that this isn't really a bug per se, but it sure felt like one before I did figure it out.

The Glass Blowing tech requires that a Glaze Maker building exist somewhere in your civ. Before that, the tech isn't shown in the Science Advisor, and trying to select techs which depend on it kind of breaks: I was trying to select Concrete to research - was in the list of available techs to select - but clicking it (or techs further along which require Concrete) did nothing. Only when I looked deeper (had to look at Glass Blowing in the 'pedia) did I see the Glass Blowing required 0/1 Glaze Maker did I clue in. And arguably, it is still a little broken since the Glass Blowing tech doesn't show up properly in the Science Advisor, even when it is available and researched.

From prehistory through classic, this is (AFAIK/R) the first tech to require a building in this way. While it seems to actually be working as intended, perhaps it shouldn't be this way? There are many other examples where it might make logical sense for a building to exist before researching the next tech, but is not done in this way, I presume mostly for abstraction/gameplay reasons (and because Vanilla Civ never did it this way).

Incidentally, it occurs to me this may explain an old bug I had where a civ had stopped doing any research. Thunderbrd had suspected it was to do with Concrete, though I don't recall whether he mentioned what the actual problem was when he fixed it: I presume the civ was trying to select Concrete but hadn't built a glaze maker yet.

.

On an unrelated note, I am currently unable to view promotions at all in the sevopedia. I can get the list of them, but clicking any of them will simply snap the list back to the top and leave the rightmost panel (where the information would normally be displayed) blank.

SVN 9233 possibly, maybe 9232 (not sure how to check exactly what SVN version I have, without updating).

 

[Thunderbrd]

If anarchy was no longer eliminated, what would a Golden Age do? Ever since was (almost) abandoned in favor of there wasn't much you could really do with a GA.

In a -dominated mod you could simply increase the income, if you gave additional to the tiles it would hardly be felt because the buildings give you so much more, and if you gave or or or or directly it wouldn't really "fit" with what you are doing with your empire.

I don't think it would be possible to introduce different GA types, where you get more culture or reduced thresholds for city influence for sacrificing a Great Artist, Wonders need less if you sacrifice a Great Engineer etc.

While I did float the idea of removing the ability for a golden age to eliminate all anarchy times during a civic or religion change, I don't think it would be a good idea, as pointed out, because it would be equally as imbalanced. It should probably just reduce anarchy times by half instead.

That said, I find the most powerful aspect of a golden age is the growth boost it can give as cities don't need as much food to grow and all three yields coming from each tile are at +1 each so there's also a huge food/hammer/commerce influx during a GA. This is really the boost that makes a golden age a golden age and it's pretty much the whole of the benefit for the AI unless the AI comes to the independent conclusion it needs to change its civics during the golden age without the golden age having been a factor in that determination.

Interesting idea to make differing kinds of golden ages for different kinds of GPs. hmm... I really like that actually but it would take a fairly major project to implement it and I'm not adding those to my list right now... already too many major projects on that list.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

While I did float the idea of removing the ability for a golden age to eliminate all anarchy times during a civic or religion change, I don't think it would be a good idea, as pointed out, because it would be equally as imbalanced. It should probably just reduce anarchy times by half instead.

That said, I find the most powerful aspect of a golden age is the growth boost it can give as cities don't need as much food to grow and all three yields coming from each tile are at +1 each so there's also a huge food/hammer/commerce influx during a GA. This is really the boost that makes a golden age a golden age and it's pretty much the whole of the benefit for the AI unless the AI comes to the independent conclusion it needs to change its civics during the golden age without the golden age having been a factor in that determination.

Interesting idea to make differing kinds of golden ages for different kinds of GPs. hmm... I really like that actually but it would take a fairly major project to implement it and I'm not adding those to my list right now... already too many major projects on that list.

I find that in C2C Golden Ages have little to no effect except the no anarchy. The boost per plot just makes no overall difference as most food, production and money come from buildings. So much so that the time to build buildings/units or cities to grow does not change between the not GA and the GA.

The first GA requires one GP, the second 2 different GP, the third 3 different GP and so on. How can you have different ones based on GP?

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

I've figured out that this isn't really a bug per se, but it sure felt like one before I did figure it out.

The Glass Blowing tech requires that a Glaze Maker building exist somewhere in your civ. Before that, the tech isn't shown in the Science Advisor, and trying to select techs which depend on it kind of breaks: I was trying to select Concrete to research - was in the list of available techs to select - but clicking it (or techs further along which require Concrete) did nothing. Only when I looked deeper (had to look at Glass Blowing in the 'pedia) did I see the Glass Blowing required 0/1 Glaze Maker did I clue in. And arguably, it is still a little broken since the Glass Blowing tech doesn't show up properly in the Science Advisor, even when it is available and researched.

From prehistory through classic, this is (AFAIK/R) the first tech to require a building in this way. While it seems to actually be working as intended, perhaps it shouldn't be this way? There are many other examples where it might make logical sense for a building to exist before researching the next tech, but is not done in this way, I presume mostly for abstraction/gameplay reasons (and because Vanilla Civ never did it this way).

Incidentally, it occurs to me this may explain an old bug I had where a civ had stopped doing any research. Thunderbrd had suspected it was to do with Concrete, though I don't recall whether he mentioned what the actual problem was when he fixed it: I presume the civ was trying to select Concrete but hadn't built a glaze maker yet.

The tech tree was updated this week to fix another problem.

Neither of the techs that require buildings are required for any other tech. They are both dead end.

Concrete does not require a building. Waterproof Concrete does and it requires Concrete.

I have tested the tech tree and it is not the building techs that are causing the problem; either when they are not available or when they are. I have yet to figure out what the problem is. It occurs for me elsewhere on the tree completely. My current theory is because of the number of techs needing to be highlighted/selected is greater than 100-110 but it is a wild guess.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I find that in C2C Golden Ages have little to no effect except the no anarchy. The boost per plot just makes no overall difference as most food, production and money come from buildings. So much so that the time to build buildings/units or cities to grow does not change between the not GA and the GA.

The first GA requires one GP, the second 2 different GP, the third 3 different GP and so on. How can you have different ones based on GP?

If you time your GA just right you can get a huge jump, particularly with the first one that comes from the early wonder - it can thrust your pop growth at just the right time to shave tens of turns off of the next population which shaves tens of turns off of your overall game development nationwide down the line.

And usually it will cut down on research time significantly.

It's not just the building sources, by the way, that diminish the value of a golden age in c2c. It's also the overall inflation on the value of a given yield that has come from plots giving so much as a base to start with. Maybe we should consider making GA's a little more potent - I know many of the traits tags have made that possible and I did have in mind a line of traits that make GAs really awesome for that leader.

But the point is well made that the AI really cannot be taught to use it properly as a player would to get civic changes made without anarchy. Therefore, knocking HALF anarchy time off would compensate for the lost golden age turns of higher productivity nationwide so should make it fairly neutral whether to enter revolt during GA or not.


I was not thinking we should remove core normal golden ages but rather give specialized types of golden ages that one type of GP can initiate as a whole new option for those GPs. Wouldn't require an extra type of GP to add to the mix like the standard golden age and wouldn't supersede the existing GA rules but rather be a new option entirely.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

As I said I have seen no effect at all from GAs. The research time does not go down, the time to build buildings/units does not change, the time to grow does not change.

The only reason I go for them is the removal of anarchy.

 

[Thunderbrd]

As I said I have seen no effect at all from GAs. The research time does not go down, the time to build buildings/units does not change, the time to grow does not change.

The only reason I go for them is the removal of anarchy.

That makes it sound bugged. I'll have to take a look at the gearworks on GAs at some point here and recalibrate so it's beneficial again without having to purely utilize if for anarchy avoidance since this is not a good feature for the AI to interact with.

 

[Niveras]

The tech tree was updated this week to fix another problem.

Neither of the techs that require buildings are required for any other tech. They are both dead end.

Concrete does not require a building. Waterproof Concrete does and it requires Concrete.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. Concrete wasn't the source of the problem, I was just describing why I went looked deeper.

The problem tech was Glass Blowing, which was unavailable until I specifically and deliberately built a Glaze Maker (as opposed to simply queuing them deeply).

Glass Blowing is definitely not a dead end tech: Glass Blowing - Concrete - Mosaic Working - Paved Roads - Civil Service and Engineering just to name a couple techs down.

I'll defer to your knowledge as to the problem with the tech not showing up -you would certainly have more experience in that regard than I do - but I consider it very suspicious that Glass Blowing did not show up until I had made a Glaze Maker. The Waterproof Concrete tech likewise is not showing up in the tree, presumably for the same reason (it is unavailable because I don't have a Lava Rock Quarry anywhere); I would still consider this a "not-bug" but less important since Waterproof Concrete actually is a dead end tech.

And if these are the only two techs that require buildings, well, like I said earlier: it is a little strange for that to be the case. Unless there are plans to do (many) more techs like this, just say "abstraction/gameplay rules" and leave the techs available without requiring a building.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

The problem tech was Glass Blowing, which was unavailable until I specifically and deliberately built a Glaze Maker (as opposed to simply queuing them deeply).

Glass Blowing is definitely not a dead end tech: Glass Blowing - Concrete - Mosaic Working - Paved Roads - Civil Service and Engineering just to name a couple techs down.

Glass Blowing should not be requiring Glaze Maker, Lead Glass should be, I thought.

I only intended for dead end techs to require buildings at the moment.

I need to check

- Is Glass Blowing showing in the tech tree when you don't have the building?

- If Glass Blowing is not showing are the techs that require it also not showing? They should be not able to be researched so they should not be seen by default.​

This could indeed be the cause of the tech tree bug since I did not consider Glass Blowing.

Good catch.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

I started a new game but am finding that when I get a military or civilian captive into the borders of one of my cities, I do not have the option of upgrading them to workers or military units.




Moderator Action: Moved to the appropriate thread.

I have been able to replicate this, so I can now hunt for a fix.

 

[strategyonly]

One of the new things added , we have this again??

[376816.250] info type 'ATTACHABLE_CHIMNEYSMOKE' not found, Current XML file is: modules\Natural_Wonders\Reef_Shark_CIV4SpawnInfos.xml

 

[Dionysis]

Thanks for stomping out this bug!

I have been able to replicate this, so I can now hunt for a fix.

 

[Harrier]

One of the new things added , we have this again??

[376816.250] info type 'ATTACHABLE_CHIMNEYSMOKE' not found, Current XML file is: modules\Natural_Wonders\Reef_Shark_CIV4SpawnInfos.xml

The Reef Shark is missing the PlayerType=42 entry. As I do not know what changes need to be added to the Schema file. I will leave it for Toffer90.