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

[Thunderbrd]

I just did an update to the latest SVN and get a CTD straight away on loading a game. I get

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "BugEventManager", line 363, in _handleDefaultEvent
  File "MoreCiv4lerts", line 140, in onBeginActivePlayerTurn
  File "MoreCiv4lerts", line 337, in CheckForAlerts
  File "MoreCiv4lerts", line 446, in getBonusTrades
  File "TradeUtil", line 379, in getTradeableBonuses
RuntimeError: unidentifiable C++ exception

as the game is loading edit I had an event early on in the game which gave my pearls resource a boost.

edit I tried loading it again and it worked fine. This time the event sign was placed on the map, it wasn't when it crashed. I am attaching the save just in case you can trace the problem

I'm not sure what I'd be looking for. Is this the save from before it crashed? Did you make any changes between those loads? If this one doesn't give any sign of or indication of a problem then it's not going to be traceable in the least unfortunately. But I can run it and see if I spot any trouble.

 

[Thunderbrd]

CTD, no errors prior

SVN 8973

Taking a look at this immediately. Hopefully I can figure it out quickly before the new years evening sets in.

EDIT: Fix is on the SVN now.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

I'm not sure what I'd be looking for. Is this the save from before it crashed? Did you make any changes between those loads? If this one doesn't give any sign of or indication of a problem then it's not going to be traceable in the least unfortunately. But I can run it and see if I spot any trouble.

The save is from before the CTD but the second time I loaded it it worked.

With the CTD it also gave the error messages. I expect it is to do with the signs because the sign was not drawn when the crash happened but I could see the plot and its improvement.

I had been loading it a lot as I tested out the text etc for the new Natural Wonder building without any crashes. Then I updated to your dll changes (8970-8971) and boom. I have done no more changes since then and I am using fully stock SVN version.

 

[Thunderbrd]

The save is from before the CTD but the second time I loaded it it worked.

With the CTD it also gave the error messages. I expect it is to do with the signs because the sign was not drawn when the crash happened but I could see the plot and its improvement.

I had been loading it a lot as I tested out the text etc for the new Natural Wonder building without any crashes. Then I updated to your dll changes (8970-8971) and boom. I have done no more changes since then and I am using fully stock SVN version.

Interesting. The changes were very minor... hard to see how they would cause that. But anything's possible.

Again... I'll check it tomorrow morning and we'll see if I can figure anything out.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

It is probably something that has been hanging around for a long time to do with the sigh stuff. Which means it is probably not repeatable and is difficult to find.

 

[vivictius]

Sentry Posts (replacing Lookout Posts) do not let you build Watchers or Enforcers.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Ok... good catch. I'll look into that shortly.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

CTD when end turn. When I use the debug dll I get

Assert Failed

File: CvCity.cpp
Line: 17099
SVN-Rev: 8969
Expression: eIndex < GC.getNumBonusInfos()
Message: eIndex expected to be < GC.getNumBonusInfos()

----------------------------------------------------------

Then another then it crashes.

 

[Snofru1]

I also get a CTD when I end my turn (current SVN). When I load the version from Dec. 29th then I have no problems.

 

[Thunderbrd]

K. Looking into both.

@DH: This was interesting. Surprisingly not a dll problem. This is apparently what happens when a training condition is placed asking for a GOM_BONUS when you meant to say GOM_BUILDING.

Might be the same for the second issue here but I'll find out shortly.

EDIT: Nope... the second one was a bug revealed by a tag that's been in place for a very long time but never has been used up to now. Good find! Fixing.

I should be able to get these fixes in without disrupting Sparth right now since I haven't done any new unit work yet since the last commit with them.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Sentry Posts (replacing Lookout Posts) do not let you build Watchers or Enforcers.

Looks like this was actually the bug that DH just posted above - the OR prerequisite established for Sentry Posts was incorrectly labeled as a bonus rather than a building.

@Joseph: Since it's been mentioned we should be collaborating further, do you think it could be ok to move the Sentry Post prerequisite back to Conduct and just make the Enforcers completely require Sentry Posts for the sake of simplifying this a little? I know that squeezes Lookout Post a bit in terms of its relative time span of usefulness but I don't think that's entirely a bad thing. A player who takes a little extra risk or just doesn't have the production budget can skip the building of of the Lookout Post and go straight for the Sentry Post fairly early if they wish, lending this change to a 'wait to build' strategy that leaves the player open to Exile infestation early on. I just wonder if it's giving a little too much anti-crime a little too early.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

There is a problem with the units in the pedia. If I do an index it is the unit after the building Energy Drink Factory. Enforcer maybe?

 

[Thunderbrd]

There is a problem with the units in the pedia. If I do an index it is the unit after the building Energy Drink Factory. Enforcer maybe?

Is this on the latest svn? I just fixed a problem with them and they open up fine in the pedia for me on this end now.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

No, apparently I had missed an update. Sorry.

 

[Thunderbrd]

No prob... just glad that was what the culprit was there too.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Looks like this was actually the bug that DH just posted above - the OR prerequisite established for Sentry Posts was incorrectly labeled as a bonus rather than a building.

@Joseph: Since it's been mentioned we should be collaborating further, do you think it could be ok to move the Sentry Post prerequisite back to Conduct and just make the Enforcers completely require Sentry Posts for the sake of simplifying this a little? I know that squeezes Lookout Post a bit in terms of its relative time span of usefulness but I don't think that's entirely a bad thing. A player who takes a little extra risk or just doesn't have the production budget can skip the building of of the Lookout Post and go straight for the Sentry Post fairly early if they wish, lending this change to a 'wait to build' strategy that leaves the player open to Exile infestation early on. I just wonder if it's giving a little too much anti-crime a little too early.

I can't say right at the moment. I've not played any C2C for over a week now. So I'm not familiar with the gameplay right now. Go for it and if it causes too big a gap we'll adjust.

JosEPh

 

[Thunderbrd]

I can't say right at the moment. I've not played any C2C for over a week now. So I'm not familiar with the gameplay right now. Go for it and if it causes too big a gap we'll adjust.

JosEPh

Yeah, agreed.

 

[Snofru1]

Thank you once again, Thunderbrd, works now like a charm, no more ctd.

On another note:

See attached screenshot, an overflow on a gigantic map.

 

[Snofru1]

Another comment:
The different police units upgrade to each other by increasing crime fighting values. But the Police Mech (-45 crime per turn city and -28 crime plot) upgrades to the Sentinel which has no crime fighting abilities at all (when looking at the Civilopedia). I think the Sentinel should also battle crime, e.g. -60/-40.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Thank you once again, Thunderbrd, works now like a charm, no more ctd.

On another note:

See attached screenshot, an overflow on a gigantic map.

Wow... even votes are overflowing eh? Maybe that can just be capped and be ok.

Another comment:
The different police units upgrade to each other by increasing crime fighting values. But the Police Mech (-45 crime per turn city and -28 crime plot) upgrades to the Sentinel which has no crime fighting abilities at all (when looking at the Civilopedia). I think the Sentinel should also battle crime, e.g. -60/-40.

Ah... just an oversight. I had it plotted out (-60/-32) in the progression but forgot to add it apparently. Thanks for pointing that out.