Single Player bugs and crashes v38 plus (SVN) - After the 20th of February 2018

[Raledon]

Barbarian's spawn rate should be tied to game speed (if they aren't).
From what I've noticed, on the faster (formerly normal) ones you reach the expansion phases while there are not many barbarians.
On slower ones, the barbarians tend to fill nearly every possible spot.

 

[jshetley]

Agreed. Better players just find more of them to be more captive farms and it tends to make their games actually easier.

Yep once I get ambushers the neanderthal cities cities are welcome for just that reason. Barb cities usually take stalkers to be able to farm them. I love getting those captives and turning them into workers. The cities are also very useful for getting experience too.

 

[amjh]

Just updated to 10010. Now I can't choose buildups on any units.

Edit:
Units currently on buildups still have them in promotion list, the option to choose buildup just isn't showing up.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Just updated to 10010. Now I can't choose buildups on any units.

Edit:
Units currently on buildups still have them in promotion list, the option to choose buildup just isn't showing up.

I can confirm this. My units I just upgraded those which were on inspections still have the old build up inspections and can't be set to buildup inspections. Same with the crime fighters.

edit the next turn they were able to. Or at least some were, some still had the old build up promotion active

edit2 you need to set them to build up "never mind" to clear the old buildup and allow them to start it again the next turn.

 

[amjh]

None of my units let me even go to the buildup selection screen, and they keep their current buildup even after moving or passing turn.

 

[Snofru1]

Another MiniDump after CTD. This was on SVN 10010.

 

[raxo2222]

@alberts2 may want to look at this bug, as he did SVN 10010.

 

[Snofru1]

I don´t think this is because of 10010, I had these CTDs before.

 

[raxo2222]

I don´t think this is because of 10010, I had these CTDs before.

I meant bug where buildup actions on units aren't displaying.

 

[olduser]

Just updated to 10010. Now I can't choose buildups on any units.

Edit:
Units currently on buildups still have them in promotion list, the option to choose buildup just isn't showing up.

I can confirm this. My units I just upgraded those which were on inspections still have the old build up inspections and can't be set to buildup inspections. Same with the crime fighters.

edit the next turn they were able to. Or at least some were, some still had the old build up promotion active

edit2 you need to set them to build up "never mind" to clear the old buildup and allow them to start it again the next turn.

None of my units let me even go to the buildup selection screen, and they keep their current buildup even after moving or passing turn.

@alberts2 may want to look at this bug, as he did SVN 10010.

I fear we have a huge problem here.

@Raledon made an mistake in his code that means every game played from the svn rev in which he added his code to register missions up to 10009 is broken.

The mistake was here

int enumByName::add(std::string name, int value) {//add element and return its value. returns 1 on success and -1 on failure.
    std::pair<std::string, int> pair(name, count);
    bool tryAdd = map.insert(pair).second;
    if (tryAdd) {
        return 1;
    }
    return -1;
}

Instead of using the parameter 'int value' as index the field count is used here 'pair(name, count);'.

That gave NO_MISSION and MISSION_MOVE_TO the same index 0. But NO_MISSION has to be -1.

@Thunderbrd

This could have caused some of the issues you have been fighting recently as well.

 

[amjh]

Does that mean the save is broken?

 

[olduser]

Does that mean the save is broken?

I'am not home now so I can't check if there isn't another issue.

Can anyone confirm that this isn't happening in new games started with 10010?

 

[raxo2222]

I'am not home now so I can't check if there isn't another issue.

Can anyone confirm that this isn't happening in new games started with 10010?

I can use buildup on new game started on SVN 10011.
Font is different as I use toffers mod.

Spoiler :

 

[JosEPh_II]

@Raledon made an mistake in his code that means every game played from the svn rev in which he added his code to register missions up to 10009 is broken.

SVN 9927: Refactored the XML's unit mission handling to be consistent with other similar methods.
XML's missions that do not appear on the CvEnums.h file should work regardless of position as they used to (untested).

Ouch!

 

[olduser]

I can use buildup on new game started on SVN 10011.
Font is different as I use toffers mod.

Spoiler :

View attachment 491863

Just to be sure does it work after saving then restarting Civ4 and then loading the save as well?

 

[raxo2222]

Just to be sure does it work after saving then restarting Civ4 and then loading the save as well?

Didn't test that.

It works after saving, exiting and reloading game too.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Okay to have a clear picture now. SVN commit 10010 Fixed an ongoing problem since SVN 9927, right? So if a game was started between svn 9926 and svn 10010 it is now borked so badly that it should be abandoned? Or can it be continued to be played?

Just to be clear.

 

[olduser]

Okay to have a clear picture now. SVN commit 10010 Fixed an ongoing problem since SVN 9927, right? So if a game was started between svn 9926 and svn 10010 it is now borked so badly that it should be abandoned? Or can it be continued to be played?

Just to be clear.

It seems that every game that has been played with a version in that range is possibly broken. It doesn't matter then a game was started its enough that it was played with one of these versions.

I didn't intend to fix a bug caused the code @Raledon added because I assumed it was working. If I would have noticed this issue before committing the changes made in 10010 I would have broken the save compatibility as well to make a clear break.

Maybe we should break the save compatibility?

 

[Wrecker013]

For the latest revision, 10011, I am having a UI issue that I can't seem to fix on my own. Of course as far as I'm aware it may simply be an option somewhere, but I've not a clue.

Spoiler Error Image :

The red blocks highlight the areas I think there is a UI glitch or an element missing. Notably, an absence of gold, absence of the technology bar, absence of the score table, and the tool-tip being covered up by the UI. Any input is appreciated, thanks.

 

[Thunderbrd]

It seems that every game that has been played with a version in that range is possibly broken. It doesn't matter then a game was started its enough that it was played with one of these versions.

I didn't intend to fix a bug caused the code @Raledon added because I assumed it was working. If I would have noticed this issue before committing the changes made in 10010 I would have broken the save compatibility as well to make a clear break.

Maybe we should break the save compatibility?

Don't care if we need to for a fix. But I'm going to let you do the honors.

That said, I DID find the problem with under-reacting in regards to crime and disease in the code. Sorry Joe, don't take this as I'm 'looking after you' or trying to audit your work, but after the fix I also have to change back the AI weight settings as they were dialed in just right before this bug showed up. I wasn't looking at it in suspicion of your changes, just in suspicion that something was probably wrong in the machinery and I was right. Apparently the problem was rooted in a part of the structure using the game era count (and one too low at that) rather than the player's era. This means the symptoms were visible now because the calendar was lagging and while this had always been an issue in the prehistoric, it was now an issue well and into and even possibly through the Ancient as well. Believe it or not, the date CAN make a difference in a lot more than just player role playing and spawns. That said, it probably shouldn't have been anything but the player's era being referenced there all along.

I'll be committing that later. There's other things I'm looking into here as well. And it MIGHT have to do with improper indexing.

Instead of using the parameter 'int value' as index the field count is used here 'pair(name, count);'.

That gave NO_MISSION and MISSION_MOVE_TO the same index 0. But NO_MISSION has to be -1.

Maybe I can speed things up and include this fix myself. You're simply saying "count" should instead be "value" right?

Theoretically, this MIGHT correct some things after the initial issue is resolved so saves may be recoverable. Hard to say yet. It might explain some of the bad behaviors we're seeing from the AI, yes.

Not sure it fully explains the settler thing but maybe. They seem to be training them then disbanding them a lot, which is really messing with their progress of course. And initial study suggests they are getting disbanded because there's no valid city spots being found where there are a LOT of valid city spots. That may not be a result of this bug. But it could sure explain some things like failure to move as they should, which could really be more at fault. I've only found the 'no city sites' issue showing up in the city AI sequence... have not yet seen what exactly takes place in the settler unit AI routine that actually leads to the disbanding.