Single Player bugs and crashes v43 plus (SVN) - After January 2023

[Blazenclaw]

After 2 turns on the hover over it listed I could build a pasture. I did so next turn. The very turn after I built the pasture all the Culture that stated to build with the Outpost disappeared.

The oddity of building forts/towers and then other improvements on them is currently in the process of being eliminated, but is proving a bit more of a challenge than expected. Should be ready in a few days though.

I lost a lot of working tiles as did the AI with that update today.

Reaching out into the 5th and 6th rings in the 1st 2 or even 3 Eras just does not play nor feel right.

It was intended that cities be significantly smaller in the first several eras as a result of this change. Note that these penalties will gradually disappear until ~era 5 or so, and by that point, RCS will behave similarly as it did before.

Using RCS without the 1-Tile start will behave in an intermediate fashion. RCS and 1-tile is intended to be the harshest experience (reaching into ring 5 by era 3 at earliest); that's what you're seeing here.

I haven't had time to look at your save yet, but from your pictures I can see you are in a very rough area (hilly, muddy, jungles; this is basically the hardest terrain to spread through, approximately equal to ice hills). Building improvements on tiles you have in your territory will help, cutting down jungles you don't intend to keep will help, and the biggest thing that will help is better road tech, but of course that's just with era.

I think I'll make bonus tiles slightly easier to grab in the next version though? It's a little bit tough to balance because if bonus tiles are too easy, then they allow cities to grow very fast through them.

 

[ParadiseDM]

I have a superbug. Game crashes after this move

 

[miccal2000]

For some reason, I can't use air units to bomb enemy units. Propeller Tactical Bomber is in range, but when I select the option and move the cursor over the units I want to bomb, the cursor square is grayed out, and not green.

 

[JosEPh_II]

@Blazenclaw How long or how much culture does a tile need to be under your culture with No neighboring culture competing for that tile? That Wood Palisade (on the hill next to Magyar) has turned into a Fort . The one with the Llama resource. The Fort gave me Llama finally. But I have watched my Culture on that tile build up at +5 a turn. I have just reached 101 Culture. So! If I build the Pasture it says I can, will it go back to having No Culture and I lose use of the tile again? What is the level of Culture (Number) needed to make an uncontested hill and then any mountain go under your Culture control?

 

[Blazenclaw]

So! If I build the Pasture it says I can, will it go back to having No Culture and I lose use of the tile again? What is the level of Culture (Number) needed to make an uncontested hill and then any mountain go under your Culture control?

As a result of Toffer's recent change, replacing a fort with a pasture will make you lose control if the Fort was the only thing influencing the tile.

However, when the SVN next updates (hopefully within a day or two), there will be a change so that non-military improvements can only be built on tiles that are being influenced by a city. The result will be preventing a user from trying to build a fort, then a pasture. Which cities are influenced by city as opposed to fort radius will be shown on the culture tooltip as e.g. 1000(C) + 5, meaning a (C)ity is claiming that tile.

 

[Blazenclaw]

I lost a lot of working tiles as did the AI with that update today.

The question is, did you lose more than you expected? Ignoring the fort->pasture issue above, do you feel it is too harsh for being in what is effectively the hardest biome at the end of the 2nd era? Remember you're also behind the AI, so their borders will be bigger than yours due to the tech advantages.

Game crashes after this move

There is something possibly weird with your great commanders, but turn passed for me (next turn save attached). If it continues crashing for you try disbanding them; judging from your save, don't think you'll have an issue using worldbuilder to remake them after we fix the issue, if it is that
Edit: Great commander is red herring, thanks Toffer, so ignore that bit. If it continues crashing on current SVN build, let us know. What version was this save, actually?

For some reason, I can't use air units to bomb enemy units.

Tested with a vanilla c2c file and yeah, something seems broken with them, thanks for the report. It'll get looked at soonish, that's kinda an important part of air units lol.

 

[Blazenclaw]

Hmm, triple post.

However, when the SVN next updates (hopefully within a day or two), there will be a change so that non-military improvements can only be built on tiles that are being influenced by a city. The result will be preventing a user from trying to build a fort, then a pasture. Which cities are influenced by city as opposed to fort radius will be shown on the culture tooltip as e.g. 1000(C) + 5, meaning a (C)ity is claiming that tile.

Here's what it looks like ingame:

Spoiler Pictures :

In cases where it may not be clear whether culture is from a fort or a city (as above), the mouseover text for culture values will always show a corresponding tag:

Notice the (C) after the culture #, which indicates this tile is receiving culture from a city, and not just an improvement (suburb, fort, tower, etc).

An open question for anyone: Is there a way you can think of to make it more clear? (C) isn't necessarily the most intuitive, for instance.

Will push this to SVN tonight or tomorrow depending on how preliminary testing and input goes.

 

[Toffer90]

Hmm, triple post.


Here's what it looks like ingame:

Spoiler Pictures :

View attachment 653030
In cases where it may not be clear whether culture is from a fort or a city (as above), the mouseover text for culture values will always show a corresponding tag:
View attachment 653031View attachment 653032
Notice the (C) after the culture #, which indicates this tile is receiving culture from a city, and not just an improvement (suburb, fort, tower, etc).

An open question for anyone: Is there a way you can think of to make it more clear? (C) isn't necessarily the most intuitive, for instance.

Will push this to SVN tonight or tomorrow depending on how preliminary testing and input goes.

Just a add a whole new line that states "Culturally Influenced by city", or "Within the cultural range of a city", or "Owner has city within cultural range". Or something along that line. I don't like the (C) in there.

 

[Blazenclaw]

I fear a second line will get ugly when there's 2-3 city cultures fighting on the tile, which is why I opted for inline something.
Maybe something like:

74% Portuguese (74 + 4) [City Culture]
20% Spanish (20)
6% Moroccan (6 + 1) [City Culture]

vs

74% Portuguese (74 + 4)
[Within cultural range of city]
20% Spanish (20)
6% Moroccan (6 + 1)
[Within cultural range of city]

 

[Toffer90]

I fear a second line will get ugly when there's 2-3 city cultures fighting on the tile, which is why I opted for inline something.

The state is only relevant for the owner of the plot, no need to say that a non-owner influence the plot with a city.

 

[Blazenclaw]

The state is only relevant for the owner of the plot

There are some edge cases where it can come to teammates and fort ownership that it could be useful for. That example is a bit of an edge case, but in general it still strikes me as off somehow to only have the distinction made for who currently owns the plot, then having to make the player check the culture #s instead of seeing at a glance who the other main influencers are.

 

[JosEPh_II]

The question is, did you lose more than you expected? Ignoring the fort->pasture issue above, do you feel it is too harsh for being in what is effectively the hardest biome at the end of the 2nd era?

Yes. The Tiles to the North and west of Magyar are not in any other Cultures influence but mine. Yet every tile but the 2 that had Wood Palisade (one of which was on the Llama resource) or where Coastline flipped to neutral tiles. Most had Jungle on them. See previous screen shot 103. You will see no other culture in that pic To N, W or S of Magyar only 1 Polynesian city to the east across the bay.

Magyar was a Barb City that I conquered so I could move South and West off the slender but long peninsula I started on (And if that is a "random" start, Yikes!). 3 other AI are south and east of me Polynesia, Sumerian, and Inca. 2 recently met AI, by way of their exploration Carracks revealed, I have no clue where they are on the map, China and Head Hunter.

I really Do Not like having to chop down Jungle to get Culture Spread. That goes against all I worked for to get Jungle Tile to be more realistic than what vanilla BtS used them for. It took Vincentz (author of the VIP mod to help convince koshling, HydromancerX, and other main C2C modders back then that Jungles were Not the tile of Bad health and nothing else.) That is why a Jungle tile worked can give a long list of possible resources showing up. But it would seem that the Vanilla BtS conditions are being re-introduced. I hope not.

C2C is Not a clone of Vanilla BtS. Those that come here to play soon/eventually find that out. I dread seeing Vanilla BtS creeping back in to C2C.

If wood palisades and Forts Lose their Cultural input from the Culture that built and mans them, then both are useless for claiming border neutral lands. Which has been a long standing part of their usage. (And I KNOW T-brd does not like Palisades and Forts. Believe me I learned that the Hard way!). It was a point of disagreement between T-brd and Dancing Hoskuld for a sometime before DH left C2C. DH built the Religions, Subdued Animals, and brought much more into the Mod from other BtS mods while he was here.

That's all I got to say for now.

 

[Toffer90]

There are some edge cases where it can come to teammates and fort ownership that it could be useful for. That example is a bit of an edge case, but in general it still strikes me as off somehow to only have the distinction made for who currently owns the plot, then having to make the player check the culture #s instead of seeing at a glance who the other main influencers are.

If it holds meaning for non owners of plots then sure, though if it doesn't then I see little reason to inform the player about which non-owners are influencing the plot through cities (it's usually quite obvious).

I'll leave it to you to decide about the tooltip, I personally don't think it even needs to inform the player about it, it should be enough for the pedia to state for the relevant improvements that they require to be within the cultural range of a city, and thus it should be obvious that one cannot build them if a fort (or IDW) is the reason why the plot is owned by you.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I really Do Not like having to chop down Jungle to get Culture Spread.

Hasn't that always been part of the realistic culture spread mod? What's supposed to make it realistic if you don't have less likely to live in terrains and features be what creates a variation in the growth resistance?

And I KNOW T-brd does not like Palisades and Forts. Believe me I learned that the Hard way!

I know my wife complains about them being overly used, but I'm not too worried about them either way. I think the AI might be wasting its time if it's doing these so much more than training settler groups to expand into those areas.

As for what you saw from me, press my borders and you become my next target. That's just a standard flowchart of how I play lol.

I think the point that Toffer and Blaze decided on recently was that if a fort is the reason a bit of territory is claimed, it should have to remain to continue that claim or the claim would be lost. Most 'forts' do count as cities and thus derive the resources underneath them as a result so no need to change out the fort for another improvement - though I always felt that a tower should produce some culture despite not having such an effect to claim resources on that tile.

 

[strategyonly]

why r my units being placed OUTside the city when being built??

btw culture is waaay better now .. .

 

[Blazenclaw]

I really Do Not like having to chop down Jungle to get Culture Spread. That goes against all I worked for to get Jungle Tile to be more realistic than what vanilla BtS used them for.

Hasn't that always been part of the realistic culture spread mod? What's supposed to make it realistic if you don't have less likely to live in terrains and features be what creates a variation in the growth resistance?

I've tuned down the penalty for jungle tiles slightly for the next release. I think part of the issue is that jungle tiles are typically also found on bad terrain (marsh/muddy/etc) which is to some extent double-dipping the penalty (or triple-dipping with advanced routes).
I did however make it so that the first expansion on 1-tile start is not free, but reduced river penalty and also 1/3 cost. As such, I would still recommend chopping jungle/forest tiles that are directly adjacent to the city center when playing 1-tile, but jungles diagonal adjacent or further from city should be fine, if slow to grab.

If wood palisades and Forts Lose their Cultural input from the Culture that built and mans them, then both are useless for claiming border neutral lands.

Palisades and forts are needed for acquiring resource tiles that aren't in cultural borders yet, and towers remain quite useful for spotting sneaky units trying to make it into your territory, or for making a wall across a chokepoint. They should not be (and now cannot be) used as a way to bypass the culture mechanic entirely.

I'll leave it to you to decide about the tooltip, I personally don't think it even needs to inform the player about it, it should be enough for the pedia to state for the relevant improvements that they require to be within the cultural range of a city, and thus it should be obvious that one cannot build them if a fort (or IDW) is the reason why the plot is owned by you.

After sleeping on it, I decided to invert it, so it'd look like this:
74% Portuguese (74 + 4)
20% Spanish (20)
• Not in Spanish city influence
6% Moroccan (6 + 1)

The purpose should be to make it more obvious to players who are investigating a tile to figure out why they can't build an improvement on it. If players read carefully yes it should be obvious, but we all know that is asking a somewhat large if there
Will make a PR to master when done in a few hrs for you to review if you want.

No clue about SO's issue...

 

[Toffer90]

After sleeping on it, I decided to invert it, so it'd look like this:
74% Portuguese (74 + 4)
20% Spanish (20)
• Not in Spanish city influence
6% Moroccan (6 + 1)

Good thinking.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Hasn't that always been part of the realistic culture spread mod?

Not that I was ever aware of. DH did not use that for RCS.

What's supposed to make it realistic if you don't have less likely to live in terrains and features be what creates a variation in the growth resistance?

Hills & mountains vs valleys & plains. If a resource is found on a plot/tile No matter the terrain, do you Not think the people living near that resource won't migrate to it?? Really? That is Unrealsitic.

though I always felt that a tower should produce some culture despite not having such an effect to claim resources on that tile.

Agreed. Did not like it when the Culture was removed from a tower tile. Sidenote: would actually Like to see the NPCs build towers too.

As such, I would still recommend chopping jungle/forest tiles that are directly adjacent to the city center when playing 1-tile,

No to Chopping! That is Old Vanilla rule that we abandoned Years ago. I do not like going back to that stodgey old Vanilla rule. We are Caveman2Cosmos! We Have the broader view! And the 1Tile start under RCS in the past never gave the 8 adjacent tile when the 1st Culture Level was achieved if there were hills and mountains in those 8 adj tiles.

I was intrigued by the Plus sign effect RCS now gives I tile Start once 1st Culture level is achieved. But, I'm starting to develop some doubt; Mainly because it's not very realistic. Now is it.

They should not be (and now cannot be) used as a way to bypass the culture mechanic entirely.

Explain how/why you think the Tower's bypass the culture mechanic? Just don't see it and never have.

I really do not want to see chopping go backwards to vanilla BtS play for any reason. I sincerely believed we had gotten past that old bad mechanic. NOw like unwanted groundhogs in the garden it's ugly head is popping back up. Ugh!

 

[Blazenclaw]

Not that I was ever aware of. DH did not use that for RCS.

No to Chopping! That is Old Vanilla rule that we abandoned Years ago. I do not like going back to that stodgey old Vanilla rule. We are Caveman2Cosmos! We Have the broader view! And the 1Tile start under RCS in the past never gave the 8 adjacent tile when the 1st Culture Level was achieved if there were hills and mountains in those 8 adj tiles.

I believe it was a part of RCS prior to my initial overhaul; the effect was simply magnified now as a result of changes. Next version should see it reduced some, but not eliminated.
Do you think it is equally desirable to inhabit a dense jungle as a grassland? I think not. So long as you agree with this, there will be some benefit to chopping, but it will never be required.

If a resource is found on a plot/tile No matter the terrain, do you Not think the people living near that resource won't migrate to it?? Really? That is Unrealsitic.

The problem is bonus density. If a bonus tile never has any penalty, RCS will matter much less because the density of bonuses is so high, even without increased bonuses. Currently, bonus tiles are 1/2 cost (rounding down). People will want to move to resources sure, but I'd still prefer to live in a nice riverside grassland over an ice sheet even though there might be some e.g. tin ore under the ice.

Sidenote: would actually Like to see the NPCs build towers too.

My next goal after this update is to make sure the AI can use it properly. There's a chance they'll be constructing them in odd places in today's upcoming ver because I haven't looked at it very carefully, just to make sure they aren't immediately spamming them everywhere. The goal is to have AI build forts on resource tiles that are outside of their city borders and chokepoints, then towers if a fort is unavailable on that tile (due to unique range limit)

Explain how/why you think the Tower's bypass the culture mechanic? Just don't see it and never have.

Spoiler Old strategy, read only if you care :

1. Build a fort/tower on a neutral tile in workable range, and let the culture build for a turn.
2. Now the tile is in your control, replace with a regular improvement of your choice.
3. Move worker one tile over to next unimproved tile, repeat from step 1.

With Toffer's new change to make culture control disappear if culture input is lost, this would cause step 2 to fail unless the improvement produced culture of its own. Because culture from cottages/other improvements is cool and I wanted to reintroduce that (among other reasons), I had to write some code to keep track of which tiles are receiving culture from a city as opposed to improvement/IDW/other source. Otherwise, strat would still apply, if only to cottages and whichever other improvements deserve culture.
Additional restriction also prevents AI from getting stuck in an endless loop of fort->pasture->fort->pasture, etc.

 

[Toffer90]

there will be some benefit to chopping, but it will never be required.

Mhm, and going forward we should seek new ways of making forest and jungles more valuable and useful. It should be situational whether its best to chop or best to preserve.