Some more questions about the mod.

[Thunderbrd]

multi-building limitations that actually make no sense.

Because, according to notes, they do make sense to keep from a discovered exploit from being accessed and will now require an extra small project to correct the problem we've just reintroduced - quite often what seems like a small thing can cascade into a rather large thing or set of things. It's also a super minor nuissance really. Nothing on the level of massive unit imbalance issues, crashes, endless turn hangs, memory leaks and MAFS, major gameplay problems in prerequisite chains, and so on. There are many such small things to tinker with.

 

[Toffer90]

but it does surprise me how none of you cared enough to fix the multi-building limitations that actually make no sense.

'Caring', or not, indicates that there was awareness about the issue, something that needed fixing, though no one brought it up as an issue before you as far as I know. Most modders were aware about the limitation, though it probably didn't bother any of us enough to even bring up the subject for discussion this past decade.
What was done to fix the issue was to introduce known exploits/weaknesses to the mechanic that the limitation sealed without exploring the issue and how to address it properly.
I didn't disagree that the multiple build mechanic could benefit from improvements that would make the limitations unnecessary, though when I tried to discuss that aspect, no one seemed to 'care' much about why the limitation were there in the first place.

P.S. I'm not annoyed with you btw (@Somebody613 ), it's good that you bring our attention to stuff we overlook.
If there's someone who annoys me once in a while it is raxo and his sometimes too trigger happy tweaking of stuff he, imo, doesn't fully understand yet. I quickly forgive him though as he is an efficient modder to have on this team who learns stuff very quickly.

 

[Somebody613]

My point is that you absolutely DIDN'T HAVE to follow any of MY suggestions or complaints - so the fact you DID, shows that you WANTED to do so in the first place, and I was merely a new trigger for an old tight spring to unravel.
Isn't that simply logically correct?
I'm not trying to sound rude, believe me.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Yeah, it was a low grade annoyance enough that once brought up as a request it was worth giving a little deeper consideration. I'd just let it be assumed for a long time that it was much more complicated than it is, and the last time I went to do something about it, the multi-threading we used to have there lost me so I really dropped it then.

 

[Somebody613]

boring thread.

-Why did the chicken cross the road?
-Who cares, let's eat.

 

[JosEPh_II]

We, the Team don't keep computer logs (at least I don't, T-brd might) of all the myriad small complaints about small bugs and irregularities of the Mod. We are Not professional game developers, just over zealous hobbyists. Just sayin' and putting in my 2 .

 

[Thunderbrd]

We, the Team don't keep computer logs (at least I don't, T-brd might) of all the myriad small complaints about small bugs and irregularities of the Mod. We are Not professional game developers, just over zealous hobbyists. Just sayin' and putting in my 2 .

I've had some lists but nothing comprehensive. Bill started up the item tracking system on Git recently and that will be helpful but it certainly doesn't contain all the years of observations we've collected here.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

I've had some lists but nothing comprehensive. Bill started up the item tracking system on Git recently and that will be helpful but it certainly doesn't contain all the years of observations we've collected here.

And there is one of the problems we had last time we had an item/bug tracking system. It has to be copied from here or Discord (as the reporting system) to the tracking system. People forget to do it. It is extra work ... and thus the tracking system gets left behind.

 

[Niveras]

Not to re-open a settled issue, but I'm curious to understand the circumstances in which you're able to build multiple wonders in one turn. (Settlers I can understand moreso, but the initial complaint was over wonders.)

In every game I've played, even as a tech leader, if I am not relatively prompt in building a wonder (which happens often, prioritizing other things over new wonders I have available), an AI civ will build it before me. It is simply not possible to wait so long that my production has expanded to the point that I'd have multiple old wonders available that I could complete within a single turn. This isn't even on Diety, or other higher handicaps (nightmare, etc), just emperor and prince. Even when I've tried slave-heavy games.

So I guess I just suck, that my hammers/food production never reaches these heights? Perhaps my slave games didn't have the exceptional dedication to capturing slaves that this would require?

Or perhaps it just happens in eras that I never reach? My interest tends to peter out at about the medieval era, and if the production balance in later eras haven't been addressed, I guess I could see a runaway empire having so much production that it can build multiple wonders per turn (addressing the production cost of buildings and wonders in those eras will still have to be done at some point.)

Or is it perhaps more to do with game speed? I do normally play Normal, maybe Blitz.

 

[raxo2222]

Ability to build multiple wonders per turn was recently added.
Above Noble buildings are more strongly discounted than techs for AI.
This may mean, that techs is 20% cheaper and buildings are 30% cheaper for AI for example.

You can always build multiple wonders per turn if your production is high enough, or wonders are cheap enough (so being unlocked for longer while meaning AI has lots of time to grab them on higher handicaps).
World wonders are 6x more expensive than buildings unlocked in same tech column.

 

[Niveras]

Ability to build multiple wonders per turn was recently added.
Above Noble buildings are more strongly discounted than techs for AI.
This may mean, that techs is 20% cheaper and buildings are 30% cheaper for AI for example.

You can always build multiple wonders per turn if your production is high enough, or wonders are cheap enough (so being unlocked for longer while meaning AI has lots of time to grab them on higher handicaps).
World wonders are 6x more expensive than buildings unlocked in same tech column.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure I was clear.

I understand this ability was recently added precisely as a result of this thread.

I am asking under what circumstances was someone prevented from building multiple wonders in one turn in order to make the complaint in the first place, i.e. before this change. I just couldn't understand when it would ever happen. If I waited so long that my production outclassed wonders to that degree, other AI would have grabbed them (assuming I didn't obsolete them for myself to begin with!).

I could only guess it's a result of a combination of low difficulty, fast game speeds, and advanced eras where production costs are low compared to production output as a result of persistent multipliers?

 

[Thunderbrd]

I'm sorry, I'm not sure I was clear.

I understand this ability was recently added precisely as a result of this thread.

I am asking under what circumstances was someone prevented from building multiple wonders in one turn in order to make the complaint in the first place, i.e. before this change. I just couldn't understand when it would ever happen. If I waited so long that my production outclassed wonders to that degree, other AI would have grabbed them (assuming I didn't obsolete them for myself to begin with!).

I could only guess it's a result of a combination of low difficulty, fast game speeds, and advanced eras where production costs are low compared to production output as a result of persistent multipliers?

It's more that it would waste excess production in a round after a wonder was completed.

 

[raxo2222]

I am asking under what circumstances was someone prevented from building multiple wonders in one turn in order to make the complaint in the first place, i.e. before this change. I just couldn't understand when it would ever happen. If I waited so long that my production outclassed wonders to that degree, other AI would have grabbed them (assuming I didn't obsolete them for myself to begin with!).

I could only it's a result of a combination of low difficulty, fast game speeds, and advanced eras where production costs are low compared to production output as a result of persistent multipliers?

On low handicap its easy to out-tech and out-develop AI, so wonders can stay unbuilt for longer.
On fast speeds all building costs are lower, so its easier to build multiple buildings per turn.
Eras don't scale building/unit costs, they scale tech costs only.
That is its easier to get multiple wonders in turn if they are cheap and AI is slow.

You couldn't built multiple wonders (and settlers/workers) before, as there is exploit - wonders, buildings and units sometimes have separate boosts.
Those separate boosts may seep over next thing if its built in same turn.
Something can boost wonder or unit or building production speed, but not another thing.

For example if you build unit and then wonder on same turn, and unit gets +10% to production rate for having resource X, then wonder may get it too.
So at the end AI got some help.

 

[Trantor]

the bug settings are not saving after the last SVN update. i think some file is readonly which has to be changed.
does anyone know the file name?

 

[raxo2222]

the bug settings are not saving after the last SVN update. i think some file is readonly which has to be changed.
does anyone know the file name?

Run as admin.

User Settings are user generated.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

the bug settings are not saving after the last SVN update. i think some file is readonly which has to be changed.
does anyone know the file name?

Don't forget that you need to save twice. Or you did in previous versions of C2C. Perhaps "they" have finally found and fixed the bug that required this double saving.

 

[Trantor]

how to save it? there is no save button in bug options screen

 

[Toffer90]

BUG options are written to file the moment you hit the exit button to close the BUG options. If that isn't happening then maybe there's a permission issue, that the game isn't allowed by the OS to write to files.
In that case you should mark the BtS exe file as "run as administrator", or look at the security and permission settings for the MODS folder.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

how to save it? there is no save button in bug options screen

You had to save the game twice to get the BUG options to save.

BUG options are written to file the moment you hit the exit button to close the BUG options. If that isn't happening then maybe there's a permission issue, that the game isn't allowed by the OS to write to files.
In that case you should mark the BtS exe file as "run as administrator", or look at the security and permission settings for the MODS folder.

So you have fixed the bug then.

 

[Toffer90]

You had to save the game twice to get the BUG options to save.
So you have fixed the bug then.

In PPIO I changed when/how the BUG option is saved, saving the game is not at all related to saving the bug settings anymore.