SVN588, need feedback!

So I need to find the Python file (Revolution/GameReady/Revolution) in Rev and replace the AND one for the C2C one?

JosEPh

I'd copy both of the following from C2C to AND
Revolution/RevEnvents.py
Revolution/GameReady/Revolution.py​
Although I there are many changes in Revolution.py including the SdToolKit changes for multi player so I am not sure if you should take the other MP changes as well.
 
I'd copy both of the following from C2C to AND
Revolution/RevEnvents.py
Revolution/GameReady/Revolution.py​
Although I there are many changes in Revolution.py including the SdToolKit changes for multi player so I am not sure if you should take the other MP changes as well.

Swapped both and still has CTD.

Even swapped BarbarianCiv.py and still CTD.

No Luck so far. :(

JosEPh
 
The problem is possibly on a bit of code starting with "def onRazeCity" but it could be in any of the python files since that is the advantage of modularity.
 
Any idea/thoughts why it only CTDs on a 1 pop city but not a 2 pop city when Barbs attack?

JosEPh
 
The problem is that there are a number of onRaiseCity events around, eg in Partisans; which could be where the real problem is occurring. Do you have a copy of all of the following from the crash PythonErr.log, PythonErr2.log and PythonDbg.log?
 
Err...DH,
You didn't even d/l the Log.rar file? If you have not looked at it how is it "Ok, no help there."???

Edit: Well! I guess maybe you did, and I viewed it before you D/l'd it! :p Sorry.

I've tried looking in various .py files for any mention of City Acquire and City Razed. There are several files that have it. But unfortunately some of it I can kind of follow, but the rest I'm :confused: .

45*38'N has access to the SVN PDB? But he's still learning how to use it.

Maybe we will just have to Hide Barb World from the Option List till a fix it located?

JosEPh
 
Err...DH,
You didn't even d/l the Log.rar file? If you have not looked at it how is it "Ok, no help there."???

Edit: Well! I guess maybe you did, and I viewed it before you D/l'd it! :p Sorry.

I've tried looking in various .py files for any mention of City Acquire and City Razed. There are several files that have it. But unfortunately some of it I can kind of follow, but the rest I'm :confused: .

45*38'N has access to the SVN PDB? But he's still learning how to use it.

Maybe we will just have to Hide Barb World from the Option List till a fix it located?

JosEPh

I doubt the problem is just related to Barbarian World. It is possible that that option just increases the chance that the problem occurs.
 
My "gut feeling" is that it's related somehow to the fact that Barbs are always set to Raze cities, especially small pop cities, instead of capturing. I've always wondered why Barbs were made to be that way. Why are they not allowed to capture 1 pop cities. For that matter why isn't the player and AI players allowed to capture 1 pop cities?

JosEPh
 
My "gut feeling" is that it's related somehow to the fact that Barbs are always set to Raze cities, especially small pop cities, instead of capturing. I've always wondered why Barbs were made to be that way. Why are they not allowed to capture 1 pop cities. For that matter why isn't the player and AI players allowed to capture 1 pop cities?

JosEPh

There is an "Barbs Always Raise" option otherwise they sometimes keep and sometimes don't. Mostly they keep in my experience.

You and the barbarians etc may capture a size one city - I am not sure what the criteria are but suspect you can capture a size 1 city if it is almost a size 2 city. Ie if it has enough food.
 
I have been testing adding the 3 metal bonuses (Iron, copper, lead) to forge, foundry, and factory. They do help the dearth of hammers in this mod for getting young cities up and running. It's not anywhere near OP as it adds 1-3 hammers.

Another problem is that the transition from Forge to Foundry and then to Factory has gaps where you lose hammer production because Forge and Foundry are made to go Obsolete. 45* and I have both thought that this could and I say Should be changed. I have removed the Obsolescence in my test game.

A 3rd problem is build cost <iCost> for a Forge it's 60, for a Foundry it is 250, for a Factory it is 325. What happens is that when you get to Dry dock and Factory the time to build a Factory is 3-5 turns Less than to build a Foundry. This should not be so. The jump from Forge at 60, to Foundry at 250 is too big (190). The jump from Foundry to Factory is more in line (250 to 325 = 75). Steel Mill cost is 520 and Manufacturing Plant is 700.

So in my test game I have done this: Reduced Foundry <iCost>150 (60 to 150) a increase 0f 90 vs 190. I have also reduced Factory, Steel Mill, and Manuf Plant by 50 each (275, 450, and 650 resp.) This makes upgrading still a supreme effort but takes a bit of the Cliff away that we have now.

I am also looking into the % hammer increase from Forge thru Steel Mill. Forge is 15% but so is Steel Mill so that when you build a Steel Mill you lose hammers which players Have complained about. Currently I'm testing an Incremental increase for this production line. The mod suffers from a drought in hammers. Now understand I do not advocate that it should be overflowing with hammers either. But a measured increase in production is call for imho.

JosEPh :)
 
@DH,
Just had a CTD in Diplomacy. This is the last segment from the Python Debug file:

Code:
19:38:17 DEBUG: DiplomacyUtil - AI_DIPLOCOMMENT_JOIN_WAR [7] from 11 to 0 with (u'Assyrian', u'', u'')
19:38:17 DEBUG: DiplomacyUtil - firing WarDemanded
19:38:17 DEBUG: DiplomacyUtil - Marcus Aurelius asks SVN590Plus to declare war on Ashurbanipal
19:38:19 DEBUG: updatePlotListButtons_Orig - column 0, offset 252
19:38:19 DEBUG: updatePlotListButtons_Orig - iCount(252), iSkipped(0)
19:38:19 DEBUG: Timer - scores took 109 ms
19:38:23 DEBUG: DiplomacyUtil - USER_DIPLOCOMMENT_NO_JOIN_WAR [7] from 0 to 11 with (-1,)
19:38:23 DEBUG: DiplomacyUtil - firing WarRejected
19:38:23 DEBUG: DiplomacyUtil - SVN590Plus rejects demand from Marcus Aurelius to declare war on Ashurbanipal
19:38:23 DEBUG: Timer - scores took 111 ms
19:38:24 DEBUG: DiplomacyUtil - ignoring USER_DIPLOCOMMENT_EXIT from 0 to 11 with (-1,)
19:38:24 DEBUG: updatePlotListButtons_Orig - column 0, offset 252
19:38:24 DEBUG: updatePlotListButtons_Orig - iCount(252), iSkipped(0)
19:38:24 DEBUG: Timer - scores took 113 ms

Would this give you enough info to point me to the file?

JosEPh
 
Any CTDs caused by Python will most likely cause an entry in the PythonErr.log file. That means that the errors you are getting are happening in the dll which does not mean that they are not being caused by something happening in the Python but it does mean that it requires someone to identify the problem from the dll perspective first.
 
Okay that explains why the PythonErr.log has been empty. Thanks again DH. :)

I'm going to leave this one to 45*38'N. I seem to be jumping the gun here lately anyway.

JosEPh
 
I have been thinking about this issue for quite some time now and thought I would share my thoughts on the matter. I have played countless games where I have either excelled or did poorly and have been wondering exactly what the deal was as the disparity of my performance was rather huge based on what type of map I was playing on. After this I took a step back and did some thinking; In original civ4, rivers just gave you a +1 :commerce:. Then BTS eventually came out which gave you the levee, granting +1 :hammers: on river tiles which was a huge step forward making cities founded on rivers unbeatable in terms of production bonus once one hit the industrial age.

RoM + AND took this a step further. You now have irrigation canals available relatively early in the game granting +1 :food: on river tiles and the river authority, granting an extra +1 :commerce: on river tiles on top of the +1 :commerce: that river tiles already offer and of course the +1 :hammers: from the levee of BTS. This gives cities founded on rivers unparalleled advantage over cities that are not in every domain and this advantage really begins to shine in the industrial era. Once the industrial era hits, my inland cities (not founded on rivers) simply fall behind in production no matter what I do.

Having thought about this further, I came up with a partial solution to balance things out somewhat. The best part about this solution is that its also realistic IMO. Rather than having the requirement for building river related buildings be that a city is founded on river tile, make the requirement such that to build those buildings, a river needs only to be in the city vicinity.

If you think about it, it facilitates city placement because you don't always have to think about missing out on production / food / commerce bonuses just because you decided to found your city one sqaure away from the nearest river tile.

There is also another upside to this; the AI. The AI often has horrible city placement, many times just a square away from a river tile and thus does not capatilize on all the bonuses that the river related buildings would offer. Thus if the requirement was to change for river buildings to be buildable as long as there is a river in the city vicinity, this would give the AI a much needed boost and make it more challenging to deal with.

Finally, as mentioned before, this is also realistic. There is no reason why a levee / river authority / irrigation canals cannot be built on river as long as a river tile is being used by a city.

When I looked into doing this myself, I found out that unfortunately there is no tag in the XML files that identifies rivers as a tile so I was unable to execute this change. However I feel that this would give a great addition for the game by making it easier for both human and AI city placement all the while making the game more realistic at the same time.
 
Just came up with another thought; I think steel mills should require a factory.

The reason I am proposing this is that its not only realistic but because the AI city builder goes crazy by making steel mills one of the very first buildings it produces, almost just after a granary. It is expensive to produce for a small city and the opportunity cost for other buildings that would give the new city an early boost is huge.
 
Was playing a game until the industrial era and faced a serious issue; I got declared war on and.... all the enemy units (musketmen, curassier, cannon) were able to use my roads.

In a single turn I had 150 enemy units parked next to a city that was 6 squares deep in my territory. Before I started my game I had removed the commando promotions for all mounted units and checked in world builder; none of the units outside my city had the commando promotion yet they got there in a single turn. Anyone wanna tell me whats going on?
 
If you've built Paved and above it's Unreasonable to think that an enemy entering your country should be limited to 1 tile/turn movement as if there were No roads. And even open grassland for that matter with post medieval units, imho.

Even in vanilla Civ IV if you have railroads in your country the enemy can use them to move 10 tiles. And you can do the same to them. When did this idea that invading forces in later eras had to be restricted in their movement?

Commando promotion was designed to give more freedom of movement to the units getting it. But it was not the only means for greater movement.

To do what you are suggesting is to remove all the road types. Not gonna happen from me.

I personally do not see it as an issue. Maybe 45*38'N will?

JosEPh
 
If you've built Paved and above it's Unreasonable to think that an enemy entering your country should be limited to 1 tile/turn movement as if there were No roads. And even open grassland for that matter with post medieval units, imho.

Even in vanilla Civ IV if you have railroads in your country the enemy can use them to move 10 tiles. And you can do the same to them. When did this idea that invading forces in later eras had to be restricted in their movement?

Commando promotion was designed to give more freedom of movement to the units getting it. But it was not the only means for greater movement.

To do what you are suggesting is to remove all the road types. Not gonna happen from me.

I personally do not see it as an issue. Maybe 45*38'N will?

JosEPh
Yes it is an issue; its beyond ridiculous - 150 units parked outside a city deep in my territory in a single turn? This is a complete gamebreaker. Where in the XML files was this change made? Personally I am for giving the enemy limited transportation access in enemy territory or reducing the level required for the commando promotion. But this implementation won't work.

Even in vanilla Civ IV if you have railroads in your country the enemy can use them to move 10 tiles. And you can do the same to them.
Err, no it didn't allow you to do that.

EDIT: also, if the game is gonna be like this, the commando promotion might as well be removed as it becomes redundant.
 
Back
Top Bottom