v21 bugs and crashes

[charlesb96]

Maybe not very important bug, but must be not hard to fix.
There are two Leonidas hero units: one is called "Leonidas", another - "Leonidas - 300 spartans".

Leonidas is a Hero and can build the related hero buildings, the 300 Spartans can be upgraded to a regular unit, with all its hero promotions.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Maybe not very important bug, but must be not hard to fix.

Another duplicate is Solomon Temple: first of them is built by great prophet in Jewish Holy City, second is usual Great Wonder with the name of The temple of Solomon or similar - not sure about the exact names, just search by "Solomon" keyword.
Thanks!

Not a duplicate. If some one can come up with abetter name then that would solve the problem.

Currently

Judaism Shrine only built by Great Prophet - Solomon's Temple.
Great Wonder built by anyone - "The Temple of Solomon".​

 

[WimpyTheWarrior]

Reverted back to version 2053, still CTD at end of turn 930AD.

Reverting back to 2053 solves the City list problem, but you lose the fixes from 2054-current, which includes some CTD fixes in revision 2071. I was getting lots of CTDs with 2053.

You can use SVN to bypass 2054. Bring your SVN back to Head, use Show Log, right click 2054 and select "Revert changes from this revision". I have done this and the game launches and shows City lists, and also has fixes from revisions added since 2054, including the CTD fixes in 2071.

WARNING!!!
However while this is possible within SVN, I have no idea if this breaks something in the game or your SVN. After I did this my SVN how has a red exclamation icon, not the green OK check. (Using Tortoise 1.76). I have already had to blow away and re-load my SVN today (4.3G download). So for me I have a great game going and I want to avoid the CTD but also have the City lists, so I reverted 2054 and 2072, which appears related. But I am now playing a "home-rolled" customised game, so I won't report any issues unless I can re-create the same issue in the latest SVN build.

So I give this advice as "you can try this", but I cannot guarantee the advice is safe. YMMV!.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

I think I have everything done for v22 release, so I am only doing bug fixes and minor tweaks from now on until the end of the freeze.

On a related note I don't think that the deep sea mod is workable in the C2C context, or even the BtS context. The current sea-ocean concept is about sailing or moving over the water not about depth of the waters. If we really did want to model both transport across oceans and the geography of the oceans we would need to do things much differently.

On another note @Hydro, I am working on a tutorial on how to add resources, using the "gas" resource you requested. It is going very slowly but I will get there and it will be as complete as I can make it.

 

[Koshling]

Figured out the casue of two reported issues (I think). These are:

• Broken options and possible crash in UN/Apostolic vote popup that appears on load of a save game (before you get to start moving units)
• Bad information about what you have just completed researching or building in 'choose whats next' popups for research or production, also in the first turn of a loaded save game before any unit movement

I **believe** that both conditions are only possible on load of an autosave (not an explicit save), and furthermore (slighly weaker assertion though) that it cannot happen with an autosave from recent (about the past 10 days or so) builds (since I changed the timing of when autosave takes place).

Unless anyone has concrete evidence (and example ideally) that contradicts the above theory (i.e. - must be autosave in particular, must be from a not-entirely SVN latest version to a lesser extent) I don't plan to try to fix it (I know what's wrong but it'll be quite a lot of effort to fix).

 

[Koshling]

EoT CTD revision 2018 (may be fixed but not sure)

Repeatable, last action is to give worker order to build mudpath on uppermost NE city. Hit end of turn and CTD.

Save and minidump provided.

JosEPh

Edit: Updated game to 2079 Revision still CTD at end of turn. Recalculated too because of assets/DL changes Also after updating 1st 4 city builds had weird out of place names for what was actually built. See screenshots. 3rd should have said Bison rider but instead said Lara Croft. Something is definitely out of order. And this game is now on hold as I can't figure how to get past CTD at EoT.

Clarification request. This has save games for 920 and 930AD. The 930 CTDs at end turn I gather (I'm running it under the debugger now so see if it will reproduce for me - takes about 30 minutes to completely process a turn though so will post when I know). What about the 920 - what's it here illustrating?

Edit - the 930 save plays through fine for me. However, the minidump (930 one) you posted does point to a problem I've seen before in minidumps but as yet have no explanation of. I suspect there is some random elemnt that prevents me reproducing it, bu I don't know what it is I can't read the 920 minidump because it doesn't seem to correspond to SVN 2018, and I need an exact match to be able to read it.

The minidump from 930 definately gives clues and I'll try to pin something down from them, but no promises. Can you still reproduce the crash from that save game with the latest SVN? If so would you be prepared to work with me running debugging versions to try to pin the problem down through extra logging and so on in a private build I could make for you?

 

[JosEPh_II]

Sure.

Save 920 AD was from the 2018 build. It CTD'd at end of turn.

I then updated to 2079 revision and was able to play 1 more turn and then it CTD's at EoT. I did recalculate on that turn to get the weird ID problem.

I tried going back to revison 1948 and it CTD while starting to Load the save. It produced the largest minidump.

I hope this is a Bug cause otherwise if animals can do this Oy Vey!!! See Screenie. New game revision 2084.

JosEPh

Edit: will try to play 930AD with new revision 2084 to see if it also will CTD.

Edit2: using revision 2084 I have been able to resume 930AD save, am up to 950AD, and ready to hit eot button.

 

[Koshling]

Sure.

Save 920 AD was from the 2018 build. It CTD'd at end of turn.

I then updated to 2079 revision and was able to play 1 more turn and then it CTD's at EoT. I did recalculate on that turn to get the weird ID problem.

I tried going back to revison 1948 and it CTD while starting to Load the save. It produced the largest minidump.

I hope this is a Bug cause otherwise if animals can do this Oy Vey!!! See Screenie. New game revision 2084.

JosEPh

Edit: will try to play 930AD with new revision 2084 to see if it also will CTD.

Edit2: using revision 2084 I have been able to resume 930AD save, am up to 950AD, and ready to hit eot button.

In that case my best guess it was the missing art defines issue, that I know caused access off the end of arrays, and probably corrupted some memory. The mini dump looks like a memory corruption of some sort, so this is consistent. Let me know if you have a repeat of the crash with current or future versions.

 

[JosEPh_II]

10-4 will do.

OT: Today is My 39th Wedding Anniversary. I have a raging flu/head clod/ allergy reaction going on. But at least I have a supper of Corned Beef and cabbage with potatoes. All is not lost. But I am missing out on seeing John Carter of Mars at the cinema (I'm a Big Edgar Rice Burroughs fan)

JosEPh

 

[lunfa_reo]

Hi, I'm suddenly getting a CTD a few seconds after I press "end turn" in this game (save attached). It does not happen with the saves from previous turns, it just started now.

I'm not sure what could be happening, I tried several times changing small things in the build queues and unit movements to make sure I wasn't doing anything "weird", but I still get the CTD.

Could you please look into it?

Thank you

This plays the turn end fine for me, but that's with the latest SVN. Are you using vanilla v21? If so have you tried updating from the patch thread?

I was playing with the DLL that came with v21. I updated it from the patch thread and that solved the problem. Thanks!

On a different note, the victory conditions screen always says "The world is too young to judge". It's 1030 AD in my current game, Prince Eternity speed, and I already built the AP (all victory conditions enabled).
This has been discussed in threads about other mods, but I haven't found a solution. Do you know if it is a bug?

Bye

 

[AIAndy]

Properties values are invisible (I play with 1280x960) if value length is longer than 2 digits (including "-"), though there's a lot of free space in the row.

I was able to see flammability value when it's up to 99 but after that it turns into dots.

I have changed the display now which should also fix that.

 

[DRJ]

I have 2 things here 1 bug that has already been reported I guess (great generals staying next to enemy cities and are not acknowledged as being at risk and/or as being a target.

+seeing a unit of a different civ but not making contact to it (my rogue sees the russian general yet its not listed on the list of civs you met on the right.

ah and a little one: land crodiles still don't move

 

[strategyonly]

Just got another Revolution error:

fixed by AIAndy

 

[Koshling]

I have 2 things here 1 bug that has already been reported I guess (great generals staying next to enemy cities and are not acknowledged as being at risk and/or as being a target.

+seeing a unit of a different civ but not making contact to it (my rogue sees the russian general yet its not listed on the list of civs you met on the right.

ah and a little one: land crodiles still don't move

The general issue is on my list, and hopefully will make it to the top before v22 is released (it's about 3rd atm). The lack of contact IMO is deliberate (and probably correct) because your rogue does not carry (to other players) the identity of your civ, so he can hardly start diplomatic contacts! Now, because Civ4 doesn't have a staged concept of 'contact' that separates diplomatic access from other aspects, this also means you don't have contact for espionage purposes (which does seem wrong). However, because contact is all-or-nothing we can't chnage one without changing the other, so with current mechanics IMO it's not a bug.

 

[BlueTemplar]

Just got to this. It's the 3rd ring (by any means) and is totally explicity (aka deliberate) in the code, but without any comment to say why. It can trivially be changed. So that I don't have to make the design decision and cast it in stone now I am changing it to increase the food required to grow by a percentage defined in a global define. FOR NOW I will set this defien to 100 (so double as now), but once ther has been a day or two for debate it can then trivially be changed to whatever we decide is most appropriate.

Why would you suddenly need more food when the third ring is activated? This activation is linked to culture (or culture + city size + building). You're effectively making the city harder to grow when it reaches a certain culture limit. I'm not sure that's a good idea... One consequence will be that you will be better off postponing culture and focusing on growth, so that the city has it's 3rd ring activated around when it doesn't grow fast enough with only the 2 first rings...

 

[Koshling]

Why would you suddenly need more food when the third ring is activated? This activation is linked to culture (or culture + city size + building). You're effectively making the city harder to grow when it reaches a certain culture limit. I'm not sure that's a good idea... One consequence will be that you will be better off postponing culture and focusing on growth, so that the city has it's 3rd ring activated around when it doesn't grow fast enough with only the 2 first rings...

My own view is that getting the 3rd ring tends to be abuge step up, so I dont have a problem with there being a penalty for it, so the transition is no so step-like in power gains. However, I thik a 100% growth penlaty is harsh. My personal view is that it should be halved (to 50%), but we need to close this debate this week in time for v22.

 

[BlueTemplar]

It tends to be a huge step up because of all the extra tiles that you can farm for food (since none of the specialists give food), so you can grow the city even more. But isn't that best handled by tweaking the food waste formula and/or the food required for cities to grow, so that the penalty is more gradual, and especially not linked to culture? Because culture tends already to be not that important in C2C with fixed borders, the main use IMHO of it now is to reach that 3rd ring... but if that has a big penalty associated with it, will you still bother with culture?

 

[DRJ]

The general issue is on my list, and hopefully will make it to the top before v22 is released (it's about 3rd atm). The lack of contact IMO is deliberate (and probably correct) because your rogue does not carry (to other players) the identity of your civ, so he can hardly start diplomatic contacts! Now, because Civ4 doesn't have a staged concept of 'contact' that separates diplomatic access from other aspects, this also means you don't have contact for espionage purposes (which does seem wrong). However, because contact is all-or-nothing we can't chnage one without changing the other, so with current mechanics IMO it's not a bug.

OK I understand what you say. But if my rogue sees russian land, I suddenly will have contact to them, not so if my rogue sees a unit of theirs (maybe a thing with general unit only, though).

Because my rogue got contact to hatti and germany whithout having revealed any of them my idendity by an other unit as my rogue passing by.

 

[Koshling]

It tends to be a huge step up because of all the extra tiles that you can farm for food (since none of the specialists give food), so you can grow the city even more. But isn't that best handled by tweaking the food waste formula and/or the food required for cities to grow, so that the penalty is more gradual, and especially not linked to culture? Because culture tends already to be not that important in C2C with fixed borders, the main use IMHO of it now is to reach that 3rd ring... but if that has a big penalty associated with it, will you still bother with culture?

Even with the 100% penalty I strive hard to get the 3rd ring due to the amount of hammers and extra commerce it tends to enable (as well as food). Do you avoid it with the current setup? If peopel are not tryin to avoid it the penalty isn't effectingtheir deciion process so it can't really be too large from that perspective.

I do agree that more gradual would be better, but that requires me to fiddle with mechanisms which takes longer. For something that is just sub-optimal rather than outright broken, I think I have higher priorites for my time. Moving it to at least be parameterised but use the same mechanism was a trivial task which I see as better than nothing is all. For v22 this isn't goign to chnage (it might at some future point, but not promising). What CAN change for v22 is where we set the parameter...

 

[BlueGenie]

My take on this is basically that it depends on playing style as well as getting that huge step up, which I certainly agree that it is.
If wanting fast growing cities one would opt for 0 for Waste and 0 for third ring either way.
If wanting slower growth one would set higher, maybe even near 100 in both.

On the downside the slower growth if getting to the third ring would be felt, really hard, in any city that's using up margin space and doesn't have more plots available to it upon reaching third plot ring. For that reason I'd say it shouldn't be 100% but rather closer to 25%.

Basic need to grow amounts can also make a big difference in this discussion. With the right Civics and Modern Granaries that +100% isn't much (12-18 turns to growth for my 30+ cities with 10 in wastage factor on the old Eternity speed) while if reaching the third plot early it'll really stump growth with a high percentage to need to grow.

If removing or reducing the extra need to grow on third plot ring it might be a good idea to also reduce the stored food percentage depending on city size, so that smaller cities can still grow fast while larger cities take that much longer again, regardless of third plot ring or not.
(Still advertising for stored food % being shown somewhere at all.)

My thoughts are that the larger the storage facility is the larger a city population it can accommodate stored food for:
Storage Pit: Full effect til size 6. -1% stored per pop above 6 to a maximum of -5% (+5% always stored).
Shaman's Hut: Full effect til size 12, -2.5% stored per pop above 13 to a maximum of -12.5% (12.5% always stored).
Granary: Full effect til size 18, -3% stored per pop above 21 to a maximum of -15% (15% always stored).
Modern Granary: Full effect til size 24, -5% stored per pop above 21 to a maximum of -25% (25% always stored).
Not sure what comes after and how much % they give.

Housings and other minor changes to Stored percentage need not be affected by this.

Cheers