Version 0.84 discussion thread

[jdog5000]

(You can always get the latest stable release from the download thread or sourceforge. Development versions and updated source code can also be checked out from sourceforge.)

A small update, mostly to fix a crash problem in the previous version. Couple other little things too.

New in Better BTS AI 0.84

Spoiler :

Bugfix
- Fixed bug (introduced) with new surrender acceptance decision logic causing stack overflow crash

War tactics
- Fast units in AI stacks now pillage first, so stacks may be able to keep moving

Tech AI
- AI no longer values ability to vassalize or form permanent alliances when choosing techs game options block those actions

 

[LunarMongoose]

You forgot to add BBAI indication in comments for the lines in CvPlayerAI.cpp that make it check the alliance/vassal game options.

 

[jdog5000]

The really long function those little changes are in is new in BBAI and tagged with comments ... I didn't update the date on the comment tags though.

 

[Janov]

hmm, both downloadlinks show version number 0.83 for me, still. Is that already the new 0.84?

Thanks, Jan

 

[Afforess]

Sweet; A new better AI always makes my weekends fun.

I looked through your todo list on the SVN, a lot of the stuff there sounds really good, hopefully you have enough free time to do it all.

 

[Woody1]

Excellent. Just one quick question: I assume we can delete the .bak files in the python and xml directories, right? Were these just left over from your development environment?

 

[jdog5000]

Yes, you can delete the .bak files. I usually do before release, they're produced when I merge things with winmerge.

 

[phungus420]

Looking at the RevDCM todo list, have you taken a look at this item:

-Fix OOS error caused by BetterAI: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=338985

Is that reported OOS error even confirmed?

 

[jdog5000]

I remember only the one poster talking about it ... anyone playing straight BBAI in multiplayer having any issues?

AI code alone can't cause OOS, it would have to be one of the few features that affect actions a human player can take. Mass unit upgrading, setting planes to auto-explore, ???

 

[essmene]

would it be possible to add an auto-explore script to spies ?

 

[TheOnlyDJCat]

I remember only the one poster talking about it ... anyone playing straight BBAI in multiplayer having any issues?

AI code alone can't cause OOS, it would have to be one of the few features that affect actions a human player can take. Mass unit upgrading, setting planes to auto-explore, ???

Yep, playing multiplayer wth BBAI and still run into OOS around 3 times per session
Usually we just save the game after the OOS reload from that turn and continue, so I don't have experience whether the OOS are reproducible.
And I play with with BUG too, so I can't say if it is a problem of, BUG or BBAI.

I try next time to keep autosaves from the turn before OOS

 

[jdog5000]

would it be possible to add an auto-explore script to spies ?

Certainly, good idea.

Yep, playing multiplayer wth BBAI and still run into OOS around 3 times per session
Usually we just save the game after the OOS reload from that turn and continue, so I don't have experience whether the OOS are reproducible.
And I play with with BUG too, so I can't say if it is a problem of, BUG or BBAI.

I try next time to keep autosaves from the turn before OOS

There is an OOS issues in a recent version of BUG, not sure if they released the new version that fixes it officially yet or whether it's just on svn. With all the interface stuff in BUG there's much more which can OOS, but it sounds like the jury is still out on whether there's any OOS issues in BBAI.

Thanks for the info.

 

[Afforess]

There is an OOS issues in a recent version of BUG, not sure if they released the new version that fixes it officially yet or whether it's just on svn. With all the interface stuff in BUG there's much more which can OOS, but it sounds like the jury is still out on whether there's any OOS issues in BBAI.

Lol, you guys are hilarious. EF says exactly the same thing, except about BBAI. Except I know BUG has some known OOS issues...

 

[Fimbulvetr]

Aren't those mostly BULL issues?

 

[Afforess]

Aren't those mostly BULL issues?

Yeah, but BUG, BULL, they're the same thing... okay, they aren't, but they are derivations of the same concept, just one with SDK changes, one without.

 

[PieceOfMind]

One of the changes I made in PIG Mod was to bring the tech requirement for Forest Preserves earlier to Monarchy instead of Scientific Method. While I was glad to see AIs did build Preserves, it seems they are building too many or over valuing them.

Here is an example:

Spoiler :

When I hover over the highlighted tile holding SHIFT, I notice these values:

Actual Build values:
Farm: -144
Workshop: -204
Lumbermill: 0
Watermill: 0
Cottage: -145
Fort: -70
Forest Preserve: 620

Standard Build Values:
Forest Preserve: 1000

Firstly, I'm curious as to why forest preserves are valued so highly. The city does not have immediate happiness concerns and is sacrificing a valuable riverside square.





Ragnar, the active player under AI autoplay (in case that makes a difference) seems to value the FPs too much and to his own detriment. See below...

Spoiler :

All the spots marked with x are forest preserves. Two of his cities are having to work bad water squares because they aren't working the forest preserves.

I haven't tested it extensively yet but it felt like it was usually the AI-controlled human player (autoplay player or whatever you call it) who seemed to keep the forest preserves the most.

Can I please request the AI be looked at in regards to how it values this improvement? Usually the improvement seems to be given a value of 50 while other improvements always get less than 50.

I have a gamesave to post if necessary but I'm unsure how useful it will be given it was played under PIG Mod v0.90.

 

[Elkad]

would it be possible to add an auto-explore script to spies ?

Certainly, good idea.

Can we add it to Great Spies as well? Actually, I wouldn't mind just seeing the button for every unit. If for some reason I want a worker to auto-explore (no barbs game?), why not?

 

[TheOnlyDJCat]

Certainly, good idea.

There is an OOS issues in a recent version of BUG, not sure if they released the new version that fixes it officially yet or whether it's just on svn. With all the interface stuff in BUG there's much more which can OOS, but it sounds like the jury is still out on whether there's any OOS issues in BBAI.

Thanks for the info.

Yes, I know. With BUG 4.2 it was impossible to play Still use 4.0 and have disabled PLE and unit naming. And the OOS come st the beginning of a new turn every time. BUG OOS mostly appear during a turn. But I will see this evening. We'll play a few hours

 

[Yakk]

Re: spies auto-exploring

Certainly, good idea.

So long as they refuse to enter non-barbarian non-team claimed territory when exploring... (or treat such territory as a very expensive barrier that they are loath to cross?)

 

[JujuLautre]

Ragnar, the active player under AI autoplay (in case that makes a difference) seems to value the FPs too much and to his own detriment. See below...

This could be a stupid idea (if it is forgive me), but since the same thing happened to me one time one tip: verify that you did not check "auto workers leaves forest/jungle".