[We the People] Bug reporting

[XSamatan]

Thanks for the quick response.

Well, then I do not understand the logic behind Admiral points vs XP, IIRC XP against/from animals is capped to 2 and should therefore not have a great impact on Admiral gain - however it does.

Is this WAD?

 

[ConjurerDragon]

2.9
Your fear --> You fear

Spoiler :

 

[raystuttgart]

2.9
Your fear --> You fear

@Kendon:
Could you correct that spelling error please?
(I do no want to mess with the text files while you correct / work on them.)

 

[Elirector]

2.9
Your fear --> You fear

I don't think it is an error. Read it like: "I have presented <...> your concern and your fear <...>"

 

[raystuttgart]

I don't think it is an error.

Correct, it is not an error.
The text matches.

 

[historix69]

While one of my colonists was travelling on the Inca trail something strange happened. He was attacked by a wild animal but could defend himself. Then the wounded wild animal pillaged the road improvement. Should wild animals be able to pillage roads? (seen in 2.8.2.2)

 

[raystuttgart]

Should wild animals be able to pillage roads? (seen in 2.8.2.2)

We simply did not consider that.
But no, they should not.

Edit:
Thanks for reporting.
I will change it so Wild Animals can not pillage anymore.

 

[Kendon]

2.9
Your fear --> You fear

Spoiler :

View attachment 598362

Thank you. It's fixed.

 

[ConjurerDragon]

I don't think it is an error. Read it like: "I have presented <...> your concern and your fear <...>"

If it is meant that way, would it not be better understood as one sentence with a comma?
As in
"I have presented your concerns to the gods, your fear that these new settlers cannot understand our world." Because - at least from my german point of understanding - "Your fear that these new settlers cannot understand our world." as it´s own sentence does not make sense as a seperate sentence to me, only in connection of the fear to the concerns.

 

[ConjurerDragon]

We simply did not consider that.
But no, they should not.

Edit:
Thanks for reporting.
I will change it so Wild Animals can not pillage anymore.

Isn´t pillaging the trash of civilization not what wild animals do? At least nowadays do e.g. ice bears or in Europe Foxes or Wild Boars even enter cities on search for food and plunder trash cans and anything leftover they find. Back in the time of Colonization that would obviously be less a problem with far less cities and far more wilderness - but a raging Grizzly or a starving wolf stealing a sheep here, a cow there and should be able to damage the infrastructure while doing so.

If they are not able to, then only enemies can - and that would mean that outside wars roads could be in perfect condition like built yesterday for 300 years where in reality every way that is not maintained every year will be slowly lost to nature - wild animals pillaging roads outside cities would be a way to simulate the wear and tear of nature to take back the road

Spoiler :

 

[Nightinggale]

Isn´t pillaging the trash of civilization not what wild animals do?

The transcontinental railroad had an issue with bisons. Whenever a herd came running across the track, the track had to be repaired as it has been torn apart. Many trains derailed that way. Yes not the correct era, but somehow I suspect 17th century bisons behaved like 19th century bisons.

 

[raystuttgart]

Yes not the correct era, but somehow I suspect 17th century bisons behaved like 19th century bisons.

So I have to put a new game feature on the todo list "Pillaging / Ravaging / Raiding Bisons"? ... ok will be interesting for gameplay ...

Edit:
Jokes aside.
"Pillaging Animal Units" is now fixed.

For non-modders just in case you are interested.
That was a 1 min fix.
Code for something like that looks like this:

bool CvUnit::canPillage(const CvPlot* pPlot) const
{
   // WTP, ray, fix for pillaging Animals - START
   if (getUnitInfo().isAnimal())
   {
       return false;
   }
   // WTP, ray, fix for pillaging Animals - END
...

 

[Kendon]

I should mention that the plural of "bison" is "bison", not "bisons"; "deer' and "moose" also share that syntax.

As for "... concerns to the gods. You fear ..." English has had a general preference for short sentences ever since the magazine era of the early twentieth century. "Elements of Style" makes a point of minimizing conjunctions. The idea is to make events more dynamic.

 

[raystuttgart]

I should mention that the plural of "bison" is "bison", not "bisons"; "deer' and "moose" also share that syntax.

Thanks for telling - I hope I will not forget.
(In German they have a singular and a plural form.)

That is why it is good to have Native English speakers on board.

 

[nci]

It seems impossible to build a Great Tool Factory in cities situated by large rivers. Is this intended behaviour, or a bug?

 

[Nightinggale]

It seems impossible to build a Great Tool Factory in cities situated by large rivers. Is this intended behaviour, or a bug?

Intentional or not, there is one issue, which is that it's currently impossible to set "requires river or large river" as a building requirement. We have:

1. isWater
2. isRiver
3. terrains required

isWater requires at least one water plot next to the colony plot where the area is larger than iMinAreaSize. If 1 and 2 are set, then only one of them needs to be present. If 2 and 3 is set with 3 being large rivers then both 2 and 3 needs to be true.

The main question is: how do we want the xml interface to work? We need a plan for an easy to use xml interface before figuring out how to write the check in a performant way. Also where does lakes fit into this?

Also should large rivers act like they always have small rivers on all sides of them (without changing the display)?

 

[raystuttgart]

It seems impossible to build a Great Tool Factory in cities situated by large rivers. Is this intended behaviour, or a bug?

Thanks for reporting.
It was simply not considered.

Also where does lakes fit into this?

That is already solved in our recent XML updated.

We could simply configure for e.g. "Lake" or "Large Rivers" like this.

<RequiredAdjacentTerrains>
<eRequiredTerrain>TERRAIN_COAST</eRequiredTerrain>
<eRequiredTerrain>TERRAIN_LARGE_RIVERS</eRequiredTerrain>
</RequiredAdjacentTerrains>

Also should large rivers act like they always have small rivers on all sides of them (without changing the display)?

Sorry, I do not get the issue.

• "Normal Rivers" flowing into "Large Rivers" has been taken care of and looks really good (similar to e.g. with Coasts)
• "Normal Rivers" flowing in parallel to "Large Rivers" has been forbidden (just like e.g. with Coasts) - except you do it on purpose by Worldbuilder

Which issue should we still have with graphics / display ?

 

[raystuttgart]

@nci @Nightinggale
The issue with "Large Rivers" not being considered as Rivers for Building Checks is fixed now.

There is no need for an additional XML tag for balancing or gameplay in BuildingInfos.
(For Building checks with "bRiver" they should be treated exactly the same.)

This here thus already did it:

       if (GC.getBuildingInfo(eBuilding).isRiver())
       {
           // WTP, fix for bRiver not considering Large Rivers
           if (!(plot()->isRiver()) && !(plot()->getTerrainType() == TERRAIN_LARGE_RIVERS))
           {
               return false;
           }
       }

 

[Fürstbischof]

I noticed those issues as well, but I fear there is nothing to be done about those issues. It seems to be a "feature" of the popup window engine in the exe
It's really annoying that the exe takes care of spacing and then leave that much empty space between buttons where there isn't enough space in total.

The exe most certainly limited the amount of text, which can be written. If there is too much text, it will cut it off. No idea why text formatting seems to be broken.

If toolips can not be fixed, then we'll have to live with that. I'll remove the colouring and commit the file tomorrow.


OTOH considering the large "event" pop-ups (of the original tutorial system) there are (seem to be?) occasionally differences re the size of the font. Is that a Python feature?

If you do some tests with the files comitted on Monday by me and run a mature 1650+ game for several turns, you'll see come up another issue which leads to the text being cut off, although a longer text (only due to the building name being longer) is not cut off.

 

[Nightinggale]

If toolips can not be fixed, then we'll have to live with that. I'll remove the colouring and commit the file tomorrow.

I made a fix in the DLL.... well workaround. It removes the formatting code when sending the text to the exe meaning rather than being displayed as plain text, it is ignored.

OTOH considering the large "event" pop-ups (of the original tutorial system) there are (seem to be?) occasionally differences re the size of the font. Is that a Python feature?

I think the command for that is or something like that and it should be available where formatting is available.

If you do some tests with the files committed on Monday by me and run a mature 1650+ game for several turns, you'll see come up another issue which leads to the text being cut off, although a longer text (only due to the building name being longer) is not cut off.

I'm not 100% sure what you refer to, but it sounds interesting. Text being cut off is an annoying issue and I wish to fix it if possible. Now sure if it is possible in all cases other than shortening the text.