LOL
those causing that? i placed them with world builder for training for my ships xD besides fighting other EU nation ships, fighting pirate ships or searching for wreckages on the oceans you have no options to train your ships. annd fighting system is messed up already.
i don't have aother savegame for it, i mean i don't know when the pirate fleut is departing, because i lost them on the ocean
That's not important if it is caused by world builder. This not only makes it easier to recreate, but it also tells us that it likely won't happen without WB.
2 might still be a bug and 3 certainly is a bug so your toying around with WB has uncovered a real bug, which should be fixed.
That's not important if it is caused by world builder. This not only makes it easier to recreate, but it also tells us that it likely won't happen without WB.
2 might still be a bug and 3 certainly is a bug so your toying around with WB has uncovered a real bug, which should be fixed.
i have to disagree here. yes it might caused by WB. but just that i placed some fluyts as animals/barbarians/pirates doesn't mean, it won't happen without using WB. like devolution here mentioned: a privateer or a pirate frigate could attacking my fluyt and capturering it. then my fluyt is a transportship under animals/pirate banner and can flee to hig sea, to europe. then you have the same problem all over again. without any usage of WB.
besides that ....
what about the normal pirate frigate? i had it multiple times, that i attacked a pirat frigate with my ship of line and my ship retreated from battle. then the pirate frigate dissapears, and even with using WB i could not find it. even trough i checked every native cost settlement in range, and find nothing.
i mean if the pirate frigate just despawns, ok fine. but then some time later THAT exact same pirate ship appears again. that tells me it is not despawnd, it flet to the high sea, towards europe. does the system not have a problem mit a privateer sailing to europe or a pirate frigate, but when a captured fluyt - now also been a pirate ship - flees to europe the game crashes? that doesn't make sense in my head
Not possible, that is explicitly prevented by the code.
Barbarians can not capture anything. It is not allowed ... unless a bug got introduced recently in the capturing code.
Barbarians play by different rules than Colonial AIs ... a lot of stuff is locked for them in the code.
Considering Barbarian Pirate Figates: They could not sail to Europe in the past. (I had this in my consideration when I implemented it.)
However maybe something accidently got changed in the code ... so rechecking to be sure makes sense.
----
However:
Yes can easily f*** up the game by doing stuff in WB that is not part of normal game play. That is common sense actually for community mod.
Simply because it might not have been considered and investing endless effort to prevent all edge casesby design is not very reasonable.
Giving Natives or Barbarians or .... access to Units which they normally do not have:
Well ... you are gambling here ... your chances to get a CTD are pretty good ...
(Simply because it was most likely not fully considered and tested by the mod developers.)
@Nightinggale already said he thinks this case is worth to be analyzed and fixed.
(For now it is probably easiest to explicitly lock Barbarians from sailing to Europe / Africa / Port Royal in the code.)
Let us however please not make up bugs and have false claims about game logic thrown around.
Speculations without actually knowing the code do not speed up bugfixing.
----------
Just a comment:
Spoiler:
I had purposely left open the general possibility for the future to have Barbarian Ships sailing to "Europe" because of this feature.
(I was not sure how far this concept would be taken in future iterations ... maybe at some point it could have become a playable Nation ... even with Ships sailing to Tortuga ... who knows.) Pirate Nation
I already fixed the part, which causes a crash and indeed it was worthy to look into. The reason is that it's not barbarian specific. It applied to all AI players meaning every single player controlled by an AI would always assume that there are 3 units on the dock in Europe. As a result when a colonial player decides to pay to get one of the units, it would only consider the first 3 and the 4th would never be selected by the AI, only human players. This is one of those bugs, which is practically impossible to find through normal gameplay.
For now I'm kind of ignoring how the barbarian player handles units it can't access. That part is less of a concern to me.
Hi all,
I've discovered an unsightly feature (not necessarily a bug). One of my scouts has found a unit (slave overseer) in a bonus village. The village is completely surrounded by mountains and the discovered unt cannot cross mountains.
If the place were near one of my settlements, I could at least send pioneers to build roads. However, since the place is at the other end of the map, I'll probably have to disband the unit...
Hi all,
I've discovered an unsightly feature (not necessarily a bug). One of my scouts has found a unit (slave overseer) in a bonus village. The village is completely surrounded by mountains and the discovered unt cannot cross mountains.
If the place were near one of my settlements, I could at least send pioneers to build roads. However, since the place is at the other end of the map, I'll probably have to disband the unit...
Stuff like that is possible. Might happen once or twice in a game.
It is mostly bad luck with the randomness of the rewards and the map generation.
Still the effort to prevent such scenarios is too high.
(At least related to the benefit ... in my opinion.)
Also the logic necessary to prevent such a scenario might have impact on performance.
(e.g. In case you want to prevent this during Map generation by not placing goodies if fully surrounded by Mountains.)
Happened to me before as well. It is a bit annoying but not game breaking.
If something like that happens, I sometimes also simply open World Builder and correct the situation again.
Similar stuff you may happen if you e.g. find a Gold deposit in a place that cannot be reached by a City.
(Also happened to me several times ... still cannot really be prevented without impact on performance.)
Stuff like that is possible. Might happen once or twice in a game.
It is mostly bad luck with the randomness of the rewards and the map generation.
Still the effort to prevent such scenarios is too high.
(At least related to the benefit ... in my opinion.)
Also the logic necessary to prevent such a scenario might have severe impact on performance.
(e.g. In case you want to prevent this during Map generation by not placing goodies if fully surrounded by Mountains.)
Happened to me before as well. It is a bit annoying but not game breaking.
If something like that happens, I sometimes also simply open World Builder and correct the situation again.
Similar stuff you may have if you e.g. find a Gold deposit in a place that cannot be reached by a City.
(Also happened to me several times ... still cannot really be prevented without impact on performance.)
good solution to use world editor, or use the save and reload with different result option, its faster then open world builder, and avoids other situations like geting always the same goody, like 15 conquistadors, that happen to me... i like diversite! happy playing!
A while back, I implemented hypothetical pathfinding to address this issue and similar ones. This feature allows us to verify if a valid path exists using the unit's actual movement abilities before creating the unit. For example, we might require a viable path to either a city on the same landmass or to an ocean plot that can be accessed from Europe. If none of these conditions are met, the unit placement should be disallowed to prevent weird (and embarrassing) cases like this! Just to be clear, if a unit cannot be spawned, other outcomes will ofc be considered, so the player will not run into a "dud hut".
Because it reduces the strategical aspects of the game.
Units that can cross Mountains like e.g. Native Mercenaries or Rangers would become a lot less interesting.
But like always, modding and gaming is personal taste.
Because it reduces the strategical aspects of the game.
Units that can cross Mountains like e.g. Native Mercenaries or Rangers would become a lot less interesting.
Chaning 50 different places in balancing or even changing the New Movement System to solve such a rare issue ... it does not make sense to me.
This would cause much more harm than do any good ... the negative effects on gameplay and balancing would be worse than the current issue.
In other words, I rather live with this tiny issue than suffer the consequences and side effects of following up such an idea.
You would also not do a brain surgery just because somebody got a bit of headache once in a while.
A Unit being spawned that is surrounded by mountains ... it is possible ... but it is rare and also not game breaking.
In some maps you will never run in such an issue ... and even if you do ... it could be solved easily by cheating with WorldBuilder.
The simple questions in modding:
Do you care enough / or does it bother you enough to invest your time and effort?
Does gameplay improvement of your solution outweight the negative side effects it might introduce ?
In this case for me the answer is clearly: "No" for both questions.
Anybody who answers these questiosn with "Yes", might give it a shot though.
A Unit being spawned that is surrounded by mountains ... it is possible ... but it is rare and also not game breaking.
In some maps you will never run in such an issue ... and even if you do ... it could be solved easily by cheating with WorldBuilder.
Whats wrong with the trading automation feature? For me its not working at all, i tried manually setting up trade routes and assign wagons to it and also setting up to export and import goods within colonies and chose automating the wagons but all they do is just sitting in the colonies and never pick up any goods and not doinf anything. Why is this not working?
Setting import amount for e.g. Coffee and also setting Export amount (in production city) and set automatic transport to the wagons.
Then such a wagon travels to export city and bring some coffee to the import city.
Sometimes they stop in situations of danger (animals, ...)
Setting import amount for e.g. Coffee and also setting Export amount (in production city) and set automatic transport to the wagons.
Then such a wagon travels to export city and bring some coffee to the import city.
Sometimes they stop in situations of danger (animals, ...)
But it becomes a nightmare when you have lots of cities and distant colonies... The amount of required wagons increases exponentially slowing down the game.. Mid game i spend hours planning the regional logistical centers with local distribution networks.. And then adding resources to the network creates more tedious complications.. I have the feeling that having a menu like in Railroad Tycoon 2 could be a solution...
I proposed that quite a while ago. Make a new concept in the game, which works like trade routes in classic colonization. You list colonies, then list what is picked up or dropped off at each location. Last units can attach to a trade route table. If one is modified, it will affect all units using said route. If a unit leaves, the settings of the route will be kept.
The idea is to add this as a new concept in parallel with the existing automated trade systems so it becomes an addon rather than a replacement.
In most games, adding an entirely new data structure like this and get it to work with savegames and network can be tricky, but that would actually be the easy part for us with our level of access. I suspect the GUI could be the hardest part. Still no plan on how to handle that. The RT2 schedule setup is a good idea and having a map with clickable colonies would be awesome. However I wonder how to accomplish that.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
