Brit Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 An early update. This is mostly just bug fixes. Notable changes/fixes: - When the AI sends a "violating my borders" message, it will tell you exactly which units are violating its borders - Reduced the amount of memory used by borders - Fixed a bug that would cause the AI to falsely complain about border violations - Fixed a bug with the rules-editor that could cause the game to crash - Players can see other players borders if they are near their own borders - Fixed a crash during Turn-Processing. It's related to expired Trade Agreements Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deguar Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 This particular battleship and bit of Rommel's border at Beijing are causing a few technically spurious violation messages. Why technically spurious, because the battleship never physically crosses the dotted red line (Rommel's Border) although his view and radar range does. In addition although the violation message reports it as "battleship (3)" the link to go to the offending unit couldn't actually physically jump to the afforementioned battleship. Evidently Rommel's violation check is extending slightly farther than the red dots suggest, which is why the "find offending unit" algorithm is only partly working. Maybe the red dots got "squished back" slightly by the close presence of the oil resources I own, or it's the penninsula that's causing it. More likely is that the violation message got triggered by the battleship clipping my own border (generated by that oil (6) resource) and it inadvertendly cascaded down to Rommel being the first AI. Yup it's the same game I got a host of messages from Rommel (1), De Gaulle (2) and Zukhov (3) between about turn 50-150 when I was pinned to the top of the map fighting Yamato (4) and had no units near their borders Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadmeat1471 Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 am i the only one who thinks sending ships near the border of an enemy MIGHT be construed as hostile? I really dont see the problem. You send military units near their border, and they get annoyed, seems fair to me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deguar Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 am i the only one who thinks sending ships near the border of an enemy MIGHT be construed as hostile? I really dont see the problem. You send military units near their border, and they get annoyed, seems fair to me? The point is, they are only supposed to get annoyed when you actually impinge on the border and the other point was it's a demonstration of a cascade bug. When I clip my own borders with naval units it can cascade down generating violation messages from AIs:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALookingInView Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 Thanks for the update. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadmeat1471 Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 The point is, they are only supposed to get annoyed when you actually impinge on the border and the other point was it's a demonstration of a cascade bug. When I clip my own borders with naval units it can cascade down generating violation messages from AIs:) you miss the point. Massing on ones borders is not a 'friendly' or 'un-responsive' move. It is a hostile move, the AI sees it as such, and replies as such. It may be a bug, but i quite like it for such reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit Posted January 5, 2010 Author Share Posted January 5, 2010 This particular battleship and bit of Rommel's border at Beijing are causing a few technically spurious violation messages. Huh. By the way, I just wanted to confirm that this is happening in the latest version - version 1.01.2609. [EDIT] Whoops. I didn't realize that you posted in the Version 1.01.2609 thread. I guess you are using the latest version. [/EDIT] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deguar Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 Huh. By the way, I just wanted to confirm that this is happening in the latest version - version 1.01.2609. [EDIT] Whoops. I didn't realize that you posted in the Version 1.01.2609 thread. I guess you are using the latest version. [/EDIT] Heh, the replay game gadget is very cool and useful. I picked up the new version this morning at 10:18 so that piccie was taken under 1.01.2609. From the replay it appears that the battleship triggered a violation while clipping my border at the oil resource (this is was when the picture was taken) , then a couple of turns later the 2 destroyer group (near De Gaulle's tank in the picture) triggered a violation at almost the same point on my border, then I had a further violation from the battleship as it clipped my border near my steel (5) resource. I've been using the game setup of :- Dex Rommel De Gaulle Zhukov Yamatto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawk Posted January 6, 2010 Share Posted January 6, 2010 Has something happened with satelite movement? It barely moves each turn (standard 1900-2030 ruleset). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Matt Lamb Posted January 6, 2010 Share Posted January 6, 2010 I am playing my beloved world map with the latest patch and there are some comments which I feel are worth making. 1. I really like the borders- they really work for me. 2. Diplomacy with the AI is still rather frustrating. I got the Germans up to 88% (very friendly but it took me ages) but couldnt push it any further than that despite additional sales of oil, food, sharing technology, etc. After I stopped showering them with gifts their attitude slowly declined again (for no discernable reason) and it now down to 71%. I was trying to get it high enough that they would share maps or sign an alliance but they just wouldnt have it. Is there a certain % you need (more than 90%? 95? 99?) before the AI will play ball in terms of alliances and so on? 3. The AI still seems rather inert. Germany is fighting China across the Urals and I have a satellite above the battlefield. There are two huge armies facing each other but they are not attacking at all- just sitting there and have done for dozens of turns (is it a shortage of oil??). Furthermore, following an initial flurry of declarations of war, battles and peace treaties at the start of the game the AI seems to have gone to sleep happy just to build up huge armies and do nothing with them. I suspect this stockpiling of troops is one reason the game really slows up after about 100 turns. 4. Still not much use of planes. The Americans have them but are just sat there in the USA being isolationist. The Spanish attacked one of my battleships with a lone dive bomber which was a first but neither the Chinese, Turks or Germans have bothered with them at all leaving me master of the skies! However, seeing my expensive and painstakingly massed tactical bombers being shot down by crippled Japanese tanks makes me wonder whether the AI is being smarter than I think not wasting its time on them. 5. The AI is now subject to the same rules as the human on food, steel and oil (which is fine) but what now happens is that if an AI empire is short of food their cities shrink to nothing (Tokyo was down to 0 by the time I occupied it). The AI doesnt seem to do what the human does- play the world market to sell oil and buy food for example. It certainly doesnt invest in the new technologies or buildings which boost its food production. It seems as it the food enhancements (fisheries, etc) were added but the AI was not updated to use them. As a result the AI empires grind to a halt. I know that tanks stop with no oil but I would have thought that food shortages would lead to land units being disbanded. The Turkish Empire has very small cities but still hundreds of infantry units. I would have thought that shortage of food should reduce your forces in some way. 6. When I set up ongoing trade agreements with the market it sometimes terminates them abruptly for no reason meaning you have to start them again. 7. Hope that rivers are still on the cards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit Posted January 8, 2010 Author Share Posted January 8, 2010 Thanks for the feedback. 2. Diplomacy with the AI is still rather frustrating. I got the Germans up to 88% (very friendly but it took me ages) but couldnt push it any further than that despite additional sales of oil, food, sharing technology, etc. After I stopped showering them with gifts their attitude slowly declined again (for no discernable reason) and it now down to 71%. Most of the events in the game will have temporary effects on foreign relations. If you give them gifts, it will raise their opinion of you for a while, but it will slowly decline back to where it was. If you violate his borders, it will lower his opinion of you for a while, but it will slowly increase back to where it was. I was trying to get it high enough that they would share maps or sign an alliance but they just wouldnt have it. Is there a certain % you need (more than 90%? 95? 99?) before the AI will play ball in terms of alliances and so on? Yeah, I am being a little bit gunshy with the AI right now. One of my concerns was that the Human player could out-maneuver the AI in terms of foreign relations. For example, being able to consistently play two AI's off of each other. So, I've been a little slow in opening up all the options with the AI to avoid exploits. 3. The AI still seems rather inert. Germany is fighting China across the Urals and I have a satellite above the battlefield.... One of the issues with the AI right now is that he tends to be overly conservative, and prefers to attack only when he has an advantage in forces. Obviously, this is a problem if two players have nearly the same power because neither of them have an power advantage. 4. Still not much use of planes... Yeah, I need to have the AI integrate planes into it's battle-strategy more fully. 5. The AI is now subject to the same rules as the human on food, steel and oil (which is fine) but what now happens is that if an AI empire is short of food their cities shrink to nothing (Tokyo was down to 0 by the time I occupied it).... Yeah, that was one of my concerns as I was getting rid of these AI-cheats. One of the related issues is that the AI should become extra-aggressive when they have more units than they can support (they can burn-up some of their units in combat, and hopefully get some new territory or, at least, hurt the other players). So, I think that's part of the solution. The AI does buy from the open-market, but won't currently send messages to the player to buy resources. 6. When I set up ongoing trade agreements with the market it sometimes terminates them abruptly for no reason meaning you have to start them again. I'll look into it. 7. Hope that rivers are still on the cards. Yes. I've been thinking lately about how exactly to implement them in the game, and how to get the random-map generator to create them. I'm not sure when they'll be in an update, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit Posted January 8, 2010 Author Share Posted January 8, 2010 Has something happened with satelite movement? It barely moves each turn (standard 1900-2030 ruleset). In earlier versions, the satellites were able to jump from one location to another. That was actually a bug. The next update will bump up the movement rate a bit compared to the version you currently have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawk Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 In earlier versions, the satellites were able to jump from one location to another. That was actually a bug. The next update will bump up the movement rate a bit compared to the version you currently have. I quite liked that feature. Oh well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deguar Posted January 11, 2010 Share Posted January 11, 2010 It's very rare now, but I still seem to be able to trigger them. This is a full 1.01.2609 game (i.e. not started in an earlier version). I'm at war with Yamato (4th AI), cross and actually travel up his border for half a turn with my Destroyer (Class 3) down near Melborne and close to an Oil (6) resource still owned by Yamato. Rommel (1st AI) pops up with a "your Destroyer (class 3) has violated my borders" message This was on turn 103 and is the first spurious border violation, the other seven violations up till this point being entirely my doing. I'm sure it's a wild coincidence that like my last one in the previous game it got triggered by the border of an oil resource. ~Edit~ Me and my big mouth, start talking about strange coincidences and what happens on turn 105? The game turn basically got stuck at "sending" and then went kerblamo a minute later. ~Edit 2~ Definitely must have been a coincidence, by a stroke of luck the Autosave was exactly on turn 105, I made similar moves and this time it got to 106 quite happily ~Edit 3~ On turn 110 a cruiser at almost the same border point, except I own the oil resource and attached border now, and a destroyer clipping a border attached to a fish resource slightly to the north of the oil one both get reported by Rommel for violating his border. Both units were clipping my border at the time and several unit widths away from Rommel's border. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jorissimo Posted January 17, 2010 Share Posted January 17, 2010 Thanks for the feedback. Yeah, I am being a little bit gunshy with the AI right now. One of my concerns was that the Human player could out-maneuver the AI in terms of foreign relations. For example, being able to consistently play two AI's off of each other. So, I've been a little slow in opening up all the options with the AI to avoid exploits. You should be able to play two off of each other. I mean, that's the whole point of diplomacy. Look at a game like civilization. It's not a problem there. I'm in a game where I gave the Japanese a lot of iron i exchange for very little oil, I gave them a city, and I even declared war on their enemies. Now they're at 84%, but they won't do anything for me. I mean, if you really go for it, and you get something back, like an alliance or map information, then it isn't an exploit, is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bugwar Posted January 17, 2010 Share Posted January 17, 2010 I do not know if it is a bug or a feature, but short of war, how do I convince a neutral AI player to get his ships back across the border to his waters? I support the right of transit and freedom of the seas as much as any law-abiding nation-state, but I do not think that parking foreign warships off my coast is considered a confidence building gesture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit Posted January 18, 2010 Author Share Posted January 18, 2010 Yes, I agree with you - to a certain extent. Being able to play AI players off of each other is good, but I want to make sure that human players can't be too good at it. I wouldn't want the human player to be able to consistently use the AI players as puppets. But, yes, right now, the AI doesn't cooperate enough with other players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit Posted January 18, 2010 Author Share Posted January 18, 2010 I do not know if it is a bug or a feature, but short of war, how do I convince a neutral AI player to get his ships back across the border to his waters? I support the right of transit and freedom of the seas as much as any law-abiding nation-state, but I do not think that parking foreign warships off my coast is considered a confidence building gesture. I need to add this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts