5937 Feedback

Describe your experience with the latest version of FreeOrion to help us improve it.

Moderator: Oberlus

Forum rules
Always mention the exact version of FreeOrion you are testing.

When reporting an issue regarding the AI, if possible provide the relevant AI log file and a save game file that demonstrates the issue.
Message
Author
MiniMe
Space Squid
Posts: 75
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:49 pm

Re: 5937 Feedback

#31 Post by MiniMe »

Omg, that explains everything and i am sorry for all the trouble/work i caused.

I thought outposts cannot be placed on habitable planets anymore since several test-releases (which made some sense to me, so i never questioned this).
But as a tiny excuse: it is hard to find out "secrets" like this...i would have never thought about having to select the ship manually to get the button for habitable planets.

Again, sorry for the work i caused :(

User avatar
Bigjoe5
Designer and Programmer
Posts: 2058
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 6:33 pm
Location: Orion

Re: 5937 Feedback

#32 Post by Bigjoe5 »

MiniMe wrote:But as a tiny excuse: it is hard to find out "secrets" like this...i would have never thought about having to select the ship manually to get the button for habitable planets.
I don't think I like that either - I might change it.
Warning: Antarans in dimensional portal are closer than they appear.

User avatar
Dilvish
AI Lead and Programmer Emeritus
Posts: 4768
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:25 pm

Re: 5937 Feedback

#33 Post by Dilvish »

Bigjoe5 wrote:I don't think I like that either - I might change it.
I agree, sounds like a good idea. It's a bit too commonly a good thing to do for us to make it so difficult. I suspect the original motivation was primarily to avoid interference between auto-colonize and auto-outpost, but I expect a bit of code can sort that out.
If I provided any code, scripts or other content here, it's released under GPL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0

User avatar
Dilvish
AI Lead and Programmer Emeritus
Posts: 4768
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:25 pm

Re: 5937 Feedback

#34 Post by Dilvish »

Dilvish wrote:That said, the AI currently does its own calcs for that expectation, and it's possible there is an error in my code that I haven't discovered yet. So I am interested in getting documentation on cases that appear to show an AI colony being planted where it shouldn't.
I did just observe such a situation in a game, & so was able to review the logs, & add some AI debugging code to help figure out what was going on. There was indeed a bug in my code & I've now committed a fix.
If I provided any code, scripts or other content here, it's released under GPL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0

MiniMe
Space Squid
Posts: 75
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:49 pm

Re: 5937 Feedback

#35 Post by MiniMe »

A colony in Ascella on the screenshot has the Caretaker's Fruit special and the foucs is set on Growth.
All my organic colonies are receiving the population bonus.

I just conquered the Gysache colony Majipoor. The system is connected via supply to all my other colonies.
Nevertheless, this colony is not receiving the pop-bonus from Caretaker's Fruit.
Adding to that, the Gysache Good Population bonus is showing negatively.

That Gysache planet has the special Tectonically Unstable.
Is this all correct?

(I attached the save game incase this is a bug: 5893, Windows, Full Installer)
Image
Attachments
specials2.zip
(616.56 KiB) Downloaded 21 times

User avatar
Dilvish
AI Lead and Programmer Emeritus
Posts: 4768
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:25 pm

Re: 5937 Feedback

#36 Post by Dilvish »

MiniMe wrote:A colony in Ascella on the screenshot has the Caretaker's Fruit special and the foucs is set on Growth. I just conquered the Gysache colony Majipoor. The system is connected via supply to all my other colonies. Nevertheless, this colony is not receiving the pop-bonus from Caretaker's Fruit. Adding to that, the Gysache Good Population bonus is showing negatively. That Gysache planet has the special Tectonically Unstable. Is this all correct?
Yes, it is. The Tectonically Unstable has nothing to do with it. Several months back, I believe, Growth Focus (from specials or Homeworld focus) was modified so that it would not apply to a planet if it had a negative population target before taking into account the growth focus. So they can raise it up from zero, but not from -1.

That a species growth bonus, like the Gyisache have, would wind up negative if the target pop was negative, was, to my recollection, a known result from the current effect structuring, and was deemed ok.
If I provided any code, scripts or other content here, it's released under GPL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0

User avatar
eleazar
Design & Graphics Lead Emeritus
Posts: 3858
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:09 pm
Location: USA — midwest

Re: 5937 Feedback

#37 Post by eleazar »

Dilvish wrote:
Bigjoe5 wrote:I don't think I like that either - I might change it.
I agree, sounds like a good idea.
Agreed.

Dilvish wrote:That a species growth bonus, like the Gyisache have, would wind up negative if the target pop was negative, was, to my recollection, a known result from the current effect structuring, and was deemed ok.
I don't remember. That doesn't seem desirable in itself, but what would it be 125% of to that it excluded negative boosts?

I assume the same effect happens in reverse to species with population maluses? That certainly isn't good.

User avatar
Bigjoe5
Designer and Programmer
Posts: 2058
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 6:33 pm
Location: Orion

Re: 5937 Feedback

#38 Post by Bigjoe5 »

eleazar wrote:I don't remember. That doesn't seem desirable in itself, but what would it be 125% of to that it excluded negative boosts?
I seem to recall Geoff adding a Max function for scripting, though I might just be thinking of statistics. If that's so though, those bonuses could be changed to be the max of their intended value, or 0.
eleazar wrote:I assume the same effect happens in reverse to species with population maluses? That certainly isn't good.
It shouldn't ever make the actual target positive though, since the malus would be (hopefully) less than 100%. It would just look weird, much like Good Population giving an apparent-but-meaningless penalty looks weird.
Warning: Antarans in dimensional portal are closer than they appear.

User avatar
Dilvish
AI Lead and Programmer Emeritus
Posts: 4768
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:25 pm

Re: 5937 Feedback

#39 Post by Dilvish »

eleazar wrote:
Dilvish wrote:That a species growth bonus, like the Gyisache have, would wind up negative if the target pop was negative, was, to my recollection, a known result from the current effect structuring, and was deemed ok.
I don't remember. That doesn't seem desirable in itself, but what would it be 125% of to that it excluded negative boosts?
I assume the same effect happens in reverse to species with population maluses? That certainly isn't good.
I just worked on what *should* have been a fix for this, but was stymied by something I think counts as a bug: viewtopic.php?p=60493#p60493
Last edited by Dilvish on Sun Apr 21, 2013 3:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
If I provided any code, scripts or other content here, it's released under GPL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 12821
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: 5937 Feedback

#40 Post by Geoff the Medio »

Dilvish wrote:I just worked on what *should* have been a fix for this, but was stymied by something I think counts as a bug: viewtopic.php?p=60490#p60490
I presume the bug is not that that topic doesn't exist?

User avatar
Dilvish
AI Lead and Programmer Emeritus
Posts: 4768
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:25 pm

Re: 5937 Feedback

#41 Post by Dilvish »

sorry, immediately after posting here I realized I should have put the first post into the Programming forum not the main forum, so I deleted and reposted it, and it took me a couple mins to get the attachments redone correctly. The link above is corrected now.
If I provided any code, scripts or other content here, it's released under GPL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0

MiniMe
Space Squid
Posts: 75
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:49 pm

Re: 5937 Feedback

#42 Post by MiniMe »

Dilvish wrote:
MiniMe wrote:A colony in Ascella on the screenshot has the Caretaker's Fruit special and the foucs is set on Growth. I just conquered the Gysache colony Majipoor. The system is connected via supply to all my other colonies. Nevertheless, this colony is not receiving the pop-bonus from Caretaker's Fruit. Adding to that, the Gysache Good Population bonus is showing negatively. That Gysache planet has the special Tectonically Unstable. Is this all correct?
Yes, it is. The Tectonically Unstable has nothing to do with it. Several months back, I believe, Growth Focus (from specials or Homeworld focus) was modified so that it would not apply to a planet if it had a negative population target before taking into account the growth focus. So they can raise it up from zero, but not from -1.

That a species growth bonus, like the Gyisache have, would wind up negative if the target pop was negative, was, to my recollection, a known result from the current effect structuring, and was deemed ok.
Thanks for explaining.

Is there a reason why a special's pop-bonus is not added if the target pop is negative?

- it would be more consistent if those specials are always applied instead of having an extra rule like in this case (which doesnt really make sense, imo, and just complicates things).
- it would slow down the pop-loss per turn and give the owner more time/chance to research the needed tech (if additionally the Gysache pop-malus were removed, the target pop would be 0 instead of -1.25).

User avatar
Dilvish
AI Lead and Programmer Emeritus
Posts: 4768
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:25 pm

Re: 5937 Feedback

#43 Post by Dilvish »

MiniMe wrote: (if additionally the Gysache pop-malus were removed, the target pop would be 0 instead of -1.25).
It shows on your screen that the pop malus here is just 0.25, as it currently should be, not 1.25
If I provided any code, scripts or other content here, it's released under GPL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0

MiniMe
Space Squid
Posts: 75
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:49 pm

Re: 5937 Feedback

#44 Post by MiniMe »

Target pop would be 0 with Caretaker's Fruit and without the malus.

User avatar
Dilvish
AI Lead and Programmer Emeritus
Posts: 4768
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:25 pm

Re: 5937 Feedback

#45 Post by Dilvish »

MiniMe wrote:Target pop would be 0 with Caretaker's Fruit and without the malus.
If you got the benefit of the fruit, there would be no malus -- 25% of zero is zero.

The reason for putting in the non-neg target pop restriction was to make it so that you actually needed certain growth techs to be able to populate nonfavorable planets. Otherwise, even hostile planets could be colonizable with just GRO_SUB_HAB and 4 growth foci (homeworld + 3 specials), and that was deemed to overly facilitate early colony spamming.
If I provided any code, scripts or other content here, it's released under GPL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0

Post Reply