AI foresters not working + AI not settling ports
Bug #1484941 reported by
king of nowhere
This bug affects 1 person
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
widelands |
Invalid
|
Undecided
|
Unassigned |
Bug Description
the attached savegame is after some 4 hours of game. You can see that yellow player has no trees in its land. it has foresters, but they are not growing any tree. note that the map started with many trees. It is the second time I playtest that map, and I already encountered the same problem, with another player.
Also, you can see that the orange player has an expedition ship going round and round, and while it has one place to make a port (the map is symmetrical, look at black or green player) it keeps sendign the boat round and round without a purpose. it has been doing so for hours now.
tags: | added: computerplayer savegame seafaring |
To post a comment you must log in.
hi,
only shortly now, as I am on vacation :)
First, it is bad to join two issues in one bug report, how can I acknowledge one issue and reject the second one? :)
First - wood issue - if player has enough logs on stock, it stops rangers, then if stocks get below a treshold, rangers are resumed and eventually new ones are built. So I presume that that player has enough logs on stock.
As for building colonization port, every portspace is checked for size of island (or land generally) if too small, it is not considered as candidate, also AI counts how far it is to nearest owned territory, if it runs into owned teritory in some "walking distance", the spot is rejected. Though that distance is being decreased with time so after some time it is able to accept port spaces that were rejected before. the logic here is to prevent building colony on a spot where chances for success (keeping the place) are low. Of course, parameters can be tweaked. Also I think if border of other player's territory is on a coast (overreaching over water), this is also considered as a neighbor, though logically this should be ignored. This flaw is present also on other places in AI code.
I am open to discussion, of course....