The previous two commits put the same number of islands closest to
each continent. This one makes their planned sizes match: instead of
rolling dice separately for each island's size, we roll dice only for
the first continent's islands. The other continent's islands get the
same sizes.
Actual island sizes still differ when islands can't be grown to their
planned size. To be addressed next.
fairland-test needs a tweak to avoid loss of test coverage.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
The previous commit made island distribution more fair by placing
islands close to a continent in turn. This is still unfair when
fairland can't place all the islands.
Make grow_islands() fail when it can't place all islands, and main()
start over then, just like it does when grow_continents() fails.
Deities can no longer fill the world with islands by asking for a
impossibly high number of islands. Tolerable loss, I think.
fairland-test needs a tweak to avoid loss of test coverage.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
fairland places islands of random size in random places, subject to
minimum distances. Results are often less than fair, in particular
when the number of islands per continent is low: some continents have
more land nearby than others. Increasing distances between islands
doesn't help much. Deities commonly run fairland until they find the
result acceptable.
The next few commits will tackle this issue. As a first step, this
one places islands closest to continents in turn, so that each
continent is closest to the same number of islands. A continent is
closest to an island when it is closest to each of its sectors.
The number of islands must be a multiple of the number of continents
now.
Since fairland may be unable to place all islands, a continent may
still get fewer islands than it should. The next commit will address
that.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
grow_one_sector() picks a coastal start sector, then moves along the
coast trying to add an adjacent sector to the island.
It operates in spiking mode with a chance of @sp percent.
When spiking, the neighbors with sea on both sides are preferred. For
instance, when the area around the sector being considered looks like
this
- .
- - .
- .
then the neighbor in direction j is preferred, because it has sea in
directions u and n. No other neighbor is preferred.
The start sector is the first coastal sector found in a linear search
in growth order, starting at the last sector grown when spiking, or
else at a random sector. This is new_try().
grow_one_sector() tries adding a neighbor in clockwise order, starting
with a random direction. When spiking, it goes around the clock two
times, trying only preferred sectors in the first round.
When it can't add a neighbor, it moves to the next coastal sector with
next_coast().
Taken together, this randomly picks one element from the set of
pairs (S, D) where the sector in direction D off base sector S can be
added to the island. How does the probability distribution look like?
Bias: a sector's probability to be added to the island land increases
with the number of base sectors it is adjacent to. This tends to fill
in bays and lakes, which is fine.
Bias: coastal sectors following runs of non-coastal ones are more
likely to be picked as start sector. Perhaps less of an issue when
spiking, where the pick is not intended to be random.
Bias: a pair (S, D) is more likely to be picked when base sector S
follows a run of coastal sectors that aren't base sectors, or
direction D follows a a run of directions that don't permit growth.
The impact of these two biases is not obvious. I suspect they are the
reason behind the tendency of large islands to curve around obstacles
in a counterclockwise direction. This can result in multiple islands
wrapping around a central one like layers of an onion.
Bug: the move along the coast is broken. next_coast() searches for
the first adjacent sea in clockwise order, starting in direction g,
then from there clockwise for a sector belonging to the island.
Amazingly, this does move along the coast in a clockwise direction.
It can get caught in a loop, though. Consider this island:
-
- - -
-
If we start at the central sector (marked 0), the search along the
coast progresses like this:
1
- 0 2
-
It reaches the central sector again after three moves (to 1, to 2,
back to 0), and stops without having reached the two sectors on the
left.
If we start with the leftmost sector, the search loops: 0, 1, 2, 3, 1,
...
2
0 1 3
-
grow_one_sector() ensures termination by giving up after 200 moves.
Nuts!
Because of this, grow_one_sector() can fail when it shouldn't, either
because the search along the coast stops early, or goes into a loop,
or simply because there's too much coast. The latter should not
happen in common usage, where island sizes are in the tens, not the
hundreds.
Clean up this hot mess by rewriting grow_one_sector() to pick a sector
adjacent to the island with a clearly defined probability, as follows.
Use weighted random sampling to pick one sector from the set of
possible adjacent sectors.
When spiking, a sector's weight increases with number of adjacent sea
sectors. This directs the growth away from land, resulting in spikes.
When not spiking, the weight increases with the number of adjacent
land sectors. This makes the island more rounded.
To visit the adjacent sectors, grow_one_sector() iterates over the
neighbors of all island sectors, skipping neighbors that have been
visited already.
This produces comparable results for low spike percentages. The weird
onions are gone, though.
Noticeable differences emerge as the spike percentage grows. Whereas
the old one produces long snakes that tend to curve into themselves,
the new one produces shorter spikes extending from a core, a bit like
tentacles. Moreover, islands are more centered on their first sector
now. The probability for coastal capitals is lower, in particular for
moderate spike percentages.
I consider this improvements.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
A sector is admissible for island placement when land can be grown in
every sector within a certain distance.
place_island() picks a random start sector, then searches linearly for
an admissible sector. If it finds one, it places the island there.
Else, it reduces the distance by one and tries again. It fails when
none is found even for distance zero.
Trying with extra distance is obviously meant to reduce the risk of
islands from running into each other without need. Initial distance
is @di, the minimum distance between continents, which doesn't really
make sense, and is undocumented.
Bug: place_island() never tries the start sector.
Bias: placement probability is higher for sectors immediately
following inadmissible sectors. Because of that, islands are more
often placed to the right of existing islands. Players could exploit
that to guide their search for land.
Rewrite place_island() to pick sectors with equal probability,
dropping the undocumented extra distance feature. If it's missed, we
can bring it back.
The new code visits each sector once. The old code visits only one
sector in the best case, but each sector several times in the worst
case. fairland performance improves measurably for crowded setups
with large @di, else it suffers. For instance, Hvy Fever example
given in the commit before previous runs seven times faster for me.
With @di reduced to 2, its run time more than doubles. Not that it
matters.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
fairland can create fewer and smaller islands than the user requested.
Report like this:
No room for island #13
6 stunted islands
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
"fairland: unstable drift -- try increasing DRIFT_MAX" is confusing:
it looks like an error, but isn't, and increasing DRIFT_MAX requires a
recompile. I'm not sure it can happen. Replace by just "unstable
drift".
"fairland: error -- continent %c had no room to grow!" is pretty
redundant: it's always followed by "Only managed to grow %d out of %d
sectors." and then "ERROR: World not large enough to hold
continents". All it adds is which of the continents failed to grow,
and that's not actionable. Drop the message.
The message sequence "designating sectors...", "adding resources...",
"setting coastal flags...", and "writing to sectors file..." is a bit
of a lie as these four tasks aren't actually done one after the other.
Replace by just "writing to sectors file..."
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Reduce number of islands in fairland run "plain" so there's plenty of
space for them. Scarce space is still covered by run "stunted".
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Rename the existing fairland run to "plain".
New run "stunted" to cover larger minimal distances, islands
that can't fully grow, and islands that can't be placed.
New run "no-spike" to cover 0% spike.
New run "spike" to cover high spike percentage, mountains and -i.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
The map fairland shows has absolute 0,0 in the top-left corner, while
POGO's map * has it in the center. Shift fairland's map to match
POGO's.
The map shows sea as '.', island sectors as '%', capitals as '#',
mountains as '^', and other continental sectors as a letter or digit
that encodes the continent number modulo 62. When a continent has no
"other" sectors, its continent number is not shown. Remove this
pathological case by using letter/digit for capitals, and '#' for
other continental sectors.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Delete stray EMPIRE_CHECK_ACCEPT=. Goes back all the way to commit
5a1544f92 "tests/empdump: New; exercising the empdump utility".
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Damage to a ship or land unit, say via pinpoint bombing, doesn't
damage loaded planes and land units.
Damage to a sector, say via strategic bombing, doesn't damage ships
there, but it does damage planes, even when loaded on a land unit (but
not when loaded on a ship), and land units, even when loaded on a land
unit or a ship.
This makes no sense. Sector damage spills over to land units that way
since Chainsaw 3 added them, and to planes since 4.0.9.
Change sectdamage() not to damage land units and planes loaded on
ships or land units.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Make lnd_prewrite() and pln_prewrite() ensure that land units and
missiles loaded on a land unit or ship are never fortified / hardened.
This takes care of edit neglecting to zap fortification on load.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
We generally preserve the invariant "land units and missiles loaded on
a land unit or ship are never fortified / hardened": fortify and
harden refuse to touch embarked land units and missiles, load and
lload zap land unit fortification on load, and refuse to load hardened
missiles.
The exception is edit, which happily fortifies embarked land units
(edit u key 'F'), hardens embarked missiles (edit p key 'F'), loads
fortified land units (edit u keys 'S' and 'Y') and hardened planes
(edit p keys 's' and 'y').
Fix the first two by correcting the new value's upper limit to zero
for embarked land units and planes. The next commit will take care of
the rest.
The fix is visible in tests where test setup fortifies land units with
"edit u * F ?..." without excepting embarked ones.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Demonstrates that edit leaves a missile's hardening intact on load.
Loading fortified land units is already covered, and also leaves
fortification intact.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
load_plane_ship() and load_plane_land() duplicate code to check
whether a plane can be loaded, except for the phrasing of one message.
Factor out into plane_loadable(). tran_plane() has equivalent code,
but wants different messages, which makes de-duplication unattractive.
load_land_ship() and load_land_land() duplicate code to check whether
a land unit can be loaded. Factor out into land_loadable().
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
load and unload silently skip unowned sectors, unlike lload and
lunload. Probably goes back to Chainsaw option ALLYHARBOR.
Drop that. Deities can now load and unload in unowned harbors and
canals. Mortals are now notified they can't.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
These commands suppress some error messages when ships, planes or land
units involved aren't explicitly selected by UID. Without this, a
command like "unload plane 80 *" would complain about every plane not
on ship#80.
Correct a few issues with this error suppression:
1. We don't suppress the error when we can't load/unload a ship or
land unit because it's on the trading block. Do suppress it.
2. We suppress the error message when we can't load/unload due to
foreign sector ownership in all but one places. Fix that place.
3. Messages about explicitly selected planes and land units to load
are still suppressed when the carrier isn't selected explicitly.
Change this to suppress regardless of the carrier.
3. We suppress the error when a carrier has no room. Don't, because
it's a potentially confusing silent failure.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Attempting to unload land units from a carrier that can't carry any
prompts for land units to unload, while attempting to unload planes or
load land units or planes fails without prompting.
Fix this inconsistency by making unload and lunload fail early for
land units, just like they do for planes.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
load and lload skip foreign ships unless explicitly named, and
suppress some error messages for ships not explicitly named. Makes
sense, except the check for "explicitly named" is flawed: it checks
whether the argument starts with a digit. Works as intended for lists
like 1/2/3. Broken for areas that happen to start with a digit, such
as 0:9,0:5. Visible in the load-tend test.
Screwed up when the feature was added in Empire 2.
Fix the obvious way: test for NS_LIST instead. While there, drop the
p && *p guard, because it's always true after snxtitem().
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Unlike tend, ltend does nothing silently when asked to tend zero
commodities. This may leave the player guessing why the command did
nothing. Report the reason and fail the command, just like tend does.
While there, improve the prompt to match tend's.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
We silently ignore target ships that can't take any more of the tended
commodity. This may leave the player guessing why the command did
nothing. Report the reason like this:
cs cargo ship (#150) can't hold more guns
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
We report
frg frigate (#170) cannot hold any uncompensated workers
only when tending from target to tender, not for the other direction.
Report it there, too.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Foreign target ships are silently ignored when tending civilians.
This may leave the player guessing why the command did nothing.
Report the reason similar to load does:
Your civilians refuse to board cs cargo ship (#162)!
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Target ships that can't be tended at all are silently ignored. This
may leave the player guessing why the command did nothing. Report
them, but only when explicitly named.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Tending to a dead ship destroys, and tending from a dead ship revives.
Has always been that way. Not actually a problem for ltend anymore,
because the dead can't carry or be carried since commit 64a53c90f0,
v4.3.17.
Fix by checking !own in addition to !player->owner
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
The bulletin reports the total amount tended to all ships so far.
Broken in commit 1de48e53da (v4.3.0), not fixed in commit 7cc14a2c9a
(v4.3.1). Fix the bulletin to report the amount tended to this ship.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Report the exact ship, like
frg frigate (#170) cannot hold any uncompensated workers
instead of reporting just the ship type, like
A frg frigate cannot hold any uncompensated workers
This is a bit more useful when tending to more than one ship.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Transferring commodities from tenders to targets continues with the
next tender when a target can't hold this kind of commodity.
Transferring them from targets to tenders fails (ltend) or stops
tending (tend) when a tender can't hold this kind of commodity. Has
always been that way.
Change the latter to continue with the next tender.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Transferring commodities from tenders to targets fails when a tender
doesn't have any. Transferring them from targets to tenders continues
with the next target when a target doesn't have any. Has always been
that way.
Change the former to continue with the next tender.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
We silently ignore foreign ships and land units. This may leave the
player guessing why the command did nothing. Report explicitly named
ones like this
You don't own ship #160!
except for tend's target ships. Nice reporting is a bit more involved
there, because you can tend to foreign target ships as long as they're
friendly. Left for later.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Land units not on the tender are silently ignored. This may leave the
player guessing why the command did nothing. Reporting them all would
be annoying; I just changed tend to report only explicitly named ones.
Make ltend behave the same.
This does add a related annoyance: ltend can complain "not on ship"
when tending explicitly selected land units from multiple ships.
Tolerable.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
The quickest way to tend all land units on a ship is to select all
land units with '*'. However, tend then prints a "not on ship"
message for every land unit not on the tender, as the load-tend test
demonstrates. Annoying. Suppress this message unless the land unit
was explictly selected by UID. Similar to how load and unload
suppress messages, only they get the condition wrong (to be fixed
soon).
A related annoyance remains, also visible in the load-tend test: tend
can still complain "not on ship" many times when tending explicitly
selected land units from multiple ships.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Each land unit is tended to each target ship in turn, and ends up on
the last one that can take it.. The load-tend test demonstrates this
with command "tend land 173 s 150/165":
spy infiltrator #320 transferred from sbc cargo submarine (#173) to cs cargo ship (#150)
spy infiltrator #320 transferred from sbc cargo submarine (#173) to ls landing ship (#165)
spy infiltrator #321 is not on sbc cargo submarine (#173)!
spy infiltrator #322 transferred from sbc cargo submarine (#173) to cs cargo ship (#150)
spy infiltrator #322 transferred from sbc cargo submarine (#173) to ls landing ship (#165)
Has been that way ever since Empire 2 added tending of land units.
Fix by breaking tend_land()'s loop over all target ships after a
successful transfer.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Exercise load, unload, lload, lunload, tend, and ltend.
Notable coverage gaps:
* Effect on land unit fortification
* Effect on mission and retreat orders
* Ships, land units and planes on sale (option MARKET 1)
* Transmission of plague (option NO_PLAGUE 0)
* Land units loading and unloading civilians (need a custom land unit
type capable of carrying civilians)
* load refusing to load x-light planes (need a custom ship type that
can carry helo but not x-light)
* load and lload refusing to load land units carrying land units, and
lload refusing to load land units onto land units that are being
carried (need a custom non-heavy land unit type that can carry land
units)
* tend refusing to tend non-light land units to non-supply ships, or
to supply ships without room (need custom a non-light assault land
unit type)
This test exposes bugs. They're marked "BUG:" in the test input.
There are also oddities marked "odd:", and usability issues marked
"usability:".
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
The edit command doesn't support editing plane fortification. Has
always been that way. Implement it as key 'F'.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Planes 7/8 aren't visible in output, because the test neglects to set
their owner. Messed up in commit commit efec441, v4.3.33. Correct
that oversight.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
The edit command doesn't support editing bars on ships and land units.
Has always been that way. The stock game's ships have always been
unable to load bars. Not the case for land units.
Unfortunately, the obvious key 'b' for bars was burned on plague time
in 4.0.17. Use key 'B' instead.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
The test covers only 'c' and 'l' with give, 'm' and 'g' with edit.
Cover the other item types, too.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
print_items() uses field widths between 3 and 5. They go back all the
way to Empire 1, and are fine for the stock game. Widen the narrower
ones to 5, because a consistent field width looks tidier, and can
avoid misaligned columns with customized ships and land units.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Fix the bug demonstrated by the previous commit:
take_casualties_from_lands() limits total casualties to @each. It
should limit each land unit's casualties, and only if !may_kill. This
can lead to fewer casualties than called for; oops in
take_casualties(). Broken in commit 025e9cc25, v4.4.0.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Tweak military in land units to demonstrate that
take_casualties_from_lands() can kill fewer military than it should.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
Commit 35ecc008c fixed take_casualties() to destroy land units only
when casualties demand it. This test demonstrated the change: inf#29
no longer dies. Good. However, this lost coverage of land units
dying in a sucessful defense. Bad.
I could tweak inf#29 to get destroyed again, but that would lose
coverage of the bug fixed by commit 35ecc008c. Make linf#28 die
instead.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
