News:

Welcome to World of Banished!

Main Menu

Might have found a bug, but need advice.

Started by A Nonny Moose, July 30, 2014, 11:40:02 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

A Nonny Moose

While playing today, I set up my Tavern to make Cherry Ale.  This ran fine for a while then the cherry orchard started looking ratty so I cut it down, changed to pear and changed the tavern to pear.  After the orchard matured, it still appeared to be growing cherries, and the tavern was also set to cherry.

Either I did something wrong, or there is an undocumented feature in the game.

Running version 2.2.0.6 on Ubuntu 14.04 under wine-1.7.22.

Comments?
Go not to the oracle, for it will say both yea and nay.

[Gone, but not forgotten. Rest easy, you are no longer banished.]
https://www.haskettfh.com/winterton-john-hensall/

RedKetchup

the order to do it is : turn to pear first and then after you chop down. they got time to seed it (each tree cut = a new plant right away)
> > > Support Mods Creation developments with Donations by Paypal  < < <
Click here to Donate by PayPal .

salamander

@RedKetchup's right, but here's a little more information as to why.  The 'Cut' button for an orchard is a one-time command, not a long-term setting as it is for foresters.  When you cut an orchard, the same type of fruit will again be immediately planted.  It sounds like maybe you switched over to pears in the orchard a little too late.

But, why your tavern went back to cherries after you'd changed it over to pears, I really don't know.  Maybe you have discovered a buggy feature, or maybe a feature no one's seen before?

rkelly17

I forget where but I saw this same thing reported elsewhere. The citizens really, really want to plant the same kind of trees they planted before. When I'm switching fruit I cut, then deconstruct, then reconstruct. That gets rid of the impulse to plant the same trees over again. If you deconstruct quickly enough there are no baby trees and the reconstruct is instant.

irrelevant

The thing with the tavern is just weird. Never have seen that.

RedKetchup

> > > Support Mods Creation developments with Donations by Paypal  < < <
Click here to Donate by PayPal .

A Nonny Moose

Clearly requires very careful switch over.  Next time I'll expunge the orchard first after suspending the Tavern.  Looks like the order is:
1. Suspend tavern
2. Expunge orchard
3. Create orchard with new fruit
4. Enable tavern and set to current fruit (new).

Sound OK?
Go not to the oracle, for it will say both yea and nay.

[Gone, but not forgotten. Rest easy, you are no longer banished.]
https://www.haskettfh.com/winterton-john-hensall/

salamander

In the spirit of investigative science, you tell us.  ;)

Does that sequence of events work? ... and keep the 'unusual' occurrences with tavern and/or orchard fruit assignments away?

Dookie

Yes, that sequence will work.  However, it is unnecessary to deconstruct the fruit field just to avoid something that isn't even really a bug...

For example, I did the same:  attempting to adjust distribution of various fruit across markets for ale production by switching some orchards from pears to peaches.  Several game years passed, and I noticed that the orchards I reassigned were a patchwork of pears and peach trees, still mostly pear trees even though the orchard had been assigned peaches a few years ago.  You see, the farmers don't replant the trees until the old trees die and/or are cut.  If the farmers replanted right as you gave the cut command, then all the trees would still be pears until you cut again.  So, the result is an orchard with 2 different types of fruit.  This is useful if you don't want to cause a food shortage waiting for new trees to mature and fruit.

It makes perfect logical sense if you simply think about the sequence of events.  It isn't unusual at all.  Trying to solve a waiting problem with another longer wait doesn't help your impatience.

The tavern being reassigned on its own is more like a bug.  Even then, I never seen something like that.  If it is prone to change, shouldn't we have heard about this sooner?   Sorry to the original poster's experience, but this part appears more like just a misclick.