From e5e541d21120a4d0eff8d42d9ccb35e27fd1574c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Marko Lindqvist Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 04:23:14 +0300 Subject: [PATCH 25/25] Fix over-the-max veteran level at process_attacker_want() Value of EFT_VETERAN_BUILD was being assigned as veterancy level directly, without checking unit's max veteran level. See RM #2081 Signed-off-by: Marko Lindqvist --- ai/default/daimilitary.c | 10 +++++++--- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/ai/default/daimilitary.c b/ai/default/daimilitary.c index 3edf6fd2cc..ffff324afc 100644 --- a/ai/default/daimilitary.c +++ b/ai/default/daimilitary.c @@ -1311,6 +1311,8 @@ static void process_attacker_want(struct ai_type *ait, }, NULL, EFT_VETERAN_BUILD); + /* Levels start from zero, so max level is 'number of levels - 1' */ + int max_level = utype_veteran_levels(punittype) - 1; /* Cost (shield equivalent) of gaining these techs. */ /* FIXME? Katvrr advises that this should be weighted more heavily in big * danger. */ @@ -1318,11 +1320,13 @@ static void process_attacker_want(struct ai_type *ait, int bcost_balanced = build_cost_balanced(punittype); /* See description of kill_desire() for info about this variables. */ int bcost = utype_build_shield_cost(pcity, NULL, punittype); - int attack = adv_unittype_att_rating(punittype, veteran_level, - SINGLE_MOVE, - punittype->hp); + int attack; int tech_dist = 0; + veteran_level = CLIP(0, veteran_level, max_level); + attack = adv_unittype_att_rating(punittype, veteran_level, + SINGLE_MOVE, punittype->hp); + unit_tech_reqs_iterate(punittype, padv) { Tech_type_id tech_req = advance_number(padv); -- 2.53.0