CA asks for Bug List - to be fixed in the expansion

[Dead Moroz]

To illustrate some of my descriptions.

When your city get upgraded it may be covered by FOW. Though you still can access this city.



That's what happens when you fight with enemies climbing on ladders:



Also another graphical bug happens sometimes with other people too:

[Dead Moroz]

Sabotaging doesn't give experience to Assaisns.

I looked VnV code and I saw that Conspirator like of traits is triggered after sabotage.
But, since Consipirator is reserved for spies only, assasins won't get any benefit from it.

No doubt this is bug! Spies just cannot do sabotage missions. The real character type for this trait must be assassin instead of spy.

[Daveybaby]

ahem OT but i had to reply :) if u right click on the town,army, agent, fleet tabs at the bottom middle of ur screen(juz above the unit icons) it will display all ur army stacks, agents and ships respectively Locations all provided, juz double click on the unit and u r there! and the description pops up too.

Oh, yeah, but it would still be nice to be able to just cycle through them like you can for cities and armies without opening the scroll.

Oh, and another bug which i havent spotted in this list yet.

If you start a battle, and manually rearrange all of your units into the formation you want, and then select all of them and click where you want them to go, they will usually stay in the formation you chose when they get to their destination.

However, sometimes they will magically decide that they want to revert to the initial default formation. So instead of an ordered advance you get a godawful mess as all of your units criscross each other to get back to their original relative positions. Very annoying as it can actually lose you the entire battle.

[SpencerH]

To illustrate some of my descriptions.

When your city get upgraded it may be covered by FOW. Though you still can access this city.


That's what happens when you fight with enemies climbing on ladders:


Also another graphical bug happens sometimes with other people too

I may be wrong but CA have shown no interest in bugs that occur in mods.

[Pritzl]

If an enemy with ranged units attacks you on a bridge, they will not cross until they expend all their missile ammo. Since prudence demands you withdraw your troops to a safe distance this means that the battle comes to an impasse. When the time-limit is turned off, the result is a stalled game as exiting causes you to lose the battle. Ideally, the AI should not attack unless they intend to follow through.

After loading a saved game, the AI seem very susceptible to diplomatic overtures such as the offering of protectorate status, ceasefires, alliances, etc.

Oh, and Kudos to CA for the initiative...

[nickersonm]

Note: I'm just writing this as I read through the thread, so the paragraphs may seem disjointed.

Flaming Arrows
Flaming ammo from archers do not light up or damage buildings like it says they do in the manual.

They do. It can just take several large volleys, but I have had it happen in RTW 1.2 vanilla. It should be fairly easy to test, for those who haven't seen it - do a custom battle where you assault a city (w/ walls), give the enemies all archers, and take a few onangers for yourself. Keep everything but the onangers out of firing range of the defending archers, and they should use fire (they did in the battle like this that I played). In my battle, several of my onangers burst into flames and burnt down after a few volleys of flaming arrows.


Also, I can confirm that in minimal UI (not sure if it is exclusive), the pause button, and a few others, appears to suffer from rapid key repetition - it toggles rapidly if the key is pressed for more than a few fractions of a second. In 1.1, and some cases in 1.2, the pause button is a single-depress toggle.

Another comment: I believe that some of the group attack 'issues' are really a certain feature asserting itself. In my experience, when a group is ordered to attack an enemy, it will attack the whole enemy group, with each individual unit generally attacking it's "counterpart" in the enemy formation. This is useful for large formation combat, as you don't want your whole group of legionaries attempting to attack the single enemy unit in the middle of their formation. Archers and other projectile units, on the other hand, are often used for concentrated fire, and this feature is not always desired. Perhaps some kind of toggle would be useful.

I have also experienced the problem with un-grouped units following grouped units orders. It is very annoying, but I can usually (temporarily) solve it by un-grouping and re-grouping everything. That doesn't help if I didn't notice immediately, though. As far as I can tell, it occurs randomly.

Also, I have the run/walk issues with pause. I'm not certain what the pattern is, but sometimes a unit ordered to run while paused will revert to a walk when the game is unpaused. Note: in my experience, this only occurs with grouped units. So it can be worked around by ordering individual units to run. Perhaps it is an artefact of the stay-in-formation feature?

From my observations, the reason for the "Pursuing cavalry sometimes just rides beside the target at walking pace" bug is that attacking units aim for the average/center of an enemy formation. If there are stragglers, as often happens when a unit is routing, the center of the routing unit will be a bit behind the main concentration of men, so the pursuing unit will have nothing to kill at its target. I imagine this kind of targeting was done to avoid computing each individual unit position in the attack AI, so I don't know how it can be avoided.

- nickersonm

[Myrddraal]

Has anyone else experienced the dead people on ladders bug apart from Dead M. I've never seen the like despite having played many sieges. I just want to check its not unique to your comp DM...

[sik1977]

Protectorates shouldn't attack each other (where you have two or more protectorates in a game), or attack your allies (those which are not protectorates). Your allies may attack your protectorate just like they may attack you, but that should be considered an attack on you and not just another ally which typically makes you choose between two allies now engaged in war, thus, an attack on your protectorate by a neutral or ally faction should change your diplomatic stance towards that faction as hostile.

Will we see the 'Loadgame issue' mentioned in the bug list?

[Kraxis]

Ok these might be issues, and we have discussed them before here in LM.

Odd Pontic Pikes: Pontic Phalanx Pikemen are oddly enough given the bonus of a large shield despite they are in fact carrying the smaller pikemen shield. Also they are given the smaller hoplite size in terms of their unit.

Shieldbonus for Pharaoh's Guards: A large shield for a unit that obviously has none, that makes no sense.

Shieldbonus for Beduin Archers: They have no shield... Again makes no sense.

Thracian upgraded Bodyguards: These guys are exactly the same as the unupgraded ones in terms of stats, they even have a shield they shouldn't have. Their look is very much heavier though, so that can't be right.

Lack of shieldbonus: The Pontic upgraded bodyguards have a shield but no bonus. Cosmetics perhaps, but at least something to make them aware of.

Mass of units inconsistent: Many units are weaker in mass than comparable unit. In particular the Silver Shield Legionaries have 1.0 in mass while Legionary Cohorts (the same unit) has 1.3. Mercenary Bastarnae are also at 1 while both the normal Bastarnae and Thracian Mercenaries are at 1.2 (the level of basic barbarian infantry). There are plenty of other instances that I (and others ) can provide if need be.

Unhardy Praetorians? Of all the cohorts only the Praetorians are not Hardy. Even the Silver Shields are Hardy.

Lost mount_effects: Sarmatian Mercenaries don't get the negative mount_effect for camels andelephants. Illyrian Mercenaries don't get the positive effect against chariots and elephants as other skirmishers.

Mount_effects where it is not supposed to be: the Eastern Heavy Spearmen have the spearman bonus against mounted units, the only phalanx unit to have it.

Blue Spaniards? Spanish generals are blue... Not brown. What gives?

Strange officer: The barb archer slave unit get an officer, a chosen swordsman actually, and he is even blue. Can't be right.

Silver Shield Legionaries prior to Marius? They are the same as Legionary Cohorts (minus the mass). How can an immitation come first compared to the original? Make them post-Marius.

Pila instead of javelin: Both Light Auxilia and Cavalry Auxilia throw javelins, but their animation have them throwing pila.

There are also issues about other unitsizes, such as Desert Cavalry and Bowmen, but they get into personal issues, though they might in fact impact the game quite substantially.
Many units also have strange sounds for when hit, such as Merc Bastarnae that has the metal sound eventhough they are nearly naked (and have very low armour).

Damn that was a lot of stuff... I don't exepct it all to get in there, but as you can see the stats are far from being correct all the way. Maybe such a list will get the devs to fix what is needed (they can determine if it was intentional that this or that was different from the rest, we can only point it out).

[Zatoichi]

Ok - there has been some mention of phalanx behaviour, but I haven't spotted this one in the list yet, so here goes:

Phalanx Reversing Into Combat
Pretty much just that - occasionally (predominantly in cities, but not exclusively) a phalanx when ordered to engage a unit in combat will turn around and back towards the enemy slowly, and fight in this way - still in phalanx formation, but facing in the wrong direction. This can put quite a dent in their offensive and defensive capabilities. I'm not sure if this is an extension of the shuffle issue which was mostly fixed in 1.2, but as far as I remember, the times I've seen it the phalanx in question is doing this to a new enemy unit, not one it's currently engaged with, if you see what I mean.

[Dead Moroz]

So what about this?

Skirmishing units in skirmish mode may run straight into enemy instead of running away.

Archers (maybe Roman only) in skirmish mode begin to run away from attacker too late. So they became engaged in combat and defeated.

Do you think it's not bugs? For me these "features" are very strange and annoying.

[sik1977]

The Senate mission and Sardis bug (issue?). Please see here for details (one is a link to .com thread, the other is a link to TWC forums)

http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotal...tart=1&stop=20

and/or

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/index...howtopic=26949

[BDC]

i can also confirm that coastal battles often have large, square areas of land projecting into the sea in vanilla rtw, often when you can see your ships in the distance after disembarking.

Yes I can confirm that. Looks very odd.

[The_Mark]

Grouped speed bug - Grouping a quick unit with a slow unit results in both units moving at the speed of the fast unit. Surely the fast units should slow down for the slow ones?

A small correction: Slow units get a speed boost but the faster units also slow down, it's more like an average speed of the group's units on which the group's units move.

[Oaty]

Has anyone else experienced the dead people on ladders bug apart from Dead M. I've never seen the like despite having played many sieges. I just want to check its not unique to your comp DM...

I just tried in custom battles and I can't replicate that.

With much testing ladders have a 1 way switch once a ladder has men going in one direction you can't reverse the direction until the ladder is clear.

If it's an exploit that needs detailed instructions you should maybe PM Myddraal how it's done.

Also was this prior to 1.2 patch?

[QwertyMIDX]

The fact that Custom battles maps use the orignial campagin map to generate rather than the modded one.

[ElmarkOFear]

Mydraal. Thank you for all of your efforts to present these issues in a way, which will increase the likelihood of CA seriously considering making changes.

I would also like to compliment the wonderful presentation everyone has given with their list of problems and preferences.

Sorry to have gotten off-topic, but I wanted to express how pleasureable it was to see a well-organized, civil presentation of the single player campaign issues which are important to everyone.

PS: Please feel free to delete this post, since it IS not on-topic. I will not be offended in the least.

[Mordred]

I think the complete grouping system should be redone. Apart form the many bugs written earlier in this thread, units when grouped often attack the wrong enemy unit, most of the times they pick enemy units closest by, instead of the unit you click on.

Ordering a group into the far distance by right click and draw, often results in the game getting stuck, especially when you get close to minimap or command icons. To avoid that you need to zoom in first on the spot you want the unit to go, then give the order. Rather annoying.

[screwtype]

@ Myrddraal,

I previously stated:

"When you direct a unit to "run" when the game is paused, and then unpause the game, the unit immediately reverts to walking."

I was certain this was the case, but blow me down when I tried to replicate it last night it didn't happen!

However, I still believe it was happening before, and I still think there's something screwy about this feature, but I will have to look into it more before I confirm the nature of this bug.

[screwtype]

1. Make the AI programmable, like an export_descr_AI.txt !!!
2. See 1!!
3. Perhaps add a section in descr_strat.txt?
4. If you don't, total war fans will keep moaning for ever and ever.

Nice idea. But would they have to compromise even further on AI complexity to do so?

someone: "Phalanx game mechanic problems
The pikes should be raised so that the points are high enough above the ground to be effective."

sunsmountain: "Well if they do they should tire more quickly than anything. Phalanx should not fight on a slope."

Actually the closer to vertical a pike is held, the less tired a phalangite should get. So I don't agree they should tire more quickly just because their pikes are at an angle to the horizontal - quite the contrary.

[Myrddraal]

The fact that Custom battles maps use the orignial campagin map to generate rather than the modded one.

I thought they used the base map...

[screwtype]

Also, I have the run/walk issues with pause. I'm not certain what the pattern is, but sometimes a unit ordered to run while paused will revert to a walk when the game is unpaused. Note: in my experience, this only occurs with grouped units. So it can be worked around by ordering individual units to run. Perhaps it is an artefact of the stay-in-formation feature?

I'm glad I'm not the only one who has experienced this. But trying to replicate it last night, it didn't happen! And I'm sure that in the previous night's play it happened EVERY time, LOL.

I still think there's something odd going on though, in the heat of battle sometimes I'm not sure exactly what it is, but that run/walk button is not working correctly and it's a danged nuisance.

From my observations, the reason for the "Pursuing cavalry sometimes just rides beside the target at walking pace" bug is that...

I don't think this is a bug at all. I think it's a deliberate feature. The cav like to attack in a semicircle, and to sort of stop and have a little break between attacks. They did a similar sort of thing in STW/MTW, when they would constantly reform before attacking again.

I don't think it's so unrealistic that cav units should sometimes take a long time to run down enemy units, or maybe even not get them all. History is full of instances of cav chasing down routing units and not returning to the main battle when they are needed.

If you think about it, the unrealistic bit is not so much in the way cav chase routing units, but the way routing units all run away in a clump that makes them relatively easy to kill. In real life a unit being chased by cav would most likely scatter in all different directions, creating multiple targets for the cav to choose between and allowing more opportunity for some to escape.

[Myrddraal]

About the loadgame bug, isn't this enough

Loading bugs (all one bug?)

AI break siege- the AI will often break up sieges after loading a saved game
AI become protectorates - After loading a saved game, the AI seem very susceptible to diplomatic overtures such as the offering of protectorate status, ceasefires, alliances, etc.

[Torvald]

I've been diligently reading this thread before posting. I usually post on the .com forum, but am seriously thinking about a permament "move" to the .org just because the atmosphere seems so much nicer here. Anyways, just wanted to say that what you're doing in this thread is really productive, and for whatever it's worth, you have my full support.

Also, the issue I want to bring up was touched upon by sik1977 a couple of posts above. I am Mindblank, the original poster of one the .com link he provides. Again, here is the link:

http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotal...ID=24041.topic

Game version is RTW 1.2 (i.e. vanilla, no downloaded mods, no personal mods or tweaks to any text files)

It is actually a twofold issue:

1) When capturing certain cities as part of a Senate mission (Sardis seems to be particularly prone to this, but other cities, including Corinth and Sidon have been known to cause this too), the Roman player gets outlawed for no logical reason. I say "no logical reason" because it apparently has nothing to do with prior Senate/Pleb popularity, number of regions controlled, etc.

2) After this premature outlawing, the Senate behaves irrationally: it outlaws the other Roman factions, hands out new missions to the already outlawed Roman player, etc.

For more details I recommend checking out the link I provided.

Also, I can provide a saved game to illustrate this problem.

[Myrddraal]

Thx Torvald, and welcome to the .org Enjoy your stay.

I'll look into that and add it to this list. sorry about the lack of speed with which the list is updated. You guys post so many a day, I'm running hard to catch up, but I can't be online very often these last few days. Keep it up though

[screwtype]

Here's a little something else in my current game that may or may not qualify as a bug, depending on your POV.

On about the fifth turn of my current campaign, a Pontic army crossed over the straits and parked itself outside my newly acquired city of Byzantium. I suspected it was planning to attack, but since I had a diplomat handy I sent him to ask for trade rights, hopeful that this might dissuade the AI from attacking.

Well, Pontus accepted the trade offer. And it's army stayed outside Byzantium where it had first moved. And stayed. And stayed. And stayed.

I'm now 30 turns into the campaign and this Pontic army is still standing there. But what really bothers me is that two Pontic ships (in separate stacks), one of which I think was used to transport the army, are ALSO just staying there, apparently stuck, in the straits. This means I cannot move ships into or out of the Caspian. It's absurd.

Oh and while I'm on the topic of ships, can anyone tell me why the heck a neutral ship would have a ZOC that restricts your movement? Surely only enemy ships (and armies) should have ZOC's that affect your units? I'm tired of neutral ships being in the way when I want to move my ships somewhere.

[Dead Moroz]

I'd like to remind about well-known bug of "flying deads". Sometimes dead bodies hangs in the air.



You can find many similar pictures in "Picture of the day" section on TWC.

I think CA should fix some glitches of hoplites and pikemen. This one:



and another one: spear or pike passing through shield when units are in phalanx formation.

[Dead Moroz]

Here's a little something else in my current game that may or may not qualify as a bug, depending on your POV.

On about the fifth turn of my current campaign, a Pontic army crossed over the straits and parked itself outside my newly acquired city of Byzantium. I suspected it was planning to attack, but since I had a diplomat handy I sent him to ask for trade rights, hopeful that this might dissuade the AI from attacking.

Well, Pontus accepted the trade offer. And it's army stayed outside Byzantium where it had first moved. And stayed. And stayed. And stayed.

I'm now 30 turns into the campaign and this Pontic army is still standing there. But what really bothers me is that two Pontic ships (in separate stacks), one of which I think was used to transport the army, are ALSO just staying there, apparently stuck, in the straits. This means I cannot move ships into or out of the Caspian. It's absurd.

Are you playing 1.1 or 1.2?

[Myrddraal]

Ah yes, I'd forgotten about that corpse. It happened to me in this situation.

There were many many men in a very small area, hoplites included. Are these similar conditions to when others get flying corpses?

[screwtype]

Are you playing 1.1 or 1.2?

1.2. I am playing the RTR mod though, which in theory might be responsible, but I doubt it would be.