66BC Bug?

[Lysander13]

This is not a bug report but rather just a technical question of sorts that I am curious about. I don't recall seeing around here reports or complaints by EB players about this so called 66BC bug that apparantly afflicts some Roman Era based mods. Is the solution as simple as the replacing of the romans_senate faction as EB has done with Saba? Or is this more of a hard coded issue related to vanilla's Roman civil war between the 4 Roman Factions to include the Senate? Pardon if this is a question that has been covered ad-nauseum.

[Tellos Athenaios]

AFAIK you are one of the first to come here and ask this question (not THE first, but not very far from it either...) and what's more you are the first to suggest that redoing the Senate as Saba fixed it. :book:

I think I can quite safely speak for other members on the team and admit we haven't got a clue (or do we?). :juggle:

[bovi]

I never knew there was a 66BC bug. Has anyone reached 66BC in EB, ever?

[Sarkiss]

I never knew there was a 66BC bug. Has anyone reached 66BC in EB, ever?
dont know about EB but iirc there was a guy who reached it in RTR and thus it become a known issue.

[Lysander13]

dont know about EB but iirc there was a guy who reached it in RTR and thus it become a known issue.
Right....Also I believe it pestered The Roma Surrectum team as well. Which as a result they went ahead and changed their dating system. One of the reasons being was to combat this bug, I would imagine. So I just got a bit curious because I didn't recall anyone ever reporting this here on the EB forums. I figured there were one of 2 reasons why. Either no has ever played to this time frame or it's not an issue in EB. So making the leap so to speak and presuming it's not an issue, I was wondering if one of the reasons was because of the way the internal factions are coded in EB...ie..Romani = Seleucid...and the romans_senate faction being replaced by Saba and as a result of this anything associated as it's relative to the internal faction coding that allows EB to not have this problem. It could be of course that I have read to much into it. Just curious is all.....

[Darth Stalin]

Well, the idea to counter that "66BC bug" has been implemented in "Ancient Empires" (RTR-based) mod by limes & co. They haven't changed the faction coding, so the Romans are the Julii IIRC.
To counter that bug they've simply changed turn marking from "year" into just "turn", with year description appearing otherwise (as a comment or advisory). Thus in the down right corner theyre's no "year 217 BC" but instead "turn 252". The mod is still under development, yet about to be released soon... and is also based upon 4TPY script. I've played only in "playable AE 1.1 beta" and this mod is quite nice; it is based on BI engine with "Loyalty" feature for all FMs.
Anyway, it seems that I'll have nice opportunity to compare both EB 1.1 and AE 2.0 mods, which IMHO are the best mods currently released or to be released.

[Olaf The Great]

I have once played a campaign to 66, I found that turning the script off for a few turns( i did 5 turns) fixed it.