View Full Version : 1.2/1.3 Community Buglist
So it's that time again ~;)
Only bugs that can be properly replicated under 1.2 RC, please.
As this list is being posted at both the Org and TWC, and as I'm getting submissions from both sources, I need everyone to check that their post has not already been made at the other forum, and is not on the list already.
Current thread - Org (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=82991)
Current thread - TWC (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?p=1955740#post1955740)
Old Thread - Org (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=73566)
Old Thread - TWC ( http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=96624)
----------
High Priority
Campaign Map
Autocalc for siege battles is determined as it is for field battles (ie. defenses not taken into account and fight to the death ignored; the AI thinks that the defender can have men remaining after the battle)
Experience bonuses from guilds/tourney fields etc. still don't work correctly. Unknown if this only occurs after a reload with the units still in the queue, as previously.
The Campaign AI is improved and no longer recklessly attacks; but it still launches naval blockades at inopportune moments and thus gets into wars that it cannot win.
Units given move orders over multiple turns will not automatically move around hostile zones of control, and can get 'stuck' next to a city.
Battle Map
Army formations often fail to be maintained when ordered to advance by a single left click over a distance of over approximately 100 yards.
DEK animation problems: In short, they refuse to attack if clumped very tightly together at times and while they have 4 anims to attack infantry, only 2 of those will actually do anything. As those 2 that are effective are their slow anims, they will hardly ever strike (and strike successfully) at another infantry unit. =FH] Explanation of why DEKs and similar units seem much weaker:
DEKs (DNK, DPK) have 4 attack animations: Pierce (medium), Push (medium), Overhead (slow), Twisting Slash (slow).
Against infantry, they will use all 4. Against cavalry only the first two.
However, it seems when attacking infantry, the first two animations do not do anything. That is, they have no effect and cannot kill other infantry units. That leaves DEKs with a net 2 slow animations which play even less frequently due to the waste of playing the other two and the pauses in between.
Further, DEKs will often refuse to attack in melee against infantry at all when clumped too closely together, possibly a collision/attack animation consideration (i.e. hitting friendlies, which non missile units will refuse to do) problem. This is compounded by the observation that DEKs will only attack if very close to the enemy, at a range that is even shorter than that of a short_spear or spear unit.
This is especially evident on walls, where in some tests, I had fully upgraded DEKs defending against unupgraded Ottoman infantry on the walls.
Each time when an Ottoman got cornered, he managed to kill exceptionally many (up to half my DEKs) units as those would refuse to attack him while he could swing freely and due to faster animation would stop DEK attack animations.
Against cavalry, DEKs fare relatively well as they will only use their medium speed animations, although the delay between attacks is much increased.[/quote]
It's almost impossible to properly deploy units in siege battles as the defender.
Passive AI remains in siege battles.
Reinforcements sometimes do not enter the battle after being issued orders.
Siege AI is generally bad, with units waiting in range of wall towers to perform menial tasks. Explanation:
I did some more extensive testing on why the AI would suddenly stop battering my entrance gate only to resume doing so a minute later. It seems that when they are at your gate and you attack one of its units making its way up the ladders/siege towers and have not yet reached the top, the ram will always disengage and then re-engage. So my test was running a few knights into the troops scaling the tower to make them come out and then I withdrew with my knights only to come back a bit later. Each time their ram disengaged when their troops went back to moving into the tower.
AI against player sallies #2: Artillery pieces the AI carries seem to be affected by some conflicting scripts. Ie. when the AI drops the siege equipment, if it has any artillery units, the artillery will drop equipment, pick it up, drop, pick up etc constantly until enegaged in melee, at which time it will retreat behind its lines without taking the artillery with it and it will not use the artillery against you at all. Again, thats a big minus compared to 1.01 where it would use artillery against you in sallies.
Stats are unbalanced in light of 2-handed and shield bug fixes.
Unit Cohesion still isn't perfect, and sometimes only the front rank of a unit will charge.
Medium Priority
AI Cheats
The AI appears to be able to ‘see’ the players hidden forces in a sally battle.
The AI can fight night battles with captains (you notice this because you are the AI's reinforcement)
The AI can 'spawn' generals into captain-led stacks spontaneously
The AI does not suffer Crusade/Jihad desertions. This allows them to move said armies drastically off course to attack player-owned cities and yet suffer no penalty for doing so.
Campaign Map
AI factions will occasionally fail to attack a crusade target and instead remain a few squares away for turns on end.
Alliances remain with destroyed factions, as does the state of war.
Checking and then unchecking the ‘night attack’ option can permanently exclude allied reinforcements from the battle.
Disasters block the building of forts/watchtowers in a region and decrease movement rate permanently (after a reload on that turn?)
If the last family members of a faction are killed sallying from a settlement or in a reinforcement battle for a settlement, the faction is destroyed but the settlement turns rebel and remains under siege with new troops that have jut magically appeared.
Man of the Hour event does not trigger properly (you get the "message arrived to a funeral" popup) if the stack moves into a city/castle, as captains do not exist in a settlement. (ie. it does not work for siege/sally/field (one square away) battles)
Man of the Hour will never trigger when attacking out of a settlement.
Possible issues using diplomacy to gain support in papal elections.
Possible save/reload issues.
I've found that the AI is behaving very differently if I exit and reload the game. In my current campaign (English VH battle, M campaign) I've had two play sessions. In my first everything was peaceful, sensible and logical. AI factions declared war rarely, and when they did it was a sensible choice. I played 52 turns, then finally dragged myself away. In all that time one faction (Danes) declared war on me, and I declared war on nobody but the rebels.
I continued the same game tonight. I played until turn 67, which means 15 turns. I've had the Danes (again, now in reduced form thanks to my taking one of their settlements and killing their troops before making peace the first time), France, Portugal (3 times) and Sicily (twice) declare war on me. The Danes have sent two puny little armies to attack one of my cities. The Portuguese and Sicilians keep dropping tiny little armies on Ireland, which I kill in short order. Then they offer peace, which I accept, and a few turns later they come back and do it all again. France is the only one making anything like a sensible war here ... though I hesitate to call it that, as we've been good friends since turn 2, I’m stronger than them, and France is engaged in multiple wars with other factions and not doing entirely well.
Scotland has also come to life. In my first play session they parked their army outside York and sat there doing nothing the entire time. On loading my save game they immediately moved that army and have been marching restlessly about their lands.
My faction remains strong, rich, respected and pious. It's been peaceful, trading with everyone I can find and only warring with the rebels. While I have gained provinces since the game's start I'm no big bad monster (8 provinces total) and I held all these provinces for a good while before quitting the first time. My armies have grown slightly, but weren’t weak before. I've done nothing threatening. In short, I can see no reason for this abrupt change in AI policy towards me.
I'm not amused. What was an enjoyable campaign has turned into a tedious game of whack-a-mole. It feels like a reverse of RTW's save/load bug.
Ransoming back a family member after a battle without also giving at least one member of the generals bodyguard unit will result in the family member’s immediate death, as the unit cannot be displayed without any bodyguards. The family member will be shown to have died peacefully.
Ships can sail into and out of blockaded ports freely
Some people report campaign map lag.
Swordsmith and Woodsmen guild bonuses (at the HQ) still do not apply correctly to both local and global at the same time (ie they only give +2EXP global, not +2 global +1 local).
The faction heir is still not given to the right person (eg. will not revert to the king's son when he comes of age)
The percentage chance to open a settlement's gates with multiple spies is not calculated correctly (cumulative percentage wise instead of adding probabilities)
When defending against a sally, it is possible to exit the battle right at the start and it will result in a draw instead of a loss. Neither side will lose units.
When two generals are in a settlement, the one with the higher chivalry will become governor, even when the general's primary attribute is dread (ie. a 1 chivalry general will govern instead of a 8 dread one, even though it results in reduced public order)
Battle Map
The 2 AI seige wooden tower bug(for lack of a better name)
Crash Criteria:
-2 AI armies
-Siege battles
-Settlement/castles with wooden defences
-AI army uses ammo based siege equipment
-AI army attacks towers that are under control either by you or the other AI!!!
-The AI army firing the siege weapon havent moved their infantry yet.
Cavalry vs cavalry charges are seemingly ineffective (head on). Cavalry also refuse to charge in with secondary weapons, even if explicitly ordered to by the player.
It is possible to ‘sally’ and attack enemy artillery in defensive siege battles without the AI responding until it is far too late to save the crews.
Missile units will complete animations before fleeing in skirmish mode.
Mounted missile units continue to shoot after leaving the battlefield and can still inflict casualties
Only siege equipment able to be carried is spawned (ie if you have 6 rams and 2 infantry units, 2 are spawned)
Pathfinding issues chasing routers. It appears that these issues are a result of a unit getting ‘spread out’, and as the engine targets your unit at the centre (average) of the enemy unit, stragglers can move this point to a position outside the actual unit mass. This is especially prevalent following an AI sally, where cavalry will usually fail to chase routers, even if they are not split on/off the walls.
Routing units locked out of a settlement or otherwise near the gate cannot be attacked effectively.
The battlemap on the area near Jerusalem shown is made unplayable by high cliffs: https://img136.imageshack.us/img136/6987/00343uu2.jpg
Units can become ‘stranded’ half-on, half-off walls in siege battles and fail to respond to orders entirely. They can also become stranded after leaving the wall, often staying in the middle of the street until given further orders.
Units in spearwall/schiltrom and archers in melee combat do not properly disengage after defeating the enemy and will lose fatigue attacking thin air.
Using two ladders on one section of wall can cause both units to climb the one ladder after placement due to a pathfinding issue.
Explanation:
I've seen that too sometimes. I think it happens if the center of the one unit is too close to the ladders of the other unit. Basically the pathfinding AI decides it's actually closer to climb the set of ladders the other guys are already using, so it will send the unit over there. It's not strictly wrong from a pathfinding sense, but it is rather awful for good assault practices. I think if the unit, having placed its ladder, was always required to begin climbing the one they placed, the problem would go away. As it currently stands that unit is disassociated with its ladder as soon as the ladder goes in place, and then it appears that the unit invokes pathfinding to determine the best way to its spot on the wall. Anyway, at least it's not too serious a problem, though somewhat annoying.
When the AI attacks with a reinforcement stack, that stack will often take up a defensive position and force you to attack it in order to win a supposedly 'defensive' battle.
While your cavalry is engaged in melee, double click attacking an enemy behind the unit you are fighting that is in charge distance results in your cavalry instantly charging and annihilating the unit they were meleeing with (plus charging into the unit you clicked on).
Low Priority
Campaign Map
During a crusade, I liberated Rome, the crusade target. The papacy contacted me and asked for Rome. They said if I gave it to them, I would be their closest ally. When I gave it to them, my faction (the Scots) did not get an alliance with the papacy.
A general with more command stars than the faction leader will sometimes command when he is present.
Adding mercenaries to the retraining queue and removing them from it deplenishes the mercenary pool regardless.
Allied spies cause a public order drop in your settlements; but your spies do not cause a similar drop in theirs.
British can build military academy and get gunpowder associated traits and retinues before gunpowder is even developed.
Demanding 'attack faction x' via diplomacy costs far too much and seemingly has no effect. The price only appears to be reasonable when one of your settlements is under siege; but the AI will still fail to take action regardless of diplomatic success.
Diplomacy can be initiated with a besieged town if the order was given before the siege commenced/was sighted.
During times of campaign map lag, clicking on a town settlement and then on the settlement again (or another town settlement) before the game updates the town's display info, can sometimes cause a CTD.
Factions now hate you for making them your vassal (i.e. after they accept your offer, the diplomat/princess will always trigger the unhappy speech).
While this in itself is no big deal or could be seen as realistic, the following is not:
After they are your vassals, if you approach them for any diplomacy, they will be as "welcome ally" stance. But once you ask for anything or even try to gift them something, they will always only barely accept and be annoyed after the transaction, as if they don't want to deal with you. What's worse, I tried gifting my new vassal 2000 florins and it was barely accepted, they were annoyed afterwards and my relations went from so-so down to abysmal....
Generals denounced for heresy are now counted as "died in battle" on the family tree instead of "denounced" as it used to be.
If you are hiring mercenaries but have not yet completed the transaction (i.e. you have the merc screen open and dragged a few over to the "to hire" section) and then disband any unit from your army, all mercs currently in the "to hire" section vanish and cannot be rehired, meaning that you need to wait another 10-20 turns for the mercs to replenish.
In some cases it seems possible to lose a papal election despite your candidate having the most votes. https://img294.imageshack.us/img294/3647/image00022gn2.jpg
Military access has no effect when marching a crusade through an allied Muslim faction's lands and vice versa with Jihads
Moving a group of fast and slow units (i.e. cav with infantry/artillery or infantry with artillery) together and then disbanding all slow units will result in the fast units losing all their remaining movement points down to how much the slow units had left.
Papal missions do not expire on the pope's death.
Possible alliances bug:
When having a force in allied territory, you can rarely get a popup during the ally's turn requesting you to aid him in battle.
If you accept, your force moves automatically in the ally's territory next to the enemy the ally requested help against.
Once that occurs, the game gets an unspecified error CTD.
Priests can be converted to heresy while assigned to an army; and sometimes fail to leave that army when that happens.
Ransoming the pope, and having that ransom rejected, can sometimes cause the game to hang.
Regicide missions do not expire when the giver dies (and payment is still given as normal)
Save/Reload will lead to an immediate papal election even if the pope died that turn.
Some mercenaries (Frankish knights, Mercenary Crossbowmen) cannot be retrained if their experience is higher than 4 (1 silver)
That means if there are 3 available merc spearmen in a given region and you have one available for retraining in one of your cities, adding/removing that mercenary spearmen unit to the retrainment queue reduces the amount that can be hired down to 2 instead of leaving it at 3.
The merchant skill works above 10, even though it is not displayed.
The pope likes moving his army around at random.
The pope will sometimes give contradictory misssions (ie. "blocade faction x's port" and "do not attack faction x")
This is hardly a bug rather an annoyance but when you right click on a priest that has a movement plan for the next turn it deletes it.
Units captured in a siege assault cannot be successfully ransomed (the ransom is successful in that you get the cash; but the units are not returned to the other faction).
When you win a siege battle, you have the option to ransom/release/execute prisoners, but the choice has no effect since they all die without your reputation going down; sort of an exploit, you always free them and get chivalry and they die anyway.
You can't see your army composition in the pre-battle screen.
Battle Map
Ballistae have problems targeting units on slopes (possibly unable to shoot below 0 degrees, which makes sense but does not tally with visual representation of range)
During battle, if a spear unit has ever entered schiltrom formation and is currently not in schiltrom formation, moving it anywhere will cause it to resume back to a schiltrom-like formation, where they are setup exactly the same way but do not count as an actual schiltrom. I.e. they use a much tighter formation and guard all sides.
Elephant Artillery cannon balls can bounce off a settlement's walls and 'return to sender'. Ability to cause damage unknown.
Hidden troop locations can be easily spotted if you have a unit selected and hover the mouse over the forest. Where your mouse is not showing a possible movement field but a standard cursor, there is a hidden unit.
Normally, when all the attacker's infantry have been routed and not all gates have been breached in a siege, the attacker loses automatically. However, if the attacker has elephants (merc or normal), the siege continues with the attacker unable to get in. This is likely a carryover from RTW, where elephants could batter down gates.
Rarely, after a victorious battle where you lose very few units, once the combat results screen appears you may lose some extra units for no reason.
Rarely, random infantry "ghosts" through the battlemap and disappear as soon as you pan the camera view. This even occurs when the enemy does not have any infantry and you don't either.
The Turks now do not even have one-liner speeches anymore. Just blank and with camera panning as if they were to give a long speech.
Tlaxcalan mercenaries have a triangular banner like missile units, but they are actually an infantry.
Trebuchets can have trouble fitting through gates in some settlements.
Units displayed in the end of battle summary can net a sum total of below zero (possibly due to reinforcements?). https://img461.imageshack.us/img461/9878/0003xt1.jpg
Units with the fire_by_rank attribute (gunpowder infantry) will sometimes get stuck in reloading status when given an order to shoot a specific target in range and fire at will mode is turned on. They get stuck as in they have their muskets raised to about half, as if they had just gotten into position and are not yet aiming with their status reading reloading but they will never actually aim and shoot until the closing enemy hacks away at them. Actually they will all release empty volleys on melee impact.
Graphics/Sound
Arab factions ambushing an enemy will return an audio that is inappropriate for the situation. The audio returned was as if the ambusher had been ambushed.
Armenian Cav refer to themselves as lightcav when they are heavy cav
As England, if your forces ambush an enemy army, the sound played is that which should be played when you are ambushed.
Free Company Men-At-Arms refer to themselves as heavy cav when clicked when they are heavy infantry
Graphical glitch for mercenary arquebusier arm textures.
It looks like they got an outstanding black frame being carried on the elbow for one type of texture (there are 2 textures for the elbow in total I think)
HRE navies winning the battle will at times feedback the retreat message instead of the victory message.
If you turn of fire at will for Italian factions, the general will stay "artillery units, hold your fire" even if you don't have any artillery but only normal missiles.
Some generals don't receive a death voice over, the camera focuses on their death without speech.
Some message triggers, especially in sieges, are bugged (eg. you can get 'our soldiers have broken the enemy gate' when the enemy has in fact done so)
Some problems with Latinkon upgraded armour(vertex weighing appears to messed up in some places)
Venetian Heavy Infantry and Venetian Archer upgraded armour models are wrong, soldier should look like the heavy billmen upgraded armour soldier but wear brigadine armour instead.
When Aztec cities/castles get upgraded to a certain level they end up with Muslim architechture on the battlemap
Whenever the AI loses the minimum men required to lift a siege engine (less than 6 for ram/tower/ladder), the player gets the feedback message that the siege engine does not man itself. However, the AI is supposed to get this message.
Game Mechanics
If captured troops are executed (without offering ransom) the losing commander still gets the RansomDread trait, similarly RansomChivalry if the troops were released without a ransom
LeaderDestroyedFaction condition is not working
Priests cannot get above the third level of StrongFaith (missing trigger)
With the introduction of the InquisitorSuccess trait, Inquisitors can no longer get a level in GoodDenouncer of 2 or higher. However priests can still. As such, the description of the 5th level of GoodDenouncer is inadequate as it reads "utterly unafraid to even prosecute royalty" or something along those lines. That description would only be applicable to inquisitor characters not priests.
Combat bonus vs faction (+X command vs the Milanese) is not working.
export_descr_character_traits
;------------------------------------------
Trigger sitting_around_town_with_city_barracks
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd
Condition IsGeneral
and EndedInSettlement
and RemainingMPPercentage = 100
and SettlementBuildingExists >= library
Affects StrategicSkill 1 Chance 4
;-------------------------------------------
This code obviously has been copied incorrectly somewhere. It should read
SettlementBuildingExists >= militia_drill_square
The trigger for dads_prim is duplicated as dads_prim and dads_Prim
dads_smoothtalker trigger exists even though the trait is diplomat only
Further improper trait triggers as generals cannot get these to begin with:
SmoothTalker in random_birth12
GoodConspirator in random_birth27
Secretive in random_birth31
Talkative in random_birth34
Hate traits' 2nd level randomly gives morale or not. Similarly 3rd level randomly decreases morale or not.
birth_with_sanitation, academia, alchemy, religious all lack > at >=
and no longer consider public_baths and aquecut for births.
Trigger governing9 is senseless as far as I can tell in context. (Why give dread solely because the treasury is >50k)
assassininit7 should be SettlementBuildingExists or otherwise all eastern assassins come out as trained killers even though they weren't trained in a settlement with a hashashins guild.
CA has added some extra trait clearers when priests turn heretic, but still lacking the clearance of TheologiansGuildMember, TheologiansGuildTrained, NaturalPriestSkill, PriestLevel.
export_descr_ancillaries
handgun ancillary still gives +2 law.
armour_custom ancillary only triggered by armourer but not by levels above when sitting around town.
marco polo ancillary still given to everyone instead of Generals only.
assassininit11 gives handgun if gunsmith present but lacks trigger for c_gunsmith as some factions can train assassins in castles
Description errors: (export_vnvs)
RansomChivalry description (incorrectly identical to CaptorChivalry)
Nuerotic (trait level is called Nuerotic and trait display as well - should be Neurotic)
LenientJustice at level Way_too_leniant (should be lenient)
Military Assistance trigger problems.
in file descr_faction_standing.txt there is trigger
0080_F_Military_Assistance
trigger is supposed to increase global reputation of faction that is PROVIDING military assistance.
But instead this trigger increases global reputation of faction that is receiving military assistance.
Trigger "sitting_around_town_with_city_barracks" has the condition "library" instead of the more appropriate "militia_drill_square"
There is a problem with the BattleDread/BattleChivalry code that allows generals to possess both traits at once.
Trait descripts for FearsEngland/Egypt/HRE level 1 reads "edgey" should be "edgy"
Merchant's Guild Apprentice trait for Merchants references the presence of an Assassin's Guild, not a Merchant's Guild.
Another bug: Getting an adoption offer that has the Drink trait on the Drunken_Heathen level results in the avatar having a mysterious permanent boost to command, even after the trait is removed. Details:
OK, this seems to be a major hardcode bug afterall.
Remember a page back that I said how starting with the Drunken Heathen trait seemed to give a permanent boost to command even after you remove all traits and ancillaries (using plain remove_ancillary/remove_trait without operators)?
Well, it seems piety is also affected and there seems to be a trend: If your general is offered for adoption or coming of age and has traits that give a total negative value for either command or piety (not chiv/dread, but not sure about loyalty), he gets a permanent +2 bonus onto that trait.
This second piece of evidence came as one of the PBM chars came of age with 2 levels in the PublicAtheism trait (-4 piety) (and ReligionStarter 1 (+3 piety)). Well, after removing everything he still had 2 piety from nowhere.
I should note he also obtained a tutor ancillary (+1 piety), so it could be that its not only if the Attribute value total is negative, but also exactly 0, depending on if ancillaries are giving before or after traits are.
Swift steed ancillary gives a public health bonus even though its an agent ancillary.
Nicolau copernicus ancillary gives a subterfuge bonus even though its a general ancillary.
Bug - AntiTraits.
Yes, we all thought they have been fixed and they have for the most part, BUT I just had a really weird encounter where my exhausted general was assaulted by a vast byzantine army and routed. After the battle, he had BOTH Brave (level1) and Coward(level2) and Haemophobic (level2).
Note that Brave has AntiTraits Coward AND Haemophobic and the latter two traits also have brave as AntiTrait.
So...Antitraits work weirdly at times and getting both traits seems more than odd to me as they are supposed to cancel out.
It seems that Traits with nogoingbacklevels will jump to the nogoingbacklevel, when given an appropriate AntiTrait value.
For example, Trait Drink with Social Drinker value becomes a Alcoholic when a Sobriety 1 is triggered.
When that happens, Command is not reduced by 3.
Another test using the Trait Feck with a Strong Language value becomes Foul Mouthed (i.e. the nogoingbacklevel for Feck) when a Prim 1 is triggered.
When nogoingbacklevels for Feck and Drink was edited out of the traits file, the Feck and Drink were decreased using Prim and Sobriety.
AS trebuchets (available only to mongols and timurids) have the main_infantry banner instead of a main_missile banner.
FactionHeir
04-09-2007, 10:35
Game Mechanics
export_descr_character_traits
;------------------------------------------
Trigger sitting_around_town_with_city_barracks
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd
Condition IsGeneral
and EndedInSettlement
and RemainingMPPercentage = 100
and SettlementBuildingExists >= library
Affects StrategicSkill 1 Chance 4
;-------------------------------------------
This code obviously has been copied incorrectly somewhere. It should read
SettlementBuildingExists >= militia_drill_square
The trigger for dads_prim is duplicated as dads_prim and dads_Prim
dads_smoothtalker trigger exists even though the trait is diplomat only
Further improper trait triggers as generals cannot get these to begin with:
SmoothTalker in random_birth12
GoodConspirator in random_birth27
Secretive in random_birth31
Talkative in random_birth34
Hate traits' 2nd level randomly gives morale or not. Similarly 3rd level randomly decreases morale or not.
birth_with_sanitation, academia, alchemy, religious all lack > at >=
and no longer consider public_baths and aquecut for births.
Trigger governing9 is senseless as far as I can tell in context. (Why give dread solely because the treasury is >50k)
assassininit7 should be SettlementBuildingExists or otherwise all eastern assassins come out as trained killers even though they weren't trained in a settlement with a hashashins guild.
CA has added some extra trait clearers when priests turn heretic, but still lacking the clearance of TheologiansGuildMember, TheologiansGuildTrained, NaturalPriestSkill, PriestLevel.
export_descr_ancillaries
handgun ancillary still gives +2 law.
armour_custom ancillary only triggered by armourer but not by levels above when sitting around town.
marco polo ancillary still given to everyone instead of Generals only.
assassininit11 gives handgun if gunsmith present but lacks trigger for c_gunsmith as some factions can train assassins in castles
Description errors: (export_vnvs)
RansomChivalry description (incorrectly identical to CaptorChivalry)
Nuerotic (trait level is called Nuerotic and trait display as well - should be Neurotic)
LenientJustice at level Way_too_leniant (should be lenient)
From the TWC bug list:
Confirmed bugs so far
High Priority
Battle map
Passive ai in certain siege situations.
Fps drop in sieges when viewing large settlements from certain battles, appears to be a memory leak issue
Ai reinforcements being issued orders but not moving and joining battle
Campaign Map
Autocalculated siege battles weighted in favour of attacked and do not seem to take into account settlement defenses.
Medium Priority
Battle map
Still some issues with unit cohesion and front rank only charging.
Still some issues with cav chasing routers.
If battle happens on steep mountain tile on campaign map armies can be deployed in inacessible places.
Ballista towers shoot cannonballs, and canon towers shoot ballistas.
Some problems with only a few soldiers in missile units shooting when on walls.
Can be difficult to deploy soldiers in settlements during siege battles, and pathfinding issues.
Missile units will complete reload animation before running away in skirmish mode
Rebalance needed of units stats in light of the shield bug being fixed. 2 handed sword units, JHI, Halberd units are now underpowered.
Campaign Map
When recruiting mercs, money is deducted from treasury when adding mercs tot he recruitment list, instead of when pressing the hire merc button.
Ai will sometimes attack rebel settlements with too few troops early on
Ships can sail in and out of blockaded ports(debatable bug due to what happened in history)
Flash food cause permanent corruption to regions preveting the construction of forts/watchtowers and reducing movement rate. Should just be temporary
Still some bugs with VnV triggers, missing triggers, errors in triggers etc.
Low Priority
Battle map
Some buildings can be passed through.
Sometimes units will not deploy in the formation you dragged them out into when you run them to their position.
Campaign Map
Wooden castle and tourney fields mention free upkeep units, yet castles cannot produce free upkeep units
Diplomacy
Graphical/Sound Bugs
When Aztec cities/castles get upgraded to a certain level they end up with Muslim architechture on the battlemap
Venetian Heavy Infantry and Venetian Archer upgraded armour models are wrong, soldier should look like the heavy billmen upgraded armour soldier but wear brigadine armour instead.
Some problems with Latinkon upgraded armour(vertex weighing appears to messed up in some places)
Free Company Men-At-Arms refer to themselves as heavy cav when clicked when they are heavy infantry
Armenian Cav refer to themselves as lightcav when they are heavy cav
Thanks FactionHeir, Lusted
@FactionHeir - if it's not too much trouble could you compile those in a more user friendly way (ie. trait affected, one or two word description of problem; eg. joe_bob; typo)
@Lusted - whether some of those are bugs is debateable; and I'd love to see proof that the siege issue is a result of a memory leak as I've never noticed any problems in that regard when experiencing a slowdown.
Regardless, I'll incorporate some of them tomorrow - no need to replicate each other completely, anyway.
Thanks
Yes some of the bugs are debatable, but i only included things on the list im reasonably sure are bugs. I believe someone at .com alt tabbed out of the game when getting the slowdown in sieges and his memory usage had sky rocketed leading him to believe its due to memory leak.
FactionHeir
04-09-2007, 12:23
Game mechanics:
-British can build military academy and get gunpowder associated traits and retinues before gunpowder is even developed.
-The AI can get new family members spawning into exisiting captain-led stacks in enemy territory even - something the human cannot do. It is unfair and exists since RTW times. And this is NOT man of the hour as the stack often did not even fight.
-Some mercenaries (Frankish knights, Mercenary Crossbowmen) cannot be retrained if their experience is higher than 4 (1 silver)
-AI does not get crusade/jihad desertions.
-Military access seems to not work if you leads a crusade/jihad through your ally's lands (i.e. crusade against egypt passing through allied turkish lands with whom i have accees). Looks like a missing trigger/condition in the faction standing file.
-THIS WILL RESULT IN EXCOMMUNICATION appears even you try to assault an undefended town against whom you have a gag order. However taking it does NOT result in excommunication.
-No man of the hour if attacking out of a settlement, sallying or siege attacking.
-Sometimes man of the hour does not trigger properly and if you save and then load, it triggers.
-Papal vote usually occurs the next turn after the pope dies in combat or was assassinated, but a save/load will lead to an immediate election.
-If captured troops are executed (without offering ransom) the losing commander still gets the RandomDread trait, similarly RansomChivalry if the troops were released without a ransom.
-AI can fight night battles with captains when they are attacking and can use captain led armies to reinforce night battles when attacking.
Not something the human seems to be able to do at all.
-Merchant Skill works even above 10.
I.e. having a skill 10 merchant gives x amount of florins on a resource but if he secretly has more than 10, he will produce more florins. Verified using give_trait and ending turns.
-When defeating a sallying army or a stack supporting a town under siege and your enemy loses his last family members in the battle, the faction is eliminated (duh) BUT the town you were sieging is still under siege and gets a full new garrison of fresh rebel troops.
IMO this shouldn't be happening as its unexplicable where those fresh troops suddenly appeared from and the town is supposed to fall to you when you win the battle instead of being taken over by rebels.
-Combat bonus vs faction (i.e. +X command vs faction Y) is not working.
I attacked a Milanese family member who had "hates the french" (-1 command) but he still had his lone command star in the pre battle screen.
Not just a display error because he was also afraid of the dark and the night battle correctly decreased his command points
-LeaderDestroyedFaction condition is not working at all.
-AI stays allied/at war to you and other AI factions when destroyed, making it impossible to forge alliances with certain factions.
Battlemap:
-Cavalry chasing small amounts of routers will converge at the tip shortly before overrunning the routing units and stop dead in their tracks as a result.
-All crossbow units will complete a reload animation AND fire an empty volley if told to move. (exception is when they just finished firing)
-If the AI sallies and their units rout, your own units often will not pursue them once they get close (say 2-3 full unit lengths) and auto terminate orders saying "orders completed" for example. Telling them to continue attacking them will yield the same result, as if the enemy was not reachable even if all their units are still outside the gate AND relatively far away from the gate. Similarly, routing units that are locked out cannot be attacked.
-AI units once leaving the battlefield (withdrawing or routing) will be able to shoot your troops inside the battlefield if they are mounted missile units (e.g. horse archers, jav horses, xbow horses) This leads to quite severe casualties if you leave your units standing near the battlefield corner after pursuing.
-Rarely, after a victorious battle where you lose very few units, once the combat results screen appears you may lose some extra units for no reason.
-Rarely, random infantry "ghosts" through the battlemap and disappear as soon as you pan the camera view. This even occurs when the enemy does not have any infantry and you don't either.
-When attacking a settlement without siege tools (i.e. with spies instead) the advice messenger will always trigger and say that the aim is not to destroy the walls etc even if the advice if turned off in general.
-Only siege equipment your units can carry are spawned when assaulting a settelement or defending from a sally. That is if you have 1 infantry unit and built say 5 siege tools, only 1 siege tool (usually the first one you built) will spawn and the rest just vanishes into thin air. That is quite annoying as you tend to build several tools in case a few go up in flames.
-Units in spearwall and schiltrom formation often do not properly disengage after the unit they were fighting died or moved away and stay in combat mode showing text info such as "balance of forces is evenly matched" and still play attack animations without actually doing anything.
The problem however is that after a while, those troops become fatigued hitting thin air and thus you keep having to check on whether a unit is still fighting or not.
The same is true for archers that have been taken out of skirmish mode and have been engaged in melee by enemies and those enemies have moved away or been killed. They also stay in melee mode till you tell them otherwise and poke away at air.
Campaign map:
-Campaign map lag. Everything on the campaign map slows to a crawl and move movement and updates are severely impaired. This issues also leads to possibilities of moving units where they are not supposed to go (ie. being able to move out an army out of a BESIEGED town leaving it empty, entering diplomacy with merchants/priests/spies/assassins, moving land units into water and naval units into land)
-It is still possible to initiate diplomacy with a town that is under siege if you told the diplomat to move there before you saw it was under siege (FOW) or it was not besieged at that time. End of turn movement seems to ignore such factors.
-Human skill 10 spies seem to have an issue where the effect on PO disappears after 1 turn inside a town. (i.e. you can move them out and PO stays constant)
-Pope and his army like to move between Florence and Genoa for no apparent reason and stay there.
-Firstly the pope asks me to stop attacking Sicily (even though I'm at war with Sicily and they have lots of single unit captain stacks in my territory cutting my income and have started the war)
Next turn, the pope(!) tells me to blockade Palermo (Sicily) without excommunicating them. (something about making the prodigal son see the light)
Doing as the pope wishes lets you fail the do not attack mission and lowers your relations with the pope.
-Missions from the pope do not expire after his death. That is, if the previous pope hated you and ordered excommunication if you attack anyone and he dies, you can attack anyone you want without excommunication for the time being. As soon as a new pope is elected however (and he may even like you perfectly) and you attack someone, you get insta-excommed by the new pope. This just cannot be right. (especially as the election video tells you that those who didn't like the old pope now can start anew etc)
-Units captured in a successful siege assault can be ransom/release/execute handled but if you ransom or release, they will still not appear (i.e. disappear) from the campaign map. Also happens if you besiege a town and are attacked by a reinforcement stack.
-Pre-battle screen: Rightclicking an enemy commander will open that commander's army card, but rightclicking your own or an allied commander will only open that commander's character card, leaving you clueless about what troops you have.
-If you are hiring mercenaries but have not yet completed the transaction (i.e. you have the merc screen open and dragged a few over to the "to hire" section) and then disband any unit from your army, all mercs currently in the "to hire" section vanish and cannot be rehired - this means you need to wait another 10-20 turns for the mercs to replenish.
-When fighting the Papal States army where a general has more stars than the Pope, the General commands instead of the Pope who is Faction Leader (according to manual, the faction leader always leads the battle).
Pre-battle screen coincidies with that, but gold star/silver star does not.
In battle, if the General falls, the cutscene is played and the general's name is listed correctly as the fallen.
If now the faction leader dies, the general who died already is mentioned again as having died without cutscene.
FactionHeir
04-09-2007, 12:34
Thanks FactionHeir, Lusted
@FactionHeir - if it's not too much trouble could you compile those in a more user friendly way (ie. trait affected, one or two word description of problem; eg. joe_bob; typo)
OK, I tried to make it a bit more userfriendly, but the problem with trait/ancillary bugs is that its usually not the trait that is bugged but triggers, and I basically wrote them similar to the way they appear in the files themselves (can't make it much clearer)
As for the newer post, errr I at least sorted them :)
Whoa that's a long list FH :grin2:
I'll look over it more tomorrow (no time atm ~:( ) but I do have one issue so far:
-THIS WILL RESULT IN EXCOMMUNICATION appears even you try to assault an undefended town against whom you have a gag order. However taking it does NOT result in excommunication.
Unless I'm much mistaken/it's changed, the message is "This may result in excommunication", not that it will do so.
Good work :bow:
FactionHeir
04-09-2007, 13:00
I mean the pop up you get after you already have the "cease hostilities" mission. Ya know, when you try to attack someone and you get the huge popup which you have to confirm to proceed.
From the TWC bug list:
My comments based on v1.2(unofficial):
Still some issues with unit cohesion and front rank only charging.
Confirmed, but it's better than it used to be. Still needs work. I'd classify this one as a "high", personally. Bad unit cohesion can ruin entire battles.
Still some issues with cav chasing routers.
Please change this to "all units" from just "cav". It's getting better but still needs a lot of work.
Ships can sail in and out of blockaded ports(debatable bug due to what happened in history)
Agree this is debatable/not a bug, but would nevertheless like to see it implemented that one cannot get boats out without fighting. I'd classify this is a low priority/feature request.
Flash food cause permanent corruption to regions preveting the construction of forts/watchtowers and reducing movement rate. Should just be temporary.
We still haven't fixed this??? :inquisitive: This should be at least medium IMO.
Sometimes units will not deploy in the formation you dragged them out into when you run them to their position.
Confirmed. This existed in RTW as well, sometimes. Can't get it to happen consistently.
Thanks for the updated list.
Durallan
04-09-2007, 14:08
Ballista towers shoot cannonballs, and canon towers shoot ballistas.
is this one certain? It looked fixed int he file but that might just be me
FactionHeir
04-09-2007, 14:24
Manned settlement towers sometimes don't fire.
Noticed that only in settlements where the entrance to the gate was U shaped, ie:
WWWWWT---------TWWWW
---------W--------W------
---------W--------W------
---------WWTGGTWW-------
The towers in the first row will be idle no matter what but the gate towers shoot normally. Had all manned btw and was a minor city.
Confirmed, but it's better than it used to be. Still needs work. I'd classify this one as a "high", personally. Bad unit cohesion can ruin entire battles.
At TWc im rating things like passive ai, shield bug etc. as major. As 1.2 did improve this im rating it as medium.
Please change this to "all units" from just "cav". It's getting better but still needs a lot of work.
Odd, i've never had problems chasing routers with infantry.
Agree this is debatable/not a bug, but would nevertheless like to see it implemented that one cannot get boats out without fighting. I'd classify this is a low priority/feature request.
Same.
We still haven't fixed this??? This should be at least medium IMO.
It's been around since RTW.
At TWc im rating things like passive ai, shield bug etc. as major. As 1.2 did improve this im rating it as medium.
Fair enough, I haven't played enough to form a solid, firm opinion on this yet. Will wait for the official 1.2 and then repost findings then.
Odd, i've never had problems chasing routers with infantry.
It's not the exact same as cavalry, to be fair. Cav does the "spread out in a star" deal, that's been partially fixed in 1.2(unofficial). They still start to do that, but will usually stop pretty quickly and semi-regroup.
Both cav and infantry have a hard time following the routing unit's path, which is what I meant. The "escorting routing unit off the map" problem with the chasers running alongside happens with both cav and infantry, though it's much more noticable with cav chasing infantry due to speed.
In short, we're getting to where we need to be slowly, but still needs some work.
It's been around since RTW.
That's my point!!! :wall:
It's not the exact same as cavalry, to be fair. Cav does the "spread out in a star" deal, that's been partially fixed in 1.2(unofficial). They still start to do that, but will usually stop pretty quickly and semi-regroup.
Both cav and infantry have a hard time following the routing unit's path, which is what I meant. The "escorting routing unit off the map" problem with the chasers running alongside happens with both cav and infantry, though it's much more noticable with cav chasing infantry due to speed.
In short, we're getting to where we need to be slowly, but still needs some work.
This also happened in RTw to an extent as well, it seems routing units have a messed 'center' as it were so chasing units have difficulty working out just where to attack the routing unit.
This also happened in RTw to an extent as well, it seems routing units have a messed 'center' as it were so chasing units have difficulty working out just where to attack the routing unit.
That's a good point, since I'm currently playing RTW. One thing I noticed, and I can't pin it down exactly, is that in v1.5 you get that insane broken unit problem, where you'll have guys literally halfway across the map from the main group, and then another guy halfway across the other side of the map. I don't ever remember this pre-1.5.
Another thing I'm noticing now moreso in v1.5 is worse unit cohesion, compared to say a year or two ago. I'm curious if anyone else is noticing this as well. A random thought that occured to me was this might be a direct result of video card driver updates. The reason I say this is look at some older games, like say Mechwarrior 3. With newer drivers, you'll get APCs that like to launch themselves into low earth orbit randomly, if you backdate your drivers to a certain version you don't have that problem. Am wondering if perhaps this somehow translates into M2TW's current issues. Oh well, I'd assume that CA knows what's going on and is working on it per the bug list. For the record my gaming rig has Nvidia hardware in it.
I wonder, it could be related to that, and if so how the hell would CA go about fixing it properly if its video card driver related?
I wonder, it could be related to that, and if so how the hell would CA go about fixing it properly if its video card driver related?
Disclaimer, I am not an OpenGL/DirectX programmer.
My guess is it has to do with how they've implemented certain OGL/D3D function calls to render certain parts of the game. Take my previous example of the Low Earth Orbit APCs from Mech3, the general consensus seems to be that it has to do with using an old implementation of DirectX. Over time Nvidia and ATI do wierd/sometimes stupid crap to their code in attempt to "optimize" for certain games, and often end up breaking older stuff in the process that's based on dated versions of the DX API. An example would be the reason that Mechwarrior 2 Mercenaries isn't playable anymore, as it uses DX2/3, which I'm not aware of any other DX2/3 games that are playable on XP (this is based only on DX compatability).
In terms of fixing it, you got me. I'd assume that it's simply the devs working with Nvidia/ATI/possibly MS to smush out bugs and figure out if it's their code or not. Seeing how they've already got the Nvidia sticker/intro movie in M2TW I'd assume that they already have this relationship established.
FactionHeir
04-10-2007, 09:54
Sorry sapi, I made a spelling mistake in my post. Was supposed to read "RansomDread" not "RandomDread" lol :)
I quite liked your old description of the campaign map lag on the old buglist btw, much more eloquent. Also, me thinks should be high priority :)
Remind me tomorrow to fix the spelling error ~;)
Oh, and it's in medium priority as not everyone experiences it.
FactionHeir
04-10-2007, 11:19
While alliances are greatly improved in 1.2, the AI still randomly will blockade your ports for no apparent reason.
For example I allied with Sicily and 4 turns later they blockade my port at Ragusa (I bought that off the Venecians) even though they have no invasion army and no allies (while I was allied to about 7 factions).
It only seems to be a port blockade problem too, as there were no land invasions at all between my allies so far in 40 turns.
[edit]
While posting my wishlist I remembered that haha:
Demand Attack Faction via Diplomacy costs exorbitant amounts (on average 600k-800k) AND the AI never actually attacks that faction even if they are at war after you pay them (i.e. via cheats).
[edit2]
After reading your conversion of my reports, I should correct your conversions :p
So:
- AI can use captains to lead night battle attacks (you notice this because you are the AI's reinforcement) [not just "AI can use captains for night battles"
- Not only alliances remain with dead factions but also being at war.
- Better explanation of MOTH: If your stack is defending against an AI attack not from the settlement but from outside while besieging the same or allied factons's settlement and you win, your captain takes the settlement during the end of turn and the next turn, if you DO NOT have an adoption/marriage offer, the MOTH message will pop up and result in funeral. However, my report is not quite about that but: Attacking from within a settlement, Sallying and Attacking a settlement will never result in MOTH. Not even the pop up resulting in a funeral. IMO it should result in MOTH at least when you don't have a captain but a general (i.e not family member) fight the battle.
-While its true routing people cannot be properly engaged (i.e. system won't let you) when they are locked out, you also cannot if they are not locked out but getting close to the gate entrance.
- Units captured in a siege assault (actually not always assault but mostly when besieging and getting attacked by a different stack that uses settlement as reinforcements) can actually be successfully ransomed, i.e. you get the cash, but the ransomed units die anyway as they have nowhere to spawn.
Priorities:
I'd move AI not getting desertions to high priority, same as random general spawns.
Also move cannot see army composition, papal cease hostility missions not expiring and combat vs faction X not working to medium.
I'd move AI not getting desertions to high priority, same as random general spawns.
The AI is very poor at protecting it's generals and moving it's crusades in a way that avoids desertions.
If you removed these advantages the AI gets then the AI would be very easy to beat as you could just wipe the family line out easily and the AI's Crusades would never reach their targets.
It's 100% clear to me thats it's a well thought out feature that helps the AI work and not a bug in any way shape or form.
FactionHeir
04-10-2007, 14:19
The general spawn in itself is not a problem. The problem is the generals spawning into captain led stacks anywhere on the map, regardless of own region or hostile region. If their adoptees were to spawn into their cities like human generals do, then I would have no problems with it.
Note that they don't get several generals a turn, but the general spawning is the one adoption you get per turn when you have less generals than regions.
As for crusade desertions, that is debatable, but I would consider it a bug as it gives the AI an unfair advantage. The devs might as well let the crusade stack travel by sea (sea invasions work fine) or let them attack neutral/hostile stacks blocking the way. Humans are limited by the exact same things and I wouldn't see a scenario where the AI would be disadvantaged in terms of campaign map movement.
FactionHeir
04-10-2007, 17:27
Game mechanics:
- Priests cannot get above the 3rd level of the StrongFaith trait as a trigger for it is lacking.
Regarding the general spawning discussion, my input:
I think that generals should spawn, in this order:
1. On their father/benefactor.
a. On the father's stack if he's in the field.
b. If the stack is full, the in the city, if in a friendly province.
c. If in enemy territory, then at the faction's capital.
2. Coming of age stuff should also spawn in the nation's capital, in my view. Spawning on pops would be OK, though I prefer the first.
HoreTore
04-11-2007, 01:32
As for the generalspawning, I fully agree with Carl. It makes the game harder, and such features should stay IMO. It simply means that you can't trust that enemy 3-unit stack to be harmless, next turn it can transform to a general-led merc stack... IMO, it's a fun feature.
As for the crusades, I sort of agree. I do not think that the AI should suffer at the same level as the player, that would mean that they never get to their targets. However, the crusading AI needs improvement. It is following the closest route to the target, however, it happily takes a 10 turn detour instead of attack a single unit stack. That's got to be improved. They should start attacking enemies on their way to the target. Add in that, and I think most of the problem goes away. But they still need to suffer desertions. This isn't just a problem for the player, this is a problem for the AI as well, as they will never end a crusade, and thus cannot start a new one.
For example, say you're playing egypt, and the pope calls a crusade on Jerusalem. You kill all the crusading armies arriving in the levant, but the spanish crusade stays in their boats off the coast of Toledo. Now, you can happily leave that army there, and you know that you won't have another crusade launched until that general dies, giving you 60 or so crusade-free years. That needs to be fixed.
FactionHeir
04-11-2007, 02:28
IMO instead of using excuses for a poor AI, the AI itself should be improved and not by cheating. Quite a few of new games use AI cheating instead of smarter AI, simply because its easier for the devs.
Strategy is all about a level game, and the game is only as easy or difficult as you make it - i.e. steamroll vs defend. No need to arbitrarily force the player into something.
Now, onto bugs:
With the introduction of the InquisitorSuccess trait, Inquisitors can no longer get a level in GoodDenouncer of 2 or higher. However priests can still.
As such, the description of the 5th level of GoodDenouncer is inadequate as it reads "utterly unafraid to even prosecute royalty" or something along those lines. That description would only be applicable to inquisitor characters not priests.
heynow21
04-11-2007, 08:42
I was wondering how many people are using this with Vista, because I can't get it to run at all in the battles. It gives me the error "MW2 has encountered an unspecified error" and boots me to the desktop during the loading screen. this is after patching a clean install with 1.2, twice. I tested and made sure that it worked 1.0 first as well.
Vista ultimate
8800 GTX
2 gigs ram
E6600
P5N32-E mobo
Daveybaby
04-11-2007, 11:57
IMO instead of using excuses for a poor AI, the AI itself should be improved and not by cheating. Quite a few of new games use AI cheating instead of smarter AI, simply because its easier for the devs.
Name any strategy game from any era (other than something with tightly constrained rules like chess or go) that doesnt have a cheating AI and yet still provides a challenge at harder difficulty levels.
FactionHeir
04-11-2007, 12:13
Name any strategy game from any era (other than something with tightly constrained rules like chess or go) that doesnt have a cheating AI and yet still provides a challenge at harder difficulty levels.
Command and Conquer I, Starcraft, Panger General I, North and South. Possibly Civilization I too
Daveybaby
04-11-2007, 14:37
Command and Conquer I, Starcraft, Panger General I, North and South. Possibly Civilization I too
C&C1 & starcraft are clickfests not strategy games, but if youre telling me that having a 1v1 player vs ai skirmish game provides a challenge then youre even worse than me at RTS games (and thats pretty poor). Oh, and on hard levels the AI gets insane production bonuses.
Panzer general is a series of scenarios which are made more difficult by giving the AI more units than you in later levels. In other words, the AI has an unfair advantage - i.e. its cheating.
Civ even goes so far as to tell you how the AI cheats at harder levels (production, unrest and research bonuses, and AI factions will gang up on the player) in the manual.
Not familiar with North and South so i'll have to give you that one - although if its anything like your other suggestions i'm going to reserve the right to be pretty sceptical.
Regardless, implying that devs are just being lazy by not programming up a human level AI is the same as implying that NASA are just being lazy cos they havent bothered to invent warp drive yet. If you know something they dont about AI development that would make it easy (or even possible) then i suggest you get busy selling what you know as you could end up a very rich man.
FactionHeir
04-11-2007, 14:54
C&C1 & starcraft are clickfests not strategy games, but if youre telling me that having a 1v1 player vs ai skirmish game provides a challenge then youre even worse than me at RTS games (and thats pretty poor). Oh, and on hard levels the AI gets insane production bonuses.
Panzer general is a series of scenarios which are made more difficult by giving the AI more units than you in later levels. In other words, the AI has an unfair advantage - i.e. its cheating.
While you may consider C&C and SC as 'clickfests' they are officially listed as strategy games. For all we know someone else might consider TW games as 'clickfests'.
Also, there was no mention of 1v1 games, as even in M2TW you aren't 1v1ing against the AI but there are ~10 or so AI factions. While I know that in SC's higher difficulty levels the AI gets a small resource boost (2000 minerals/gas) at the very start only, nothing like this is known about C&C1. Also, extra resources, i.e. florins isn't strictly speaking 'cheating' as its pretty standard measure to have opponents start off with more money on higher difficulties, even in human vs human games in terms of board games. In those games, you vs 7 comps on the highest difficulty is manageable (not easily, but possible, at least for me - not sure about you).
Now, we can keep doing this back-and-forth but I doubt it will result in anything more than that we simply agree that we don't agree on this AI cheats issue. So there is no point in continuing it other than having the mods eventually ban both of us for flaming.
Moderators: I suggest renaming this topic to Unofficial 1.2 Buglist. CA have pulled the patch for a reason, which can only mean that they have found some issues with it. The official patch will have these issues fixed. I'm sure our community will uncover the same things so it is likely that some of the issues reported here will be fixed in the official 1.2.
FactionHeir
04-11-2007, 18:12
Moderators: I suggest renaming this topic to Unofficial 1.2 Buglist. CA have pulled the patch for a reason, which can only mean that they have found some issues with it. The official patch will have these issues fixed. I'm sure our community will uncover the same things so it is likely that some of the issues reported here will be fixed in the official 1.2.
Actually CA posted that they want us to keep lists for the unofficial patch so they can fix those bugs for the final 1.2
Another bug:
Battle map:
- Elephant Artillery cannon balls bounce off settlement walls and back towards them. Not sure if those are still lethal though, but it might be.
Campaign map:
- Spelling error when a witch kills a priest. Last sentence ends in "or say they insist" should be "or so they insist"
Actually CA posted that they want us to keep lists for the unofficial patch so they can fix those bugs for the final 1.2
I understand, but I just suggested a name change. When the real 1.2 comes out you'll want to have a separate bug list for it (if it has any bugs left, that is).:beam:
Traits:
I could get screenshots, but basically ALL princesses I see in 1.2 have 0-1 charm and are called "____ the snob" from bad traits I guess. The trait system is really messed up.
Another thing I noticed is that pretty much all my generals have the "sexually liberated" line of traits, which is kind of ridiculous.
I´ve noticed something with Dread when city management is determined (with more than one character in the city), it´s the one with less Dread who becomes governor. Chivalry works allright, the one with higher Chiv is the governor.
And then something with the rules of sucession (though that´s like it was in 1.1 before): When a Man without a mature son becomes King, his younger brother becomes the heir. So far so well, however, shouldn´t the king´s son, when comes of age, become the heir?
I´m not really sure whether that´s a bug, but there´s a sort of pathfinding issue on the campaignmap as well. When you order an army (or ship) somewhere, and there´s a visible hostile or neutral obstacle (namely the control zone of another army, ship or city), the army or ship still use the straight way and get stuck in the control zone. If I remember correctly, in RTW units move around obstacles they can see. This cost me a whole crusade army, by the way.
FactionHeir
04-11-2007, 22:53
I could get screenshots, but basically ALL princesses I see in 1.2 have 0-1 charm and are called "____ the snob" from bad traits I guess. The trait system is really messed up.
According to the new trait triggers, if your treasury at the end of turn is higher than 10000, your princess gets the PretentiousWoman trait. IMO CA did a mistake doing that because you aren't always able to spend all your florins and sometimes you just want to save some up for next turn's construction or diplomacy. I for one disabled that trigger in my fixes. I would agree that this is 'buggish' though.
I´m not really sure whether that´s a bug, but there´s a sort of pathfinding issue on the campaignmap as well. When you order an army (or ship) somewhere, and there´s a visible hostile or neutral obstacle (namely the control zone of another army, ship or city), the army or ship still use the straight way and get stuck in the control zone. If I remember correctly, in RTW units move around obstacles they can see. This cost me a whole crusade army, by the way.
Noticed this too. My crusading army is slightly northwest of Paris and I want to move them just outside the zone of control south of Paris (well within the green and the general would just have to move right outside the zone of control) What does the general do? Run into the northwestern zone of control of Paris for no obvious reason. I agree this is a pathfinding bug.
Now, a bug of my own :D
Game mechanics:
- The condition of training cavalry to gain points for the horse_breeders_guild is NOT working. I set the tresholds of all other guilds well into the 1000s for testing purposes and the one for cav down to 80. Trained in several citadels some mailed and feudal knights (each worth 20 points) and yet didn't get the guild. However, I then stopped training for a few turns and held races in Alexandria. Next turn I get an offer for the guild there. Thats pretty much proof that the guild trigger for cavalry is faulty (probably should be like sword smiths guild where it lists each unit individually). Also, building the castle stables line of buildings doesn't seem to give points towards the guild either even though it should. (at least the S part doesn't seem to be working, not sure about the O part)
IrishArmenian
04-11-2007, 23:55
Armenian Cav refer to themselves as lightcav when they are heavy cav
We just get confused sometimes!
I was going to post that and the Men-at-Arms, but those have already been posted.
Brutal DLX
04-12-2007, 10:04
Game mechanics:
- The condition of training cavalry to gain points for the horse_breeders_guild is NOT working. I set the tresholds of all other guilds well into the 1000s for testing purposes and the one for cav down to 80. Trained in several citadels some mailed and feudal knights (each worth 20 points) and yet didn't get the guild. However, I then stopped training for a few turns and held races in Alexandria. Next turn I get an offer for the guild there. Thats pretty much proof that the guild trigger for cavalry is faulty (probably should be like sword smiths guild where it lists each unit individually). Also, building the castle stables line of buildings doesn't seem to give points towards the guild either even though it should. (at least the S part doesn't seem to be working, not sure about the O part)
Isn't the horse breeder's guild a city-based guild only?
FactionHeir
04-12-2007, 11:09
Haven't actually checked on that, but building the castle line of stables buildings according to the guilds file gives settlement points to the castle. So either its kind of working as it should and there are a lot of junk triggers or its not working :)
Well it's real early, I couldn't sleep, so I thought I'd run a few scenarios with the v1.2 unofficial update and see how unit grouping/blobbing has been handled.
Unfortunately, it does not appear to be improved at all. I did this with both infantry and cavalry, but tests were mainly done with cav.
See some screenshots here.
https://img152.imageshack.us/img152/2762/0001cr7.th.jpg (https://img152.imageshack.us/my.php?image=0001cr7.jpg)
Some individuals do as depicted above, and move very far away from the other men in the unit.
https://img152.imageshack.us/img152/8885/0002ji3.th.jpg (https://img152.imageshack.us/my.php?image=0002ji3.jpg)
Example of how the unit will stop and remain after coming out of a move order. No attempt to get back into formation is made.
https://img152.imageshack.us/img152/1435/0003wo6.th.jpg (https://img152.imageshack.us/my.php?image=0003wo6.jpg)
This is how they will run, which is very badly out of formation. In RTW units would slowly get back into formation when moving/running, I have not seen that happen at all in M2TW in any of the versions.
Note the above screenshots were only from one of my multiple test runs. The observations below were noted to varying degrees in all runs.
Observations:
- Units do not keep or attempt to get back into formation when moving at slow or high speed.
- When coming out of a run or move order, units will not attempt to get back into the formation that they were ordered to be in. Missile units will keep firing but will not attempt to regain formation.
- Unit blobbing is not improved, in multiple instances several individuals would go very far distances from the main group and then stay there. See above screenshots.
- Setting the "hold_formation" flag in the descr_pathfinding.txt file from 20 down 1 had absolutely no noticable impact.
- Units are very slow to respond to commands, and will often not do as ordered (such as run). Units also appear to rarely ignore commands completely.
- Guard mode had no effect whatsoever on keeping formation when moving and coming out of a move order.
Points 2 and 5 make the game pretty much unplayable and a crapshoot. Kinda hard to manage a battle when your units ignore or respond extremely slow to commands. The "simulated delay" argument is awful, this problem didn't exist in the other 3 games.
:wall:
Brutal DLX
04-12-2007, 12:25
Haven't actually checked on that, but building the castle line of stables buildings according to the guilds file gives settlement points to the castle. So either its kind of working as it should and there are a lot of junk triggers or its not working :)
The way I understood guilds to work was that you can accumulate points in every settlement, no matter if it's a castle or a city, however, you won't get the guild when the requirements are reached unless you have the appropriate settlement type too. A quick way to test this in your game would be the conversion of your castle and then waiting a couple of turns if the guild offer comes up. (But it might be that you didn't accumulate enough points in the castle yet... need to bear that in mind too)
FactionHeir
04-12-2007, 13:03
Hmm I just check my descr_buildings file and it indeed is city only. The way you describe the guild points is reasonable too, thus I shall retract the bug statement :)
The convert_to command in export_descr_buildings.txt seems to be busted, mostly for the two biggest city types but has all around problems. It used to be that one could add a conver_to line for them, and one could change them to another city type. That doesn't work anymore, no matter what, I cannot add anything that will allow a huge city to convert to any level of castle. Further, after a random point, one cannot convert to or from a city to a castle anymore.
This was discovered using the base campaign, editing the bone stock export_descr_buildings.txt, and using console commands add_population (both + and - numbers) and process_cq to test.
FactionHeir
04-12-2007, 16:45
Ermm once a city gets stone walls its not supposed to be convertable to a citadel anymore...
Campaign map:
- When sending a spy into a settlement and then besieging it and the spy did not open the gate, and you unsiege (i.e. lift siege) and send in another spy the same turn, re-sieging the settlement that turn still won't open the gates even if the chance is now 100% or higher.
Ermm once a city gets stone walls its not supposed to be convertable to a citadel anymore...
In the base campaign as designed, true. In terms of file editing, yes, this used to be doable.
Edit - Confirmed for sure. The convert_to stuff is almost totally busted. I set a citadel to be converted to huge city walls. It works, but I can't build above the 3rd tech level in the city, even when I demolish stuff. Also I can't convert large or huge cities at all.
RickooClan
04-13-2007, 17:41
Computer hanging bug:
When you attack the AI and open the pre-battle screen, sometimes while you switch to "night battle" , the AI suddenly considered the battle odd is too disadvantage on them and "retreat". The AI general will then retreat and moving backward on the campaign map. However, the pre-battle screen still go on [even you switch off night battle now the AI general on map already "retreat backward"]. If you push continue and enter battle, the game will load but lock up in the middle as it cant find the map for battle. [since your army and AI army are actually on different spot on map now]. You cant do anything with that other than reboot the PC.
I have this happen once while my general have a +3 command by swithing to night battle.
Quickening
04-13-2007, 20:12
You get an announcement that your siege equipment is unmanned when in fact it is the enemy who has abandoned their siege equipment. This has only happened to me when I sally out to fight besiegers.
Also, when the battle opens you sometimes get an announcement about who is winning (I mean even before you click "Start Deployment"). This never happened once in my English campaign but all the time in my French one.
HoreTore
04-13-2007, 23:40
Ok, this one is weird. Very weird. Just a quick note, this is my first campaign with the new patch, and I did a clean install, as well as no tweaking in the files.
Anyway, I got offered this guy for adoption:
https://img249.imageshack.us/img249/6615/0000yy2.jpg
It's weird enough that I get offered someone with 16 points in drink... But look closer at his traits. He hasn't got ANY traits giving positive command, yet he still has 1 command, and alcoholic gives -3 command! First, I figured that this may be a bug resulting from shifting the position of traits in the trait file(which gives odd results like showing the wrong name and desc for a trait). However, out of curiosity, I accepted the adoption, and I type remove_trait Drink in the console. Now he looked like this!
https://img444.imageshack.us/img444/9827/0001no5.jpg
He's suddenly got 4 command stars out of the blue! No trait whatsoever is giving those stars! I checked through the trait file to look for hidden traits giving command, there weren't any.
FactionHeir
04-14-2007, 00:48
Campaign map:
- If defeating an enemy army and receiving the message "Enemy army routs", it still shows your own general as the army routing. Similarly, "Your forces melt away" will show the enemy general routing instead of yours although the game situation is the exact opposite.
Teg_Navanis
04-14-2007, 15:35
Something I hoped would be fixed by now: global experience bonuses (for example the one from the Swordsmiths Guild) don't work. I had a Master Swordsmiths Guild in Caen and built a few knights in Granada (which had a Tourney Field). They ended up without experience, even though they should have 3 (2 from the Tourney Field and one from the Swordsmiths Guild).
Teg_Navanis
04-14-2007, 15:41
I can confirm HoreTore's bug.
https://img145.imageshack.us/img145/3549/0001wq2.jpg (https://imageshack.us)
This screenshot is from 1.1, but I have another mad king in my 1.2 game with the same problem. (Talent for command and good with taxes are the two traits one can't see on the screenshots - they don't affect authority)
With -4 from insanity and +2 for being faction leader, he should have -2 authority. I assume that the game has problems coping with negative values.
HoreTore
04-14-2007, 16:12
Teg_Navanis, try removing the trait with the console and see what happens then... If you're not familiar with it, take him out of a settlement, select him, then type remove_trait this Insane.
Negative values gone bad could be the answer to your problem. However, I doubt it is the cause of mine. The reason is that there is NO WAY anyone can gain Alcoholic on adoption. To gain that level, you'll have to get 16 points of drink. When adopted, you have an 8% chance of gaining 1 point in drink, no more. There is also the problem that occurs when you remove the trait, and some hidden stats jump out...
I have absolutely no idea where the problem is...
FactionHeir
04-14-2007, 16:53
Something I hoped would be fixed by now: global experience bonuses (for example the one from the Swordsmiths Guild) don't work. I had a Master Swordsmiths Guild in Caen and built a few knights in Granada (which had a Tourney Field). They ended up without experience, even though they should have 3 (2 from the Tourney Field and one from the Swordsmiths Guild).
Thanks for testing and confirming :)
RickooClan
04-14-2007, 18:40
Disasters block the building of forts/watchtowers in a region and decrease movement rate permanently (after a reload on that turn?)
I had both storm and flood happen in my 1.2 game and it seems the bug only occur after flooding. I have a quick search on the forum and realize this bug was in RTW as well.
Rickoo, this has indeed been in the games since RTW. It's beyond me how/why it hasnt' been fixed yet. :dizzy2:
Another ... "bug". I'm hesitant to call it a bug because it's probably more of a 'matter of taste', but it's a bit excessive. In the v1.2 unofficial, corruption seems to be out of control. In v1.1 it wasn't very noticable, in v1.2 I'm struggling to keep my finances in order while maintaining a modest, reasonable sized standing army and keep improving my cities. I checked the income tab and I'm losing a LOT to corruption. Think perhaps this should be toned back some.
RickooClan
04-14-2007, 19:28
Rickoo, this has indeed been in the games since RTW. It's beyond me how/why it hasnt' been fixed yet. :dizzy2:
If that is the case then should we regard it as an "intended" game feature actually??? [I know it is very difficult to understand tho... :dizzy2: ]
And about corruption, since my kingdom is not large enough so i dont have much cities very very far away from the capital yet. May be you could build more law enforcing building to stop those corruption?
Teg_Navanis
04-14-2007, 20:13
I have to take back what I said about global experience bonuses not working. After reloading, everything works as it should. I'm not sure what to make of it: is it possible that the bug is automatically fixed when you reload your game? I think there was a similar bug, something to do with your capital and/or merchants, that could be fixed by reloading.
If that is the case then should we regard it as an "intended" game feature actually??? [I know it is very difficult to understand tho... :dizzy2: ]
It's a bug, CA has acknowledged this before, in the days of RTW.
And about corruption, since my kingdom is not large enough so i dont have much cities very very far away from the capital yet. May be you could build more law enforcing building to stop those corruption?
Yeah I can build a few, but it's still excessive. Think it needs to be toned down quite a bit.
I've also confirmed another bug. The "stalled crusade" bug where factions will get their crusade stacks to within a square or two of the target, and never attack it still exists.
FactionHeir
04-14-2007, 21:57
I have to take back what I said about global experience bonuses not working. After reloading, everything works as it should. I'm not sure what to make of it: is it possible that the bug is automatically fixed when you reload your game? I think there was a similar bug, something to do with your capital and/or merchants, that could be fixed by reloading.
Yes, the bug occurs with loading and if you empty your queues and load, it gets fixed on its own until you reaload again.
FactionHeir
04-15-2007, 11:42
Battle map:
When the AI attacks you and has reinforcements (and you don't - or at least I never had in those situations), their reinforcements tend to take up a defensive position and wait for you to attack them after their main army has been defeated. This has happened repeatedly for me during my French campaign against the Byzantines and the Portuguese. This is also most noticeable when they only bring 1 reinforcement stack, as you usually tend to take out the main army fairly quickly with aimed charges and flanking and the reinforcement army that just entered the battlefield will look for the nearest hill (they always go for a hill then) and camps there. Of course this is most annoying when you do not have the battle timer on as it forces you to attack them even though you are the defender, as quitting the battle results in you losing it. Lose - Lose situation without battle timer really. It also happens if the AI brings more than 1 reinforcement stack.
Campaign map/Game mechanics/Battle map:
The faction leader does not always lead the stack if his command is lower than that of another general in that stack, contrary to information given by the manual. I can give you a screen shot of that if you want one. This does not only happen for the pope but also for other factions (AI).
AI: The AI would sometimes drop a faction heir alone or not into my lands.
Battlemap (sound) : Do a battle vs a small size army with a lot of reinforcements, kill half of the original army, you get the "The enemy is badly bloodied" message even if the kill counter is at <<<<<< 50% (11% for me).
Updated.
Phew, that was a lot :grin2:
I'll do the wishlist tomorrow :bow:
FactionHeir
04-17-2007, 11:32
Errr where did you get the info that antitraits are not working??
From what I read over at the modding forum it works.
Battle map
If the AI has artillery and while moving into position the artillery blocks each other from taking up the position, the AI gets deadlocked in a loop where you can hear the enemy commander shouting commands every second and the army stalling where it is. This continues until your general (or main bulk of army) comes into their range at which time they become active again. Not so bad if you are the attacker, but annoying if the enemy is the attacker (as this forces you to attack them)
HoreTore
04-17-2007, 11:47
Yeah, at least they are partially working. I've got a lot of generals who've lost one point in something, like strategychivalry.
@FH - whoops, misread something :embarassed:
Pope'o meter
The meter displaying Papal standing gets stuck at "outstanding" while the diplomacy screen states, relations with the Pope are "Perfect". The situation has persisted for quite a few turns now in my English campaign.
FactionHeir
04-18-2007, 01:49
Some more happy bugs:
Campaign mechanics
- Exploitable feature: With the trusted allies in place, if you are allied with the papal states and on at least very good relations, attacking any nation will result in the papal states also declaring war on them the next turn. This will thus result in instant excommunication for catholic victims, paving you the way to mercilessly eliminate your foe.
Battle map
- Hidden troop locations can be easily spotted if you have a unit selected and hover the mouse over the forest. Where your mouse is not showing a possible movement field but a standard cursor, there is a hidden unit.
- Ballistae refuse to shoot at enemies at a slope below them even though there is a clear shot possible according to my screen. Note this is only a selective screenshot. I moved the ballistae all around the mountain and they'd only shoot when they were below or right across at the same level as the enemy.
https://img137.imageshack.us/img137/6897/0001mk7.jpg
https://img137.imageshack.us/img137/683/0002lx2.jpg
- Negative unit display?? (My venetian allies had reinforcements which didn't show on the battlemap. Maybe that is the cause?)
https://img461.imageshack.us/img461/9878/0003xt1.jpg
Campaign mechanics
- Exploitable feature: With the trusted allies in place, if you are allied with the papal states and on at least very good relations, attacking any nation will result in the papal states also declaring war on them the next turn. This will thus result in instant excommunication for catholic victims, paving you the way to mercilessly eliminate your foe.
I wouldn't necessarily call this a bug or an exploit. It took me quite a long time in my current campaign and a lot of cash and goodies to get the Pope to be my ally. Thus with all that effort put into it, he should behave like any other ally, which he has so far in my campaign.
- Ballistae refuse to shoot at enemies at a slope below them even though there is a clear shot possible according to my screen.
I think this may be intended, BUT am not sure. The bolts travel at a certain speed and (IIRC) the equipment itself behaves like archers or towers, where there's a min and max angle they can shoot at. If they're unable to shoot below 0 degrees, with 0 being horizontal front, then that would account for the situation you ran into.
- Negative unit display?? (My venetian allies had reinforcements which didn't show on the battlemap. Maybe that is the cause?)
Spontaneous reproduction! :inquisitive: :sweatdrop: :beam:
Also, good work on the bug hunting so far.
GOWDragonMaster
04-18-2007, 16:18
Can someone verified if all agent related move are affect by Settlements under sieged, because I've seen spy enter a sieged settlements or possibly AI Agent continue to perform their mission regardless of a siege or not. I believe this only happens when orders are issue before the siege though.
Cannot Verified for AI orders though.
Von Nanega
04-18-2007, 16:22
I get a massive hang, and the game does not go to the battle map when I click to fight the battle myself. Anyone know how to fix this?
FactionHeir
04-18-2007, 16:24
Can someone verified if all agent related move are affect by Settlements under sieged, because I've seen spy enter a sieged settlements or possibly AI Agent continue to perform their mission regardless of a siege or not. I believe this only happens when orders are issue before the siege though.
Cannot Verified for AI orders though.
Yes, its one of the bugs I've reported, only for diplomats and spies though. Quite possible that it affects other agents too.
HoreTore
04-18-2007, 16:55
Bug:
The great cross still wont go through the gate when sallying. Just sallied from Antioch, when I selected the cross and clicked anywhere outside the gate, it would flash the movement arrow for a second, and then disappear, not moving an inch.
FactionHeir
04-18-2007, 21:34
Three more bugs:
Campaign map:
- Ransoming back a family member (or the AI ransoming its family member) without ransoming a general's bodyguard (sometimes only the family member gets caught) will result in his instant death as the unit cannot be displayed without bodyguards. The family will show him as having died peacefully.
- Moving a group of fast and slow units (i.e. cav with infantry/artillery or infantry with artillery) together and then disbanding all slow units will result in the fast units losing all their remaining movement points down to how much the slow units had left.
- Generals (non family members) dying are still displayed as family member deaths in the faction announcements.
Old Geezer
04-19-2007, 00:40
Immediately upon loading the game after updating with the 1.2 patch I checked the upgrades from the Master Swordsmith's Guild and the Woodsmen's Guild HQ. The Woodsmen's HQ gave 2 experience chevrons globally even in its city (Nottingham) which should give 3 and these cannot be futher upgraded to 3 at the HQ. The Master Swordsmith's Guild, however, gave 3 experience points globally to Mailed and Feudal Knights. Dismounted Feudal Knights and English Dismounted Knights get no experience bonus. Mounted knights received 1 experience point in castles that have no Swordsmith's Guild.
So it seems that the bonus which the archers lost at Guild HQ has been given to mounted knights. I guess when they reprogrammed these they got the instructions reversed. (Or is this subtle class warfare?) :dizzy2:
PutCashIn
04-19-2007, 02:53
Hey, the 1.1 bug list has all gone by by, even tho 1.2 isnt 'officially' out yet (?).
That and I'm sure someone has seen it, but the Trait 'Intelligent' is spelt with 3 L's in the game.
Another ... "bug". I'm hesitant to call it a bug because it's probably more of a 'matter of taste', but it's a bit excessive. In the v1.2 unofficial, corruption seems to be out of control. In v1.1 it wasn't very noticable, in v1.2 I'm struggling to keep my finances in order while maintaining a modest, reasonable sized standing army and keep improving my cities. I checked the income tab and I'm losing a LOT to corruption. Think perhaps this should be toned back some.
My guess is this is an intentional design decision meant to be a BIG drag on rapid expansion, due to the various reports of people beating the game so damn quickly and easily. As corruption is a function of distance to capital, it is the single most significant economic factor the devs can use to punish rapid expansion, and it's likely that's exactly why it is much higher now. You almost have to wait for your economy to develop to keep your war machine going, which means games will now be much more reasonably paced and as a result the AI will have a chance to develop better and put up a better fight hopefully. Also, it serves as a further reward for choosing the city government branch over the much easier happy-building tree: IIRC government is responsible for keeping corruption in check.
- Generals (non family members) dying are still displayed as family member deaths in the faction announcements.[/B]
This one is simply a matter of semantics. The game code always refers to anyone on the family tree as "family." So from the game's point of view, anyone on the family tree is a family member. This would be exactly why you adopt prospective generals, or they marry into the tree: it really is even treated like a family, even if they're not direct blood relatives. I don't think there's anything wrong with this particular item, we just have to adjust our thinking: all generals ARE really family members. :smile:
FactionHeir
04-19-2007, 10:55
Hey, the 1.1 bug list has all gone by by, even tho 1.2 isnt 'officially' out yet (?).
That and I'm sure someone has seen it, but the Trait 'Intelligent' is spelt with 3 L's in the game.
They fixed that in 1.2 btw.
frogbeastegg
04-19-2007, 21:21
Sorry, no time to read all this through and see if these points have been mentioned already ~:( I haven't got nearly enough playtime to say that these are bugs, but they are odd enough to make me want to pass the word along so others can take a look.
1. The game doesn't save my city settings. When I exit the game entirely and then come back and load a save game all of my cities are set so I have to have a governor present to build and recruit. I always have the game set to let me manage all settlements at all times.
2. I've found that the AI is behaving very differently if I exit and reload the game. In my current campaign (English VH battle, M campaign) I've had two play sessions. In my first everything was peaceful, sensible and logical. AI factions declared war rarely, and when they did it was a sensible choice. I played 52 turns, then finally dragged myself away. In all that time one faction (Danes) declared war on me, and I declared war on nobody but the rebels.
I continued the same game tonight. I played until turn 67, which means 15 turns. I've had the Danes (again, now in reduced form thanks to my taking one of their settlements and killing their troops before making peace the first time), France, Portugal (3 times) and Sicily (twice) declare war on me. The Danes have sent two puny little armies to attack one of my cities. The Portuguese and Sicilians keep dropping tiny little armies on Ireland, which I kill in short order. Then they offer peace, which I accept, and a few turns later they come back and do it all again. France is the only one making anything like a sensible war here ... though I hesitate to call it that, as we've been good friends since turn 2, I’m stronger than them, and France is engaged in multiple wars with other factions and not doing entirely well.
Scotland has also come to life. In my first play session they parked their army outside York and sat there doing nothing the entire time. On loading my save game they immediately moved that army and have been marching restlessly about their lands.
My faction remains strong, rich, respected and pious. It's been peaceful, trading with everyone I can find and only warring with the rebels. While I have gained provinces since the game's start I'm no big bad monster (8 provinces total) and I held all these provinces for a good while before quitting the first time. My armies have grown slightly, but weren’t weak before. I've done nothing threatening. In short, I can see no reason for this abrupt change in AI policy towards me.
I'm not amused. What was an enjoyable campaign has turned into a tedious game of whack-a-mole. It feels like a reverse of RTW's save/load bug.
FactionHeir
04-19-2007, 21:26
There's usually 2 different outcomes on a save/reload, including AI moves, so its entirely possible what you are saying. However, 1.1 AI ends up attacking you if you don't have a stack defending every single border to the AI sooner or later. Nothing you can do about it. 1.2 AI on the other hand (This is a 1.2 bugtopic btw, but you probably use 1.2 :p) is quite passive and will keep to alliances if your relations are very good or better.
As for your first issue, I always manage myself so I don't know.
frogbeastegg
04-19-2007, 21:38
Yes, I'm using 1.2. ~:) There's the reason I'm mentioning this here.
I did have good relations, and I did have armies in position to guard my lands. The AI still went psycho on me when I loaded my game up to continue it tonight, and it wouldn't stop, whereas for 52 turns in my first play session it was quite the reverse.
FactionHeir
04-20-2007, 11:36
I'm not quite sure whether the following is a bug or intended:
Battle map:
- While your cavalry is engaged in melee, double click attacking an enemy behind the unit you are fighting that is in charge distance results in your cav insta charging and annihilating the unit they were meleeing with plus charging into the unit you clicked on. Gotta wonder how they killed their current melee enemies with a charge that had no acceleration...
Ships can sail into and out of blockaded ports freely
Pathfinding issues chasing routers.
who the hell rewrites existing code for functions which work fine in previous products?
HoreTore
04-20-2007, 14:06
Frogbeastegg, I'm suspecting there is some trigger for the AI where it simply goes nuts at the player... I like this feature though :laugh4:
Have not seen this mentioned anywhere, but during papal elections in v 1.02 I seem to be unable to attempt coercing other factions to vote for my favorite Papal candidate. This was possible in v 1.00.
FactionHeir
04-20-2007, 14:53
Campaign mechanics - Diplomacy:
- Factions now hate you for making them your vassal (i.e. after they accept your offer, the diplomat/princess will always trigger the unhappy speech).
While this in itself is no big deal or could be seen as realistic, the following is not:
After they are your vassals, if you approach them for any diplomacy, they will be as "welcome ally" stance. But once you ask for anything or even try to gift them something, they will always only barely accept and be annoyed after the transaction, as if they don't want to deal with you. What's worse, I tried gifting my new vassal 2000 florins and it was barely accepted, they were annoyed afterwards and my relations went from so-so down to abysmal....
Don't know whether this really a bug list thing or not. However I just started my first 1,2 version of vanilla but it has been unpacked and I was playing with the IO first bit in it.
Anyway as the Turks got to go 7 fought siege by me at Tiblisi no problem then had to fight second siege at Adana. Tried 3 times but each time got CTD. Issue seems tied to weather + siege so may be a little bit hardware related as I always had the occasional issue with version 1.1 and so cut down the graphics a bit. Only issue this time is this wasn't a thunderstorm type graphic so don't know if its a new bug or not.
My machine is a 6700 duel processor with 2GB of ram and a 512 MB ATI X1950XTX card running with windows XP
FactionHeir
04-21-2007, 01:11
Game balance:
- Assassins now are completely useless at taking out other agents but very powerful against generals. Example: My skill 10 assassin with handgun, apprentice and AssassinsGuildTrained had almost no chance (read less than 10%) to kill I think it was a piety 5 or 6 priest. Just how sad is that? On the other hand he can take out heirs at 95%.
frogbeastegg
04-21-2007, 10:14
So the sudden and drastic change in AI behaviour and the fact Scotland's AI woke up doesn't remind anyone else of a reverse version of RTW's save/load bug? Because it strikes me that way - that's why I'm rather desperate for others to take a look.
It all started to happen on the very turn I reloaded my game. I didn't take more territory, I didn't declare war on anyone, I didn't suddenly raise a massive army, I didn't do anything shady with agents - I can't explain the sudden massive increase in aggression, or the fact Scotland sat about unmoving for 50 (took 2 turns to move an army to York, then went dead) and sprang back into life the very turn I loaded my game.
FactionHeir
04-21-2007, 11:17
Well I think there is something like that frogbeastegg (I think I mispelled this twice before getting it right just now).
Reloading a game (usually to fix the train/retrain issue) sometimes resulted the AI declaring wars on each other the next turn, but mainly due to an actual updating from the campaign_db_ai file it seems.
I.e. trusted allied will auto declare war on their ally's enemies and this usually happens but not always. Reloading/end turn often fixes that so thats probably what you were encountering (not the ally thing, but that file controls all AI strat map behaviors)
So the sudden and drastic change in AI behaviour and the fact Scotland's AI woke up doesn't remind anyone else of a reverse version of RTW's save/load bug? Because it strikes me that way - that's why I'm rather desperate for others to take a look.
It all started to happen on the very turn I reloaded my game. I didn't take more territory, I didn't declare war on anyone, I didn't suddenly raise a massive army, I didn't do anything shady with agents - I can't explain the sudden massive increase in aggression, or the fact Scotland sat about unmoving for 50 (took 2 turns to move an army to York, then went dead) and sprang back into life the very turn I loaded my game.
That sounds horrible ~:(
I'd check it myself, but my 1.2 install has somehow picked up the ctd bug in sieges ~:(
That sounds horrible ~:(
I'd check it myself, but my 1.2 install has somehow picked up the ctd bug in sieges ~:(
That's not permanent, at least wasn't for me. If you wipe, reinstall, then patch to 1.2 again, it should hopefully work.
I think the main singular issue is still around the passive AI for me. I just played a game and came out to sortie. The AI just stayed in formation as it normally does allowing me to shoot it in the back etc as before. It had however appeared also with siege bits (ram and ladders) on the 1st go of the siege (didn't think it was suppose to build them so quick) and then refused to put them down to fight as I walked around them!
On the plus side the earlier crash I had with sieges was me being stupid. I had copied over my older CFG file and the new cfg had more attributes generated than the old one so I'm guessing that's why I then had problems.
Gaius Terentius Varro
04-23-2007, 17:32
I think the main singular issue is still around the passive AI for me. I just played a game and came out to sortie. The AI just stayed in formation as it normally does allowing me to shoot it in the back etc as before. It had however appeared also with siege bits (ram and ladders) on the 1st go of the siege (didn't think it was suppose to build them so quick) and then refused to put them down to fight as I walked around them!
On the plus side the earlier crash I had with sieges was me being stupid. I had copied over my older CFG file and the new cfg had more attributes generated than the old one so I'm guessing that's why I then had problems.
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1502276&postcount=1
Gaius Terentius Varro - Sorry don't understand your post? Are you saying that the item I posted which is happening ALL the time as far as I can tell is the intermittent AI problem that CA mentioned? It just doesn't fit normal definitions of intermittent.
On the other hand I just experienced this one. Also in a siege situation. I'm hoping this IS intermittent.
https://img107.imageshack.us/img107/5808/image1hi5.jpg (https://imageshack.us)
Depending on angles you could also get to a lone figure about 4 metres in the air (It crashed after I tied to get the snap shots).
Daveybaby
04-23-2007, 23:10
Dali mod?
FactionHeir
04-24-2007, 00:10
Dali mod?
lol, priceless.
Personally I was thinking of a mutated ballista
Just wanted to lend some further explanation to the problematic pathfinding for units chasing routers. I've done quite a lot of router chasing tonight, and have noticed something: the problem always occurs when the unit being chased has become spread out for some reason. Often a few of its men failed to break away from combat right away, or got hung up on the city gate while fleeing, but whatever the reason, men being separate from the main clump of the unit is the cause of the trouble. Every time the unit being chased had good grouping, the chasers rode right through the middle of it and wiped them out.
Noting this behavior, I began holding the shift key down when I had a unit selected that was chasing routers. For those of you not familiar with this, it displays a red pin on the map that shows you exactly what point your unit is heading for. I noticed that units that were spread out typically had a pin nowhere near any of the men in the group: one man far away often made the pin appear in the space between him and the rest of the unit, which was always where my horsemen would ride to. From this I deduce that the game uses the "center" of the unit for all pathfinding in combat: basically, the average position of the men in the unit is considered to be the point the unit is at.
The problem, then, has nothing to do with pathfinding or unit cohesion of the chasing unit, but rather has to do with the cohesion of the fleeing unit. Because routers are allowed to flee in complete chaos with no formation at all, the center of the unit (as calculated by the game) goes wild, and often leads the chasers to a place where no actual men of the unit are. Needless to say, this looks completely dumb, and has been the subject of much stress to some Orgers.
What then can be done about it? The first (though likely least nice) solution is to simply enforce some sort of ordered formation on routers. This would be totally effective, however it would kinda lose the effect of routers running for their lives in, well, disorder. Perhaps semi-orderly formations could be used for routers, to preserve the feel while making sure not to leave those problematic stragglers behind.
Likely better is to change the formula for finding the center of a unit. The problem would likely drop off the radar if some substantial portion of outliers would be ignored when considering the center of the unit: that is, if we're ignoring 25% as outliers, the 1/4 of the unit that is the most average distance from other soldiers would no longer count toward finding the center. This would essentially treat the clumped men as a unit and ignore the few that are quite far away, meaning the chasers would hunt down the most significant portion of the group they're chasing, and do so totally effectively. There can still be trouble, though, if the rogue portion of the group is more than the chosen outlier percentage: they would again tug on the center.
Another possibility would be to set a threshold distance a man can be from the others to be considered. Using the median distance from a given man to every other, it should be simple to lop off any above a reasonable level, and thus arrive at a much tighter calculated unit center for pathfinding purposes. I recommended using the median because it neatly classifies a man as part of the bunch or one of the rogues, since his median distance from other men will be high if most are far from him, and low if most are nearby. So since the median will be much more polar than an average, it is IMO the best choice for dealing with this problem, and should result in very good unit center calculations that are not influenced at all by nonconformists.
As far as I can see, removing outliers by either method would not substantially affect anything in normal circumstances: units in good order should generally continue to have their center calculated very near where it was the old way, while either should show significant benefit in chasing routers. I of course don't know the particulars of the situation... but I do hope my comments on the matter are some use, provided the devs haven't already fixed it (a change could be in the new 1.2 build already for all I know).
PutCashIn
04-24-2007, 06:08
I was wondering about the chasing issue, thinking back to RTW I remember the units would move untill the enemies standard was in the centre of the chasing unit.
Now in M2TW it looks like the chaser is moving unitll the front of the unit coincides with the emeny standard, then slows down to do some chopping/hacking, but at least half the enemy unit still gets away.
Basically in RTW, the 'footprint' of the chaser (seemed to) coincide with the footprint of the routing unit.
Now only the front half of the chaser coincides with the back half of the router.
If any of that made sense....?
Gaius Terentius Varro
04-24-2007, 06:18
Gaius Terentius Varro - Sorry don't understand your post? Are you saying that the item I posted which is happening ALL the time as far as I can tell is the intermittent AI problem that CA mentioned? It just doesn't fit normal definitions of intermittent.
On the other hand I just experienced this one. Also in a siege situation. I'm hoping this IS intermittent.
https://img107.imageshack.us/img107/5808/image1hi5.jpg (https://imageshack.us)
Depending on angles you could also get to a lone figure about 4 metres in the air (It crashed after I tied to get the snap shots).
No I am saying that the problem which is happening a lot to me ( not all the time tho) is on a "to do list" for the new patch which i find a relly good bit of news
nikolai1962
04-24-2007, 06:37
So the sudden and drastic change in AI behaviour and the fact Scotland's AI woke up doesn't remind anyone else of a reverse version of RTW's save/load bug? Because it strikes me that way - that's why I'm rather desperate for others to take a look.
The scotland/york thing is a side effect of a pathfinding error. They can snap out of it sometimes, even without reload, though i'll try that out to see if it has a consistent effect (if it does, then it's a good thing). On the other hand the rest of the things you mention sounds like VH behaviour where your faction standing has been tanking for 50 turns whereas i think you said you were on M campaign diff. So that is a bit worrying for people who like M difficulty precisely because of the lack of AI "attack the human no matter what" stuff.
FactionHeir
04-24-2007, 09:34
Foz: Your observations are correct. I had quite similar experiences.
There is also another problem though and that happens if the routers are very few in number or at least one of your chasers overtakes the routers. In those cases your chasers tend to stop, regroup and never get anywhere chasing them.
Further problem is if the routing unit is nearing the end of the map. Then your chasers often for some weird reason go either left or right of the routers, run against the edge of the map and then against the routers by which time they will have left the battlefield.
Gaius Terentius Varro
04-24-2007, 21:30
I am having a problem whith the venetian units armor upgrades . I applied the usual fix in the export_descr_unit.txt but the model upgrade stays in the same order. After the patch i mean
Edit: ok i forgot the mod switch so ignore
I think there may be a bug with lance cavalry charging other cavalry - there does not seem to be the charge bonus you get when charging infantry. This is from another thread:
The charge of cavalry against another cavalry unit head-on has no effect, as far as I can tell (in 1 on 1 battles at least). Nobody dies until the secondary weapons are drawn.
I think that the lances are too short so when the mounts come head to head the lances don't reach the rider(s) - and nothing happens. Since they also have the same mass, they cannot push into each other's formation either. I am not sure whether this is intentional, but it sure doesn't look like the tales of medieval jousting matches.
May be saying nobody dies on impact is too strong, but there does not seem to be a benefit from charging.
FactionHeir
04-27-2007, 19:58
Yeah, only if you charge cav from the rear do they actually take extra casualties and then mostly only if its a 1hp unit. Head on hardly ever does any damage, but highend cav charging low end cav head on will still kill the first row of cav if the cav being charged is static. If they both charge each other head on, noone seems to die.
Has anyone noticed that 1.2 cavalry ignore the alternate attack command entirely? I'm not sure if it existed in previous versions, but I've had occasion several times lately to attempt making my knights ride in with swords drawn, however they always seem to bring out the lances instead. This is especially annoying if I'm pretty sure they can't correctly charge in the current situation, but they raise the lances anyway, only to run up to the enemy unit with lances up, stop, and draw swords anyway. The usual result is much wasted time that would not happen if I could get them to ride in with swords out already...
FactionHeir
04-28-2007, 01:25
Happens in 1.0 and 1.1 as well. Found it annoying too. Kind of defeats the purpose to even have a charge value for secondary weapons...
For the first time in my life, I think I've found a bug that I've never seen reported before. It's not serious, because it requires a lot of work to achieve, but I figured I should report it. In short, I have a family member that isn't showing up on the family tree. Here's how it happened:
I had been refusing marriage offers for my young faction leader, because I wanted to use him to arrange a political alliance with another faction. On the turn that I finally tracked down a 4 charm Portuguese princess, I was offered a marriage proposal for him yet again. Instead of rejecting it, I simply minimized the offer. I then approached the princess, she accepted the marriage offer, and he was married. The other marriage option didn't disappear though. As a laugh, I clicked Accept on the marriage offer, and was given the same message you get when you adopt someone who has already died. Interesting, but no big deal.
A few turns later, a marriage proposal screen popped up, like you would get if you had an unmarried Princess wandering around. That was strange, since I had no princesses at all. I also noticed that the name of the woman was "Campagnola de Crete" which was the name of the woman on the 'aborted' marriage proposal to my faction leader.
https://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b203/TinCow/MTW2/th_offer.jpg (https://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b203/TinCow/MTW2/offer.jpg)
I minimized the offer and went to check my family tree to make sure I wasn't imagining things. Sure enough, there was no one by that name on my family tree. In fact there weren't any unmarried women (other than children) on my family tree.
https://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b203/TinCow/MTW2/th_treebefore1.jpg (https://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b203/TinCow/MTW2/treebefore1.jpg)https://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b203/TinCow/MTW2/th_treebefore2.jpg (https://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b203/TinCow/MTW2/treebefore2.jpg)
I wanted to see what would happen, so I accepted the marriage proposal. It went through as normal and the new general spawned into my capital.
https://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b203/TinCow/MTW2/th_married.jpg (https://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b203/TinCow/MTW2/married.jpg)https://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b203/TinCow/MTW2/th_spawned.jpg (https://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b203/TinCow/MTW2/spawned.jpg)
I then checked my family tree again, and nothing had changed. Mouseover of the new general showed him as a family member (see second screenshot), rather than a general, but he wasn't on the family tree at all.
https://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b203/TinCow/MTW2/th_treeafter1.jpg (https://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b203/TinCow/MTW2/treeafter1.jpg)https://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b203/TinCow/MTW2/th_treeafter2.jpg (https://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b203/TinCow/MTW2/treeafter2.jpg)
Not a serious bug, but I find it kind of interesting. I'm now curious to see if he'll have any children, or whether he'll just act like non-family member general.
FactionHeir
04-29-2007, 01:40
Two more bugs:
- AI can see your hidden forces if they are sallying from a battle. In my case, they sallied from Rennes and I had my mailed knights run to a nearby forest and hide. Even though I placed my general away a fair bit and the AI was still busy regrouping his troops at 100 meters from the gate (according to the files they do this before anything else) while my knights were already hidden, he later directly charged at the hidden units, ignoring my general.
- Regicide missions do not expire when the mission giver dies. Rufus offered 5000 for William's death but I decided to kill Rufus first and see what happens, but the mission continued and I even got 5000 for killing William the next turn.
I took Antioch in a crusade and then the Mongols came and besieged it with a single stack, I defeated that stack in a siege battle and had only few units left. Next turn they besieged again and in the following turn they attacked with three stacks. I thought I'm gonna show them and had my longbowmen deploy their stakes in the city centre, hoping that they'd lose a whole lot of cavalry trying to take the city but when their ram broke through my gate, the game crashed. I reloaded and tried again, game crashed again at the same point. I then autoresolved. Rest of the campaign seems fine so far, haven't fought the Mongols since, Antioch was my only province there.
I just installed leaked 1.2 over 1.0 and game crashes everytime i try to run m2tw. This didn't happen on 1.0 or 1.1 version, don't know what's the problem, does anyone had same problem as me? Plz help
HoreTore
04-30-2007, 16:39
Tex, that would be the reason why it was withdrawn.
You'll simply have to tweak around and uninstall/reinstall a bunch of times, and try to solve it.
There is a bug in the leaked patch causing a CTD in certain circumstances.
FactionHeir
04-30-2007, 23:19
- Allied AI spies will cause a PO drop if they infiltrate your settlements but if you infiltrate an ally's settlement, the spy does not cause a PO malus.
I think with the twohand fix and the shield fix now, the balancing is a bit off, I hope some two-handed units will get a significantly higher attack in the official patch.
I just had some twohanders from the HRE fight against french DFKs in an open plain custom btlle and the DFKs won with more than half of their men left. I tested this after noticing in my english campaign, that Armoured Billmen, being a higher tech level than Armoured swordsmen, are definitely inferior in melee. They may have a bonus against cavalry, but the higher protection of units with shields usually makes up for a lot, sword and shield infantry are now the kings of the infantry, don't know whether that's right.
Two hander animations are fixed, but as long as they have mediocre attack and rather low defense, they're only useful against archers and maybe early spearmen and that's it.
Twohanders have just one more point in attack(in MTW they did at least have armour piercing) and significantly lower overall defense than sword and shield units, I hope that won't be the case in the official patch anymore.
Apart from that, I like the balancing a lot, dismounted english knight, who also use two handed weapons, seem fine, low defense but a very high attack which makes up for that.
It's just badly armoured, high-tech twohander units which also have only a mediocre attack rating that are apparently useless now.
RihardsVlasovs
05-01-2007, 14:21
in file descr_faction_standing.txt there is trigger
0080_F_Military_Assistance
trigger is supposed to increase global reputation of faction that is PROVIDING military assistance.
But instead this trigger increases global reputation of faction that is receiving
military assistance.
It is essy to test (1)by changing trigger value to big number, and (2)then within the game gift atack faction aggreement against rebels to papal states and (3) then just attack rebels. The result: your faction reputation stays the same, while papal states reputation becomes trustworthy.
Slicendice
05-05-2007, 02:24
I've experienced problems chasing routers in seige battles as previously mentioned. Units sometimes will not chase fleeing enemy at all. Charging cavalry into fleeing crossbowmen makes them stop amidst the bowmen but cavalry does not engage. If left alone crossbowmen will go into "fight to the death" mode and will kill the cavalry (in this case generals bodyguard). Cavalry will kill units infront but will not kill units behind it. Also Cavalry will maintain it's tight formation and stand still. This causes mass casualties on HC if left alone.
When assembling units (spear militia and peasant archers specifically but perhaps not exclusively) inside enemy city some units assemble in loose formation. Clicking on formation button to make them loose and then again to make them tight does not always work. If it does, making units into straight line can again make some units loose formation.
Units attacking city wall with ladders and towers marched up the ladders and suddenly fell back away from the ladders even though some were on the wall already. In fact all units on ladders and towers did so simultaneously. These units were not grouped. I believe that a wall breached by my balista triggered the withdrawel, however, the gate and another wall were already breached.
Units, (mercenary crossbowmen) will not respond to command get on enemy walls to fire on enemy even though wall and entrance are nearby. Also same units may not fully get on wall if it does respond thus leaving some on the ground and some on the wall. (Running icon is present however no movement.)
Attacking peasant archers firing on defending General Body Guard in the townsquare triggered the Body Guard to move toward units that were down another street. ie. archers were south, GBG moved east toward Mailed Knights. Not sure if GBG would have moved down that street if it was empty though. Is it possible he went down there to avoid archer fire?
Experienced game slowdown in the campaign map. Also memory leaks during seige battles.
Only in my first 10 turns so no field battles yet. I'm already dreading what else I might find.
I think I might go back to leaked patch. It seemed better than official patch.
Attacking peasant archers firing on defending General Body Guard in the townsquare triggered the Body Guard to move toward units that were down another street. ie. archers were south, GBG moved east toward Mailed Knights. Not sure if GBG would have moved down that street if it was empty though. Is it possible he went down there to avoid archer fire?
Couple thoughts on this one. First, yes it's entirely possible he went there to avoid the archer fire. The AI may actually have opted to try to engage the mailed knights, hoping to force your archers to stop firing as you'd take friendly fire casualties. Also, I noticed the AI actually send mailed knights out of the city square to combat my mailed knights that were positioning for a charge (though some distance down a street from the square). So the AI might have decided to send the GBG after your mailed knights simply because it thought it had a shot at beating them, or if it considered them a threat worthy of its attention. I nearly fell over and died when the AI actually sent a unit out of the square after setting up camp there, as I honestly don't think it ever happened before for me, and thus surprised me that much. I can only hope this is a sign of a more proactive AI, even in a defensive posture, as it has all-too-often simply sat there and taken abuse from archers, or allowed my units to flank it unhindered.
Even in leaked 1.2 (i'll be continuing that campaign before installing the official patch) I've been noticing the enemy move out of the town square more, even taking all their units out and rushing towards my men as they ran for the destroyed gate in an attempt to keep me out, so hopefully it is a change for the better...
pike master
05-05-2007, 19:46
army formations not holding properly when commanded to advance by single click any greater distance than 100 virtual yards
Slicendice
05-06-2007, 08:03
When I built the Woodsmen Guild Headquarters (in Toulouse Castle) it qeued up 6 pre-existing archers in the castle automatically. The first turn, the first three archers received no 2 chevron upgrade. the second turn I built a new archer and retrained 2 others and produced the upgrade.
At Alleppo I was using a cavalry unit to hold all my priests so I didn't have to move each one individually. When I tried to kill a heretic one of my priests was converted while still inside the cavalry unit. I moved the whole unit into Alleppo Castle because I couldn't separate them all because of the heretic. Next turn heretic was no where to be found. Possibly reconverted?
When I built the Woodsmen Guild Headquarters (in Toulouse Castle) it qeued up 6 pre-existing archers in the castle automatically. The first turn, the first three archers received no 2 chevron upgrade. the second turn I built a new archer and retrained 2 others and produced the upgrade.
At Alleppo I was using a cavalry unit to hold all my priests so I didn't have to move each one individually. When I tried to kill a heretic one of my priests was converted while still inside the cavalry unit. I moved the whole unit into Alleppo Castle because I couldn't separate them all because of the heretic. Next turn heretic was no where to be found. Possibly reconverted?
so the guild bug with loading game still exist then ~:pissed:
Slicendice
05-07-2007, 04:31
Retested Woodsman Guild Headquarters and archers built do not get any exp upgrade. They must be retrained to get an upgrade and then they only get 2 exp not 3. (since it's in the city that headquarters is)
Retested Woodsman Guild Headquarters and archers built do not get any exp upgrade. They must be retrained to get an upgrade and then they only get 2 exp not 3. (since it's in the city that headquarters is)
if you take units into queue for retrain and then end turn imidiatelly they will have upgrades. upgrades disapear if you load game that have eariler upgrading queue.
Vladimir
05-07-2007, 17:23
army formations not holding properly when commanded to advance by single click any greater distance than 100 virtual yards
This is what I've found very annoying. Usually the AI just lets you march behind them to higher ground (in less you get into missile range, then those units engage you). The problem is that your army isn't in it's original formation. I've experienced similar problems with even a small group of three spearmen. I'll draw them into three lines, group them, but when I click to move them (when defending), they go back to their original uneven ranks.
Overall I'm not too impressed with the performance on the battle map. A good thing is that the units (Jinettes) seem more organic when launching javelins but I prefer that they maintain a better formation when they do so.
Free Upkeep: Sometimes when viewing my city's garrison the militia units don't show that they're receiving free upkeep. This may just be a display problem but I want to ensure I'm not paying unnecessary maintenance.
FactionHeir
05-07-2007, 17:55
Free Upkeep: Sometimes when viewing my city's garrison the militia units don't show that they're receiving free upkeep. This may just be a display problem but I want to ensure I'm not paying unnecessary maintenance.
Just a display error. Happens when you disband a unit currently under free upkeep. If you move a unit in/out of the settlement it updates. Also if you end turn.
As for the formation issue, that's around since 1.0.
It tends to happen if you drag a box around your units on the field and then tell them to move. Usually not if you select them one by one from the unit card.
speedofsound
05-08-2007, 18:27
Had no graphical issues prior to 1.2, but now I no longer receive tooltips when mousing over the campaign HUD, construction options screen, training screen, etc. Not a huge issue, but it makes planning my queues incredibly tedious.
SirRethcir
05-08-2007, 18:40
"The merchant's wharf series of buildings do not appear to be working as the description indicates (ie they give a bonus to tradeable goods but not to the number of fleets; see the thread at the Org for details)"
It's still the same.
pike master
05-09-2007, 03:45
border horse still beats heavy cav. shield fix seems to only help versus infantry and not cav.
Foz, Whacker, Daveybaby - that discussion was out of place and now has its own thread ~;)
Bug: Trigger "sitting_around_town_with_city_barracks" has the condition "library" instead of the more appropriate "militia_drill_square".
Path finding Bug:
Last night attacked a citadel. Happily slaughtered my way through two walls to third level and city square then took a pounding. My troops are getting slaughtered and I suddenly have a unit of just 8 ghazis left in the square (rest routing), while the milanese have a full ducal cav unit.
Then I realise I have a full 40 qapakulu...outside the outside citadel walls, wshere they have ben aimlessly pushing since the rest of my cav entreed the city 10 minutes ago. I swear loudly. I click on the milanese cav to attack and hit run, corssing my fingers....they push aimlessly against the wall. I swear again. A lot...then notice the timer counting down and the ghazis unscathed...?
Upon closer inspection the milanese cav display the crossed swords in combat symbol and are pressing against the inner citadel walls (they're inside the inner ring pushing outwards in teh direction of my qap).
Both units of cav, seperated by not just one wall but 3 and an entire citadel, pushed aimlessly against walls until the timer ran out and my 8 ghazis had captured the fortress....
There's some kind of graphics-related bug that keeps biting me periodically. It may have been introduced by 1.2, as it hadn't happened to me previously. The gist of it is that when a battle loads, once in a while most of the scene will come up jet black as if shadowed, or perhaps as if textures did not apply correctly: the black areas have definite shapes corresponding to things in the scene. That is very brief, and is followed by the entire screen going to black and the M2 hourglass being displayed, perpetually if I allow it to be. ESC sends me back to the desktop. The log only reports an unspecified error.
The main problem, however, isn't just that. It's that after it happens, nothing can make the battles work again, it is perpetually stuck w/ this problem until I wipe, reinstall, and repatch. I've had to do so twice already since installing 1.2 official, and since it takes so long it is getting very old.
The problem sounds a lot like how I heard some people describing the elephant bug previously, and similarly includes the game being stuck in a state where all battles are broken, however no elephants are involved. I've determined it's nothing inherent to the battle in any case, though - Once I've finished the reinstall process, loading up the same saved game and fighting the same battle does not result in a repeat of the issue. The repeated battle problems, however, do flag the problem as decidedly software-based, as a hardware problem cannot cause persistent issues that resolve upon reinstallation.
I did notice that this last time it happened the first battle after I had unpacked txt and xml files. I had done so before, but did not notice a correspondence if there was any. I'll try to unpack again and see if the problem returns.
This time I also made a restore point as soon as M2 was installed and I verified 1.2 was able to play battles. If/when the issue occurs again, I will try to restore first thing and give further info on what happens.
FactionHeir
05-12-2007, 01:11
1.02 Official still has pretty much the same bugs 1.02 leaked had from testing so far.
In addition, I think I found something that's somewhat reproducible in inducing a CTD:
-During times of campaign map lag (which is almost always for me), clicking on a town settlement and then on the settlement again (or another town settlement) before the game updates the town's display info, you can often get a CTD.
Kobal2fr
05-12-2007, 03:48
In the localized French version, rank 2 of the Intelligent trait displays as rank 1 of the Intelligent_Lady one, though it's probably just the flavor text that is borked, not the trait itself. Still, it's a bit weird to read that William the Cruel is a "scholarly maiden" :laugh4:
Also, I had a general both Intelligent and Ignorant, IIRC those are supposed to be antitraits, but then again I haven't delved into the new trait file yet.
FactionHeir
05-12-2007, 09:02
BattleChivalry and BattleDread are not AntiTraits as they should be. Actually managed to have a general with both
BattleChivalry and BattleDread are not AntiTraits as they should be. Actually managed to have a general with both
Lol. The code for those two is nasty, too. They take great pains all the time to code around the fact that you might have one already, and often do not allow points of the opposite if you do have some points in one (although they obviously missed doing so on at least one, as FH demonstrates). They may actually intend them not to be anti-traits at all, but to generally keep a general stuck on the path to one or the other if he has started down one road. That of course is entirely unclear, though, it could just as easily have been an early attempt to dodge the faulty anti-trait behavior via the triggers if CA noticed the problem prior to release.
FactionHeir
05-13-2007, 02:12
Yup, I figured they wanted to keep you on one path as otherwise BattleChiv is near impossible to max out when you chase routers. Gotta get Chiv first and then you can chase as many as you like and get more chivalrous from doing so :D
Btw: GoodSaboteur and BadSaboteur ought to be antitraits too but aren't
pike master
05-13-2007, 05:42
pole arm spearwall units/ halberdiers, swordstaff etc. are too weak versus cavalry. also i must stress the importance to make these units move faster than their current speed. perhaps intentional by CA but in my eyes a bug.
pole arm spearwall units/ halberdiers, swordstaff etc. are too weak versus cavalry. also i must stress the importance to make these units move faster than their current speed. perhaps intentional by CA but in my eyes a bug.
Concerning the speed, you're just using 'em wrong. Turn spearwall and defend off, and they run fine. Spearwall is an intentionally defensive formation that limits their mobility (I guess b/c it takes work to stay in the formation?) so you'll have to turn it and defend off if you intend to move them very far or use them offensively. You can switch them back on whenever needed, they form up in spearwall fairly quickly most of the time. By the way it helps a great deal to memorize the formation and defend hotkeys so you can do this very quickly in combat.
As to balance, I tend to agree. Try a rebalance mod, there are several good ones already. You're bound to find something much closer to what you like. Most people that've tried them never go back. :smile:
FactionHeir
05-13-2007, 13:18
Actually pike units in phalanx formation and guard mode OFF will walk faster than most infantry can run. Only pikes though.
As for balancing, I agree. Had my egyptian halberdiers take a beating from cav from the front. They are great for attacking from the back though, but much too slow moving and their animation is slow and they seem to need to close in as much as sword infantry do but the length of their weapon often prevents them from doing so.
FactionHeir
05-13-2007, 21:47
Major bug:
When defending against a sally, you can exit the battle right at the start and it will result in a draw instead of a loss. Neither side will lose units either. Lets you starve out the defenders nicely...
Minor bug:
Trait descripts for FearsEngland/Egypt/HRE level 1 reads "edgey" should be "edgy"
Diplomacy:
During a crusade, I liberated Rome, the crusade target. The papacy contacted me and asked for Rome. They said if I gave it to them, I would be their closest ally. When I gave it to them, my faction (the Scots) did not get an alliance with the papacy.
May be a case of whoever wrote the dialogue not understanding the game mechanics.
pike master
05-14-2007, 14:07
even with spearwall off halberdiers march too slow and fatigue too fast. you have to make them run a lot to get them anywhere.
gardibolt
05-14-2007, 18:21
Low priority:
Merchant's Guild Apprentice trait for Merchants references the presence of an Assassin's Guild, not a Merchant's Guild.
FactionHeir
05-14-2007, 19:15
Right, my first major siege in my Egyptian campaign. Its horrid really.
The scenario:
Me, Egypt, defending with a full stack inside Bran (Citadel) against two Polish full stacks who come from both sides.
One of his stacks has 1 treb, 2 rams, 1 ladder, 1 siege tower, the other stack has 1 catapult.
I start off by sending a light cav out the gates to intercept his treb and catapult which advanced about half the distance from his main army towards my walls. I finish both off while the enemy just watches me do so without trying to stop me. Big mistake and a bug in itself. Just when his treb crew (his catapult was gone) was down to 2 men, his first stack started using siege equip to advance towards my wall, still ignoring my light cav which is right in front of him.
I pull both cav back inside the citadel and move all my units to the side which has the advancing siege gear.
Before his stuff reaches my walls, I destroy his tower due to my ballista towers. His ram breaches my gate, his ladder latches on (and the guys coming up are routed). His second ram stands in its starting position not moving at all.
I then go on and kill all the first stack's units coming through the gate and subsequently hunt down all his routing units. Once all his first stack save the xbows carrying ram #2 are captured, his second ram starts moving. Half way toward my gate, it gets set alight by the ballista towers and the xbows go and take the first ram which stands by my gate. In the meantime, a few infantry and some cavalry of stack2 are moving around the walls with the other half still standing in starting position, idle.
Once his xbows pick up ram#1, they just stand there doing nothing and letting me kill them off with missiles and then hunt them down with light cav.
When that happened, his second stack's merc spearmen walked towards the ram slowly while being shot, pick it up and....still stand around doing nothing like the xbows.
In the meantime, one of stack 2's infantry runs against a map corner, fully spread out over 1/3 of the map length, not quite sure what this is supposed to be.
The rest of stack 2 still stands where it is, bored, doing absolutely nothing, even though my outer gate at the other end is breached. If they don't attack, they might as well withdraw, but they just keep standing there.
[edit]
I continued the siege that was running paused in the background. I moved my naffatun off the walls and right next to the spearmen and bombarded them. Just when the spearmen broke and ran, I get the audio message "Wisest one, that siege equipment is not going to man itself" ....not quite sure what this is supposed to mean but likely another bug as this ought to happen only to the besieger.
Now, that infantry unit that ran against the map border started to reform and march towards my position after having crossed the entire map and tagged the NW map corner. While its on its way, a second polish infantry started marching against that same map border....I bet it will do the same as the first one....
[edit2]
Well the spear unit ended up moving towards me, yes, but it stopped at stack 1's starting position doing absolutely nothing. The second infantry unit stopped in the NW map corner idling.
In the meantime my naffatun destroyed ram#2 and together with my nubian spears and halberd militia started to take apart a set of ladders on the floor but those ladders never got past 1% damage. Seems ladders are indestructible, so why the option to attack them? Bug!
So yes, timer ran out (finally) and I got a clear victory...
frogbeastegg
05-14-2007, 21:03
I loaded up my first campaign with the official 1.2, and I've not got any tooltips inside of settlements. None for traits, unit and buiding icons, the icons on the city detail scroll, or even the interface buttons.
I deleted my old M2TW install, removed all remaining traces, rebooted the PC, installed the game and patched straight to 1.2. The patch install took a good 10 minutes, as it should.
Any ideas? It's not an issue I've had before.
I loaded up my first campaign with the official 1.2, and I've not got any tooltips inside of settlements. None for traits, unit and buiding icons, the icons on the city detail scroll, or even the interface buttons.
I deleted my old M2TW install, removed all remaining traces, rebooted the PC, installed the game and patched straight to 1.2. The patch install took a good 10 minutes, as it should.
Any ideas? It's not an issue I've had before.
Haven't had it myself, but others have been reporting it too. My guess is there's something corrupt with the text file that generates those text overlays you're missing. The only thing anyone's had success with against these seemingly-random problems is to reinstall repeatedly until you luck out one time and don't have any problems (hopefully).
Honestly though... at this point I'm going to call leaked 1.2 joyous to install by comparison. At least with that, you knew the only problem you'd have was if you tried to install it over 1.1. The official release seems to not only still do that, but also includes a slew of new potential problems with the pack files. At least I'm assuming that's how all these problems keep cropping up, from the packs updating incorrectly in various different ways. It really makes you wonder how things got worse after they yanked the patch, in part, to fix the installation problems.
FactionHeir
05-14-2007, 23:58
If it took you only 10 minutes, then you don't have a proper 1.02 I think. Even on my new rig it took some 30 mins (45 on my old one)
FactionHeir
05-15-2007, 02:08
Arab factions ambushing an enemy will return an audio that is inappropriate for the situation. The audio returned was as if the ambusher had been ambushed.
Daveybaby
05-15-2007, 08:30
If it took you only 10 minutes, then you don't have a proper 1.02 I think. Even on my new rig it took some 30 mins (45 on my old one)
Heh, that reminds me of a bug i keep forgetting to report.
Bug: THE PATCHER DOESNT WORK RELIABLY
If you've modded the game it will fail to install the patch correctly, but will not return an error during patching. Instead the game will crash with an unspecified error when you try to run it.
Also, sometimes the patch seemingly just doesnt install regardless of whether youve modded the game or not. Players will be left with a working but unpatched (or at least, incompletely patched) game. Again, no errors or warnings are given to the player during patching.
FactionHeir
05-15-2007, 18:56
Siege AI take 2:
This time around I was defending a huge city with ballista towers with a captain led saracen militia heavy army against a full stack of the papal states which had loads of missile units, knights and infantry as well as 2 generals.
As I have a trebuchet inside my walls, I take out one of their siege towers while my towers take out the other tower and their ram. I then notice the AI brought a total of 6 rams. But they don't use them properly:
once the first wave of equip (2 towers, 1 ram) is gone, all their units stand in range of my towers and archers, letting themselves get shot to pieces while one of their units walks back to pick up a single ram and advances towards my gate. Needless to say, with ballista towers that ram burns quite quickly. The AI repeated that each time until they were down to their last ram which finally managed to get to my gate and batter it.
By the time that happened, he lost 70% of all his units and any unit only walking through the gate auto-routed.
That is just horrible AI....
First of all. Why do they stand in your tower/archer range all the time while waiting for a ram?
Secondly, why did they not have several of their infantry each carry a ram close to the gate?
Thirdly, when their first ram did burn, why did only one unit go fetch one ram?
That really needs fixing.
That is just horrible AI....
First of all. Why do they stand in your tower/archer range all the time while waiting for a ram?
Secondly, why did they not have several of their infantry each carry a ram close to the gate?
Thirdly, when their first ram did burn, why did only one unit go fetch one ram?
Fourth, why did they build SIX FREAKING RAMS and only 2 towers? They'd be far better off with it the other way: oodles of towers, and just 1 or 2 rams. At least the AI has an easier time using multiple towers, and it makes more sense to build the equipment that way anyway: you can make a more effective and coordinated assault.
FactionHeir
05-17-2007, 02:13
I found something odd in my errorlog today, other than the "Point not inside battlemap" reports:
18:49:21.437 [data.invalid] [error] BATTLE_MAP_AREAS failed to calculate area shapes : See Charlie
21:29:53.515 [data.invalid] [error] BATTLE_MAP_AREAS unhandled situation : See Charlie
Daveybaby
05-17-2007, 09:46
Well you know what you have to do.
army formations not holding properly when commanded to advance by single click any greater distance than 100 virtual yards
It tends to happen if you drag a box around your units on the field and then tell them to move. Usually not if you select them one by one from the unit card.
I also had it happen when I ordered a grouped unit. The savest way to avoid it is to drag out the formation at the target location.
But what´s worse, this also affects skirmishing missile units, when the yretreat from a closing enemy they often change to this marching (deep) formation.
Talking about skirmishers, it seems they always retreat towards the map edge that was in their back on army deployment. If, for some reason, you had to rotate your battle setup by 180° the skirmishers will move towards the enemy once he is in skirmishing distance.
I found something odd in my errorlog today, other than the "Point not inside battlemap" reports:
18:49:21.437 [data.invalid] [error] BATTLE_MAP_AREAS failed to calculate area shapes : See Charlie
21:29:53.515 [data.invalid] [error] BATTLE_MAP_AREAS unhandled situation : See Charlie
Well, you'd better have a chat to him then, hadn't you? (:grin2:)
Will update the buglist over the next few days - got a fair bit on atm (~10k words of work to do)
FactionHeir
05-17-2007, 12:24
If I knew who Charlie was, yes :p
Another bug: Getting an adoption offer that has the Drink trait on the Drunken_Heathen level results in the avatar having a mysterious permanent boost to command, even after the trait is removed.
Swift steed ancillary gives a public health bonus even though its an agent ancillary.
Nicolau copernicus ancillary gives a subterfuge bonus even though its a general ancillary.
:laugh4:
Probably an in joke by CA - after all, we all know that drinking has many positive effects on your health :inquisitive:
Daveybaby
05-17-2007, 13:34
Charlie doesnt though :uhoh2:
FactionHeir
05-17-2007, 18:34
Just when I thought after my 2 previous siege bug reports that it couldn't get any worse.....it did:
Scenario was Sicilian campaign, defending Staufen (fortress) against HRE attack
https://img369.imageshack.us/img369/3638/0000ut5.jpg
https://img369.imageshack.us/img369/7255/0001yc2.jpg
https://img501.imageshack.us/img501/9530/0002vf5.jpg
https://img369.imageshack.us/img369/5893/0003pf5.jpg
I think the pictures are pretty self-explanatory...
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned already but I'm having the same problem with AI reinforcements as I used to have in RTW: they don't make any sounds. You know, like the marching sounds? When you zoom in on your AI reinforcements you don't hear anything. Didn't they figure out how to fix this in RTW already?
Daveybaby
05-17-2007, 19:51
I think the pictures are pretty self-explanatory...
Umm... theyre not entirely.
To me it looks like the HRE are carrying ladders & rams inside your fortress, presumably in order to assault the inner walls. I assume thats not the case though.
FactionHeir
05-17-2007, 20:18
Umm... theyre not entirely.
To me it looks like the HRE are carrying ladders & rams inside your fortress, presumably in order to assault the inner walls. I assume thats not the case though.
Well yes, except that not a single unit of theirs ever made it past the entry street due to being massacred by my spears. Yet when more than half their units already routed and their general was dead, they would carry ladders and rams into my fortress instead of either withdrawing or fighting the troops guarding the entrance. Carrying a ram/ladder through the entrance guard is suicidal especially in that situation. Besides, they had a siege tower latched on one of my walls and except for the unit carrying it, none of them bothered to use it afterwards (even though I had left that section undefended)
As for even more bugs:
I did some more extensive testing on why the AI would suddenly stop battering my entrance gate only to resume doing so a minute later. It seems that when they are at your gate and you attack one of its units making its way up the ladders/siege towers and have not yet reached the top, the ram will always disengage and then re-engage. So my test was running a few knights into the troops scaling the tower to make them come out and then I withdrew with my knights only to come back a bit later. Each time their ram disengaged when their troops went back to moving into the tower.
Philippe
05-18-2007, 06:42
I've been looking at 1,2 and I've noticed three things, the first two are probably bugs, but there's a caveat.
Caveat: My hard drive is very full at the moment, and my system uses free hard disk space for extra memory. So the two observations that I'm about to make may be memory related, or may not be.
1) I get a lot of verbal sitting in ambush messages, most of them at inappropriate times. Haven't tracked this carefully but it seems to happen after battles, after sieges, more or less constantly. I wouldn't expect to hear it when a unit enters a city, but I do. The messages vary, but the odd behavior is the excessive frequency of the triggered messages. [note: I don't really think this is related to memoy issues on my system].
2) I've been getting a lot of diagonal streaks on the campaign map. It usually goes away after a moment, and my guess is that this may be memory-related. I don't get anything like this in battles, though.
3) This is not a bug, but it is driving me crazy. The game's concept of line of succession defies anything that was actually practised in the middle ages. I simply can't wrap my mind around the notion that if the heir to the throne doesn't have children, but does have a functional brother, if he takes a few generals into the family tree, they not only get precedance in terms of succession over his brother, but over any subsequent children as well. I'm sorry, but it simply didn't work like that. I like the fact that in RTW you can pick your heirs -- that's very Greco-Roman. I also like the fact that you're stuck with whatever system for succession you happen to have going in M2TW. But I emphatically don't like the way it is executed. Adoptees should be classified as cousins of the current ruler, or something similar, and not automatically bump out legitimate heirs.
FactionHeir
05-18-2007, 11:39
Agreed on family tree mechanics, they don't make any sense at the moment, especially when the current heir becomes leader and does not have any legitimate, adopted or in-law offspring. Then the next heir jumps somewhere into the center of the tree to someone with almost no relation to the new leader instead of to his brother as it should be. If no working system can be made, the player ought to be able to choose the heir each time the current heir or leader dies at least.
khaos83_2000
05-18-2007, 15:06
Not sure if this is posted.
Bug issue: Free trait and upgrading w/o engaging in battle and all done in seconds.
The trait given for my case is saint in battle.
I have a general with night fighter trait.
I attack a enemy stack with another enemy stack in reinforcement range.
The main stack does not have a general. Reinforcement stack has a general w/o night fighter trait.
Goes into fight/auto-resolve/Withdraw screen. I select and de-select the "night attack" button multiple times and my general was given a trait. I repeat it again, the trait is upgraded. I repeat it again until it got to Saint of Battle.
FactionHeir
05-18-2007, 16:57
Not sure if this is posted.
Bug issue: Free trait and upgrading w/o engaging in battle and all done in seconds.
The trait given for my case is saint in battle.
I have a general with night fighter trait.
I attack a enemy stack with another enemy stack in reinforcement range.
The main stack does not have a general. Reinforcement stack has a general w/o night fighter trait.
Goes into fight/auto-resolve/Withdraw screen. I select and de-select the "night attack" button multiple times and my general was given a trait. I repeat it again, the trait is upgraded. I repeat it again until it got to Saint of Battle.
Yes it does happen when you attack and withdraw from combat when attacking a non-same religion faction, but you also get the IndecisiveAttacker trait for doing so, which balances it out.
As for today's bugs from me:
- Siege battles (Yes, you love that don't you): for multilayered castles, when the AI breaches your outer gate and fights your defenders for a while (and generally routs en masse) it will pick up the ram that stands by your gate, carry it all the way back to the starting position and then back to the gate again to move it to the inner gate even if the entrance is still fully defended. I reported that issue here yesterday or the day before, but the carrying ram back and forth is new.
- HRE navies winning the battle will at times feedback the retreat message instead of the victory message.
- If you turn of fire at will for Italian factions, the general will stay "artillery units, hold your fire" even if you don't have any artillery but only normal missiles.
- AI against player sallies is worse in 1.02 than compared to 1.01. In 1.01, it would at least move its ranged troops forward to shoot what you were sending out (which can be exploited, but generally was a smart thing to do if you had several units out) now it just stands around and lets itself get shot to pieces. Still no reaction to side gate either and I can now send out troops from the front gate without being harassed.
- AI against player sallies #2: Artillery pieces the AI carries seem to be affected by some conflicting scripts. Ie. when the AI drops the siege equipment, if it has any artillery units, the artillery will drop equipment, pick it up, drop, pick up etc constantly until enegaged in melee, at which time it will retreat behind its lines without taking the artillery with it and it will not use the artillery against you at all. Again, thats a big minus compared to 1.01 where it would use artillery against you in sallies.
- The pope will at times give you missions to blockade a rebel or non christian port now but the very next turn or two tell you that the mission expired as the faction was brought back into the fold. Only noticed this in 1.02. 1.01, the pope would at best give you that mission against an excommed catholic faction.
There is a siege CTD bug confirmed here (http://shoguntotalwar.yuku.com/forum/viewtopic/id/16058?page=1) (<-Link) Dunno if you guys know about it, thought I'd post just in case.
candelarius
05-19-2007, 14:13
Are you guys sure about the cannon/ballista tower bug? I thought this was fixed in 1.2? This has already been confirmed, hasn't it?
FactionHeir
05-19-2007, 14:25
Are you guys sure about the cannon/ballista tower bug? I thought this was fixed in 1.2? This has already been confirmed, hasn't it?
The list was started during the leaked patch and the only difference between leaked and official I think the the tower bug that has been fixed I think. So yes.
Attempted to break a siege with an additional force outside the city, chose night attack, it shows the enemy retreating, but the attackk selection screen is still displaying. It freezes up the game so where I cannot do any other actions except to quit game. Tried it a second time and had same result plus a crash to desktop.
I have a file saved so one could try to recreate this.
Generals_Bodyguard
05-20-2007, 05:19
There is a siege CTD bug confirmed here (http://shoguntotalwar.yuku.com/forum/viewtopic/id/16058?page=1) (<-Link) Dunno if you guys know about it, thought I'd post just in case.
I call it:
The 2 AI seige wooden tower bug(for lack of a better name)
Crash Criteria:
-2 AI armies
-Siege battles
-Settlement/castles with wooden defences
-AI army uses ammo based siege equipment
-AI army attacks towers that are under control either by you or the other AI!!!
-The AI army firing the siege weapon havent moved their infantry yet.
PutCashIn
05-20-2007, 07:04
Gorm, I have recently experienced something similar in a night attack/seige situation.
Milan and I (as HRE) were crusading Venice (the city), a bottleneck built up around the bridge out side of the city.
During the AI turn, Milan attacked a venice stack, one of my armies was included as an ally, although it was greayed out as Milan was performing a night attack, in order to exclude the second Venice stack nearby.
Of course the UI asked if I wanted to partake in the battle, I declined, already worried about what was going to happen when I auto'ed, let alone actually trying to watch(not) my troops fight(not).
Apparently Milan won the Auto, my army recieved some casualties ???? and the game hangs during the victory animation on the campaign map.
Thankfully on a reload, venice moved its armies away and Milan decided not to include my Army in its quantum dynamics experiment.
I should have clicked 'fight on battlemap' ;)
FactionHeir
05-20-2007, 23:25
Bug - AntiTraits.
Yes, we all thought they have been fixed and they have for the most part, BUT I just had a really weird encounter where my exhausted general was assaulted by a vast byzantine army and routed. After the battle, he had BOTH Brave (level1) and Coward(level2) and Haemophobic (level2).
Note that Brave has AntiTraits Coward AND Haemophobic and the latter two traits also have brave as AntiTrait.
So...Antitraits work weirdly at times and getting both traits seems more than odd to me as they are supposed to cancel out.
Noticed this one during the seige of Inverness.
Having placed my seige towers against the city walls, phase two of my assault strategy was to run four ladders up to the walls on either side of the initial assault point (2 ladders either side).
This resulted in two sets of ladders being raised alongside each other on the next available assault slots on the wall.
The Problem
Having raised both sets of ladders the ladder teams from both proceeded to ignore one clamber up one set of ladders. Effectively, reducing the assault effectiveness by 50%.
Noticed this one during the seige of Inverness.
Having placed my seige towers against the city walls, phase two of my assault strategy was to run four ladders up to the walls on either side of the initial assault point (2 ladders either side).
This resulted in two sets of ladders being raised alongside each other on the next available assault slots on the wall.
The Problem
Having raised both sets of ladders the ladder teams from both proceeded to ignore one clamber up one set of ladders. Effectively, reducing the assault effectiveness by 50%.
I've seen that too sometimes. I think it happens if the center of the one unit is too close to the ladders of the other unit. Basically the pathfinding AI decides it's actually closer to climb the set of ladders the other guys are already using, so it will send the unit over there. It's not strictly wrong from a pathfinding sense, but it is rather awful for good assault practices. I think if the unit, having placed its ladder, was always required to begin climbing the one they placed, the problem would go away. As it currently stands that unit is disassociated with its ladder as soon as the ladder goes in place, and then it appears that the unit invokes pathfinding to determine the best way to its spot on the wall. Anyway, at least it's not too serious a problem, though somewhat annoying.
FactionHeir
05-22-2007, 00:39
Units with the fire_by_rank attribute (gunpowder infantry) will sometimes get stuck in reloading status when given an order to shoot a specific target in range and fire at will mode is turned on. They get stuck as in they have their muskets raised to about half, as if they had just gotten into position and are not yet aiming with their status reading reloading but they will never actually aim and shoot until the closing enemy hacks away at them. Actually they will all release empty volleys on melee impact.
Ive had a browse, didnt see this one but that dont mean it not there
v1.2 vanilla
I call this one 'pass the duchy' to the right hand side
basically the english have just broken through the gates of Hamburg oops no wrong this one happens to be the Poles at mada...something south of Hamburg - does appear to be castle related
Once the gate is broken, at this point they do a little shimmy and all go and line up in a lovely straight line to the RHS of the castle, with all my towers cutting them down
the appropriate problem that caused this - I dont know what the trigger is other than its immediately after the gate is broken - is resolved after some fighting of the initial units through the door
and then the army proceeds to try and force entry in a very piece meal way
I lost count of how many seiges Ive seen this behaviour
so lets all line up and pass the duchy to the right hand side
Theyll all set here at flemington
the reds lights flashing...
rrrrrrrrRACING!!
http://members.westnet.com.au/rogun/screenies/passtheduchy.jpg
AI still not behaving very sensibly in 1.2 with siege artillery.
I was defending Dijon (as French) against HRE attack. They had 4 ballistae. First up they blew down my gate (which their spy had already opened), then knocked a hole in the wall next to the gate. So far, so good.
Then 3 ballistae went walkabouts near to my wall to attack I don't know what, whilst the fourth marched straight for the hole in the wall (not I suspect to make a withdrawal) where it was butchered by the defending spearmen.
Is there any way to make the AI artillery do the sensible thing and sit still and attack the nearest towers /walls and not wander off and get killed?
khaos83_2000
05-22-2007, 14:41
Ok, this bug will give one of your general a -1 loyalty.
How it happen to me:
I was playing in a campaign. End turn, blah blah for AI turn. Then my turn again. A general for adoption or for my little darling, cant remember which 1. I accept. Everthing is fine. Then i did some thing wrong. So i reload the autosave file, which will bring me back to the start of my turn. I load it, the adoption or proposal appear again. I accept again. Then i got a message saying one of my general got -1 loyalty trait.
FactionHeir
05-22-2007, 15:07
Ok, this bug will give one of your general a -1 loyalty.
How it happen to me:
I was playing in a campaign. End turn, blah blah for AI turn. Then my turn again. A general for adoption or for my little darling, cant remember which 1. I accept. Everthing is fine. Then i did some thing wrong. So i reload the autosave file, which will bring me back to the start of my turn. I load it, the adoption or proposal appear again. I accept again. Then i got a message saying one of my general got -1 loyalty trait.
This is not a bug but a chance based trigger for traits.
redpatch
05-23-2007, 06:08
This is the most recent buglist right?
1.) Some generals don't receive a death voice over, the camera focuses on their death without speech.
2.) Broken city gates from a battering ram focuses above the gate
3.) Upgraded towers for cities that shoot ballista bolts shoot from the towers next to gateways, but the next tower over only shoots from one side of the tower (or I'm missing the animation)
redpatch
05-23-2007, 06:16
Cannon/Ballista towers still don't work properly and shoot the wrong ammo.
I haven't seen this bug in 1.2
Also, I have another.
1.) When you place a grayed-out unit (say merchant) in the queue because you have no money, you can add an additional unit the next turn. Ultimately, this means one can produce up to through or four on one turn. Normally these units are limited to one per turn.
FactionHeir
05-23-2007, 12:13
As far as I have heard and tested, the ballista/cannontower bug is no longer existent. Are you playing the leaked version or a not properly patched version, which happens so often for 1.02? Because all other bugs you report also happen in 1.1 for instance (and have not been reported yet, although I had seen them before)
FactionHeir
05-23-2007, 15:34
Graphical glitch for mercenary arquebusier arm textures. It looks like they got an outstanding black frame being carried on the elbow for one type of texture (there are 2 textures for the elbow in total I think)
DVX BELLORVM
05-23-2007, 20:50
The battle map is broken in the area southwest of Jerusalem.
https://img136.imageshack.us/img136/6987/00343uu2.jpg
The troops are placed on a mountain cliff and you can't move them anywhere because the surrounding terrain is impassable.
It looks very interesting... ~:rolleyes:
https://img136.imageshack.us/img136/2504/0032pd2.jpg
https://img513.imageshack.us/img513/4763/0034ab2.jpg
FactionHeir
05-23-2007, 20:53
While personally I'd say that's a bug, CA's stance on that is that it's intended. Don't ask me why...
redpatch
05-24-2007, 01:21
As far as I have heard and tested, the ballista/cannontower bug is no longer existent. Are you playing the leaked version or a not properly patched version, which happens so often for 1.02? Because all other bugs you report also happen in 1.1 for instance (and have not been reported yet, although I had seen them before)
I don't know if you were responding to me or the original post, but yeah, I was agreeing with you. I don't know why it's listed. All the bugs I posted I found in the most recent 1.2
FactionHeir
05-24-2007, 01:23
I don't know if you were responding to me or the original post, but yeah, I was agreeing with you. I don't know why it's listed. All the bugs I posted I found in the most recent 1.2
Ah ok. I didn't quite understand your post the first time as you didn't use the quote function to highlight that you were saying it was fixed, as I was saying.
This is hardly a bug rather an annoyance but when you right click on a priest that has a movement plan for the next turn it deletes it.
Possible bug in the random sense. Game locks up (not the pc though). English sieging HRE at Florence. After the battle is won game locks up at the strategic map where it should show winning army moving into city. So far only happened once.:furious3:
Brutal DLX
05-25-2007, 19:29
Definitely, the siege AI has gotten worse, not better, as others mentioned already. Glaring weaknesses are shown, in my campaigns under 1.02 at least, especially with the Timurids' armies, in particular with the stacks that have elephants but no bombards. The musketeer eles march right to the gate as if they want to start ramming (as in RTW) and then hold right there and get shot up.
The ele artillery sometimes do not shoot at the walls at all, in particular I noticed this when I had no troops manning the walls (it seems as if they target the troops on the wall rather than the respective wall section).
Also, while they build lots of rams, the improvement is that they now are actually manning most of them right away, however, they stay back and wait if the first ram is successful in breaking open the gate. If it is not, more often than not, they will get movement orders but appear to be kind of stuck in place, especially when there are also siege towers placed close to them. Perhaps they equipment is placed to closely and blocking everything. This results in a complete deadlock where you either have to run down the clock or try to attack the stuck units to force the AI to issue new orders. This is very bad and can in no way be described as improved siege behaviour.
Another related problem is multi-stack sieges. It appears that also stacks that are not actually besieging (but are in an adjacent square) join the AI siege attack. This results in them showing up on the map (usually on the opposite side of the city/castle) and then staying there until the other stack has successfully opened a way into the city. IIRC, in RTW reinforcements could only join a city attack if they were actually laying siege too, this resulted in them having at least some siege equipment and thus giving the defender a harder time, as he had to deal with attacks on different sides of the town.
So, this must be fixed, as it is, I am sorry to be saying this, a real shame that such elementary things are still not taken care of after such a long time and two patches.
EDIT: I forgot to mention that attacking 2nd and 3rd level walls of castles still works only randomly. The AI still stumbles around aimlessly or, worse, lines up their main force in front of my 2nd line towers and missile troops while their troops carrying the ladders/rams arrive like 5 minutes later (if at all).
FactionHeir
05-29-2007, 22:18
OK, this seems to be a major hardcode bug afterall.
Remember a page back that I said how starting with the Drunken Heathen trait seemed to give a permanent boost to command even after you remove all traits and ancillaries (using plain remove_ancillary/remove_trait without operators)?
Well, it seems piety is also affected and there seems to be a trend: If your general is offered for adoption or coming of age and has traits that give a total negative value for either command or piety (not chiv/dread, but not sure about loyalty), he gets a permanent +2 bonus onto that trait.
This second piece of evidence came as one of the PBM chars came of age with 2 levels in the PublicAtheism trait (-4 piety) (and ReligionStarter 1 (+3 piety)). Well, after removing everything he still had 2 piety from nowhere.
I should note he also obtained a tutor ancillary (+1 piety), so it could be that its not only if the Attribute value total is negative, but also exactly 0, depending on if ancillaries are giving before or after traits are.
locked_thread
05-31-2007, 06:56
edit
FactionHeir
05-31-2007, 19:52
Update to 1.2 and then test. Don't test in 1.0 or 1.1 and report :p
There are some things that 1.02 didn't list as fixed but actually did fix. Not a lot but some.
apprentice
06-03-2007, 05:40
Family member has a Drink trait with a level of Gets Merry.
On a new turn when he gets a baby, the Drink Trait become Alcoholic.
FactionHeir
06-03-2007, 11:14
Nothing wrong with that really. Normally he'd get a lot of Sobriety traits for becoming a father, but there is also a 1% chance of getting more drink. Further, if you parked him somewhere, especially inside a city with the tavern line of buildings, you can become an alcoholic very quickly.
khaos83_2000
06-03-2007, 11:47
This is not a bug but a chance based trigger for traits.
in my case, it happens EVERYTIME.
FactionHeir
06-03-2007, 12:05
in my case, it happens EVERYTIME.
Then you have a streak of bad luck. The chance for that to occur is 50%. If you reload an autosave to test this though, you'll find it happens everytime because the seed is not reset.
apprentice
06-03-2007, 12:51
Family member has a Drink trait with a level of Gets Merry.
On a new turn when he gets a baby, the Drink Trait become Alcoholic.
It seems that Traits with nogoingbacklevels will jump to the nogoingbacklevel, when given an appropriate AntiTrait value.
For example, Trait Drink with Social Drinker value becomes a Alcoholic when a Sobriety 1 is triggered.
When that happens, Command is not reduced by 3.
Another test using the Trait Feck with a Strong Language value becomes Foul Mouthed (i.e. the nogoingbacklevel for Feck) when a Prim 1 is triggered.
When nogoingbacklevels for Feck and Drink was edited out of the traits file, the Feck and Drink were decreased using Prim and Sobriety.
Disappointing.
FactionHeir
06-03-2007, 13:29
It seems that Traits with nogoingbacklevels will jump to the nogoingbacklevel, when given an appropriate AntiTrait value.
For example, Trait Drink with Social Drinker value becomes a Alcoholic when a Sobriety 1 is triggered.
When that happens, Command is not reduced by 3.
Another test using the Trait Feck with a Strong Language value becomes Foul Mouthed (i.e. the nogoingbacklevel for Feck) when a Prim 1 is triggered.
When nogoingbacklevels for Feck and Drink was edited out of the traits file, the Feck and Drink were decreased using Prim and Sobriety.
Disappointing.
Tested with Drink/Sobriety setup and confirmed. [give_trait this Drink ; followed by a trigger on CharacterTurnEnd that gives Sobriety 1 at 100 if Drink = 1 -> result: Alcoholic]
Looks like a very major bug.
Time to make some fixes to the files....
madalchemist
06-03-2007, 16:45
(Probably someone already wrote it)
-When you win a siege battle, you have the option to ransom/release/execute prisoners, but the choice has no effect since they all die without your reputation going down; sort of an exploit, you always free them and get chivalry and they die anyway.
@Redpatch
1.) Some generals don't receive a death voice over, the camera focuses on their death without speech.
I noticed that too.
-The description for the general's character trait "Intelligent" is the one of the princess' "Intelligent_Lady" (it says the general gains +1 Charm); it is faulty only in the description, since I verified the general gains +1 command, +5% taxes and +5% trade as for the trait instead of +1 Charm.
-With France, when your spies open enemy gates, you hear your general say YOUR gate has been opened; it happens sometimes.
-Diplomatic messages (both when the other refuses or accept) from many factions say "England" almost always, even when you are dealing with HRE, Poland, Milan, etc.; for instance: "England could spare you from its plan of conquest if you give us x florins" is a message used even when it's not England who speaks.
Anyway, I play the Italian version so maybe these bugs are only in it.
HoreTore
06-03-2007, 18:19
@ madalchemist, I've never noticed those in the english version, so I guess that's a translation problem in the italian version.
Can't comment on the general's voice-over on their death though, I removed cutscenes a long time ago...
madalchemist
06-03-2007, 18:41
@ madalchemist, I've never noticed those in the english version, so I guess that's a translation problem in the italian version.
Yup, it must be a translation error.
By the way, you didn't notice the siege battle win bug or only the last 3 bugs I wrote?
FactionHeir
06-03-2007, 18:59
madalchemist:
Siege ransom bug I reported a while ago I think in 1.1 times already.
Death voiceover missing happens in the English version too.
Announcement error, trait descript and diplomacy are local italian version problems as I do not have them. There are messy voices for France, HRE and Islamic factions though even in the English version, but they are slightly different. Most of those I found back in 1.1 and as soon as I get more time playing those factions again I'll re-report them for 1.02 too.
madalchemist
06-03-2007, 19:22
@FactionHeir
Thank you for the quick answer
Tested with Drink/Sobriety setup and confirmed. [give_trait this Drink ; followed by a trigger on CharacterTurnEnd that gives Sobriety 1 at 100 if Drink = 1 -> result: Alcoholic]
Looks like a very major bug.
Time to make some fixes to the files....
So how should we fix this for the moment? Simply strip all the no going back levels out of the traits file? I imagine that might be best, since clearly it's better to allow traits to cancel their antitraits correctly all the time as opposed to none of the time. If everyone agrees that's the best temporary fix, I can go modify one of my existing fixes to strip those lines out of the EDCT - in fact my antitrait fix from earlier was similarly stripping the antitrait lines out of the file, so this should be VERY quick for me to do, and amazingly easier than editing the file by hand. I'd then roll out a patched vanilla file as well as a patcher to handle any EDCT at all, esp useful for modded ones... but I at least want some feedback before I go do that in case anyone has thought of something better or reasons not to do that.
FactionHeir
06-04-2007, 11:47
I did that with my fixes after I posted the above. (Version 1.25 to Version 1.25a)
Was actually quite easy to do. Open EDCT in word, replace all entries of NoGoingBackLevel with ; NoGoingBackLevel
FactionHeir
06-04-2007, 14:47
Adding mercenaries to the retraining queue and removing them from it deplenishes the mercenary pool regardless.
That means if there are 3 available merc spearmen in a given region and you have one available for retraining in one of your cities, adding/removing that mercenary spearmen unit to the retrainment queue reduces the amount that can be hired down to 2 instead of leaving it at 3.
MulusMariae
06-04-2007, 15:52
During the Papal States turn, the Pope attacks me. During the battle, my troops capture the routing Pope. After the battle, I try to ransom the Pope, but they can't pay, so the prisoners are executed.
The game "hangs" forever, still showing that it is the Papal States' turn. :wall:
I did that with my fixes after I posted the above. (Version 1.25 to Version 1.25a)
Was actually quite easy to do. Open EDCT in word, replace all entries of NoGoingBackLevel with ; NoGoingBackLevel
Haha! Good one. I was thinking too hard and missed the easier answer. I guess I have a hammer so the problem looked like a nail. :smile:
Commenting the lines even has the advantage of letting you search for the lines later and auto-remove the comments in similar fashion via a find and replace for "; NoGoingBackLevel".
During the Papal States turn, the Pope attacks me. During the battle, my troops capture the routing Pope. After the battle, I try to ransom the Pope, but they can't pay, so the prisoners are executed.
The game "hangs" forever, still showing that it is the Papal States' turn. :wall:
That'll teach you to mess with the pope! Did you miss the part of the manual that says "if the pope ever attacks you, you must roll over and die, or suffer biblical wrath of epic proportions?" I guess they mean God hangs your game, lol.
Seriously though, sorry to hear about your troubles. All I can say is reload a save and try it again, play it out differently. If the problem repeats itself try again so you can avoid killing the pope, that'll probably at least get you by the problem.
Abokasee
06-05-2007, 16:48
Not a bug, but something worth fixing
https://img110.imageshack.us/img110/6012/image2hx1.png
khaos83_2000
06-05-2007, 18:52
https://img116.imageshack.us/img116/5796/manofthehourwd1.png (https://imageshack.us)
Look at the unit bar. It's the same guy. I hit this bug a few times with different game.
I just go into battle and win, this bug pop out.
FactionHeir
06-05-2007, 19:37
There is nothing wrong with that. He is a general and not a family member, so you get the offer to promote him to become a family member.
There is nothing wrong with that. He is a general and not a family member, so you get the offer to promote him to become a family member.
So... you can have Man Of The Hour on a non-family-member general, not just a captain??? I had no idea ~:confused:
Rhyfelwyr
06-05-2007, 22:13
Does this patch fix the shield bug?
madalchemist
06-05-2007, 22:49
There is a bug I'd call the "speedy spy" bug (but maybe it's oly in the Italian version): when you tell a spy to spy an agent and he's successful, you seldom see "unknown traits" under the spied guy or gal (this happens a lot when you spy princesses and merchants).
This is strange, and it hapens with a pattern I could not find, except for the fact that you must be in "max unit speed" mode -you can modify the speed by hitting the space bar-; if I slow the game for the moment of the spy acting, this bug never shows.
Anyway it's pretty annoying to have to remember to change features each time I spy someone out of a city, so it should be fixed imo.
FactionHeir
06-05-2007, 23:35
Yes MOTH triggers for captains AND generals.
Shield bug is fixed in 1.02
"speedy bug" is probably related to something else. I also noticed that issue, but it didn't have anything to do with how fast the units moved - at least not on my old rig. My new rig doesn't even let me speed up because its too fast.
I'm using the french version with official 1.2 patch.
First the venetian heavy infantry armor upgrade seems to work (brigandine first then partially plate armor) but the venetian archer armor upgrade is still in reversed order.
Second, a translation bug (french version) : for "pierre l'ermite" ancillary message part of it is in french and part is in english (i have the turn saved when it happens).
Third (battlemap) : i saw a bunch of grass levitate above the ground
(I noticed it on Toscane battlefield, didn't bother to find it again)
Finally (a possible bug in campaign faction behaviour) :
England allied with Milan, Milan betrayed me (Venice) his ally, I called a crusade on a milanese city.
And this is where I think it could be a bug or where faction behaviour improvement can be done. England attacked Milan, his ally, to satisfy the Pope's call but England reputation fell to not trustworthy and lost alliance with Milan that had a strategic position allowing the english to encircle the french.
Maybe the mechanism that computes the faction decision (attack an ally) could be improved here.
madalchemist
06-06-2007, 13:24
Second, a translation bug (french version) : for "pierre l'ermite" ancillary message part of it is in french and part is in english (i have the turn saved when it happens).
I've the same bug with the italian version (text is part italian part english)
Fix Dismounted Imperial/German Knights to have trait: Good Morale
This was either illogically left out purposefully or left out by mistake. Mounted knight variant still retains Good Morale trait.
Tschüß!
Erich
DVX BELLORVM
06-06-2007, 22:07
Tlaxcalan mercenaries have a triangular banner like missile units, but they are actually an infantry.
https://img106.imageshack.us/img106/9464/clipboard010na5.jpg (https://imageshack.us)
Vlad_Impaler
06-10-2007, 07:56
CTD on attempt to use diplomacy to capture target of Crusade.
Don't know if this has already been noted. Apologies if I am too lazy to use the search feature to read 52 pages of unrelated, unfiltered junk from all forums.
(Hint: Wouldn't it be nice if search function could be restricted to specific forum?)
Details on CTD:
My lovely and talented level 9 princess approaches Antioch after her brother failed to capture it during the second crusade. Though he died in the attempt and thus proved himself a lesser son of grerater scions, she is not bitter. She offers 5000 florin now, and another 5000 each turn for two turns. The signs look favourable, as the target thinks this is a balanced deal and they have freely given up lesser territories for less lucre in the past. Hit the button, instant black screen and much nonsense to get back to desktop.
Reboot, reload, reproduce. Same crash. Oh well, I guess the Pope wants blood.
FactionHeir
06-10-2007, 11:13
Hmm dunno, but when I used a diplomat to buy the target the other day it didn't crash for me. Of course that was in 1.01, so this might be a newly introduced CTD heh.
DeathBUA
06-10-2007, 15:50
Alot of people have pointed out some of the obivious ones....
But I ran into one, don't know if it's a bug or not. But on my milanese campaign I've always kept a near perfect rating with the pope, however when I donated them Baghdad in the holy land my rating went from perfect to 0 crosses/abysmal!?! I thought whatever just a fluke but I even tried it when some of my better and closer cities in italy, western europe, wherever I donated cities, boom my standing would plummet!
Is this a bug or an intended effect because I've NEVER had that happen with any of my campaigns with Catholic/Muslim/Orthodox factions...
FactionHeir
06-10-2007, 16:09
Yes its a known bug
WhiskeyGhost
06-11-2007, 09:03
I have noticed a little bug, where if you select night battle during the "play it out/auto resolve/retreat" screen, and hit Esc to say, save it before the battle, that if you have a general, and the conditions are correct for the trait, you'll gain a point in it (i.e. BattleChivalry/Dread traits) and the process can be repeated to max out that trait line....
also i tried to use the search to see if its been brought up already, but to no avail, so if its already been mentioned, my bad :embarassed:
FactionHeir
06-11-2007, 11:12
If you mean the prebattle screen attacking a faction of another religion and that you withdraw from battle to reengage to get the chiv traits, then that is how it works (although it shouldn't). If you mean simply by minimizing/maximizing the screen, then that is quite some bug.
WhiskeyGhost
06-12-2007, 00:34
If you mean the prebattle screen attacking a faction of another religion and that you withdraw from battle to reengage to get the chiv traits, then that is how it works (although it shouldn't). If you mean simply by minimizing/maximizing the screen, then that is quite some bug.
Alright, i've done some testing, and yes, it appears thats what that is, its when you attack another religions faction (not entirely sure if night fighter is needed though)
heres some screens......
https://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p147/Wiskyghost/first.png
heres the bottom of the traits....
https://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p147/Wiskyghost/middle.png
and finally the end result from hitting esc about 6 times as apposed to hitting withdraw.....
https://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p147/Wiskyghost/final.png
so i guess i kinda found a bug, or to be more precise, an easier way to exploit one.......:sweatdrop:
unless im mistaken, and if thats the case i apologize and will edit this post if necessary
FactionHeir
06-12-2007, 01:42
Feel free to mention the exploit. Just as common as the crusade join/abandon...
Normally you could only get this from attack/withdraw/attack, but that ESC does it too is interesting. I wonder if it also gives you the IndecisiveAttacker trait you get from withdrawing?
WhiskeyGhost
06-12-2007, 02:47
from my tests, it does NOT give indecisive attacker at all
FactionHeir
06-12-2007, 10:56
Did you lower the threshold and mod the triggers to check that or just by pressing esc.
Rhyfelwyr
06-12-2007, 11:20
Does this patch fix the armour upgrades? For example if you upgraded Peasants to padded armour, will their armour change to 4 rather than 1?
WhiskeyGhost
06-12-2007, 17:03
Did you lower the threshold and mod the triggers to check that or just by pressing esc.
I play on Vanilla 1.2, no mods of any type (not even faction unlocking) so i know whether its something with the game itself and not something i was meddling with
post edit: to the next post, i'll see if i can find some time to try the trigger once i find it, and update accordingly
FactionHeir
06-12-2007, 17:35
What I meant was whether you tested the IndecisiveAttacker trigger triggering in that situation. The thing is, the threshold is like 40 or 50 and only triggers for certain odds, so without a modded file its hard to pin down whether the game considers pressing esc as withdraw/reengage or not.
WhiskeyGhost
06-12-2007, 18:44
What I meant was whether you tested the IndecisiveAttacker trigger triggering in that situation. The thing is, the threshold is like 40 or 50 and only triggers for certain odds, so without a modded file its hard to pin down whether the game considers pressing esc as withdraw/reengage or not.
Ok, i tested the trigger for IndecisiveAttacker by hitting withdraw ,manually for the chivalry, and it shows up (battle odds at 1-1, within threshold, because the trait showed up after 3 manual withdraw clicks, and performed another few clicks to see it further down the line to final level which took me a total of 21 tries) then tried using my "night battle+esc menu" method to perform the chivalry trick without getting IndecisiveAttacker trait, and performed 100 attempts (200 presses of escape key) without getting the IndecisiveAttacker trait. The results should be at least reasonably with that outcome after 3 separate full tests of similar amounts (give or take maybe a 1-5 margin for the indecisive trait applying, which makes me think that theres probably a luck involvement as well)
*edit* solid numbers are on average, not from 1 particular test *edit*
If someone who does mod files and is curious decides to test this out for themselves, i'd like to see if they attain similar results. As for me however, i won't be modding, since i have some really bad experiences with that (including one melted computer, and countless full restores of things i screwed up)
Also, my apologies for taking up a lot of space here with so many posts :sweatdrop:
I call this one "game it broken"
http://members.westnet.com.au/rogun/screenies/broken.jpg
No matter how much immersion youve managed to delude yourself with, this happening every seige kinda kills it
Not sure if this is a known bug. During a siege, I tend to sally out some cavalry to attack the catapults while the rest of my men wait behind the walls (note: this is when the attacker assaults, not when I choose to sally from the campaign map.)
When I have destroyed the catapults or trebuchets, the narrator states that "the siege equipment will not man itself", as if they were my siege weapons. If the "narrator" thinks I can pick up this equipment with men on horseback, in the middle of the rest of the enemy force, well... ~:rolleyes:
Rhyfelwyr
06-13-2007, 10:59
Anyone know the answer to this?
Does this patch fix the armour upgrades? For example if you upgraded Peasants to padded armour, will their armour change to 4 rather than 1?
FactionHeir
06-13-2007, 11:33
That's not really the place to ask that here you know.
But if it stops you from asking them in the buglist, no it has not been fixed.
And it has been reported before too.
locked_thread
06-14-2007, 22:20
edit
Doug-Thompson
06-15-2007, 22:44
I took Smyrna as the Hungarians, which was a council mission.
When it fell after a spy let me in, I got a "Mission failed: Another faction took it" message, and I don't think I got my ƒ1,000, either.
FactionHeir
06-15-2007, 23:24
Are you sure the order was for you to capture it and not to annex it?
Doug-Thompson
06-15-2007, 23:26
Are you sure the order was for you to capture it and not to annex it?
No, I have to admit. It was occupied by a faction, not bandits, if that makes any difference.
FactionHeir
06-15-2007, 23:29
The thing is, capture means by military action or diplomacy.
Annex means by diplomacy only.
However, last I checked (1.01), annex missions still fail even if you successfully buy it from them.
-> capturing or buying off an annex settlement mission target will return "taken by another faction"
Are you sure the order was for you to capture it and not to annex it?
Good point! I managed to misread one of my missions and captured the city as I thought I had been instructed too, only to fail the mission because all it had really wanted me to do was blockade its port.~:doh:
Monsieur Alphonse
06-17-2007, 09:54
I had units get extra experience but they didn't do anything during the battle. They had no casualties, no kills and no prisoners. Look for the levy spearmen
https://img207.imageshack.us/img207/1992/image00019ui0.jpg
I lost a papal election to someone with less votes than my candidate.
https://img294.imageshack.us/img294/3647/image00022gn2.jpg
Cowhead418
06-18-2007, 04:45
Sea battles:
I started a campaign as the Spanish and the French declared war on me. I won some naval battles against them and my naval commander gained a few stars. However, I noticed that during random future battles the command stars would not be there during the pre-battle screen even though the trait is still there. My commander would lose his stars but re-gain them after gaining another trait.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.