Well, Camulosadae works fine these days I know that much. Or worked in my recent Casse campaign anyway.
Printable View
Well, Camulosadae works fine these days I know that much. Or worked in my recent Casse campaign anyway.
Description of the Pharos Alexandreias has typos and the second praragraph is written weirdly.
Hysteroi Pezhetairoi field mercenary standards instead of those of proud Makedonia!
If you have fixed this in 0.81a, forget it.
It's because they have to use the merc variant for that model - there's no way to fix it (Hysteroi pezhetairoi).
:no: :no: :no:
That's sad, but thanks for the explanation.
May be this was mentioned before but looking through EBBS_script.txt I 've found possible errors:
In Section 7j: Gauls - Epeiros Alliance:
check lines with commands like this(line number 157686): console_command create_unit Vindobona illyrian infantry taxeis illyrioi 2
I suppose unit ID must be in quotes .
The same possible errors with create_unit command are present in Section 7a: The Chersonesos Event of the script.
I have the same problem, as the Romans, in 261 BC, usually as Backtria or Phalava, which ever nation that translates into.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agiselaos
Disregard the link that was here. It is/was the wrong file. This, Autosave.sav is the right file.
Thanks.
UPDATE :: NVM.
I've noticed that the Sweboz can't build ale-houses (even though they have a German-specific one in their starting province.) There's also a vaguely Greek looking building (white with cedar trees) called "WARNING!" in the same city. It gives a 5% law bonus.
Is it correct that a prophrorion gives 5% law bonus, phrourion still 5% and only the next evolution (mega phrourion I think) gives 10%? Shouldn't it be 5%, 10%, 15%? I'm talking of Makedonia.
Other issue:
The Romans besieged Messana, and that lead to a punic war. The Romans were allied to Carthage. The next turn, they were allied again, and no war was left.
Also, the Romans were allied with the Arverni, and both were at war with the Aedui. I've got the message two times saying "these people decided to give up independence", meaning Arverni were now a protectorate of the Aedui. But in the the diplomacy menu, there was nothing left from all this. They were just at war as before. When the Saka became protectorate of Baktria, this worked and I could see it in the diplomacy menu.
A quick one: the Getai victory conditions as mentioned by the advisor do not match the map and the victory conditions as described by the trait of the faction leader...
This has been cleaned up just in the past week and will be in the next release.
I noticed a strange bug in which the AI sent troops through my walls. The Seleucids were besieging my KH army and brought 1 ram, 1 ladder, and 2 siege towers. The ram was destroyed and the battle on the walls reached a stalemate, so a unit of Seleucid peltasts simply strolled up to the wall and walked right through into the city. I was a little surprised to say the least.
Dragon, I'm reasonably certain that bug is not EB specific, but it is odd indeed.
As Seleukids I built a "Naiskos Mithrou (Small Temple of Mithras)" in Asaak and the constuction report says "JULII forge PLACEHOLDER".
A texture bug in the mesopotamian palm trees, when looking at them from an extremely long distance they appear to be gray.
One more... In the loading screen that shows the kings of the Seleucid Empire, the timeline of Antiochos II Theos is 281-246 when it should be 261-246.
Great, now I remember two other tiny issues - I won't call them even "bugs"...
1. The "Naos / Naiskos (sorry can't remember what level actually) Mithrou" is translated with "Temple of HERMES".
2. From the distance, Makedon Argyraspidai look the same like Hysteroi Pezhetairoi, they seem to have a blue coat instead of a red one.
Dunno that we can do anything about that palm thing - that's how the game created the sprites for those palms - maybe it's just a haze or fog or something.
Both Mithras temple issues you guys just pointed out have now got fixes submitted to our official build thread.
I'll submit a fix for that seleucid coin problem too, good eye on that.
Those are two different buildings you're talking about though there. We might try to do something else with the Maks in regards to this extra garrison though - still trying to figure it out now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Centurio Nixalsverdrus
Excellent. They were left out, but they have two levels that should be available and also the descriptions are already done. Feel free to add "germans, " yourself to the export_descr_buildings.txt file if you feel confident (backup the edb.txt first of course) - add it for both the tavern and bardic_circle levels if you want - our next patch isn't really coming down the road next week or anything. :grin:Quote:
Originally Posted by Os-Q
A lot of those (Western Greek) buildings were caused by a problem that we only just solved thanks to Dol Goldur (he solved it - we're not taking the credit at all! :laugh4:), so we hope to have those fixed in the next build too.
The faction destroyed message talks about glory of Rome when you kill the Ptolemaioi as Seleukid:
https://img404.imageshack.us/img404/...aioing6.th.jpg
In my KH campaign I have come across several regions where I can't recruit anything.
I cannot recruit in Sardinia, part of my Victory conditions. I presume this is a bug, because I can recruit in Corsica.
Can you please let me know if there there are any rules-of-thumb about where recruitment holes would be part of the design and not a bug.
Some regions don't have their regionals done yet. There is a sardinian unit that is complete or almost complete, but just not in the current build. They have been towards the bottom of the 'to-do' list for units. Illyria/Pannonia also may have some holes still that aren't done yet. Saharan border provinces and Arabian ones also still have more units coming - lots of places do.
I have a few small things to report from my ongoing Sauromatae campaign.
The descriptions for roads and small trading port have the Warning should not be displayed thing, and the healer needs a description.
Other than that I'm having a great time and i really love their music, great theme.
Those descriptions and title errors are the result of a particular (and heretofore unknown) problem but they will be fixed in our next build we expect. Dol Goldur from FATW figured out the problem that was causing them. Basically if you have "and not" as a building requirement it can show this error in buildings placed at the start of the game. Also you must place the building by descr_strat and never by campaign_script.
Something else I noticed the Sauromatae diplomat is rendered kind of weird he has some textures and polygons missing or something he looks ragged, all the other diplomats I've seen look normal.
EDIT: I don't know if this is a bug or intended but the melee attack value of the Sauromatae Fat Aexsdzhytae (Sarmatian Horse-Archers)
is 12 while similar units like the Aorsi have only 4-5.
I was looking at this, and I can't figure it out. I went into EDU, and found that the dictionary name was hellenistic_cavalry_baktrioi_hippeis. So I searched for that in export_units and it came up just fine. Which makes sense because the name displays just fine. However, the long description entry is {hellenistic_cavalry_baktrioi_hippeis_descr}, which is precisely, exactly the same (I pasted it here directly), and in the correct format. Yet for some reason it doesn't want to display properly... it doesn't say "unlocalised placement text" or anything, just nothing at all under Description. I haven't checked it out for the short description in custom battle. I do see a spelling error in the text of the short description though: it says "Baktroi" where I believe it should say "Baktrioi".Quote:
Originally Posted by Thaatu
(edit) short description works just fine?!
While playing Swezboz, one of the starting building in my capital that was (western-greek) I think it's the building that is supposed to state you are the swezboz, it gives a 5% morale boost. Anyways in the description it just had this big Warning notice.
Also, in the capital for grain silo, for description it says "you are not supposed to see this, report the bug"
I play as Romans and during my campaign i noticed that some units have strange description. For example:
Samnitici milites
(heavy infantry)
(light infantry)
Kirslininkas
(baltic light infantry)
(heavy infantry)
the same problem with Pedites.
So what, are they heavy or light infantry?? :dizzy2:
i'm getting the bad supervisor trait on sweboz despite the guy already being a Governor, and the message he's asking to become a governor. I've had it happen a few times.
Also, what's with the command stars? I've fought close to 40battles, i've almost beaten the sweboz campaign and I haven't gained one command star from my battles.
And, just from a preference side of things, i find it annoying to have to identify someone who might get bored, then walk them around outside like they're a dog. I just find that aspect of things to be tedious micromanagement, but also micromanagement that is hard to identify.
Yes, i also noticed that my generals receive almost no command stars. Its quite frustrating when i fight personally almost every battle and still no command stars are coming to my general :furious3: On the other hand AI has not such problems because most of AI generals have lots of stars :shame:Quote:
Originally Posted by Static
Playing as the Sauromatae this I noticed that the Shahrdar is missing a picture and a description:
https://img521.imageshack.us/img521/...rdartw3.th.jpg
I think you guys are aware of most of what I'm posting here but I'm just trying to be a good beta-tester, not a pest.:2thumbsup:
Generals must fight a couple of battles before they get the experience and learning to gain stars, sometimes they need some time to take it in as well. Fight large battles with the odds against you, and the stars will come. The AI gets bonus stars in order to provide a better challenge for you.