Printable View
One of my generals is constantly getting a new image on his unit card instead of his portait. IVe had him be a boat, onager, another general potrait, a mix of them (yes like a quarter of each) and many othes. It was on a campaign as the WRE but i finished it a while ago so i cant provide a screenshit
No traitincrease for Assassins. Well there is for normal murdering, but there is only decreases for sabotage. You can get a decrease for failed sabotage but apparently not an increase.
Did this ever work? I did a lot of sabotaging in 1.0 but I don't believe I ever got an increase or a decrease for traits in it.
Not only when asking for alliance, but all refusals(alliances, cease fire, military access etc) at either side in a negotiation will end the diplomatic possibilities with that faction that turn.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kraxis
I had a case where I as the Franks(I think) was besieging a WRE city where the sally ended as a draw(they refused to leave the city, incredibly annoying :furious3:). Back on the campaign map they sallied again, on the same turn. I couldn`t stand putting the battle on 3x speed and wait for it to end once again, so I autocalced and lost.Quote:
Rebels can sally twice, when using autocalc that ends in a draw. (magnum)
.
I'm sure this has been mentioned multiple times before but it seems that the siege/assault/sally AI has been left unprogrammed. ~:pissed: Yes, it's that. Whether in offense or defense, the AI simply ignores the existence of firing walls/towers/gates and sends troops to ultimate suicide.
:gah2:
.
The Goths in Scandinvia and the Goths in the game are two different people. The Goths in Sweden are named after two parts of the land Västergötaland and Östergötaland - Westgoths and Eastgoths,Quote:
Originally Posted by Seasoned Alcoholic
Thanks for the heads-up. Was just a bit concerned after reading that (some? all? ~:confused:) of the Goths were Eastern Germanic tribes, which originated from Scandinavia of course. Then some of these settled in and around the Ukraine, before being dislodged by the great migrations of the Steppes peoples. Thanks anyway :bounce:Quote:
Originally Posted by PseRamesses
Sassanid Gateways
http://show.imagehosting.us/show/898...725_898441.jpg
You can see from the above screenshot that Sassanid gateways (on standard Stone Walls btw) do not have any murder holes on their inner side. So, once the gateways are taken by the attacker, these Sassanid towers will not fire inwards upon any defending troops that are within gateway range. As we know, this is the not the case with other stone wall gateways - they are capable of firing inwards once they've been occupied, such as Roman, Barbarian etc cultures.
However, I have not yet seen either a Large or Epic Stone Wall for the Sassanids on the battlefield, but will post some more screens if and when I get there ~D
Gateway, Tower, Wall Occupation / Ownership Status
Going back to the same screenshot, I've noticed in RTW and now BI how the flags displayed along defenders' walls, on top and in front of gateways / towers do not change regardless of ownership. Whether the developers missed this, it is bugged, or they never got round to it is anyone's guess.
It would make things a lot easier to see who is ocupying which towers, gateways etc, so (if defending) you can direct men towards breaches, or reinforce (if attacking) a wavering breakthrough.
This would be achieved simply if the flags changed to reflect ownership status. Obviously they don't at present, so its annoying to keep moving your cursor over each section of wall, tower, gateway etc to find out who's in control. After all, your eyes can't be in more than one place at any time: at-a-glance flags on walls are the way forward ~D
.
Frozen in time and space ~:)
Got this in one of my conventional "watch the AI infantry get grinded by fortifications" battles. The last Hun Horde Spearmen unit of the four besieging horde armies were diminished to two. Then:
https://img317.imageshack.us/img317/...ozen4ah.th.jpg
They were unreachable, unmovable, unkillible and unhittable. I had to send my melee units down and back, after which they decided to flank the frozen enemy from within the siege tower so that the game resolved. ~:)
.
Mercenary Sarmatian (Armoured) Archers
On the battlefield, I've noticed that Mercenary Sarmatian (Armoured) Archers (not Mercenary Alan Archers) cannot form Cantabrian Circle. This gets annoying, since other cavalry archer types can perform this manouvere. Also, you have to keep them moving around the battlefield to avoid casualties - if they were able to form cantabrian then they would stay out of range of most missile and infantry troops anyway.
Back on the strategy map, it takes 2 turns to recruit Sarmatian Armoured Archers - all other cavalry units take 1 turn. For balance purposes, Sarmatian Noble Cavalry should take 2 turns since they are the most heavily armed and armoured, otherwise Sarmatian Armoured Archers should take 1 turn to recruit like the rest.
* Discovered these whilst playing a Roxolani campaign
https://img438.imageshack.us/img438/...ephesus1bx.png
As you can see, the Bosphoran Infantry have the uncanny ability to wield short swords and spears at the same time. Bug? Undoubtably. Also is the same for Mercenary Bosphoran Infantry.
.
Schizophreniac Faction?
https://img522.imageshack.us/img522/...stroyed2al.jpg
~:joker:
.
What faction is that horde at the British Isles? ~:eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mouzafphaerre
.
The Romano-British, emerged a few turns ago. Not technically a horde though, a single full stack army.
.
That explains it, always been a bit unsure about the Romano British.
Earlier I mentioned a graphical problem with the Sassanid camel riders, i.e. their hollow chests and rear left legs. Now I take a couple of screenshots to prove it...and they come out showing them perfectly formed! Even though the units still have the glitches in-game, the screenies show them looking totally normal.
What gives?
Minor bug
Enslavement does not increase population growth If you have a growth rate of 3 % plus 1 % from slaves totaling 4 % the town only recieves the 3 % growth rate even though it says it should grow at 4 percent.
This has been there since at least RTW 1.2 possibly 1.0 and took a while discover this was happening due to many factors with the main one being you need a road in the enslaved town to be able to export slaves.
I read the first page but haven't read all pages. I got things to do people!
Bugs I have found so far that I haven't seen listed yet:
Sarmatians talk greek and at end of battles praise greek gods and are called greeks by the narrator.
Sarmatian units will not chase routing units that have sallied from a city. Very annoying.
I abandoned a city and then sent 1 mercenary unit to sac it. I was rewarded with negative 2147468648 denarii! (edit--I have done this with no mercs in my army and using my faction leader to get this amount!) I'm not sure how they came up with that number but apparently when you are a horde you have to pay looting bonus' to mercs. This bonus is pretty extreme though.
Why do you Roxolani have Sarmatian Virgin Archers?
v1.6
Well the 1.6 patch contains updated models for the Hunnic Warlord, Imperial German Bodyguard, British Legionaries, Pictish Crossbowmen and Scholae Palatinae. No more Legionaries with half a leg missing! The West Roman German Bodyguard now has a proper spear head. Sadly, the shield now contains part of the spear head - obviously this was carefully done. Pictish Crossbowmen now fire their weapon properly.
The Barbarian factions' Chosen Archers now have old RTW chosen archer textures. Sadly, the patch didn't update my descr_model_battle.txt file, and with no old RTW archer model referred to, the unit is completely messed up. It's easy to fix (edit the chosen_archer entry, and replace the existing model_flexi lines with this:
model_flexi data/models_unit/unit_barb_chosen_archers_400.cas, 8
model_flexi data/models_unit/unit_barb_chosen_archers_300.cas, 15
model_flexi data/models_unit/unit_barb_chosen_archers_200.cas, 30
model_flexi data/models_unit/unit_barb_chosen_archers_100.cas, 40
model_flexi data/models_unit/unit_barb_chosen_archers_70.cas, max).
The Hunnic Warlord's (new?) red plume or whatever it is called is completely messed up too, or it is for me. Shockingly, many units still have messed up textures or broken models. Another amateurish patch job.
There are lots of changes to the Character_traits file for BI also (463 apparently). As well as many changes to gaining command stars, it's much harder for family members to gain traits relating to the use of assassins. Heck it'll take half hour to list all those changes. Noticeably, however, it's harder to gain the bad governor traits of Bad Farmer and Poor Taxman. About time too. Player1 will have a field day sorting through all the changed files. Rather him than me!
(This thread just for 1.5 then? Oops.)
This is 1.6 BI-stuff
Just from the start the AI strategy looks to becoming now more flexible. The WRE is defending the gates into Italy very strong now. After a normal battle my Horde general get promoted with a command star! That did not happend before that easy. Assasins are now nearly useless without any experience. To kill a normal Diplomat you have a chance of 10 % to kill him - and a chance of 15 % to kill the captain of a stack with 2 peasants! Spies die much quicker when checking persons. I used several times my Spy to check a city with a chance of 75 % and succeed in 5 of 6 attempts. I checked enemy Diplomats with the same rate (75%) and my Spy got killed in about half the attempts.
Another change is the skirmish mode for AI. All the time the AI-enemy-archers started to run whenever you give your cavalry order to charge at them. This seems to be no longer. In the only battle I made, the archers took place behind a friendly spear unit and continued to fire.
This is what I learned in a 10 turns testing game with my Horde.
Yes, that's all BI-stuff. I see no need to make a seperated one for BI and patch 1.6
Are all the reports in this thread is actually sent to CA?
There isn't much point in reporting a bug if the devs won't notice it right?
Since the developer visit here occasionaly, I am sure they know about it. One of them even posted in the LM bug thread some time ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by KSEG
Incidentally, wouldn't it be wise to start this thread over again for 1.5/1.6?
Units don't just sometimes get stuck fighting the ghosts of already departed foes - sometimes those ghosts fight back. A while ago I was mildly suprised when a fair few of my Egyptian phalangites managed to die passing over the remnants of smashed enemies - although I'll grant that those spikes protruding from the wrecks of Scythed Chariots would no doubt be rather dangerous to cavort around IRL, I'm pretty sure they aren't supposed to kill people in the game...
deleted to make new thread for 1.6 bugs.
:help: After I installed BI, I can't get back to my previous RTW saves my campaign there (huge), but they seem to be there in the folder!?
Install the 1.6 BI Patch and you should have access to your saves again.
OK, I've looked over the threads and I don't see any posting for this bug:
In my BI games, regardless of the faction I am playing, I'm having this same problem if I attack a city with large stone walls or huge stone walls. I send my siege towers to the walls, and invariably, one or two or three of the towers get stuck.
By that I mean, the units line up the siege tower against the wall, as they're supposed to, then when they are supposed to disappear into the siege tower to ascend the tower to the top of the city wall, they don't. Instead, the men tumble about at the entrance at the base of the siege tower and stay stuck there.
Getting them unstuck, by pressing the halt button and having them return to the outside of the siege tower, is a real ordeal. If I didn't try to get them unstuck, they would literally stay there, tumbling about at the base entrance of the tower throughout the battle.
Usually this only happens to one or two of my siege towers. Depending on the size of the defending garrison, I will build between 4-5 siege towers for an assault. But in one case I've even had three of my siege towers become afflicted with this malady.
Having browsed thru several threads on this site, I haven't seen that anyone else in the guild is having this problem.
Is there a fix for this problem? Has anyone else had this problem?
According to the readme file I saw on patch 1.5/1.6 this particular problem was supposed to be dealt with in these patches. But I have the Gold Edition of RTW deployed on my laptop, from the ERAs package. So I'm supposed to already be patched to 1.6. Nevertheless, I'm still getting the aforementioned bug.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guyus Germanicus
So I welcome any suggestions from them who might help.
They didn't fix the problem with 1.5/1.6, they caused it. Pre-1.5/1.6, there was a separate problem whereby men would occasionally fall down between the siege tower and the wall. This was what CA claimed to fix with the last patch, and perhaps they did fix it. But in doing so they caused this, more serious problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guyus Germanicus
There have been some efforts by modders here at the org to correct the issue by editing the details of the tower, but without much luck. However, it is apparently possible to mitigate the problem by repeatedly pressing backspace (cancel orders) and re-issuing the order to get up onto the wall. It is very annoying when it happens though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barbarossa82
Thanks Barbarossa.
I read about that other issue in this forum, about the men falling off the towers. Apparently CA has been short of good testers in the past. Hopefully with Jack Lusted there now testing has improved. I can't understand how such an obvious bug could just slip through the cracks or be allowed to stay in a release. My customers at work would drive me crazy if I did that to them. Taking cities with large or huge stone walls is de rigueur in BI. You can't get around it. And waiting out sieges takes too long. Some of these cities could hold out for 9 to 10 turns.
I shall try the 'backspace' key. What I've usually been doing is simply spacing out my siege towers so that at least one unit can find a way to get on the walls unopposed. Then I can move them to support by capturing wall towers to stop the wall towers' archers from sniping my tumbling brethren in my siege towers. I have never had a success getting a tumbling unit to the top of a wall. Probably I've just not shown the patience. I usually just try to get them disengaged from the tower from the ground by cancelling their command and then re-issuing commands to move away from the siege tower until they finally respond. And that takes awhile.
What an a n n o y i n g little bug!!! :smash: :smash: :smash: :furious3:
Thanks again for responding Barbarossa.
I do what Barbarossa mentioned and it always works for me. After hitting backspace wait until all the soldiers are standing still before re-issuing orders though, they seem to make better progress that way in my experience. You can also mod out the Large Stone Walls by going to the export_descr_buildings file in your data folder if you want to.
Thanks. I'll give that a shot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phoenix
Phoenix, et al -Quote:
Originally Posted by Phoenix
The backspace/re-issue command eventually works in siege tower assaults. But, I dare say, it would be problemmatic in the extreme if you're assaulting a well-defended settlement. You can't be banging away at the backspace key and fight a seriously defended wall. One thing I noticed while using the backspace command. If you time your hitting 'backspace' so that the tumbling unit finishes his tumbling just as he steps into the siege tower, he will then ascend the tower when you re-issue the command to ascend the tower.
Also, I've noticed a couple other serious bugs in BI.
Today, while playing the Huns, I had both Constantinople and Thessalonica under siege. The sieges would terminate in the same term if I waited them out, and I did. When the turn ended, I won both cities. Since I had not yet 'settled' in a homeland I was going to sack them both to collect the money and reduce the population, then re-besiege and retake them to settle in/occupy with reduced populations.
When the turn ended, the AI granted me the win at Thessalonica, offered me the option to 'sack' or 'occupy,' and I choose 'sack'. But what the game did was: (1) it granted me the sack option for both cities - Thessalonica AND Constantinople - without prompting me with a separate choice for Constantinople, (2) it gave me the money for the sacking of both cities, (3) invested my armies in both cities as OCCUPIERS, and (4) left the populations in tact as if I had chosen to occupy instead of sack. I lost half my Hun army because the game interpreted my battle as an occupation, and I was faced with two hugely unmanageable city populations. OHHHHHHHHH I was PO'd! :furious3: :wall:
But that's not the only bug. Seems when a foreign army takes Thessalonica, the port goes away and it doesn't appear as a building option. Grrrrrr :furious3: That happened when I was playing the Huns and the Goths on separate occasaions.
I can't believe what a slipshod product CA put out with Barbarian Invasion. It makes you have second thoughts about buying the Kingdoms expansion of M2TW. :yes:
Any comments Mods? Would to read the reflections of serious veteran gamers on this subject? Apologias, mea culpas, whatever. . .
I consider myself just an amateur even though I've been playing for about a year and a half.