-
Bugs and Patch Changes RTW 1.5
I'm going to start this thread as a placeholder for when the patch arrives sometime in the next 48 hours. (If Mods object, etc. then delete or lock as appropriate.)
The Readme is nice but it is general, and as it states it probably omits a number of small or subtle changes...or perhaps uses classic British understatement. So what I hope to do in this thread is to compile a list of changes and fixes that have been implemented compared to RTW 1.3. I will try to edit to maintain a list of what we find (although I could be out of pocket for a considerable time in the coming weeks--so a moderator might want to take over if I don't appear for an extended time after the patch is released.) Some general guidelines:
1. Contribute what you observe that is different/changed.
2. For obvious things like changed stats, just provide before/after number.
3. If you are uncertain about something that requires some testing, it might be best to have a separate thread to discuss it and flesh it out before adding it to the list.
4. CA comments would of course be very helpful toward compiling a complete supplemental list.
A similar thread for BI 1.6 might be useful. I'm not a good candidate for managing the BI list, as I don't have BI at the moment and won't have any "history" to compare. (Hopefully this RTW patch will prompt me to remedy that, and change my sig.) :san_grin:
And as always...a separate bug/workaround type list would be handy to keep in a different thread. Bugs of course could be in this thread, assuming they are *changes* from the previous release, not pre-existing bugs.
EDIT to begin lists for RTW 1.5, looks like my original format is going to require changing:
Undocumented fixed/changed items.
1. Officers seem to all have their weapons now. Before they had a tendency to show up for battle at times with no sword. Lots of punching... (Several...need more time to confirm.)
2. British Generals have been upgraded to 5 def. skill from 1. (Red Harvest.)
3. Generals_unit_upgrade added for Pontus "East Pontic Generals"
4. The AI has resumed using its warcry more consistently. In 1.3 it would often not warcry when attacking. In 1.5 it seems more prone to do so...including in custom tests. Glad to see this back! (Red Harvest)
Confirmed officially documented fixed items.
1. Naval invasion seems to be working according to initial reports. (Many.)
2. The AI uses its pila now. (Many.)
3. Barb Archer Rebel/Slave officer removed.
4. Spear warbands now have secondary swords and slightly lower cost/upkeep.
5. Berserker hit points have been cut to 2, and armour increased to 2. Recruiting and armour/weapon upgrade cost have been increased.
6. Memory leak has been partially fixed. It takes much longer to get the same level of leak. However, symptoms are exactly the same as before. CA gets partial credit.
7. Javelin skirmish AI appears to be improved. It is more likely to use them as skirmishers now. Archers/slingers still have some serious issues (not firing at times, marching through enemy fire, etc.) but they do seem to behave more like skirmishers on average.
Unfixed issues.
1. The two highest level horse temples are still buildable for Gaul, etc. and should not be according to the messages provided onscreen. (Red Harvest, many others) EDIT: Confirmed by Intrepid Sidekick/Capt. Fishpants, the two highest level horse temples should be buildable by Roman factions only.
2. SPQR still has Greek family members. (Seasoned Alcoholic)
3. Some reports of not having control of reinforcements in battle. (Various.)
4. "Short_pike" does not work properly. Phalanx units with it won't shoulder arms when phalanx is toggled off, and when attacked in phalanx, the pikes don't seem to hold the enemy off at all, the whole first row switches to swords. (Red Harvest.)
New 1.5 Bugs
1. AI seems to be able to very successfully use pila after it engages in melee...even after it did the initial hurl and charge. (Red Harvest.)
2. Academy class buildings might not be providing intended law bonus. (Barbarossa82.)
3. Disasters don't seem to work properly. The triggers are unreliable now (and appeared to be in 1.3 as well.) I've not seen a storm at sea in 1.3 or 1.5. I can get Etna to smoke, but not erupt (except for the historical event.) I have seen two floods, but no deaths from them. Have so far been unable to trigger a quake, or drought, or storm at sea in 1.5.. I know the disaster file is getting referenced, since I can make Etna smoke (by plugging in a coordinate as well as a frequency.)
4. Slave resources don't seem to be adding to population anywhere, even when the growth icon shows they should. There is growth in year zero, but none of the projected slave population growths are actually received. (Pode, Germanvs, and others. Confirmed.)
5. There have been quite a few reports of problems with siege towers, particularly the larger ones. Typically, men will mill about running in and out and can't be commanded. Eventually, they move up the tower. Sometimes they bypass the tower and end up on the wall before the ramp opens, this can cause a CTD. (MAt, and others.)
6. There is no option to turn off the battle timer in provincial campaigns. (Red Harvest)
7. During a Civil War test (as provincial campaign using straightforward descr_strat diplomacy mod) found that agreeing to a ceasefire with an AI Roman faction allows them to siege and blockade without being at war...and if the player's popularity is low, he can't counterattack in any way, leaving him helpless. It looks like the AI cannot attack ships or armies, but it can siege and blockade. War continues against other Roman factions. (Red Harvest)
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
With regards to a new RTW v1.5 bugs thread, it may be useful to everyone if the first page documents the entire list of encountered (and confirmed) bugs. I'm taking this idea straight from Kraxis' Sticky BI bugs thread. Before anyone posts a potentially new bug they should double-check the entire list to date to avoid duplications. It would need to be updated on a frequent (perhaps daily) basis, depending on how many members are posting in there.
Perhaps once the patch is released, someone could post the final readme version in here, and this could prevent duplications on this topic. It may contain a few more documented changes / fixes than what CA have already provided.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
I have plans for a RTW Bugs/BI Bugs/Undocumented Features thread to sticky so there will be only one sticky instead of three. All I need is someone dedicated enough to maintain it
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
The different flavours of RTW/Bi probably need different threads for bug I think. This one's stickied for now, to merge with BI bugs at a later date
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
I think Golden band are much better now. I don't remember their original stats but they seem a bit higher.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
RTW v1.5
SPQR start with 2 Greek-named family members. It appears that their names are generated at random at the start of a new imperial campaign.
Of course, it depends how you interpret this as to what you believe it to be.
[EDIT:]Double-checked descr_strat and there aren't any entries in the family section under Romans_Senate for these 2 named charachters. Looks to be bugged.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
The Imperial German Bodyguard and the Hunnic warlord look fine to me, but the Chosen Archer thing is just frightful. They kind of look like Bobba Fett. How the @#&% did that slip past QA? I mean it's not something you'd miss with even a cursory glance at them, and since they CHANGED them, you'd really think they'd bother to look at them.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
1. AI is using its pila, but the implementation is whacked. In hastati vs. hastati match up I just did they both throw, then charge...then the AI halts in melee switches back to pila...AND throws again...successfully. How the hell do they get away with this??? The implementation of pila has always been wierd about the charge (often blunting it.) I'm going to break out a separate topic on this...
2. AI archers are still dolts so no apparent improvement there. It will still march its longer range archers up to my line, get shot to pieces, then try to run away. It did this with enemy hastati captain and enemy archer auxilia vs. my triarii captain and roman archer. My hopes for improved missile unit AI have been dashed.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
From the patch readme:
"Academy-class buildings now give a law bonus, as they do in the BI expansion pack. These buildings now have uses in cities without governors or generals in residence"
There is nothing on the info scrolls for the academy-class buildings to indicate that they have that effect. Has it been implented or not?
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Professorspatula:
Are you saying that 1.5/6 makes it HARDER or EASIER to get command stars? 1.3 and BI made it much harder to get them, so if 1.5/6 made it even harder than that, I will be pretty annoyed; if they made it easier, then good for them.
Thanks
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barbarossa82
The Imperial German Bodyguard and the Hunnic warlord look fine to me, but the Chosen Archer thing is just frightful. They kind of look like Bobba Fett. How the @#&% did that slip past QA? I mean it's not something you'd miss with even a cursory glance at them, and since they CHANGED them, you'd really think they'd bother to look at them.
Well this is what I experience:
------------------------------
Imperial German Bodyguard:
https://img327.imageshack.us/img327/...31153ud.th.jpg
Hunnic General:
https://img416.imageshack.us/img416/...24544lk.th.jpg
It's amazing how many units still have messed up textures (often basic alpha channel issues) and also messed up models. The quality assurance people are my heroes.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
My mistake about the bodyguards, Professor. On closer inspection I do have those odd floating artifacts at the corners of the shields.
About the Hun guy though, this is weird. I tried both custom battles and campaign battles with Hun generals and captains, and saw nothing amiss. Then I decide to take a screenshot to prove it - and the stupid red rectangle shows up in the screenshot! I swear it isn't there on my monitor during the battles though. This isn't the first time I've seen differences between what I saw in a battle and what came out on the screenshot. Might be some graphics card weirdness I guess.
My screenshot of the Hun general:
https://img363.imageshack.us/img363/1738/hun8bk.th.jpg
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hurin_Rules
Professorspatula:
Are you saying that 1.5/6 makes it HARDER or EASIER to get command stars? 1.3 and BI made it much harder to get them, so if 1.5/6 made it even harder than that, I will be pretty annoyed; if they made it easier, then good for them.
Thanks
Well I just took a quick look, and it appears easier to get points towards the good commander traits, but at the same time, you need a few more points to get each level of the trait. So overall it's probably a little easier to get a good commander which is welcome. It also appears it's more difficult to lose command stars too. Hurrah.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
I just knoticed that Public order seems harder to maintain for barbarian factions i think, i loaded up my Saxons Game and before i patched all my cities were green, then i loaded up after i patched and Most of them were Red Faced or at least blue, i had to up garisons by like 50 percent
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
So far all my officers/captains have actually had weapons, rather than punching at opponents as in 1.3. This appears to have been fixed.
I've seen some initial reports that reinforcements are still prone to be under AI control. No confirmation yet.
The temple of horse upgrade problem is still there. Very puzzling that this simple edit wasn't made.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Ok, this new pila issue is definitely a bug. I just had a scutarii ram my phalanx FOUR times and each time it start "reloading" it's pila AFTER melee began. It inflicted quite a few casualties this way, even though it took plenty as well. This is a very poor implementation of getting the units to use their pila in a charge, because in many cases they are instead switching to them after they run in. It is better than not having the AI use its pila at all...but it has introduced a new problem that actually seems to favor the AI.
Also, in the "not fixed" category is "short_pike." It behaves just the same as it did in 1.3. Units with "short_pike" never leave the phalanx style animation, whether or not phalanx is turned off (they don't shoulder pikes.) The phalanx itself still does not work like one when short_pike is used. All the enemy troops penetrate past the pikes so the phalanx switches to swords in the first row.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
I'll have to check that one Red.
Interestingly, it's actually a tactic I've used regularly against the AI, particularly when fighting on walls! I'd press the standard attack button which would geet my troops to throw pila then charge. Then once engaged, I'd press it a second time to get them to throw another round of pila whilst engaged. Seemed to work for me, so until I try fighting against AI pila troops I'll reserve my judgement on this one.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
for 1.5, What did they do to Germania!?!?!
this is early in my scipii campaign.
https://img203.imageshack.us/img203/1876/923le.jpg
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
I personally reckon CA have upped the ante when it comes to AI aggression. Like the previous poster's minimap screenshot shows, the AI doesn't hold back on its conquest anymore.
In my Scipii campaign the Seleucids and Macedonians have been destroyed by 250 BC. The Julii aren't sitting passively with the Gauls which they too often did in previous versions and the Brutii are having a tough time of it against the Greeks. A constant stream of Carthaginian ships has prevented my Scipii navy doing too much to help expansion early doors and they've been landing army upon army onto Sicily.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rilder
It seems much more random, in my 1.5 camp (brutii) the britons has northern france and germany, the germans have been pushed east. the seluids seem strongern in that camp. too.
This would need to be confirmed ofcourse.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rilder
That was fairly normal before. Gaul gets carved up amongst the Julii, Germania, and the Britons. In the next phase Briton and the Julii begin to carve up Germania.
A more accurate question would be "What is happening to Gaul?" Gaul simply doesn't have much of a chance because it has four flanks to protect: Spain, Britannia, Germania, and the Julii. Factions in a corner do better as long as they have land mass to expand out onto--and enough of a base economy/poplulation to power the expansion: Briton and Egypt do well for this reason. Scythia suffers from having such a huge landmass, with little economic power or population. Numidia suffers from a weak economy (and weak units for autocalc.) Meanwhile, the Julii, Brutii, and Scipii are all effectively in a corner, since their backs are to one another and they can expand outward.
-
Re: Default diplomacy between the AI
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jambo
I personally reckon CA have upped the ante when it comes to AI aggression. Like the previous poster's minimap screenshot shows, the AI doesn't hold back on its conquest anymore.
Well, if you check out the default diplomacy for all factions in descr_strat, you'll see that many factions have been made to act more aggressively toward one another, as below:
Code:
; >>>> start of diplomacy section <<<<
;DS_ALLIED = 0
;DS_SUSPICIOUS = 100
;DS_NEUTRAL = 200
;DS_HOSTILE = 400
;DS_AT_WAR = 600
core_attitudes romans_julii, -10 romans_brutii, romans_scipii, romans_senate
core_attitudes romans_julii, 400 carthage
core_attitudes romans_julii, 600 slave
core_attitudes romans_brutii, -10 romans_julii, romans_scipii, romans_senate
core_attitudes romans_brutii, 600 slave
core_attitudes romans_scipii, -10 romans_julii, romans_brutii, romans_senate
core_attitudes romans_scipii, 600 slave
core_attitudes romans_senate, -10 romans_julii, romans_brutii, romans_scipii
core_attitudes romans_senate, 600 slave
core_attitudes macedon, 90 romans_brutii
core_attitudes macedon, 600 slave
core_attitudes egypt, 410 numidia
core_attitudes egypt, 600 slave
core_attitudes seleucid, 410 parthia
core_attitudes seleucid, 600 slave
core_attitudes carthage, 310 romans_julii, romans_scipii
core_attitudes carthage, 90 numidia
core_attitudes carthage, 90 spain
core_attitudes carthage, 600 slave
core_attitudes parthia, 90 armenia
core_attitudes parthia, 600 slave
core_attitudes pontus, 410 armenia
core_attitudes pontus, 600 slave
core_attitudes gauls, 410 romans_julii, spain
core_attitudes gauls, 600 slave
core_attitudes gauls, 90 germans, britons
core_attitudes germans, 90 gauls
core_attitudes germans, 310 britons
core_attitudes germans, 600 slave
core_attitudes britons, 310 germans
core_attitudes britons, 600 slave
core_attitudes armenia, 90 parthia
core_attitudes armenia, 600 slave
core_attitudes dacia, 90 romans_julii
core_attitudes dacia, 410 germans
core_attitudes dacia, 600 slave
core_attitudes greek_cities, 410 romans_brutii, romans_scipii
core_attitudes greek_cities, 600 slave
core_attitudes numidia, 90 carthage
core_attitudes numidia, 600 slave
core_attitudes scythia, 600 slave
core_attitudes spain, 410 carthage
core_attitudes spain, 600 slave
core_attitudes thrace, 310 romans_brutii
core_attitudes thrace, 300 dacia
core_attitudes thrace, 600 slave
core_attitudes slave, 600 romans_julii, romans_brutii, romans_scipii, romans_senate, macedon, egypt, seleucid, carthage, parthia, pontus, gauls, germans, britons, armenia, dacia, greek_cities, numidia, scythia, spain, thrace
This is what I've changed the diplomacy section to:
Code:
; >>>> start of diplomacy section <<<<
;DS_ALLIED = 0
;DS_SUSPICIOUS = 100
;DS_NEUTRAL = 200
;DS_HOSTILE = 400
;DS_AT_WAR = 600
core_attitudes romans_julii, 100 romans_brutii, romans_scipii, romans_senate
core_attitudes romans_julii, 200 gauls
core_attitudes romans_julii, 600 slave
core_attitudes romans_brutii, 100 romans_julii, romans_scipii, romans_senate
core_attitudes romans_brutii, 200 greek_cities
core_attitudes romans_brutii, 200 macedon
core_attitudes romans_brutii, 600 slave
core_attitudes romans_scipii, 100 romans_julii, romans_brutii, romans_senate
core_attitudes romans_scipii, 200 greek_cities
core_attitudes romans_scipii, 200 carthage
core_attitudes romans_scipii, 600 slave
core_attitudes romans_senate, 100 romans_julii, romans_brutii, romans_scipii
core_attitudes romans_senate, 200 macedon, egypt, seleucid, carthage, parthia, pontus, gauls, germans, britons, armenia, dacia, greek_cities, numidia, scythia, spain, thrace
core_attitudes romans_senate, 600 slave
core_attitudes macedon, 300 romans_brutii
core_attitudes macedon, 100 dacia
core_attitudes macedon, 200 thrace
core_attitudes macedon, 300 greek_cities
core_attitudes macedon, 600 slave
core_attitudes egypt, 200 numidia
core_attitudes egypt, 300 seleucid
core_attitudes egypt, 600 slave
core_attitudes seleucid, 300 parthia
core_attitudes seleucid, 200 pontus
core_attitudes seleucid, 100 greek_cities
core_attitudes seleucid, 300 egypt
core_attitudes seleucid, 200 armenia
core_attitudes seleucid, 600 slave
core_attitudes carthage, 300 romans_julii, romans_scipii
core_attitudes carthage, 100 numidia
core_attitudes carthage, 100 spain
core_attitudes carthage, 600 slave
core_attitudes parthia, 100 armenia
core_attitudes parthia, 200 seleucid
core_attitudes parthia, 600 slave
core_attitudes pontus, 200 armenia
core_attitudes pontus, 200 greek_cities
core_attitudes pontus, 200 seleucid
core_attitudes pontus, 600 slave
core_attitudes gauls, 300 romans_julii
core_attitudes gauls, 300 spain
core_attitudes gauls, 200 germans
core_attitudes gauls, 100 britons
core_attitudes gauls, 600 slave
core_attitudes germans, 200 gauls
core_attitudes germans, 300 britons
core_attitudes germans, 300 dacia
core_attitudes germans, 600 slave
core_attitudes britons, 300 germans
core_attitudes britons, 100 gauls
core_attitudes britons, 600 slave
core_attitudes armenia, 100 parthia
core_attitudes armenia, 200 seleucid
core_attitudes armenia, 200 scythia
core_attitudes armenia, 600 slave
core_attitudes dacia, 200 romans_julii
core_attitudes dacia, 300 germans
core_attitudes dacia, 100 macedon
core_attitudes dacia, 300 thrace
core_attitudes dacia, 200 scythia
core_attitudes dacia, 600 slave
core_attitudes greek_cities, 300 romans_brutii, romans_scipii
core_attitudes greek_cities, 200 carthage
core_attitudes greek_cities, 100 seleucid
core_attitudes greek_cities, 200 pontus
core_attitudes greek_cities, 300 macedon
core_attitudes greek_cities, 600 slave
core_attitudes numidia, 100 carthage
core_attitudes numidia, 300 egypt
core_attitudes numidia, 600 slave
core_attitudes scythia, 200 armenia
core_attitudes scythia, 200 dacia
core_attitudes scythia, 200 thrace
core_attitudes scythia, 600 slave
core_attitudes spain, 200 carthage
core_attitudes spain, 300 gauls
core_attitudes spain, 600 slave
core_attitudes thrace, 300 romans_brutii
core_attitudes thrace, 200 scythia
core_attitudes thrace, 200 macedon
core_attitudes thrace, 300 dacia
core_attitudes thrace, 600 slave
core_attitudes slave, 600 romans_julii, romans_brutii, romans_scipii, romans_senate, macedon, egypt, seleucid, carthage, parthia, pontus, gauls, germans, britons, armenia, dacia, greek_cities, numidia, scythia, spain, thrace
I've inserted a lot more rows in my modified version to try and improve the chances of survival for most factions. Each faction still remains at war with the rebels (slave), but overall hostilities have been reduced. Why for example have the Julii been given default 410 (just over a hostile diplomatic mentality) towards Carthage? Must be to do with the Senate mission involving Caralis, but other than that, these two factions rarely engage in warfare through the entirity of an imperial campaign.
Also, each faction now at least has a core attitude to their immediate neighbours - before there were scarcely any core attitudes in place. I'm not sure if the AI follows these values by the book, but IMO they required tweaking to avoid campaign maps as displayed above, IE steamrollering factions.
-
Re: Default diplomacy between the AI
But any human player will steamroller given the opportunity! In fact in most campaigns I will be looking for my first war in the first few turns.
I think ideally you want a more aggressive AI. Otherwise what you end up with is one human superpower taking advantage of many equally sized AI factions who are all doing very little with outdated troops. This is particularly frustrating when playing with a Roman faction and the other Roman factions are doing very little to further their empire. I remember getting frustrated with the Julii in previous versions as so often they'd simply refuse to attack the Gauls.
Also, remember in RTW one can only replace outdated units when they're killed as this is the only time when unit upkeep is freed. This is where some form of unit upgrading feature would be extremely beneficial to the peaceful factions. Without it though, the AI doesn't disband archaic units and therefore a stagnant AI faction is likely to be one with town militia throughout their armies.
In my mind what makes a good campaign is one where the prevailing factions are different each time. What you don't want is repetition of which AI factions always win.
-
Re: Default diplomacy between the AI
For instance, one nice thing to do with this diplomacy is gang up Parthia and Seleucids on Egypt and encourage Pontus to tackle Armenia rather than Seleucids!
That might balance out the eastern factions and make it a little more interesting.
-
Re: Default diplomacy between the AI
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jambo
For instance, one nice thing to do with this diplomacy is gang up Parthia and Seleucids on Egypt and encourage Pontus to tackle Armenia rather than Seleucids!
That might balance out the eastern factions and make it a little more interesting.
Yes, I've been considering reworking diplomacy to ally various factions against Egypt to try to keep the Seleucids from breaking down immediately. Considering the same for Carthage-Numidia-Spain-Gaul-Britain, it should help Gaul and slow Britain. Numidia might be able to focus its resources into holding Siwa. While these factions will eventually end up fighting amongst one another, at least this would give them a chance to retard the stronger Roman/Egyptian factions.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Egypt are definitely the problem faction in the middle east. I'd stripped 3 of their provinces (given them to the rebels) back in RTW v1.2, reduced their population growth rates, starting armies, various unit sizes, stats etc to bring them in line with their neighbours. AFAIK, Egypt were earning around 7000 denarii per turn in an unmodded vanilla copy of RTW. After modification, this is roughly 1000 denari from 3 starting provinces.
Yeah, I suppose you could set the default stances to allies (as with the Romans) so that they have a combined power to fight off Egyptian raids. Tbh, I just like to keep changng things to keep the game interesting, rather than 'same old' each new imperial campaign.
-
Re: Default diplomacy between the AI
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jambo
For instance, one nice thing to do with this diplomacy is gang up Parthia and Seleucids on Egypt and encourage Pontus to tackle Armenia rather than Seleucids!
That might balance out the eastern factions and make it a little more interesting.
Sounds good, but if two or three AI factions don't dominate then the human player isn't going to have strong opposition later in the game. Of course, in RTW playing as the Romans you have to eventually beat the other roman families, so there is that challenge.
-
Re: Default diplomacy between the AI
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puzz3D
Sounds good, but if two or three AI factions don't dominate then the human player isn't going to have strong opposition later in the game. Of course, in RTW playing as the Romans you have to eventually beat the other roman families, so there is that challenge.
Yes, but the problem is often *which* factions dominate and how rapidly.
I'm not even sure that I've even had the civil war. By the time that comes around I'm already unstoppable and bored. Starting with the civil war ongoing might be interesting...then it might be a single uber Roman faction that emerges for the late game.
A big problem with the game is that it is structured so that rapid conquest is a necessity, because each turn you sit stagnant you lose more income. So while I might prefer a liesurely pace, I'm forced to fight like a demon to conquer everything, rather than try to hold an empire. As with the tactical map, the strategic play is accelerate. 10 RTW years is about 50 actual years.
-
Re: Default diplomacy between the AI
Umm is it just me or is it alot harder to maintain public order? in 1.2-1.3 a small garison of like 2-3 town watch plus a governer allowed very high taxes, now you need a near half to ful stack garison just to pull off normal taxese
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Oops? I had always use for much more garrison. Big metropolis are not easy to handle, so I use to use lots of peasants. Now akademy helps to maintain order as well.:san_kiss:
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Darn, the memory leak is still there. It takes much longer to become a problem...but it still does the same basic thing as it accumulates. CA gets partial credit. They found something...but they didn't find it all.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
.
One less reason to patch. :gah2:
.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Upon inspecting some VnV files, I've noticed that basic RTW got some of the fixes I previously added only to BI version of bug-fixer.
Also, I think many of bug-fixer fixes were added in BI version too.
At first glance I would say at least half of them.
Maybe something is missing, but it would take a long research time.
Anyway, we consider trait system much less buggy then before.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by player1
Upon inspecting some VnV files, I've noticed that basic RTW got some of the fixes I previously added only to BI version of bug-fixer.
Also, I think many of bug-fixer fixes were added in BI version too.
At first glance I would say at least half of them.
Maybe something is missing, but it would take a long research time.
Anyway, we consider trait system much less buggy then before.
Well, this one is back...:san_cry:
https://img465.imageshack.us/img465/...nafu3am.th.jpg
I think you're right - there will not be an easy solution for 'the other half'...:san_sad:
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
That's not a trait. That is poor editing by CA on the temples. Why they even have higher level horse temples is beyond me. Rome isn't allowed to build the base level temples but can build higher level versions? And why in the world should Rome get huge bonuses for their already overly powerful cavalry.
It's easy enough to edit out...been doing it for awhile.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Harvest
....
It's easy enough to edit out...been doing it for awhile.
Well, thats why I liked the bugfixer - I didn't (can't) have to...:san_wink:
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by C-F
Well, thats why I liked the bugfixer - I didn't (can't) have to...:san_wink:
It is ironic that back when we were discussing unit stats problems, player1 didn't seem to think much of anything was in error and defended every oddity in the stats and build queue. I gave up trying to reason with him on that, and did my own edits. Then he came out with "bug fixer." I haven't really looked at it. :san_rolleyes:
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
You think this is bad, look what I've got to sort out:
Random Temples etc
:san_rolleyes:
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seasoned Alcoholic
~:eek:
Seems to be on your end - checked mine (just Germania) and its only showing the 3 orig. shrines...
My setup was RTW1.3/BI1.4 with Bugfixer2.06 and Bosook's(sp?) unlock all factions on top ~ figuered reinstall if it doesn't work ~ but it did... all factions are still unlocked and I guess Player1's fixes were just 'overwritten'... to what extend - I have no idea...
I'd try a reinstall if I were you... good luck :bow:
[edit] actually, on second thought, I'd redownload the patch before applying it [/edit]
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by C-F
~:eek:
Seems to be on your end - checked mine (just Germania) and its only showing the 3 orig. shrines...
My setup was RTW1.3/BI1.4 with Bugfixer2.06 and Bosook's(sp?) unlock all factions on top ~ figuered reinstall if it doesn't work ~ but it did... all factions are still unlocked and I guess Player1's fixes were just 'overwritten'... to what extend - I have no idea...
I'd try a reinstall if I were you... good luck :bow:
[edit] actually, on second thought, I'd redownload the patch before applying it [/edit]
It really is a joke, I'll have to spend a while trying to figure out what is causing these random temples to appear.
Its definitley my own modded copy of export_decr_buildings.txt which is causing the problems, might try copying a vanilla version over the top, although I'm not expecting anything to change.
I'd originally reinstalled RTW before patching upto v1.5, what I tend to do is replace selected text files with my own modded versions.
The temple of horse issue seems relatively straightfoward to fix, here is the vanilla RTW v1.5 code from export_descr_buildings:
Code:
building temple_of_horse
{
levels temple_of_horse_shrine temple_of_horse_temple temple_of_horse_large_temple temple_of_horse_awesome_temple temple_of_horse_pantheon
{
temple_of_horse_shrine requires factions { spain, gauls, }
{
capability
{
happiness_bonus bonus 1
recruits_exp_bonus bonus 1
}
construction 1
cost 400
settlement_min town
upgrades
{
temple_of_horse_temple
}
}
temple_of_horse_temple requires factions { spain, gauls, }
{
capability
{
happiness_bonus bonus 2
recruits_exp_bonus bonus 2
}
construction 2
cost 800
settlement_min large_town
upgrades
{
temple_of_horse_large_temple
}
}
temple_of_horse_large_temple requires factions { spain, gauls, }
{
capability
{
happiness_bonus bonus 3
recruits_exp_bonus bonus 3
}
construction 3
cost 1600
settlement_min city
upgrades
{
temple_of_horse_awesome_temple
}
}
temple_of_horse_awesome_temple
{
capability
{
happiness_bonus bonus 4
recruits_exp_bonus bonus 4
}
construction 5
cost 3200
settlement_min large_city
upgrades
{
temple_of_horse_pantheon
}
}
temple_of_horse_pantheon
{
capability
{
happiness_bonus bonus 5
recruits_exp_bonus bonus 5
}
construction 6
cost 6400
settlement_min huge_city
upgrades
{
}
}
}
plugins
{
}
}
All you need to delete is the extra levels, which in this case are temple_of_horse_awesome_temple and temple_of_horse_pantheon, as well as the 2 unrequired entries.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Fix from old bugfixer 2.06
Code:
temple_of_horse_awesome_temple requires factions { }
{
capability
{
happiness_bonus bonus 4
recruits_exp_bonus bonus 4
}
construction 5
cost 3200
settlement_min large_city
upgrades
{
temple_of_horse_pantheon
}
}
temple_of_horse_pantheon requires factions { }
{
capability
{
happiness_bonus bonus 5
recruits_exp_bonus bonus 5
}
construction 6
cost 6400
settlement_min huge_city
upgrades
{
}
}
and explanation:
Graphic glitch with Awesome Temple of Epona and Pantheon
Quote:
It seems that in 1.3 version of imperial campaign, developers decided to remove the feature that romans can build Epona temples if barbarians already built Circle of Epona. The problem is that they haven't removed feature well, making it in fact available to all factions, which actually gives the graphic glitch in building browser. To fix this I added empty "requires" tag in the line for these buildings, making them disabled for all factions as intended.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Some of the models are still messed up in 1.6
Some due to bad textures and models, and some other just because battle_model.txt wasn't updated in patch at all.
From first group, there is still armless Praetorians, or Choosen Axemen that grab axes in different way at different unit models (lods).
Also Paladin Bodyguards still have messed up right side of brestplace (lod2).
I won't comment those bugs due to unapdated battle_models.txt, these are mosty old issues fixed with bug-fixer.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Slave resource no longer adds to population growth rate in any town. Haven't tested whether slaves are still sent to governed towns properly or not. I never played around with 1.3, so this may have been broken/changed in that patch instead of 1.5. Don't know if it's intentional design change or bug, so I posted it here.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Are naval battles more decisive on average now? I've been noticing what appear to be perhaps twice as many casualties per naval encounter...not sure if this is a fluke or what.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pode
Slave resource no longer adds to population growth rate in any town. Haven't tested whether slaves are still sent to governed towns properly or not. I never played around with 1.3, so this may have been broken/changed in that patch instead of 1.5. Don't know if it's intentional design change or bug, so I posted it here.
Pode, you are right, slavery isn't working properly. In fact, it has several accounting errors as I'll demonstrate. (I think it might have been this way in 1.3 as well. People were discussing it, but I wasn't paying attention.)
Try taking Segesta as the Julii. If you enlsave, 450 slaves enter the pool. Immediately, on that same turn, your population in your other two cities grow by 112 each. Leaving a residual of 226 slaves for future depletion/growth.
You will now show a 1.5% boost to population from slaves in Segesta, but when you do the math, you always come up this same 1.5% short in actual growth.
When you build a governor's house and a road, you will get 0.5% additional in Arretium, but each time you check you come up 0.5% short as well.
You should be depleting the slave pool of 226 at a rate of 27+ per turn (after the first two turns at 6 and 6 before the road is complete.) So it should take 10 turns to deplete them. Instead it takes about 18 turns for the icon to disappear...which would be about right IF there were 450 in the pool and IF they actually were going into the population.
So in summary, you only get the initial slave distribution, regardless of roads. After that you never get what is claimed on the growth graphic for slaves.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Crivvens! You sure put a lot of effort into finding faults in various aspects of the game. If only CA did the same.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by professorspatula
Crivvens! You sure put a lot of effort into finding faults in various aspects of the game. If only CA did the same.
Yeah, and Red Harvest, Player1, yourself and others are picking these out in the space of a week or so FOR FREE. Whatever they pay the QA people over at CA or Sega (not sure who's handling it), it's probably a little too much.~:pissed:
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Harvest
Try taking Segesta as the Julii. If you enslave, 450 slaves enter the pool. Immediately, on that same turn, your population in your other two cities grow by 112 each. Leaving a residual of 226 slaves for future depletion/growth.
The other 226 go to Rome (see the manual, and I can confirm this actually happens). I don't think the bonus 1/2 % extra growth that is indicated have anything to do with the original population of the town conquered.
The bonus city-growth due to slave trading is broken even in 1.2, as far as I could tell (see this post , the rest of the thread is also noteworthy).
If I knew how, I would instal a clean RTW (next to my existing one) and see if 1.0 is broken as well. I would not be surprised the whole thing never worked at all.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Germanvs,
Thanks, I just found your posts on this issue in Ludus Magna. (Funny as I did a Segesta test about 48 hours *after* you did.) I didn't realize Rome was getting the other half of the slaves. Manual, who is that? I don't know no stinking manual! :san_laugh: Actually, I still can't find this in the manual, although I believe you.
Seems odd to me that the resource would run out when the 450 figure is hit...
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
I still have an unpatched 1.0 running, so if you tell me what to do I can try it out and report results.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
From original 1.0 RTW readme:
Quote:
Population Enslavement
After a settlement is conquered, and "enslavement" is chosen as the option to occupy the settlement. Roman factions and Roman allied factions will have 25% of the population go to the capital of the senate faction.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by player1
From original 1.0 RTW readme:
That would explain why I can't find it in the manual, it's in the read me. :san_wink:
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by gardibolt
I still have an unpatched 1.0 running, so if you tell me what to do I can try it out and report results.
Start a campaign as the Julii.
Get the Governor out of Ariminum
Get one of the stacks allready near Segesta to attack and conquer the place.
Enslave the population.
Build Gov. house.
End Turn.
Build road in Segesta.
Hit 'end turn' 5 times.
Report population both in Segesta AND Arretium.
Report as well if you got the Slave-Trader Ancillery (the guy that is supposed to give extra slaves in a city with slave-trade present)
Thanks :b
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Dunno if its a bug, but I found it strange. Ive just patched to 1.5, and in my Scipii campaign, I set micromanagement to let the AI manage taxes only (as I do sometimes when I can't manage everything), and automatically all taxes were set to the low or normal, while public order rocketed to 130% or more (sometimes even 220%) in most of my cities.
Is it just me, or didn't the AI always manage taxes so as to make as much money as possible while keeping public order i.e. around 90%, rather than keeping the population as happy as possible as is happening now?
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Germanvs
Start a campaign as the Julii.
Get the Governor out of Ariminum
Get one of the stacks allready near Segesta to attack and conquer the place.
Enslave the population.
Build Gov. house.
End Turn.
Build road in Segesta.
Hit 'end turn' 5 times.
Report population both in Segesta AND Arretium.
Report as well if you got the Slave-Trader Ancillery (the guy that is supposed to give extra slaves in a city with slave-trade present)
Thanks :b
Do I use the Governor from Ariminium in the stack to conquer Segesta, or just let him sit in the countryside?
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by gardibolt
Do I use the Governor from Ariminium in the stack to conquer Segesta, or just let him sit in the countryside?
You don't need him, you've got two other small stacks standing there with family members. Either one of them will suffice.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
OK, I ran four tests as described above in unpatched, unmodded 1.0 vanilla RTW. In all four, the populations were as follows:
Segesta: 492
Arretium: 4644
Ariminium: 3941
The shackles appeared every time, but I never got the Slave Trader. The first and fourth tests, I got no retainer. Test 2, I got the Body Slave. Test 3, I got the Exotic Slave.
I see from the Ludus Magna thread that you were ending up in Winter 267, which is 6 End Turns as far as I can tell. In Winter 267, the populations are as follows:
Segesta: 499
Arretium: 4714
Ariminium: 4020
Does that help? It looks like in 1.5 the Arretium pop is getting some kind of major boost from something.
For comparison's sake, I also ran exactly the same steps, except occupying and exterminating in Segesta in the 1.0 program.
Occupy:
Segesta: 985 in end turn 5/1000 in end turn 6 (winter 267)
Arretium: 4461/4528
Ariminium: 3941/4020
Exterminate:
Segesta: 436/443
Arretium: 4461/4528
Ariminium: 3941/4020
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Thanks.
Perhaps the base farming level has been raised from V1.0?
Base farming in 1.5 is (Summer 270 turn):
2% (4 grain icons) for Segesta
3% (7 grain + 1 farm - 2 squalor) for Arretium)
(Ariminum is 3% as well, same fractions as Arretium)
Nevertheless, I think it is save to assume the slave bonus for city-growth is broken in 1,0 as well :san_sad:
I had a slave-trader once in a test, but that did not affect the outcome at all.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
You really need the growth percentages to interpret (total shown, and slave % shown), as the values could differ between versions. Wasn't the province to province grain bonus broken in 1.0? I remember some comments about it but I never looked into it.
Also descr_strat has changed since 1.0 IIRC. So the starting populations might even differ.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Germanvs
I don't think the bonus 1/2 % extra growth that is indicated have anything to do with the original population of the town conquered.
You are correct. It appears that the slave resource lasts 10 years, then expires. I did a quick test in Parthia.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
C-F Perhaps you should check your own image you provide.
The "bug" "is not back". You have modded the game to allow you to play the Spanish and you have then given them access to a "Roman Faction only" building.
We don't support bugs accidentaly created by modification of the game data, never have, never will do. How can we possibly fix a problem you created?
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Harvest
That's not a trait. That is poor editing by CA on the temples. Why they even have higher level horse temples is beyond me. Rome isn't allowed to build the base level temples but can build higher level versions? And why in the world should Rome get huge bonuses for their already overly powerful cavalry.
It's easy enough to edit out...been doing it for awhile.
I checked with the people responsible, and the Epona temples were a deliberate design decision. Many cavalry barracks did include a small shrine to Epona, as the worship of the horse god seemed a practical benefit to the Roman cavalry and so the practice spread across the Empire.
The Romans can't *start* a "Temple of Horse" line in a settlement, but if they capture a settlement with an intact temple they can improve it and make it part of their system. That's the explanation - it's a bit of "local colour", and a nice benefit feature if you find it. It is most definitely not "poor editing" (I *love* the way that there's an automatic assumption that we're all numpties).
Edit:
Unfortunately, it appears that one of us may be a numpty after all. An unauthorised somebody went into the file and "improved" matters on his own say-so (a) without actually checking on the design intent (b) without bothering to tell anyone that he had done this and (c) without actually having responsibility for this area of the game. This has caused problems. A little knowledge, and all that kind of thing... So, sorry guys. Intrepid Sidekick is currently off applying a small amount of boot toe to certain bottoms.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
But why are from 1.3 (and still in 1.5), removed
Quote:
temple_of_horse_awesome_temple requires factions { roman, }
...
temple_of_horse_pantheon requires factions { roman, }
...these bold lines that existed in 1.0/1.2???
When I made bug-fixer for 1.3 and 1.5 I considered that it was "revison" decision by CA, to remove access to these temples from romans (why edit it otherwise?)
Anyway, only thing that edit did was to make these temples available to "all factions (no require tags means available to "all" not "none"), which gave graphic glitchs for gaul and spain factions.
Anyway, it is an error in editing, since it should be either as it was in 1.2, or removed (like in bug-fixer).
EDIT:
I released bug-fixer for 1.5/1.6 yesterday
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Intrepid Sidekick
C-F Perhaps you should check your own image you provide.
The "bug" "is not back". You have modded the game to allow you to play the Spanish and you have then given them access to a "Roman Faction only" building.
We don't support bugs accidentaly created by modification of the game data, never have, never will do. How can we possibly fix a problem you created?
You are absolutely right. - poor wording on my part...sorry :bow:
btw, I only 'applied' a(two) mod(s) [bugfixer from player1 and factionunlock from Bosook (SP?)] that I downloaded here and then started; I didn't give or take away anything in the game (I'm not a modder/programmer) - the reason being is, that I am trying to get the tech trees for all the factions in the game that were not published.
In my case you could fix it in giving us all the tech trees (I didn't create this problem :san_wink: ), fix the skins and the other little things that are addressed in those above mentioned mods...et all :san_rolleyes:
I look at it as being in a 'drive thru': nowadays it is a challenge to get but the simplest order right. RTW and BI are not simple and I guess a lot of people are just afraid that many of the 'issues' will remain as the time and-financial clock is ticking - after that (@ the game over part), only the pride and dedication of the individual programmers will remain...:san_sad:
Again, no offense intended, I did get my 'fix' in player1's release 3.0 :san_wink:
[edit] PS, while on the subject of helping, is it possible to get info on what "Improved general's bodyguards" does and wether it is the same for every faction...it would take the last ?-mark off my 'homemade' techtrees (I think...). Thanks in advance.[/edit]
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Fishpants
I checked with the people responsible, and the Epona temples were a deliberate design decision. Many cavalry barracks did include a small shrine to Epona, as the worship of the horse god seemed a practical benefit to the Roman cavalry and so the practice spread across the Empire.
The Romans can't *start* a "Temple of Horse" line in a settlement, but if they capture a settlement with an intact temple they can improve it and make it part of their system. That's the explanation - it's a bit of "local colour", and a nice benefit feature if you find it. It is most definitely not "poor editing" (I *love* the way that there's an automatic assumption that we're all numpties).
If you look at the intentional changes to the buildings text for the horse temple, and the removal of "requires factions { roman, }" the assumption I made is quite reasonable. Since it was an intentional decision, then the editing was indeed poorly done. The horse temple is now showing up for playable Gauls among others--with that warning graphic IIRC.
I do find the idea of giving Rome even more bonuses for cavalry to two more levels of horse temple a questionable balance issue.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Intrepid Sidekick
C-F Perhaps you should check your own image you provide.
The "bug" "is not back". You have modded the game to allow you to play the Spanish and you have then given them access to a "Roman Faction only" building.
We don't support bugs accidentaly created by modification of the game data, never have, never will do. How can we possibly fix a problem you created?
This response about it being a modding problem is overused and misapplied unfortunately. This same "warning" shows up as Gauls in vanilla 1.5. That is how I found it with the patch.
The hostility to modding is misplaced. Afterall simple playable faction mods like this turned up problems with the unit line up of Spain and Numidia in vanilla, did they not? These were ones where the unit cards were ready and the units were slotted for the factions, and they were usable in custom, but the AI could not recruit them. The fixes were straightforward once found and CA made the changes to allow them in future patches.
EDIT: Wanted to add that I appreciate CA folks responding to the issues in the thread, thank you. However, you are doing yourself a bit of a disservice by not examining the issue more closely before attributing it to modding. I've seen this same approach used on at least four different issues since 1.2 where the community had already confirmed the problem.
We would all like to hear more about positive things that were changed that didn't make it into the readme. Blow your own horns on these! There are several positive changes that I suspect were done, but I don't have enough confirmation yet to list them at the top of the thread.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Hello Red Harvest.
I've just taken a look at the source files. Someone (unauthorised) here has in fact removed Roman faction access to Temple of Horse Awesome Temple and to Temple of Horse Pantheon. This is the only faction that should have access to these two buildings.
This has the unfortunate side effect of making those temples accessable to factions that should not have access to those buildings. Hence the "WARNING! This text should never appear on screen!" message.
We are investigating how this happened.
So we do have to hang our heads in shame on this one.
Intrepid Sidekick
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Hmmm...
I guess I'll make v3.01 of bug-fixer soon...
(and put it back how it was in with patch 1.2 when it worked as intended)
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
I admire your honesty and humility Intrepid Sidekick. Thanks for the update. :D
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
I re-edited the higher Epona temples to make them buildable by the Romans in version 1.3. I reported about this some time ago in the Julii guide. (postings # 213, 215, 217)
But I must add that although it basically worked, it came at the cost of game stability. The game crashed to the desktop once or twice in an hour.
If the same thing happens under version 1.5 is still to be found out ...
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Intrepid Sidekick
Hello Red Harvest.
I've just taken a look at the source files. Someone (unauthorised) here has in fact removed Roman faction access to Temple of Horse Awesome Temple and to Temple of Horse Pantheon. This is the only faction that should have access to these two buildings.
This has the unfortunate side effect of making those temples accessable to factions that should not have access to those buildings. Hence the "WARNING! This text should never appear on screen!" message.
We are investigating how this happened.
So we do have to hang our heads in shame on this one.
Intrepid Sidekick
Intrepid Sidekick,
Thank you for checking it, and especially for reporting back.
No reason to hang your heads in shame! It is a small editing thing that can be changed back to how you intended it (whether or not I agree on the balance aspect, LOL.) ...and perhaps add the academy law bonus that appears to have been unintentionally omitted (comparing the file to the 1.5 Readme.) This is little stuff that players/mods can correct if we know the intent.
CA made some considerable improvements with 1.5 as most of us agree. Of the RTW patches released, this one is the best in my opinion. I would of course like to see a couple of hardcoded issues addressed.
Again, most importantly, thanks for the communication. It really is much preferred over us on the outside hypothesizing over design intent. I embarass myself when I guess wrong...
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Since we have your attention, El Capitan, what about the questions re the slave trade bonus and whether it's working, as discussed upthread?
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Intrepid Sidekick
Hello Red Harvest.
I've just taken a look at the source files. Someone (unauthorised) here has in fact removed Roman faction access to Temple of Horse Awesome Temple and to Temple of Horse Pantheon. This is the only faction that should have access to these two buildings.
This has the unfortunate side effect of making those temples accessable to factions that should not have access to those buildings. Hence the "WARNING! This text should never appear on screen!" message.
We are investigating how this happened.
So we do have to hang our heads in shame on this one.
Intrepid Sidekick
Thanks for your feedback :bow: ~:cheers:
I think this is a wonderful game and we just want to get it 'just right' - shame and hanging heads should definitely not be on anybodys mind that accomplished such complex task in a program and gameplay - I mean that.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Harvest
New 1.5 Bugs
1. AI seems to be able to very successfully use pila after it engages in melee...even after it did the initial hurl and charge. (Red Harvest.)
(Red Harvest)
Not an introduced bug. I have been able to hurl pila from an engaged units in multiple ways since patch 1.2 and maybe earlier.
One way is guard mode with fire at will on. The unit can stay engaged and the rear ranks of the unit will throw pila. However if the unit becomes too disrupted it will be unable to throw.
Two just fire at will on. The unit will more likeley becom engaged once hit, but if the unit does not counter attack it can still throw from rear ranks.
Three probably the most obvious is to right pila click on a nearby unit that is within range.
Why this has become suddenly obvious is the fact that the A.I. always has FAW on. And now the A.I. is at the same level as the human.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
One thing that really puzzles me is that Praetorian Cohorts are buildable with Army Barracks+ AND also the Imperial Palace (both now post marian reforms). Didn't they used to be buildable from the Imperial Palace only?
This relative freedom to build the Praetorian Cohort using Barracks and or Palace construction pathways seems to make the other Legionnaire types rather pointless. They're also buildable anywhere on the map, which seems rather unhistoric.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
hmm this is a maby undocumented patch change but i've noticed the reforms happen exact turn you finish your imperial palace, i loaded my 1.2 brutus campaign were i hadnt had the reforms and a imperial in italy then the moment i got to the next turn i got the reforms, further testing i started a scipii campaign and did the add_poulation Capau 5000 then worked up to an imperial and lo and behold as soon as i finished "A New man, Gaius Marius" when it was like 250 bc.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jambo
One thing that really puzzles me is that Praetorian Cohorts are buildable with Army Barracks+ AND also the Imperial Palace (both now post marian reforms). Didn't they used to be buildable from the Imperial Palace only?
This relative freedom to build the Praetorian Cohort using Barracks and or Palace construction pathways seems to make the other Legionnaire types rather pointless. They're also buildable anywhere on the map, which seems rather unhistoric.
I had the same question, Jambo and for the same reasons.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Were the Thracian bastarnae intended to have warcry? They don't presently, while the merc bastarnae units do.
Also have been intending to mention that it appears to me that in 1.5 the AI is again using warcry more consistently. It was not doing so in 1.3 and it was costing it in 1vs1 match ups. Glad to see this apparently fixed!
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
heh...
Maybe they are more "civilized" then their mercenary friends?
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
lol!
Maybe one to address (Thracian Bastarnae) in the text files.
Red,
I had thought making Praetorians more freely available might have been CA's way of helping the Roman AI factions achieve such dominance over the world, i.e. building up to the supposed civil war climax. This is certainly true, but it also makes it seriously easy for the Romans in the hands of a human to beat up on the rest of the world. Only the tough Greek phalanx units seem to represent a problem. Tying Praetorians to Italy and the Imperial Palace seems the fairest option.
Also, it's a shame to see skirmishers still attacking in melee. This was reportedly fixed but I still see it happening with the Numidian and Greek armies I've been facing as Scipii. I've lengthened the range of skirmishing units from 50 to 60 to hopefully lessen the likelihood of the AI using them in melee.
