CA requests for next patch:

[Polemists]

Well it's true, it's been true since RTW and military access. If you get military access you can technically walk up to a capital and destroy a one nation faction. Though I've never seen the AI betray alliances much, compared to say MTW2.

[antisocialmunky]

Well it's true, it's been true since RTW and military access. If you get military access you can technically walk up to a capital and destroy a one nation faction. Though I've never seen the AI betray alliances much, compared to say MTW2.

In CIV3 terms this is called a 'Right-Of-Passage' Rape and its totally lame. In CIV4, they solved it by making a declaration of war auto-eject all units to the border. While its gamey, it definitely solves the problem.

[Polemists]

Well technically once you break a military alliance the Ai cannot "Enter" your land without declaring war, however if the Ai's army is already marching through your land it just sits there, not sure what to do I guess. A auto eject would be nice.


But honestly CA please fix this trade thing, it annoys me to no end. I just took St.Petersburg last night as Russia and got 0 trade routes out of it. I mean common, the only thing I used to be good at was taking port towns. Don't doom us to land trade and starting naval trade only :(

(Apparently if you are given land by another nation you get the trade route, but if you conquer a factions city who owns a trade port, even with repairs the trade routes will not appear. It's vexing in the extreme."

[dopp]

The 'auto-eject' functionality is already in the game. I bought several provinces and all foreign armies were immediately moved to the border, even those that were garrisoned. Too bad they didn't think of extending it to declarations of war or military access breaking.

[PseRamesses]

The 'auto-eject' functionality is already in the game. I bought several provinces and all foreign armies were immediately moved to the border, even those that were garrisoned. Too bad they didn't think of extending it to declarations of war or military access breaking.

That´s promising. Since it´s already in the game they only have to add it to DoW´s on allies. I´ll add it to the list.

[Polemists]

This only partially works, as if you buy a island, the army isn't sent out to sea or anything, they just sit on your island for the next 100 years. Not doing anything.

[batemonkey]

i recently had a (badly depleted) stack stuck south of the alps with a long a daunting route home through europe when my travel argreement with Venice expired and they were transported all the way to dover, boy was i pleased.

As for the CTD, its got so bad with ports since the last patch i hardly dare upgrade them.

I also find a terrible lag when i click on ship stacks in the channel

[Veresov]

I must be in a minority as I am not happy about Empire. The game is not SLI friendly and crashes constantly. The guy at Sega customer service suggested that I removed a card from my rig to play the game!

Why wasn't this revealed to me as a buyer PRIOR to purchasing the product? THis is the last product I will ever buy from CA.

[vladiator]

I just want them to get rid of CTD first. Other bugs may only make a great game good, whilst CTD can make it unplayable...

Yesterday I spent 50 mins in a battle and was seconds away from victory when I got CTDed. That annoyed me..

[Wandarah]

I must be in a minority as I am not happy about Empire. The game is not SLI friendly and crashes constantly. The guy at Sega customer service suggested that I removed a card from my rig to play the game!

Why wasn't this revealed to me as a buyer PRIOR to purchasing the product? THis is the last product I will ever buy from CA.

Erm it was.

The specifications didn't list SLI compatiable. So it wasnt. Surely the mistake is on your side here.

[Lord Ovaat]

I wouldn't think SLI compatibility with a new application would be an issue. I've had horrid problems with SLI and ETW, some of which have been reduced by disabling SLI. That said, all of my hardware IS SLI compatible, and I've yet to play a game that's given me a problem. In fact, I'm still playing MTW2 with no problems at all with SLI activated. I don't remember MTW2 not being advertised as compatible with SLI. This is a software issue that doesn't appear to be present in CA's earlier games. I only hope they correct it.

Has anyone had a problem with ATI's Crossfire, or is this specific only to Nvidia's multi-card setup? That would be funny if SLI is the only one, after all, Nvidia's add is in the load screens. "The way it's meant to be played", lol.

[al Roumi]

A few unit bugs not already on the list:

Horse-drawn artillery: Trying to limber up the arty sometimes freezes mid way through the maneuver. I've noticed this in two cases: 1, when the path of the horse drawn limber is blocked by an obstacle (eg wall) and 2, when the gunners have been involved in melee (with no casualties). Looks to me like the bug is to do with re-setting the arty's behaviour -probably related to buggy fire at will behaviour.

Light infantry:
1, in "light infantry mode", deploying a unit by clicking and dragging to form the shape of their unit causes the unit to face the wrong way! I first thought i must be at fault (and deploying them back to front) but after checking with a unit of line inf, i confirmed i wasn't. Clicking to attack a particular unit or move to a given location does cajole the light infantry to face the right way and they will then fire at will as intended.
2, skirmish mode for light infantry units. This basicaly renders light infantry useless (or very short lived) when deployed as a screen in front of the main battle line. Light inf have a longer musket range than many other units and so should be able to fire on the enemy, especially their line infantry, whilst out of the range of returned musket fire (i assumed that this was the whole point of them). However, light inf actually don't seem to fall back untill threatened by melee/charge range of the enemy. This means that they have to be micro-d to intolerable degrees in order to achieve their purpose of drawing the enemy on whilst remaining out of the range of returned fire. I suggest that the fallback/skirmish "trigger" should be coming into the firing range of a targeted or approaching unit -not an arbitrary distance of the enemy from the unit of light inf.

Cover:
I am wary of using cover in my games. I've found that units placed behind cover don't fire by rank and will not always fire at all either. This is obviously a major pain in the neck as you might expect your infantry, so deployed, to do some damage rather than absurdly sit behind the wall.

COME ON CA

Kudos to the OP for starting this thread...

[Suraknar]

Just make the game stable again...

[geala]

Well technically once you break a military alliance the Ai cannot "Enter" your land without declaring war, however if the Ai's army is already marching through your land it just sits there, not sure what to do I guess. A auto eject would be nice.


But honestly CA please fix this trade thing, it annoys me to no end. I just took St.Petersburg last night as Russia and got 0 trade routes out of it. I mean common, the only thing I used to be good at was taking port towns. Don't doom us to land trade and starting naval trade only :(

(Apparently if you are given land by another nation you get the trade route, but if you conquer a factions city who owns a trade port, even with repairs the trade routes will not appear. It's vexing in the extreme."

Hmm, I got some trade routes in conquered territory, at least I had the impression because of the green lines that appeared. It took some time however. Sometimes trade is just not possible because the harbours of all other nations are still occupied with other trade (so told me the diplomacy window).

[Polemists]

I find that if you have a exsisting port and you conquer a city you get the port. However if you conquer the city and have to build a port it does not seem to present a trade route. Though I will check this in the trade window.