CA asks for Bug List - to be fixed in the expansion

[Oaty]

Captured watchtowers not working When an enemy army parks an army on my watchtower, only about 10~20 percent of the time it gets diasabled.

[Dead Moroz]

It's actually an issue than bug. I think that number of rebellious units in city uprising must be not larger than number of available population in the city. And their chevrons, armour and weapon must be not gold. It's very strange when very small town produce about 15-20 units of best peasants.

[FlorianG]

The FAMILY TREE has a major bug. At about the 5th generation in the tree I can no longer see my factions tree. For example, as the Romans I click on the Family tree of my faction--and I get the tree of the Guals or Greeks. I can no longer see my faction's tree or select a new heir. This has happened on all three of my campaigns with the Julii/Romans and also with the Seleucids. It really takes away from the fun of the game.

[Simetrical]

Are you using a mod?

-Simetrical

[Viking]

Sorry if it has been listed before, but I couldn`t see it in the bug list:

Cavalry don`t change weapeon when they stay in prolonged melee otherwise you press ALT key before you charge.


-edit-
Oh dear, it says the same just a few post above
really sorry..

[ZZR Puig]

1.- On the battlefield, usually issuing orders that implies moving small distances results in a complete mess. The most usual situation is that where you are advancing a unit of archers a few meters ahead just to reach the point where the desired enemy unit is in range (has nothing to do with the fact that is difficult to get the desired alignment on the first attempt). After the order is given the unit starts advancing but don't stop at the supposed location which can be clearly seen pressing the space bar. Instead, the unit continues to advance towards the enemy until you order them back again. Sometimes they don't advance further, but end up facing a very different direction that the one ordered. It also happens when you issue the order by dragging the formation shape on the desired location, so it seems that the problem isn't related to the order itself, but to the proximity of the destination point from the initial position.

2.- This one is not necessarily a bug, but I wonder why spies always die when they fail to accomplish a mission. That doesn't happen with assassins, and I think it's more realistic. The fact that the spy fails doesn't necessarily mean he should get slaughtered.

Note: I'm also wondering why multiple sallies in one turn are considered a bug. I don't know if that is inconsistent with the manual, but every army can fight as many battles you want each turn, it only depends on its available movement points. So if the AI or the player has still some units left should be able to try to sally forth as many times as he want.

[Bhruic]

Note: I'm also wondering why multiple sallies in one turn are considered a bug. I don't know if that is inconsistent with the manual, but every army can fight as many battles you want each turn, it only depends on its available movement points. So if the AI or the player has still some units left should be able to try to sally forth as many times as he want.

It's because the AI is incapable of winning against a sally. The AI doesn't get its siege weapons, and it isn't programmed to follow your units back inside the city. Therefore, it has no effective win scenario.

Furthermore, it is too easy to exploit that fact. Especially with missile units, and even more especially with horse archers.

Bh

[Squid]

It's because the AI is incapable of winning against a sally. The AI doesn't get its siege weapons, and it isn't programmed to follow your units back inside the city. Therefore, it has no effective win scenario.

Furthermore, it is too easy to exploit that fact. Especially with missile units, and even more especially with horse archers.

Bh

I found out to my misfortune that isn't entirely accurate, I had a city under seige and sallied out, however I made a serious blunder and my entire army routed when my general was killed and the AI units followed me back into the city to keep up the attack. I will admit that they did pull out but only when my reinforcements hit them from behind.

Squid

EDIT: The rest is accurate however, and missle troops can just sit behind the walls and kill off the enemy army because they will come right up.

[Myrddraal]

I've tried to include everything in the first post tai4ji2x, what have I missed?

[UltraWar]

I have a problem with my diplomats,assassins,spies...etc...
They just dont show up on the campaign map.
I can only see there shadows in certain places but i think this is a bug because it's slowing my progress as Greek Cities down...

[player1]

I've tried to include everything in the first post tai4ji2x, what have I missed?

Half-sized sprites for Creten Archers problem for example.

[SpencerH]

The minimal UI pause bug also includes the controls for speed (CTRL-T). I've noticed that the problem doesnt seem to happen in the turn after reloading and gets somewhat worse if one leaves the game running to avoid reload features and uses alt-tab to go back to desktop.

[bouis]

Negative building "bonuses" don't work -- it would be nice if some buildings could have negative as well as positive traits.

[A.Saturnus]

myrdaal-

yes, i understand you update the original post, which is great. i'm just saying that superfluous and off-topic posts in this thread should be considered for deletion, if only for ease of navigation. anything that you missed could be more easily spotted, for example. i assume it would also be nice for CA devs, who might like to also have reference to the original bug reports and descriptions for each specific problem - hence cleaning up the thread would make that easier.

The easiest way to clean up the thread would be if anyone checks his posts whether what he said is now included in the list. If it is, delete the post.

[Myrddraal]

Yes, if you could delete the contents of the post (replace it with spaces if it says its too short), then I'll go round and mop up the old posts.

[Puzz3D]

Increasing the battlefield difficulty adds an attack bonus to both the AI and human player's units. It should only add a bonus to the AI's units as it did in v1.1.

[Simetrical]

Suggestion, Puzz3D: submit proof of that to the Research: Battle Difficulty thread. I don't see how you can figure out that the difficulty adds more attack to both sides, rather than being messed up in some other way.

-Simetrical

[sik1977]

Is there a deadline for collection and submission of this list to CA? Or are we expecting CA to visit and note the list by themselves instead of a formal submission?

There has been no comment from CA since the one posted at the begining. Would be nice to know that they have been keeping up.

[Shigawire]

This is definitely one of their better ideas in a long time. And of course Jerome, the LEAD PROGRAMMER, is doing a better PR-job than CA's designated PR-guys (hype-maestros).

[yacoub35]

add Unlimited Ammo option box to Options menu for missile-based ammunition as seen in both previous Total War games.
add option to Custom Battles to allow users to Deploy Forces and choose to Start Battle instead of dumping them right into battle, again as per both previous Total War games.

I consider both of those bugs because they are indeed "broken" in that they aren't implemented when they should be and there was a logical expectation for them to be in the game, especially considering their useful existence in previous TW games.




(can't remember my old acct password or email address. ugh.)

[Yukon Cornelius]

Weapon and armour upgrades have a maximum bonus of +3, rendering the existing Awesome Temple of Artemis and its Pantheion useless. Right-clicking a unit in the Unit Recruitment screen will show the expected +5 missile weapon bonus, but when you actually (re)train a unit it only gets +3. The same problem manifests when a Temple of Artemis (or above) is combined with a Foundry. The combination should give units a +4 missile attack bonus.

I'd consider this a bug since two existing buildings explicitly state that any missile units (re)trained with that building should get a bonus greater than +3, yet it still only gives +3.

[yacoub35]

Since I can't edit my previous post: I see now that these options are tied together with other options all under the "Arcade Battles" option. It would be nice to have them separated as they were in the past (Fatigue, Unlim. Ammo, Deployment, etc).

[Puzz3D]

Since I can't edit my previous post: I see now that these options are tied together with other options all under the "Arcade Battles" option. It would be nice to have them separated as they were in the past (Fatigue, Unlim. Ammo, Deployment, etc).

You can adjust them separately by editing the preferences.txt file.

[Puzz3D]

Suggestion, Puzz3D: submit proof of that to the Research: Battle Difficulty thread. I don't see how you can figure out that the difficulty adds more attack to both sides, rather than being messed up in some other way.

-Simetrical

The proof was done by other people, and posted at .com. They did very good testing which clearly showed the speeded up combat resolution at higher difficulty with no difference in the probability of which side won. Unfortunately, they don't save threads at .com no matter how important they are.

[mfberg]

From another thread, more of an issue than a bug.
The number of seige weapons in a unit stays the same, no matter how large your army.

Siege artillery has a problem when used in the battlefield, and not just to breach enemy walls. The problem is that their numbers don't increase with the unit size option. So you get two onagers per unit in small size and also two onagers on huge.

There may be some reasons for this, basically if you get only one onager in small unit size you wouldn't probably be able to breach a wall with a single unit of onagers. By contrast, with 6 onagers on huge you would be able to destroy half of the city walls with a single unit.

The result of that situation is that siege units are only worth it in combat on smaller unit sizes. The right solution would have been to change the walls resistance with the unit size and also increase the number of onagers with it. In addition, some other siege engines like scorpions that can't attack walls get the very same limitation as onagers, which doesn't make much sense.

Personally, playing on large unit size, I recently changed the siege engines per unit for all types from 2 to 3. On large unit size, it should have been 4, but I left it in 3 not to get them to powerful against walls. This way are a bit more useful in the battlefield and may be worth using in some situations.

Note: Another solution that has come to my mind right now to really balance their usefulness either in combat or sieges is to also change their damage to buildings value. For example, you could mod the number of onagers per unit from 2 to 4 for large unit size and also reduce their damage against buildings to one half. This way they would be as effective against troops and buildings as they are on medium unit size. All these changes can be made in a few minutes, so it don't involve any problem.

mfberg

[Oaty]

@ Mfberg, you need to put it in a short format and not a detailed description of the problem.

Siege equipment uneffected by unit size settings No matter if huge units or small units are selected you always get 2 onagers or ballistas. It should be 1,2,4,8 respectively. Or 1,2,3,4 for balance issues.

[yacoub35]

You can adjust them separately by editing the preferences.txt file.

Can you figure this one out for me perhaps?

http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotal...ID=25767.topic

Thanks.

[professorspatula]

Crazy running around enemy:
If you are fighting an enemy unit and he choses to voluntarily retreat (possibly to initiate another charge), when your men chase after him, they often end up running through the enemy unit, and then run around him in chaotic fashion, getting cut down to pieces by the enemy in the process - instead of fighting immediately. This happens on other occasions whereby one unit seems disinterested in fighting with the enemy and just runs around them like a bunch of stupid cretins who have a tendancy for lemming-type life decisions.

Units half-on-walls-half-on-ground:
If a unit has some men on a wall, and others on the ground, and you order the unit to move elsewhere, those on the ground become instantly drunk, and are unable to co-ordinate themselves in an organised manner. They often refuse to carry on using siege towers and ladders, or gates, and spend much of the battle going everywhere but where you want them. Also, if some of the men are at the top of a siege tower when you suddenly give a new movement order, they can walk to the side of the tower, in mid-air. I had screenshots, since deleted I think.

Spotting hidden agents in settlements:
It's possible to find out if there are agents in another settlement, even if you shouldn't know. I'm trying to remember how I stumbled upon this... I think if you select a settlement, and right click on any unit card stationed there so it brings up their info scroll, when you click on the magnifying glass to show where this unit is, the scroll will change to a page showing an agent if there is one in the settlement, or just a family member or someone else if there isn't an agent. Hence you can scan each of your settlements for enemy spy activity by using this method - or even AI settlements. Not a big bug, but surely one.

Flashing unrest disappearing:
I find at the start of a turn, many settlements show x amount of unrest, some of it flashing. Any change to the settlement (changing tax, adding or removing a unit from the build queue) and the flashing unrest disappears, even if you actually have made no real changes.

AI's lack of multiple unit co-ordination on the strategy map :
The AI can perform one diplomatic action in a turn, and it's next unit can perform the exact opposite, making a mockery of the game's diplomacy. Several times I have seen offers of alliances/protectorates etc, and the very next instant being attacked by the same faction, thus rendering the last action null, and making me laugh at the AI at the same time. The AI needs to re-evaluate its situation more often and co-ordinate all its units together with more conviction so such nonsense is a thing of the past. This also includes the AI no longer sending a series of single units to kill rebels, with each unit losing until one finally wins.

AI and siege equipment:
Probably been said 2000 times before, but the AI must start using its siege equipment and not leave half of it on the floor and just stand around getting shot. It's bad enough it often builds entirely the wrong equpiment which isn't available in the battle, but during the battle itself, the AI frequently gets confused and refuses to use ladders, siege towers and sap points. Sometimes the AI will go to great lengths to break open a gate with a ram, but then refuse to go through the gateway, and then just leave its army in front of the towers to slowly die. Nine out of ten sieges I find completely wrecked by the AI unable to use siege equipment with any ounce of intelligence. In fact, apart from village siege battles (where the AI shows a hint of smarts), they might as well be removed altogether.


Not a bug but:
When you have two or more armies together and one is attacked by the AI, please let us decide which one we control, and which one the AI can control. The AI loves to target the weaker army, which typically doesn't have your best general in it. You therefore risk losing the general to a suicidal charge if you let the AI control his army. Sticking the general in the smaller army defeats the point of him being in charge in the first place really.

And how about a mini-map on the Battlemap editor? Unless I'm missing something, I don't see one and I end up getting dis-orientated.

And if you make a historical battle and use a barbarian settlement, but try to use non-barbarian stone-wall defences, the stone wall won't appear in the battle itself. Any units stationed on the walls will make the game crash if you try and play it. In the campaign, you can have stone walls around barbarian cities, so why not in custom or historical battles?

[tai4ji2x]

When you have two or more armies together and one is attacked by the AI, please let us decide which one we control, and which one the AI can control. The AI loves to target the weaker army, which typically doesn't have your best general in it. You therefore risk losing the general to a suicidal charge if you let the AI control his army. Sticking the general in the smaller army defeats the point of him being in charge in the first place really.

huh? ever since 1.2, you could always choose...

[professorspatula]

Really? Well if there isn't a general about, you have no say in what army you control - it's automatically the one that is attacked. The others you can get the AI to control as reinforcements, but that's about it. Perhaps having generals in either or both armies means you can control whichever one you like then, but I seldom find myself in that position, typically relying on captains.