The Org Buglist v2

[Doug-Thompson]

Thanks to sapi for the prompt and full replies. More about those later. First off, I've also seen the campaign map slowdown and reported it on the technical forum soon after getting the game. Seems to hit after hours of sustained gamplay for me, making me think it's a memory leak problem again. Quitting the game and restarting the computer fixes it every time. Saving the game first is clunky, but can be done. Oddly, though, Windows XP has a hard time shutting down after this crops up. You get "program not responding" error messages after MTW2 has quit for things like Explorer and msnmgr, things I thought I'd shut off and wasn't using.

=========

On the other, I used the word "pilgrims" when I meant "fanatics." I paid closer attention after reading about the two-handed problem with other units. The next time I had a Jihad siege battle against cheap spear units, I discovered that my best, hardest fighting unit of Muslim fanatics fought and fought and fought — achieving a grand total of six kills, which I presume they got in their initial charge. And yes, they do use a club, so it could be a two-handed weapon.

==========

I stand corrected on the natural disasters issue. I also obviously misunderstood the "archers in the rain" problem. If they're not getting hits that count, then the animation showing them getting hits should be fixed if practical.

I'm not convinced on the rest, but it's not worth arguing about. I will do sapi the courtesy of answering the question on “rock bottom.” I’d point out that there’s war, then there’s “war to the knife.” If a powerful neighbor attacks me, I want peace but will defend myself, and expect an AI to do the same. If I want to wipe a faction off the map, that’s different.

Clausewitz would agree with me.

[Shahed]

sapi it seems there's another two blatant errors (?) on the Anatolian map, so blatant that I'm amazed how I did'nt spot it before. I think the graphics and general awe of the game had me completely spellbound.

There is no road connection between Caesarea and Yerevan.
There is no road connection between Caesarea and Trebizond.

This later missing link is pretty serious from a geological/historical point of view, because there exits a road that has been a major highway for transporting silk from China. In a gameplay sense of course, it would make things a lot better for anyone in Anatolia.

I do understand the abstraction taking place on the campaign map, and the scale is not symetrical in all areas of the map. Anyway ingame there has to be a link between Georgia and Trebizond (Trabzon) as well as Caesarea and Trebizond. Specially because the entire state of Armenia and Georgia is abstracted, it just can't be without road links, LMAO.

I'd like to add these two to the list for the February update as well, as an enhancement.

Thanks !

[sapi]

Ok, thanks guys.

I'll update the list later today, after i've got around to setting up a wireless network at home :)

[SirRethcir]

Cause it seems it is not addressed in the first patch:

as it should be:
port: Increase tradeable goods + 'ships'
Shipwright: Increase tradeable goods + 'ships'
Dockyard: Increase tradeable goods + 'ships'
Naval Drydock: Increase tradeable goods + 'ships'

Merchant's Wharf: Trade fleets available 1 + Increase tradeable goods
Warehouse: Trade fleets available 2 + Increase tradeable goods
Docklands: Trade fleets available 3 + Increase tradeable goods


as it is now:
port: Trade fleets available 1 + Increase tradeable goods + 'ships'
Shipwright: Trade fleets available 2 + Increase tradeable goods + 'ships'
Dockyard: Trade fleets available 3 + Increase tradeable goods + 'ships'
Naval Drydock: Trade fleets available 3 + Increase tradeable goods + 'ships'

Merchant's Wharf: Increase tradeable goods (?)
Warehouse: Increase tradeable goods (?)
Docklands: Increase tradeable goods (?)

Interesting:
In export_descr_buildings.txt (provided by CA) it is correct implemented.
So, I'm not sure if it is fixed in the new build.

[FactionHeir]

sapi, do you want me to go through the previous list and the ones you have not sent yet to round up all the stuff you can send to CA? :)

[sapi]

There's nothing on the front page i haven't sent (i just haven't updated the titles).

I'm also supposed to use a new reporting system, and that coupled with errors on teh wireless i was supposed to set up today mean i'll have to update this tomorrow.

Thanks for the offer anyway mate, but i'll be able to do it fine myself, i think.

[Oaty]

I'm not convinced on the rest, but it's not worth arguing about. I will do sapi the courtesy of answering the question on “rock bottom.” I’d point out that there’s war, then there’s “war to the knife.” If a powerful neighbor attacks me, I want peace but will defend myself, and expect an AI to do the same. If I want to wipe a faction off the map, that’s different.

Clausewitz would agree with me.

I think I understand what you are at, If the pope gives me a cease hostilities action I can still attack that factions armies in my own territories, on top of that I can attack an enemy fleet if it is blocading a port of mine and all of this with no repurcussions. So what Doug is saying that relations worsen when he is defending/ relieving a siege/blockade.

Edit: forgot to add marriage alliances don't work properly on very hard and possibly hard difficulties. Relations will worsen just as fast as they do with a neutral nation. The same goes for regular alliances of course.

[Foz]

Like a few others, I also sometimes experience lag on the campaign map. The main thread on this problem can be found here - though I'll outline what I've managed to pull from various postings for the sake of convenience:

- This problem is characterized by the game being sluggish graphically on the campaign map. Scrolls open slowly, notifications fall slowly, scrolling the map is jerky and slow. Basically, it's a lot like bullet-time in The Matrix, but jerkier.

- It seemingly can occur at any time. For me it happens mostly when a turn of mine begins. Not each time one begins, but if it is going to that's usually when it starts. I haven't yet had it happen as soon as I start a campaign, but others report that it can, and also due to seemingly minor events like removing a building from the queue in a settlement.

- It affects about 80% of the map area. The less affected areas seem to be less graphically intense areas: edges of the map, oceans, or any simple areas with little geography or game elements (cities, armies, agents, etc). This seems to suggest the problem is graphical in nature.

- The slowdown is not to a consistent level: I've had it barely noticeable, all the way to nearly impossible to move the mouse, with the exact same area on the map visible on screen, so one would imagine that some game-related factor is affecting the severity of the problem.

- It appears to be independent of hardware, as people with low- and high-end rigs have reported the problem at what appears to be the same severity level.

That's what I've managed to conclude so far about the nature of the problem. Concerning solutions, it appears that saving, quitting, then reloading the game invariably fixes it, so it can't be just about what's on the screen graphically: the game must be doing something to cause things to grind down like they do. I myself have had success alt-tabbing to the desktop then back to the game, which relieves the campaign map lag temporarily, however others do not appear to have similar results here.

Given my observations of the problem in action, I would suggest the game is hogging memory, or else processor time. This would indicate a memory leak, or some sort of out of control process cycling. Of course something less immediately obvious like data accesses could be the culprit if the game is slowed down waiting for data it needs all the time, but there's no real way for me to determine any of that so I leave it for someone else...

[sapi]

With your idea of a memory leak, what does your memory usage look like when you get the problem (quit the game, hit ctrl+alt+del, go to the performance tab and look at peak memory usage)?

[PureFodder]

I've found a nice if unlikely hiccup if an enemy decides to withdraw from the battle and you have a reinforcement army waiting on the edge of the map. There's an oh so slim chance that the enemy will withdraw its units directly towards the units waiting off the map. If so, when they reach the edge they get stuck on the edge of the battlefield trying to walk through the off map units.

These are then ripe for the slaughter .

[Foz]

With your idea of a memory leak, what does your memory usage look like when you get the problem (quit the game, hit ctrl+alt+del, go to the performance tab and look at peak memory usage)?

I did one better... took a series of screen caps of Task Manager: Before I run the game, while it's running without campain map lag, and then after the lag has been going for a few minutes. Note that Task Manager popped me back to the desktop, and I have no idea what that may do to the game's memory imprint versus when it's actually the active window.





After I quit the game, it looked so close to identical with the pre-game state that I didn't even cap it again.

So unless I am missing something glaring, the numbers I'm getting don't look suggestive of any memory leaks. The available memory is only VERY slightly lower after the lagging was going, but presumably this is not nearly enough to cause any memory issues, or this particular issue, and is probably just due to the game needing a little more memory for legitimate purposes as I got deeper into the campaign.

As I said though I could be wrong or have missed something obvious, so if anyone has a word of confirmation or contradiction, let me know as I'm sure some people here know more than I do about these kinds of things.

[sapi]

Hmmm - i'm actually, on considaration, inclined to disbelieve the memory leak theory - i've never seen my page file get touched and after playing mtw for hours today my memory usage is at 37% of 2GB.

Hard to say what it is though...

(The first post's update will be coming some time this weekend)

[Lord Leonard]

Sapi is correct. There's no memory leak. Those who have reported the memory leak should consider it's something else, such as anti-virus or windows services running in the background. My memory is 100% stable with M2TW.

[Shahed]

Ok, but what is it then?. I have nothing running in the background when I play. I like to have everything available for the game. Even the network connection is shut down.

[sapi]

It's a problem with one of the textures/animations in a siege battle.

Personally i'm leaning towards it being the smoke (and a similar dynamic transparencies issue to what occurs in oblivion) but that's a purely uninformed guess so don't quote me on it (unless i'm right, of course :P )

[Bucky_Rogers]

I have the unspecified error bug, presumably caused by the aforementioned elphant unit issue. This explanation makes sense, because I have only experienced this in battle against the tamarids, and in battle with my one army which has elephant units.

It occurs usually about 30 secs into the battle every time I fight the Tams now.

What I don't know is how to fix it. Can someone please let us know if there is a fix? Another poster in another thread claims to have had the same problem and before anyone replied they said that they figured it out and fixed it on their own but neglected to explain what was causing the problem or how they fixed it. I am guessing that they had an unrelated hardware issue.

Is there a fix for the elphant bug? Have they put out a patch fixing this?

Thnx for any help,

~Buck

[sapi]

If i remember correctly then it's fixed in the new patch - you should be able to find a thread on it (with a download link) in this very forum.

[Faenaris]

I just skimmed through the list and want to add some "texture oversights". These are easily noticed in custom battles and I believe that one can also see the phenomena in the campaign.

Berdiche Axemen: Regardless of armour level, their outwards appearance stays the same. You can give them no armour upgrade, 1 armour upgrade or 2 upgrades, they just look the same. This can't be right since we have seen Berdiche Axemen wearing special masks.

Venetian Archers: Their armour upgrades are switched. Upgrade a unit and they show LESS armour than the upgraded version.

Venetian Heavy Infantry: Same problem as the archers.

I will post screenshots tonight.

[sapi]

Updated.

(and since i noticed the 40k quote in your sig, faenaris, i'd like to add one from the game Dawn of War - 'hope is the first step on the road to disappointment ;) )

----

It appears that marrying a general acts a marrying a faction heir should do and vice versa (ie, marrying a faction heir brings him into your faction whereas marrying a general doesn't). Reported with marrying Robert in Caen first turn as the French.

Gunpowder upgrades at university give bonus melee attack instead of ranged.

British can build military academy and get gunpowder associated traits and retinues before gunpowder is developed.

Christian factions can retrain most mercenaries, even ones which are not found in their home territories, whereas muslim factions can't even retrain local ones.

Becoming a king makes you lose your starting piety bonus.

Gunpowder infantry often get stuck 'reforming' and don't do anything but get killed.

When using "Total war" view, in the French version of the game, the camera keys relate to a "qwerty" keyboard, and the other contros use an "azerty" keyboard.

Troops with the plague don't display any indication of it, making it hard to stop it spreading (bug or 'feature'?)

Archers seem to have infantry marching sound and infantry seem to have Archers marching sound - archers make the intimidating 'crunch crunch crunch' noise as they march, wereas infantry just rattle and barely make a noise.

The mongols sometimes fail to expand, and just sit around as a big horde.

Crossbows sometimes fire an empty volley when you tell them to move or stop firing; and they won't turn and run until they have completed their firing animation, making saving them from charges impossible.

If the gates shut to stop a routing unit passing through, the unit will never pass through the gate, even if it opens later in the battle, and will be almost impossible to kill.

The AI can get new family members in stacks in the middle of nowhere.

When an enemy army decides to assault one of your settlements, by having diplomats/prests/spies/assassins in the enemy territory you can see their planned route (the big blue arrow) of the enemy army all the way to your settlement even when it's going to take several turns for them to get there. Even if you then use this information to massively re-enforce the settlement the computer still follows it's attack order resulting in the enemy sneak attacks being utterly non-sneaky and disastrous for them.

The campaign map sometimes lags very badly, even on high end systems, and this does not seem to be reproducable, even though it is a widespread issue.

Historically, the game is missing several road connections that existed in real life. Constantinople-Trebizond, Nicea-Trebizond, Caesarea-Yerevan and Caesarea-Trebizond are examples of connections that existed and were significant historically but are not ingame. To clarify why this is a bug (and, to be honest, it's more of an enhancement), the absence of these connections makes life very hard for the Turkish and whoever invades their empire.

The AI sometimes withdraws its armies (on the battle map) directly towards an army that is waiting to enter, preventing the AI army from leaving.

Upgraded armour is not represented visually on Berdiche Axemen.

Venetian Archers and Venetian Heavy Infantry show less armour the more they are upgraded (ie the effect works in reverse).

[Faenaris]

(and since i noticed the 40k quote in your sig, faenaris, i'd like to add one from the game Dawn of War - 'hope is the first step on the road to disappointment ;) )

Aha, another Dawn of War player, excellent! I got all the quotes from that game sitting in a text document. I just love them. I had your quote in my signature for a long time.

[sapi]

:P

You could call me a DoW player, but to be honest i didn't really like the game - it was fun while it lasted but there was too much rushing and not enough strategy in mp :(

[Whacker]

:P

You could call me a DoW player, but to be honest i didn't really like the game - it was fun while it lasted but there was too much rushing and not enough strategy in mp :(

Never did quite get the hang of Warhammer 40k. Classic Battletech was much much easier in the way of books and games, too bad Wizkids and whomever else it is now took that franchise down the toilet with a vengeance. Dark Ages... (shudder)

"YOU DRIVE LIKE A FREEBIRTH, CADET!!!" 1000k bonus points if you get that.



Sapster, sadly I must reconfirm a bug with the latest patch. I'd posted this earlier in the thread, about playing a siege battle, I am the attacker. The defender has an army inside the city/castle, and a stack coming in to reinforce. Well, per usual I position myself to engage the reinforcements to smash them before they can get into the city, and am successful. My ^&%(*%& units still won't chase down and kill routers! Double-clicking and single-clicking to attack the routing unit fleeing into the city does nothing. Positioning my units in their path hoping to get some kills does nothing. Ranged units will not fire on them with fire-at-will, or a directed attack.

[Shahed]

Hi

I think there's enough evidence to show that the passive AI has been improved but not adequately. It seems the experience is different depending on the battle conditions. It's still early but I think we should be requesting a review of passive AI once again for Update 2, and it should be included for the buglist.

Please see here for more details:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=75369

Will post again in a week or so but as far as I'm concerned it's confirmed, at least 50% of the people who reported are reporting the passive AI issue is still outstanding. There is also a lengthy post on this at the .com with people complaining of the same issue.

[kellesius]

My apologies if I am posting in the wrong thread. However, both before and after the patch my mouse icon will freeze on the campaign map. The mouse itself is still functional, although invisible. Needless to say, it makes playing very difficult. The mouse graphic remains frozen even after exiting the game. The only solution I have found so far is to reboot. Any suggestions?

[manbaps]

A bug that I cant seem to be stated is that the general's bodyguard unit never seems to get upgraded.

[Whacker]

Two more post-patch items. Sorry if they're already posted.

1. When modding the turns to make it 2 turns per year, the date doesnt' jive with what's displayed on the campaign map UI. IIRC the campaign map UI is one season behind the actual timer.

2. Found a stupid bug related to the catholic factions. As the english, I was row row rowing my cogs merrily around the Med, when I came across Tunis which was owned by the Sicilians, who are a. excommunicated and b. my enemies. Naturally having a larger stack I plow in and beat off two stacks, when I see two more wedged in that little bay. Go after them as well, but as I go to attack, I get the menu item "You sure? You'll be excommunicated if you do this!"... Why would the Pope care? They're excommunicated themselves! Should be free game!

[Chrisky]

This seems to constantly happen to me playing as HRE on VH/VH pre- and post-update. Also I had an insatnce tody where the freshly finished Ballista towers only fired arrows, even though the ballistas were clearly sticking ot of the towers.

Another minor bug I found was when I got reinforment Teutonic knights from a corner section, where the unit of knights never arrived on the battle map for command, as three horses were still off-map, but the unit had stopped moving as it clearly reached the "entrance" mark. And I was counting on them badly.

[SirRethcir]

Ok, is this already in another buglist?

If not, why does it not appear in any buglist?

It is not fixed in the 1.1 patch.


@Whacker
Perhaps, you killed the Sicilian leader.

[sapi]

Mate, i'm not sure what you're trying to point out.

When i build those buildings in the campaign, it all works fine, so i'm not quite sure what what you've said means.

[SirRethcir]

Mate, i'm not sure what you're trying to point out.

When i build those buildings in the campaign, it all works fine, so i'm not quite sure what what you've said means.

Ah, then ask me!

You think it all works fine, because you are used to the RTW system: Every port level increases 'Trade fleets' +1. So, it is the same in M2TW.
But it is intended to work differently.
Merchant's Wharf, Warehouse, Docklands should increase 'Trade fleets' +1 not port, Shipwright, Dockyard, Naval Drydock.

Look at the export_descr_buildings.txt!

trade_fleet X
trade_base_income_bonus bonus Y

These are exclusive for sea_trade buildings.
Port and castle_port buildings don't even have trade_fleet and trade_base_income_bonus, their only purpose should be ship building.

So, it is an hardcoded issue an has to be fixed by CA.