Least bugged campaign ?

**Shahed** · 11-24-2007, 14:56

HI All ! Which campaign is the least bugged ? Americas methinks.

**_Tristan_** · 11-24-2007, 14:58

Yes, I have yet to encounter a killing bug in that campaign...

Of course, ther is really nothing new in it (No Kalmar Union, no stone forts,...), it even looks like M2TW Light... So maybe that is why...

**Shahed** · 11-25-2007, 01:00

True.

Where is the bug list for Britannia ? I have'nt played that yet. Might try that next.

**Nebuchadnezzar** · 11-25-2007, 03:57

The Teutonic has a lot of bad bugs and I think the crusades the least. Stone forts to me are extremely petty. Britannia also seem to have only minor problems (except for welsh reinforcement bug & Norway cannon recruit bug).

But overall I found the Americas near worthless due to the plague of minor bugs and very bad gameplay. Buildings that do nothing! priests that never gain piety etc..

...and thats only for Apachean faction lol!

**Rhedd** · 11-25-2007, 10:03

Yeah, I'd have to say that I think Britannia has fewer bugs than Americas.

I didn't even really notice the Welsh bugs the first time through (as Wales!), the others are extremely minor, and they're all pretty easy to fix.

Americas sounds like it's got some doozies, though.

The Crusades is, for me, the one that gets the dubious award of Most Buggy, since the one huge bug in that campaign (stone forts) can't just be modded and fixed by me, making it worse than the Kalmar and Welsh bugs combined.

The only way to think that the stone forts bug is "minor" is to never have considered how enormous the changes to gameplay would be with the forts working correctly. Stone forts are a huge deal in Britannia, and being able to build them anywhere would make things feel like a whole different game.

**marrow** · 11-25-2007, 15:56

Originally Posted by Rhedd

The only way to think that the stone forts bug is "minor" is to never have considered how enormous the changes to gameplay would be with the forts working correctly. Stone forts are a huge deal in Britannia, and being able to build them anywhere would make things feel like a whole different game.

How true, I never understand why some posters downplay it so much. Minor stone castles built at the location of your choosing sounds like dream to me and gives the game a completely new and fresh flavour. How QA dept could overlook that, I do not know.

What's "the Welsh bug"? Where I live people would think it was found in a load of dodgy pot noodles

I reckon Brittania has the least amount of glaring bugs, although the bug whereas barons pick up English diplomacy trait upon the destruction of England is annoying. Surely Barons revolt because they're extremely displeased with king's policy and you would think they change at least something having assumed power, no?

'spect

**IPoseTheQuestionYouReturnTheAnswer** · 11-25-2007, 20:55

Even though I just got Kingdoms, I must say the Americas is definitely NOT the least bugged - I can't even PLAY it! It crashes every time I go to fight a battle. I get into the battle screen, and there are no textures anywhere - just men floating in midair - and then it crashes. Sigh. Updated video drivers and all, so this kind of annoys me.

The Crusades campaign is the only other one I have played, and encountered no bugs at all but I didn't play it for more than a few minutes.

On a closing note - does anyone know what's wrong with my Americas campaign? Might help save some forum space by asking here instead of making a new thread.

**Shahed** · 11-26-2007, 02:43

Thanks for the feedback all.

Hmm sounds like it might be an installation error. Did you try reinstalling ?

I think I'm gonna go for another Crusades campaign, maybe Britannia,not sure yet.

**ReiseReise** · 11-27-2007, 01:09

Americas was the first campaign I played. Played through as Spain, Mayans, Apaches. The only major bug I noticed was the Native faction heirs having 0 loyalty.
Also a few minor annoyances:
Spain can sit back and use cannons to blast the **** out of native armies sitting in city square. Give me a challenge please!
Apache can easily do a "Sherman's March to the Sea" starting on turn 1, taking 5-6 provinces along the way with one Warpath.
It is annoyingly difficult to upgrade piety of Apache elders. Mostly because the Sun God provinces are so far away starting out.

Overall though, I enjoyed the campaign, especially with Apaches I had to adapt to an archer based fighting style which was a lot of fun.

**Shahed** · 11-27-2007, 01:14

I enjoyed the first Apache campaign as well, although it got a bit boring, just not enough cav. The cavalry roster is lacking in variety. Finally I ended up with a couple of stacks full of Mounted WTFPWNBBQ Braves, but that was really no challenge. PWN the colonials, and everyone else. Still it was fun and was interesting to use an all cav gunpowder army. I did not notice any big bugs either. Fortunately my tech tree advanced on plan i.e gunpowder and all, I was expecting it to go wrong. (LUUULZ!!!111??)

**phonicsmonkey** · 11-27-2007, 01:24

Hey Sinan, you mentioned on another thread that you had a good experience with GrandViz' Ultimate AI Mod.

Are you using that with Kingdoms? or just with the main game?

Is it that much better? I'm trying to decide whether to continue my current Crusades campaign, start a new one, play GrandViz, or play EB...so many choices

**Vladimir** · 11-28-2007, 21:19

I guess I should play more than just the crusade expansion. None of the others interest me once I start. Even with the crusades I find myself starving out 1/4 garrisoned cities with full stacks. Too much money and no real threats. Guess I should stop using catapults to guard my gates.