Possible Bug

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Possible Bug

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815 >> Tech Support >> Possible Bug

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Possible Bug - 2/29/2008 8:01:42 PM

Dragonheart

Posts: 101
Joined: 1/17/2005
Status: offline

Hi there,
I encountered a strange thing when playing hotseat with my friend. I had my transport fleet in Newport (Garrissoned). The Danish fleet attacked the port, 30 guns were hitting 8 Ship of the Danes and then the fight was aborted with me (great britain) winning 2 points and my friend loosing 2 political points....the strange thing was that my whole transport fleet vanished after the fight. Is this a bug or is this a rule that a non supported transport fleet is scuttled when attacked?

< Message edited by Dragonheart -- 2/29/2008 8:03:06 PM >

Post #: 1

RE: Possible Bug - 2/29/2008 10:08:01 PM

Jimmer

Posts: 1968
Joined: 12/5/2007
Status: offline

It's a rule. It's kind of an odd way to get to it, but it's a rule.

Any time a transport fleet is attacked by itself, or ends the battle alone with an enemy, it's gone. I think the intent of the rule would be that a transport fleet in port (alone) does not count the harbor guns as "friendly ships", so it would evaporate if the attacking fleet survives the guns firing.

However, this little detail is not clearly stated in the rules, so it could be interpretted the other way (that the 30 harbor guns count as friendly ships for this purpose only). From a realism perspective, though, this is hard to justify. The harbor guns are on land.

_____________________________

At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?

(in reply to Dragonheart)

Post #: 2

RE: Possible Bug - 2/29/2008 10:15:02 PM

gwheelock

Posts: 563
Joined: 12/27/2007
From: Coon Rapids, Minnesota
Status: offline

Yah; the guns are on land; but the transport fleet is also tied up at the warf next to them.
The real reason to allow vaporizing undefended transports is that - since they don't shoot
back - the attacking fleet can hunt them down & kill them at its leisure ... which doesn't
apply if the harbor guns are shooting & killing your attacking fleet.

My suggestion for a harbor assault like this would be to kill a number of transports equal to the
surviving attacking ships.

(in reply to Jimmer)

Post #: 3

RE: Possible Bug - 2/29/2008 10:15:56 PM

Grognot

Posts: 409
Joined: 12/7/2007
Status: offline

Note -- they're captured, not sunk. And by captured, I mean that the transports are converted to reinforcements available in one month at a nearby port belonging to the attacker -- they're not prisoners that you can get back with a peace deal.

(in reply to Jimmer)

Post #: 4

RE: Possible Bug - 3/1/2008 4:35:02 PM

Murat

Posts: 803
Joined: 9/17/2003
From: South Carolina
Status: offline

This is working fine. Port gun numbers reflect the damage done by the guns during a port raid no matter what is in the port. In this case the ships sailed in, found no armed ships, boarded crews and left with their booties intact.

(in reply to Grognot)

Post #: 5

RE: Possible Bug - 3/1/2008 7:18:47 PM

Jimmer

Posts: 1968
Joined: 12/5/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gwheelock

Yah; the guns are on land; but the transport fleet is also tied up at the warf next to them.
The real reason�to allow vaporizing undefended transports is that - since they don't shoot
back - the attacking fleet can hunt them down & kill them at its leisure ... which doesn't
apply if the harbor guns are shooting & killing your attacking fleet.

My suggestion for a harbor assault like this�would be to kill a number of transports equal to the
surviving attacking ships.

Good point.

_____________________________

At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?

(in reply to gwheelock)

Post #: 6

RE: Possible Bug - 3/1/2008 7:20:27 PM

Jimmer

Posts: 1968
Joined: 12/5/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Grognot

Note -- they're captured, not sunk.� And by captured, I mean that the transports are converted to reinforcements available in one month at a nearby port belonging to the attacker -- they're not prisoners that you can get back with a peace deal.

Good point. Put this together with gwheelock's point and you've come up with a good reason that they should survive. It REALLY makes no sense that an at-sea enemy can waltz into a port and CAPTURE a bunch of ships, all the while having grapeshot rained on them from land.

_____________________________

At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?

(in reply to Grognot)

Post #: 7

RE: Possible Bug - 3/3/2008 7:08:25 AM

Murat

Posts: 803
Joined: 9/17/2003
From: South Carolina
Status: offline

Again, port gun numbers reflect the capacity for a raid, no matter what type, an argument can be made that transports should be allowed to be taken as casualties by the raider but beyond that, boarding parties could have grabbed many unarmed ships and fled while the land forts fired at them (NOT using grape by the way, they were stocked with round shot) gaining casualties based upon the quality of the gunners stationed there (typically poor).

(in reply to Jimmer)

Post #: 8