RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02)

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02)

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 >> RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02)

Page: << < prev 7 8 9 [10] 11 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 5/20/2008 3:03:17 PM

Marshall Ellis

Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline

Got it.
I think it's a little deeper than a typo.
I'm concerned about the PS slipping into instability then coming out. I'll do some digging...

_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games

(in reply to pzgndr)

Post #: 271

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 5/23/2008 12:03:15 AM

bresh

Posts: 936
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline

Apparently "new" bug, not sure, never notiched it before, since i tried new opening move for Turkey.

1.02K was in pbm. Should be recreatable.

Game wants to use sea supply, while legal depot is in same area as corps. And when i tried, the depot spot was even a supply source,(Turkish controlled Jerusalem).

Regards
Bresh

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)

Post #: 272

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 5/23/2008 4:38:34 AM

testcase4321

Posts: 11
Joined: 2/4/2008
Status: offline

Im having a problem in v. 1.02K with the game seeming to enter an infinite loop. Im playing russia, its July of 1805. I just conquered chechnya and the game says "Invalid floating point operation". At that point the system switches me over to France for the land segment. I then have to process two land segments for France, and it brings me back to the Russian land phase. I cant seem to move beyond this loop . . .

Id also like to add that every time it brings me back to the Russian land phase, I still have to pay for supply costs. So, Im slowly running out of cash. . .

< Message edited by testcase4321 -- 5/23/2008 4:42:00 AM >

(in reply to bresh)

Post #: 273

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 5/23/2008 2:29:47 PM

Marshall Ellis

Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline

Testcase4321:

Can you email me the saved game files (game.dat.sav and game.dat) right before you end your pahse and go into the loop?

marshalle@matrixgames.com

_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games

(in reply to testcase4321)

Post #: 274

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 5/23/2008 5:16:19 PM

WJPalmer1

Posts: 81
Joined: 9/20/2004
From: Colorado Springs
Status: offline

We're also having a "show-stopper" problem in our PBEM game which popped up just as our group updated to 1.02k.

-Turkey is attempting to conduct its May 1806 Diplomacy Phase;
-Upon clicking "End Current Phase" the game message appears, "Awaiting results from Great Britain for battle of Tunis" (Note: Turkey and Britain successfully resolved a battle in Tunis several months earlier and we've confirmed that there are no old battle files lurking in anyone's Battles folder);
-After clicking "OK", the program opens up Turkey's Battles folder apparently looking for a non-existent Tunis battle file
-With no resolution possible to this phantom battle, the game fails to produce a new Diplomacy Phase file for Turkey which has completely halted game progress.

We would much appreciate any advice as to how to move our game ahead. Do we need to revert to 1.02j or some earlier version? As it is, we're completely stuck, even after attempting to "dummy up" a blank battle file.

Current game files are attached...

Thanks,
Ron

Attachment (1)

(in reply to bresh)

Post #: 275

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 5/23/2008 5:19:04 PM

Jimmer

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

There's a problem trying to add a free state's corps counter to a valid location outside of that free state's borders. In this case, GB owns Sweden as a free state. There are several British corps in Portsmouth, plus one Swedish corps and four Swedish infantry. There's even a depot, although that shouldn't matter (all that's required is a friendly corps and at least one factor to put into the new corps.

Attempting to select and place another Swedish corps there returns "You cannot place that type of counter there."

I can add a saved game, if needed, but I suspect this one is trivial to reproduce.

_____________________________

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 Marshall Ellis)

Post #: 276

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 5/29/2008 2:35:55 PM

Spartan07

Posts: 335
Joined: 5/26/2002
From: UK
Status: offline

bump...Any news on this display bug?

Mike

_____________________________

Mike - Nego

(in reply to dodod)

Post #: 277

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 5/29/2008 3:44:45 PM

Marshall Ellis

Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline

Mike:

I have not been able to dup this. I did take the engine to a smaller system with less memory to see if this was the issue but was unable to get the lower right quad (Or any other quad) to corrupt itself??? Can you make this happen regularly (somewhat)?

_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games

(in reply to Spartan07)

Post #: 278

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 5/29/2008 4:00:38 PM

Spartan07

Posts: 335
Joined: 5/26/2002
From: UK
Status: offline

Marshall,

It happens after loading a few Pbem files. Normally will occur after loading 6 or 7 files.

Mike

_____________________________

Mike - Nego

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)

Post #: 279

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 5/29/2008 6:01:54 PM

Jimmer

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

There's still an old problem that seems to have gotten lost (or, at least was still happening at 1.02g):

These steps are in order, and the order matters:

1) One corps is besieging a garrison (use free factors for this example)
2) Corps from the besieged nation tries to break the siege by sending in some corps to relieve the siege.
3) Siege is lifted temporarily
4) Factors inside the city forage. Note that the siege is currently "off", so the factors forage for free.
5) Battle is fought
6) Besieger wins
7) Besieger is NOT besieging the city any more, but is in the field after combat

Steps 4 and 7 both violate the rules. Step 7 is obvious: The besieger should always be consider besieging until either defeated or its next turn.

Step 4 is not so obvious, but is clear: The factors in the city should forage using the city's spire values, minus 1 per five full factors. This never actually happens if the siege is temporarily broken (regardless of whether the battle is won or lost).

The way it SHOULD work (per the rules) is:

1) One corps is besieging a garrison (use free factors for this example)
2) Corps from the besieged nation tries to break the siege by sending in some corps to relieve the siege.
3) Siege is lifted temporarily
4) Factors inside the city forage. These factors must forage using the city's spire value and negative modifiers due to high factor count (-1 per 5 factors present), despite the possibility that the siege will be lifted.
5) Battle is fought
6) Besieger wins
7) Besieger is replaced into "besieging the city" position

Obviously, if the attempt to break the siege is successful (step 6 has the opposite result), then step 7 would change to "Besieger retreats ...". However, step 4 should NOT change, because it occurred prior to the siege actually having been lifted.

This is a major problem tactically. By the rules, if someone puts a 1-factor garrison in place, I have two chances to conquer the city: When I attempt the break-in roll, and again the next time that garrison forages. But, if a simple one-factor corps is sent against my besieging force, the factors do not forage at all (unless they are in a corps -- and THAT gets REALLY ugly; try it some time).

_____________________________

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 Spartan07)

Post #: 280

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 5/29/2008 6:57:54 PM

Marshall Ellis

Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline

Jimmer:

I do remember this now BUT did not have this on my list.
Basically, a siege should only be relieved IF the relieving force wins, correct?

_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games

(in reply to Jimmer)

Post #: 281

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 5/29/2008 8:14:42 PM

Jimmer

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

Correct. Also, the foraging of a besieged corps, even if temporarily the siege is lifted, should still occur at whatever the city-supply value would have been had there been no battle (# of spires -1 per 5 factors present).

EDIT: I realize the programming ramifications that caused you to do it this way in the beginning. It makes sense from a programming perspective. So, I wouldn't remove the "siege is temporarily lifted" code or change it substantially. What is needed are two changes:

1) Have the garrison "remember" that it was besieged at the beginning of land movement, and forage based on that value, regardless of attempts to lift the siege.

and

2) Change the code so that the besieging corps is placed back into "besieging" status after a failed attempt to lift the siege.

These two should be easy to write into the code, without modifying the underlying structure a great deal (in fact, I think only number one would require any structural change, and that would be relatively small).

< Message edited by Jimmer -- 5/29/2008 8:19:46 PM >

_____________________________

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 Marshall Ellis)

Post #: 282

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 5/29/2008 8:27:53 PM

NeverMan

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

Not sure if this is a bug or not.

I am playing Russia. I was attacked by the French in Hamberg, I lost and was retreated. On my land movement phase I moved into Hamberg to attack. Then on my land combat phase, it wouldn't let me create a battle file as it kept saying "Awaiting Battle File from Opponent" after the battle was done and I was retreated by the computer AND it was my turn. SO, I couldn't attack the French corps that were sitting in Hamberg (no, they were not in the city, I tried to move into the city and got the "move blocked" message).

On top of that, I then tried to hit "End Current Phase" button and it worked. It's now not my turn anymore, it's Turkey's land phase. ALSO, I have 4 Russia Corps happily sitting with French Corps in Hamberg apparently just chillin' out.

Does that sound like a bug?

EDIT: The host had to create a backup from the last players move. THEN I had to make sure all previous battle files were deleted before loading the backup saved game, then and only then was I able to go ahead.

This is a bug. You shouldn't have to manually delete files in order for the game to work properly.

< Message edited by NeverMan -- 5/29/2008 8:39:50 PM >

(in reply to Jimmer)

Post #: 283

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 5/29/2008 8:37:51 PM

Howard7x

Posts: 213
Joined: 8/19/2006
From: Derby, England
Status: offline

So, its still not ready to play even with the 1.02 patch? Im looking forward to this game but prehaps i should wait till all this beta stuff is over with??

Ive read through some threads but all this talk of 1.02k beta this and that is confusing the hell outta me.

What do i get if i buy the game today? Is it still bug ridden. I dont want to be patching a game every month. Id rather wait till its all ironed out.

Cheers

_____________________________

"In times of peace, a good general is preparing for war" - Gaius Julius Ceasar

(in reply to NeverMan)

Post #: 284

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 5/30/2008 2:20:48 AM

gwheelock

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

Not sure if this is a bug or not.

I am playing Russia. I was attacked by the French in Hamberg, I lost and was retreated. On my land movement phase I moved into Hamberg to attack. Then on my land combat phase, it wouldn't let me create a battle file as it kept saying "Awaiting Battle File from Opponent" after the battle was done and I was retreated by the computer AND it was my turn. SO, I couldn't attack the French corps that were sitting in Hamberg (no, they were not in the city, I tried to move into the city and got the "move blocked" message).

On top of that, I then tried to hit "End Current Phase" button and it worked. It's now not my turn anymore, it's Turkey's land phase. ALSO, I have 4 Russia Corps happily sitting with French Corps in Hamberg apparently just chillin' out.

Does that sound like a bug?

EDIT: The host had to create a backup from the last players move. THEN I had to make sure all previous battle files were deleted before loading the backup saved game, then and only then was I able to go ahead.

This is a bug. You shouldn't have to manually delete files in order for the game to work properly.

I think that this happened because we had >2< battles of Hamberg (one on the
French combat phase & one on the Russian) & the program got confused with
leftover files. What I would suggest is that at the end of the land MOVEMENT phase
(when the .pbm file is created); that ALL battle files (only for the named game in question
of course) be deleted. This would prevent a "slop-over" from one player's combats
into anothers.

(in reply to NeverMan)

Post #: 285

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 5/30/2008 1:02:39 PM

eske

Posts: 258
Joined: 1/2/2008
Status: offline

Persuit loss problem:

Lost a battle and got persued taking 2cav/6inf/12mil in casualty.

Only got a corps with 5inf + 2mil. Clicking that once, and 2inf + 2mil remained.
Now still needed to take 1cav/3inf/6mil, but clicking the corps didn't do nothing.

I couldn't do nothing at all and I was stuck on the battle screen. Had to terminate the program from windows.

I suppose the corps should have been emptied of remaining factors.
Come to think of it. A rule interpretation might be, that inf is downgraded to mil for persuit casualty purposes, when only 2 or 1 inf remains. That way 2inf + 5mil taking 1cav persuit would result in 1inf left.

Or maybe just that if you can't take persuit loss simply eliminate whats left. Won't make much difference.

/eske

_____________________________

Alea iacta est

(in reply to gwheelock)

Post #: 286

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 5/30/2008 3:04:57 PM

Marshall Ellis

Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

Correct. Also, the foraging of a besieged corps, even if temporarily the siege is lifted, should still occur at whatever the city-supply value would have been had there been no battle (# of spires -1 per 5 factors present).

EDIT: I realize the programming ramifications that caused you to do it this way in the beginning. It makes sense from a programming perspective. So, I wouldn't remove the "siege is temporarily lifted" code or change it substantially. What is needed are two changes:

1) Have the garrison "remember" that it was besieged at the beginning of land movement, and forage based on that value, regardless of attempts to lift the siege.

and

2) Change the code so that the besieging corps is placed back into "besieging" status after a failed attempt to lift the siege.

These two should be easy to write into the code, without modifying the underlying structure a great deal (in fact, I think only number one would require any structural change, and that would be relatively small).

Jimmer:

I think I've got a pretty reasonable way to do this. I will log this as an issue and hopefully code this for 1.03! Appreciate the ping!

_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games

(in reply to Jimmer)

Post #: 287

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 6/2/2008 2:39:09 PM

testcase4321

Posts: 11
Joined: 2/4/2008
Status: offline

Ive posted a problem Im having here with EIA getting through the Spain build phase. Essentially, the game locks up when it cycles through the Spanish build part. This has now happened when Ive played England and Russia in two separate games.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by testcase4321 -- 6/2/2008 2:43:04 PM >

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)

Post #: 288

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 6/2/2008 2:42:51 PM

Marshall Ellis

Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline

testcase4321:

There is only one game file in your zip file? You sent me the "game.sav.dat". Can you send me "game.sav" file as well?

_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games

(in reply to testcase4321)

Post #: 289

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 6/2/2008 2:47:55 PM

testcase4321

Posts: 11
Joined: 2/4/2008
Status: offline

This should do it

Attachment (1)

(in reply to testcase4321)

Post #: 290

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 6/2/2008 2:58:53 PM

Marshall Ellis

Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline

Testcase4321:

Runs fine with 1.02k here???
What version are you running?

_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games

(in reply to testcase4321)

Post #: 291

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 6/4/2008 2:44:05 AM

testcase4321

Posts: 11
Joined: 2/4/2008
Status: offline

Im running 1.02K, and the problem seems to be happening intermittently with the Spanish build phase for some reason. I have attached another file, part of the same game. The problem occurs within 1-3 months of this phase pretty consistently. So, hopefully you can get the problem to reoccur

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)

Post #: 292

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 6/6/2008 8:57:03 AM

bresh

Posts: 936
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline

Marshall, not sure if you know.

But the siege combats during naval combat phase still happen in 1.02k

Regards
Bresh

(in reply to testcase4321)

Post #: 293

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 6/6/2008 4:16:26 PM

Marshall Ellis

Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline

Bresh:

Don't happen to have a game, do you?

_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games

(in reply to bresh)

Post #: 294

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 6/6/2008 4:44:50 PM

bresh

Posts: 936
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

Bresh:

Don't happen to have a game, do you?

What files do you need ? pbm files or savefiles ?
Spain naval + Spain naval combat ?`

I might be able to recreate a savefile if you need, from a old backup.

Btw was same game you fixed a blockaded Bristol navy for Kwik E Mart.

Regards
Bresh

< Message edited by bresh -- 6/6/2008 5:27:28 PM >

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)

Post #: 295

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 6/6/2008 5:35:32 PM

Marshall Ellis

Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline

OK. If you see specific case where the game will not let you pass without addressing the siege in the naval phase then save her and let me know (if you want).

_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games

(in reply to bresh)

Post #: 296

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 6/6/2008 5:55:02 PM

bresh

Posts: 936
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

OK. If you see specific case where the game will not let you pass without addressing the siege in the naval phase then save her and let me know (if you want).

Email send.

Regards
Bresh

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)

Post #: 297

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 6/6/2008 6:07:49 PM

NeverMan

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bresh

Marshall, not sure if you know.

But the siege combats during naval combat phase still happen in 1.02k

Regards
Bresh

This happens all the time, it is actually quite frequent. It has happened in both of the games I am currently in, to me and to other players as well.

(in reply to bresh)

Post #: 298

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 6/6/2008 6:12:23 PM

bresh

Posts: 936
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: bresh

Marshall, not sure if you know.

But the siege combats during naval combat phase still happen in 1.02k

Regards
Bresh

This happens all the time, it is actually quite frequent. It has happened in both of the games I am currently in, to me and to other players as well.

Thought it was fixed.
Only saw it in 1.02g games till now.

Regards
Bresh

(in reply to NeverMan)

Post #: 299

RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02) - 6/7/2008 1:34:28 PM

Marshall Ellis

Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline

I'm on it.
Will advise...

_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games

(in reply to bresh)

Post #: 300

Page: << < prev 7 8 9 [10] 11 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815 >> Tech Support >> RE: Reporting bugs (post v.1.02)