A new bug is born.

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

A new bug is born.

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 >> A new bug is born.

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

A new bug is born. - 11/15/2008 2:07:49 PM

Cunctator

Posts: 181
Joined: 3/26/2004
From: Italy
Status: offline

This is the situation:
France, after having surrendered to Russia and Austria, has a temporary access of 3 months to their lands.
France dows two minors; Russia takes control of one them and Austria of the other one.
Nappy successfully breaches the wall of the two capitals, put garrisons in them and wait for the conquest.
In the meantime french temporary access to Russia and Austria expires and....surprise!!!... the french forces in the two minors are expelled!!!

The bug:
By mistake, the game considers the dowed minors as part of the russian and austrian empires and when the right of passage ends...bye bye Nappy.

Please Marshall solve this situation becuase it is not solvable in any way.

Thanx in advance

C.

_____________________________

- Scutum Romae -
"Gladius et Scutum Romae" appellabantur. Hannibal se recepit, Marcellus expugnavit Syracusas, Cunctator Capuam. Postremo Quintus Fabius Maximus expugnavit Tarentum.

Post #: 1

RE: A new bug is born. - 11/15/2008 3:50:15 PM

DCWhitworth

Posts: 676
Joined: 12/15/2007
From: Norwich, England
Status: offline

I would strongly suggest that the artificial construct of players taking control of 'neutral' minors is disposed of. This was something that was necessary in the board game, but is completely unneeded in the computer version.

If it's neutral get the AI to run it !

_____________________________

Regards
David

(in reply to Cunctator)

Post #: 2

RE: A new bug is born. - 11/15/2008 10:18:50 PM

gwheelock

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: DCWhitworth

I would strongly suggest that the artificial construct of players taking control of 'neutral' minors is disposed of. This was something that was necessary in the board game, but is completely unneeded in the computer version.

If it's neutral get the AI to run it !

Either that or give it a different name & status from stuff that REALLY is owned
by a player - instead of "Free State"; call it "Controlled". A "Controlled" state
FUNCTIONS as a "Free State" & will either turn into one (lapse of war) or
be turned over to the DOWing power as a "Conquored" (conquest). The
main thing that this does is to allow the computer to easily differentiate
between the two types for purposes of access, conquest, etc.

(in reply to DCWhitworth)

Post #: 3

RE: A new bug is born. - 11/16/2008 10:28:02 AM

Cunctator

Posts: 181
Joined: 3/26/2004
From: Italy
Status: offline

I agree completely with DCWithworth.
AI should run the minors.

_____________________________

- Scutum Romae -
"Gladius et Scutum Romae" appellabantur. Hannibal se recepit, Marcellus expugnavit Syracusas, Cunctator Capuam. Postremo Quintus Fabius Maximus expugnavit Tarentum.

(in reply to gwheelock)

Post #: 4

RE: A new bug is born. - 11/16/2008 1:51:57 PM

StCyr

Posts: 148
Joined: 7/2/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cunctator

I agree completely with DCWithworth.
AI should run the minors.

ie: France decalres war on Bavaria, Austria takes control of Bavaria, and Austria furthermore declares war on France, so that the Austrian and Bavarian troops fight together and combined vs the attacker.
This scenario makes sense but you want the ai to run a minor ?
Check out history and you will find "some" more examples of minors being attacked by majors and seeking protection from another major. EiA may sometimes really reflects history, and I wonder how some can call this an "artificial construct".

(in reply to Cunctator)

Post #: 5

RE: A new bug is born. - 11/16/2008 11:01:15 PM

Jimmer

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

I completely disagree with the basic concept that controlling minors is a negligible duty. I feel is is the very heart and soul of the early game. Typically, only the people who dumb down the game by house rules that neuter these transactions feel this way (which seems to be a majority of those here). There are some ingenious uses of minors that it seems nobody supporting this concept has any clue about (or refuses to allow because of some ill-conceived concept of "gamey-ness"). Britain and France (especially, but others too) spent a great deal of resources scheming behind the scenes and out in the open, all in an effort to have these "minor" countries join their side.

USE those minors! That's why the game included them. At an absolute minimum, work to gain at least one victory point by keeping them intact to the end of an economic month (if possible). But, there's so very much more that they can do. Even just the ability to defend them by declaring war is a huge potential game element. How in the world is France going to defend Bavaria if the game takes control of it? It's ludicrous.

-------------------

The one thing, though, that needs to happen is to prevent powers from "rolling for control" if it is an ally that declares war. This would bring it back to more of the original intent. Influence should not be enough to overcome this, although, ally status would be (since the game forces the declaring power to break the alliance).

_____________________________

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 StCyr)

Post #: 6

RE: A new bug is born. - 11/17/2008 12:58:20 AM

NeverMan

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

I agree with Jimmer.

Making the AI control minors really goes against one of the major spirits of the game and should never be implemented.

(in reply to Jimmer)

Post #: 7

RE: A new bug is born. - 11/17/2008 9:01:08 AM

bresh

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

I agree with Jimmer and Neverman on this subject.
Oh and Also StCyr :)

Regards
Bresh

< Message edited by bresh -- 11/17/2008 9:02:09 AM >

(in reply to NeverMan)

Post #: 8

RE: A new bug is born. - 11/17/2008 11:49:58 AM

DCWhitworth

Posts: 676
Joined: 12/15/2007
From: Norwich, England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: StCyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cunctator

I agree completely with DCWithworth.
AI should run the minors.

ie: France decalres war on Bavaria, Austria takes control of Bavaria, and Austria furthermore declares war on France, so that the Austrian and Bavarian troops fight together and combined vs the attacker.
This scenario makes sense but you want the ai to run a minor ?
Check out history and you will find "some" more examples of minors being attacked by majors and seeking protection from another major. EiA may sometimes really reflects history, and I wonder how some can call this an "artificial construct".

If someone declares war in support of a minor then that minor should automatically come under their control.

I'm not saying there are no flaws in this idea, but there are a lot less flaws than major powers controlling minors directly. I do not dispute that you can come up with historical examples that contradict this, unfortunately history hasn't read the rule book so there will always be exceptions

Jimmer - my objection to the 'ingenious uses' of minors is not so much because they are 'gamey' its because they are 'unhistorical' e.g. Spain declares war on Portugal, GB gets control and promptly uses the Portuguese fleet to attack the French fleet in port with British ships, taking all the losses from the minor fleet. Some people will howl in outrage, others will shrug and say 'so what ?'. I am with the former, I want to play a game that simulates history not that can be exploited in 'ingenious' ways.

As for the 'artifical contruct' comment - how else was minor control to be done in the board game ? Minor control was given to major powers not because it was a brilliant idea that enhanced the game, but because it was the only thing that could be done with any degree of playability.

This is a branch of the age old realism/playability argument. Neither side is wholly right nor should they ever be allowed to win since it is necessary to strike a balance. On the one side you'd have a hideously complex game that is no fun to play, on the other hand you'd have chess.

_____________________________

Regards
David

(in reply to StCyr)

Post #: 9

RE: A new bug is born. - 11/17/2008 1:34:59 PM

Marshall Ellis

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cunctator

This is the situation:
France, after having surrendered to Russia and Austria, has a temporary access of 3 months to their lands.
France dows two minors; Russia takes control of one them and Austria of the other one.
Nappy successfully breaches the wall of the two capitals, put garrisons in them and wait for the conquest.
In the meantime french temporary access to Russia and Austria expires and....surprise!!!... the french forces in the two minors are expelled!!!

The bug:
By mistake, the game considers the dowed minors as part of the russian and austrian empires and when the right of passage ends...bye bye Nappy.

Please Marshall solve this situation becuase it is not solvable in any way.

Thanx in advance

C.