RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) (Full Version)

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



Message

Grognot -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) (2/28/2008 8:49:34 AM)

There's either a bug or a non-in-manual rule that's preventing a major from building ships in a port city in territory which was just ceded from another major.  France unconditional'd to my Prussia, giving me La Rochelle (which held only Prussian forces and Prussian-controlled FS forces), but the game gave me 'You do not control this territory' message when attempting to order ship construction there in the economic phase that month.



La Provence -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) (2/28/2008 4:42:57 PM)

BUG in a PBEM Backup_File sequence :

If you play reinforcement from a Backup file and after no or other sequence you stop, you have to retrun to the game via the GAME.sav file.

If you still open the game from the Backup (by error or volontary [:-] ) you can still play the sequence (reinforcement here) ... and so on.
BUT, in this case, you will see that all the reinforcement created are cumulated !
I don't test that a lot of time but I suppose you could built the complete army in 1 phase [8D]



delatbabel -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) (3/1/2008 1:58:14 AM)

#102-G4 GENERAL:

I know that this has been reported many times before, but if I have to read the words "Eminent Collapse!" one more time I'm going to throw something. The word you're looking for is "Imminent".



delatbabel -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) (3/1/2008 2:02:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

New bug. Well, probably not new, but first time I have seen it.

The picture says it all: It's the British naval phase, and there is a corps counter in Amsterdam, yet the Holland fleet counters are both still there. They should have attempted to evacuate before my naval phase.

I've included the current save files, plus the saved reinforcement phase files, so you can see I really did own it prior to my naval phase.

By the way, I think you should re-think how evacuations are handled. In the original game, they occurred instantly. There really isn't a good reason not to maintain that tradition. Yes, I know, they get conquered in the land phase. But, you can still add a naval combat item. It would just be another file to upload (along with the land movement and land combat files).


I am sure that this bug did not exist in the original 1.0 version of the game, it's new to 1.0.1. I clearly recall taking ports in 1.0 and having the fleets evacuate immediately, however in 1.0.1 there seems to be a delay -- sometimes until the next diplomacy phase.



Murat -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) (3/1/2008 4:29:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: delatbabel
#102-G4 GENERAL:

I know that this has been reported many times before, but if I have to read the words "Eminent Collapse!" one more time I'm going to throw something. The word you're looking for is "Imminent".


Perhaps only His Eminence collapsed and a new Pope is in order. [:D]



Jimmer -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) (3/1/2008 7:23:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: delatbabel

#102-G4 GENERAL:

I know that this has been reported many times before, but if I have to read the words "Eminent Collapse!" one more time I'm going to throw something. The word you're looking for is "Imminent".


A bunch of misspellings are noted in the fix list for 1.02. This might be one of them.



Jimmer -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) (3/1/2008 7:24:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: delatbabel


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

New bug. Well, probably not new, but first time I have seen it.

The picture says it all: It's the British naval phase, and there is a corps counter in Amsterdam, yet the Holland fleet counters are both still there. They should have attempted to evacuate before my naval phase.

I've included the current save files, plus the saved reinforcement phase files, so you can see I really did own it prior to my naval phase.

By the way, I think you should re-think how evacuations are handled. In the original game, they occurred instantly. There really isn't a good reason not to maintain that tradition. Yes, I know, they get conquered in the land phase. But, you can still add a naval combat item. It would just be another file to upload (along with the land movement and land combat files).


I am sure that this bug did not exist in the original 1.0 version of the game, it's new to 1.0.1. I clearly recall taking ports in 1.0 and having the fleets evacuate immediately, however in 1.0.1 there seems to be a delay -- sometimes until the next diplomacy phase.


Oh, yes. In fact, in this very game the same thing happened in three other ports, and they all worked the way they should. So, whatever the problem is, it is inconsistent.



Jimmer -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) (3/1/2008 7:27:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Murat

quote:

ORIGINAL: delatbabel
#102-G4 GENERAL:

I know that this has been reported many times before, but if I have to read the words "Eminent Collapse!" one more time I'm going to throw something. The word you're looking for is "Imminent".


Perhaps only His Eminence collapsed and a new Pope is in order. [:D]


One of the worst puns in history. Congratulations!



Grognot -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) (3/3/2008 8:22:26 AM)

Update. It's been a few more months, and the game will still not let my Prussia construct ships in La Rochelle, despite it having been ceded by France to Prussia and complete controlled by Prussian forces. "You do not own this area" -- but I do.



Grognot -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) (3/3/2008 11:58:15 AM)

Unnecessary dialog box --

If you attempt to sue for peace a nation which has no corps inside your territory, the game will prompt you with the admonition that you have to sue -all- nations at war with you -- even if that's the only nation with which you're at war.



Grognot -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) (3/4/2008 6:42:16 AM)

False bankruptcy. Bug probably triggered by France voluntarily giving some $ to Turkey -- but France has no formal debts (having not lost any wars this game) and over $200 in the bank.

[image]local://upfiles/27377/FECA4270E7A742E49F37D2E5365BF75B.jpg[/image]



Grognot -> Minor kept despite Fiasco Zone (3/4/2008 10:28:58 AM)

Prussia still has Gottingen, a conquered minor, despite being in the Fiasco Zone; it should have become neutral. Lausitz should also have turned French.

[image]local://upfiles/27377/585BFD6AF05B4C148A5BD2CB0B3C70BD.jpg[/image]



Grognot -> Same game -- John alone (3/4/2008 10:32:37 AM)

John's being hanging out with no corps, for months.


[image]local://upfiles/27377/D87956D87AE94D0AB0752260964EEA2E.jpg[/image]



Grognot -> It's not just John, either. (3/4/2008 10:37:21 AM)

Two Prussian leaders w/o corps.

[image]local://upfiles/27377/EA735150660945E699F70EA0814393B5.jpg[/image]



Grognot -> Incorrect 'in city' fleet designation (3/4/2008 10:44:39 AM)

Click on a fleet in a city, then click on a fleet at sea and 'in city' is still designated.

[image]local://upfiles/27377/887511B652D0445D94B4752C575CB29B.jpg[/image]

Incidentally, GB and Austria are not at war, but GB is blockading an Austrian-held port -- they were blockading it when it was French-held. GB has voluntary access to Austrian territory.



Grognot -> AIs don't like getting money (3/4/2008 11:08:50 AM)

Giving money to AIs still results in a nuisance roll and the possibility of them breaking the alliance.




BruceSinger -> RE: AIs don't like getting money (3/5/2008 4:21:08 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Grognot

Giving money to AIs still results in a nuisance roll and the possibility of them breaking the alliance.




I was playing GB. I was allied to Austria. Austria was at war with everyone except GB and France. For mulitple turns in a row, it was surrending to France. As GB, I had a lot of cash as I had took the port where the French fleets and they were scuttled. So I started giving $15 per turn to Austria. They started doing better and quit surrendering to France. After about 9 months, they broke the Alliance with GB at no cost to themselves and 2 PP to GB. Is giving them the Money what caused it?

After Austria broke the Alliance, I started given Spain some money. {Not as much as Austria} and after ~ 6 months, they broke the Alliance as well.






Grognot -> RE: AIs don't like getting money (3/5/2008 5:26:40 AM)

Probably.  See the logs for 'Nuisance roll' where the recipient is evaluating whether the alliance is still worth it.  I've never seen those rolls happen unless there's a diplomatic interaction (a request for access, a request for an attack somewhere... bizarrely, a gift).  Considering that there's no way to attach any strings to the $, it shouldn't be generating these rolls.



Jimmer -> RE: AIs don't like getting money (3/5/2008 6:08:03 AM)

Major transport bug:

I have the Swedish heavy fleet in Le Havre. It has 10 factors. Also in Le Havre is my guard corps, with six factors. When I select the Swedish fleet (during naval movement), and then click on the "Load transport" button, all it does is ding at me.

I checked the rules, and there's nothing that says I can't leave port with my corps if it is besieged. Yet, I'm stuck there with half the French army about to clobber me, because I can't leave port.

This is a major bug for Great Britain, as it means GB has to basically build a whole army every time she wishes to attack ships in port.



bresh -> RE: AIs don't like getting money (3/5/2008 8:26:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

Major transport bug:

I have the Swedish heavy fleet in Le Havre. It has 10 factors. Also in Le Havre is my guard corps, with six factors. When I select the Swedish fleet (during naval movement), and then click on the "Load transport" button, all it does is ding at me.

I checked the rules, and there's nothing that says I can't leave port with my corps if it is besieged. Yet, I'm stuck there with half the French army about to clobber me, because I can't leave port.

This is a major bug for Great Britain, as it means GB has to basically build a whole army every time she wishes to attack ships in port.


Well, its not noted in the manual, but I think one could argue both ways, so if is Besieged corps able to load onto transports ?
I leave this to developers and EIA-gamers to know how it should work.

Regards
Bresh




Grognot -> RE: AIs don't like getting money (3/5/2008 10:28:17 AM)

If we go by the original AH rules --  http://eia.xnetz.com/rules/eiarules-with-errata.html

6.2.5.1 TRANSPORTATION MOVEMENT PROCEDURE: The corps and the fleet must both begin in the same friendly controlled (it may be besieged) _port_. They move together until in the sea area or blockade box adjacent to the land area in which the corps is to land or until reaching a port. Fleets and the corps they transport may enter other ports only if controlled or with access.




Grognot -> Prisoner edge case (3/5/2008 12:40:33 PM)

1) GB and France reach an enforced peace due to a successful French gambit with a Swedish corps and fleet
2) France is at war with Austria
3) Austria goes to war with GB
4) France DOWs Genoa
5) Genoa becomes Austrian free state
6) A French force pops in, breaks Genoa garrison -- taking a prisoner -- and leaves a small garrison
7) A British corps pops in, leaves a larger garrison (same turn)
8) Genoa becomes a British possession

...and the Genoan prisoner remains in French custody -- even after France is no longer at war with Genoa, or Genoa's owner. The prisoner isn't returned after Austria surrenders, either -- it's no longer an Austrian possession.

This probably hinges on the shift of control to a third party to whom the other aggressor is at peace with, and is a not particularly common or severe edge case in this manifestation. A possible concern is --

if A and B are majors at war with a minor, and A loses a leader to the minor (prisoner, not killed), and B conquers the minor while A's war with the minor is still in effect -- does the captured leader still exist as a prisoner of the major sponsor of the minor? Even if A is not at war with the sponsor? The original version above suggests that the prisoner exchange didn't happen, so my suspicion would be that this would hold here as well. This is still an edge case, although a slightly more severe one.


[image]local://upfiles/27377/F797FE93625743DEB96C51950F7D4FCE.jpg[/image]



Monadman -> RE: Prisoner edge case (3/5/2008 4:58:55 PM)

Guys,

I have been away (and out of contact) since February 22nd. Unfortunately, there were some open issues that were not resolved pre-departure nor during this absence. Some time will be needed to resume to the necessary pace in order to keep the bug list up to par.

Meanwhile, 1.02 should be released soon, however, there may be some non-critical unresolved 1.02 issues that will need to be readdressed in 1.03.

Sorry for the delay. Working on it . . .

Richard



Grimrod42 -> RE: Prisoner edge case (3/5/2008 5:17:56 PM)

What do you mean by "there may be some non-critical unresolved 1.02 issues"?




Monadman -> RE: Prisoner edge case (3/5/2008 5:25:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Grimrod42

What do you mean by "there may be some non-critical unresolved 1.02 issues"?




These issues may need continuing focus to make them work correctly but the problem does not include crashes or lockups.

Richard



Jimmer -> RE: Prisoner edge case (3/5/2008 5:29:37 PM)

Richard,

I have a suggestion for you when you start the thread for post-1.02 bugs:

Keep this thread (kind of "archived"), and start a new one for new bugs.

That way, people can know which patch included which bug fixes (etc.)



Monadman -> RE: Prisoner edge case (3/5/2008 5:45:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

Richard,

I have a suggestion for you when you start the thread for post-1.02 bugs:

Keep this thread (kind of "archived"), and start a new one for new bugs.

That way, people can know which patch included which bug fixes (etc.)


Will do.

Richard



Jimmer -> RE: Prisoner edge case (3/5/2008 7:46:10 PM)

You know, you guys are absolutely the most responsive computer game company I've ever dealt with. My hat's off to you!



Mardonius -> Black Sea Trade Rule Omission (3/6/2008 3:07:25 PM)

Monadman:

There is another minor rule from the AH game that was omitted from the PC game.

“8.2.1.2.1.3:“Ports on the Black Sea can only trade if given permission by the major power controlling Constantinople” See page 24 AH Rule book.

Should not be too hard to fix by allowing a check box in the Turkish trade options.

best
Mardonius



bresh -> RE: Black Sea Trade Rule Omission (3/6/2008 3:33:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mardonius

Monadman:

There is another minor rule from the AH game that was omitted from the PC game.

“8.2.1.2.1.3:“Ports on the Black Sea can only trade if given permission by the major power controlling Constantinople” See page 24 AH Rule book.

Should not be too hard to fix by allowing a check box in the Turkish trade options.

best
Mardonius


This hardly go under bug forum though :)

And we do want bugs fixed before enhancements.
Offcourse stuff that brings game closer to EIA are nice.
But better post it in the right threads.

Regards
Bresh




Page: <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.7041016