How am I playing Portugal? (Full Version)

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



Message

Grognot -> How am I playing Portugal? (1/19/2008 9:00:00 AM)

This is one of three two-player PBEM games being played in parallel. I'm *supposed* to be playing France, but...

See the unedited screenshot.

[image]local://upfiles/27377/25D00FF138C742F4A473632DA11DE5F4.jpg[/image]

All three parallel games were started with the 1.01 beta -- Great Britain vs. France. I've been loading three games in sequence (Austria and Prussia; GB and France; and Spain and Turkey. All involve the same e-mail addresses. Are there possible corruption issues if we don't close/restart the program between games?



Marshall Ellis -> RE: How am I playing Portugal? (1/19/2008 6:29:54 PM)

Can you send me the game along with the turn file that made Portugal active?



Grognot -> RE: How am I playing Portugal? (1/19/2008 8:22:22 PM)

File sent via IM.  I also have the two incoming .pbm files for the last exchange that game, if they'd help.

In the previous land phase, there'd been multi-corps (both sides) combat between my forces and the Prussian AI, if that matters.



joshua_dk -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) (1/19/2008 11:09:33 PM)

(Repost with attachment, thanks sw30 for explaining to me how to do this)

AI canot find path

this bug seems to still exist.

I am loading a save from a 1.00 game, I tried loading it in 1.01 and I still get the error message when I press "End current Phase" button.

Maybe the bug has been fixed so as not to be able to occur in a 1.01 game, but I was under the impression that I would be able to load the save in a 1.01 game and continue the game after that.

Regards,
Joshua




yammahoper -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) (1/19/2008 11:32:13 PM)

While playing Ru, and after a long, long fight, Fr surrendered...except Fr keeps surrendering to Fr. All conditions are applied against Fr, but I gain nothing. Fr even loses 8pp and gains 5pp.

I am playing with 1.01 patch, which is probably obvious since I posting in this thread.

Also, cannot always garrison citys full during reinforcement. Very weird.

yamma



ecn1 -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) - Bavaria Movement Not Increased Under French Control (1/20/2008 12:19:59 AM)

Hi All

Okay, this is the 3RD bug from 1.0 that was supposedly fixed in 1.01 patch

I am france, got Bavaria as minor free state, and its infrantry corp movement is still "3", not "4"

I know you guys are working hard on this, but the point of the patch was to fix bugs, and so far ottoman morale not fixed, ships disappearing from blockade battles not fixed, and now movement of french minors not fixed....sort of depressing

let me know if you want the saved game file

erik



Monadman -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) - Bavaria Movement Not Increased Under French Control (1/20/2008 2:10:36 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ecn1

Hi All

Okay, this is the 3RD bug from 1.0 that was supposedly fixed in 1.01 patch

I am france, got Bavaria as minor free state, and its infrantry corp movement is still "3", not "4"

I know you guys are working hard on this, but the point of the patch was to fix bugs, and so far ottoman morale not fixed, ships disappearing from blockade battles not fixed, and now movement of french minors not fixed....sort of depressing

let me know if you want the saved game file

erik


erik,

1.01 is a public beta patch and not an official release.

Bavaria will only get the increase MA if a component of a French controlled Confederation of the Rhine. You do not have the EiANW addendum yet so refer to EiA 11.5.2.1 for explanation.

The components of Turkish controlled OE morale boost was only a partial fix – our bad – that allowed component corps to move with the morale boost but they are going into battle with the older morale (#102-LC1 LAND COMBAT PHASE)

The blockade battles where fleets were disappearing was a complex code bug that was fixed under certain conditions but not all (obviously). There was another report and another fix was made (#102- N5 NAVAL PHASE).

We hope to have 1.02 in your hands soon.

Thanks

Richard




delatbabel -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) - Bavaria Movement Not Increased Under French Control (1/20/2008 2:13:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Monadman
erik,

1.01 is a public beta patch and not an official release.
...
We hope to have 1.02 in your hands soon.

Thanks

Richard


Does this mean that there will not be a "final" 1.01 patch release but that the next patch release will in fact be 1.02?



Jimmer -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) (1/20/2008 2:24:27 AM)

You might want to break this into a separate thread for each phase. That might keep it from getting too long.

Anyhow, in the manual, on page 28, the entry for Portugal has the columns switched for starting forces (first war vs. later wars).



zenmaster -> RE: France Surrenders to Herself!!!! (1/20/2008 5:40:46 AM)

I'm seeing serious "Surrender Issues" in patch 1.01.

Frequently countries are surrendering to another country repeatedly when clearly they can't be at war after the 1st surrender.  (Month after Month)
Countries are surrendering for no reason.  (Example - Russian Surrendering to France when France does not have a single corp outside of France proper.)

I saw France Surrender to England a few months into the game w/o any English forces in France............



yammahoper -> RE: France Surrenders to Herself!!!! (1/20/2008 6:08:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: zenmaster

I'm seeing serious "Surrender Issues" in patch 1.01.

Frequently countries are surrendering to another country repeatedly when clearly they can't be at war after the 1st surrender.  (Month after Month)
Countries are surrendering for no reason.  (Example - Russian Surrendering to France when France does not have a single corp outside of France proper.)

I saw France Surrender to England a few months into the game w/o any English forces in France............


Ditto this. France surrendered to itself several times in a row and absolutely decimated itself, allowing me as Ru to beat out a surrender, except Fr would always surrender to itself and not me. I solved this by surrendering to Fr. After that, every three months or so Au would surrender to Fr, which was really weird.

Nothing like a beta release to remember why I back up anything I apply a beta release too!

yamma



Grognot -> RE: France Surrenders to Herself!!!! (1/20/2008 9:06:36 AM)

A second of the three-games-in-parallel I'm in has gone corrupt -- this time, the other (Austrian, here) player has been inexplicably taken over by Hard AI.  Turn files are still being generated as per a normal PBEM game, it's just by the AI.  Happened after the Austrian player sent me the diplomacy files.

1.01 beta (started there).



pzgndr -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) (1/21/2008 2:00:53 AM)

Russian land phase. I go to View Current Surrender Settings and get a spurious error, "Unable to insert a line." I'm able to proceed by clicking it and making it go away. I have a save if needed.


[image]local://upfiles/11380/F98E24E0C4DB4C2EB8179871E6413830.jpg[/image]



Pans -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) (1/21/2008 7:45:54 PM)

Hi Richard,

I´m not sure if this is a bug but I get the same output from the random numbers generated during forage. I was playing the french against AI.
Please look at my attachment

Andreas



WJPalmer1 -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) (1/21/2008 8:13:04 PM)

Trade Display Error -

Just noticed that when running the cursor over the "Trade" icon within the National Statistics box for Britain, the values received by Britain and its trade partners seem to be reversed. Also, it would be great if the display could remain up a few seconds longer!



[image]local://upfiles/14111/3FB46B7D54B741369DDF700460369323.jpg[/image]



WJPalmer1 -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) (1/21/2008 9:18:36 PM)

Duplicate Map Area #'s

There are two sea areas carrying designation 702. They are adjacent to each other in the Baltic: One borders Karlskrona (Sweden) and the other is off Konigsberg (Prussia).



AresMars -> Map Area Numbers (1/21/2008 10:11:20 PM)

Speaking of Map Area numbers....

Would it be possible for Matrix to provide a GIF copy of the EIANW map with the area number designations for PBEM diplomacy?

Here is a draft copy that might be able to help your Graphics department....

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/eih/files/EIHv5.gif



gwheelock -> RE: Map Area Numbers (1/21/2008 10:52:18 PM)

Add to this - how about a Printable (for use in HOTSEAT games)/email attachable copy.

Copy needs to be able to include/exclude (when generated) :
o  Political Control
o  Depots
o  Corp/Leaders
o (am I missing anything?)



Grognot -> Conquered minor -> FS stand up (1/22/2008 1:05:21 AM)

When a conquered minor is returned to Free State status, the minor presently gets the ships existing at the time of conquest (good), but not any troops (bad).

Ex. -- my Turkish troops facing an Egyptian deployment excessively NE in the Sinai merely went around them and eliminated the 2i garrison in Cairo.  The Egyptian corps stood there, and Egypt became Turkish conquered.   When Turkey granted them FS status, I got exactly zero Egyptian troops as reinforcements.  They couldn't have starved to death unless they burned their MP moving in circles, I think (Jan -- war and seizure of Cairo; Feb -- Egypt falls.  Max twice forage, 2 supply zone, +1 on roll for winter/native country, max loss without movement = 2x (roll 6 + 2 winter -1 home -2 supply -3 movement) = 4), and they didn't move to a town to garrison it and then stand down the garrison and vaporize the empty corps (just sat there).



delatbabel -> RE: Conquered minor -> FS stand up (1/22/2008 1:16:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Grognot

When a conquered minor is returned to Free State status, the minor presently gets the ships existing at the time of conquest (good), but not any troops (bad).

Ex. -- my Turkish troops facing an Egyptian deployment excessively NE in the Sinai merely went around them and eliminated the 2i garrison in Cairo. The Egyptian corps stood there, and Egypt became Turkish conquered. When Turkey granted them FS status, I got exactly zero Egyptian troops as reinforcements. They couldn't have starved to death unless they burned their MP moving in circles, I think (Jan -- war and seizure of Cairo; Feb -- Egypt falls. Max twice forage, 2 supply zone, +1 on roll for winter/native country, max loss without movement = 2x (roll 6 + 2 winter -1 home -2 supply -3 movement) = 4), and they didn't move to a town to garrison it and then stand down the garrison and vaporize the empty corps (just sat there).



That it how it is supposed to work. When a minor is defeated the ships stay in the fleets but the army vanishes. Check the rules.



Grognot -> RE: Conquered minor -> FS stand up (1/22/2008 1:29:52 AM)

The EiANW rule book should probably be tweaked, then --  7.3 notes "If the minor country has corps, and this is not the first time setting up, the forces available will be whatever was leftover from the previous war (but not including prisoners)".  A clarification that this only occurs if a formerly free state became a neutral state through downgrade of relations would be appropriate.



Grognot -> RE: Conquered minor -> FS stand up (1/22/2008 1:33:03 AM)

Update on the Pr/Au PBEM game where the my machine (client) thought that Au (host) went AI -- Host was able to generate a backup save file.  I uninstalled / reinstalled / repatched EiANW to be sure, loaded the backup save file, and client now considers Au to be human-controlled once more.



Monadman -> RE: Conquered minor -> FS stand up (1/22/2008 1:49:52 AM)

Grognot,

You are confusing the setup of minors after war has been declared on them (section 7.3) and the setup of fleets (at their last known strength) after declaring a minor country a free state (section 6.8)

Richard



Monadman -> RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) (1/22/2008 1:52:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pans

Hi Richard,

I´m not sure if this is a bug but I get the same output from the random numbers generated during forage. I was playing the french against AI.
Please look at my attachment

Andreas



Andreas,

Do you have the actual saved game file that generated these numbers? It is always easier (and faster) for Marshall to fix problems when there is a file to work with.

Thanks

Richard



zaquex -> RE: Conquered minor -> FS stand up (1/22/2008 3:16:23 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Grognot

The EiANW rule book should probably be tweaked, then --  7.3 notes "If the minor country has corps, and this is not the first time setting up, the forces available will be whatever was leftover from the previous war (but not including prisoners)".  A clarification that this only occurs if a formerly free state became a neutral state through downgrade of relations would be appropriate.



This is interesting, what happens if the Free State becomes neutral because of fiasco?

EiA rules states that land forces are removed if the minor loses its status as Free State. I beleive this is interpreted by most player groups that if the minor is activated again its set up according to the land forces listed in the minor innitial setup table. I know the game is sometime played with House Rules allowing neutrals to keep its forces when inactive and sometimes even to retroactivly build forces for economic phases passed while inactive (usually with the printed value not doubled as when active). I'm leaning towards prefering to play with the second (with off board building) as it usually makes it harder to conquer minors.

Im not sure that the concept of retaining armies if you downgrade the minor is good though. Its unrealistic to disolve the army and then be able to recreate it without any side effects or drawbacks. It also opens up for some shady tactics. Its possible to use the minors as a mobilization pool after they are built up to full strenght and dodge cost for maintainance and at will use the income to build up the majors forces, pay supply etc. I have a hard time beleiving this was ever intended by the developers.



zaquex -> RE: Conquered minor -> FS stand up (1/22/2008 3:33:29 AM)

Btw section 7.3 seems to be missing an "is".

quote:

If the minor country has corps, and this not the first time setting up, the forces • available will be whatever was leftover from the previous war (but not including prisoners).

 




Grognot -> RE: Conquered minor -> FS stand up (1/22/2008 3:41:04 AM)

For consistency, it might be best if minor country prisoners weren't available for reinforcement if one returns them after FS status.

Currently -- ex. France at war with Prussia, captures Saxon soldiers in battle, then takes Saxony -- he can then FS Saxony, and release the Saxon factors, and they're now available.



sw30 -> RE: Conquered minor -> FS stand up (1/22/2008 5:02:53 AM)

Performance on adding/removing supply depots gets progressively worse as you increase the # of corps and territories.  it seems to be exponential in growth.  I suspect your basic algorithm is wrong, trying a sweep and mark strategy should get the performance down to acceptable levels.



sw30 -> spelling (1/22/2008 6:04:33 AM)

This may fall under item G4- is it Stavrapol or Stavropol?  The maip and the log/victory condition screen disagree with each other.



delatbabel -> RE: spelling (1/22/2008 1:13:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sw30

This may fall under item G4- is it Stavrapol or Stavropol? The maip and the log/victory condition screen disagree with each other.


Transliterating Russian into English is a tricky business, especially with certain vowel and (soft) consonant sounds. Although the name of the place in Russian is spelled as "Stavropol" (or the equivalent Cyrillic letters -- the PC that does Cyrillic is in the other room and I'm too lazy to go switch keyboards), any Russian "o" vowel that is in a syllable that is not stressed is pronounced, and often transliterated, as a short "a". It's actually a schwa, that sound that is almost a silent vowel, like the "e" in "begin".

The stress on "Stavropol" is on the last syllable, as such -- stavroPOL. The last "O" is pronounced very much like an "o" in the English word "box", but the middle "o" is pronounced like a short / schwa "a" so the word sounds like "stav ra POL". The more modern approach is to transliterate that word into latin characters as "Stavrapol", although the correct spelling in Russian is (or looks like the cyrillic letters) "Stavropol".

Either is correct, although one or the other should be chosen for consistency in the game.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.235352