France not able to attack Russia

France not able to attack Russia (Full Version)

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

Message

gwheelock -> France not able to attack Russia (11/12/2008 3:21:54 AM)
France's main army with Nappy is not able to attack 2 Russian corp in Grodno but it WAS allowing me to seige the CITY underneith them. (Note-they did NOT do a successful withdraw) Here is the save file. Marshall; please fix - Urgent - game stopper.

NeverMan -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/12/2008 4:11:50 AM)
The 2 Russian Corps are on loan to Austria and Austria is not at war with France. I'm not sure if this is a bug or not because I'm unaware of the rules for this situation.

Grognot -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/12/2008 4:31:53 AM)
The rules should probably ensure that a loaned corps retains its original owner's war status, because otherwise it allows pretty ugly abuses, e.g. loaning corps to a friendly power who's at peace so he can safely maneuver you into a desired position; or if you've just beat down somebody who surrendered, loaning corps to somebody who's still at war with the victim so you can help beat them down even more. Recall that the loaning of EiANW is essentially a way to implement combined movement, not the forcible loaning as a surrender condition found in the original EiA (in /that/ case, using the DoW status of the borrower would seem more appropriate).

gwheelock -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/12/2008 4:33:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NeverMan The 2 Russian Corps are on loan to Austria and Austria is not at war with France. I'm not sure if this is a bug or not because I'm unaware of the rules for this situation. If this is the case; it is still a bug that needs to be resolved. Loaning a corp to a neutral party should NOT protect it from attack. It is still OWNED by the party at war & the troops are still wearing the UNIFORM of the ENEMY. Under this case; someone at war with EITHER the owner or the controller should be able to attack and to be attacked by this corp. Also - there needs to be a mechanism for a player to REFUSE to accept a loan of a corp (because they don't want to take the pp hit for losing a battle with that corp) PS: This is mantis bug # 0000388

Marshall Ellis -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/12/2008 1:20:56 PM)
This is definitely an issue with how I handle loaned corps. I have changed this for 1.05 so that if you enter an area with loaned corps (Where the original owner is hostile to you) then the corps reverts to the original owner thus allowing combat. This has also been done for fleets (Only if you attempt an attack). You could either wait until BETA 1.05 OR I could revert the corps back to Russian control? Your call...

NeverMan -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/12/2008 2:07:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis This is definitely an issue with how I handle loaned corps. I have changed this for 1.05 so that if you enter an area with loaned corps (Where the original owner is hostile to you) then the corps reverts to the original owner thus allowing combat. This has also been done for fleets (Only if you attempt an attack). You could either wait until BETA 1.05 OR I could revert the corps back to Russian control? Your call... So, like I thought this is the way the rules are implemented, it is NOT a bug just a bad design decision.

NeverMan -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/12/2008 2:09:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: gwheelock quote: ORIGINAL: NeverMan The 2 Russian Corps are on loan to Austria and Austria is not at war with France. I'm not sure if this is a bug or not because I'm unaware of the rules for this situation. If this is the case; it is still a bug that needs to be resolved. Loaning a corp to a neutral party should NOT protect it from attack. It is still OWNED by the party at war & the troops are still wearing the UNIFORM of the ENEMY. Under this case; someone at war with EITHER the owner or the controller should be able to attack and to be attacked by this corp. Also - there needs to be a mechanism for a player to REFUSE to accept a loan of a corp (because they don't want to take the pp hit for losing a battle with that corp) PS: This is mantis bug # 0000388 Guy, simply because you do not agree with an EiANW rule does not make it a bug. Trust me, I disagree with A LOT of the rules in EiANW but that doesn't mean they are bugs. From an earlier thread on these forums this is how I understood this would work, I tried to find that thread but was unsuccessful, sorry. Anyways, it looks like Marshall has fixed this bad design decision (NOT A BUG!!) in 1.05.

NeverMan -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/12/2008 2:11:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis This is definitely an issue with how I handle loaned corps. I have changed this for 1.05 so that if you enter an area with loaned corps (Where the original owner is hostile to you) then the corps reverts to the original owner thus allowing combat. This has also been done for fleets (Only if you attempt an attack). You could either wait until BETA 1.05 OR I could revert the corps back to Russian control? Your call... While I do think the "handling of the loaned corps" was a bad design decision and certainly needs to be changed, I'm not sure it's fair to change the rules in the middle of a game. I would agree if this were a BUG but it's NOT. It's not a bug, it's a bad design decision, which just makes it a bad rules. EiANW are FULL of these, are we to change them all?

bresh -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/12/2008 3:16:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NeverMan quote: ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis This is definitely an issue with how I handle loaned corps. I have changed this for 1.05 so that if you enter an area with loaned corps (Where the original owner is hostile to you) then the corps reverts to the original owner thus allowing combat. This has also been done for fleets (Only if you attempt an attack). You could either wait until BETA 1.05 OR I could revert the corps back to Russian control? Your call... While I do think the "handling of the loaned corps" was a bad design decision and certainly needs to be changed, I'm not sure it's fair to change the rules in the middle of a game. I would agree if this were a BUG but it's NOT. It's not a bug, it's a bad design decision, which just makes it a bad rules. EiANW are FULL of these, are we to change them all? When game reacts in a unintended way it is a BUG. And the purpose of lending corps was not to avoid beeing attacked. So I will think this is a BUG. About lending and refusing issue, this should not be a problem if the pp-share code works correct, there is only supposed to be a PP-share if its in a combined force ,and not for single MP-owned/minor forces. Kind Regards Bresh

NeverMan -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/12/2008 3:40:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bresh quote: ORIGINAL: NeverMan quote: ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis This is definitely an issue with how I handle loaned corps. I have changed this for 1.05 so that if you enter an area with loaned corps (Where the original owner is hostile to you) then the corps reverts to the original owner thus allowing combat. This has also been done for fleets (Only if you attempt an attack). You could either wait until BETA 1.05 OR I could revert the corps back to Russian control? Your call... While I do think the "handling of the loaned corps" was a bad design decision and certainly needs to be changed, I'm not sure it's fair to change the rules in the middle of a game. I would agree if this were a BUG but it's NOT. It's not a bug, it's a bad design decision, which just makes it a bad rules. EiANW are FULL of these, are we to change them all? When game reacts in a unintended way it is a BUG. And the purpose of lending corps was not to avoid beeing attacked. So I will think this is a BUG. About lending and refusing issue, this should not be a problem if the pp-share code works correct, there is only supposed to be a PP-share if its in a combined force ,and not for single MP-owned/minor forces. Kind Regards Bresh I understand the clear purpose and I agree that this needs to be changed, it's a very bad design decision; HOWEVER, Marshall clearly stated that this IS the way he is HANDLING LOANDED CORPS, which directly implies that this IS what was intended, hence this is NOT a bug but a bad design decision.

Marshall Ellis -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/12/2008 3:51:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NeverMan quote: ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis This is definitely an issue with how I handle loaned corps. I have changed this for 1.05 so that if you enter an area with loaned corps (Where the original owner is hostile to you) then the corps reverts to the original owner thus allowing combat. This has also been done for fleets (Only if you attempt an attack). You could either wait until BETA 1.05 OR I could revert the corps back to Russian control? Your call... So, like I thought this is the way the rules are implemented, it is NOT a bug just a bad design decision. You can call it whatever you want. Bad design decision will work but it was certainly an oversite on my part to not pay enough attention to the political status of the original owner vs a player in the same area. The loaned corps function has been anything but smooth but a combined move would have been MUCH uglier (trust me).

NeverMan -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/12/2008 4:02:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis quote: ORIGINAL: NeverMan quote: ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis This is definitely an issue with how I handle loaned corps. I have changed this for 1.05 so that if you enter an area with loaned corps (Where the original owner is hostile to you) then the corps reverts to the original owner thus allowing combat. This has also been done for fleets (Only if you attempt an attack). You could either wait until BETA 1.05 OR I could revert the corps back to Russian control? Your call... So, like I thought this is the way the rules are implemented, it is NOT a bug just a bad design decision. You can call it whatever you want. Bad design decision will work but it was certainly an oversite on my part to not pay enough attention to the political status of the original owner vs a player in the same area. The loaned corps function has been anything but smooth but a combined move would have been MUCH uglier (trust me). I agree. I'm just saying that I think it's important to note it what it is. If this is the way you intended it to be, whether by oversite or not, then it's not a bug by definition. I agree that this needs to be changed and it should be an easy fix.

Marshall Ellis -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/12/2008 7:54:20 PM)
This actually is fixed in 1.05. There were several issue numbers related to this.

Jimmer -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/12/2008 9:55:33 PM)
See my post in the After Action forum. Bottom line: This is a bug, by definition. See http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bug: Informal. a defect or imperfection, as in a mechanical device, computer program, or plan; glitch: The test flight discovered the bugs in the new plane.

Marshall Ellis -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/12/2008 10:39:39 PM)
I think "bug" works LOL! Thanks Jimmer!

NeverMan -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/13/2008 12:34:49 AM)
Well, again, by your logic, since this whole game is an imperfection, then the game is a bug. Now if you want to stop arguing semantics and point me to a rule I would gladly follow.

Jimmer -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/13/2008 12:56:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis I think "bug" works�LOL! Thanks Jimmer! [:)] [:D] Well, it worked for those first programmers. Splat! [:)]

Jimmer -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/13/2008 1:09:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NeverMan Well, again, by your logic, since this whole game is an imperfection, then the game is a bug. Now if you want to stop arguing semantics and point me to a rule I would gladly follow. See the other thread (actually, I think maybe it belongs here instead). It's a negative inference. The corps is at war. The corps is then loaned. Some very specific items occur that change the various elements of status for that corps, and these are specified in the manual. For example, only the nation the corps is loaned to can supply it. Since no longer being at war with the other power is not listed, it doesn't happen. Here's the rule, for reference: quote: 6.9 Loaning Corps Allies may declare that one or more of their corps will be �loaned� for the remainder of the month, with movement and supply costs of all loaned forces being handled by the ally borrowing them. This enables allies to move and attack together against a common enemy. To use a reductio ad absurdum argument: Premise: If my negative inference above were false, then that would mean that the corps truly is not at war right now. But, the rule also doesn't say that the factors inside the corps become guard factors when loaned. If my negative inference is false, then the game could change the factors to guard factors while loaned. Everybody would agree that such a change would not be valid. But, since the same logic allows both, that means that the first premise is also invalid. Reductio ad absurdum shows a contradiction with the premise as stated. Therefore, the corps must remain at war, even though loaned (unless the rules are changed to allow it -- something I don't believe anybody wants).

NeverMan -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/13/2008 2:30:42 AM)
I read the other thread and commented there also. I'm not sure that the use of reductio ad absurdem is used correctly here, you may want to double check your usage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum "When reductio ad absurdum is in error, it is because of a fallacy in the reasoning used to arrive at the contradiction, not the act of reduction itself." Anyways, unfortunately for all of us Matrix has seemingly left many details out of the rulebook and therefore left many things up to interpretation, which is just bad.

gwheelock -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/13/2008 3:43:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis This is definitely an issue with how I handle loaned corps. I have changed this for 1.05 so that if you enter an area with loaned corps (Where the original owner is hostile to you) then the corps reverts to the original owner thus allowing combat. This has also been done for fleets (Only if you attempt an attack). You could either wait until BETA 1.05 OR I could revert the corps back to Russian control? Your call... If you could revert the corp (thats what 1.05 would do anyway) - I would much appreciate it. That way we could get on with the game. Thanks Guy

Grognot -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/13/2008 4:46:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis This is definitely an issue with how I handle loaned corps. I have changed this for 1.05 so that if you enter an area with loaned corps (Where the original owner is hostile to you) then the corps reverts to the original owner thus allowing combat. This has also been done for fleets (Only if you attempt an attack). You could either wait until BETA 1.05 OR I could revert the corps back to Russian control? Your call... To clarify, the original owner's DOW status should also be used if it's the borrower who is the phasing player, correct? Because otherwise, you run into scenarios where France loans his blockaded fleets to Spain, who merrily steers them past the British fleet (an obviously game-breaking abuse if the loaned fleets are allowed to pick up and drop off French troops while on loan...). Edit: of course, if the UK fleet moved after the Spanish fleet, he might DOW for carrying French troops just as if the borrowed fleet were neutral. There would still be problems in land operations, however, and merely being able to escape the blockade might be useful.

Jimmer -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/13/2008 4:57:38 AM)
It is used correctly. The same ruleset (logic) is applied to both situations. The one with the "guard" premise clearly fails (except, see below). Thus, the original premise also must fail. Either the rules are complete (in this situation, that is), or they are not. If they are complete, then the premise that an at-war corps cannot be attacked if loaned can only be allowed if all non-listed options are also allowed. The "guard" situation would thus fit as well ("The rules don't SAY that they can't become guard factors when loaned. ..."). The only way out for the original premise is to conclude that the guard premise is also possible (i.e. to deny that what I claim is "absurd" is not really absurd). But, I can go further and say that "The rules don't say that the factors don't become 10 morale super-infantry." A good rule of thumb when using logic against a set of rules is that anything not listed does not happen/apply/etc. While this is not an absolute, for most sets of rules, it works pretty well. Most rules are written in the form "general rule first, specific rules after that, each being an exception or clarification of the general rule". In this type of rule grouping, the logic I outlined above almost always applies, if the rules themselves are correctly written. NOTE: An argument can be made that the rules are not correctly written. Such an argument would invalidate my reductio proof. However, such an argument would also render the game unplayable. "The proof this last statement is left as an exercise for the reader." (My paraphrase of those terribly evil statements in college mathematics textbooks.)

NeverMan -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/13/2008 1:41:28 PM)
The rules don't SAY a lot of things but that doesn't mean you can use that argument for each and every one of them. You need to reread the link I gave. I don't see why we should revert when the rules clearly don't say anything about this situation and the game is implemented the way it is.

bresh -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/13/2008 3:39:22 PM)
Neverman this is a BUG. Its almost identical to one of bugs reported in 1.0-1.2, where lend corps could be used by a controlling ally�against a enemy�the owner�was not at war with. This is just the reverse effect where now they dont get attacked if the controller is not at war with the enemy. Your reference that if something doesnt follow the manual its not nessecary a BUG. Is�in this current situation is like arguing because you can not accept you might be wrong. There has been previous bugs where players could transfer factors to from stuff(dont remember how), but by doing so they generated new "Free-extra" factors. Here you argument "if its not in the manual" and you dont need to follow logic its not a bug..... Very bad Argument.. Regards Bresh

Jimmer -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/13/2008 5:27:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NeverMan The rules don't SAY a lot of things but that doesn't mean you can use that argument for each and every one of them. You need to reread the link I gave. I don't see why we should revert when the rules clearly don't say anything about this situation and the game is implemented the way it is. The link is essentially correct, but you are misinterpretting it. It is precisely because the rules "clearly don't say anything about this situation" that the logic applies and the contradiction surfaces. The premises and logic are: A: The rules do not speak to it (regarding loaned corps -- going much further in the rulebook would needlessly complicate matters), B: The game allows it C: It must be allowed If A and B, then C. In the specific case here, A = loaned corps are no longer at war, and B is clearly true. Therefore, C must be true. However, this scenario also fits: A = factors inside of a loaned corps turn into super-infantry with 10 morale, and B = an assumption for the argument (that the game allowed it). IF the game did allow this, then, we arrive at an absurd conclusion. Since B is part of the assumed scenario, this means that A must be false. On a side note, I hadn't heard of the "cubing the cube puzzle". It's obvious that their logic is correct and thus it can't be done, but the proof stated there is very elegant (this word has a different meaning to a mathematician; see definition 6 of this: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/elegant).

Jimmer -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/13/2008 5:31:53 PM)
Oh, and I LOVE the Hardy quote at the end: quote: Reductio ad absurdum, which Euclid loved so much, is one of a mathematician's finest weapons. It is a far finer gambit than any chess gambit: a chess player may offer the sacrifice of a pawn or even a piece, but a mathematician offers the game.

gwheelock -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/13/2008 7:21:55 PM)
The best argument that it is a bug is that Marshall is FIXING it in 1.05. If need be; I will wait until 1.05 is out. Then the PROGRAM will not work the way that it does now & that will REMOVE the support for your argument.

NeverMan -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/13/2008 8:43:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis This is definitely an issue with how I handle loaned corps. I have changed this for 1.05 so that if you enter an area with loaned corps (Where the original owner is hostile to you) then the corps reverts to the original owner thus allowing combat. This has also been done for fleets (Only if you attempt an attack). You could eithe This is definitely an issue with how I handle loaned corps.r wait until BETA 1.05 OR I could revert the corps back to Russian control? Your call... This is the best argument why Marshall is CHANGING (not fixing) this is 1.05. NOTICE he even says: "I have CHANGED this for 1.05..." "This is definitely an issue with how I handle loaned corps." He can back track now because it suits his needs but these things remain the same, I believe this is how he originally intended the game to work but now realizes this was a mistake and so he is CHANGING it. Are you going to take your ball and go home too man?

Marshall Ellis -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/13/2008 8:48:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NeverMan quote: ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis This is definitely an issue with how I handle loaned corps. I have changed this for 1.05 so that if you enter an area with loaned corps (Where the original owner is hostile to you) then the corps reverts to the original owner thus allowing combat. This has also been done for fleets (Only if you attempt an attack). You could eithe This is definitely an issue with how I handle loaned corps.r wait until BETA 1.05 OR I could revert the corps back to Russian control? Your call... This is the best argument why Marshall is CHANGING (not fixing) this is 1.05. NOTICE he even says: "I have CHANGED this for 1.05..." "This is definitely an issue with how I handle loaned corps." He can back track now because it suits his needs but these things remain the same, I believe this is how he originally intended the game to work but now realizes this was a mistake and so he is CHANGING it. Are you going to take your ball and go home too man? Nope! I'm not that good. I didn't look into the potential side effects of the loaned corps function deep enough and frankly we didn't test the function deep enough either. Nothing against the testers, it was just a situation that we did not see. Had I seen this side effect, I certainly would not have allowed it.

eske -> RE: France not able to attack Russia (11/13/2008 11:49:04 PM)
This seems to be an illustrative example of a futile rules discussion between players of a game. "Surpricingly" they are not able to agree who is to benefit of the game stumbling into a situation not covered by the written rules, and thus the games probably nonintended handling of that situation. Even if they try to augment their argumentaion by including nonrelevant mathematical theory or some poor hardworking employes dropping of words they wont convince anybody. To you guys playing in this game: Thanx for contributing to the improvement of this game by uncovering this jinx. Now be a bit manly about this and simply take a vote between you, how to get on with the game. Either it happened they way it did, or it must be changed before you go on. Remember to accept the majority, right. The other players also have a right to enjoy your game. The rest of us reading this forum don't really need to witness this dragging on, do we ? Apologize for dropping in ... /eske ( And please don't start hazzle me now. I probably won't read it anyway [;)])

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.609375