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: Limitation on Loaning Cossacks etc

 
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: Limitation on Loaning Cossacks etc Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Limitation on Loaning Cossacks etc - 1/26/2008 12:36:45 AM   
bresh

 

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

ORIGINAL: eske

How about leaders? Can they be loaned? Of course they would need to be attached to a loaned corps...
/eske


Not as it is, thats why i was thinking it could be bug.

If you try lend a corps with a leader. You just cant, game says (in red as for illegal actions) "leader attached" and nothing happens.

Regards
Bresh

(in reply to eske)
Post #: 121
New 1.01b Bug - 1/26/2008 4:38:31 AM   
ecn1

 

Posts: 132
Joined: 4/9/2007
Status: offline 		Okay, I patched to 1.01B tonight

Started playing the computer and came across a major new bug

1. I am at war with Austria as France
2. In February 1805 I beat charles in venice, but fail to break in and kill the garrison and siege it
3. right after the diplomacy phase of March 1805, suddenly venice becomes conquered, with me still besieging the garrison..and no, austria did not sue me for peace...

the saved file is attached




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by ecn1 -- 1/26/2008 4:41:40 AM >

(in reply to Monadman)
Post #: 122
RE: New 1.01b Bug - 1/26/2008 5:40:02 AM   
Grognot

 

Posts: 409
Joined: 12/7/2007
Status: offline 		Not bug.  Austria was in the Instability Zone during the Diplomatic Phase and had no unbesieged major-power corps there, and Venice was conquered, not a Free State.  They lost it -- to you, because you were there at the time.


(in reply to ecn1)
Post #: 123
RE: New 1.01b Bug - 1/26/2008 6:01:04 AM   
Monadman


Posts: 2085
Joined: 12/6/2005
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ecn1

Okay, I patched to 1.01B tonight

Started playing the computer and came across a major new bug

1. I am at war with Austria as France
2. In February 1805 I beat charles in venice, but fail to break in and kill the garrison and siege it
3. right after the diplomacy phase of March 1805, suddenly venice becomes conquered, with me still besieging the garrison..and no, austria did not sue me for peace...

the saved file is attached



Read section 6.6.1; subsection changing control

Unfortunately, the Austrian garrison did not repatriate so you have something here.

Richard



_____________________________


(in reply to ecn1)
Post #: 124
RE: New 1.01b Bug - 1/26/2008 8:28:13 AM   
Grognot

 

Posts: 409
Joined: 12/7/2007
Status: offline 		Attached -- saved game (game was started in 1.01 beta B) where with some positive probability (*) Austria surrenders to France.  The problem is that France and Austria aren't actually at war.


(*) Not guaranteed that Austria will surrender to anybody.  Tried save/reload 'bout eight times with the autosave after seeing it happen, and this bug manifested once more.


(in reply to Monadman)
Post #: 125
RE: New 1.01b Bug - 1/26/2008 9:47:18 AM   
Grognot

 

Posts: 409
Joined: 12/7/2007
Status: offline 		Attached -- save game from a two-player PBEM in which case client machine (1.01 beta, b) decided that *both* human players should simultaneously be replaced by AI.


Attachment (1)

(in reply to Grognot)
Post #: 126
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/26/2008 11:58:57 AM   
ndrose

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline 		Running 1.01b --

Strange problems with sea supply:

First problem: creating sea supply. Not sure whether this is an intentional change, but in 1.0 it was possible to create sea supply in a controlled port if one had a depot in a supply port and a fleet in the supply port. Doesn't seem to be sufficient in 1.01b, but I was able to create the depot when I moved a fleet to the target port ALSO. As I say, maybe that's an intentional change, but the manual doesn't seem to read that way. Clarification?

More definite problem:

Created sea supply depot in Hull. Was able to use it to supply and add factors to the Swedish corps and the Holland corps, and to place and fill a new French corps.

However, when the Swedish corps moves more than one area away, it's out of supply. The French corps and Holland corps are still in supply, though. (?!)

Also, cannot create second depot two areas away, in London ("not a valid supply chain"). In fact, when I click on the Hull depot, it says it's not in a supply chain. BUT the French and Holland corps are still getting supply from it.

Possible cause/related issue: since creating the depot, the supply port (Malmo) has been blockaded by the Russian fleet. It would make sense if that cut Hull's supply, though I'm not sure whether that's indeed supposed to happen. But in any case, presumably it shouldn't cut it for some corps and not for others, or for adding depots but not for adding factors.

File attached.

Nathan Rose

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Monadman)
Post #: 127
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/26/2008 12:07:09 PM   
zaquex


Posts: 368
Joined: 11/30/2007
From: Vastervik, Sweden
Status: offline 		If malmo is the only valid supply source and its blockaded the chain is invalid so that part seems from your description be working as it should, that you still can supply and reinforce corps on the depot seems like a bug.

(in reply to ndrose)
Post #: 128
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/26/2008 8:45:12 PM   
ndrose

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline 		I've been playing around with this sea supply thing, re-running it a couple of different ways. This is what I've found.

The blockaded fleet doesn't seem to have anything to do with it. Maybe it should block the supply line, but it doesn't seem to. Only the Sweden corps is affected, and that is true when the port is not blockaded also.

It appears to have to do with lapse of war. Sweden is a free state acquired by France when Russia declared war. Since AI Russia only takes Finland, Sweden proper always seems to end up under the permanent control of the sponsor.

However, Russia does move a corps into northern Sweden, so the war doesn't lapse until that dies of foraging.

The weird behavior of sea supply for the Swedish corps comes to an end when the war lapses, and it starts receiving supply normally.

Now, I can understand that a sponsored minor might be treated differently from a normal one, but this seems like an odd result. You can run sea supply from the minor's port (Malmo); that depot will supply your own corps up to the normal three spaces away; you can place new corps and factors on it; you can supply that minor's corps up to one space away; BUT you cannot supply that minor's corps two spaces away; and you cannot extend the supply chain from that depot. (Until the war lapses; then you can do all those things.)

Nathan Rose

(in reply to zaquex)
Post #: 129
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/27/2008 2:18:48 AM   
zaquex


Posts: 368
Joined: 11/30/2007
From: Vastervik, Sweden
Status: offline 		Malmo as blockaded is not a valid supply source for sea supply. To be able to place, reinforce or supply ANY corp from Hull shouldnt be possible as there is no valid sea supply chain.

If the war lapses the blockade is broken and the sea supply chain from Malmo becomes valid.

This should also be true of you break the blockade of Malmo or if you break the blockade of Le Havre it can serve as a supply source for Hull.

If you place a depod in Amsterdam there will be a valid sea supply lane/chain.

It seems it may take a month before the chain is activated in some of the circumstances, dont know if this is intended.


(in reply to ndrose)
Post #: 130
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/27/2008 2:38:51 AM   
ndrose

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline 		I agree with you that blockading Malmo should make the sea supply invalid. I'm just saying that, in the game, that's not having any effect. I know this because I started a new game, and did everything the same, but this time Malmo didn't get blockaded, and the situation was identical: Hull could be used to bring up new corps, place factors, and trace supply; but the Swedish corps couldn't get supply more than one area away, and the line couldn't be extended to London--until the Russo-Swedish war lapsed. That's with no blockade on Malmo at any time.

So, really there are three (or perhaps four) issues:

1) It seems to be necessary to have a fleet in both ports to create the depot; rules say only the supply port.

2) The blockade on the supply port should sever supply, but doesn't seem to.

3) Weird behavior of the depot until minor war lapses.

4(?) It could be an open question whether tracing supply from Malmo is legitimate at all, since until the war lapses it's just a sponsored minor. People used to argue about rules like this ad infinitum; the advantage of a program is that it makes a ruling--you can do what it lets you do. But right now, what it lets you do seems to be somewhat, er, idiosyncratic.


Nathan Rose

(in reply to zaquex)
Post #: 131
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) - 1/27/2008 3:33:06 AM   
delatbabel


Posts: 1252
Joined: 7/30/2006
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

#102-D15 DIPLOMACY PHASE
From: delatbabel
Problem: Once the Confederation of the Rhine is created the morale for its component corps drops back to 2 inf / 3 cav.
No file available
Status: No Confirmation yet – Pending


In this first game I have just begun a new game as Prussia, added the saxony corps, and saved. This demonstrates that the initial morale for saxony is 3 for inf and 4 for cav.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

--
Del

(in reply to Naxias)
Post #: 132
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) - 1/27/2008 3:34:02 AM   
delatbabel


Posts: 1252
Joined: 7/30/2006
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

#102-D15 DIPLOMACY PHASE
From: delatbabel
Problem: Once the Confederation of the Rhine is created the morale for its component corps drops back to 2 inf / 3 cav.
No file available
Status: No Confirmation yet – Pending


In this game I am playing Austria in 1811 and have formed the Confederation of the Rhine, note that the saxony corps is in Freiburg and has morale 2.0.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

--
Del

(in reply to delatbabel)
Post #: 133
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01) - 1/27/2008 4:29:03 AM   
ndrose

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline 		Not sure whether this is a bug, but it is unexpected....

France and Austria have just concluded peace (but are not allied or anything). France DOWs Bavaria, which goes to Spanish control.

First month, French corps fights Bavaria corps in the mountains (good set-up by the AI there). In Austria's phase, since Austria is at war with Spain, Charles moves a corps in to besiege Munich, but doesn't get a breach. (Note this is not a recurrence of the poaching bug, which I think was eliminated in the patch. This is a legitimate action on Austria's part.)

Next month, France moves Ney's corps to besiege Munich. Here's the surprise. When I get a breach, I find that the Austrians are besieging with me, and we are all under the command of Charles.

No sinister consequences--I was allowed to move into the city when the garrison was eliminated, and got the conquest. But for a minute there it was like France and Austria had combined movement.

File attached--land phase, move Ney to Munich and besiege....

Nathan Rose

Attachment (1)

(in reply to delatbabel)
Post #: 134
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/27/2008 4:53:30 AM   
zaquex


Posts: 368
Joined: 11/30/2007
From: Vastervik, Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

1) It seems to be necessary to have a fleet in both ports to create the depot; rules say only the supply port.

2) The blockade on the supply port should sever supply, but doesn't seem to.

3) Weird behavior of the depot until minor war lapses.

4(?) It could be an open question whether tracing supply from Malmo is legitimate at all, since until the war lapses it's just a sponsored minor. People used to argue about rules like this ad infinitum; the advantage of a program is that it makes a ruling--you can do what it lets you do. But right now, what it lets you do seems to be somewhat, er, idiosyncratic.




1. yes, a fleet in the supply source, Malmo in this case, should be enough.

2. yes, a blockaded port can't be a supply source for the purpose of sea supply(actually it probably could, if the depots filled all other prerequisites for sea supply and belonged to a power not at war with any blockading fleet and there was a eligible fleet not at war with the blockading fleets in either port ).

About 3 and 4

I guess it could be argued that Sweden is not under your full control. Its however not logical in that case, that Malmo could be used as a supply source for French corps, while it would be logical that the Swedish corp could.

Something is definatly wierd with the depot in Hull, it should as per AiE rules not be deemed valid in some cases and not in some. But in a way it seems to be remotly related to the same type of problem that I had in Linz that is described earlier in this thread. And I can see that it from a programers point of view can be a logical nightmare.

I'm not sure I can explain it very clearly without doing a really long post that is very technical something I would prefer not to do, but I'll try

Probably something to do with the order of testing the validity of different conditions and that the program is assuming that if a certain condition is meet its implied that a second condition must be true or false when there is actually one or more situation where this is actually not true. This means that depending on the order of the test or alternativly if it is a positive or negative test you get different results.

Whats complicating the issue here is that France is not at war with Russia so a test of the depot(French) would not be blockaded by a russian Fleet while if you test the Fleet(Swedish) it is very much blockaded.

I would like you to test to move a French Fleet to Malmo as France aint at war with Russia it shouldnt be blockaded and if my suspicion is correct the sea supply chain would be valid.




< Message edited by zaquex -- 1/27/2008 3:13:48 PM >

(in reply to ndrose)
Post #: 135
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/27/2008 5:20:57 AM   
zaquex


Posts: 368
Joined: 11/30/2007
From: Vastervik, Sweden
Status: offline 		Tried to do the test, moving the french fleet, seems not to make the chain valid, at least not immidiatly and as the war with Russia lapses before next land phase I havent managed to see if there is months delay on validation of the sea supply chain as if you would place a depot in for example amsterdam.

(in reply to zaquex)
Post #: 136
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/27/2008 5:31:59 AM   
Alex Gilbert

 

Posts: 140
Joined: 9/20/2002
From: New York City
Status: offline 		Forwarding a report of a bug in 1.01b from one of the topics below:

In PBEM with 1.01b. I am GB. France holds London, I am at war with Fr and Sp. Spain has no troops in GB.

I get the message that I must surrender to France. I sue for peace, accept an unconditional from France, but when I try to end the phase, I get the "you must surrender to France message".

I tried this again going as far as surrendering to noth France and Spain unconditionally (although clearly under the rules I am not required to surrender to spain) and even surrendering to both and accepting unconditionals, it STILL gave me the "you must surrender..." message. So we are now stuck in GB diplomacy phase.



Attachment (1)

(in reply to zaquex)
Post #: 137
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/27/2008 9:55:17 AM   
ndrose

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline 		Playing as France, 1.01b--

I've had corps in some DOWed German minors for several months without getting conquest. Haven't generally had this problem in this game--it just started.

Subsequent to attached savefile, I was able to get conquest by detaching factors to garrison, but the corps should be (and usually is) sufficient.



Attachment (1)

(in reply to Alex Gilbert)
Post #: 138
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/27/2008 9:59:02 AM   
ndrose

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline 		I don't know whether this is a bug or an intentional change, but it's definitely different from 1.0--

In the peace conditions screen, the list of fleets to remove for any given country is now the entire OOB of fleet counters, whether they're in existence on the map or not. Previously, that screen listed only those actually available to choose, as it does with the land units. (And since naval information is more public than land, I don't see the point of this change if it is intentional--so I suspect it isn't.)

No file--you can confirm this just by starting a new game. All fleet counters are listed from the beginning.

Nathan Rose

(in reply to ndrose)
Post #: 139
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/28/2008 6:59:55 AM   
moopere

 

Posts: 46
Joined: 1/26/2008
Status: offline 		Spelling Error:

Naval Phase
===========

Anti-Piracy is spelt as Anit-Piracy on mouse over.

See embedded pic




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Monadman)
Post #: 140
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/28/2008 7:12:38 AM   
Grognot

 

Posts: 409
Joined: 12/7/2007
Status: offline 		I'm trying to build a depot in area 512, immediately north of Cairo. The Egyptian corps has not moved; there is ample money in the treasury to buy depots or pay for depot supply; there is a long-standing depot in Cairo itself. Egypt has been a Russian FS since the initial Turkish DOW.

The game tell me that area 512 is not within a valid supply chain when I try to place a depot there. The game is clearly letting me supply the corps, however... ?




Attachment (1)

(in reply to moopere)
Post #: 141
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/28/2008 8:34:00 AM   
ndrose

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline 		Follow-up to post above re:non-conquest of minors with corps.

In the attached file, France begins its land phase with corps in three Italian minors sponsored by different majors. All garrisons have been previously eliminated, and the corps are standing in the rural areas of the capital cities. If you just forage through the land turn, making no moves, all three minors should fall at the end of the phase. But only Rome does.

My suspicion, based on this situation and others I've been observing, is that conquest by corps (i.e. without detaching a garrison into the city) is not working properly IF the minor's sponsor is a country to which the invading major has forced access (by prior peace treaty). In this case, both Britain and Austria, but not Spain.

If these minors were "real" possessions of the controlling powers, this would be the correct behavior--I can't conquer the possessions of a major with which I'm not at war just by moving into them by virtue of my access rights. But the program seems to be applying the same rule to sponsored minors.

Nathan Rose

Attachment (1)

(in reply to ndrose)
Post #: 142
RE: Limitation on Loaning Cossacks etc - 1/28/2008 5:01:51 PM   
ndrose

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline 		I just saw AI Austria surrender to France, even though we are not at war. I know this bug was reported in 1.01a, but thought it had been addressed. Maybe not? This is in 1.01b.

Also, when that happened, Austria went into instability and Austria's sponsored minor, which France had invaded, became French. Now, I should have gotten conquest before (see posts above), but it should NOT happen this way, I think.

Control should be transferred only if there are ENEMY forces present. France and Austria were not at war, of course, but even if they were, this sort of transfer should only happen if instability occurs WHILE they're at war, right? In this case, instability was the consequence of surrender--at which point the "war" was over. Maybe the program, having invented the war in which Austria surrendered, also invented a state of war continuing after the surrender?

I wonder whether this surrender bug is actually related to the forced access/sponsored minor bug. Is the AI reacting to imminent loss of its territory by pre-emptive surrender, whether there's a war or not?

Nathan Rose

(in reply to bresh)
Post #: 143
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/28/2008 5:04:56 PM   
ndrose

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline 		One more:

The program still doesn't recognize ceded provinces as no longer the original MP's territory. For instance, France defeats Austria, takes Moravia. Russia and Austria are at war; Russia feels free to send troops through Moravia.

Nathan Rose

(in reply to Monadman)
Post #: 144
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/28/2008 8:55:40 PM   
Grognot

 

Posts: 409
Joined: 12/7/2007
Status: offline 		Bug with lapsed war and POWs --

Spain DOW'd Morocco.  My Turks got control.  Blake crosses with a Spanish corps, gets beat-down,  and retreats into eastwards through Morocco (can't retreat across the crossing arrow).  He starves a bit, attacks the Moroccans again, and loses.  I hit him again and capture Blake.

There are no longer any Spanish forces in Morocco, so the war lapses... and Blake remains a prisoner of the Turks, who are -not- at war with the Spanish.

(in reply to ndrose)
Post #: 145
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/29/2008 8:55:53 AM   
ecn1

 

Posts: 132
Joined: 4/9/2007
Status: offline 		Excuse the cross-posting, but wasnt sure if this bug was posted here...

Naval Retreat Bug - Retreats are not made to nearest port...

Read Bug reports here:
see http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1694550


(in reply to Grognot)
Post #: 146
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/29/2008 7:27:35 PM   
Monadman


Posts: 2085
Joined: 12/6/2005
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline 		Sorry guys, the list has not been updated while I have been away. Will be returning shortly after Marshall and with any luck, but no promises as to when; we can get out a 1.01c patch that is obviously needed (what else is new).

Richard


_____________________________


(in reply to ecn1)
Post #: 147
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/30/2008 5:19:56 AM   
Jimmer

 

Posts: 1968
Joined: 12/5/2007
Status: offline 		New bug: Tracing supply through enemy corps (with friendly corps in the same area). See the attached file.

Turkey is at war with Egypt. It's the January, 1805 Turkish land phase. I've moved the Turkish Imperial cav corps to Cairo. According to the manual, the Egyptian corps next to Jerusalem should not block supply, because I have unbesieged friendly corps in that same location (see the EXCEPTION in rule 10.3.3, top of page 59). However, as you can see, the cav corps would have to forage if I left this situation as it is.

I didn't include a screenshot, but I also tried having the cav corps sitting two spaces from Jerusalem (with only the battle area between it and Jerusalem). In this case, the game was going to charge me $3 for supply.

So, what is happening is that it believes the unbesieged corps is blocking supply, even though the exception clearly applies in this instance.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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 Monadman)
Post #: 148
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/30/2008 5:33:24 AM   
Jimmer

 

Posts: 1968
Joined: 12/5/2007
Status: offline 		Check out the new math:

Turkey has the wind. 15% of 16 ships is 2.4 or 2 ships. This is correct.

However, once Spain's turn comes up, those two ships SHOULD be gone. I suspect they are not. 20% of 16 is 3.2 or 3 kills, not 4 as listed. 20% of 18 is 3.6, which would round to 4. I suspect the game is not properly honoring the wind gage in this case.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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 Jimmer)
Post #: 149
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01b) - 1/30/2008 5:37:35 AM   
Jimmer

 

Posts: 1968
Joined: 12/5/2007
Status: offline 		Someone can delete my last post. I think it is just displaying things out of sequence. The Spanish started with 20 ships, not 18, so their losses were already displayed in the totals.

This is NOT a bug.

_____________________________

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 Jimmer)
Post #: 150
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815 >> Tech Support >> RE: Limitation on Loaning Cossacks etc Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.906