Page 10 of 39
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 4:10 pm
by JJKettunen
ORIGINAL: Chliperic
Moreover, an AI has the right to do silly or sypid things from time to time. even some real Generals did the same, [:D]
Very true!
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 5:55 pm
by Chilperic
OK.Objective regions must be garrisoned by regular units, not militia. A bug of the official version.
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 6:52 pm
by JJKettunen
Thanks for the info!
One would think that militia units are perfect for garrisoning purposes. [;)]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 7:43 pm
by Chilperic
ORIGINAL: Keke
Thanks for the info!
One would think that militia units are perfect for garrisoning purposes. [;)]
Only objectives are affected. Others cities may be garrisoned by militia without problem. In you game, this has cost you certainly several hundred of VPs.
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 8:44 pm
by Nikel
ORIGINAL: Chliperic
Very interesting indeed. Many thanks [&o] and good holidays
Good [:)]
Just a small trip, tonight in Porto, tomorrow in Viana do Castelo and then back to Galicia in Spain for some sea food [;)]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 8:47 pm
by Nikel
ORIGINAL: Chliperic
OK.Objective regions must be garrisoned by regular units, not militia. A bug of the official version.
In the manual, p.13 it is said:
Important Note: In order to gain credit for a captured Objective or Strategic city, a player must garrison the
location with a regular unit (i.e. no Irregulars, Militias) if the region has a Loyalty rating less than 51%.
Regarding the german help option you added, you are using a graphic already available (Brest-Litovsk), is not better to use a new and different graphic?
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 8:53 pm
by JJKettunen
ORIGINAL: Nikel
In the manual, p.13 it is said:
Important Note: In order to gain credit for a captured Objective or Strategic city, a player must garrison the
location with a regular unit (i.e. no Irregulars, Militias) if the region has a Loyalty rating less than 51%.
Doesn't explain me getting no points for Ekaterinodar and Novorossijsk though - loyalty over 51%.
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 9:05 pm
by Chilperic
Yes but the manual is often not accurate [:D]. Thanks Nikel, I should have looked in the rulebook first. Now it's possible the rule is relaxed whatever the Loyalty or it is a bug restrained to this peculiar point.
I've not had time to search for a better option picture ( I did for Semyonov). This picture isn't used as far I know in the GC. But if you find a better one...[:)]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 9:06 pm
by JJKettunen
ORIGINAL: Keke
ORIGINAL: Nikel
In the manual, p.13 it is said:
Important Note: In order to gain credit for a captured Objective or Strategic city, a player must garrison the
location with a regular unit (i.e. no Irregulars, Militias) if the region has a Loyalty rating less than 51%.
Doesn't explain me getting no points for Ekaterinodar and Novorossijsk though - loyalty over 51%.
I'll be damned... both are actually below 51%... Maybe I should read the manual more often?
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 9:11 pm
by Chilperic
ORIGINAL: Keke
ORIGINAL: Keke
ORIGINAL: Nikel
In the manual, p.13 it is said:
Important Note: In order to gain credit for a captured Objective or Strategic city, a player must garrison the
location with a regular unit (i.e. no Irregulars, Militias) if the region has a Loyalty rating less than 51%.
Doesn't explain me getting no points for Ekaterinodar and Novorossijsk though - loyalty over 51%.
I'll be damned... both are actually below 51%... Maybe I should read the manual more often?
So not a bug but a feature working as intended. Good news. [:)] I should re read the rulebook too [8|]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 9:22 pm
by Nikel
Confused right now, bug or not? [:'(]
Ekaterinodar is garrisoned by a light but regular unit, is it not?
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 9:24 pm
by Chilperic
ORIGINAL: Nikel
Confused right now, bug or not? [:'(]
Ekaterinodar is garrisoned by a light but regular unit, is it not?
Manual must be uncomplete , partially unaccurate. Good pick indeed, light infantry seems to be unfitted for garrisoning objectives too. Personnaly, I can live with.BTW, it gives one more reason to use corruption and authorize multipartism options [:)]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 9:30 pm
by JJKettunen
ORIGINAL: Chliperic
ORIGINAL: Nikel
Confused right now, bug or not? [:'(]
Ekaterinodar is garrisoned by a light but regular unit, is it not?
Manual must be uncomplete , partially unaccurate. Good pick indeed, light infantry seems to be unfitted for garrisoning objectives too. Personnaly, I can live with.BTW,
it gives one more reason to use corruption and authorize multipartism options [:)]
Do note that I used them very early in the game. They didn't disappear and from earlier experience I knew that I could use them anytime as long as there were EPs enough available. Because I knew it wasn't WAD, I didn't do it. Sorry for not reporting this earlier.
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 9:31 pm
by Chilperic
ORIGINAL: Keke
ORIGINAL: Chliperic
ORIGINAL: Nikel
Confused right now, bug or not? [:'(]
Ekaterinodar is garrisoned by a light but regular unit, is it not?
Manual must be uncomplete , partially unaccurate. Good pick indeed, light infantry seems to be unfitted for garrisoning objectives too. Personnaly, I can live with.BTW,
it gives one more reason to use corruption and authorize multipartism options [:)]
Do note that I used them very early in the game. They didn't disappear and from earlier experience I knew that I could use them anytime as long as there were EPs enough available. Because I knew it wasn't WAD, I didn't do it. Sorry for not reporting this earlier.
Thanks, I will look at. [:)] Finally a bug. Mine. [:D]
And fixed. Next version [8D]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 9:46 pm
by Nikel
Thanks to Keke your plans to continue modding Struggle for a Vast Future in Augusts are somewhat ruined [;)]
or are you doing both in parallel? Good night to both of you [:)]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 9:55 pm
by JJKettunen
G'night. [:)]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 10:11 pm
by Chilperic
ORIGINAL: Keke
G'night. [:)]
Let's hope you will not dream about Voroshilov taking the right decision [:D]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 10:12 pm
by Chilperic
ORIGINAL: Nikel
Thanks to Keke your plans to continue modding Struggle for a Vast Future in Augusts are somewhat ruined [;)]
or are you doing both in parallel? Good night to both of you [:)]
I hope not. AACW is simpler than RUS( smaller map, better design of the original game and part of the mod yet done ).
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 10:24 pm
by Nikel
Oops, still here, very late, though 1 hour less here [:)]
RUS was not awarded, both for WitE
http://www.alanemrich.com/CSR_pages/res ... eYear=2010
Now good night, really [:)]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 10:30 pm
by Chilperic
For graphism, I prefer those of RUS, but WiTE are excellent too.