Issues that were addressed in 1.01b and 1.02
Moderator: MOD_EIA
RE: Reporting Bugs (as of v.1.01)
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.
- Attachments
-
- false_bankruptcy.jpg (285.79 KiB) Viewed 307 times
--
Not a grognard.
Not an optimizer. It's a game to me, not a job.
Not a grognard.
Not an optimizer. It's a game to me, not a job.
Minor kept despite Fiasco Zone
Prussia still has Gottingen, a conquered minor, despite being in the Fiasco Zone; it should have become neutral. Lausitz should also have turned French.
- Attachments
-
- fiasco.jpg (302.68 KiB) Viewed 307 times
--
Not a grognard.
Not an optimizer. It's a game to me, not a job.
Not a grognard.
Not an optimizer. It's a game to me, not a job.
Same game -- John alone
John's being hanging out with no corps, for months.
- Attachments
-
- john.jpg (296.85 KiB) Viewed 307 times
--
Not a grognard.
Not an optimizer. It's a game to me, not a job.
Not a grognard.
Not an optimizer. It's a game to me, not a job.
It's not just John, either.
Two Prussian leaders w/o corps.
- Attachments
-
- alone.jpg (295.14 KiB) Viewed 307 times
--
Not a grognard.
Not an optimizer. It's a game to me, not a job.
Not a grognard.
Not an optimizer. It's a game to me, not a job.
Incorrect 'in city' fleet designation
Click on a fleet in a city, then click on a fleet at sea and 'in city' is still designated.
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.
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.
- Attachments
-
- fake_in_city.jpg (245.91 KiB) Viewed 307 times
--
Not a grognard.
Not an optimizer. It's a game to me, not a job.
Not a grognard.
Not an optimizer. It's a game to me, not a job.
AIs don't like getting money
Giving money to AIs still results in a nuisance roll and the possibility of them breaking the alliance.
--
Not a grognard.
Not an optimizer. It's a game to me, not a job.
Not a grognard.
Not an optimizer. It's a game to me, not a job.
-
BruceSinger
- Posts: 54
- Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 9:39 am
RE: AIs don't like getting money
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.
RE: AIs don't like getting money
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.
--
Not a grognard.
Not an optimizer. It's a game to me, not a job.
Not a grognard.
Not an optimizer. It's a game to me, not a job.
RE: AIs don't like getting money
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.
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.
- Attachments
-
- CantPickUpCorps.zip
- (294.75 KiB) Downloaded 14 times
At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?
RE: AIs don't like getting money
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
RE: AIs don't like getting money
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.
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.
--
Not a grognard.
Not an optimizer. It's a game to me, not a job.
Not a grognard.
Not an optimizer. It's a game to me, not a job.
Prisoner edge case
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.
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.
- Attachments
-
- prisoner_edge_case.jpg (76.66 KiB) Viewed 307 times
--
Not a grognard.
Not an optimizer. It's a game to me, not a job.
Not a grognard.
Not an optimizer. It's a game to me, not a job.
RE: Prisoner edge case
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
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
RE: Prisoner edge case
What do you mean by "there may be some non-critical unresolved 1.02 issues"?
RE: Prisoner edge case
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
RE: Prisoner edge case
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.)
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.)
At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?
RE: Prisoner edge case
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
RE: Prisoner edge case
You know, you guys are absolutely the most responsive computer game company I've ever dealt with. My hat's off to you!
At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?
Black Sea Trade Rule Omission
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
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
"Crisis is the rallying cry of the tyrant" -- James Madison
"Yes, you will win most battles, but if you loose to me you will loose oh so badly that it causes me pain (chortle) just to think of it" - P. Khan
"Yes, you will win most battles, but if you loose to me you will loose oh so badly that it causes me pain (chortle) just to think of it" - P. Khan
RE: Black Sea Trade Rule Omission
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