Matrix Games Forums

Hey guys:

Just wanted to pass along the release notes for 1.06 for your review!

•Version 1.06.02 (07/17/09)

Known Issues
The Microsoft help system can lock up with the in game help system if you are doing a lot of fast scrolling. This may be due to the file size but the work around is to be careful scrolling and use page up/down when you can! Microsoft is no longer utilizing this help system and this may force us to utilize the HTML help system at a later date.

Upgrading an existing game while battle files are in the battles dir can cause unit location problems! Please clean your battles dir (After completing your battles) should solve this!

Wide screen monitors with their DPI set to something other than 96DPI can cause viewing issues making the game unplayable. Please set your CRT DPI to 96.

Some systems may give you the message “Not Enough Storage Space To Process This Command” when trying to begin a new game. This can be related to memory / hard drive space. Please exit as many apps as you can then restart. It can also be related to some virus protection software compatibility issues (Trend).

Pressing a key to skip the Matrix movie from playing may not always work, depending on the machines video card buffer size.

When unit ranges are always shown, intermittently sea units are not clearing their ranges when a land unit is selected.

There may be some issues with Microsoft Vista (Screen sizing errors, game not running, etc) and if you do see any difficulties then try the following:
1. Right click on the EiANW.exe file
2. Click properties
3. Click the compatibility tab
4. Check off the compatibility mode and then switch to something other than Vista.

New Updated Manual!
- We have updated the manual for both the in-game manual and actual game manual. The actual game manual is in PDF form in the DATA\DOCS dir.

Fix List

Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars - 1.06.02
=============================================
- 0000540: [Game Bug] Editor move functions not working properly (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000538: [Game Bug] French I corps magically annihilated (marshall) - resolved.

Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars - 1.06.01
=============================================
- 0000534: [Game Bug] Can place depot in besieged port in enemy territory (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000533: [Game Bug] Can't surrender while in Civil Disorder (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000524: [Game Bug] Moving into Garrison is broken. (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000528: [Game Bug] besieged port supply broken (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000519: [Game Bug] Garrison Vanishes (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000325: [Game Bug] slipping past blockade in land phase (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000514: [Game Bug] Troops are left behind by retreating force after LOSING combat (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000516: [Game Bug] losing side retreats to enemy-occupied area (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000515: [Game Bug] siege without engaging enemy corps (marshall) - resolved.

Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars - 1.06.00
=============================================
- 0000501: [Rules Deviation] Garrisoned Depot Screend (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000499: [Rules Deviation] Game allowing violation of Rule 7.2.2 paragragh "adding factors to garrisons" (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000485: [Game Bug] Guard Corps is full one turn later. (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000498: [Rules Deviation] Russia gains PPs but has only one Cossack unit in battle (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000493: [Game Bug] GB unable to reach (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000480: [Rules Deviation] Not allowed to take militia losses in sieges (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000483: [Game Bug] Corps moved back to battle site and Leaders on board after being removed. (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000490: [Game Bug] Corps CAN forage and assault under particular circumstances (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000481: [Game Bug] Anti Guerrilla Operations do not count Free State Corps (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000491: [Game Bug] Defender can choose outflank with only one corps (marshall) - resolved.
- 0000459: [Game Bug] Loaned units creates battle in spite of enforced peace between corps owner and opponent. (marshall) - closed.
- 0000461: [Game Bug] Nelson reappearing after capture (marshall) - closed.
- 0000476: [Game Bug] the black hole of Kutais (marshall) - closed.
- 0000452: [Game Bug] Trade Totals not adding up correctly (marshall) - closed.
- 0000450: [UI Bug] medium AI setting displaying VP bonus incorrectly (marshall) - closed.
- 0000474: [Game Bug] Paris Garrison can be overstacked but troops are relocated (marshall) - closed.
- 0000475: [Game Bug] Russia conquered Denmark - the Danish fleet is still there (marshall) - closed.
- 0000477: [Game Bug] minor corps can't build depot (marshall) - closed.
- 0000258: [UI Enhancement] Slight mod to "you have factors coming" message in the econ phase. (marshall) - closed.
- 0000439: [Game Bug] Spelling Mistake on the names of the cities Ciudad Rodrigo and Ciudad Real in Spain (marshall) - closed.
- 0000410: [Game Bug] Loaned Units' maintenance in Economic Month (March, June, Sept, Dec) Pained for by Receiving Nation (marshall) - closed.
- 0000446: [Game Bug] Turkish Smyrna Corps shows strength of 0 (marshall) - closed.
- 0000326: [Game Bug] Corps landing via amphibious assault does not capture depot (marshall) - closed.
- 0000443: [Game Enhancement] Naval Production (marshall) - closed.
- 0000414: [Rules Deviation] Ottoman Not receiving Trade Income (marshall) - closed.
- 0000140: [AI Enhancement] AI Turkey is overspending on supply (marshall) - closed.
- 0000139: [UI Bug] Log showing incorrect info (marshall) - closed.
- 0000109: [Game Bug] minor game log error (marshall) - closed.
- 0000223: [PBEM Bug] Skipping Spanish Diplomacy in a PBEM game also skips resolution of the diplomatic phase (marshall) - closed.
- 0000276: [Game Bug] Guard Commitment problem with Multiple Guard nationalities present. (marshall) - closed.
- 0000067: [Game Enhancement] PBEM anti-cheating measures (marshall) - closed.
- 0000455: [Game Bug] Poland not created correctly (marshall) - closed.
- 0000076: [Rules Deviation] Naval pursuit rule is missing (marshall) - closed.
- 0000075: [Rules Deviation] Naval evasion rule is missing (marshall) - closed.
- 0000456: [Rules Deviation] Egypt & possibly other Ottoman states can't be conquered or ceded (marshall) - closed.
- 0000460: [Game Bug] corps in city auto forages when it shouldn't (marshall) - closed.
- 0000113: [AI Enhancement] AI should not DoW in an economic month (marshall) - closed.
- 0000172: [AI Enhancement] AI Siege decisions (too small attacking force) (marshall) - closed.
- 0000144: [UI Enhancement] Inspecting a stack of enemy naval units (marshall) - closed.
- 0000237: [Rules Deviation] Spain Losing 2 PP per Phase when Madrid is occupied (marshall) - closed.
- 0000121: [Rules Deviation] Russia recieves normal income, even though St. Petersburg is enemy occupied (marshall) - closed.
- 0000148: [AI Enhancement] AI doesn't run economics for its minors (marshall) - closed.
- 0000457: [Game Bug] Swedish navy doubled (marshall) - closed.
- 0000137: [UI Enhancement] Make units auto forage as default rather than supply (marshall) - closed.
- 0000462: [Game Bug] Lend units breaks sieges and prevents forage rolls (marshall) - closed.
- 0000036: [UI Enhancement] Skip non-required naval phases (marshall) - closed.
- 0000014: [UI Enhancement] Need to add xfer messages for garrison transfers telling the player where they went. (marshall) - closed.
- 0000038: [AI Bug] Austria ineffectively DoW Lausitz (marshall) - closed.
- 0000134: [Game Bug] part of Anapa garrison camps in mountains (marshall) - closed.
- 0000084: [UI Bug] Alliance bug with text (marshall) - closed.
- 0000085: [AI Enhancement] AI knowing corps factor count (marshall) - closed.
- 0000086: [AI Enhancement] AI Russian attack on Sweden (marshall) - closed.
- 0000400: [AI Bug] Russian AI "cannot find path?" (marshall) - closed.
- 0000299: [Game Bug] GB Corps teleport back to London from France (marshall) - closed.
- 0000119: [Game Bug] Corps garrisoning city in enemy province is forced to fight a field combat by arriving enemy corps (marshall) - closed.
- 0000378: [Game Bug] DOW rules violation - Forced War Declarations 6.6.3 (marshall) - closed.
- 0000390: [Game Enhancement] PP Cost for DoWs should be reduced to 3pp (marshall) - closed.
- 0000409: [AI Enhancement] AI is staling out in long term wars and produces little aggression / action. (marshall) - closed.
- 0000407: [AI Bug] AI Bonus VP not quite right.. (marshall) - closed.
- 0000406: [Game Bug] Turkey Naval skipping Blockade ?? (marshall) - closed.
- 0000403: [AI Enhancement] AI needs to manage freestates with no corps better. (marshall) - closed.
- 0000309: [Game Bug] free state not recieving trade $ (marshall) - closed.
- 0000405: [Rules Deviation] Depots have intrinsic Tactical Rating (marshall) - closed.
- 0000035: [AI Enhancement] France AI too timid, setup awry (marshall) - closed.
- 0000413: [AI Enhancement] Guard Commitment / Tactical Options (marshall) - closed.
- 0000399: [Game Bug] minor corps in certain situations withdraws but surrenders (marshall) - closed.
- 0000417: [Game Bug] Control of loaned corps not returned (marshall) - closed.
- 0000419: [Game Bug] France Conquers its own Minor (marshall) - closed.
- 0000424: [Game Bug] Transfer of Ottoman factors between Corps (marshall) - closed.
- 0000415: [Game Bug] Minor Country conquered by an Ally (marshall) - closed.
- 0000422: [Game Bug] Editor not saving scenarios properly (marshall) - closed.
- 0000384: [Game Bug] Toulon Port in undergunned (marshall) - closed.
- 0000089: [Game Enhancement] Scenario Editor Request (marshall) - closed.
- 0000316: [UI Bug] Talk to AI Allies button (delatbabel) - closed.

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis
...
Pressing a key to skip the Matrix movie from playing may not always work, depending on the machines video card buffer size.
...

It is also dependent upon main system memory size as well. More accurately, it works if the last instance of the game has not had the memory image of the game removed. So:

If you add memory to your system, it works more reliably and will work over a longer period of time. This is dependent on how much memory-intensive stuff you do on the system. Guild Wars will fully-utilize 2 GB of memory in a very short period of time, thus preventing the "skip the splash screen" from working. But, you can go back and forth between Civilization IV and EiANW almost indefinitely without losing it. NOTE: There is roughly a 2 GB limit to the value of "more memory" in situations like this. 3 or 4 GB doesn't buy you much more than 2 GB does.

If it hasn't been very long since you've played EiANW, it usually works better.

Something I've been meaning to do, but haven't tried yet, is partitioning off a portion of memory just for EiANW. If anybody has tried this, I would like to know the results.

I still wonder, when we will see a better (hidden die rolls), in PBM battles.
Can only wonder how 1 player always rolls 5&6 vs 1&2's when defending.
Same for those very lucky blockade runs.
Also the "exclude" quick 1 corps defend combats from beeing quick.

Could it just ad a case sensitive about not showing die roll, after chit select, but at casulties instead for defender?


Regards
Bresh

If someone is reloading these files then a message will appear telling you this???
ALSO, if anyone is tampering with the file then it will ALSO give you a message indicating this.

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

If someone is reloading these files then a message will appear telling you this???
ALSO, if anyone is tampering with the file then it will ALSO give you a message indicating this.

I fail to see the reason why to show the rolls ? Unless to leave it to the players to run arbitarys, instead of letting the game handle this.

To me this is a very important part of the game.

Im sure its avoidable somehow to show reloads, havent tested it deeply yet. But i have seen signs, that leaves me question the reload is foolproof.

But why leave it possible to reload, way better would be hide rolls so nothing would be gained from any reloads.
If the only time a player saw rolls+chits is when taking casulties or seeing final result im guessing you use some flag to keep track of whos up during battle(all rolls hidden at other "phases of the battle" withdraw/outflank/reinf/gd.commit/pursuit/combat rounds).
Hiding chit/rolls could be simple like setting textcolour equal to background colour, for those boxes.




Another thing, I remember requesting game showing what patch a file was submitted with, did you implement this yet ?

Regards
Bresh

Hiding the rolls? I'm confused? Hide what rolls from who?
Hide attacker rolls from defender until defender actually rolls?

Do you mean the turn files being tagged with a version number? If so then no we have not yet.

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

Hiding the rolls? I'm confused? Hide what rolls from who?
Hide attacker rolls from defender until defender actually rolls?

Do you mean the turn files being tagged with a version number? If so then no we have not yet.

When i write hiding rolls, its primary combat rolls (each round), as far as i recall the only time during battle attacker sees the rolls before his opponent, is the pursuit roll(if he won), or during siege battles.

I should not need to go through the steps of how battle occour, you should know them better than most.
I dont recall the GDcommit/reinf never used it yet in pbm games, so i write those where i belive they are choosen.

Anyway.
1. Attacker selects battle (in his battle-phase), selects chit (dont recall if he splits force in case of outflank), then sends the battlefile to the defender, think also he decides if he wanna try reinf+Gd commit.
2.A. Defender loads the battle, selects chit, gd commit/reinf.
2.B Defender selects done game rolls 1.round of battle, game shows all 1.round rolls to defender. (1. combat-round rolls executed).
3. Defender sends battlefile to attacker.
4. Attacker take casulties first, then he selects again if Reinf/gd.
5. Attacker sends battlefile to defender.
6.A Defender selects his casulties for 1.round, after he can chose reinf/gd-commit.
7.B Game shows results for all dice 2.round to defender.
8. defender sends battlefile to Attacker who selects caulties etc same as 4.
Etc.
XX. Winner selects if pursuit, and sees the roll.
XX. B. Winner sends battlefile to the other for casulties. (dont know if 0 pursuit still requires file exchange).

The "B"'s are not required its "extra". As far as i can think there is no reason to show them to the side where game rolls the dice, since its always the other player who needs to act on the roll.

Anyway from gamedesigning i do belive "a shown reload" can be evaded, I will try look into this. Though hiding "B"'s would do that obsolete.


To bad, about the patch version number,not yet shown in files. I think we discussed this around 1.2k-1.4 since 1 player using different patch can also add bugs, and if file showed player used other patch some errors might be user-errors.
As a addup question, could 1 player use older official patch than the rest without it showing ?.


Regards
Bresh

Bresh:

OK, I understand the steps but if you get a file back with a "6" rolled and a "5 reload" notice then is that not enough to vote and boot them out?

The version is in the file but not displayed. I could maybe add an option "Rigid version control" which would force all to have the aame version number as the Host?

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

Bresh:

OK, I understand the steps but if you get a file back with a "6" rolled and a "5 reload" notice then is that not enough to vote and boot them out?

The version is in the file but not displayed. I could maybe add an option "Rigid version control" which would force all to have the aame version number as the Host?

Marshall, even if a reload get caught say 1 reload, and I still need to test my theory(To many sleepless nights lately), about the flaw in the reload-counting.

But why have the players need to act as arbitarys, its after all a pc-game that could easy remove any doubts ?
Why not code it, pure and simple.
If X-is acting player to take casulties show chit(round=1)/dice, else dont diplay battle Boxes "B".

Yes, a "rigid Version control" could help some i think.

Regards
Bresh

Bresh:

I have found through experience that (Especially with this monster) it is better to let the players decide another's fate through arbitration as opposed to the game deciding. You're certainly correct that I could do this myself and prevent reloading period but this is a bit extreme. I'm not sure where the answer is here maybe somewhere in between???

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

Bresh:

I have found through experience that (Especially with this monster) it is better to let the players decide another's fate through arbitration as opposed to the game deciding. You're certainly correct that I could do this myself and prevent reloading period but this is a bit extreme. I'm not sure where the answer is here maybe somewhere in between???

Did some testing. 1.0505. Was some single-cps battles.
Results send to you.

What I dislike about the design(showing dice/chit) mostly is that whenever someone in game gets "a very lucky stribe", I get will get substicious(or how its spelled), even more now than before...

That really hurts the game, and im sure im not the only one !! Had players quit because of the weak security.


Regards
Bresh

Agree with bresh, security is key to enjoy PBEM and I am seeing this in a couple of games when after several months of playing we are in danger to stop because of suspicion about the "luck" of just one of the players. This can easily push toward the cycle: lots of effort in months of play->game ruined by a suspicious result in a key battle/blockade battle->it's not worth starting another game if PBEM is not secure. And this is a pity because we are getting to a point where I can see the game becoming more stable and enjoyable.
 
Maybe some players can have the luxury of having a trusted and dedicated group of people but many of us do not. The reload feature can be helpful but it is always difficult to understand if one or two reloads amount to cheating and this is all you need to win a key battle or run that key blockade. Even if there is not cheating a very good result may generate suspicion if the players know the system is not secure and this does not help in terms of game enjoyement. I think the system should be something like (I am sure more experienced players can elaborate on that and make it more detailed): 
[ol][*]attacker select chit / sends battlefile
[*]defender select chit / sends battlefile
[*]chits/die rolls of the previous round are shown to the attacker which selects guard commitment/reinforcement etc for next round
[*]chits/die rolls of the previous round are shown to the defender which selects guard commitment/reinforcement etc for next round
[*]3-4 is repeated until defender or attacker breaks.[/ol]

One big problem with counting reloads beside that the some player might find a way around.
What about the player who gets forced to reload once, cause of some bug/crash/power etc legitimate reason, now if he got Extemly lucky(lets say he needed enemy roll 1 and himself 6), and it happend in that reload, he might as well quit the game, since all will think he might have been cheating...
To me security is a high ranking issue.

Regards
Bresh

The reload count was installed to show you potential patterns of certain players reloading all of the time and getting high numbers of 6s! That is why I do not prevent but simply notify and let the players decide.
I'm not opposed to the hiding of the rolls. It does sound like it is worth looking into.