User avatar
Pocus
Posts: 25423
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:37 am
Location: Lyon (France)

Birth of Rome quick fix patch - Public Beta

Fri Feb 01, 2013 8:11 pm

Hi everybody,

Here are a few additions to Birth of Rome 1.02a. It is updated from the first one posted 5 days ago

This small patch is a public beta patch, so although we don't expect issues, we can't rule them out completely. If you prefer to wait for an official patch, then don't download and install this file.

http://downloads.ageod-forum.com/AJE/BOR_Quickfix_v1.02a.rar


List of QF 1.02 Changes

************
NEW EXE
- fixing a rare battle result bug in Assaults
- fixing blockade of straits

***********
NEW FEATURE

[color="#FF8C00"]BOR becomes AJE-aware![/color]
Birth of Rome is now capable of using the AJE scenarios, if you installed it anywhere on your PC! Both games remain standalone, meaning you don't need to buy AJE to play BOR scenarios, but now, if you bought AJE, you only need to launch BOR to get the scenarios of both games!


*************
LANGUAGE
German translation is now available. If you want to switch to German, you can do this by manually changing the following
inside the General.opt file

-------------

2. *** General interface choices ***
// language (0: English; 1: Francais; 2: Espanol; 3: Deutsche)

Language = 0 ==> write 3 instead of 0 to obtain German

--------------

**************
UI
- Fix to Military decisions icon (the Eagle) glitch in some lower resolutions


**************
MAP
- small tweak to RGD and siege icons placements in Rhegium region

**************
SCENARIOS AND DB FIXES

All scenarios:
- Praefectus Urbi leader added to Rome Garrison
- Facilitated recruitment of Dictator by SPQ if controlled by AI
- several models, units and factions DB corrections
- Various texts corrections

Samnites scenario
- Fix Volsinii as samnite objective (F7 list)
- Fix the removal of consul Megellus in -290
- Fix to the samnite spies option
- some small fixes to the Senones alliance and Gallic withdrawal options (including increased probability of Samnite AI choosing Senones alliance)and the Tarentum at War event
- Added Magister to Lucanian army in the beginning of the scenario
- Added replacements to Umbrian units
- Fix to the Lin Teata legions option (now it will bring 2 legions and the total force pool will be 4)
- several missing and erroneous messages corrected


Senones scenario
- corrected objective cities list if SPQ takes option to go to war with the Cenomanii
- corrected cost of Etruscan alliance for Senones
- fix to Cenomanii related options and events
- small fix to Insubrian suport events

Pyrrhus scenario:
- fix the double consuls bug
- fix error in SPQ regional decisions
- tweak to results of Pyrhus answering to Syracusae call for help and related events and options


FPW264 scenario:
- Carthaginian army fixed in Africa for 18 turns

FPW scenarios (264 and 256):
- reduced heavily the probability of regeneration of the mercenary recruitment options (IN EVALUATION)
- fix the double consuls bug
- fix the Xanthippus of Sparta option
- fix to Baal sacrifice and War declaration by Carthage options
- small fixes to the Numidian at War replacements and the Attack on Massalia events


Mercenary War scenario:
- Gisco fixed in Tunis
- fix to various options
- fix to Roman Blackmail on Sardinia and Corsica multichoice event

************

Edited by Philthib - February 7th, 2013
Image


Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."

vaalen
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1226
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 8:48 pm

Fri Feb 01, 2013 8:18 pm

This is terrific, to have some of these problems already fixed. Can you use this patch with an ongoing game?

Please let me know, as I am truly enjoying my current game of the first Punic War, and would hate to lose it.

User avatar
PhilThib
Posts: 13705
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:21 pm
Location: Meylan (France)

Fri Feb 01, 2013 8:22 pm

The patch is save compatible...what changes are some events and options, so it will probably fix those not yet occured but won't for those which already happened.
Image

anibal barca
Lieutenant
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 5:55 pm

Sat Feb 02, 2013 2:32 pm

i am playing a campaign multiplayer with the birth of rome with other player.
this patch is compatible with the save game of this campaing?,thanks.

User avatar
PhilThib
Posts: 13705
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:21 pm
Location: Meylan (France)

Sun Feb 03, 2013 10:08 am

Yes, the patch is save compatible
Image

User avatar
Franciscus
Posts: 4571
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 8:31 pm
Location: Portugal

Sun Feb 03, 2013 10:48 pm

Due to an oversight and contrary to what is stated, in the FPW 264 scenario the cartthaginian african army is locked for 10 turns and not yet for 18 turns. This will be corrected when the patch becomes final.

Regards

bob.
General
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 6:56 pm

Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:11 pm

Please also remember to fix the strait crossing bug ;)

User avatar
Franciscus
Posts: 4571
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 8:31 pm
Location: Portugal

Mon Feb 04, 2013 12:02 am

bob. wrote:Please also remember to fix the strait crossing bug ;)


Yes, it was already identified and fixed by Pocus. :thumbsup:

Will be on the official patch

Thank you

numahr
Sergeant
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:11 pm

Wed Feb 06, 2013 11:00 am

Is there any estimate for the date of release of the patch? It is difficult to start any campaign without the fix on the Messina strait and the possibility to attach leaders to units...

User avatar
PhilThib
Posts: 13705
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:21 pm
Location: Meylan (France)

Wed Feb 06, 2013 11:41 am

We shall post a modified QuickFix today
Image

squidelica
Sergeant
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:14 pm
Location: London

Wed Feb 06, 2013 6:07 pm

promises, promises......

User avatar
PhilThib
Posts: 13705
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:21 pm
Location: Meylan (France)

Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:23 pm

...and delays, usual with testing...

Now updated, check post #1 above :coeurs:
Image

squidelica
Sergeant
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:14 pm
Location: London

Thu Feb 07, 2013 4:18 pm

awesome thanks :)

bob.
General
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 6:56 pm

Thu Feb 07, 2013 5:24 pm

Strait crossing bug Messana-Rhegium still not fixed :(

EDIT: I just read that you fixed it so maybe I am doing something wrong? Here's screen from my problem:

http://www.abload.de/img/straitcrossingw1jpu.jpg

NOTE: This is DIFFERENT from the problem I had before the patch so you did something ;) Before you could see the Roman army march to Messana, now it stays in Rhegium during the turn but is beamed to Messana at the start of new turn.

User avatar
Franciscus
Posts: 4571
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 8:31 pm
Location: Portugal

Thu Feb 07, 2013 5:47 pm

bob. wrote:Strait crossing bug Messana-Rhegium still not fixed :(


Are you sure ?

Remember, if no enemy navy is blocking the strait, it can be crossed without problem. But if the strait is blocked by enemy navy now it should prevent the crossing

If this is not the case, please post a save with the problem

Regards

User avatar
Franciscus
Posts: 4571
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 8:31 pm
Location: Portugal

Thu Feb 07, 2013 5:52 pm

bob. wrote:Strait crossing bug Messana-Rhegium still not fixed :(

EDIT: I just read that you fixed it so maybe I am doing something wrong? Here's screen from my problem:

http://www.abload.de/img/straitcrossingw1jpu.jpg

NOTE: This is DIFFERENT from the problem I had before the patch so you did something ;) Before you could see the Roman army march to Messana, now it stays in Rhegium during the turn but is beamed to Messana at the start of new turn.




You are playing as CAR vs Roman AI ? There is a one shot option called Night crossing that "beams" all armies that are in Rhegium to Messana, at a cost, and only one time in the game.

If you have doubts, please post a save, we will check it out ASAP

Regards

numahr
Sergeant
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:11 pm

Thu Feb 07, 2013 5:54 pm

@ bob. : remember Rome has the possibility once to cross by night. I guess the effect would be close to what you experienced: you don't see them embarking... and in the morning, surprise here they are. So in essence this should happen twice to be labeled as a bug; or you should investigate the turn file of Rome to check whether they are using the decision, in which case their stealthy move is legitimate.

Edit: beaten to it!

bob.
General
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 6:56 pm

Thu Feb 07, 2013 5:55 pm

Oh damn that is embarassing I don't enjoy playing as much as Rome so I totally forgot that they have this option...

EDIT: They were able to do it on the first turn, though. Is that WAD because when I start as Romans I don't see the option the first turn?

User avatar
Florent
Posts: 1744
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 10:09 pm
Location: Mirambeau

Thu Feb 07, 2013 6:16 pm

Available on turn 2.

bob.
General
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 6:56 pm

Thu Feb 07, 2013 6:19 pm

Hmm.. so how come AI Romans are able to do it on the first turn? I tried it five times in a row and they always crossed it.
Here's the latest script report, I hope that's the right file. [ATTACH]21545[/ATTACH]
Attachments

[The extension txt has been deactivated and can no longer be displayed.]


User avatar
Florent
Posts: 1744
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 10:09 pm
Location: Mirambeau

Thu Feb 07, 2013 6:23 pm

Because the IA Ignores the night crossing but is at a risk doing so...

Early in the playtest a Roman army departing from Rome needed 3 or 4 turns to reach Sicily against ONE turn now THUS i suppose that a change is certainly needed to reflect this.

As a human player, be sure that your cohesion is OK before crossing as a Battle(s) is waiting for you.

bob.
General
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 6:56 pm

Thu Feb 07, 2013 6:25 pm

OK thanks for the explanation. I find it not so bad right now the AI needs a boost anyway I just wanted to make sure that I am doing nothing wrong or that this isn't a bug :)

User avatar
Franciscus
Posts: 4571
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 8:31 pm
Location: Portugal

Thu Feb 07, 2013 6:29 pm

bob. wrote:Hmm.. so how come AI Romans are able to do it on the first turn? I tried it five times in a row and they always crossed it.
Here's the latest script report, I hope that's the right file. [ATTACH]21545[/ATTACH]


Checking your scripts, the AI is indeed using the Night crossing option. In fact it is playable by the AI one turn earlier than a human (so, on first turn, for a human player on 2nd turn)...we can fix this (both available on first turn or from turn 2), not sure if needed.

Opinions and or inputs ?

User avatar
Florent
Posts: 1744
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 10:09 pm
Location: Mirambeau

Thu Feb 07, 2013 6:46 pm

Turn 1 has a risk of low cohesion and thus the turn 2 will be a defeat/disaster.
Turn 2 should see a Roman army rested and ready to cross.

Nevertheless a verification is certainly needed to check the situation of a roman army crossing in turn 1.

jimwinsor2
Lieutenant
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 12:07 am

Thu Feb 07, 2013 6:53 pm

I know this may be a radical solution, but has anyone considered getting rid of this crossing arrow problem by just getting rid of the crossing arrow?

A crossing arrow is common in the straits of Messena in countless wargames depicting Italy. However, does one really belong in AJE/BOR? Was there really a fleet of ferries that existed there in ancient times, sufficient to transport huge armies at a months notice?

Someone has already mentioned the historical example of Spartacus' army trapped there, and that episode seems to argue the answer to the above question is "no".

Maybe it would be better to just get rid of the crossing arrow, make it so any army wishing to cross over has to do it the hard way, load themselves onto a fleet, and manually sail themselves there. We could place a transport or two in Rhegium/Messena to facilitate this if need be.

Now an enemy fleet can quite naturally interdict a crossing. In addition, someone wanting to cross, if they don't have naval superiority and are feeling desperate and/or daring, can try to "run" the blockade using transports set to Passive + Avoid Combat. Is it risky? Sure. But that's how this historical night crossing was anyways, right? Thus we wont even need this Night Crossing rule, the natural game mechanics have got this one covered.

User avatar
Philippe
AGEod Veteran
Posts: 754
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: New York

Thu Feb 07, 2013 7:17 pm

I don't know the game well enough to comment on game mechanics, but the preceding post seems emminently sensible.

The straits of Messina are, it is true, relatively narrow.

But they contained one of the nastiest bodies of water that existed anywhere in antiquity.

Scylla and Charybdis, beleived to be located in that strait, were a notorious menace in Homer's day, but apparently weakened over the centuries. As recently as the 18th century the whirlpools (maelstroms) in the straits of Messina were capable of spinning a large warship right around (can't remember the exact size, but the citation is somewhere in Ernle Bradford). I have only sailed through that particular body of water once in my life, but it was especially noisy because every plate in the ship was creaking madly from the torsion and the pressure. In a small boat I can imagine that it would be quite scary.

Crossing the straits of Messina on a fleet of flat-bottomed rafts (or whatever double-arrows is supposed to represent) would be an extremely unpleasant undertaking, and would probably have involved taking casualties, even if the whirlpools were at today's feeble strength. It would most certainly require full-blown naval transport, the only difference being that your troops wouldn't be exposed to the dangers of a sea-crossing for very long.

User avatar
Ebbingford
Posts: 6121
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:22 pm
Location: England

Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:17 am

[quote="jimwinsor2"]I know this may be a radical solution, but has anyone considered getting rid of this crossing arrow problem by just getting rid of the crossing arrow?

A crossing arrow is common in the straits of Messena in countless wargames depicting Italy. However, does one really belong in AJE/BOR? Was there really a fleet of ferries that existed there in ancient times, sufficient to transport huge armies at a months notice?

Someone has already mentioned the historical example of Spartacus' army trapped there, and that episode seems to argue the answer to the above question is "no".[quote="jimwinsor2"]



+1 :thumbsup:
"Umbrellas will not be opened in the presence of the enemy." Duke of Wellington before the Battle of Waterloo, 1815.

"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.


Image

User avatar
Ebbingford
Posts: 6121
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:22 pm
Location: England

Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:19 am

jimwinsor2 wrote:I know this may be a radical solution, but has anyone considered getting rid of this crossing arrow problem by just getting rid of the crossing arrow?

A crossing arrow is common in the straits of Messena in countless wargames depicting Italy. However, does one really belong in AJE/BOR? Was there really a fleet of ferries that existed there in ancient times, sufficient to transport huge armies at a months notice?

Someone has already mentioned the historical example of Spartacus' army trapped there, and that episode seems to argue the answer to the above question is "no".

Maybe it would be better to just get rid of the crossing arrow, make it so any army wishing to cross over has to do it the hard way, load themselves onto a fleet, and manually sail themselves there. We could place a transport or two in Rhegium/Messena to facilitate this if need be.

Now an enemy fleet can quite naturally interdict a crossing. In addition, someone wanting to cross, if they don't have naval superiority and are feeling desperate and/or daring, can try to "run" the blockade using transports set to Passive + Avoid Combat. Is it risky? Sure. But that's how this historical night crossing was anyways, right? Thus we wont even need this Night Crossing rule, the natural game mechanics have got this one covered.



+1 :thumbsup:
"Umbrellas will not be opened in the presence of the enemy." Duke of Wellington before the Battle of Waterloo, 1815.



"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.





Image

User avatar
Franciscus
Posts: 4571
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 8:31 pm
Location: Portugal

Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:55 am

jimwinsor2 wrote:I know this may be a radical solution, but has anyone considered getting rid of this crossing arrow problem by just getting rid of the crossing arrow?

A crossing arrow is common in the straits of Messena in countless wargames depicting Italy. However, does one really belong in AJE/BOR? Was there really a fleet of ferries that existed there in ancient times, sufficient to transport huge armies at a months notice?

Someone has already mentioned the historical example of Spartacus' army trapped there, and that episode seems to argue the answer to the above question is "no".

Maybe it would be better to just get rid of the crossing arrow, make it so any army wishing to cross over has to do it the hard way, load themselves onto a fleet, and manually sail themselves there. We could place a transport or two in Rhegium/Messena to facilitate this if need be.

Now an enemy fleet can quite naturally interdict a crossing. In addition, someone wanting to cross, if they don't have naval superiority and are feeling desperate and/or daring, can try to "run" the blockade using transports set to Passive + Avoid Combat. Is it risky? Sure. But that's how this historical night crossing was anyways, right? Thus we wont even need this Night Crossing rule, the natural game mechanics have got this one covered.



There is one problem: the SPQ AI would have an even harder time to ever be able to reach Messana (and I think that is one of the reasons for the strait link existence)

Cordell
Sergeant
Posts: 98
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 9:36 am

Fri Feb 08, 2013 11:50 am

Minor bug :D on't know if someone repport it: Samnits war, in french version the samnits stockpiles appears as Roman Force when spotted.(no gameplay consequences anyway)
Je ne sais pas si quelqu'un l'a signalé dans la version française scénario guerre samnites, les piles de ces derniers sont indiquées comme forces romaines dans l'infobule.(pas de conséquences en terme de jeu apparament)

Return to “Help to improve AJE”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest