AGEOD Forums

One more thing I noticed (finished 2nd game a week ago): The NM penalty when you are very far ahead seems rather harsh, as CSA I was being hit for -7 in one turn at some point.

Here are a few things I have noticed that could be improved:

-Sea units moving from Memphis to Bowling Green move overland through Montgomery/Clarksville TN. Ships appear to take the valid path through rivers to Bowling Green -seems to just be a graphical error with the displayed movement path.

-Is there a hotkey for evading combat? If not, can we get one please?

-If you play with the activation rule being able to lock inactive leaders in place it seems to remove the affected leader from the command chain for the purposes of promotion and army assignments. For example, if playing as the Union and Butler and Banks are locked from inactivation you can assign a leader with lesser seniority to an army command without the VP and NM hits you would normally receive for bypassing the locked leaders.

The rest are text errors in the CSA industrial options:

-Build Arsenals in Georgia (the 2nd one that appears in Sept. 61') Title is wrong - it makes armories instead of arsenals.
-Build Armories in Virginia and South Carolina - Description says it builds 3 armories and 2 arsenals - actually builds 3 arsenals and 2 armories.
-Build Armories and Arsenals in North Carolina - all buildings are in SC - title should be Build Armories and Arsenals in South Carolina.
-evt_nam_CSA_Georgia_ArmoryArsenal_GA12 shows in message box - should be Greenwood & Gray Armory construction started.

Oh, and if you could fix the mis-swapped names Minneapolis and St. Paul in the state of Minnesota that would be great. I know it has no real affect on gameplay but as person that lives in the area it makes me shake my head in disgust every time my map scrolls through the area.

Thanks for the report, we will see what we can do.

Please check all North and South Carolina industry builds to verify proper locations. See post #82. Thanks Pocus.

On a rather minor point, in my game, the FI of "-29" is being displayed as "29".

[ATTACH]33131[/ATTACH]

There appears to be a bug in my game --- or Nathan Bedford Forrest is just that good... (Its a bug)

If you run the turn on the attached saved game N. B. Forrest attacks Paducah and captures a Union fleet. Along with the gunboat he also captures Union admiral Foote. He appears to have switched sides? (Foote is in the stack with Forrest - not the gunboat)

[ATTACH]33145[/ATTACH]

Cardinal Ape wrote:There appears to be a bug in my game --- or Nathan Bedford Forrest is just that good... (Its a bug)

If you run the turn on the attached saved game N. B. Forrest attacks Paducah and captures a Union fleet. Along with the gunboat he also captures Union admiral Foote. He appears to have switched sides? (Foote is in the stack with Forrest - not the gunboat)

[ATTACH]33145[/ATTACH]

He converted! Yea, that's a bug. Haven't seen that since early beta though
when I captured Buchanan and he decided to return to the Union navy

Since updating to to RC9, I have had multiple crashes and lockups. I've been running CWII without errors or problems since its release. Not sure what the issue is. I have updated on both my laptop and my desktop. Same issue. Random locking and crashing. Nothing seems consistent about when it occurs.

Try reverting to the last official patch and see if you get crashes, because I believe this has more to do with hardware or new software. I'm running extensively RC10/Official right now and the game is very stable.

Pocus:

I've been running RC9 since release, everyday for several hours, and have yet to have a crash (Win 8.1)- one lockup when I left CW2 up for over an hour inactive and screen save/screen shutdown kicked in- resulting in a system hard lockup, which given experience is due to Windoze not CW2; reloaded save and all is well. So stability is definitely there with RC9.

Thank you very much.

Do we have an ETA on 1.05 Official? Sorry if this is an annoying question.

It is now being prepared for official release, so at most in 10 days with a 90% certainty

So how's that 90% certainty looking

Delay... I would say there is 50% chance to get the patch before next week-end. And again 90% to get it in at most 10 days, from now on. Sorry for the frustration, but between adding up the new game speed optimization and that the production team was not 100% full (sickness or vacation) there was this small hiccup.

Time cures all ... make it the best it can be!!