New official 1.14 patch

[It's a Trap]

Maybe he died of starvation or was captured

Oh just said "bleep* this if they're not even gonna feed me."

[Jim-NC]

I have noticed this as well (it happened in 1.13b also). If your stack disappeared, more often than not, your general died as well. I believe this is a WAD. However, you will note that a general by himself will not starve to death (even in a hostile region).

[enf91]

If my general died, the messages should at least say something like "Sir, I beg to report, General ______ has died of starvation" or something.

[kwhitehead]

I have noticed this as well (it happened in 1.13b also). If your stack disappeared, more often than not, your general died as well. I believe this is a WAD. However, you will note that a general by himself will not starve to death (even in a hostile region).

I've actually seen a mix of results it is just hard to tell since the combat report doesn't list what happened to generals. Here are some of the more interesting:

A force under I believe Banks got wiped out in Virginia. Banks reappeared in New Jersey with a three turn lock on him I assume for injuries or cowardice.

I had a Corps destroyed in Humboldt. It left three generals behind inside the city with no units. They held off the Corps that destroyed them for an additional three turns. I managed to send a cavalry into the region and escort two of the generals out but the third was still locked and fought on for another turn, I guess to the last man.

[soloswolf]

If my general died, the messages should at least say something like "Sir, I beg to report, General ______ has died of starvation" or something.

Don't you think that is implied when you find out that a whole division has just starved to death? Why should he not die?

[enf91]

I've actually seen a mix of results it is just hard to tell since the combat report doesn't list what happened to generals. Here are some of the more interesting:

A force under I believe Banks got wiped out in Virginia. Banks reappeared in New Jersey with a three turn lock on him I assume for injuries or cowardice.

The combat report puts little crosses next to killed generals who can fit in that little line next to the ranking general's portrait. True, it doesn't say if that ranking general died, or if the general has been wounded if his unit has been wiped out, but the messages at the bottom of the screen do. They say something like "The enemy killed _____ in battle" or "____ is recovering from injuries".

[squarian]

Sorry to post a stupid question, but I'm trying to piece together info from various threads.

What is the status of 1.14? Is it fully functional, is it causing frequent CTDs, or are elements (e.g. Kentucky rework) not WAD?

Thanks!

[Franciscus]

As regards 1.14, unfortunately I have not yet found time to play any significant amount of time with it. Nevertheless, there are indeed some reports of crashes in this thread. Apart from that, there are some very minor issues, engine related, that I listed above:

So, after all the fuss of last week, I must confess I am a bit confused about what are the issues that have been spotted in 1.14. Since it seems very likely that we are one step away from a "legacy" patch for AACW, maybe it would be good to try and summarize the reported remaining "engine" issues:

To start:

- The discrepancy between general's rank in the roster and in-game, spotted by akk70:
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showpost.php?p=152818&postcount=129

- The missing objective flags in Spanish 1.14a:
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showpost.php?p=153194&postcount=18

- the odd missing flag in the map ? (Madisonville, spotted by Chaplain Lovejoy):
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showpost.php?p=153499&postcount=1

- The wrong FI calculation with French intervention in Mexico, spotted by Big Ideas:
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showpost.php?p=152917&postcount=1
(...)

As far as I know there are no specific problems with any of the scenarios, including those with Kentucky rework

Regards

[Brochgale]

Crikey thats one one heap of changes. Still trying to digest them all. One question I do have which might be obvious as I have not caught up with all the forums yet - what do they mean for historical accuracy mod?

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[richfed]

As regards 1.14, unfortunately I have not yet found time to play any significant amount of time with it. Nevertheless, there are indeed some reports of crashes in this thread. Apart from that, there are some very minor issues, engine related, that I listed above:



As far as I know there are no specific problems with any of the scenarios, including those with Kentucky rework

Regards

I have another -- at least I never noticed this before ...

If you check a stack composition, let's say a Corp ... the Corp commander will be listed along with any adjutant, supply and HQ-type support units: signal corp, engineers, etc, independent units, and divisions. The division part is the problem [minor one, at that] ... The division leader is listed and in parenthesis is just ONE brigade in the division; even though there may be 18 elements, only the division general and one brigade are listed.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[arsan]

I think richfed talks about the tooltip over yours / and enemy forces.
But what he explains was there before the 1,14 patch and its probably WAD.
Richfed, check this post and the following ones.
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showpost.php?p=138776&postcount=12
Is that what your are talking about??
Cheers!

[richfed]

Yeah, I guess it is ..

Never noticed that before, but I suppose it is working as designed ...

Edit ---> After looking at the screen shot, I just noticed that Pickett's name is mispelled ... ???

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Lew]

Good job overall with the improvements in 1.14. Several glitches got fixed - more than were introduced, IMO ... with the possible exception of the crashes reported earlier.

Do have a possible issue. In 1.14, 12lb cannon were turned into "light" arty to hack away a problem with regiment replacement in brigades. While this appears to have solved the original problem, it caused another: 12lb arty are now an even better buy compared to other guns than they were before.

The only thing that used to beat them earlier were Columbiads (and possibly Rodmans). Then these two were made slower, so that any force including them also moved more slowly. The AI is very incautious about this.

Now 12lbers, already arguably the best buy for arty in the game, are even cheaper. Since it'd probably be too much trouble to undo the hack, I therefore recommend that 12lbers should cost slightly more upfront, and that 10lb Parrots should cost somewhat less. Seriously consider also making 10lb Parrots "light" and raising the replacement cost for light arty.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[soundoff]

Let's add to this

2 separate crash issues. (one confirmed)

Cavalry non-ability to take undefended standalone depots

Broken Pillager ability

Unless it was fixed in 1.14 you also have broken Master Logistician ability in 1.13b

edit the 'you also have' in italics should read as..... there is also the

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Colonel Dreux]

Yeah, I guess it is ..

Never noticed that before, but I suppose it is working as designed ...

Edit ---> After looking at the screen shot, I just noticed that Pickett's name is mispelled ... ???

Picketts' name was misspelled in 1.13b (fixed up) as well. Someone had brought it up too, I think.

[GraniteStater]

And just to make everyone feel better, especially GL, I was playing 114 'right outta da patch' and had played the betas up until the rc14 version.

I have had no egregious problems with 114. I'm sure the observations & feedback are totally valid, but all I'm saying is that, IMHO, it is eminently playable.

We run this software to have fun, right?

Can you say "fun?" There. I knew you could.

[soundoff]

<snip>

Be careful how you apply the word "you".

A timely reminder Gray. My poor wording. The 'you' was supposed to be a general comment rather than a specific aimed at any individual. Apologies for any confusion/misrepresentation.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Lew]

No issue here at all. It's WAD.

I certainly like hearing that replacements reflect the cost of regiments of that type on the field.

I also appreciate the explanation of why the change was made. However, I already followed it in your earlier posts dealing with the matter.

The problems remain, WAD or no WAD. 10lb Parrots are not cost-effective enough. 12lb smoothbores are too cost-effective. The slow heavy arty hinders the AI.

It is your call as to whether these costs are an acceptable price to pay for the benefits of the changes to artillery.

I submit that, even if they are, some renewed consideration of the matter may be able to reduce these costs, to "get us our cake and let us eat it too".


Possible changes for your consideration:

1) reduce the up-front cost of 10lb Parrots, or make range more vital in more battles, or just tweak the combat values a tad.
2) increase the up-front cost of 12lb smoothbores, (ditto), (ditto).

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[richfed]

OK - here's a new one:

I have been playing this game since its inception, and ALWAYS the CSA has ZERO ocean transport capability up there in the railroad/riverine/transport supply box. I have never seen it vary.

Just began a new game with 1.14 - HF 1.2.

My rebels had a "3" up there in the ocean transport box --- sitting there at 3/3 for supply phase movement. Over a few turns, it decreased to "1". There is no option in the game where I can invest in this - like there is for rail and river supply transport - so how is this happening ... and why?