AACW (public beta) code patch 1.16 (beta 8 update October 12)

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[ShovelHead]

We're talking about scenario creation/regeneration saves of the .scn file NOT normal scenario game saves of a game in progress involving the .hst file.
...
(.scn) files from the Script (.ini) (located in the .../ACW/Scripts/... and other assorted informational files.

I was refering to the scenario creation using the script ini files to create the scn files. Wherever the map is current displayed when saving the scn file is saved in the scn file.

[Pocus]

I'll check the issues as soon as I get time for them (non committing sentence )

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[richfed]

Thanks, Gray ...

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Pocus]

Here's one save and backup with this NM problem from AACW

http://www.ageod-forum.com/showpost.php?p=185998&postcount=205

In this one from RoP the second battle I think is wrong

http://www.ageod-forum.com/showpost.php?p=184061&postcount=1

And another one from RoP.

http://www.ageod-forum.com/showpost.php?p=178401&postcount=19

I finally got into the problem. It was that you could be declared the winner (because you held ground) while you had lost NM (and the loser could have won NM), as NM losses are tied to the hits you inflict. This resulted in weird messages, because the NM indicated in the message was always considered positive in case of win and negative in case of loss.

For example, you hold the ground but have lost 3 NM. The message would still say 'you have won the battle and gained 3 NM', but in fact the tally would be that you lost 3 NM.

And for the reverse, true too. You could have lost a battle, so the message would indicate you lost 3 NM. But no, for real you won 3 NM.

So the discrepancy. This is now fixed. I reworked a bit things:

a) you gain 'Battle Points' at the end of battle. If you hold the ground, you gain 5 points. If you don't hold it (it means you don't have fighting units with a posture which is not passive), you lose 5 points.
b) you gain one battle point for each NM you gained. Same for losses: you lose one BP for each NM lost
c) if your side is routed, you lose a further 5 BP.

And then I check who got the more BP. It now means, and this is important, that victory in the AGE engine is not only considering who is holding the ground. If you 'win' a large Pyrrhic victory, then you'll still be traced as the loser!

That, plus some corrections and fixes in messaging, should give more consistent results.

[Pocus]

It appears that beta8 still contains a significant movement orders bug that will need to be fixed before it's able to be considered for "official" status. This bug is present in the v1.15 version of the game also.

regarding a post by Berge20 here: http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=18919

The USA player has given orders to 15. Union Detachment in Saint Louis, Mo to move to Lake, TN.

The route to be taken was:
Saint Louis, MO -> Kaskaskia Confluent -> Big Muddy Confluent -> Cape Girardeau -> Reelfoot Lake -> Lake, TN

[ATTACH]12724[/ATTACH]

Instead 15. Union Detachment moves towards (and ends up in) Henry,TN.

[ATTACH]12725[/ATTACH]

Searching thru the !Host.txt file (attached below also), the following lines were found:



Notice from the excerpts above that the destination was changed when the unit reached Big Muddy Confluent. There is no rational reason for the destination to change in mid-turn like this other than some sort of bug in the game engine code.

Attached below is the pertinent saved game files of the turn the orders are issued. Playing thru it ends up with the units in Henry, TN instead of Lake, TN.

Berge20 also reported that this behavior has been observed by him in other situations also. This issue needs to be resolved prior to any sort of "official" AACW patch AND I'm not so sure it's just an AACW issue.

edit> No password required to use these saved game files.
.

It is on intercept and merge with Lyon Cav Rgt ...

[Pocus]

Thanks for the feedback, Gray.

I misspoke regarding depots ... sorry ... but if you look at my just posted save ... and maybe forward a few turns ... you will see that the depots that start the game have accumulated stock, but the ones I created in-game [James City,VA, Humbolt, TN, Pensacola, FL, Charlottesville, VA ... to name a few] are not seeming to attract supply movement to any great extent, if at all.

As for Iowa ... agreed. If there is going to be a default view, the DC/Northern VA theater ought to be it. Picking up where a game was last saved, though, seems the best choice.

There was a bug, and it has been fixed. I checked before and after the fix 4 of the locations you cite, and the change in stockpile is drastic to say the least!

As a gesture of thanks for you and AACW players still on the look out for bugs, I added to AACW the code necessary to compute and display the supply flow, as in ROP. See for example the tooltip related to Pensacola:



It seems now than this good Bushrod will have his allotment of booze, cigars and fine clothing. Err, I mean much need ammos and war rations.

[Pocus]

Lack of proper focus under some circumstances won't be fixed as of now, I need to switch to others things. Reasoning is that I don't think it is a wide spread problem, otherwise it would have bothered ROP betas and people still on WIA (Steve and Chris for example).

Same for the passwording of unpassworded file... The limitation of the system is that for a given AACW copy, there is only one password, at the game level. You can't choose to disable or enable, or change the password on a per game basis. So reworking the system will be too much of a pain in the rear (meaning too much time) for me, as of now.

Sorry for both issues remaining, I must move on. At least plain bugs are fixed

This page can also be of interest to people:

http://www.ageod.net/agewiki/AGE_Improvements_and_Bug_Fixes

[gchristie]

So are we seeing the official "official patch" at this point?

The wiki of bug fixes is quite helpful, but is/will the
1.) Fix the bug concerning units changing their orders destination intra-turn as per post #291 in Grey's post #306 get addressed?

I'm looking forward to getting back into the game once the final patch is released, as I'm sure you are looking forward to removing this Tar Baby from your "to do" list.

Regards

[Pocus]

There is no bug for me, the US force was targeting another force, so the dynamical change in trajectory.

[gchristie]

Ah, that makes sense, sorry I missed that.

So....is the latest beta the now official patch...I hope

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[asdicus]

Are we going to see a fix for the units being built too quickly - especially artillery and ships ? This used to work fine with the original release version then somewhere along the patching process building units speeded up. 2 turns or 30 days to make trained ships and artillery is far too fast. Other comments on this forum have agreed that a problem exists.

[asdicus]

Not sure this has anything specific to do with the beta patch but with scenario 3 first csa turn the total manpower added is listed as +34. I cannot get this to agree to the totals by state. Virginia gets +8 richmond. The other 10 csa states each get +2 total +20. Missouri and Kentucky get +1 each total +2. Overall total +30. Difference of 4 to the box at the top of the screen.

Am also unable to match the war supply figures. The total at the top of the screen is +43 yet all the states added together come to +39. Am I missing something ?

I am using the beta 6 patch.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[richfed]

There was a bug, and it has been fixed. I checked before and after the fix 4 of the locations you cite, and the change in stockpile is drastic to say the least!

As a gesture of thanks for you and AACW players still on the look out for bugs, I added to AACW the code necessary to compute and display the supply flow, as in ROP. See for example the tooltip related to Pensacola:



It seems now than this good Bushrod will have his allotment of booze, cigars and fine clothing. Err, I mean much need ammos and war rations.

Thanks, Pocus! That was a much needed fix ... in a previous run-through, I had a division starve sitting right on a depot with a good supply line [port was blockaded so I thought maybe that was it].

In any event, I look forward to beta 9 or the official 1.16 with that fix included ... kind of unplayable now ... one needs a bunch of drunken soldiers to win at this game!

[Buckley]

Think I found a bug. Playing the long campaign w/ Kentucky as CSA (Latest Beta plus Hotfix.) It's Late July and at the start of the turn I received 342 messages in the message box. The vast majority are notices like:

"We have finished building a City in Decatur, TN at day 1."

or

"We have finished building a Harbor in Hardin, TN at day 1."

Not sure if there are any gameplay effects. I have a pic and a saved game if you need it. Will need directions on how to post.

B

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Buckley]

I just fired up the same scenario and had 64 messages quite a few of which announced the building of depots or Indian villages. This is a new feature and WAD. None of the messages stated anything about building a city however.

I suspect you have a corrupted installation. Try uninstalling, followed by complete deletion of the installation folder. You may have to reboot to actually be able to delete the installation folder. After that, reinstall the game from the Setup.exe file and then DIRECTLY patch to the v1.16 beta8 patch. You can then finally apply QuickFix6. Let us know if that doesn't help.

Will do. Much obliged!

B

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Pocus]

No that's my fault... I added a command that allows structures to be added unfinished to the setup, but by default you will now create all structures in such state!

That means Gray that the setups you redid are screwed

Send me your quickfix6 in non installer format with the various scripts, and I'll redo them on my side then produce beta9.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Pocus]

Thanks, I wanted the output files yes, sorry to be not that clear.

I'll check if the current scenarios are fine, if not I'll regenerate them.

[asdicus]

Not sure this has anything specific to do with the beta patch but with scenario 3 first csa turn the total manpower added is listed as +34. I cannot get this to agree to the totals by state. Virginia gets +8 richmond. The other 10 csa states each get +2 total +20. Missouri and Kentucky get +1 each total +2. Overall total +30. Difference of 4 to the box at the top of the screen.

Am also unable to match the war supply figures. The total at the top of the screen is +43 yet all the states added together come to +39. Am I missing something ?

I am using the beta 6 patch.

Pocus - the CSA manpower figures for the individual regions do not agree with the total at the top of the screen - although they do agree for the USA player. I am told this is because the overall total reflect adjustments for loyalty etc but I have my doubts about this. I am sure in earlier versions of the game the region manpower totals always agreed to the overall total. Pocus can you confirm this is working ok please ?

[asdicus]

Running the beta 8 patch as the csa vs the union ai.

August 61 turn generation - game drops out to load game menu as it processes the turn. fatal error in main log

Exception caught: Violation d'accès à l'adresse 00682099 dans le module 'AACW.exe'. Lecture de l'adresse 00000020

1003099 5. CSA Detachment - order initiated
8:09:46 PM [Error ] THost.AbortProcess Hosting aborted while performing MakeStep:CheckTimeUsingSpecOrders 8

Attached is the save game zip files and the main log file.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[von Sachsen]

Is there any update on said beta?