Rise of Prussia gold?

[marek1978]

i just bought new ROP GOLD and cannot start sileasian wars scenario

this what i found in a script


22:26:34 (Reporting) User: Dell Computer: DELL-PC
22:26:34 (Reporting) Loading general settings
22:26:35 (Reporting) USettings.LoadSettings 581 settings loaded, out of 8 settings files.
22:26:35 (Reporting) Loading Localized Strings
22:26:45 (Reporting) System local strings loaded from C:\Program Files\Rise of Prussia\ROP\Settings\LocalStrings__AGE.csv
22:26:45 (Reporting) Loading Display Options
22:26:45 (Reporting) Entering DirectX Initializations
22:26:45 (Reporting) LocalStrings & Settings 11482 ms
22:26:46 (Reporting) Cursors 32 ms
22:22:33 (Reporting) DirectX Initializations 423 ms
22:22:33 (Reporting) Fonts 20 ms
22:22:33 (Reporting) TTerrainDefs.Create 108 Terrains definitions loaded, out of 54 terrains files.
22:22:33 (Reporting) Terrains Definitions 1883 ms
22:22:33 (Reporting) Areas 227 ms
22:22:33 (Reporting) Theaters 0 ms
22:22:33 (Reporting) Particles I 0 ms
22:22:33 (Reporting) TAbiDefs.Create 137 Abilities loaded, out of 137 abilities files.
22:22:33 (Reporting) Units Abilities 240 ms
22:22:33 (Reporting) TStrucDefs.LoadFromFile 7 StrucDef loaded, out of 7 StrucDef files.
22:22:33 (Reporting) Structures 56 ms
22:22:33 (Reporting) TFactionDefs.LoadFromFile 20 FactionDef loaded, out of 20 FactionDef files.
22:22:33 (Reporting) Factions 206 ms
22:22:33 (Reporting) Application.Initialize OK
22:22:33 (Reporting) TSplash.Create OK
22:22:33 (Reporting) TSplash.Show OK
22:22:33 (Reporting) TSplash.Repaint OK
22:22:33 (Reporting) Starting Media Librarian
22:22:33 (Reporting) Max Texture size: 8192 x 8192
22:22:33 (Reporting) TAgeAudio Initializing Audio Engine
22:22:33 (Reporting) TMediaLibrarian.InitializeSounds 206 sounds loaded.
22:22:33 (Reporting) TMediaLibrarian.InitializeMusics 61 Musics loaded.
22:22:33 (Reporting) TMediaLibrarian.InitializeVoices 5 Voice Languages loaded.
22:22:33 (Reporting) TMediaLibrarian.Create Redundant ImageID: xp-star , ExImage ignored
22:22:33 (Reporting) TMediaLibrarian.Create Redundant ImageID: supplyindicator , ExImage ignored
22:31:18 (Reporting) TMediaLibrarian.Create Redundant ImageID: timedsplash , ExImage ignored
22:31:18 (Reporting) TMediaLibrarian.Create Finished loading images in 19.500 seconds Memory usage: 176208 kb
22:31:18 (Reporting) Media Librarian 23769 ms
22:31:18 (Reporting) TParticlesDef.Create 4 particles definitions loaded, out of 4 particles files.
22:31:18 (Reporting) Particles II 52 ms
22:31:18 (Reporting) TDoodadDefs.Create 9 doodads definitions loaded, out of 9 files.
22:31:18 (Reporting) Doodads 9 ms
22:31:18 (Reporting) TListRegionDefs.Create 1001 Regions definitions loaded.
22:31:18 (Reporting) Regions & the Map 14128 ms
22:31:18 (Reporting) TListButtons.Create 63 buttons definitions loaded, from 29 frontend files.
22:31:18 (Reporting) Buttons 262 ms
22:31:18 (Reporting) TMediaLibrarian.GetMediaInfo: Unable to find MediaInfo for image: ledger_tab_off
22:31:18 (Reporting) TAgeDxComponentList.Create 6 frontend definitions loaded, from 6 frontend files.
22:31:18 (Reporting) TFrontEnd.Create 29 frontend definitions loaded, from 45 frontend files.
22:31:18 (Reporting) Frontends Initializations 9843 ms
22:31:18 (Reporting) Starting Game World
22:31:18 (Reporting) TMerchandises.LoadFromFile 22 Merchandises loaded, from 22 Merchandises files.
22:31:18 (Reporting) TModels.Create 988 (Cached) Models loaded in 782 ms
22:31:18 (Reporting) TListUnitDefs.Create 1048 (Cached) Units loaded in 306 ms
22:31:18 (Reporting) TWeather.Create 5 Weathers patterns loaded, from 5 files.
22:31:18 (Reporting) TEthnics.LoadFromFile 0 Ethnics loaded, from 0 Ethnics files.
22:31:18 (Reporting) TReligions.LoadFromFile 0 Religions loaded, from 0 Religions files.
22:31:18 (Reporting) TAgendaDefs.LoadFromFile 37 AI Agendas loaded from 37 AI Agendas files.
22:31:18 (Reporting) TMapAleaDefs.LoadFromFile 0 TMapAleaDef loaded, from 0 files.
22:31:18 (Reporting) TAIAgentDefs.LoadFromFile 0 AIAgentDefs loaded, from 0 aia files.
22:31:18 (Reporting) TFactionMods.LoadFromFile 0 Faction Modifiers loaded, from 0 files, in 0 ms
22:31:18 (Reporting) TFacAttribDefs.LoadFromFile 0 Faction Atttributes loaded from 0 Attributes Definition files.
22:31:18 (Reporting) TFacAttribsOverride.LoadFromFile 0 F.A. Overrides loaded from 0 Attributes Definition files.
22:31:18 (Reporting) TRgnDecisionDefs.LoadFromFile 15 Region Decisions loaded, from 15 Decisions files.
22:31:18 (Reporting) TBattlePlanDefs.LoadFromFile 0 Battle plans loaded, from 0 files.
22:31:18 (Reporting) Game World & attached DBs 1949 ms
22:31:18 (Reporting) Starting Data Parser
22:31:18 (Reporting) Data Parser 0 ms

[Carnium]

Please post !Main log (located in Logs directory).
Also AVOID installing your games into C:\Program Files\. Something like C:\games\ROP Gold would be better!

[Carnium]

I deleted the units.cached file but still get these errors. I uninstalled and installed everything again and still.

Have you deleted the remaining files after unistalling?

[JacquesDeLalaing]

Carnium, my hero! Success! Thank you very much!

[Carnium]

Carnium, my hero! Success! Thank you very much!

I have deleted the response to your question by mistake.
I said to delete the remaining files after uninstalling.
Enjoy the game

[JacquesDeLalaing]

Well actually it was your tip to "not" install the game directly to "programmes".

[Carnium]

Well actually it was your tip to "not" install the game directly to "programmes".

Ah, old trick that still works

[ribaluigi]

+1 for this. No ledger buttons appear in my upgraded Gold edtion as well.

Still, a nice makeover for a fine but largely overlooked game. Thanks.

-C

+3 (me and one friend of mine)

I have just noticed that with the numbers 1...8 you can use the overlays but the buttons do not work

Luigi

[cohimbra]

+3 (me and one friend of mine)

I have just noticed that with the numbers 1...8 you can use the overlays but the buttons do not work

Luigi

Here I am! There's a screenshot of the ledger button issue:

The attachment 6gxy5y.jpg is no longer available

Regards.


edit: Ops, JacquesDeLalaing just posted this screenshot...

[cohimbra]

Hi again, I don't want to be a wet towel (guastafeste) but I'm here and I report what I see, hoping that this news will
help you to fix the (minor) issues of this new release. Look that:

The attachment clyxx.jpg is no longer available

When I enter in the 'Decision Mode', in the background it appear a second 'Military Recruitment' menu. Regards (again).

[ribaluigi]

Hi again, I don't want to be a wet towel (guastafeste) but I'm here and I report what I see, hoping that this news will
help you to fix the (minor) issues of this new release. Look that:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]22498[/ATTACH]

When I enter in the 'Decision Mode', in the background it appear a second 'Military Recruitment' menu. Regards (again).

Same here.

[Soderini]

Look at the details of your order at the AGEOD site. It contains the download link (or it should).

No, no link to see there, just the payment details and a delivery address.

[PhilThib]

In case of issue, send me an email at pthibaut@ageod.net

[Soderini]

Got it! Impeccable support as always.

[Erik Springelkamp]

Hi again, I don't want to be a wet towel (guastafeste) but I'm here and I report what I see, hoping that this news will
help you to fix the (minor) issues of this new release. Look that:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]22498[/ATTACH]

When I enter in the 'Decision Mode', in the background it appear a second 'Military Recruitment' menu. Regards (again).

A bit more feedback from my side:

That doesn't happen at my installation.

I did try the numeric keys for the overlays:
Regions and Grand Regions (5 and 6) don't show up, but 7 shows the Terrain overlay (called weather zones, is that correct?) and 8 shows the current weather.

I don't have pictograms for the Ledger pages, while PhilTib suggested they should be there on top, the only way to access the Ledger is with the function keys (but that was the way I did it anyway).

[PhilThib]

Just found a bug in the upgrade kit, that may be the reason of some of these. Will work quickly on a fix

[Die Zieten]

Just found a bug in the upgrade kit, that may be the reason of some of these. Will work quickly on a fix

I was just about to report my own bugs.

[Erik Springelkamp]

Just found a bug in the upgrade kit, that may be the reason of some of these. Will work quickly on a fix

I applied the fix you posted in the French section, and that created the buttons for the Ledger.

Looking at the ledger in the 4-player campaign from the French side, I see a few Austrian replacement chits.
Does that mean that the French will have a few Austrian forces under their command?

I did notice that the French did have a few HRE forces, but that the bulk of the HRE forces was under the Austrian command.

Are the French, Austrian and Russian players competitive, or cooperative?
i.e. is human diplomacy intended between all four players?
Would it be unsporting to interchange strategic information between Coalition players? Or should the French en Russians send a few cavalry units to their partners to get a picture of the situation over there, as I see that at start the partners are mutually in Fog of War.

[PhilThib]

Cooperation between players inside a MP PBEM game is totally free, there are no written rule in the engine. It's up to the players to decide what "allies" can do, something that all should agree as house rules before starting the game. My own feeling is that they should behave like historically, i.e. no transfer of information or with a delay (remember, no cell phones at the time, so a delay was always present and accuracy always absent).. the game is planned so that "allies" don't share LOS (i.e. all are on FoW)

In terms of objectives, VP, the allies should be cooperative...now, the winner will be the one with most VPs, so they can also have "hidden" agendas of their own... .. here again, players shall decide... and yes, Human diplomacy must be there...

[Die Zieten]

Cooperation between players inside a MP PBEM game is totally free, there are no written rule in the engine. It's up to the players to decide what "allies" can do, something that all should agree as house rules before starting the game. My own feeling is that they should behave like historically, i.e. no transfer of information or with a delay (remember, no cell phones at the time, so a delay was always present and accuracy always absent).. the game is planned so that "allies" don't share LOS (i.e. all are on FoW)

In terms of objectives, VP, the allies should be cooperative...now, the winner will be the one with most VPs, so they can also have "hidden" agendas of their own... .. here again, players shall decide... and yes, Human diplomacy must be there...

Would it be possible to have an option to hide the VP from other players?

What about creating events that bring some friction between the allies?
There where some troop transfers IRL that did not happen and monetary subsidies etc..

[Erik Springelkamp]

4 player scenario French side:

There is an Austrian 'Rhein Flotte' in Köln, it is located in the middle of the land region. The French do not control it, it is under Austrian control. But it doesn't show up in the Austrian side of the scenario. I assume it is a faulty leftover from the creation of a corresponding French 'Flottille du Rhin' in the harbour of Köln.

[Erik Springelkamp]

Would it be possible to have an option to hide the VP from other players?

What about creating events that bring some friction between the allies?
There where some troop transfers IRL that did not happen and monetary subsidies etc..

On the F5 ledger, only the VP of the 'enemy' are shown.
I wonder which side that 'enemy' is for the Prussian player? The sum of all opponents?

[Erik Springelkamp]

I played a few turns in the French side of the 4-player campaign.

First: I get a message of unlocked troops in the Netherlands, but they are already in Beresford on map.

Next: I see messages about breaches in besieged fortress of Kassel, that is in my Fog of War, and I don't suppose I am to know that somebody is besieging Kassel (Austria? that would be a surprise move?), and about a Prussian breach in Köningsgrad.

I also see that the Prussian AI is doing massive amounts of requisitioning in its territory. I thought the Prussians don't have an immediate need for money?

Also there is a fair bit of fortress improvements going on all around the map. Seems these regional decisions are intensively used by the AI.

[Guru94]

just played the 1st silesian War in 2 hours against the AI. Great work guys, really . The new siege system and the card system add possibilites to the game I somehow missed in the old version but couldn´t figure out what actually was missing .

The new Mapmodes, although I did not really need them did not work for me. I hope that gets fix with a little patch until Monday, when my 4 player pbem game starts.

[ATTACH]22504[/ATTACH]

[Erik Springelkamp]

I played some more turns in the French campaign, and it is a very nice if you want a good fight without the strategic complications of the whole war.

I see the AI builds field fortifications like mad. I took a peek at the Russian AI faction, but I saw the AI failed to assign an army commander, and it built fortresses all along its route in Eastern Prussia. It also tried to move fortress artillery towards sieges, moves that would take years. I also tried to move static supplies around. I think a bit of tinkering with the AI is required in this respect.

The new siege options give a whole new dimension: there are a few that will hand you a level three fortress in one or two turns, but you only have one or two of those.

Question: do field fortification anything for your supply? What do you get from them if you don't hide inside them (which the AI has not yet done on several occasions).

[Die Zieten]

OOB issue that i would call a major.

The prussian musketeer and grenadier batallions are missing the reinforcements they historically got in January 57 and the game starts in April 57.
So the Prussian player opens his campaign missing fifth of his fighting force.

I have used the winter in the previous games to get the batalions in that level, it makes a big difference, this is a serious issue.

[PhilThib]

Are you sure about this?

Which campaign are you talking about? 1757?
The 1757 Campaigns in Gold (both normal and MP) are strictly identical to the one we had in the original ROP game, and no one ever complained about such an issue before. I checked the events, there are no events between 1756 and April 1757 in either version of the game that give reinforcements (the Prussian player receives a few replacements end of 1756, but they are are already included in the at start pool of 1757)

[Die Zieten]

Are you sure about this?

Which campaign are you talking about? 1757?
The 1757 Campaigns in Gold (both normal and MP) are strictly identical to the one we had in the original ROP game, and no one ever complained about such an issue before. I checked the events, there are no events between 1756 and April 1757 in either version of the game that give reinforcements (the Prussian player receives a few replacements end of 1756, but they are are already included in the at start pool of 1757)

Talking about the 1757 campaign, i always started 1756 so i noticed this now.

I have understood that the numbers are for flavor but elements are not in game mechanics?.

Most Prussian battalions start 4 company strong, for Grenadiers this is correct, for Musketeers this is not.

If there is only one model for batallions, i would still make an argument that the Prussians should have 5 elements to a Musketeer/Fusiler battalion and 4 for Grenadiers from the start and power adjusted to the historical strength.

I always understood that the possibility to get an extra company for the Prussian battalions was representing this reinforcement.


PRUSSIA

Organisation of a Regiment

In 1756, a regiment usually counted two battalions. Each battalion consisted of 5 companies of musketeers and 1 company of grenadiers.
Musketeer Battalion
In 1748, a musketeer battalion counted 658 men (including battalion staff and excluding the grenadier company) and included 5 companies:
21 officers (including 1 adjutant)
50 non commissioned officers
16 drummers
570 musketeers
1 fifer

In 1756, a musketeer battalion counted 706 men (including battalion staff and excluding the grenadier company) and included 5 companies (140 men each).
The reinforcement of January 1757 brought the total strength of a battalion of musketeers to 856.

Grenadier Battalion
In 1756, a converged grenadier battalion counted 600 men and included 4 companies (150 men each).

After the reinforcement of January 1757, a grenadier battalion counted 720 troopers, for a total of 754 men including staff (for the moment, we do not know if the staff of a converged grenadier battalion was similar to the staff of a musketeer battalion).

http://www.kronoskaf.com/syw/index.php?title=Prussian_Line_Infantry_Organisation


AUSTRIA

Wartime Organisation

With the mobilisation of the army in summer 1756, the regiments were to arrive with 3 battalions at their assigned destinations. A regiments 4th battalion was to remain behind and serve as the regiments reserve depot and being now entitled a "Garrison Battalion", while the 3 other battalions would now form as 2 so called "Field Battalions" with each 6 coys, by disbanding a regiments 3rd battalion.
Total book strength of a regular 1756 "Field Battalion" was 18 officers and 798 men; the 4 coy "Garrison Battalion" with a regular 12 officers and 532 men.

Notes on variants, augmentation, and changes of organisation

[B]Austria failed to arrive at a system that could compete with Prussia’s much superior means to replace losses, despite all efforts to improve the armies resources for ample replacement. As a result, with the beginning of 1755, general Daun estimated a shortage of no less then 38,000 men for the infantry. By June 1756, the infantry was still short of about 10,000 men – very different to Frederick’s Prussian army, which entered the war ‘complete’ and could additionally draw from a large reserve of trained men. [/B]The regiments stationed in Italy and Netherlands counted only 2,000 men each. The single Slavonian regiment Simbschen (No. 53) – the former Trenck Pandurs of the War of Austrian Succession 1740-1748 – entered the 7 Years War with only a single battalion, being augmented to regulation size only early in 1757.

Summer 1756, the 2 national-Italian as well as 16 German and Hungarian regiments stationed in Italy and Netherlands were fixed on a somewhat lower force, for lack of enough recruits. Their fusilier coy counted 3 officers and only 113 men for a total of 18 officers and 678 men per battalion. The 4 National-Netherlanish battalions attached to the French army in 1757 (one battalion from each of these regiments: IR 9, 30, 38, and 55) took to the field with 5 coys each of 2 officers / 112 men and a single grenadier coy with some 90 men. During the course of the war, their garrison battalions were eventually disbanded altogether, as a result of insufficient replacement. The 4 National-Netherlandish regiments, thus being organised with 3 battalions of 4 coys each throughout most of the 7YW.

During 1757 – in response to the successful Prussian early invasion of Bohemia – a good number of the regiments garrison battalions had been ordered to the field. They were really converged battalions, created by combining 6 coys of 2 or 3 regiments. Most of the 3 battalion regiments listed in the Kolin order of battle would have fielded such a 3rd battalion. The 3rd battalion Moltke (IR 13), for example, was formed of 4 coys Moltke and 2 Kheul (IR 49).

Winter 1757/58, the regiments were ordered to raise "Depositories" in strength of 1 or 2 officers and a 100 to 200 NCO’s and men, that were to serve as a regiments store of recruits, and to receive the sick, and lightly wounded. They were to be set up at a suitable distance somewhat in the rear of the army. Also all of a regiments dispensable baggage was to be located here. For an example, by September 1758, the "Depositories" of 43 regiments with more then 6,900 men were located at Prague.

Spring 1758, all of the armies "Garrison Battalions", that had for the most part been sucked into the field army during the preceding campaign, were to be re-raised and organised in 6 companies like the 2 "Field Battalions". In contrast to the "Depositories", they were to be employed to escort the transports and other rear activities. At the same time each fusilier coy was somewhat increased to a total of 140 men, including officers.
Each regiment was now organised in 2 coys of grenadiers and 3 battalions of fusiliers of 6 coys each, with a total of 24 officers and 816 men per battalion. With regard of the "Field-Battalions", this 1758 re-organisation would basically now remain unaltered until the end of the war, except for the 4 Netherlandish regiments, which eventually organised in 3 battalions with 4 coys each. However, as a result of severe losses, the number of battalions in some regiments had temporally been reduced during the course of the one or other campaign.

Winter 1761/1762, overall strength of the regiments had to be reduced as a result of Austria’s dwindling financial resources. Each regiments 3rd Garrison-Battalion was cut down to the 4 company establishment of 1756 in order to reduce costs.
The grenadiers often formed in ad hoc battalions of between 4 to 8 companies for special tasks. Often, the grenadiers of the entire armies 1st and 2nd line regiments were converged into a so entitled "Grenadier Corps" of elites only. Size and composition greatly changed during campaign.

http://www.kronoskaf.com/syw/index.php?title=Austrian_Line_Infantry_Organisation


I think that the Prussians have more difficulty with their replacements in the game than in real life compared to the Austrians.

I made earlier the suggestion to remove the Elite Musketeer battalions and give experience points for the starting Musketeer/Fusiliers battalions that are considered veteran units.

To reserve the Elite Replacement Chips only for to the Grenadiers would streamline the management of Prussian replacements, Prussian players now have Grenadier and Musketeer battalions competing for the same replacements.

[Charles]

I would be careful in using wiki as a source for anything, unless you can check out the source material.

Duffy makes no mention of any "1757 reinforcements" or of any TO&E changes in 1757.

According to Duffy, the Prussian infantry regiment TO&E was the same during the entire 1740-63 period with a max of 1700 men which works out to a max of 850 men for each of the two battalions. From that figure, you have to deduct the Grenadiers.

Grenadier battalions in the SYW were not permanent units, but were formed on an adhoc basis before battle. This was done by taking the two grenadier companies in an infantry regiment (around 350 men) from two separate regiments to form an adhoc Grenadier battalion of 700 men.

Once you deduct the 350 grenadiers from the regiment, you are left with a total of 1350 men or 675 in each battalion.

so TO&E
-grenadier battalion - 700 men
-infantry battalion - 675 men

Note these are the max figures, it is doubtful any unit would have been at 100% TO&E on a consistent basis.

Again according to Duffy, the average Austrian infantry regiment had a shortfall of about 9% at the beginning of each campaign in the SYW.

We have no equivalent figures for the Prussian Army. Much has been made of the Prussian "cantonal" (i.e draft) system, but this supplied only part of the Prussian needs, namely 50,000 out of 133,000 (38%) in 1751 and 70,000 out of 160,000 (44%) in 1768. The proportion of draftees was higher during the middle/end of the SYW, but never fulfilled all the manpower needs since Frederick spent heavily on foreign recruitment during the war and also forcibly recruited enemy prisoners, something which no one else did. The Prussians also had a big problem with desertions. IR n39 "Jung-Braunschwig" alone lost 1650 men, basically 100% of its TO&E to desertions in the SYW.

so, it is doubtful the Prussian army was much better off than the Austrians in obtaining replacements.

[Die Zieten]

I would be careful in using wiki as a source for anything, unless you can check out the source material.

Duffy makes no mention of any "1757 reinforcements" or of any TO&E changes in 1757.

According to Duffy, the Prussian infantry regiment TO&E was the same during the entire 1740-63 period with a max of 1700 men which works out to a max of 850 men for each of the two battalions. From that figure, you have to deduct the Grenadiers.

Grenadier battalions in the SYW were not permanent units, but were formed on an adhoc basis before battle. This was done by taking the two grenadier companies in an infantry regiment (around 350 men) from two separate regiments to form an adhoc Grenadier battalion of 700 men.

Once you deduct the 350 grenadiers from the regiment, you are left with a total of 1350 men or 675 in each battalion.

so TO&E
-grenadier battalion - 700 men
-infantry battalion - 675 men

Note these are the max figures, it is doubtful any unit would have been at 100% TO&E on a consistent basis.

Again according to Duffy, the average Austrian infantry regiment had a shortfall of about 9% at the beginning of each campaign in the SYW.

We have no equivalent figures for the Prussian Army. Much has been made of the Prussian "cantonal" (i.e draft) system, but this supplied only part of the Prussian needs, namely 50,000 out of 133,000 (38%) in 1751 and 70,000 out of 160,000 (44%) in 1768. The proportion of draftees was higher during the middle/end of the SYW, but never fulfilled all the manpower needs since Frederick spent heavily on foreign recruitment during the war and also forcibly recruited enemy prisoners, something which no one else did. The Prussians also had a big problem with desertions. IR n39 "Jung-Braunschwig" alone lost 1650 men, basically 100% of its TO&E to desertions in the SYW.

so, it is doubtful, the Prussian army was much better off than the Austrians in obtaining replacements.

Im going the email the people that keep the site, im not trusting your one source either.

And Prussian grenadier batalions where permanent formations, some even in peace time.

Im sure attrition took the toll on all troops in campaign but we are not talking about that either here.

Btw, isnt that a Saxon regiment with that desertion rate?