Re: Bug Commentary
 

I don't think #dyingdom is working. I left a capital province, the only province in the game, with no pretender for 10 turns and the dominion of 1 didn't change (shouldnt it drop to 0?). I don't know if its a bug or a normal game behavior.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

Deleted.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

I seem to remember a thread in Doms2 where it was mentioned that tramplers were /supposed/ to make a melee attack at the end of their trample. Is this supposed to be the case in Doms3 or is the current situation WAD?

Re: Bug Commentary
 

Tramplers have never made a melee attack except when they attack something their size or larger. Allowing them to make such an attack would make tramplers other than elephants and other size 6 creatures much more useful.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

#clearsites doesn't affect LA Pangaea starting site "The Carrion Grove". It could be related to old code that made Carrion Woods have different Carrion Groves depending on world richness.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

I got this sent by PM. Might as well put it here so it's visible to all. Time to add some more to the shortlist.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

I believe I stated earlier that #clearsites doesn't work at all. On anything. I stand by that; although I haven't tested it extensively I've never seen it clear any sites at all from any nation.

So have you had a different experience?

Re: Bug Commentary
 

It's listed there as not working at all (my experience as well, but only cursorily tested), but I added a separate shortlist entry for the special case for Carrion Grove and Unholy Sepulchre due to their special nature.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

It is bugged, yes. I hadn't noticed that, but I havne't used it at all in Dom3 any way.

MA Mictlan using one #clearsites removes Temple of the Rain and Temple of the Sun, leaving those of Land and Moon. They appear in the order of Rain, Moon, Sun, Land. Using four #clearsites removes all sites. I didn't test it any further, but using couple of #clearsites instead of just one should do the job. It's still bugged, and should be reported, but the workaround is quite simple.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

How weird. Still, that's actually very useful information for me to have.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

Fascinating what you find when you go mucking around in the deep pages of the forum. This bug was in Dom2, so there's a good chance it's in Dom3 also.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

I'm not sure if this has already been noted, but the EA ermorian equites have no secondary weapons (ie, swords). They only have light lance and hoof attacks.

Equite monster number 1107
Equite of the shroud monster number 1108

This might be because they are supposed to have 'long swords' when in fact no such weapon exists in dom3. Maybe there are other units with this problem.

If this has already been noted, that's my bad. Try not to bite my head off ;]

Re: Bug Commentary
 

It's not a bug. Light Lance has charge bonus, but it is NOT a once per battle only weapon the way the Lance is. You can use lance only for one strike, then it's gone and you have your actual primary weapon. With light lance, it IS your primary weapon and you can use it to whack the enemy as many times as you want.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

Ah. Well then the description is inaccurate, because it mentions 'long swords'. Not as big a problem as it seemed.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

Not so much a bug as just the result of the equation they implemented for globals. Part of the long list of things where more documentation would be helpful, yet arcane enough that its probably just as well to have the "documentation" be in the forums rather than a manual.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

I know. There's a discussion somewhere that discusses the relative merits ofa couple of equations, but I'm not going to try to comb through the forums to try and find it. As I recall, there was a fairly elegant solution to the problem by simply changing the equation a tiny little bit that would account for the discount in calculating dispel difficulty. As such, it could be fixed with relatively little effort as long as it's reported and if we can find that old discussion to save Johan some time in looking at and analyzing the code for why it behaves that way.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

I didn't have time or inclination to read throught he previous 55 pages so I apologize if this is already in the list bue I just had a battle in a SP game against Vanheim in its home fortress.

There were 10 commanders half of them vanherses/vanjarls and the like, another half or so dwarven smiths, and an A5F7 phoenix. The holy units cast the divine retribution spell (I think that's the name...the one that smites you when you kill the mob). They were then killed off by the phoenix's fire aura. That was kind of funny to watch as it's sort of poor positioning by the AI. But that's not the bug. The bug is that every turn after they died (and this included the vanheim prophet) my side would get smitten. Every turn. There was no text indicating what had cast the smite, and there was no holy unit on the field on the other side. I guess dying without a clear "killer" other than their own preternder's aura did this.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

Unit bug (typo/discrepancy):

Hirdman #1510
Actual defense is 16, but from the "Recruit" screen is listed as 17.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

MaxWilson, since when has that been true? I've got recruited hirdmen of that type and they show a defense of 17. They have a base value of 14 for def and the modifiers raise it to 17. The only way they could have def 16 is by having an affliction or being otherwise hampered. Such as being in a swamp province.

Survivalist, I think that's WAD. If somebody with the divine retribution gets killed, the heathens get smited every turn. Doesn't matter why he died, it's the heathens' fault! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: Bug Commentary
 

(um for the post above me, was that by chance in a swamp Province? swamp provinces lower attack and defence for most units, damn you Edi beat me to it.)


This looked like the place to report bugs, so please correct me if I'm wrong! ahem

1. Late Age Rhyla, the insanity causes commanders to do random things inclueding, Become prophet, this makes rhyla get multiple prophets, baaad, unless this is ment to be like this..


2. sieging a fort, it was taking a while and I had a random event to increase province defence on the province and I had 15 def there, when you shouldn't normaly be able to make province def in a sieged province.

I shall report more once I remember what they are, I'm very sure I saw others.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

1) It's supposed to be that way.

2) That's been reported, but from the POV of the sieged forces in the castle. Thanks for the confirmation. It's a bug.

You can also take a look at the Bug Shortlist Thread to see if the things you have in mind are already reported.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

1 hum , I thought it might have been but I wasn't sure, thanks too.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

Did someone report that MA Jotunheim and LA Marignon have bugged mages that can be recruited without labs.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

Do people bother reading this thread? AT ALL?

That bit is snipped from the first big bug commentary post on the previous page. TRY at least to pay some bloody attention to what is going on. It gets a tad annoying having to explain things several times simply because people are too lazy to use their own two eyes.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

Gateway works correctly... and so does Astral Travel. From my testing Astral Travel works every time. The #startspell only is available for one turn so you'll need to setup a map giving yourself astral travel and 2 astral mages with randomequip_4 which will supply the astral gems to cast the spell. I'm reporting they both work correctly because we don't want the developers wasting time investigating something which is not broken. The only piece which might be busted is the GateStone item.

I've never reported bugs with Twiceborn or Ritual of Rebirth so you're confusing me with someone else.

I'm questioning the bug report because I have yet to experience this spell failing. Your confusion is the bug is not the astral spell which works great... it's the gatestone item. If you spend just 8mins of testing Astral Travel you would see the spell works.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

Apologies. Looks like I did confuse you with somebody else. Probably happened when I was sorting the chaotic mess I gleaned out of the early thread where I also had the names so I knew who posted what.

Thanks also for clarifying the Gatestone issue. Better that it's just the item bugged than the spells. Sorry I was so snippy with you, riding herd on this thing gets on the nerves sometimes.

SoInjustice: National itemspell restriction?
 

The Sword of Injustice description (unchanged from D2) is probably missing a limitation.

A simple sword of ordinary appearance, this sword was once not unlike other swords. After it was worn and wielded by the Grand Censor of Ermor, who used it to mete out his depraved justice, it acquired considerable power from the innumerable innocents that died from it. The residue of these injustices residing in the blade was enhanced during the cataclysmic fall of Ermor, when it absorbed considerable amounts of unholy energies. The sword will now increase the holy might of its wielder and will strike anyone it hits with the rot of Hell. It also enables the owner to protect his undead minions from banishment.

It's supposed to grant the combat spell 'Protection of the Sepulchre', I believe. As T'ien C'hi, gave it to a GoR'd wight to protect his fellow wights; but this option wasn't listed in the order-assignment screen.

I'm not sure whether this is intended -- there are multiple possible causes here.

1. It's a national spell, and even items aren't supposed to break national-spell restrictions. In which case, this limit should probably be mentioned somewhere.

2. It's a holy spell, and there's something which prevents holy spells from being granted to non-priests. This would be unusual in so far as other itemspells work for non-mages ex. Phoenix Rod, skellipendant.

3. It's something specifically about this item.

My suspicion is #1, which should be testable via playing an Ashen Empire game. I don't have one active let alone at Cons 8; nor are there any other items which grant national spells, if memory serves. But if somebody does have an AE game and the Sword of Injustice, it might be interesting to check, and to also inquire as to whether the national-spell restriction is really intended here.

Re: SoInjustice: National itemspell restriction?
 

From my past experiences with this sword, the spell 'Protection of the Sepulchre' is cast automatically when the battle begins as it was in Dom2. I may be wrong.

Re: SoInjustice: National itemspell restriction?
 

Ahhhhh. Autocast? Didn't think about that possibility. Doh.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

Er, never mind. It turned out the Hirdmen I was checking were in a swamp. Not a bug.

-Max

Re: Bug Commentary
 

I've read this bug some times ago but because i didn't find it in the short list so i bring it up again:

[b]Paralized summons stay paralized after death. It means for example a recast air queen still have the paralize(x) and is still paralized in her next battle! Same for all the unique summons.[b]

Re: Bug Commentary
 

Thanks, calmon. I'll add that one. I remember exracting it out of the thread, but it probably got lost in the shuffle as I organized the stuff into categories.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

True, it was reported here: http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/thr...306#Post500306

Re: Bug Commentary
 

Thanks, Ich.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

Its not permanent at all. If you bring up the commander in a new battle it starts paralized but the paralize count down normally.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

Thank you for the clarification. That also explains a lot of things. All units in the game have a unique identifier number that tells them apart from all other units and allows keeping track of afflictions, age, paralysis etc.

The unique monsters obviously also have these identifiers, and when they are resummoned, they will retain the characteristics they had previously (except maybe experience, which is afaik nullified). Seems that there is no similar nullification for paralysis, so when the unit dies and has the paralysis characteristic set to some value, it persists after the summon. So while it is a bug, it seems to be consistent with the game mechanics and not some totally bizarre behavior. I will amend the bug description.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

Dev Comment is correct. All Queens have regeneration in 3.06.
The problem is that all Water Queens have the huge Regeneration in water AND on land. They shouldn't regenerate without water.

I think the idea is that 'unholy bless' is the bless for the undead sacreds and 'bless' is for the non-undead sacreds. This would work fine for me!
The problem is that 'unholy bless' is a national spell for ermor only.
This means that nations like LA ulm can't bless the sacred ghouls, same for Sauromatia which can't bless her national (undead) sacreds ancestral spirits.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

This is a leftover from Dom2, where there were unholy sacreds and holy sacreds. Ermor had unholy ones. Everyone else had holy.

Right now, everyone has holy sacreds, whether undead or not, so normal blessing should work. Otherwise, what the hell good is any blessing? OR unholy blessing needs to be available for all. The best solution would be for even normal blessing to affect undead, but the special unholy undead boost spells (power of the Sepulchre, protection of the sepulchre, unholy power, unholy protection) being MA and LA Ermor only. So the bug report is correct and sensible.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

Yes you're right. I'm thinking about the problem again and there isn't any good argument for not having 'one bless to bless them all' http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Playing ermor it happened to me that i accidentally script the wrong bless spell which can be really annoying.

Maybe you can add it to the bug list that 'unholy bless' will become obsolete when fixing this bug.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

I think the idea was to seperate holy into 2 seperate paths ie...holy and unholy but sadly its created alot of problems for certain nations. Its more thematic to have bless for living beings and unholy for the undead.

Re: Bug Commentary
 

But the whole point of the changes from Dom2 was to get rid of the Holy/Unholy distinction.

Why preserve this one relic of the two different types of priests?

Re: Bug Commentary
 

It shouldn't be preserved. The special unholy stuff that Ermor and Desert Tombs C'tis had in Dom2 can be done with restricted national holy spells, and those were generally meant to boost the powers of undead creatures in ways other than bless. Note that they also generally affected ALL undead, not just unholy undead (which are precious few in number).

The blessings are separate and need to be applicable through normal bless. Why would a god who is the god of a nation that uses undead nad considers them sacred refuse to bestow his blessings on sacred undead? And why would the priests who also consider the undead holy refuse to do that?

Re: Bug thread
 

I'd like to reiterate Calmon's report because it seems like a major bug which I cannot find on the shortlist. I myself have experienced situations where, having started with a low dominion strength, my temples remain ineffective even after building enough temples to get my conversion rates up to the 10X modifier. I've also seen reports of this referenced in other threads, so I think it's an issue of long standing. Surely the numbers you get when you click "Temple" would not be detached from your temples' actual effectiveness if this were WAD?

Re: Bug thread
 

The Tempest Warriors for EA Caelum seem to have icicle mail even if the description says that do not wear ice armours. It says they wear Ring Mail Hauberks and the protection is calculated correctly during recruitment. However during the battles I noted that the protection of both head and body seem to go up/down 2 for every cold/heat icon.

Re: Bug thread
 

From Kristoffer's Encouragement Thread:
This sort of thing should be posted here to make certain that it gets shortlisted in the next roundup.

Re: Bug thread
 

Thanks for the report, but please read the instructions in the first post of the shortlist thread. This has now been reported, but the whole forum has now run out of exceptions.


GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENT:

Any future reports on units, weapons, armor, items or sites will be completely ignored unless the identification number for the object in question is provided.

The ID numbers for units, armor and weapons is available by viewing a unit and pressing shift+i. Item number by viewing item and pressing shift+i. Site numbers, poptype numbers and a lot of other stuff from the Dom3 DB.

I do not appreciate having to do extra work when the guidelines have been laid down and the special indulegnces and lenience end right bloody now. I don't give a damn if the bug is a complete game breaker, I will NOT shortlist incomplete bug reports that would necessitate additional research on my part. If it's an important bug in your opinion, then you WILL have time enough to go the effort to report it properly. Or you can make an incomplete report and pray that it gets fixed on its own.

Re: Bug thread
 

Thanks to Reay for providing the unit ID for Tempest Warrior by PM, saved me from doing that when I get home. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: Bug thread
 

Found a bug, when a fortress is being raided but nothing is inside and the fortress is just taken by your raiding forces, no battle, the recruitment orders that were previously given to the fortress are still there and you may dismiss the units in que for your enemies money back!

Re: Bug thread
 

That's been reported and shortlisted already. Thank you in any case. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smile.gif

Re: Bug thread
 

Oh, I checked the shortlist, I must have missed it sorry..