Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

You've never had the Scabrella event?

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

I have. I think it was in 1979 in Atlanta. Took 4 rounds of penicillin before I was able to rid myself of the memento.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

If flail does not ignore shield as per manual says, it would be great of you guys to produce a document to correct the serious errors in the manual.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

So, I seem to be having something similar also, relating to flagellants. For the *second* turn in a row I just had a thug defeated by the same group of unblessed flagellants. Not quite the same order of magnitude as the fire king, but still extremely unlikely and relating to flagellants so it made me think of this thread.

King of the Deep 24/25 protection, awe-0, ethereal, lucky (fatigue 44). I'd expect flagellants dealing 11+3 damage to only have about a 3% chance to deal damage to me if they can hit my head. Ignoring my (considerable) defense the luck + etherealness should reduce the chance of dealing damage by roughly another order of magnitude...so about 0.3% chance of dealing damage if they overcome my defense. Turn one of engaging the flagellants a little red 4, 6, then 14 float up from my guy. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif That 14 damage alone has a chance of 0.0001% of happening, the chance of getting hit 3 times (15 x 2 attacks occurred) boggles the mind...never mind that something similar (don't have the turn to recite specifics, that dude's dead) happened with the same flagellants the previous turn.

Trying to strike agains Awe 1 (mor 18)
10200 striking with weapon Flail. att33 def21
hitloc Flagellant strikes King of the Deep wl3 diff0 -> 3
hitunit 10200 2440 dmg3 spec2097159 ba3
10200 striking with weapon Flail. att25 def19
hitloc Flagellant strikes King of the Deep wl3 diff0 -> 3
hitunit 10200 2440 dmg3 spec2097159 ba3
damage 4 on King of the Deep, spec0x200007 ba3
Ethereal failed
Trying to strike agains Awe 1 (mor 18)
10174 striking with weapon Flail. att19 def16
hitloc Flagellant strikes King of the Deep wl3 diff0 -> 2
hitunit 10174 2440 dmg3 spec2097159 ba2
10174 striking with weapon Flail. att13 def8
hitloc Flagellant strikes King of the Deep wl3 diff0 -> 2
hitunit 10174 2440 dmg3 spec2097159 ba2
damage 6 on King of the Deep, spec0x200007 ba2
Ethereal failed
Trying to strike agains Awe 1 (mor 18)
10201 striking with weapon Flail. att15 def6
hitloc Flagellant strikes King of the Deep wl3 diff0 -> 2
hitunit 10201 2440 dmg3 spec2097159 ba2
10201 striking with weapon Flail. att19 def7
hitloc Flagellant strikes King of the Deep wl3 diff0 -> 1
hitunit 10201 2440 dmg3 spec2097159 ba1
damage 14 on King of the Deep, spec0x200007 ba1
Ethereal failed

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

Perhaps is the time to put something on the bug thread, this is quite well documented.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

Critical strike bypassing protection due to high fatigue on the thug, perhaps?

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

Yeah, you need to take the fatigue into account I think Baalz.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

Perhaps I am mistaken, but I thought the fatigue critical hit only kicked in if fatigue is over 50?

*edit* hmmm don't know where I got that, but its not in the manual, I guess that would explain it. My bad. If I'm reading that right it looks like there is a 1/6 chance of a critical even at 0 fatigue... Just bad luck I guess that this bit me with flagellants twice in a row.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

It'll get put in the bug shortlist in due time, but so far it's still only a maybe and will be flagged as such.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

It seems to me one of the most severe and well documented bug, expecially after the great work of vbf among the others. But the bug boss are you.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

It seems to me that you and I get fairly different interpretations out of the same text. The debug logs and their analysis by some of the others here tell us that there MAY be something to this, but my reading of that is not conclusive. Nothing like the findings about the scale bug that vfb made, for example.

So give it a rest already. I have now added your complaint as a potential, unconfirmed issue in the BHV category and to be frank, more to shut you up than anything else. This pestering of yours just used up all credit you had with regard to bug reports, so if you have any more issues to report, don't even bother unless you can solidly document them and make them 100% reproducible. Every time the game behaves differently than you expected, it is NOT a bug.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

It seems that you are doing your best to put up a flame. I will not follow you, at least to respect your work with the bug and the people that put you in charge of forum administrator. But you are not very nice.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

moved

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

It is not intended to be a flame, Beorne. But it does reflect my frustration. You have a history of posting bug reports about issues that are either inconclusive or very minor in nature, especially compared to the amount of work required to fix them 100%. Or not even bugs at all but working as designed. You are also very insistent that the problem MUST be addressed immediately and it gets tiresome after a while and I'm fairly conked out after a 13 hour day, so I may be a little snappish.

Formulating shortlist entries that are clear, concise and carry the gist of the issue with all the necessary gravity is NOT easy, especially for something complex and uncertain like this and doing so eats into my free time. So if I add a couple of quick and easy entries into the shortlist, it does not mean I'm ignoring the more complex issues. I just may not have enough time and energy to make shortlist entries out of those at the time.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

This is questionable. I only remember that ea R'yleh description thing, the first time you answered me, and you were very rude in the public answer. At least at that time I could hope in some good admin, like Gandalf parker. But now you are the admin and imvho an admin should be more calm and peaceful, and you are not.
I'm not interested to quarrelling with you.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

"I don't want to argue with you, but long paragraph."

Come on guys, just let it go. There are plenty more productive things you could be doing. And a TON of better ways to waste your time. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

Calling Edi a bad admin might not be the most effective way to get him to do what you wish.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

hmm... have Gandalf Parker left us?

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

No, he hasn't. I think Beorne is saying he wishes Gandalf or another mod handled his requests, because he likes them better.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

I agree that Edi isn't as calm as some others, especially Gandalf. However, Edi manages several projects that take far more of his free time than just managing the forums would. The dom 3 database and the buglist threads alone are incredible, and priceless. I'd rather have grumpy Edi to do this categorizing stuff than not have them, and AFAIK Edi was made a moderator because he does that, instead of giving his job to some moderator. I presume there were no volunteers.



However, I also fail to see the clear, well-documented bug. It seems that sometimes, the RNG produces strange results - that's about it. What else was there to this bug report?

That it happens more often to flagellants than other units? Well, is it about the flagellant's unit nr, or their weapon, or were they actually blessed in all fights and there's some strange hidden damage multiplicator bug that sometimes occurs on blessed units, or what?

So far, the bug reported in this thread seems to be:

"Sometimes units, such as flagellants, manage to hit superior units, such as King of Elemental Fire with 15 more defense and 34 protection (on a shield hit), and deal lots of damage."

What should be done about that? Rewrite Dominions internal mechanics completely?

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

Maybe JK can fix Beorne's bad luck. Heck, if JK can fix bad luck, I'd like to be next in line. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

This reminds me, how big are chances that someone will score at lottery? Low I bet, but people still play lottery and some even win. Maybe JK could invent giant foot that would squish lottery winners as they must be buggy. I mean, to get lucky against such odds must be a bug and be dealt with ...

It's all well documented as well ...

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

The odds are VERY improbable on this one, though. There could well be some kind of a bug on the damage part - dealing over 60 damage seems way out of line. It's just that there's nothing to link it with. If it's just something that happened, bad luck, that's it. If it's in something else, we have to know what else first.


BTW, I just realized that Flail's second attack might intentionally have length 6 (or whatever it was. The second wl (weapon length) value was much higher, any way). Length is only used for repel. When flail repels, it's the length of the first attack that is checked. And when flail attacks, it could well be that it's one chance at repelling all of the attacks of the same weapon - repel works, no flail at all // repel fails, both attacks are in. At least for flail, it seems to work. If you get in under his guard, you perform your attack there, and if you don't, you can't attack at all.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

This appears to be going nowhere, so I'm locking it down. If anyone wants to discuss further, feel free to send me a pm.

Annette