LA Game - Victoria - Running - Page 25

Bwaha · #**241** November 5th, 2008, 07:14 PM

I received a new turn from Llamma Server. Should I disregard it? As far as a roll back, I staled the turn before, so I await further instruction. Thanks.

WraithLord · #**242** November 6th, 2008, 03:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bwaha

I received a new turn from Llamma Server. Should I disregard it? As far as a roll back, I staled the turn before, so I await further instruction. Thanks.

OK. So unless I hear any objections I'll rollback the turn this evening.
This means that you can disregard your new turn.

WraithLord · #**243** November 6th, 2008, 04:26 PM

ok then. hold tight - rolling turn back.

Herode · #**244** November 7th, 2008, 02:37 AM

I didn't send any orders last turn since the llamaserver was broken. I thought we will receive some wrning before the hosting... I am therefore a strong supporter of the rollback option.

[edit : oops, too late. Well...

]

WraithLord · #**245** November 7th, 2008, 02:59 AM

We will have to wait for the server to be fixed. Currently the rollback option is not working. I've tried it for like three times but it doesn't do anything.

WraithLord · #**246** November 7th, 2008, 04:20 AM

It seems like the server cached my request for rollback, didn't show any sign its rolling back and then all of a sudden rolled three turns back.
I'm really sorry for this

I will PM llama and ask if its possible to set game back to turn 64. Please do not delete the "Victoria: Rolled back to turn 64" emails you got as you would need those turns in case the server is set back to turn 64.

I will keep you posted and hope this unfortunate affair is resolved quickly.

WraithLord · #**247** November 7th, 2008, 02:18 PM

Still no ansewr from llama.

According to the server's documentaion I could just force host back to 64, since the original 2h files are saved on the server. Ain't got nothing to lose since at worst we roll back to 62.

Bwaha · #**248** November 7th, 2008, 02:42 PM

So should we submit turn 64?

WraithLord · #**249** November 7th, 2008, 04:24 PM

Frankly I'm not sure this will work. However, llama did say he is very busy ATM and I'm sure he has had enough on his plate what with the server down and all this.

My rational is that if indeed that server keeps the .2h file then if I were to force host turn 62 the hosing will work ok. Meaning no one will need to resubmit and no one will stale.
I'm not sure this will work for turn 63. This is b/c the second hosting of turn 62 will, even though using same orders, inevitably have different results than the first hosting (due to random events, close battles ending differently etc). This in turn may cause force hosting of turn 63 to yield unexpected and probably undesired effects.

In any case submitting turn 64 now will not work. The server will probably reject your file.

I'll try to amend this one step at a time. First host to turn 63. Then I'll check with you if files were generated ok (no stales or such).
Then force host to 64. This step is more likely to fail in my opinion but anyway its one turn better than 62.

Zeldor · #**250** November 7th, 2008, 04:44 PM

I am not in that game, but I wouldn't recommend it. Turn 63 results will be certainly different [at least random events] and it will mess unit IDs, so if someone submits old turn 63 it can mess things up [really mess it up, like people getting some new commanders, some batles that shouldn't happen, mess with province ownership]. So if you do it be aware that you everyone will have to do turn 63 again.