Leader Casualty ???
Moderator: MOD_EIA
-
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:24 pm
Has 1,07 fixed the leader casuality bug?
Marshall,
We are starting a new PBEM game and need to know if to include leader casualties. This will depend if the bug is fixed so the senior leader isn't killed each time.
Please reply asap as the whole board are waiting on your answer to start.
Thanks a lot
Captain
We are starting a new PBEM game and need to know if to include leader casualties. This will depend if the bug is fixed so the senior leader isn't killed each time.
Please reply asap as the whole board are waiting on your answer to start.
Thanks a lot
Captain
- Marshall Ellis
- Posts: 5630
- Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
- Location: Dallas
RE: Has 1,07 fixed the leader casuality bug?
I cannot see a Mantis case on this BUT I just looked into the code and can see that I am randomly selecting an available leader.
Let me see if some testers can chime in on this...
Testers?
Let me see if some testers can chime in on this...
Testers?
RE: Has 1,07 fixed the leader casuality bug?
Im no tester, but if i can find the old savegame in my sendbox i used to show my point that it always took the seniority leader(and not random). I might be able to test some battles, but wont bee till next week, im stuck in work and xmas stuff.
Regards
Bresh
Regards
Bresh
RE: Has 1,07 fixed the leader casuality bug?
Marshall, we need a "cheat code" (if one exists) to allow testing of this scenario. It will just take too long to exhaustively test it at one time in every (averaged) 36 tries.
At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?
- Marshall Ellis
- Posts: 5630
- Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
- Location: Dallas
RE: Has 1,07 fixed the leader casuality bug?
I will try and run a scenario later this week...
RE: Has 1,07 fixed the leader casuality bug?
I would strongly advise against giving any testers any "cheat codes" (if in fact I am understanding what you mean by "cheat codes" correctly).
- Marshall Ellis
- Posts: 5630
- Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
- Location: Dallas
RE: Has 1,07 fixed the leader casuality bug?
Nobody is going to get any cheat codes! They don't work in the full versions anyway!
I think (To Jimmer's credit here) he is just looking for a quick way to test the casualty selection process.
I think (To Jimmer's credit here) he is just looking for a quick way to test the casualty selection process.
RE: Has 1,07 fixed the leader casuality bug?
Right on about the purpose.
But, cheat codes SHOULD work on full versions and SHOULD be given to players (not just testers, although an argument could be made for that). However, they should be optional (i.e. an option turns them off for the whole game; the option cannot be changed after game start).
The reason is because ordinary testing will never come close to discovering all of the bugs. Only full production usage ever uncovers the hidden bugs. EiANW is an excellent example of what happens when you do not release cheat codes: Dozens (hundreds?) of bugs are not uncovered until real games are impacted.
But, cheat codes SHOULD work on full versions and SHOULD be given to players (not just testers, although an argument could be made for that). However, they should be optional (i.e. an option turns them off for the whole game; the option cannot be changed after game start).
The reason is because ordinary testing will never come close to discovering all of the bugs. Only full production usage ever uncovers the hidden bugs. EiANW is an excellent example of what happens when you do not release cheat codes: Dozens (hundreds?) of bugs are not uncovered until real games are impacted.
At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?
RE: Has 1,07 fixed the leader casuality bug?
ORIGINAL: Jimmer
Right on about the purpose.
But, cheat codes SHOULD work on full versions and SHOULD be given to players (not just testers, although an argument could be made for that). However, they should be optional (i.e. an option turns them off for the whole game; the option cannot be changed after game start).
The reason is because ordinary testing will never come close to discovering all of the bugs. Only full production usage ever uncovers the hidden bugs. EiANW is an excellent example of what happens when you do not release cheat codes: Dozens (hundreds?) of bugs are not uncovered until real games are impacted.
Not that I entirely disagree with your opinion; however, the vast majority of a lot of these bugs could have been discovered by simple unit tests. The leader casualty is a PERFECT example. Unit testing should be done on the development side BEFORE the product ever goes to testing. JMO.
RE: Has 1,07 fixed the leader casuality bug?
Yes, but it wasn't. So now our only option is to production-test things.
Actually, beta-testing could do this as well, but production use of any software always uncovers the most issues. Since having cheat codes available harms nobody (if made optional), the only cost is what it would take to externalize them. (This is potentially difficult, though, so the cost to implement could be quite high, even if the risk is low.)
Actually, beta-testing could do this as well, but production use of any software always uncovers the most issues. Since having cheat codes available harms nobody (if made optional), the only cost is what it would take to externalize them. (This is potentially difficult, though, so the cost to implement could be quite high, even if the risk is low.)
At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?
RE: Has 1,07 fixed the leader casuality bug?
I wonder whether we are misunderstanding the bug here. From bresh's 30 battle test, I would have expected each side to have had five casualties, on the average, not one. So it seems like the game might be correctly rolling for each side, looking for a six...when it gets a six, it chooses a general randomly...and then it ignores the result of the second die roll (or never makes one) unless that general is the commanding officer. That last part of the process (taking a non-commander off the map when injured) is where I'd look for a code problem.
RE: Has 1,07 fixed the leader casuality bug?
ORIGINAL: RJCowan
I wonder whether we are misunderstanding the bug here. From bresh's 30 battle test, I would have expected each side to have had five casualties, on the average, not one. So it seems like the game might be correctly rolling for each side, looking for a six...when it gets a six, it chooses a general randomly...and then it ignores the result of the second die roll (or never makes one) unless that general is the commanding officer. That last part of the process (taking a non-commander off the map when injured) is where I'd look for a code problem.
One casualty per side tracks the correct rate, per original rules:
[ 12.7 ] LEADER CASUALTIES: After the completion of a field or limited field combat, a trivial combat, or a naval combat ,each side with a leader or leaders present checks to see if any became casualties in the combat by rolling two dice. Rolling a " 12 " indicates a leader casualty. If a casualty is indicated, randomly choose a leader counter from among those present (if more than one is present) and roll one die for the chosen leader. If a "6" is rolled, the leader casualty is "killed" and taken permanently from the game. On any other roll, the leader casualty is "wounded" and taken from the map for a number of complete months equal to the die roll number.
Rolling a "12" means two 6's: a 1/36 chance. The bit of the 1.06 in-game manual quoted in an earlier message says 1/6, but that must have been an error; the 1.07 manual says 1/36, which is correct. So that part's OK.
I haven't done any specific testing on this problem, but I'm pretty sure I've never seen a casualty that wasn't the senior leader, so it seems clear something's amiss with that.
RE: Has 1,07 fixed the leader casuality bug?
I agree, but the game isn't using the board game rules. The manual was quoted above, where apparently only 1D6 is now rolled to determine whether there is a casualty, and on a 6 there is one. The printed manual says 1D12 and a 12 gets a casualty, which would still average 2.5 casualties per side in 30 combats. Since the manual is inconsistent with itself, I don't know exactly what is done in game to determine that there is a casualty. But it appears that more casualties should result than in the board game.
- Marshall Ellis
- Posts: 5630
- Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
- Location: Dallas
RE: Has 1,07 fixed the leader casuality bug?
Tha manual should be updated as well as the roll which was fixed way back! I am actually rolling 2d6 per the original game. This was not the case before 1.04 in which I believe this was fixed??? Maybe even earlier...
- Marshall Ellis
- Posts: 5630
- Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
- Location: Dallas
RE: Has 1,07 fixed the leader casuality bug?
UPDATE!
Hey guys:
I did some testing today and found that the leader casualty was NOT being selected randomly. It was also not always the main leader being selected but had to do mainly with the unit number and db ordering. I have fixed this in 1.08 and have tested it where it is a complete random selection! Appreciate the ping to get back to look at this!
Hey guys:
I did some testing today and found that the leader casualty was NOT being selected randomly. It was also not always the main leader being selected but had to do mainly with the unit number and db ordering. I have fixed this in 1.08 and have tested it where it is a complete random selection! Appreciate the ping to get back to look at this!