bugs in WiR 3.0

Matrix Games Forums

Command Rommels Panzers in Battle Academy!

Servers Update

The Deal goes Fourth!

Command Ops gets a Massive Update!

Lost Battles AAR: Smolensk 41

War in the East: Lost Battles is here!

Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear! Let's Play video

Lost Battles Scenario Manual excerpts available!

A sneak peek from Allied Corps!

Harpoon 3 ANWs Free Ultimate Update!

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

bugs in WiR 3.0

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Classic (Free) Games] >> War In Russia: The Matrix Edition >> bugs in WiR 3.0

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

bugs in WiR 3.0 - 2/22/2001 5:51:00 AM

Mist

Posts: 483
Joined: 11/21/2000
From: Russia, Moscow
Status: offline

I were playing comp vs. comp and found that: there are strange messages occuring sometimes while USAAF strategic bombing missions 1) "no sustains light damage" This is when bombers fly from the south 2) "X tank Bde is renamed to X Guards Tank Bde" this happens pretty often when bombers come from GB upon the certain city in NW Germany. Also, I've noticed that AI air missions are sometimes aborted and "Not allowed" message is displayed. Whole game is very fine and seems more balanced. Thank you very much! [This message has been edited by Mist (edited February 21, 2001).]

Post #: 1

- 2/22/2001 7:27:00 AM

RickyB

Posts: 1155
Joined: 7/26/2000
From: Denver, CO USA
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Mist: I were playing comp vs. comp and found that: there are strange messages occuring sometimes while USAAF strategic bombing missions 1) "no sustains light damage" This is when bombers fly from the south 2) "X tank Bde is renamed to X Guards Tank Bde" this happens pretty often when bombers come from GB upon the certain city in NW Germany. Also, I've noticed that AI air missions are sometimes aborted and "Not allowed" message is displayed. Whole game is very fine and seems more balanced. Thank you very much! [This message has been edited by Mist (edited February 21, 2001).]

Thanks for the feedback, Mist. Appreciate hearing it. Regarding the X Brigade, is the X an actual number or does it show the X? If it is a number, that is a correct message. If an X, what scenario were you playing? The Not Allowed message may be okay also, but I am not sure. Thanks again for the information. ------------------ Rick Bancroft Semper Fi

_____________________________

Rick Bancroft
Semper Fi

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 2

- 2/22/2001 7:49:00 AM

tsbond

Posts: 60
Joined: 11/23/2000
From: USA
Status: offline

The only time I got not allowed was after I moved my HQ and then tried to bomb something or of course if I try to bomb from or at GHQ or RVGK.

_____________________________

"What luck for rulers that men do not think." <br />-Adolf Hitler

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 3

- 2/22/2001 3:11:00 PM

Ed Cogburn

Posts: 1979
Joined: 7/24/2000
From: Greeneville, Tennessee - GO VOLS!
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by tsbond: The only time I got not allowed was after I moved my HQ and then tried to bomb something or of course if I try to bomb from or at GHQ or RVGK.

You have to fly your missions before moving the HQ, but that doesn't explain the "Not Allowed" message as I'm not seeing it. Hmmm...

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 4

- 2/22/2001 4:15:00 PM

Mist

Posts: 483
Joined: 11/21/2000
From: Russia, Moscow
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by RickyB: Thanks for the feedback, Mist. Appreciate hearing it. Regarding the X Brigade, is the X an actual number or does it show the X? If it is a number, that is a correct message. If an X, what scenario were you playing? The Not Allowed message may be okay also, but I am not sure. Thanks again for the information.

X is a number. As for 'not allowed' message, it appears in computer play, so I suspect there is a minor bug in AI coding. What can you say about 'no sustains light damage' message?

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 5

- 2/22/2001 10:13:00 PM

RickyB

Posts: 1155
Joined: 7/26/2000
From: Denver, CO USA
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Mist: [QUOTE] X is a number. As for 'not allowed' message, it appears in computer play, so I suspect there is a minor bug in AI coding. What can you say about 'no sustains light damage' message?

I think the Guard Tank Brigade message is okay, unless you are saying it happens during the bombing phase. If so, what city is it tied to? Like Ed, I have never seen the Not Allowed during the bombing phase as I have been playing head to head for awhile now - sounds fairly minor from your description I guess, but it will be passed on. As to the other, I have not clue. Are the bombers being hit hard, and thus not dropping any bombs on target? Even that I have had happen without the message you are seeing. What delay and display settings are you using? Thanks for the details. ------------------ Rick Bancroft Semper Fi

_____________________________

Rick Bancroft
Semper Fi

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 6

- 2/23/2001 2:22:00 AM

Mist

Posts: 483
Joined: 11/21/2000
From: Russia, Moscow
Status: offline

Originally posted by RickyB: I think the Guard Tank Brigade message is okay, unless you are saying it happens during the bombing phase. tank bde is ok, sorry. It just remains shown when those bombers come. If so, what city is it tied to? Like Ed, I have never seen the Not Allowed during the bombing phase as I have been playing head to head for awhile now - sounds fairly minor from your description I guess, but it will be passed on. I try to reproduce this 'not allowed' thingie, but still fail. It appeared once or twice in the first turns of barbarossa during Soviets turn. I will let you know details if reveal something more about that. As to the other, I have not clue. Are the bombers being hit hard, and thus not dropping any bombs on target? Even that I have had happen without the message you are seeing. What delay and display settings are you using? I use no delay/display settings, because I have not much time to look at the whole campain in details and I hit a pause I want to look at something more closely. So, I have no idea about bomber losses. But I am more sure than not sure about that weird message. My speculations led me to conclude that there can be an empty city without factories. If it is bombed, then factory of _no_ sustains damage. BTW, today I saw 'City sustains damage' message. That is for sure. Is it ok? I discovered one more bug which was in the previous versions also. Player still can rail transfer units from invalid(no operative railroad) location. My panzer korps was reinforced by infantry division in the begining of 1st pulse(*grrr*). It advanced along the railroad and I was able to rail transfer infantry back safely when my turn had come. It is easy to reproduce. [This message has been edited by Mist (edited February 22, 2001).]

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 7

- 2/23/2001 10:26:00 AM

RickyB

Posts: 1155
Joined: 7/26/2000
From: Denver, CO USA
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Mist: I use no delay/display settings, because I have not much time to look at the whole campain in details and I hit a pause I want to look at something more closely. So, I have no idea about bomber losses. But I am more sure than not sure about that weird message. My speculations led me to conclude that there can be an empty city without factories. If it is bombed, then factory of _no_ sustains damage. BTW, today I saw 'City sustains damage' message. That is for sure. Is it ok? I discovered one more bug which was in the previous versions also. Player still can rail transfer units from invalid(no operative railroad) location. My panzer korps was reinforced by infantry division in the begining of 1st pulse(*grrr*). It advanced along the railroad and I was able to rail transfer infantry back safely when my turn had come. It is easy to reproduce. [This message has been edited by Mist (edited February 22, 2001).][/B]

The message about City sustains damage is an old one related to a city being bombed without any active factories - I have gotten this one when all factories are out of action already, or there just aren't any present. I have no clue where the No sustains light damage is coming from. Rail issues, although not the specific one you mentioned, were one of the things Arnaud did not get fixed, because the code was difficult to find and the time to fix it seemed too much. He wants to fix these issues - there were 4 or 5 different ones left - in the next update. ------------------ Rick Bancroft Semper Fi

_____________________________

Rick Bancroft
Semper Fi

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 8

- 2/23/2001 3:30:00 PM

Ed Cogburn

Posts: 1979
Joined: 7/24/2000
From: Greeneville, Tennessee - GO VOLS!
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Mist: I try to reproduce this 'not allowed' thingie, but still fail. It appeared once or twice in the first turns of barbarossa during Soviets turn. I will let you know details if reveal something more about that.

I'll bet the "Not allowed" message is related to not having enough operations points to make the move or transfer. It is very likely to happen to the Soviets in the early turns because of their lack of OPs. It would be nice if the error message actually said this wouldn't it?

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 9

- 2/23/2001 6:07:00 PM

Paul McNeely

Posts: 607
Joined: 9/8/2000
From: Germany
Status: offline

I noticed a bug-error in the reporting of bombing results. Sometimes the message that shows up saying the number of tons of bombs dropped does not agree with the after combat results. I had a airfield attack where what showed up as a message was a few tons dropped (this was the 3rd Rummian Army's starting BR20 group bombing the southern Front) and little effect but in the combat result summary I got significantly more tonnage and russian losses.

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 10

- 2/24/2001 7:49:00 AM

Mist

Posts: 483
Joined: 11/21/2000
From: Russia, Moscow
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Paul McNeely: I noticed a bug-error in the reporting of bombing results. Sometimes the message that shows up saying the number of tons of bombs dropped does not agree with the after combat results. I had a airfield attack where what showed up as a message was a few tons dropped (this was the 3rd Rummian Army's starting BR20 group bombing the southern Front) and little effect but in the combat result summary I got significantly more tonnage and russian losses.

I also regulary see that thing. Tonage is doubled, do not know about losses.

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 11

- 2/24/2001 2:11:00 PM

Paul McNeely

Posts: 607
Joined: 9/8/2000
From: Germany
Status: offline

I had two occurances of the teleporting army last night. In two combats in the same turn I forced a retreat then the AI 'ported in another army group to that location. I didn't save the file, but let me know if a saved file would help and I will if it happens again.

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 12

- 2/24/2001 4:11:00 PM

Ed Cogburn

Posts: 1979
Joined: 7/24/2000
From: Greeneville, Tennessee - GO VOLS!
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Paul McNeely: I had two occurances of the teleporting army last night. In two combats in the same turn I forced a retreat then the AI 'ported in another army group to that location. I didn't save the file, but let me know if a saved file would help and I will if it happens again.

We know about this AI bug. Its at the top of the AI Buglist. However the programmer has difficulty since this code is undocumented and the most complex code in the game. Changes to the AI will come later, perhaps much later. We all want to play the game some now before making any more changes.

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 13

- 2/24/2001 10:36:00 PM

RickyB

Posts: 1155
Joined: 7/26/2000
From: Denver, CO USA
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Paul McNeely: I had two occurances of the teleporting army last night. In two combats in the same turn I forced a retreat then the AI 'ported in another army group to that location. I didn't save the file, but let me know if a saved file would help and I will if it happens again.

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 14

- 2/25/2001 12:39:00 AM

StratMan

Posts: 32
Joined: 10/21/2000
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by RickyB: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Paul McNeely: I had two occurances of the teleporting army last night. In two combats in the same turn I forced a retreat then the AI 'ported in another army group to that location. I didn't save the file, but let me know if a saved file would help and I will if it happens again.

As Ed said, that is on Arnaud's list. What we found out is happening is that the AI already has the 2 corps in the same hex before combat, so it is not creating the second on the fly - it is already there. The advantage to this, if there is one, is that you can surround both units and take them out together. The doubling up does not always happen in critical areas, fortunately, so it is a fairly minor issue overall, just very weird. [/B][/QUOTE] I have not had the time to check out the new version yet. But I distinctly remember playing the Russians against the old AI in version 2.1 . The AI teleported an entire Panzer Korps behind my forward lines in front of Moscow during October and September, during September I found two entire Panzer Korps behind my lines. I had had no breach in my line where they turned up so that was'nt it. Scotty must be working for the Axis AI I think. (beam me up scotty). Did not really hurt to much because they were forced to be supplied by air, yeah right two entire Panzer Korps, I anniliated them in two weeks, problem was it caused me to use my few and far between reserves. Incidently, Berlin fell march 43. The StratMan.

_____________________________

StratMan
-----------------------------------------

Einstein rules relativity.
Well in theory at least.

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 15

- 2/25/2001 12:56:00 AM

RickyB

Posts: 1155
Joined: 7/26/2000
From: Denver, CO USA
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by StratMan: I have not had the time to check out the new version yet. But I distinctly remember playing the Russians against the old AI in version 2.1 . The AI teleported an entire Panzer Korps behind my forward lines in front of Moscow during October and September, during September I found two entire Panzer Korps behind my lines. I had had no breach in my line where they turned up so that was'nt it. Scotty must be working for the Axis AI I think. (beam me up scotty). Did not really hurt to much because they were forced to be supplied by air, yeah right two entire Panzer Korps, I anniliated them in two weeks, problem was it caused me to use my few and far between reserves. Incidently, Berlin fell march 43. The StratMan.

I'd forgotten who brought that one up-that was a good one and the AI does it from both sides at the switch in weather turns. It is probably still in there also, as Arnaud couldn't find enough hints as to where to look for it, and it is strictly an AI issue. He plans to fix both of these after he rests for awhile and plays the creation a little bit. ------------------ Rick Bancroft Semper Fi

_____________________________

Rick Bancroft
Semper Fi

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 16

- 2/25/2001 2:34:00 AM

Mist

Posts: 483
Joined: 11/21/2000
From: Russia, Moscow
Status: offline

The game crashed suddenly when I were changing replacement rate for AGS. It was 50, I increased it to 80 and pressed + on the numeric pad once more. Crash had thrown me back into my program shell. I doubt I can reproduce this one at will, but probably my report will make more complete pattern with others. Tnank you very much! I love this game despite of all bugs and just hope to make what I can to make your great efforts little bit easier. ------------------ ------------------------- 'I ve got blisters on my fingers!!!!' Ringo Star

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 17

- 2/25/2001 9:23:00 PM

shane056

Posts: 31
Joined: 10/11/2000
From: Western Australia
Status: offline

The PBEM is still non functional, as I have discovered that in a game saved under PBEM, that I am playing, that whilst deploying the soviet forces, and then saving the game, to leave it for a while, and then, on coming back and loading it up, all my moved armies have had the readiness of their units, and their entrenchment levels increased, plus all my HQ's have had their OP points topped back up, and the units in them have had their readiness levels also increased, and any transferred air units, no longer have "t" alongside them, but are now available for immediate use, plus I also keep getting a full allocation of rail points returned. The game cannot be played via PBEM, under these conditions, as there would be no way the axis would get beyond second base, so to speak.... Shane PS...Thankyou to all for this update to a great game...

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 18

- 2/25/2001 11:38:00 PM

RickyB

Posts: 1155
Joined: 7/26/2000
From: Denver, CO USA
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by shane056: The PBEM is still non functional, as I have discovered that in a game saved under PBEM, that I am playing, that whilst deploying the soviet forces, and then saving the game, to leave it for a while, and then, on coming back and loading it up, all my moved armies have had the readiness of their units, and their entrenchment levels increased, plus all my HQ's have had their OP points topped back up, and the units in them have had their readiness levels also increased, and any transferred air units, no longer have "t" alongside them, but are now available for immediate use, plus I also keep getting a full allocation of rail points returned. The game cannot be played via PBEM, under these conditions, as there would be no way the axis would get beyond second base, so to speak.... Shane PS...Thankyou to all for this update to a great game...

Shane, Thanks for that tidbit of information. Never thought about quitting out and going back in as always tried to get a turn done, but I know when not testing the game I might do this. There must still be a problem with where the game is re-entering on start, even when it is part way through a turn. We will make a note of it for fix in the update that Arnaud should do later on. ------------------ Rick Bancroft Semper Fi

_____________________________

Rick Bancroft
Semper Fi

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 19

- 2/26/2001 3:01:00 PM

Yogi Yohan

Posts: 445
Joined: 7/28/2000
From: Uppsala, Sweden
Status: offline

I know losses is a problem with this game, but those incurred by German forces seem excessive after 1941, especially on the defense. Take a case where a Soviet 2:1 infantry attack is repulsed by a German Infantry Korps in the summer of 1942. The Germans are supported by bombers and the Soviet are not. You'd expect much heavier Soviet casualties than German but they are usually roughly equal or even somewhat larger for the Germans. There must be something wrong with the combat routines. Maybe they do not take experience into account properly? One idea for tweaking would be to let the experience influence losses also AFTER the combat has been resolved and not only by increasing combat value. In this way, an elite division that is forced to retreat by a 4:1 attack would suffer less losses than a green divison under the same odds.

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 20

- 2/26/2001 10:09:00 PM

Charles22

Posts: 912
Joined: 5/17/2000
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline

I'm having the same problem I had with V2.3, and that is on the full campaign, on the second or third week, a lot of the infantry corps go into mangled graphics, and there's extra cities added to the map (which aren't really there - illusion) with intact infantry corps in them. I have the orginal WIR, and it doesn't do that, but then I play that in DOS. I'm playing thoough Windows 98 SE, if I run WIR straight through DOS, is there any hopr this the graphics won't get off, or any other solutions out there?

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 21

- 2/26/2001 10:17:00 PM

RickyB

Posts: 1155
Joined: 7/26/2000
From: Denver, CO USA
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Charles22: I'm having the same problem I had with V2.3, and that is on the full campaign, on the second or third week, a lot of the infantry corps go into mangled graphics, and there's extra cities added to the map (which aren't really there - illusion) with intact infantry corps in them. I have the orginal WIR, and it doesn't do that, but then I play that in DOS. I'm playing thoough Windows 98 SE, if I run WIR straight through DOS, is there any hopr this the graphics won't get off, or any other solutions out there?

I have played the different test versions on a variety of systems, through Windows, and haven't had any problems with the graphics, except an occasional one when using the Strategic map. Makes it hard to recommend anything, but I would say try the DOS mode and see if that helps. I will check back through some old notes from other people over the years also and see if I find anything - I seem to remember some various graphics glitches, but nothing specific. I'll let you know if I find anything. ------------------ Rick Bancroft Semper Fi

_____________________________

Rick Bancroft
Semper Fi

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 22

- 2/27/2001 9:13:00 AM

Ed Cogburn

Posts: 1979
Joined: 7/24/2000
From: Greeneville, Tennessee - GO VOLS!
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Charles22: I'm having the same problem I had with V2.3, and that is on the full campaign, on the second or third week, a lot of the infantry corps go into mangled graphics, and there's extra cities added to the map (which aren't really there - illusion) with intact infantry corps in them.

As with RickyB, I've never seen this and I play WiR under Windows 98SE. How much ram is available in a DOS box on your system?

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 23

- 2/27/2001 8:56:00 PM

Charles22

Posts: 912
Joined: 5/17/2000
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline

Ed Cogburn: My Windows is managaing the memory. Do you mean how much memory is left after I activate DOS? I'm not sure, but any times I've checked memory when Windows was up, the management was very good; better than anything I was able to do when we had only Windows 3.1 on my own. If I remember I'll activate DOS when I get home tonight and check the memory as well as see if the graphics glitch occurs under pure DOS conditions. I don't have all that much time, so I may not be able to go through with testing the glitches. I think I'd rather play something that works on Fat Tuesday, than experiment around.

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 24

- 2/28/2001 12:58:00 PM

Ed Cogburn

Posts: 1979
Joined: 7/24/2000
From: Greeneville, Tennessee - GO VOLS!
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Charles22: Ed Cogburn: My Windows is managaing the memory. Do you mean how much memory is left after I activate DOS?

Windows doesn't "manage" DOS memory the way you are thinking. When you are in a DOS box, it is the DOS that manages its own memory (the first 640k, high memory, and upper memory blocks from the 384k above the 640k), as far as any DOS program is concerned. Also, with Windows 95/98 there is no such thing as pure DOS, unless you boot up an old copy of 6.22 or something. The DOS v7.10 that is part of Windows 95/98 is not 100% compatible. I have some DOS programs that run under a DOS box in Windows but will not run if I boot only into DOS and do not load Windows. This is what is referred to by Windows as "MS-DOS mode". Ironic isn't it? MS-DOS mode is less compatible than a DOS box under Windows?!? When you've got Windows up, go to the "Run" command on the Start menu, and type "mem /c". At the end of the display there will be a line that says "Largest executable program size". That is the memory you're concerned with. On my system (which has never had the problem you are having) the available memory is 612k (626,368).

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 25

- 2/28/2001 9:17:00 PM

Charles22

Posts: 912
Joined: 5/17/2000
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline

Ed Cogburn: Alright, but I'm pretty sure it's always taching around 620K.

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 26

- 3/1/2001 7:22:00 AM

Martinov

Posts: 24
Joined: 12/24/2000
From: Western Australia
Status: offline

I also occasionally (1/20) get the mixed up graphics error. It seems to subsititute the axis satellite army tile for the minor city tile on the map, and sprinkle a few along the rhine for good measure. Doesn't affect play (I have 650Mhz, 128MB RAM computer) - probably not worth worrying about.

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 27

- 3/1/2001 8:19:00 AM

Charles22

Posts: 912
Joined: 5/17/2000
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline

Ed Cogburn: I've tried it now, and I have 616K available.

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 28

- 3/1/2001 6:03:00 PM

Ed Cogburn

Posts: 1979
Joined: 7/24/2000
From: Greeneville, Tennessee - GO VOLS!
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Charles22: Ed Cogburn: I've tried it now, and I have 616K available.

Then its not a memory problem apparently, as 616k should be enough (more than I have). I don't know what else to tell ya. [This message has been edited by Ed Cogburn (edited March 01, 2001).]

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 29

- 3/1/2001 8:10:00 PM

Tom1939

Posts: 789
Joined: 11/23/2000
From: Hungary
Status: offline

Hi! I played to the death scenario (no allies). I destroyed a 5 army pocket near lenningrad in 41. I have shaterred or surrendered 3 of them, after that combat showed some other battles. When the combat continued in the packet the 3 destroyed armies were there again. My troops destroyed them again, but I had to destroy 8 armies to kill 5 (3 of them twice).

(in reply to Mist)

Post #: 30