Search results for query: *

The same issue seems to occur with the quest "Family Feud". This time I saw a message warning me about being above the companion limit and potentially losing one (I finished the quest fast enough so it's fine).
I believe that in both of these quests, the additional party member isn't supposed to be counted as a companion.

I can see three sources for this problem :

- as in the OP, there's the case of defenders losing the siege defense so it's expected that they get captured but the castle remains in the same realm for some reason, maybe it's because the enemies leave the siege after the battle (low numbers remaining) so the game gives the prisoners to the wrong side ?

- but there's also a problem with nobles that are already prisoners and are taken as prisoners by their allies instead of being freed (didn't notice this, was reported on reddit).

- and there's the case where a lord joins a kingdom (like I just recruited one) and an army still starts a siege at their new ally's settlement :

Merci pour les conseils !
Je n'avais pas trouvé l'info que CONVERSATION_NPC.GENDER existait, pourtant j'avais cherché mais je n'avais trouvé que des exemples avec PLAYER et RULER ironiquement. J'avais essayé des choses comme ONETOONECONVERSATIONHERO ou CONVERSATION_HERO (en m'inspirant des noms de variables dans le code) mais sans succès.
Je crois que ce n'est pas mentionné dans ton document, qui est super par ailleurs.

En ce qui concerne les traducteurs, oui ils sont mis au courant qu'il existe des variables dans la discussion que j'ai lancée sur le workshop. Mais je n'ai aucune idée si d'autres langages ont besoin d'autres infos dont on n'a pas besoin de français, du genre l'âge de l'interlocuteur ou des choses du genre. Et au final même le gars qui me proposait de traduire a pris peur dès qu'il a vu qu'il faut s'adapter avec des variables et que ça ne consiste pas juste à traduire des phrases. Ce n'est pas bien grave.

Quel con ! Il a suffit de faire une pause pour trouver le problème en 1min en revenant.
Si jamais ça intéresse des gens, voici la solution :

I haven't seen this bug recently, based on 2 successful marriages in v1.0.2
However I either had no brother (Sandbox game) or my brother was already married (normal game), so I wouldn't expect the bug to occur anyway.

The OP doesn't seem to know that you can click a built siege machine and put it in reserve, so that you deploy them all at the same time.
It's not a very satisfying mechanism but at least it makes them useful.
Other than that, I didn't notice any difference in 1.8 : they shoot quite randomly, and they seem to ignore enemy spots that are on the other side of the city.

Thanks guys, seems we all would like more info on this.

Lord Irontoe said:

I wonder if all his troops are actually getting the +50hp when he's on his own

Click to expand...

Indeed, the feeling when chosing perks is too often "that won't probably make any difference anyway".

Ananda_The_Destroyer said:

I don't know if other parties get tactics skill in live battle with you either, I think you get all the credit.

Click to expand...

I actually learned about this today : after I fell in the middle of a battle, my brother took charge of the army and quickly gained many tactics points (his skill was still very low). I wish that would work when we delegate command !

Ananda_The_Destroyer said:

I think speed perks up their speed and then it's averaged out for the army..... but I don't know.

Click to expand...

It's more complicated than that, since two parties going at the same speed will go slower after merging, and also mounts are shared so that you can hold mounts for other parties who are overburdened (which is great). I wish the tooltip gave more info on how the "base" part of speed calculation is obtained.

Ananda_The_Destroyer said:

I try to get them going on steward and medicine as I think those are the most useful on a party leader.

Click to expand...

Indeed, it seems reasonable to focus on that after all (aside from a few perks in scout).

I read somewhere from a developer that captains are assigned automatically at the start of the battle in case they're missing, or even in the middle of battle if a captain falls. I don't know if we can verify this, or if it's still the case.
Obviously the equipment of heroes is important because it determines the formation they start in, and in turn it determines what captain they could become during the fight.

It seems "Lag R Aus" and I are not talking about the same problems but mine looks more like a bug than a missing feature.
Here's an explanation in two images, probably clearer than a GIF.


Let's increase number in group 6 with the slider :



That doesn't seem like a big deal until you need to train troops very fast : every max tier unit added to group 6 will "steal" a lot of xp to the lower level units. (I use this method to tell group 2 to stay behind for low levels to get more xp in group 6)

To be fair, the new system shows great promise, but it's not very satisfying right now.
Let's give concrete examples :
- if you want to level up sturgian archers for instance, you can have 2 groups and add "heavy armor" to the group with high level archers and tell them not to fire. The system gives priority to tier 3 archers in the "low level" group, great. However, the tier 4 troops don't have priority in the low level group before the tier 5 troops, instead it seems to fill the group randomly.
- I got the same problem as above with melee, horse archers, and cavalry.
- some orders are interpreted wrong, for instance "charge" only changes their position.
- when I create an infantry group in group 5, they often position themselves with too much space between each other in the future battles (not the first time though). I suspect they act as if they were cavalry, even though they are not mounted (including the captain).
- we don't have access to the "protect the left flank" kind of orders that the AI uses for cavalry.
- sieges show an order of battle as usual but the order is completely overridden when starting.

I'd like to signal that this is still not resolved in the current beta version (e1.7), so 11 months after being marked as resolved.
Here are a few examples :

The issue in the OP was solved, however there are still some bugs / annoyances related to Formations :
- if you take troops from a garrison, the formation of those troops is reset to the default formation even if you already had those troops in your party, in another formation (I just checked this bug in the stable branch)
- formations are not respected in armies, and we can't select who leads them
- cavalry can slow down considerably if one of them loses his mount.
- I'd like an option to make units switch formations automatically if they lose their horse / run out of ammo / lose their shield.
- at the beginning of a battle it would be neat if we could select / unselect the troops that participate, that would simplify formation management. Example : if I want to take all my units that aren't max level, it's annoying to make separate formations for those who are maxed.

The main problem is that the enemy lords tend to stay behind their troops. So the code for this safe behaviour is already here, but weirdly our captains don't act that way and instead die very fast.
Captains relay orders, give various bonuses, so it doesn't make sense if they charge in. Except if they're valorous.

I managed to reproduce the crash, and sent the save file with a link to this thread. The uploading was weird though, it said "update aborted" but then "update successful". Let me know if I should send it again.
The save I sent is right after the barter offer is accepted : we just made peace but the kingdom decision is still up. Trying to resolve it leads to a crash.