Large Middle Earth queries

  • Two questions on Large Middle Earth please:

    • Lorien can no longer produce units after losing its capital (but retaining Wellinghall). The Game Notes say you keep gaining PUs without a capital, so I wondered if it's intended that they can still make units?
    • The battle calculator seems to struggle with retreat after N turns option. I think it may be confused by the extra rounds like Charge.
      Any thoughts please Alekxr?
      Still loving the game though, Thanks, Matt

  • Moderators

    @mattbarnes I suggest updating to the most recent prerelease of TripleA for the battle calc issue. Should be fixed there. Unless this is a new development. Bug report post suggested if it continues.

  • @mattbarnes If L√≥rien lost their capital, they are likely pretty much screwed anyway ūüôā But I'll try to fix it in the next version.

  • Moderators

    I'm having some oddness with the tooltip info: (i'm using v .8304)
    if I mouseover a unit on the mainmap, and press "I" to get information on it, it gives one set of info; whereas if I open the battle calculator, and mouseover a unit, it gives a different set of info, including different unit stats for things like attack/defense; and this is in a province with no territory modifiers, so it should be straightforward. it seems like the one from pressing I is correct, whereas the tooltip for mouseover a unit in the battle calc screen is wrong.
    this issue is happening as I look at some of the basic dwarven units that i'm fighting a bunch of, the axeman and axethrower.
    I'm pretty sure I've had this issue with some other units as well.
    this should be unrelated to the bug the other person was talking about, as it's about the tooltip info only.
    edit addition: the tooltip info you get on the unit purchase screen is showing the same thing as the tooltips on the battle calc screen; the info that appears to be incorrect as it doesn't match actual battle results for die rolls. this is a very odd bug; it's like there's an error in the tooltip generation code used in some areas, but other areas use a different tooltip generator which works correct; eitheri that or there'se some fixed tooltip strings somewhere which havne't been updated, but I can't find any of those in the xml file.

    On an unrelated note; there's a minor annoyance with objectives: wherein one nation on a side gets a benefit from a province, but it could end up that another nation ends up taking it, so you're missin gout on the objective. In my case it was High Elves missing out on some of the bonus for controlling the formerly elven territories (the +2 per terr one) because the freefolk got to them first. It'd be nice if either there was some system (without using edit) to transfer control of the province to the nation that most benefits from it, or to simply give the bonus as long as someone on your alliance has it rather than it having to be that specific nation. I know all these issues can' tbe fixed just by changing "original owner" for some of the objectives, like for the fight over mirkwood stuff, wherein each alliance has a nation that benefits from controlling parts of mirkwood.

  • Moderators

    @zlefin You can also set your objective to be "Allied" controlled instead of directly if you want the Free Folk to retain control of the ownership and receive the direct payment for control of the territory while allowing the High Elves the benefit of the N.O.

  • Moderators

    @zlefin As a suggestion to you it also helps to provide examples of what you are discussing when you do this.... helps speed up the process of getting answers from those who might know the answer.

    0_1519316895308_Example 1.png

    0_1519316906753_Example 2.png

  • Moderators

    @zlefin Good catch. This unit appears to be using 2 different tooltips. The one in battle calculator, purchase and, territory tab is player generated by, but the "I" hotkey while hovering over unit appears engine generated.

    This will cause inconsistencies in all maps that use, I would imagine. Unless there is another line that can be added to that file that also changes tooltip for "I" hotkey.

    This is worthy of a bug report.

    As it applies to this map specifically, if the values in battle calc tooltip are incorrect. They need to be changed in file by @alkexr.

  • @zlefin As others have said, having two different tooltips is a non-map-specific engine bug. Fixing the tooltips for dwarven units is already on the to-do list. As far as objectives are concerned, their purpose is either to encourage a specific strategy for specific players (e.g. incentivizing Saruman to go after the Shire) or to help with balance (evil just doesn't have the economy). I wouldn't give Saruman PUs if it was Angmar who managed to reach the Shire. But setting original owners for some objective-related territories is definitely a good idea.

  • Moderators

    personally, i'd rather have engine generated tooltips than custom ones (for all games, like as a setting to ignore custom tooltips or somesuch). with custom ones there's always a risk they haven't been kept up to date with patch changes; and right now i've stopped learning the map pending fixes because it's way harder to learn when there's tooltip inaccuracies on such a complex map.
    just as a general principle, I want to be able to trust that in-game tooltips are accurate. I know game notes are often out of date, and not marked as such; but I expect in-game stuff to always be correct.

  • Moderators

  • @zlefin The other side of the coin is that engine generated tooltips don't show some vital details, like whether a unit can move into mountains, be targeted by flank special attack, etc. It is also poor with describing abilities implemented using support attachments. Custom tooltips being incorrect is not the fault of custom tooltips, but mine; custom tooltips are fine and I need to be more rigorous.

  • Admin

    I think both are valid points. The generated tooltips could definitely use improvements but for complex maps, there is probably always a good case for custom tooltips as there are a lot of unit properties that are hard to capture in a generated way.

  • Here's another oddity: a Bat attacking a Bear in a Settlement (on a River). The Bear appears to defend at 2: why?? His stats on defence are 3x2 and a Creature is -1 in a Settlement. So he ought to defend at 3 surely? The Bear also died after a single hit for some reason. He was not previously wounded but died after a single dice roll,

  • @mattbarnes That's a great WTF. @redrum you should have a look at the bear dying immediately despite having multiple hitpoints. Only happens in settlements, quite consistently reproducible.

    The bear gets -1 defense in a settlement for being a creature, so it should defend with 2x2 instead of 3x2. But the bear is a unit, so the "All" colunm also affects it, meaning it is supposed to be back to 3x2. But I have found the glitch in the territory effect matrix, it will be fixed in the next version. Honestly I did not expect territory effects to be correct, that part of the xml is just such a mess.

  • Admin

    @alkexr @mattbarnes If you can post a save that reproduces it, I'm glad to take a look.

  • @alkexr sorry to jump in here but "bear bug" made me LOL.

    I'll go away now : )

  • Moderators

    @alkexr Just looked at your XML.... and there are some real queer things going on in the Territory effects section. These might be contributing to the strange behaviors you are seeing. From the examples I have seen the territory attachments are filled with large amounts of conflicting data.

  • @hepps Strange behaviors like a two hit unit dying without being hit once? There might be queer things going on, but for sure not queer enough for this.

    Conflicting data? I'm fairly certain it usually works just fine, the problem was that bears had -3/-2 on a settlement, instead of the intended -1/0.

  • Moderators

    @mattbarnes The Bear has a defense of 3 (x2 defensive rolls) the terrain modifier on defense is -2 for a bear in settlement. So the engine will take -2 from both defensive rolls.... (3-2)+(3-2)= 1+1= defense of 2 in LL or a defense of 1 and 1 for dice.

Log in to reply