Bugs Reports & Technical Help

[Macaras]

Thanks for the suggestion Macaras. By destroying Abbasid faction I managed to get pass that turn (up to 2-3 turns more) and then the game became extremely unstable for me. Frequent "Medieval 2: Total War encountered an unspecified error and will now exit." and occasional "pure virtual function calls". Even during the game save or... load!
I can provide a saved game that fails to load if that would be useful for you (note: I managed to create more than one such "corrupted" saved game), but I wonder if you guys can trigger that by yourself with my original saved file and Macaras`suggestion (i.e you should not be able to pass a third turn for some reason).

I have an updated version, so I cannot even load your save, I have error right with the loading attempt. It sucks that this error continues, but when 'pure virtual function calls' and the other errors appear I have no idea what to do.. Usually, I was able to surrender regions and continue campaign, it could be something wrong with your settings, combability, etc.. ? But I really don't know at this point.

[Radosław of Bielitz]

I have an updated version, so I cannot even load your save, I have error right with the loading attempt. It sucks that this error continues, but when 'pure virtual function calls' and the other errors appear I have no idea what to do.. Usually, I was able to surrender regions and continue campaign, it could be something wrong with your settings, combability, etc.. ? But I really don't know at this point.

Understood, thanks for your assistance so far!
I don't think it is a hardware problem though. I can load and play my two other SSHIP gameplays just fine (including my previous gameplay with Polish faction where I watered my Piast Bloodline a bit too much )

[vovery]

I noticed something interesting: if there are multiple generals in one settlement, those who are not the current governor (no white scroll on the general's icon) don't seem to recover their troop weariness at all. The troops of one general were weary, and the troops of another one were despondent, but despite having them sit tightly in the settlement, they didn't recover. Once I moved the generals to other settlements, they started to recover (weary to ready for action in one turn, despondent to ready for action in some turns).

If needed, I can check if I have a save showcasing it.

[Jurand of Cracow]

I noticed something interesting: if there are multiple generals in one settlement, those who are not the current governor (no white scroll on the general's icon) don't seem to recover their troop weariness at all. The troops of one general were weary, and the troops of another one were despondent, but despite having them sit tightly in the settlement, they didn't recover. Once I moved the generals to other settlements, they started to recover (weary to ready for action in one turn, despondent to ready for action in some turns).

If needed, I can check if I have a save showcasing it.

interesting but doubtful. As the mental state of the troops this is a trait of a general, it would have meant that the non-governors don't get their traits evolving (ie triggers don't fire). This is not true as I've seen many instances when many general would have their traits changed. In particular, several young generals staying in a city with school /university, get their education. Or even just their "Teenager" trait changes. So I doubt this conclusion.

[Macaras]

I think there is something in this,I don’t know precisely the reason for it, but I have similar observation- two generals in the same army, sticking together for few battles, and in the conquered settlement one has a different state of troops than the other…

[Gigantus]

I think there is something in this,I don’t know precisely the reason for it, but I have similar observation- two generals in the same army, sticking together for few battles, and in the conquered settlement one has a different state of troops than the other…

Only the designated leader will receive benefit of effects granted by the settlement or for being the leading general.

[vovery]

I had an older save to test it + zipped in two most recent saves, in which you can see it too. Here are the saves.

nor59 = turn 59
nor70 = turn 70
nor1 = turn 71

What to check:

nor59: Roskilde. The king's son Kolbein is the active governor there, and also Magnus' brother-in-law Charles Haakonsson is in Roskilde. Charles' troops are despondent, but when testing the save by letting it run from turn 59 to 62 without moving Charles or Kolbein, Charles' troops didn't recover at all.

nor70 & nor1: Bergvin. I had moved Magnus out just in case when Godfred arrived even though Godfred immediately became the current governor upon his arrival, just to make sure he recovered from weary to ready for action after the previous experiences in Lund & Roskilde. When outside, Magnus gained the camping trait, but despite moving him back in, he doesn't seem to lose the camping trait, as Godfred is still the active governor.

I first noticed it before taking Roskilde, when Godfred, Kolbein and Charles were in Lund together. Godfred was the active governor, so Kolbein's troops remained weary and Charles' despondent even though multiple turns passed. I had moved Godfred and Kolbein in to becomed schooled (the school was built in Lund at turn 54), but seeing the troop weariness not recovering & an opportunity opening for Roskilde, Kolbein and Charles went for conquest. Luckily both Godfred and Kolbein are scholars, so the firstly mentioned became schooled at around age 23, and I guess there's still hope for Kolbein too.

[SubutaiV321]

Hi again, I am getting errors really frequently (probably once every 4 turns), in multiple different campaigns. They are unspecified errors that mostly happen on end-turn and sometimes after returning to the campaign map after a battle. I'm on the latest 0.98 version and I used LAA. So far I just used continue campaign because most of the time this puts me at the autosave at the end of the previous turn, but sometimes it skips to after the end turn phase. This also causes the Mongols to not have spawned in turn 218. Here's a drive link with the last log, I'll add more as I experience other crashes: https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...in?usp=sharing

This trigger often seems to happen 10-20 times before a crash:

12:25:34.835 [game.script.trigger] [trace] Trigger <0055b_T_Invasion_Flee> fired
12:25:34.835 [data.transgression] [info] Applied transgression TC_FLEE_INVASION from transgressor faction 1E3FA962 against faction 1E42E4CA

[a Dictator's Cigar]

during my Leon and Castile campaign, I kept running into a crash everytime I decide to battle a rebel army that spawns in central\NW of spain. *attached a save of the issue. this crash was the only crahs I ran through in my long 300+ laps campaign.

155.rar

[kostic]

This crash is probably due to the javeliners unit which changed its status and is no longer "mercenary". I would like to check with your backup but my PC does not allow downloading your file. Maybe you could post them to a server like google drive?

[Jurand of Cracow]

This crash is probably due to the javeliners unit which changed its status and is no longer "mercenary". I would like to check with your backup but my PC does not allow downloading your file. Maybe you could post them to a server like google drive?

I think is a true "rebel" army, spawned by the game engine, not by script or otherwise.
Hi @kostic - I don't think the attribute "mercenary_unit" matters in this case. It has very limited use and this army is not a mercenary army.
What matters is this case, i think, is whether in the set of files for "slave" faction for this unit is present in the relevant (slave) folder. Or something related.

[murats987]

If there is a rebellion in Malatya, he joins the Seljuks. I think there is a mistake. He should join the rebels or the Rum.

[kostic]

I think is a true "rebel" army, spawned by the game engine, not by script or otherwise.
Hi @kostic - I don't think the attribute "mercenary_unit" matters in this case. It has very limited use and this army is not a mercenary army.
What matters is this case, i think, is whether in the set of files for "slave" faction for this unit is present in the relevant (slave) folder. Or something related.

Yes. You're right. This is more of a problem that concerns a rebel unit and not a mercenary unit. I will check this later on my PC, but I seem to have already corrected this problem on my working version...

[kostic]

I'm having a problem with my Papal States (VH/VH) campaign:
Since the appearance of the inquisitors, each turn the game reports roaming armies without generals even if there are none outside of my cities.


In fact, I notice that this corresponds to the appearance of the inquisitors... each new inquisitor costs me 1000 or 2000 florins. In 1227, I have 7 inquisitors and a loss of more than 10,000 florins each turn!!!
It is likely that there is poor coding that identifies inquisitors as roaming armies.

My save with the start of the bug : Pape 1223

[Radosław of Bielitz]

Some characters stats are not calculated properly according to the traits description. I got such a feeling from a long time now, here's a decent example. She should have at least 3 charm:

[Radosław of Bielitz]

Another inconsistency I've found (or I simply don't understand how it works) is the script that's responsible for amending town names, depending on which faction controls such a settlement. This is my 5th Polish faction gameplay and the Grodno stayed Hrodna for some very significant time already.
Also, another very minor inconsistency related to the naming changes concernes the governor positions. We can read for instance that a general "has granted fiefs around settlement_name", but the settlement_name has changed during the gameplay.



Also please let me know, if you find my bug/issue submissions helpful. I am really enjoing your mod, so I want to contribute something back (by these issue/bug submisions)

[Gigantus]

I'm having a problem with my Papal States (VH/VH) campaign:
Since the appearance of the inquisitors, each turn the game reports roaming armies without generals even if there are none outside of my cities.


In fact, I notice that this corresponds to the appearance of the inquisitors... each new inquisitor costs me 1000 or 2000 florins. In 1227, I have 7 inquisitors and a loss of more than 10,000 florins each turn!!!
It is likely that there is poor coding that identifies inquisitors as roaming armies.

My save with the start of the bug : Pape 1223

Inquisitors are papal states agents - might need to have a 'and not AgentType inquisitor' condition in the monitor?

[Sllhouette]

there is an olive oil commodity just north of Nice in southern France, sitting on the mountain. it is inaccessible for merchants

[vovery]

I suppose this a Med2 engine feature, and nothing can be done to prevent it from happening? Novgorod besieged Riga, and when I'm trying to attack the besieging army with troops from Kernave, for some reason the besieging army gets to ambush my reinforcement army. I tried also just moving the army right next to Riga without attacking, but as soon as my army comes within a tile from the Novgorodian army, they ambush. Even having a spy accompany the army from Kernave doesn't help. Quite an ambusher this Novgorodian prince, he's able to ambush even in plain sight

I found a backup solution when googling this problem, and that is to withdraw from the battle with the reinforcing army, which makes the besieging army break their siege. But I would really like to fight the battle together with my troops from both Riga and Kernave, as Novgorod seems to be closing in on Kolyvan too in the next turn. I'll post an update, if I manage to find a better solution.

[Jurand of Cracow]

there is an olive oil commodity just north of Nice in southern France, sitting on the mountain. it is inaccessible for merchants

thanks, I'll fix it for the next version!
JoC

Some characters stats are not calculated properly according to the traits description. I got such a feeling from a long time now, here's a decent example. She should have at least 3 charm:

yeah, with the Princesses it may happen, yes.

Another inconsistency I've found (or I simply don't understand how it works) is the script that's responsible for amending town names, depending on which faction controls such a settlement. This is my 5th Polish faction gameplay and the Grodno stayed Hrodna for some very significant time already.
Also, another very minor inconsistency related to the naming changes concernes the governor positions. We can read for instance that a general "has granted fiefs around settlement_name", but the settlement_name has changed during the gameplay.

Settlements' name changes do not always fire. You may change the name manually as well.
"Fiefs" thingy - the problem is: texts are static (cannot change), settlement names' are dynamic (can change) in the Medieval2. We have to live with it.\

Thanks for these observations, they're always useful, even if many times we cannot fix the issues.
JoC