[1.12][BUG] Units lose movement points without moving

I have a group of five, my sovereign on a horse (4 movement points), a champion on a horse (4 movement points), another champion without a horse (2 movement points), an ebben wolf (5 movement points) and an ophidian (4 movement points). When the walking champion moves out of the group, he not only spends one movement point but the others also lose half of their movement points. When the walking champion moves back, each individual member of the group has zero movement points left. See the debug.err file at http://pastebin.com/DX5xwGi5.

When I reloaded the autosave to reproduce the behavior, it became even worse! Now my sovereign is reduced to 2 movement points although he is still sitting on his horse and the details show 4 movement points. When I start the turn again, the group has already lost its movement points without even attempting to move. Another turn, and it has lost half of its movement points, still resting in the same position. See the debug.err file at http://pastebin.com/jsS1MNsi.

Now I hope that the previous save is still intact...

5,401 views 10 replies
Reply #1 Top

 

If a unit is in a group outside of a city, its movement is limited that turn to that of the slowest unit. This is true even if you eject the units from a city and then move them back into the city. It has been like this since I've played.

Furthermore, if you move a unit into a group (or out of a group and back into the same group), the group's movement will be updated. So, if the unit moving into the group uses its last movement point to join the group, the group won't be able to move farther.

While some have complained of this behavior, I'm pretty certain it is working as intended.

 

 

Reply #2 Top

Quoting coyote303, reply 1

If a unit is in a group outside of a city, its movement is limited that turn to that of the slowest unit. This is true even if you eject the units from a city and then move them back into the city. It has been like this since I've played.
End of coyote303's quote

That's clear.

Quoting coyote303, reply 1

Furthermore, if you move a unit into a group (or out of a group and back into the same group), the group's movement will be updated. So, if the unit moving into the group uses its last movement point to join the group, the group won't be able to move farther.

End of coyote303's quote

The movement points of the remaining group members are updated independently of and already before the unit is moved back in. This is one bug. The second bug is that, even if one member of the group is not able to move any further, the rest should be able to move along without it. Otherwise, why would the details show individual movement points separate from group movement?

Quoting coyote303, reply 1

While some have complained of this behavior, I'm pretty certain it is working as intended.

End of coyote303's quote

This would be a shame. How can I split a group and move the members in different directions? All of this contradicts common sense and expectations we have from other games.

The "corrupt" savegame is a further indication that there is something seriously wrong here.

Reply #3 Top

Quoting baddl, reply 2

The movement points of the remaining group members are updated independently of and already before the unit is moved back in. This is one bug. The second bug is that, even if one member of the group is not able to move any further, the rest should be able to move along without it. Otherwise, why would the details show individual movement points separate from group movement?
End of baddl's quote

I believe the independent tallies are kept because if any movement points are left you can always split the group.

And sometimes it's worthwhile to split a group and send everyone on their own scouting mission.

And sometimes it's worthwhile to split several groups and re-merge their units -- arranged differently.

And note also that sometimes you can use this mechanism offensively.  If you web a unit in an opponent army, that army is stalled for that season, regardless of the outcome of the battle.  (Obviously, this is a cheaper tactic if you use the "escape" air spell than if you have to sacrifice a unit to achieve this effect.)

(The painful part is that if you are maneuvering your army one tile at a time you cannot stack your units if they think they can merge.  So sometimes you need to think very carefully about how you perform your maneuvers.)

Reply #4 Top

The splitting is exactly what does not work for me. With that mechanism in place, if I move two slow (2 MP) units out of a group separately, the rest of fast (5 MP, say) units won't be able to move. Does that mean I have to do it in a different order?

So where is the interesting part in all that pointless micromanagement? I rather suspect an invalid optimization of the pathfinding problem behind that counterintuitive behavior. Age of Wonders, for example, uses a more complex model of movement costs and solves the problem very well.

Reply #5 Top

Quoting baddl, reply 5
The splitting is exactly what does not work for me. With that mechanism in place, if I move two slow (2 MP) units out of a group separately, the rest of fast (5 MP, say) units won't be able to move. Does that mean I have to do it in a different order?

So where is the interesting part in all that pointless micromanagement? I rather suspect an invalid optimization of the pathfinding problem behind that counterintuitive behavior. Age of Wonders, for example, uses a more complex model of movement costs and solves the problem very well.
End of baddl's quote
 

Are you saying units during your turn, units that you are not actively moving, and which are not receiving other units have their available movement decreased?  That does indeed sound like a bug.  To my knowledge, decreases in available movement during a turn are supposed to be caused by doing something: movement, combat, receiving other troops.  I have never seen movement decrease when other units leave the army.

Reply #6 Top

Exactly.

Reply #7 Top

Quoting baddl, reply 7
Exactly.
End of baddl's quote

Ok.

That is surprising -- I have not seen this issue.  When I move units out, I have never seen the remaining units change.

I imagine stardock's people will want to fix this (once they are back from vacation, and if they understand how to make it happen -- I do not know how to make it happen myself, so I cannot explain that to them).

Reply #8 Top

-deleted-

Reply #9 Top

Quoting coyote303, reply 1
 

If a unit is in a group outside of a city, its movement is limited that turn to that of the slowest unit. This is true even if you eject the units from a city and then move them back into the city. It has been like this since I've played.

Furthermore, if you move a unit into a group (or out of a group and back into the same group), the group's movement will be updated. So, if the unit moving into the group uses its last movement point to join the group, the group won't be able to move farther.

While some have complained of this behavior, I'm pretty certain it is working as intended.

  
End of coyote303's quote

 

I would say that woudln't be working as intended; or is a bug even if what they intended;  since it goes against what players expect to happen, theres' no need for it from a balance perspective; and games as old as the original warlords and probably even older had it working right;, so it can't be that hard to do.

Reply #10 Top

Two separate groups on the same tile also cause trouble. If, for example, one of them still has all of its movement points and the other can't move any further, it is very difficult to move the former away.

In my current situation, after the right-click the display changes from 10/10 to 10/5 (yes, ten out of five!) and the group does not move. (10 movement points because it's a group of six champions on horses [= 4MP] plus each enchanted with tireless march [= 6MP].) If I click on a group member except the first, the display changes back to 10/10 and I can repeat the procedure. I finally managed to persuade the group by clicking on an adjacent tile. But the group did not move there and executed the planned move instead. (Which was fine although very strange.)