| Author |
 Topic Search
 Topic Options
|
GM Luna 
New Poster
Community Manager
Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Location: Illyriad
Status: Offline
Points: 2042 |
 Posted: 17 Nov 2011 at 02:48 |
The devs are working on figuring out what is causing this problem and sorting it out for you. Thanks for your patience while we sort this out and I'm sorry for the inconvenience.
Luna
|
GM Luna | Illyriad Community Manager | community@illyriad.co.uk
|
 |
Manannan
Postmaster
Joined: 22 Mar 2011
Location: Mystical Mists
Status: Offline
Points: 576 |
Posted: 17 Nov 2011 at 03:46 |
A suggestion perhaps... You can only exodus to a location with one of your armies in occupation before hand?
Or a diplomat (T2 messenger perhaps) you can send to stake a claim to the location first?
Or final unserious suggestion we all go down the pub and drink ourselves VERY silly and forget about the bug! I vote for this option!
|
|
Doesn't look good... doesn't look bad either!
"Manananananananananan, so long Sir, and thanks for all the fish." ~ St.Jude
|
|
Rill
Postmaster General
Player Council - Geographer
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903 |
Posted: 17 Nov 2011 at 04:14 |
The suggestion that Exodus must be made to locations occupied by an army presents interesting opportunities to introduce conflict to the game without destroying cities -- would be even more interesting if control had to be maintained while the city is en route. If control was not maintained at least at the beginning and end points, the city could be "bounced" off course and land nearby.
Seems like it could create some fun conflicts short of sieges.
|
|
White Beard
Greenhorn
Joined: 21 Aug 2011
Location: AUS
Status: Offline
Points: 53 |
Posted: 17 Nov 2011 at 06:57 |
 Manannan wrote:
Or final unserious suggestion we all go down the pub and drink ourselves VERY silly and forget about the bug! I vote for this option!
|
this one has my vote
|
|
Ander
Postmaster General
Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1269 |
Posted: 17 Nov 2011 at 17:33 |
Manannan wrote:
A suggestion perhaps... You can only exodus to a location with one of your armies in occupation before hand?
|
I like this solution best. You can start an exodus to a location with only if your armies are occupying the square. Once exodus has been initiated, the spot should be flagged (city under construction or something..)
I am not in favour having your city bounced. Exodus itself might take any duration less than 23 days depending on the distance. Someone who has sacrificed much of the city size and waited that long patiently wouldn't like to see it landed on some random square. In a game that requires a lot of patience and perseverance, huge losses should not happen in a flash for nothing.
|
|
EternalFire
Greenhorn
Joined: 25 Oct 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 72 |
Posted: 17 Nov 2011 at 18:52 |
Ander wrote:
Manannan wrote:
A suggestion perhaps... You can only exodus to a location with one of your armies in occupation before hand?
|
I like this solution best. You can start an exodus to a location with only if your armies are occupying the square. Once exodus has been initiated, the spot should be flagged (city under construction or something..)
I am not in favour having your city bounced. Exodus itself might take any duration less than 23 days depending on the distance. Someone who has sacrificed much of the city size and waited that long patiently wouldn't like to see it landed on some random square. In a game that requires a lot of patience and perseverance, huge losses should not happen in a flash for nothing.
|
Hm, seems good, now don't put it into effect til a week from now when my city will be exodusing about 1000 squares due north.
|
|
SunStorm
Postmaster
Joined: 01 Apr 2011
Location: "Look Up"
Status: Offline
Points: 979 |
Posted: 18 Nov 2011 at 20:24 |
People speak of cities bouncing as though they can just turn around from a 10 day journey and go back to where they started.... but what happens if someone occupies that space as well - you will have a city going back and forth....
On a side note:
I say we coordinate for 10 players to send a spare village to one location and see how many cities we can stack upon one another. (^_^) Who's with me?!
|
"Side? I am on nobody's side because nobody is on my side" ~LoTR
|
|
Manannan
Postmaster
Joined: 22 Mar 2011
Location: Mystical Mists
Status: Offline
Points: 576 |
Posted: 21 Nov 2011 at 03:30 |
SunStorm wrote:
On a side note:
I say we coordinate for 10 players to send a spare village to one location and see how many cities we can stack upon one another. (^_^) Who's with me?!
|
If for no other reason other than the giggle (and maybe the headache it would cause the GMs) I'm in!
|
|
Doesn't look good... doesn't look bad either!
"Manananananananananan, so long Sir, and thanks for all the fish." ~ St.Jude
|
|
Kidrock
New Poster
Joined: 21 Nov 2011
Location: India
Status: Offline
Points: 7 |
Posted: 21 Nov 2011 at 06:52 |
This is
situation i mean how can they be stacked on top of one another.... cant the devs write a code to alter capital move a little and stop the cities from moving to a spot where a city is already being exodused ??
|
|
Captain Kindly
Forum Warrior
Joined: 19 Aug 2011
Location: Fremorn
Status: Offline
Points: 276 |
Posted: 21 Nov 2011 at 20:06 |
Kidrock wrote:
This is situation i mean how can they be stacked on top of one another.... cant the devs write a code to alter capital move a little and stop the cities from moving to a spot where a city is already being exodused ?? |
In my opinion, the problem was that the devs hadn't covered (or tested) this problem fully (that exodus takes a long time (as in 3 days in this case), while relocating a capital is instantly).
Also, most of the thing has been resolved by now. Thundercat moved my city in this issue to a location nearby where I had just started my 4th city, and returned the 3 settlers to it.
The only things that have to be solved yet are:
- I can't send those 3 settlers out. It says there aren enough. I suspect this is because somewhere in the system, my city counter is still on 4, or something like that. Until that's fixed I cannot start new cities, but that's not necessarily bad: it gives me some time off to grow my current 3 cities.
- the resource layouts of location and city do not match yet. City has 5-5-5-5-5, while the location has 5-4-5-5-6.
- The 2 resident armies in the City are flagged as 'on manoeuvres', as they were sent there to reinforce it. Newly trained armies are acting normally though, so I can get around that for now.
Those are still in the petition, and I'm guessing the devs will pick them up soon enough. They had some other stuff on their hands lately ;)
Edited by Captain Kindly - 21 Nov 2011 at 20:08
|
|
Tweet
Two cities on the same location???