Hello everyone,

I have a few...weird things to which perhaps you can answer because I could not.

Bug no. 1:

1. You build the Road in any given province;
2. You build the Militia;
3. You build the Elite Militia;
4. The count of that province demolishes the Militia;
5. To any knight or army present in or near that shire it will appear as if it doesn't have neither the Militia, nor the Elite Militia;
6. But if that province is attacked by an enemy army, than it will fight against the Elite Militia.

In other words, I can keep Elite Militia built and active without having the Militia as well. I have experimented this bug when we fought the Serbians in Jerusalem and it works.

-----------------

And you can check this nice new bug right now because it has just occurred.

Bug no. 2

1. One scoring ago one of my small armies, named Inglorious Bastards lost a battle in Nawa;
2. After losing the battle, the army retreated to Jerusalem;
3. I asked the Persians to set my large army, named the Glorious Bastards as the leading army;
4. All our armies are ordered to set Palestine (shire 498) as our fall-back shire;
5. We fight for Jerusalem;
6. We lose the battle;
7. We all retreat to Palestine, only that ALL our armies are disbanded.

Now, by my knowledge only the army that lost two consecutive battles should have disbanded. Instead all our armies are disbanded and I think it's because of a bug. Not only that, but my small army should have disbanded in Jerusalem, not in Palestine.

-----------------

Short question:

Oh and I have one question for you: right before the battle for Jerusalem I have set Khazar back to Friendly. Khazar also has the Fatimids as friendly, but yet Khazar still fought against us.

How is that possible?

Bug 1 is fairly well known - one can have animal husbandry without farming as well, though that's not useful of course...

Bug 2 is not a bug:
- Persians lost in Nawa, fell back to Jerusalem and stayed there without moving, hence they shattered at the next battle
- Glorious bastards lost in Lebanon (I think), fell back to Jerusalem and stayed there without moving, hence they shattered at the next battle
- The Knights of shattered armies end up at the fallback field

Indeed, i found it weird when i looked at the map with no sign of any of your armies o.O
Probably if an army is to disband, any army connected to it via leading gets disbanded as well?

As for the khazars, they were following us, adopting our diplomacy.

Smelgar:

1. Persia didn't even fight in Nawa. One of my small armies did (check the log). The Persians fought in Lebanon 3 or 4 days ago;

2. Glorious Bastards didn't fight in Lebanon, it fought in Nawa and there was a one day break between the defeats.

If there is a one day break between defeats than the disbandment does not occur because a "reset" occurs. That is also common knowledge . In order to disband an army you need to defeat it twice in a row, in two consecutive days.

If what you said would have applied than your armies should have disbanded at least 3 times so far as well, considering how many consecutive battles you lost in this war prior to today's battle.

Plus, when an army disbands it does not do that in the fall-back shire, but in the shire in which it lost the battle.

All these are common knowledge and all these I have done countless times before, so I'm pretty sure I'm not wrong.

PS: As for bug no. 1: just because it is so, that doesn't make it right.

Alar I wrote:

QUOTE:
1. Persia didn't even fight in Nawa. One of my small armies did (check the log). The Persians fought in Lebanon 3 or 4 days ago;

OK - same point - they fell back and then didn't move

QUOTE:


2. Glorious Bastards didn't fight in Lebanon, it fought in Nawa and there was a one day break between the defeats.

If there is a one day break between defeats than the disbandment does not occur. That is also common knowledge ;). In order to disband an army you need to defeat it twice in a row, in two consecutive days.

Incorrect: armies disband if they lose two battles without an intermediate autonomous move, no matter how many turns between the battles. It has always been this way.

My armies did not disband because I made autonomous moves between battles.

QUOTE:

Plus, when an army disbands it does not do that in the fall-back shire, but in the shire in which it lost the battle.

Also incorrect; instead the fallback shire is used if it is set. I think it is possible that this changed at some point, but it has been like this for some time.

Alar I wrote:

QUOTE:
PS: As for bug no. 1: just because it is so, that doesn't make it right.

It seems various bugs are currently being solved! Hoern is busy.
I don't know if all changes have been implemented yet on KH, but some have, as of yesterday evening first time ever mid-chess-game messages of moves made are sent to me.

As for your bug - possibly by now former bug
http://ritterheere.de/component/option,com_fireboard/Itemid,181/func,view/id,695214/catid,47/

QUOTE:
Miliz und Erweiterte Miliz 12.12.2011 09:55:38 --- 1 Woche, 2 Tage her
Der Button für den Abriss der Miliz ist ab sofort nur sichtbar, wenn keine erweiterte Miliz ausgebaut ist.
Sprich, wer die Miliz abreissen möchte muss vorher die erw. Miliz abreißen.

"The button for tearing down militia is from now on only visible, if no extended militia is built. That is, anyone who wants to tear down militia has to tear down the extended miltia first."

Ohhh, I see Smelgar, ok, I get it: you're playing a different KH than I am.

You know, that's ok, I didn't expect much anyway. We'll just regroup and that will be the end of it. Regrouping is what we should have done in the first place, so I'll take the good with the bad.

You just enjoy your soon-to-be 100 knight army over there...while it lasts.

I am just trying to help people understand the rules, which is what I am meant to do as a Tech-Mod.

I'm not sure why this should be a problem, but if it is, I'm sure Jessica can confirm the shattering rules are as I have stated.

QUOTE:
Alar I wrote:
...
Short question:

Oh and I have one question for you: right before the battle for Jerusalem I have set Khazar back to Friendly. Khazar also has the Fatimids as friendly, but yet Khazar still fought against us.

How is that possible?

The reason about the case with diplomacy is the chronology of the scoring:

-> Daily task
-> Duels
-> Fieldanalysis
-> Moves of single knights
-> Battles
-> Debacles
-> Movement of armies
-> Change of diplomacy
-> Jousts
-> Fief
-> Escape attempts

Diplomacy changes after battles. But in this case that doesn't matter because Khazar adopted diplomacy from the templars (see post above).

Ι think this has also been discussed in the past. And still the same. If an army loses 2 battles without an independent movement between them, it gets shattered. And the knights always ended up where the fallback field was set.


Im sorry i didnt check for the moves of your armies before my first post.

I've witnessed both cases in the past, at least twice. It's nothing new.