Page 1 of 2

Field of Glory Patch v1.1.2 Released

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 4:00 am
by admin
Slitherine are pleased to announce the release Field of Glory version 1.1.2 with numerous bug fixes and tweaks. The update can be downloaded here: http://www.slitherine.com/files/fog/fie ... _1.1.2.exe or from this mirror site: http://www.patches-scrolls.de/field_of_glory.php#112

This update requires that you have already have version 1.1.1 of Field of Glory.

This patch does not support the Matrix Games edition, it will soon be available at: http://www.matrixgames.com/products/latestdownloads.asp

The version number appears in the lower left of the screen as you load the game.  If you do have an earlier version number then you can download and install the 1.1.1 patch from here: http://www.slitherine.com/files/fog/fie ... _1.1.1.exe

One of the major changes is that owners of Rise of Rome can now create new single and multi-player games with Line of Sight/Fog of War rules enabled.  There are also six new battles included, all were developed by Field of Glory players using the scenario creator that is supplied with game.

Changes in v1.1.2
Change: Medium foot will no longer charge impetuously if they would end up in clear terrain.
Fix: Correct a number of typo's in the D.A.G. army lists.
Fix: Issue with some baggage camp deployment locations changing after a game has started.
Add: Line of sight/Fog of War functionality for Rise of Rome owners.
Add: Field fortifications can now be deployed in the same way as baggage camps.
Add: Shooters now use the new Line of Sight logic.
Fix: Null pointer crash in gamelogic.s.RoutPath.movePathGrow.
Add: Updated artillery battlegroup graphics.
Fix: Improved restrictions with a logical 'or' in the DAG.
Add: Added new user contributed scenario, Rhone Crossing 218 BC (JB).
Add: Added new user contributed scenario, Akragas 406 BC (DC).
Add: Added new user contributed scenario, Crimissos River 341 BC (DC).
Add: Added new user contributed scenario, Hecatombeaum 226BC (AD).
Add: Added new user contributed scenario, Medway 43AD (ND).
Add: Added new user contributed scenario, Tagus 220 BC (DC).

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 2:25 pm
by 76mm
what does this mean??

"Fix: Improved restrictions with a logical 'or' in the DAG."

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 2:29 pm
by keithmartinsmith
In most lists many choice are an OR 5 MF or 5 HF surrounded by a yellow border. In at least one list ther was a limit of 2-6 mounted where 0-2 could be upgraded and the system was allowing all 6 to be upgraded. Keith

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 2:50 pm
by Mercutio
Sweet, thanks for the quick update and adding LOS!

Error in Medway Scenario

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 2:51 pm
by kilroy1
Sorry the file 'Medway 43AD (ND)' does not seem to be valid.

The "scenario1" file for this scenario is named "scenario1 NO". Renaming it does not help, also there is an extra space between the scenario name and the author's initials. Suggestions?

kilroy

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 3:05 pm
by petergarnett
Quick to install thankfully

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 3:09 pm
by EricS
Kilroy,

Thanks for reporting this bug. This should be fixed in the next patch.

(The "scenario1" file is named differently to disable free deployment. That isn't the cause of the error. The reason for disabling free deployment is that some battlegroups of each side are meant to be deployed a long way towards the enemy map edge, which would be impossible with free deployment, so it wouldn't play very well.)

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 4:07 pm
by dave_r
Next time, can I suggest that you actually release the patch before you update the online game so we can't play it?

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 4:07 pm
by jamespcrowley
Excellent, thanks for the patch, particularly LOS.

I can confirm that my 'null pointer' game was fully recoverable, although the turn on which the event occurred (and which I had finished - a routing unit exited the board) was reset back to the beginning and the results the second time around were much worse for me than previously :cry: But, hey ho, the game was revived and thats the main thing.

Initial small testing with LOS is very encouraging. It seems to work as laid out in Help and, IMHO, will add an interesting dimension to the game as a whole, particularly in DAG games where the make-up of your opponents army is unknown at the outset. A further planned addition of limited range LOS, replicating the effects of rain, fog, mist etc. can only be for the good.

A side effect of using LOS is that you cannot replay a previous move, even if the BG has not fired or been in combat, as you can without LOS. You just have to be a bit more carefull and think brfore committing.

Overall, a very worthy add-on to an already great game, which seems to be going from strength to strength. It is however costing me a small fortune in associated books and reading materials; even more with the advent of 'Storm of Arrows' :)

Cheers
Jim

LOS requiring Rise of Rome?

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 4:10 pm
by batesmotel
Is the LOS/Fog of War functionality restricted to owners of Rise of Rome or will it apply to all versions of the game with the 1.1.2 patch. While LOS was originally announced with the Rise of Rome supplement, my impression since then was that it would be made available as a patch to the basic game engine and hence would not require Rise of Rome. Is this not the case?

Chris

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 4:20 pm
by keithmartinsmith
A typo from adding the authors credits. Fixed and ready for 113.
Keith

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 4:24 pm
by Geordietaf
Confirm the first of my dead games has resurrected with no problem.

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 4:56 pm
by arsan
Will 1.1.3 finally include the AI improvements promised for RoR? As i see they are not on 1.1.2... :?

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 5:00 pm
by Examinondas
IMHO, there were already AI improvements in 1.1.1. At least, the AI deployed his troops better and was able to keep them in a line...

Can't wait to try 1.1.2 :D

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 5:04 pm
by TheGrayMouser
Well i'm about 6 hours away from getting home from work and trying out the patch but I am dying to know how the LOS is implimented... for example, what happens when one moves his unit adjacent to a previously unspotted enemy? Is combat resolved immedietly, is there any bounus given to the "hidden" unit?

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 5:16 pm
by keyth
TheGrayMouser wrote:Well i'm about 6 hours away from getting home from work and trying out the patch but I am dying to know how the LOS is implimented... for example, what happens when one moves his unit adjacent to a previously unspotted enemy? Is combat resolved immedietly, is there any bounus given to the "hidden" unit?
From a few brief tests, you stop one hex away from the concealed unit... cavalry ambushes may well be brutal :)

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 5:18 pm
by keithmartinsmith
See:-

http://www.hexwar.com/field-of-glory/he ... sight.aspx

So if one side is on a hill and one is not the guy on a hill has quite an advantage! Moving through woods can also now be quite a risky business. Personally, in testing, I like to keep my best troops in reserve behind my front line so my opponent does not know where they will emerge from.

Keith

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 5:23 pm
by TheGrayMouser
Sounds great, now swarms of light cavalry can handle an important task, screening the advance of ones own army 8)

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 9:51 pm
by grumblefish
Sneaky devils, is that a new elephant unit graphic I see for the pre-166 BC Seleucids? :D

Also, the new rule changes don't affect units from previous games that you refrain from moving. That is to say, if I move my bowmen, I can no longer shoot into a hvy inf unit hiding in the vine fields from far away. However, if I leave my bowman where he is, I can continue to shoot at him from afar. To obey the rules, or not to obey the new rules, that is the question... (I got the short end of the stick, too, however, when a unit of mf inf charged out from a forest into the open).

EDIT: Oooh, a number of new units. :D Is this going to be the norm with future patches? (please say yes)

EDIT 2: looks like you swapped the gallic lowlands/hill descriptions around, so now it says the lowlands have medium foot, and vice versa, when really it should be the opposite.

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 10:46 pm
by ScipioTerra
WOW!

This not just a patch. Its a real update with "the good stuff" inside. :D :D :D

The next round is on me.

Thanks Hex War and Slitherine!