Forums

Full Version: Possible Bug
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
I had 2 engineering units in the same hex creating a bridge on the same hex side. They both created there bridges together on the same turn. As one bridge was redundant I ordered one unit to start bridging operations to remove the bridge. The unit immediately dismantled the bridge and was available for moving with full movement points.

Is this a bug or a design feature? In this scenario, bridge building typically takes 2 or 3 turns.
What game and sceanrio are you referring to?

A turn file before and after the bridge build would help.

Dog Soldier
FLG Wrote:I had 2 engineering units in the same hex creating a bridge on the same hex side. They both created there bridges together on the same turn. As one bridge was redundant I ordered one unit to start bridging operations to remove the bridge. The unit immediately dismantled the bridge and was available for moving with full movement points.

Is this a bug or a design feature? In this scenario, bridge building typically takes 2 or 3 turns.

I am thinking this didn't happen i ONE turn as you indicated - if it did you would not know the bridge was created. I think what happened was you had two Eng units with Bridge Operations - on one turn you had the bridge built - you saw the bridge and the unit that built it had the label change from Bridge operation to Has Bridge maybe,

... and then you inadvertenty left the second eng in the same hex with Bridge operations. If it is as I suspect, I don't thnk it is a bug because the second eng could have been building a bridge from the samehex to a different hexside and I wouldn't expect the game to know or judge when you would want the second Bridge Operation cancelled.

Anyway - not sure how the game could build and un-build the bridge int he same turn because the two operations would cancel it other out and you would have no way to know if you had two failed atempts or one pass followed by a removal.

Glenn

Glenn
Glenn has it right ... user operator error here.

Sheepishly looks for rock to hide under