Bug? Seize trade post warscore

[DrOak2]

Hi,

I'm playing a (Muslim) Merchant Republic and have declared war to seize a Silk Road trade post in Hormuz. I have occupied all the regular holdings, but I keep getting negative warscore for not controlling Hormuz. At the same time, if I siege any longer, the war ends inconclusively because the CB is no longer valid (because the trade post gets destroyed?).

Is this a bug?

 

[jonjowett]

Yep, me too.

Aside: Did you also start as Dhofar? If so, interesting coincidence! Top tip: coastal provinces that the silk road passes through (without silk road trade post) are also extremely rich. (They receive +X trade value from silk road passing through, as well as +100% from Imperial Trade Contract.)

I think this is a bug, but I have kept forgetting to document the problem because I found an easy workaround:
- Ensure you have enough money on-hand to build a new trade post
- Turn the game speed way down
- Siege the trade post, which destroys it
- War becomes invalid. Pause immediately.
- Start building the trade post.
- Unpause.

This costs more money than it should - but it also means you only need to completely siege one province, so I think it actually works in your favour.

If you have the relevant documentation (screenshots, saves, etc), you should probably add it here and ask a mod to move this thread to the bug reports subforum.

 

[DrOak2]

Yes I started as Dhofar -- thanks for the tips .

More info:

I'm on the latest version [2.8.3.3], lots of DLCs, no mods, no ironman. Would have to do some digging to get the save but can do so if requested (but sounds like this should be pretty reproducible).

 

[jonjowett]

Yes I started as Dhofar -- thanks for the tips .

Fair warning: I just started my first ever run as a Muslim MR, and there seem to be more bugs than usual. I suggest you make a habit of archiving saves before you take important actions.

Would have to do some digging to get the save but can do so if requested (but sounds like this should be pretty reproducible).

I'm probably going to start taking the trade posts in India soon, so I'll also try to remember to get the docs.

 

[Yxklyx]

So the trade post has a chance to be destroyed when you conquer it right. Seems like the war should just end inconclusively then.

 

[DrOak2]

As far as I can tell, it's not a chance, it's always destroyed.

So, to clarify:

1. There's no way for me to control my wargoal.
2. I constantly lose warscore for not holding the goal -- in the screen shot, I've got -137.50% for that.
3. In this case, fighting a large enemy that I couldn't take over completely in time even if I tried, there's simply no way for me to win this war, as far as I can see.

 

[Aardvark Bellay]

Did you guys start your games on an earlier patch, especially earlier than 2.8 ?
If not, any mods ?

Wonder, as the changelog for 2.8 had this:

Silk Road trade posts are no longer destroyed when the county changes hands outside succession

and as i recall that fixed exactly that destroyed-on-conquering bug.

*later*
Looked manualy down to mid nov'17 (2.8.0) and found two threads in Bug Reports subforum claiming at least a similar issue.
Hmm....

For the record:
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...d-trade-post-destruction-after-siege.1086356/
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...t-destroyed-if-county-capital-looted.1057348/

 

[Yxklyx]

Except in this case it was destroyed after sieging (before actual conquest). Raiders have a chance to destroy a trade post when it's sieged, I wonder if that also applies to normal attackers. Anyway, there is a bug report, maybe you should post another one.

 

[DrOak2]

Did you guys start your games on an earlier patch, especially earlier than 2.8 ?
If not, any mods ?

No mods, had only started the campaign on Sunday.

I've posted a bug report now.

 

[Aardvark Bellay]

..
I've posted a bug report now.

Good.