strat map movement

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

strat map movement

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Close Combat Series >> Close Combat: Last Stand Arnhem >> Tech Support >> strat map movement

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

strat map movement - 12/10/2010 6:07:04 PM

Broz

Posts: 8
Joined: 12/1/2010
Status: offline

I'm playing a GC vs the AI as the allies. Its Sept 18 1500 and I get three new BGs deployed on the strategy map. None of these BGs are able to move from the map they deployed on.
One BG deployed on Ginkel Heath, one on Renkum Heath and one on Son Heath.

I am able to move the BGs on Ginkel and Renkum already on the maps from the previous turn.
I dont know if its a bug or if the newly deployed BGs are prevented from moving on there first turn.

Post #: 1

RE: strat map movement - 12/10/2010 6:58:21 PM

Andrew Williams

Posts: 6116
Joined: 1/8/2001
From: Australia
Status: offline

They are paratroops and are unable to move as they need to "Form up" - is my recolection.

_____________________________

(in reply to Broz)

Post #: 2

RE: strat map movement - 12/10/2010 8:13:15 PM

Tejszd

Posts: 3437
Joined: 11/17/2007
Status: offline

They can't be moved on the first turn they appear....

(in reply to Andrew Williams)

Post #: 3

RE: strat map movement - 12/10/2010 8:16:47 PM

Broz

Posts: 8
Joined: 12/1/2010
Status: offline

Why was I able to move the airborne BGs on the first turn of day one then?

< Message edited by Broz -- 12/10/2010 8:18:03 PM >

(in reply to Tejszd)

Post #: 4

RE: strat map movement - 12/10/2010 11:15:33 PM

RD Oddball

Posts: 4836
Joined: 2/10/2007
Status: offline

Some BG's are not engaged therefore able to move. The ones you cannot move are unable to move because they are landing into a contested area.

(in reply to Broz)

Post #: 5

RE: strat map movement - 12/11/2010 1:19:15 PM

Broz

Posts: 8
Joined: 12/1/2010
Status: offline

Ok, I got it now.

The BGs from the first turn of day one didnt actually land on that turn, thats why I can move them.

(in reply to RD Oddball)

Post #: 6

RE: strat map movement - 12/11/2010 9:56:54 PM

STIENER

Posts: 857
Joined: 1/7/2001
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline

what page of the manual does it tell us that...i cant find it??

(in reply to Broz)

Post #: 7

RE: strat map movement - 12/13/2010 2:45:53 PM

RD Oddball

Posts: 4836
Joined: 2/10/2007
Status: offline

Various types of movement as it pertains to differing aspects of the game is explained in section 17 of the manual.

(in reply to STIENER)

Post #: 8

RE: strat map movement - 12/13/2010 10:03:04 PM

STIENER

Posts: 857
Joined: 1/7/2001
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline

i had a quik look in the 16 pages in sec 17 of the manual and i stil cant find it....didnt see it in MOVE 17.12.2...perhaps you can list the sub sec and make it easier.

perhaps this is one of the things that can be put in the manual re write......a sub sec that pertains to para air drops.

(in reply to RD Oddball)

Post #: 9

RE: strat map movement - 12/14/2010 1:05:22 PM

xe5

Posts: 783
Joined: 5/3/2009
Status: offline

My tests dont show any need for AB BGs to 'form up' before moving off of Allied controlled maps. The BG on Son Heath above should have, within stacking limitations, been able to move to any adjacent map. To quote 17.4.1 in the Manual Addendum:

"There is no restriction on strategic movement from friendly controlled maps, regardless of whether a Battle Group is deployed or not."

However, there should be a restriction on strategic movement from enemy controlled maps even if unoccupied by the enemy. If, for instance, Son Heath had been Axis controlled but unoccupied when Broz's AB BG deployed to an interior VL, that BG should not have been allowed to move on the assumption that it was spending its arrival turn taking control of the rest of the enemy controlled map - in effect, mopping up the nominal enemy garrisons implied by the term "enemy controlled".

As of the .50b patch, the reason neither reinforcing AB BG on Ginkel or Renkum Heaths could move is a combination of 17.2.2 ("On maps that are of mixed control, you may only move along roads for which you hold the victory locations") and 17.4.1 in the Addendum ("Until a Battle Group is deployed it may only exit a contested map (one with an enemy Battle Group present) by returning to the map it came from. If this move is not possible (due to losing the Victory Location corresponding to the map connection) then the Battle Group may not move at all until it deploys."). Since the reinforcing BGs have not yet been 'Deployed' they can only exit the map by returning to the map(s) they "came from". But reinforcing AB BGs come from off-board and deploy on 'interior' non-exit VLs, so there is no map they can exit to.

Two problems encountered in researching the issues in this thread:

1. [Major] - Contrary to 17.9 Reforming and Reinforcements - ("If the Reinforcement Battle Group is trying to arrive on a designated map, but cannot because there was another friendly Battle Group on the map, it finds the closest open �friendly� supply depot to it�s initial deploy map and deploys there.") - the game CTDs if a reinforcing BG cant deploy because of stacking limitations even if there is an adjacent open friendly depot.

2. [Minor] - 17.12.2 MOVE ("By left clicking the Battle Group icon, a yellow border will appear around all adjacent maps. The yellow boarder is thicker for those maps that the Battle Group may move to.") - is bogus information. When you left click a BG a yellow border is only displayed around those maps the BG may move to. And "boarder" ?!? Did the production budget not allow for the use of spell-check?

(in reply to STIENER)

Post #: 10

RE: strat map movement - 12/14/2010 3:06:09 PM

RD Oddball

Posts: 4836
Joined: 2/10/2007
Status: offline

Thanks Mick! Your point re: as of the .50b patch I guess could be another scenario under which this would occur.

You make an interesting suggestion re: having to retake enemy territory on an uncontested, enemy controlled map.

I'll report the issues you pointed out. With regard to spell check - I'm guessing since "boarder" was spelled correctly it got past Knights' spell checker.

Maybe there's a need for a elocution checker? I'd be setting that thing off constantly if such a thing were even possible. That wy me not manuwall riter.

(in reply to xe5)

Post #: 11