problems with auto subs (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific



Message

XG76 -> problems with auto subs (1/26/2007 6:29:47 PM)

Hi all,

after I´ve switched in my recent AI game the homebase of my (computer controlled) subs to Shortlands just to have them as close as possible to the frontline I encountered an odd problem: when they return there after finishing their war patrol, they always get disbanded by the computer and will be kept in port, never to auto-release back at sea. Even if I manually launch them, set to "computer control" and order a course - they will return to port after one or two turns. Tried same way with Lunga or Gili-Gili - in vain. It seems to work from Truk backwaters only :(

So, what´s wrong?

TIA



DEB -> RE: problems with auto subs (1/26/2007 9:20:18 PM)

I have never tried switching my submarine base. However, several things come to mind as things to consider.
Nominating a new base is not enough. Several HQ units need to be transferred, several naval support units also. I have no idea which ones. Moving the correct ones will almost certainly give you problems with other fleet vessels ( Carriers, Battleships etc. )
Given the range of Submarines, I think it's best to leave them at Truk anyway.




XG76 -> RE: problems with auto subs (1/27/2007 6:28:25 PM)

sounds pretty logical...
but had it read here in the forum that someone did right what I did then too: swtching homebase of my fleet subs. However, for the I-121 minelayer U-baots I always retained Truk as return port.
Any further helpful hints?



DEB -> RE: problems with auto subs (1/27/2007 11:53:14 PM)

If it's possible to do, then it has to be down to the exact choice of the HQ units that you move to the new site. If you could get the I class Minelaying/Transport Subs. to continue their OPS at Truk, then any other I class subs. at somewhere other than Truk are without their HQ unit.
I would understand fully if these have problems.

I would suggust keeping all the I class subs. at Truk as they all have a good range. Maybe the RO class ( shorter range ) can operate elsewhere.
If not then maybe all the subs need to be kept togeather.




DEB -> RE: problems with auto subs (1/28/2007 5:44:27 PM)

Further to previous posts on this subject.

I have today reviewed the situation re the HQ etc. units for the Japanese.
If the problem cannot be solved by moving all the Combined fleet units to Shortlands (!!), then it is likely to be a port size problem, or a "support" problem; Rabual would be better than Shortlands here, particularly re size.

As the Allies I have got my subs to operate out of PM & GG ! However I have only placed 1 at GG. Maybe the problem is to do with the number of subs operating from Shortlands and/or the size of the TF's. It would be easier to "service" one sub at a time with limited resources than 3 or more.

It also occurs to me that the placement of Subs at a new base will depend on the date of the Sc. you play and the level/s that each base has reached at the point of the transfer re base size, support etc..
Also, some bases are "supply" bases re Ammunition for the BB, DD etc.. so this probably also applies to torpedoes. Somewhere in the rules it tells you these bases ( can't recall where ).

Hope these thoughts may help solve the problem.



XG76 -> RE: problems with auto subs (2/2/2007 9:03:50 AM)

If
quote:

ORIGINAL: DEB

If it's possible to do, then it has to be down to the exact choice of the HQ units that you move to the new site..



k, so far I understand your suggestion.[:)] thanks DEB! But WHICH PARTICULAR HQ unit I need to move to desired new forward submarine base?? There is just one "Combined fleet" HQ in the game, any else are army HQ´s... [&:]



DEB -> RE: problems with auto subs (2/2/2007 8:39:58 PM)

Hello,

My post of 27th Jan was made prior to my later review of Japanese units noted in my post of 28th Jan. As there is only one Navel HQ at Truk, my suggustion re " the exact choice of HQ units" was incorrect. Sorry.
The problem is therefore more likely to be solved as per one ( or more ) of my suggustions noted in my 28th Jan. post.

By the way, these are only my theories, based on experience of play and rules etc. to date. They have yet to be proved.

Apologies if this misled you.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.90625