RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

fbs -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/4/2009 2:57:22 AM)


May want to review this unit, scenario 1, 1.0.1.1083:

Unit 5841 "Tapanoeli Gsn Bn", -perhaps- should be "Sibolga Gsn Bn"

Thanks! [:D]
fbs



Weidi72 -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/4/2009 8:44:11 AM)

I 've got some units were the headquarter is lost. There's a "unknown" now. Scen6.



Smeulders -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/4/2009 11:22:16 PM)

I have a question about the 3" Mortars, devices 1040 to 1042. It seems you wanted more 3" production later in the war, but I am wondering how this upgrade works. Is it like normal weapons, so when they are 'upgraded' I end up with a whole lot of device 1040 3" Mortars in the pool, or is it an upgrade like we have for squads, where devices sent back to the pool are immediately upgraded ? And just out of curiosity, why is the 1041 device there ? No build rate, starts and ends 'production' on the same date, it doesn't look to useful.



fbs -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/5/2009 1:54:50 PM)

Scenario 1, 1.0.1.1083:

Both the Cavite USN Base Force and Manila USAAF Base Force are depleted of engineers. So there are no engineers in Manila to build me a fort -- is that right?

This lack of engineers is extensive on the Phillippines, by the way: all bases have little or no engineering.

Cheers [:D]
fbs



Dutch_slith -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/5/2009 2:22:27 PM)

Tapanoeli is the correct designation!



Andy Mac -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/6/2009 4:06:14 PM)

Guys I am on Vacation for next three weeks - currently nursing a hangover in Las Vegas !!!

I have intermittent email contact and internet access especially for weeks in September when I will be in Canada.

keep posting feedback and I will consolidate it on my return

Viva las Vegas !!!

Andy



Andy Mac -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/6/2009 4:08:36 PM)

Smeuldurs quite correct I wanted to steadily increase 3" mortar production so its the same device and it upgrades over time - you will end up with two pools of devices I may take another look at it for patch 2

Re the one in the middle it was a error but I ran out of time to fix it it should be irrelevant (at least I hope so)



Blackhorse -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/6/2009 4:27:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: fbs

Scenario 1, 1.0.1.1083:

Both the Cavite USN Base Force and Manila USAAF Base Force are depleted of engineers. So there are no engineers in Manila to build me a fort -- is that right?

This lack of engineers is extensive on the Phillippines, by the way: all bases have little or no engineering.

Cheers [:D]
fbs


The US has one powerful Engineer unit at start -- the 14th Philippine Scouts at Clark. It is at battalion strength, but can expand into a regiment.

There are base forces at Bataan, Clark and Manila (x2) that will get a small number of engineers, if allowed to grow.

Between the end of December and mid-January three construction battalions (reservists mobilizing) will arrive on Bataan.



Montbrun -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/10/2009 9:02:18 PM)

Unit 5172 - 275th USAAF Base Force - permanently attached to SWPAC ("white letters" v. "yellow letters").



Rainer79 -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/11/2009 11:22:36 AM)

1.00.84/ scen 1

The 4th Border Defense Fortress at Kotou has a few invisible guns (see screenshot). The unit TOE has the same problem.

[image]local://upfiles/30391/F2442088CE40444886B5E967731CDC2E.jpg[/image]



Rainer79 -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/11/2009 11:27:26 AM)

Also the other border forts do have 2 entries of 0 IJA infantry squads in their TOE while they currently possess none there. Is that intentional?



[image]local://upfiles/30391/FACE981D7C5B40FF9520C4BABD97FB3B.jpg[/image]



Andy Mac -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/11/2009 5:29:16 PM)

OK guys patch 1 is now out there with new AI scripts (beta/Offical are identical for Japanese AI) so if playing v AI japan on the beta its identical.

I am going to need feedback to try and keep making it better - feedback against either side is good



witpqs -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/11/2009 5:37:55 PM)

Andy - are those new scripts picked up mid-game? Started before beta. don't want to give you irrelevant feedback.



Herrbear -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/12/2009 11:05:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Brad Hunter

Unit 5172 - 275th USAAF Base Force - permanently attached to SWPAC ("white letters" v. "yellow letters").


I think its HQ should be 100 West Coast instead of 104 SW Pac.



Herrbear -> RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread (9/12/2009 11:58:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary D

The 99th and 100th Indian Brigades posted to Colombo start scenario 6 with a morale of zero.




That is OK. From the editor manual on page 36. "Morale indicates the overall morale of the ground unit‘s personnel. This should be between 0 and 99. If a 0 is entered, the unit will assume the standard experience for a ground unit given the nationality and time of arrival."



Jonathan Pollard -> RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread (9/13/2009 12:19:14 AM)

The absence of partisans on Hainan island could be an issue.  I read that partisan activity there was extensive.  I found a map of Japanese objectives in China for December 1941 that includes operations on Hainan Island on a par with the Hong Kong area.

[image]http://ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/USA-CBI-Mission/maps/USA-CBI-Mission-1.jpg[/image]



Smeulders -> RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread (9/13/2009 1:00:46 AM)

Question about Madras Fort, in it's TOE, there are 100 naval support squads, but even though replacements are on and many are in the pools, they aren't getting any. Looking at the editor, it is has an initial 100 motorized support squads in the same slot as the naval has in the TOE (weapon 8). Could this be the cause of them not upgrading and if it is, is this WAD ?

Also noticed that the 2/11 Armoured Car Bn (Australian unit) starts with device 1078 Marmon Herringtons, but has device 1094 Marmon Herringtons in its TOE.

Edit so I don't have to double post:

Found out that it is possible to 'skip' certain device upgrades, for example NZ militia upgrading straight to the NZ inf 43'. However, in other test this wouldn't work (for example, device 921 radar to device 1048 has device 922 and 923 in between). Interesting with this path is that the final device is available 6/42, but intermediary stages are only available 1/44. Is this WAD to eliminate the shortcut ?



Montbrun -> RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread (9/13/2009 8:59:22 PM)

v1084d - Device 6082 - 3rd RAN Base Force - has British "colors" (tan) rather than Australian "colors" (green).



Dr. Duh -> RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread (9/14/2009 2:24:38 AM)

v1084-Scen 1

There are several land units at Manila and Clark Field that start the scenario with movement orders already.
These movement orders are to either Bataan or Clark Field, yet the move direction on all these units is East, and they do in fact attempt to move to the east.

By reissuing the order (reset the destination), they start moving correctly towards the destination.



Dr. Duh -> RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread (9/14/2009 2:30:07 AM)

I wasn't going to look through 100's of pages of posts, so I don't know if this is a known issue or not -

Since "Asiatic Fleet" is a subordinate HQ to a restricted HQ, it itself is restricted, however units reporting to it are not restricted. I have a feeling this is not intended. Is it a problem that you can't make subordinate HQ's restricted?

There is a similar issue with the AirHQ in Singapore.



Smeulders -> RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread (9/18/2009 10:28:25 AM)

RAAF OTU Canberra has NZ Militia, rather than CMF Militia.



Andrew Brown -> RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread (9/18/2009 12:40:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jonathan Pollard

The absence of partisans on Hainan island could be an issue.  I read that partisan activity there was extensive.  I found a map of Japanese objectives in China for December 1941 that includes operations on Hainan Island on a par with the Hong Kong area.


Interesting. Thanks.

Andrew



loricas -> RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread (9/19/2009 9:38:12 AM)

two AI stupid action: Wake: they unload here unit unit and again unit without attack\bombard: it' s mid april 42 and allied defense are only civil worker: i pick out the marine defence to see this help AI

Mandalay: i tried a surronding action (first time in this game)allied entrnched in city. Huge Japan AI army (four japan 1 thai division plus indipenden artillery 60000men) siege: a burma battalion (250 men) turn around cutting supply: no reaction for the main japan army and the few rear troop (a thai division) that go away from enemy

(i have save if needed)



Oliver Heindorf -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/20/2009 7:10:54 PM)

Device # 322 USA Engeneer Squad is the only inf squad which has the option to be build switched YES.

That doesnt seem to be right becasue all other inf squads have the option selected NO.


version 1084e



John Lansford -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/21/2009 2:10:49 PM)

I can verify that a HQ's naval support is not being counted on the base display screen.  I've got a HQ at Pearl with naval support and it isn't included in the total, and another at Aden and not counted there either.

Also, the AI landed a division (!!) at Koumac but never 'took' the base.  It's still listed as Free French and this has been several weeks after the landing.  I did sink a pile of the ships in the invasion TF but my recon says the bulk of the division is ashore, although probably with scarce supply levels.  Why haven't they taken the base yet?  I have no LCU's there at all.



BigJ62 -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/21/2009 3:42:57 PM)

If they don't have supplies then it will not attack. Also is naval support in cbt mode.



John Lansford -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/21/2009 6:37:31 PM)

Yes all my HQ's are in combat mode; the one at Pearl Harbor has been there since the game began.

As for the division not attacking due to loss of supplies, it's hard to imagine that no supplies made it ashore if the entire unit did before I sank the TF.  It's done nothing at all and so far the AI's made no effort to evacuate or resupply it either.



Monter_Trismegistos -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/21/2009 9:30:05 PM)

del



erstad -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/22/2009 7:03:22 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

Yes all my HQ's are in combat mode; the one at Pearl Harbor has been there since the game began.


Some naval HQs aren't providing support correctly. I posted a save in the tech support and Don Bowen confirmed it was a known issue and will be fixed. If I understand correctly, it's command HQs that are affected.

Here's the link
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2243783




AvG -> RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance (9/22/2009 3:27:41 PM)

1rst Campaign.
Most of Japanese landunits have understaffed Support.
Is this meant to be ?
The manual states that the new AE-support unit are bigger in size, but the program does NOT understand that and seems not to be able to work correctly with that statement.

AvG



Page: <<   < prev  57 58 [59] 60 61   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.09375