Reporting a severe vehicle bug!

Reporting a severe vehicle bug! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Tech Support

Message

mktours -> Reporting a severe vehicle bug! (4/28/2014 12:19:56 PM)
I am currently playing a PBEM game with Saper222, and in the end of my T61, my motor pool number is 155k (127k). When I opened Saper’s T62, I was shocked to see that the motor number suddenly turn into 164k (223k), since both sides were resting and I placed more troops on the rail-line than last turn, the motor requirement should be smaller, not bigger. All the tank corps were already at 42b TOE and at full strength, so that could not be the reason as well. I already did some test with Saper222, I did nothing but just clicked the “close the turn” of the T62 file and sent it to Saper and he return the next turn to me, and the motor pool number in my next turn is 147k (145k), since I didn’t do anything in the T62, so the motor-requirement should be roughly the same, it could not be 223k Vs 145k. So that could be confirmed as a bug. That is a very serious bug. As all my troops have to lend their vehicles to the motor pool, and also, 10% vehicles in the motor pool were damaged due to the shortage of vehicles in motor pool. All of my units have their vehicles down to a 70% level, last turn their level were all 100%. Please show how I could send the file, and I would email you the end of my T61 and the start of my T62. Regards, mktours

morvael -> RE: Reporting a severe vehicle bug! (4/28/2014 12:26:27 PM)
Remember that fully stuffed units require more trucks to transport supplies. Also, you pay truck cost based on the number of goods to transport from rail to HQ (as well as distance) and when your HQs and units are closer to rail then they are allowed to get more supplies. This paradox might lead to units closer to rail resulting in higher truck need (the trucks are used even if the range is 0). Also, are you sure there wasn't a different weather rolled in the real game vs the test case? Truck usage changes dramatically with weather.

morvael -> RE: Reporting a severe vehicle bug! (4/28/2014 12:33:17 PM)
My biggest recorded truck change (using quite old game version, it could have even been on 1.06 or early 1.07) was +57 606 from 123 321 to 180 927 when the 1942 blizzard hit on 1942-12-10. If you don't move and fight the units doesn't use fuel and ammo, so the supply needs are much, much lower in the next logistics phase, so such test is not reliable.

mktours -> RE: Reporting a severe vehicle bug! (4/28/2014 12:54:18 PM)
morvael, thanks for the help, the files has been email to you, so please check the email box. we play non-random weather, and we are in clear turns and only have 1 battle in T61. all HQs are sitting on rail lines. The biggest motor requirement I have throughout the game is in mud turns, and it is 169k. quote: ORIGINAL: morvael Remember that fully stuffed units require more trucks to transport supplies. Also, you pay truck cost based on the number of goods to transport from rail to HQ (as well as distance) and when your HQs and units are closer to rail then they are allowed to get more supplies. This paradox might lead to units closer to rail resulting in higher truck need (the trucks are used even if the range is 0). Also, are you sure there wasn't a different weather rolled in the real game vs the test case? Truck usage changes dramatically with weather.

morvael -> RE: Reporting a severe vehicle bug! (4/28/2014 12:59:49 PM)
Actually, mud turns have lower truck usage multiplier (but the supply movement costs may be higher, so it partially balances) than blizzard. My max truck need was 196k, so yeah, 223k looks like it's a bit too big. I will know more when I will check the saves. Thanks.

mktours -> RE: Reporting a severe vehicle bug! (4/28/2014 1:05:03 PM)
When you open my files, you will see that 90% of my troops were on the rail line, that is why the requirement is only 127k at the end of my T61. It can't be right that it require 223k in the next turn. Thanks very much for your help! quote: ORIGINAL: morvael Actually, mud turns have lower truck usage multiplier (but the supply movement costs may be higher, so it partially balances) than blizzard. My max truck need was 196k, so yeah, 223k looks like it's a bit too big. I will know more when I will check the saves. Thanks.

morvael -> RE: Reporting a severe vehicle bug! (5/4/2014 8:02:59 PM)
I have analyzed the "bug" and to me it looks like a price to pay for sending entire Red Airforce to reserve and then back. Each airbase sent it's stocks back to cities (as they were no longer needed) and when the airforce returned each airbase required 2000-5000 trucks to refill. The trucks are needed to move supplies even if the airbase unit sits on the railway, and this caused the extreme truck requirement.

mktours -> RE: Reporting a severe vehicle bug! (5/5/2014 10:35:56 AM)
That must be the reason, as I did send a lot of planes to reserve and got them back to airbase in T61. If I knew it would cause such a big trouble, I would never do it.( I did it simply for convenience, for saving time.) Thank you for your work! Kind regards, mktours quote: ORIGINAL: morvael I have analyzed the "bug" and to me it looks like a price to pay for sending entire Red Airforce to reserve and then back. Each airbase sent it's stocks back to cities (as they were no longer needed) and when the airforce returned each airbase required 2000-5000 trucks to refill. The trucks are needed to move supplies even if the airbase unit sits on the railway, and this caused the extreme truck requirement.

morvael -> RE: Reporting a severe vehicle bug! (5/5/2014 10:44:37 AM)
Long ago in my PBEM game I did the same, as this was what the "tips & tricks" said to do [:)]. At that time the logistics model was more forgiving, as it wasn't as efficient in immediately returning extra supplies. Looks like the Turn 1 tactics for the Red Army have to be revised.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.09375