RE: Truck Summary in logistics Phase Report is hard to understand: (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East 2



Message

juv95hrn -> RE: Truck Summary in logistics Phase Report is hard to understand: (6/17/2021 2:10:15 AM)

When I transfer an air group into an existing AOG on map, from reserve, there is room on the air base. The air base is not set to zero supply level, there is plenty of fuel, ammo and supplies on the air base itself, there is a large depot in the same hex, why do I get "Failed to resupply air base, do you still want to transfer?". To me it feels like this should be an excellent air base to insert more planes into. What am missing? Too low air base supply level, for the amount of new air planes I try to base there?

This example is in Feodosia, on the Kerch, supplied by sea, but it happens afaik everywhere.

+confused+



juv95hrn -> RE: Truck Summary in logistics Phase Report is hard to understand: (6/17/2021 3:03:21 AM)

I need help to understand why my front lines on the Kerch are starving without supplies. HQs are next to them. The ports of Kerch and Feodosia have freight stored up in them. The rail line behind the front isnīt bombed. Its snowfall in January.

Yet a trickle of supplies are sent from a two Caucasus depots to one division, all but one freight each being lost on the way.

And to the majority of the front line hexes none is sent at all. The port depots have very few trucks in them, but I cant influence that except supply settings I believe. Could I send trucks there manually? I dont think so.

Feodosia is 4 hexes from the front, so no horse drawn transport, but if no supplies are sent out, this wouldnt matter I suppose.

I have a prio 4 depot on the rail line one hex behind the front, 3 from the port. It never receives any freight. A lack of moving stock on the peninsula to get anything here?

My only guess would be a somewhat too low supply priority on their HQs, but this doesnt really make sense either. They are some of the highest on the map.

Is it the frontline forts being built automatically sucking up all the supplies? This isnt the case anywhere else.

The AI isnt attacking, so it isnt combat depleting me. And its the delivery, and not the consumption that wont work.

Is it just that you simply cant supply an entire full Front, through the ports, even if they are stocked to the brim with freight?

Anyone dare to venture a guess?



loki100 -> RE: Truck Summary in logistics Phase Report is hard to understand: (6/17/2021 6:37:22 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: juv95hrn

When I transfer an air group into an existing AOG on map, from reserve, there is room on the air base. The air base is not set to zero supply level, there is plenty of fuel, ammo and supplies on the air base itself, there is a large depot in the same hex, why do I get "Failed to resupply air base, do you still want to transfer?". To me it feels like this should be an excellent air base to insert more planes into. What am missing? Too low air base supply level, for the amount of new air planes I try to base there?

This example is in Feodosia, on the Kerch, supplied by sea, but it happens afaik everywhere.

+confused+


it tests what is there, plus what it can send under the in-turn supply routines (ie what is usually used to replenish ammunition etc).

treat it as advice that maybe there might be a longer term problem there but most likely it'll resolve in the next logistics phase.



loki100 -> RE: Truck Summary in logistics Phase Report is hard to understand: (6/17/2021 6:51:51 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: juv95hrn

I need help to understand why my front lines on the Kerch are starving without supplies. HQs are next to them. The ports of Kerch and Feodosia have freight stored up in them. The rail line behind the front isnīt bombed. Its snowfall in January.

Yet a trickle of supplies are sent from a two Caucasus depots to one division, all but one freight each being lost on the way.

And to the majority of the front line hexes none is sent at all. The port depots have very few trucks in them, but I cant influence that except supply settings I believe. Could I send trucks there manually? I dont think so.

Feodosia is 4 hexes from the front, so no horse drawn transport, but if no supplies are sent out, this wouldnt matter I suppose.

I have a prio 4 depot on the rail line one hex behind the front, 3 from the port. It never receives any freight. A lack of moving stock on the peninsula to get anything here?

My only guess would be a somewhat too low supply priority on their HQs, but this doesnt really make sense either. They are some of the highest on the map.

Is it the frontline forts being built automatically sucking up all the supplies? This isnt the case anywhere else.

The AI isnt attacking, so it isnt combat depleting me. And its the delivery, and not the consumption that wont work.

Is it just that you simply cant supply an entire full Front, through the ports, even if they are stocked to the brim with freight?

Anyone dare to venture a guess?


aye, I'd go for volume of demand > over what can feasibly be supplied.

worth bearing in mind what the unit supply priority actually means.

units under a level #1 HQ get first call on the supply network but can only get 50% of their total need, so if they have 50% they claim no new supply, at #2 this is 70%, at #3 90% and at #4 the default is 90% but there are a sequence of special rules that come into play.

So the claim sequence is #1 (cap 50%), 2 (cap 70%) etc. So in a low supply region, setting HQ priority >1 has a few problems but may help. The problem is that the local supply such as it is will have long been claimed so you get into the truck problem (ie your unit trucks spend so long looking for supply they forget to be available to move and fight) but it is an insurance policy against failed logistic checks (miss on round 1, they can go and look again on round 2).

Point here, is that simply raising unit supply priority is not the solution. In a problematic area get most of them to 1 or 2 maybe a single 3 (easier with the axis corps HQ).

You have several problems there. One is that rail cap can't cross sea hexes (even with a ferry) - this also affects Leningrad if that is cut off. So you quite likely lack any rail capacity in the Crimea if retaking it from the east till you regain Sevastopol.

I'd suggest take this to a thread in its own right, and add some images, you say the ports are full would help to unpick this if the above doesn't explain the situation.



Rollerman -> RE: Truck Summary in logistics Phase Report is hard to understand: (6/18/2021 3:54:24 PM)

Is it possible to automate the Hungarian and Romanian armed forces?



loki100 -> RE: Truck Summary in logistics Phase Report is hard to understand: (6/18/2021 4:08:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rollerman

Is it possible to automate the Hungarian and Romanian armed forces?


no, any on-map formations need to be handled manually. But there are only a few available Hungarians in 1941 (most are locked in place till about May 42)



juv95hrn -> RE: Truck Summary in logistics Phase Report is hard to understand: (6/19/2021 1:54:45 AM)

It seems the formula for fatigue lowering is entirely under-the hood?

Which is better, using movement, and gaining some additional fatigue, to move away from being adjacent to an enemy unit (when the situation allows it), hoping to regain this loss in the next logistic phase.

Or to remain adjacent adjacent to the enemy, suffering additional fatigue and attrition, but not having to move in and out of a better refit position.

Yes, weather, terrain, etc. would influence this. But a hint at the formula would help you estimate.

I guess experience and careful note taking is required to gain insight.

Thanks!



loki100 -> RE: Truck Summary in logistics Phase Report is hard to understand: (6/19/2021 6:55:18 AM)

in the main being in a ZoC is a large drag on regaining combat readiness, so yes break contact if you can



juv95hrn -> RE: Truck Summary in logistics Phase Report is hard to understand: (6/19/2021 2:26:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

in the main being in a ZoC is a large drag on regaining combat readiness, so yes break contact if you can



My little experience tell me that, unless the movement cost (and fatigue penalty for this), is all to prohibitive, yes this is indeed the better solution.



juv95hrn -> RE: Truck Summary in logistics Phase Report is hard to understand: (6/19/2021 2:28:03 PM)

I asked before about assigning construction units to Forts (that might cost AP if they happen to be attacked to a city/location).

But on Kerch, it costs AP to assign CUs to forts from Army HQs. This is usually no the case. Why?

Is it because Kerch is "isolated" by only ferry or Naval contact?

Or is it a bug?

Is there a workaround?

Thanks!

EDIT:

Nope, its now all of a sudden a cost of 1 AP all over. Its Turn 31. Does something change in 1942?



loki100 -> RE: Truck Summary in logistics Phase Report is hard to understand: (6/19/2021 3:06:47 PM)

there should be no cost, its a bug that will be fixed in the next patch. There is a partial work around set out in this thread - maybe a page or so back?



warspite1 -> RE: Quick Questions Thread (6/19/2021 3:27:02 PM)

Why change the title of this thread????



beamslam -> RE: Truck Summary in logistics Phase Report is hard to understand: (6/20/2021 12:41:20 AM)

As I'm used to metric values like most Europeans, so it would make sense to have metric values instead of Imperial values. I can be a bit cumbersome all the time to "translate" the imperial values to metric figures. Like the speed of the planes and vehicles for example, those I know roughly in Kmh for the various types but the Mph values doesn't say me much until converted.
In the editor it is possible to change but it will not change in the game file. Is there a way to do this?



hei1 -> RE: Truck Summary in logistics Phase Report is hard to understand: (6/20/2021 9:16:24 AM)

+1



Starway -> RE: Truck Summary in logistics Phase Report is hard to understand: (6/20/2021 1:31:45 PM)

+1 for metric values



loki100 -> Quick Questions Thread (6/20/2021 2:41:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: beamslam

As I'm used to metric values like most Europeans, so it would make sense to have metric values instead of Imperial values. I can be a bit cumbersome all the time to "translate" the imperial values to metric figures. Like the speed of the planes and vehicles for example, those I know roughly in Kmh for the various types but the Mph values doesn't say me much until converted.
In the editor it is possible to change but it will not change in the game file. Is there a way to do this?


since this really isn't a question about game mechanics I'd suggest putting in a post into the 'feature suggestions' thread. More chance of it being noticed or the modding forum - depends really which bit of your question you want an answer to



juv95hrn -> RE: Truck Summary in logistics Phase Report is hard to understand: (6/20/2021 2:52:12 PM)

Is the paradrop interface bugged?

How do I order and CONFIRM a new paradrop hex?

Each time I click the radio button of a corresponding para unit, it CHANGES drop hex destination shown, without me having chosen a new hex, like it has multiple targets allocated.

Also, after assignating a new drop hex for one unit, the next one will always show that same hex too, after clicking its radio button, even though its accual target hex is another one. If you reclick it, it will show the correct one.

If I right click a hex after picking a new target hex, it states "must be a friendly air base hex". But you cant choose staging base or

Bugged and overly complicated interface, or how do you handle this?



loki100 -> RE: Quick Questions Thread (6/20/2021 3:26:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: juv95hrn

Is the paradrop interface bugged?

How do I order and CONFIRM a new paradrop hex?

Each time I click the radio button of a corresponding para unit, it CHANGES drop hex destination shown, without me having chosen a new hex, like it has multiple targets allocated.

Also, after assignating a new drop hex for one unit, the next one will always show that same hex too, after clicking its radio button, even though its accual target hex is another one. If you reclick it, it will show the correct one.

If I right click a hex after picking a new target hex, it states "must be a friendly air base hex". But you cant choose staging base or

Bugged and overly complicated interface, or how do you handle this?


not my experience, takes two clicks:

so open an old save, press F9 and select airborne.

it shows me all the airborne units I have that are potentially eligible to have a mission set - in this case a brigade in Budapest:

[image]https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/4330/OKIH6x.jpg[/image]

following the instructions I left click on the map on a potential target hex:

[image]https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/4047/XfO20K.jpg[/image]

thats it, its set. The brigade will build preparation pts and be ready to carry out the drop in 2 turns.

press F1 or whatever and back to the map.

or select another brigade (if I had more than one showing) and redo those steps.



beamslam -> RE: Quick Questions Thread (6/20/2021 6:46:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100


quote:

ORIGINAL: beamslam

As I'm used to metric values like most Europeans, so it would make sense to have metric values instead of Imperial values. I can be a bit cumbersome all the time to "translate" the imperial values to metric figures. Like the speed of the planes and vehicles for example, those I know roughly in Kmh for the various types but the Mph values doesn't say me much until converted.
In the editor it is possible to change but it will not change in the game file. Is there a way to do this?


since this really isn't a question about game mechanics I'd suggest putting in a post into the 'feature suggestions' thread. More chance of it being noticed or the modding forum - depends really which bit of your question you want an answer to



Right, I'll put it in the "feature suggestions"



juv95hrn -> RE: Quick Questions Thread (6/20/2021 6:58:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

quote:

ORIGINAL: juv95hrn

Is the paradrop interface bugged?

How do I order and CONFIRM a new paradrop hex?

Each time I click the radio button of a corresponding para unit, it CHANGES drop hex destination shown, without me having chosen a new hex, like it has multiple targets allocated.

Also, after assignating a new drop hex for one unit, the next one will always show that same hex too, after clicking its radio button, even though its accual target hex is another one. If you reclick it, it will show the correct one.

If I right click a hex after picking a new target hex, it states "must be a friendly air base hex". But you cant choose staging base or

Bugged and overly complicated interface, or how do you handle this?


not my experience, takes two clicks:

so open an old save, press F9 and select airborne.

it shows me all the airborne units I have that are potentially eligible to have a mission set - in this case a brigade in Budapest:

[image]https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/4330/OKIH6x.jpg[/image]

following the instructions I left click on the map on a potential target hex:

[image]https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/4047/XfO20K.jpg[/image]

thats it, its set. The brigade will build preparation pts and be ready to carry out the drop in 2 turns.

press F1 or whatever and back to the map.

or select another brigade (if I had more than one showing) and redo those steps.



That is not the problem I describe.

I have changed drop hex, from one initial to an new one, after doing what you describe, which works fine for me to.

Now the unit will randomly show the new, or the old drop hex target.

When I have multiple para units on the same air base, with multiple targets, they take turns on showing new, old and random targets hex alternativs, depending on which order I click the radio buttons.

Even if I assign the correct new hex, and this registers, the next time I check, it will still point to the old location, the third time the correct one, without me not having done anything, but check the radio buttons to indicate which para unit is active.

So, yeah, the workaround might be to only use one para brigade per air base and never change the target hex.



loki100 -> RE: Quick Questions Thread (6/20/2021 9:48:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: juv95hrn

...

That is not the problem I describe.

I have changed drop hex, from one initial to an new one, after doing what you describe, which works fine for me to.

Now the unit will randomly show the new, or the old drop hex target.

When I have multiple para units on the same air base, with multiple targets, they take turns on showing new, old and random targets hex alternativs, depending on which order I click the radio buttons.

Even if I assign the correct new hex, and this registers, the next time I check, it will still point to the old location, the third time the correct one, without me not having done anything, but check the radio buttons to indicate which para unit is active.

So, yeah, the workaround might be to only use one para brigade per air base and never change the target hex.


ok, went back over my saves for an instance where I can put two brigades on the same airbase, as below just swapped between them and selected a different target hex.

[image]https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/2144/AGMMsk.jpg[/image]

[image]https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/1183/Bsm9Js.jpg[/image]

did nothing but open F9, select airborne, select one brigade left click on a target, select the other and left click on a different target hex.

Clearly you are doing/seeing something different but not sure why it doesn't work as above?



juv95hrn -> RE: Quick Questions Thread (6/20/2021 10:03:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100


quote:

ORIGINAL: juv95hrn

...

That is not the problem I describe.

I have changed drop hex, from one initial to an new one, after doing what you describe, which works fine for me to.

Now the unit will randomly show the new, or the old drop hex target.

When I have multiple para units on the same air base, with multiple targets, they take turns on showing new, old and random targets hex alternativs, depending on which order I click the radio buttons.

Even if I assign the correct new hex, and this registers, the next time I check, it will still point to the old location, the third time the correct one, without me not having done anything, but check the radio buttons to indicate which para unit is active.

So, yeah, the workaround might be to only use one para brigade per air base and never change the target hex.


ok, went back over my saves for an instance where I can put two brigades on the same airbase, as below just swapped between them and selected a different target hex.

[image]https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/2144/AGMMsk.jpg[/image]

[image]https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/1183/Bsm9Js.jpg[/image]

did nothing but open F9, select airborne, select one brigade left click on a target, select the other and left click on a different target hex.

Clearly you are doing/seeing something different but not sure why it doesn't work as above?


Thanks for your input and efforts.

What you describe is what I experience too, so far.

- It would be great if you exit, then go back into the paradrop menu again, then check if the paras keep their new destination hex, you set the first time in the menu.

- Then select the paraunits a couple of times, with the radiobuttons, and check if the allocated target hex remains the same, or shows different ones, like for me.

Again, I can assign a target hex, I can change it to a new one, like you comfirm here.

The issue is that when re-checking if the changes "stick", the para target hexes differ from one time to another, as I select the para units. Like the order didnt stick, or that system shows the old or new hex intermittently or randomly. Or like you actually have 2 hexes selected, the new and the old, and the system shows them both each other time you select the unit.

Also as I described above, after giving one para unit a new destination hex, the next para unit I select, will have that exact same hex selected to in the map arrow interface (although in actuality it has another hex, previously pointed to and assigned with the coordinates). So I click around a bit more, selecting units, and the next time it will show the correct targets hex.

I suspect here there is a minor bug, and the system remains indicating the same target location hex, after you select a new para unit in the same hex, although this is just showing the wrong target hex, but in effect, the unit really has the correct, other target. So its just a visual glitch.

Its hard to describe more precise like this. A screen shot wouldnt help, since you have to select different para units on the same air base multiple times, for the glithch to appear.

Its this or I am doing something wrong, but I am follwing your exact steps above, its just that I have re-assigned a new hex from the original one, and not just chosen an inital drop hex. That works just fine.

Hope this explains the problem better.

Thanks!



loki100 -> RE: Quick Questions Thread (6/20/2021 10:14:54 PM)

I've gone back to that and simply re-ordered, opened and closed (via F1) the tab and can't generate anything unusual. The only issue is it does re-open with whichever brigade you last allocated showing it may look like they both have the same targets.

So there is an apparent delay/hook to the other target but I think its not actually what is happening.

I've attached a wetransfer link to a video of the command sequence I am following and the respective target display.

Just click on the link and download:

https://we.tl/t-UnMJTdJSfD

I'm using a test beta build (hence the info at the screen top) but that really shouldn't be influencing this routine



juv95hrn -> RE: Quick Questions Thread (6/20/2021 11:06:04 PM)

24.3 states that a ground unit has a transport cost. In actuality this consists of two numbers fx. "1000/2000". What do these mean specifically?



juv95hrn -> RE: Quick Questions Thread (6/20/2021 11:15:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

I've gone back to that and simply re-ordered, opened and closed (via F1) the tab and can't generate anything unusual. The only issue is it does re-open with whichever brigade you last allocated showing it may look like they both have the same targets.

So there is an apparent delay/hook to the other target but I think its not actually what is happening.

I've attached a wetransfer link to a video of the command sequence I am following and the respective target display.

Just click on the link and download:

https://we.tl/t-UnMJTdJSfD

I'm using a test beta build (hence the info at the screen top) but that really shouldn't be influencing this routine


Yes, I think the video describes exactly what is confusing me. The delay in wrongly showing the other para units target, instead of its own, correct one, the first time you select it (but not if you re-select among them again). I agree its a glitch, and probably not WAD, and if the targets actually registers correctly with the system, in contrast to what it is showing graphically, I think I can understand it anyway.

But I also have 3 para units on one air base, and when clicking around selecting them, the shift among different targets seemingly randomly (ie. not only the previously selected target hex, or the previously selected para units target hex, but each others current and previous target hexes, making it impossible to discern (at least by the on-map graphics) which is their actual target hex. I guess one has to go with the map coordinates given instead for now.

Thanks for your input. I will check next turn if the lastly given target hex has "stuck" for each para unit, or if they still give the wrong target then. I suspect it does, because I started to briefly look into this last turn, but dismissed it as me simply not understanding the interface.

Although nothing major I think this must be classified as a minor visual and interface bug?

EDIT:

I found a small work-around. By clicking/selecting the same para unit twice in a row, you convince the system to show the correct target hex.

The Soviet para-forces are utterly confused at this stage, and their preparations have suffered greatly. But finally I believe some units have their correct targets set. We will see what the system shows next week.

EDIT 2:

The whole thing is actually quite intuitive when you realize, and get used to that you actually have to click each para unit TWICE, to show that units actual target hex.



juv95hrn -> RE: Quick Questions Thread (6/21/2021 3:22:24 AM)

How does 124 vehicle factories in the factory navigation table (with no damage) translate to 61 active and available factories producing 610 vehicles in the logistic phase report? Some production coefficient for the year?



56ajax -> RE: Quick Questions Thread (6/23/2021 1:11:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: juv95hrn

How does 124 vehicle factories in the factory navigation table (with no damage) translate to 61 active and available factories producing 610 vehicles in the logistic phase report? Some production coefficient for the year?

For the Soviets, from 1942 onwards there is a multiplier of 0.55. (germans 0.7)

Maths dont quite add up so I suspect each factory has the multiplier applied individually as opposed to the sum of the factories x the multiplier. (or there is hidden damage/delay)



56ajax -> RE: Quick Questions Thread (6/23/2021 1:16:35 AM)

Quick question on unit supply and trucks and rail.

Units are supplied from depots using vehicles and not rail. Is this correct?



carlkay58 -> RE: Quick Questions Thread (6/23/2021 2:41:23 AM)

Correct



Hardradi -> RE: Quick Questions Thread (6/24/2021 5:37:27 AM)

It seems like there is a difference between conquering a port versus conquering a land locked city. Eg, if you conquer Riga and Minsk on turn 1, with Riga you can allocate construction units and AA units on Turn 1 but with Minsk you cannot assign either on Turn 1. I think the option appears in Turn 2 for Minsk. The difference seems to apply for all coastal versus land locked cities.

If you build a depot in Minsk on Turn 1, there is still no option to assign const/AA units.

Is there a reason for this difference?



Page: <<   < prev  24 25 [26] 27 28   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.5927734