RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

Marten -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/3/2005 2:03:36 PM)

you should have included force 10 from navarone with your usmc to destroy those guns



Bradley7735 -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/3/2005 5:03:17 PM)

I've peeked at some units when playing the AI. I haven't seen 245 CD guns, but I have seen 120. I don't think this problem is occuring with the CD LCU's. It's the base force LCU's.

I've never lost a lot of ships to CD's, only because I don't land at the bases with dark red troops. As the allies, vs AI, you just simply island hop.



Mr.Frag -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/3/2005 6:31:52 PM)

quote:

It's the base force LCU's.


That is correct, The Computer player grows base forces, but it is only supposed to grow support and av support. In this kind of a case, there is only one of the two and it seems to get fooled into growing the only other part available.



Buck Beach -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/3/2005 6:57:41 PM)

To quote Tankerace said " How is all the corruption happening? It seems to me that at least half or more bug reports I see, the answer is explained as something getting corrupted."

To me this really is a big deal and serious setback to all AI players. In a short term game, Start Over, but this puppy can take years out of your life. It is a ball and game buster. Hope there is a solution.



erstad -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/3/2005 7:41:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Hunter

I doubt that Japan had 245 4.7" costal guns in the entire Pacific. And I find the fact that they fire 5.5" shells even more interesting.



The unit had probably upgraded the 4.7" guns to the 5.5". IIRC, the TOE displays don't update to represent upgrades. If he posted a screenie of the actual unit, that would tell.



Black Cat -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/3/2005 8:16:55 PM)

This Bug has been around since the beginning and it`s close to a **GAME STOPPER**, with all that implies for us guys playing the full Campaign in a historic way. Which BTW, was what this Game was sold as.

One reason I don`t post much is the constant barrage of silly requests by silly people ( who feel they know more then Garry about wargame Design ) for " enhancements" in this or that " model " or " debates" on AI issues that are not broke, and are in fact a judgement call, while this issue, _and others_ as bad still exist.

While no doubt not an easy fix, the old Devs. stock answer " it`s a corruption issue " is starting to sound lame. Maybe more like " we can`t fix it and we don`t care " ???

In that respect, why is so much effort expended adding " requested features" like the new Japanese AC production control and others, while these Major Bugs Still Exist ?



byron13 -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/4/2005 2:48:30 AM)

I've got a game going against the AI. I'll have to take a look around and see what there is to see.



Bradley7735 -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/4/2005 5:18:34 PM)

I loaded up my AI game last night. I peeked at the Japanese status. I've been bombing Kwajelein for about 30 days now. The base has no supplies. The LCU's are very close to 0. There's two base forces there. One has a TOE of 4.7" CD guns at 80!!! The good news is that 25 are disabled. The other BF has a TOE of 4.

BTW, the BF that has a TOE of 80 has at least 1 part from each line item. (there are no items that are completely destroyed. It's not partial. So, I don't think the game is confusing the CD guns with AV support. It's just multiplying all line items by the airfield size. (It's TOE for AV support is 600, but hasn't filled out completely)



bradfordkay -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/4/2005 6:48:26 PM)

This is what I worried about when I read that the AI's base forces will grow as needed. Why did 2by3 include this feature? In a PBEM game the Japanese player has to send extra base forces to an important base so that they can fly the extra planes (or service the extra troops). Why can't the AI follow the same rules? It's the one thing about computer games that I have always disparaged - that the AI is given non-historic abilities in order to ease the programmers' work. Now it turns out that this rule has given the AI an incredible boost in fire power. Sure, it can be overcome, but it greatly reduces the historic feel of the game.



byron13 -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/4/2005 8:13:55 PM)

I couldn't find any uber CDs in my game, but I did discover that the Japanese engineer training academy is in Rangoon. One engineer unit there had 1,818 squads of engineers! That's not men, but squads. It's basically an engineer corps. Needless to say, Rangoon had maxed out its building program. I suspect they may have actually secretly begun digging a tunnel under the Bay of Bengal from Rangoon to Ceylon.


quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

In a PBEM game the Japanese player has to send extra base forces to an important base so that they can fly the extra planes (or service the extra troops). Why can't the AI follow the same rules? It's the one thing about computer games that I have always disparaged - that the AI is given non-historic abilities in order to ease the programmers' work.


The programmers have to get some breaks. My review of the Japanese AI showed there were several bases with a/c without base engineers, so all of the planes were sitting around 100% damaged and the pilots - well, they were still drawing pay. Anyway, I thought, "gee, this should be easily programmed," and I started thinking about it. Rule: you can't move a base engineer if it is the last engineer and their are a/c present. Well, that doesn't work because the engineer is stuck there until the a/c leave. Maybe it's better if the a/c are forced to leave if the AI determines the engineers ought to move. Rule: if engineers need to move, as determined by a switch value somewhere, and it is the last engineer in the base, then fly all a/c to another base. Well, maybe the other base's engineers need to move as well, so they'd have to fly to only bases where the engineer is not planning to leave. What if there are no such bases or you have Hurricanes stuck on Andaman? Another round of code for freezing the engineer until an AK arrives to take the planes away. Unless, of course, the engineer movement is top priority and there is an AK within two-days sailing to take away the Hurricanes.

I'll cut the programmer's a break. While letting the AI build bases up to what it needs will result in more support being available in the game than may have been "historical" (especially with all of the full-strength fragments running around), it provides a reasonable facsimile to reality without have to spend a ton of code lines for figuring what bases have priority for engineer units, which engineer units should receive replacements, where an extra 90 points in aviation support might be needed in 10 turns, etc. I'm starting to think that, like sausage, I don't want to see how the AI plays in any detail. Just try and fix the uber-weapons problems.



Mike Wood -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/5/2005 2:28:45 AM)

Hello...

This was not our intent, so I guess that makes it a bug. Fixed. You should not face so many guns, if playing with the next patch.

Bye...

Michael Wood

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpitfireIX

Hello, all--

This happened to me in Scenario 15, latest version (1.4).



SpitfireIX -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/5/2005 4:21:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Wood

Hello...

This was not our intent, so I guess that makes it a bug. Fixed. You should not face so many guns, if playing with the next patch.

Bye...

Michael Wood

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpitfireIX

Hello, all--

This happened to me in Scenario 15, latest version (1.4).


[&o][&o][&o][&o]



SpitfireIX -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/5/2005 5:55:01 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35

neat-o you got 3 of his carriers [&o]


I got a lot more than that--here's the top of the sunk ships list. Sadly, the majority were lost due to AI idiocy :-( I'm seriously considering playing both sides next time (If two of my multiple personalities can find the time [:D] There was one truly epic battle, though. Lexington and Saratoga were near Noumea, and Enterprise and Hornet were coming to join them. Akagi, Kaga, Hiryu, Soryu raided PM from the south, and lost about 20 planes. I determined that by steaming flat out for three days, my four CVs could rendezvous and catch them just as they were crossing back into the Coral Sea, close enough to use the Devastators. Also, the Yorktown had a squadron of Marine Dauntlesses she was transporting to Noumea. This was in May 42, so the Zero bonus had just reached zero (ha, ha). I figured "At this stage of the war, it doesn't get any better than this."

The two TFs made rendezvous, and also refueled from an oiler that was luckily in the area. But there weren't enough op points left to refuel Saratoga; she was down to about 2000 miles' fuel at cruise. On the next turn, both TFs reacted to the Japanese and ended up at a range of two, in the same hex. The US strike went in first, mostly coordinated. The main wave badly damaged Hiryu and Akagi, with only light damage to Kaga and Soryu. I thought, "Great, they'll probably sink whatever CVs I have left with their second strike." But then a straggling TBD squadron slipped past the Japanese CAP and scored two hits on Kaga, knocking her out. Meanwhile, the perfectly coordinated Japanese strike hit Lex and Sara; Lex was sunk; Sara, Chicago, and Houston were badly damaged. Japanese afternoon strike hit Enterprise and Yorktown, but did only 13 sys and minor flooding to Yorktown. Sara made for Espiritu, the nearest friendly port; she was flooding progressively; also, she had just about enough fuel to make it; I didn't want to slow down to refuel. She just barely made Espiritu before she sank; she had 9 miles' worth of fuel on board when she dropped anchor. Talk about your close things. Follow-up strikes from Enterprise and Yorktown mopped up the Japanese.

[image]local://upfiles/8341/Vs554591352.jpg[/image]



Gem35 -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/5/2005 6:24:43 AM)

hmm, you managed to lose Lady Lex...[:(][:(]




<-----------------------



bradfordkay -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/5/2005 7:44:07 AM)

Thanks, Mike. We appreciate your efforts.

To all: my comment was not necessarily targetting Matrix or 2by3. It was a comment from a long time board game wargamer who has often found computer wargames to fudge too far. I realize that it is quite difficult to write a decent AI, and 2by3 does better than the vast majority of gaming programmers (you may recall that I have written a couple of posts praising the AI in this game - how many others have done so?). This situation showed how that fudging can get out of hand. They're fixing it. Cool.



SpitfireIX -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/6/2005 2:32:16 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35

hmm, you managed to lose Lady Lex...[:(][:(]




<-----------------------


Let's see--one US CV sunk, one heavily damaged, and one lightly damaged and two CAs heavily damaged, against four Japanese CVs sunk, in May '42. Exactly how is that not a decisive US victory?



Gem35 -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/6/2005 3:22:19 AM)

quote:

Exactly how is that not a decisive US victory?


I never said it wasn't decisive, well done to be sure. I was just commenting on my avatar being sunk...[&o]



GrahamFife -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/6/2005 3:58:46 PM)

Cannot resist adding an extract from a combat report to this thread.

Playing against the AI, 1945 campaign, 31 March 1945.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Coastal Guns at Aparri, 46,49, firing at TF 1031
TF 1031 troops unloading over beach at Aparri, 46,49


588 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.
Allied Ships
LST LST-483, Shell hits 4
DD Converse, Shell hits 1, on fire
DD Drayton, Shell hits 2, on fire
LST LST-479, Shell hits 1
DD Braine, Shell hits 1
LST LST-477, Shell hits 4
LST LST-473, Shell hits 2, on fire
DD Charles Ausburne, Shell hits 2
LST LST-467
DMS Southard
AP Hercules, Shell hits 1
DD Edwards, Shell hits 1
DD Foote

Japanese ground losses:
58 casualties reported

Allied ground losses:
1062 casualties reported
Guns lost 8

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

How many coastal guns would it have taken to fire 588 shots?

And why can they not aim straight?



mogami -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/6/2005 4:05:19 PM)

Hi, If they had a rate of fire of 1 shot per hour it would be around 74 guns. (each phase is 8 hours long) 2 shots per hour 37 guns 3 shots per hour 25 guns 4 shots per hour 18 guns.

When you look at this way the guns scored 19 hits. or 1 out of every 31 shots fired or 2.375 hits per hour zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz



bryanh06 -> Critical Errors RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/6/2005 5:49:25 PM)

The number of game flaws revealed by your experience is remarkable. I was considering buying WitP (I'm playing UV now) but this type of experience completely undermines the integrity of the game. Individually they are perhaps minor bugs but collectively they seem pretty inexcusable.

1) In insane TOE for a CD unit -- obviously this could be a database foul up but still -- nobody saw this in play testing?
2) Where are the guns that smashed your ships? This unit has no guns (and even if they do then they are 4.7" not 5.5")! Another database foul up?
3) Where are the 5.5" guns? Another database foul up.
4) The unit supplies are horrendous yet they obviously got as many reloads as needed -- we are talking about a lot of shells for a lot of guns -- where are they?. AI balance cheating (if so then this crosses way over the line)?
5) Not sure of the details of this but it seems that your invasion tf leader should have aborted the landing when he started to take such massive fire such that you could reconsider your next move after only losing a few ships (although then you wouldn't have found all of these game flaws.) I can't really think of a USN commander being quite this suicidal/aggressive/crazy.
6) Given that your transports did get massacred -- your troop casualties would have been horrendous IMHO -- more than 10% -- this also seems to be a complaint about UV -- that so little damage is done to cargo and troops even when ships take massive damage.
7) Another oddity (or flaw) -- why is the Japanese base unit shown have Shortlands as its next objective (isn't this in Japanese hands?)

I've seen alot of excuses made for AI game balance but if that is what this is all about then I'll pass on this game. I used to play PacWar and had high hopes for this game -- hopefully they will address this thread and fix these problems -- I'll be watching. Thanks for the information and my condolences on the invasion.

Bryan



Drex -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/6/2005 6:05:55 PM)

has anyone seen this in a pbem game? Sounds like another reason to avoid the AI.



Mr.Frag -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/6/2005 6:40:29 PM)

quote:

588 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.


That number is an *abstraction*, not the actual number of guns shooting. The lower it is, the better you have suppressed the beach that you are landing on. Try sending just ak's in with nothing else, you'll see numbers in the 10,000 range.



bradfordkay -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/6/2005 9:19:36 PM)

"Ive seen alot of excuses made for AI game balance but if that is what this is all about then I'll pass on this game. I used to play PacWar and had high hopes for this game -- hopefully they will address this thread and fix these problems -- I'll be watching. Thanks for the information and my condolences on the invasion. "

Bryan, you may have noticed Mike Wood posting that this was an unforseen result of the programming and that they intend to fix this in an upcoming patch. It's not enough reason to avoid the game, IMO.



Gem35 -> RE: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!!! (3/7/2005 7:19:20 PM)

those 586 shots fired is probably from a beach that was not properly shelled, bombed long enough before the assault.try softening it up for a month and see how many guns fire back at your landing forces. As for our disgruntled poster, all I can say is you are missing out on a fantastic game, the old adage 'don't knock it till ya try it' works here.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.8125