RE: Land OOB and AI Issues

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Land OOB and AI Issues

Page: << < prev 45 46 [47] 48 49 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/29/2009 7:35:54 PM

fbs

Posts: 1048
Joined: 12/25/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

90mm TOE is a flow through to an upgrade to the TOE in June 43

How would that work, Andy? If you have 0x 90mm M1A1 AA gun on the TO&E, it will upgrade to 0x 90mm M2 DP gun... still can't get any guns. Is that right?

Cheers

fbs

(in reply to Andy Mac)

Post #: 1381

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/29/2009 7:38:47 PM

Andy Mac

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline

Its a carry over from a previous build where the slots had to be aligned so if you were adding 90mm AA guns you needed to have the slot free in the preceding unit. So the TOE gets an upgrade

Its sorted now but the upgrade has 6 x 90mm AA Guns

(in reply to fbs)

Post #: 1382

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/29/2009 7:51:52 PM

fbs

Posts: 1048
Joined: 12/25/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Its a carry over from a previous build where the slots had to be aligned so if you were adding 90mm AA guns you needed to have the slot free in the preceding unit. So the TOE gets an upgrade

Its sorted now but the upgrade has 6 x 90mm AA Guns

Ah, got it. Living and learning. Thank you :D
fbs

(in reply to Andy Mac)

Post #: 1383

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/29/2009 10:03:22 PM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

�I think terrible is an overstatement we did a lot of work to get it right if a few units are in the wrong locations we can move them but it wont be mateiral to the game.

I think "terrible" as used by Jeff is an expression of the Ozzie brashness that others discussed elsewhere...it isn't meant as being rude....but sometimes we other Anglo/Saxons have a difficult time understanding it....not sure i expressed myself well here probably "lost in translation"

Nope, its terrible.

While I'll check further on my info, I believe that very few units are in their real life location.

Plus, I paid AUD$100 for this and at least expect some checking of the data before its released.

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to treespider)

Post #: 1384

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/29/2009 11:26:08 PM

steveh11Matrix

Posts: 944
Joined: 7/30/2004
Status: offline

The Dutch KNIL Army Command unit in slot 107 has an HQ value of "75".

The Editor manual says the 1st digit tells what the HQ type is, and the second digit is it's range: "Command (100), Corps (0), Air (50), Naval (20) and Amphibious (30)."

So where does "75" come from, and what's the effect?

Edit: most of the other Army level commands seem to be the same?

_____________________________

"Nature always obeys Her own laws" - Leonardo da Vinci

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 1385

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/29/2009 11:28:31 PM

Andy Mac

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline

7 is an army HQ its a different type that basically has the combat abilities of a corps HQ and the supply side of a command HQ we were hoping to do more but ran out of time

(in reply to steveh11Matrix)

Post #: 1386

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/30/2009 2:46:50 AM

fbs

Posts: 1048
Joined: 12/25/2008
Status: offline

bump

< Message edited by fbs -- 7/30/2009 3:11:14 AM >

(in reply to Andy Mac)

Post #: 1387

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/30/2009 4:15:45 AM

vettim89

Posts: 3615
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Toledo, Ohio
Status: offline

I think the AI scripting for Cral Sea could use some help. Have played it on both sides now and both sides ignored the invasion TF. As Allies, I was able to circle around behind CarDiV 5 and smoke the convoy before it landed a single unit. As Japanese I brought my carriers up close to the convoy and escorted it all the way in to PM. I only engaged the Allied CVTF on the 14th as I just wandered south to see where they were. Only Lexington was at sea (Yorktown was disbanded at Noumea). THe lex airgroup did manage to clos Sho's flight deck and damge Zui a little too. Lex was out of action and three DD's and two CA's were sunk.

_____________________________

"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry

(in reply to fbs)

Post #: 1388

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/30/2009 5:21:18 AM

Blackhorse

Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline

quote:

FR: J Boomer

quote:

I'll check out the Provincial Archives here in town and there is a couple other avenues I can check. I'll send you a PM if I find anything.

Thanks!

_____________________________

WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!

(in reply to JSBoomer)

Post #: 1389

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/30/2009 5:28:53 AM

Blackhorse

Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fbs

An engineer unit with no engineers: scenario 002, unit 5712 (Fort Lewis); should be Coastal Defense, but it is set as Engineer Unit even if it doesn't have a single engineer on the TO&E. Also 5714 Fort Ord, and 5713 Camp Adair; there are probably a few more in this situation.

Also B/C/D Det USN Port Svc; I don't know which type they should be, but they are set as Engineer Unit with no engineers.

Cheers
fbs

All working as designed -- Base Forces, even those with only support squads and no engineers are defined as "engineer units" -- Ft. Lewis, Ft. Ord, Camp Adair and San Luis Obispo are major training camps with enough support for the 2-4 divisions that will be training at each location. They are definitely *not* coastal defense units (esp. Camp Adair)

Ditto the USN Port Service detachments. Any unit with only "support" squads is considered an engineer unit. Btw, these port service detachments are *extremely* helpful if you're trying to move LCUs to an undeveloped friendly island (port of 0 or 1). Load LCUs in an Amphibious TF, use APAs and AKAs if available, and have enough naval support squads to make the "effective port" level a 3 -- otherwise you'll be unloading for a looong time, and some larger devices may never get off the ship.

_____________________________

(in reply to fbs)

Post #: 1390

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/30/2009 5:40:40 AM

Blackhorse

Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fbs

A few more oddities:

Unit 5712 has 4 garrison units, but TO&E doesn't have them. So if this unit is attacked and the 4 garrison units are destroyed, the unit suddenly changes from static to mobile. I'd say better add the 4 garrison units to the TO&E.

Unit 5608 has 0x 90mm gun and 0x 16" CD guns on the TO&E; similarly 5600 SF Harbor has 0x 90mm gun. Better remove them, as quantity of 0 does nothing for the TO&E.

Again, working as designed.

The West Coast "training camps" are fixed in location so they are used for their historical purposes (training forces that primarily went to the ETO). But if the Japanese attack, obviously they should be able to flee. Thus the static "garrisons" are in the unit, but not the TOE. But if the Japanese player is daft enough to invade the West Coast in AE, he'll have a lot more problems to deal with than a few training camps on the loose . . .

As Andy Mac indicated earlier, the x0 90mm and 16" guns in the Harbor Defense TOEs are placeholders for when the TOEs change and the guns become available in 1943. Unlike in stock, in AE US Coastal Defense units significantly change over time, generally, by scrapping scads of the WWI-era 10" and 12" guns and mortars, and adding 1 or 2 14" or 16" guns, and several light dual-purpose 90mm guns -- the early war 90mm was only an AA weapon -- it could not be depressed enough to use in a coastal defense role.

_____________________________

(in reply to fbs)

Post #: 1391

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/30/2009 5:55:24 AM

Blackhorse

Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fbs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

90mm TOE is a flow through to an upgrade to the TOE in June 43

How would that work, Andy? If you have 0x 90mm M1A1 AA gun on the TO&E, it will upgrade to 0x 90mm M2 DP gun... still can't get any guns. Is that right?

Cheers
fbs

Unlike stock, in AE the TOEs themselves can upgrade (not just the devices in the weapons slots).

If you look in the editor you'll see that unit 5608 - the Puget Sound Defenses -- starts the war organized under TOE 2527. In June of 1943, the TOE changes to 2528. The significant changes are:

Weapons Slot 4: (90mm gun) goes from 0 to 6
Weapons Slot 8: (10" gun) goes from 8 to 0
Weapons Slot 9: (12' gun) goes from 6 to 0
Weapons Slot 10: 16" gun) goes from 0 to 2

I hope this explanation helps.

As you can see, the ability to adjust TOEs has allowed us to much better reflect the changes in how units were organized and equipped throughout the war.

_____________________________

(in reply to fbs)

Post #: 1392

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/30/2009 6:09:13 AM

Blackhorse

Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline

quote:

Plus, I paid AUD$100 for this and at least expect some checking of the data before its released. [JeffK]

Well then, your expectations have been fulfilled. Congratulations!

I can personally testify that AndyMac spent countless hours checking, verifying and adjusting data. I spent (far fewer) hours trying to line up historically-accurate commanders for the Australian brigades, divisions and headquarters and to show the transition from the peacetime HQ structure to a new one in 1942.

We welcome any (sourced) information you can share re: different starting locations for Australians LCUs.

_____________________________

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 1393

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/30/2009 7:06:51 AM

fbs

Posts: 1048
Joined: 12/25/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse

quote:

ORIGINAL: fbs

An engineer unit with no engineers: scenario 002, unit 5712 (Fort Lewis); should be Coastal Defense, but it is set as Engineer Unit even if it doesn't have a single engineer on the TO&E. Also 5714 Fort Ord, and 5713 Camp Adair; there are probably a few more in this situation.

Also B/C/D Det USN Port Svc; I don't know which type they should be, but they are set as Engineer Unit with no engineers.

Cheers
fbs

All working as designed -- Base Forces, even those with only support squads and no engineers are defined as "engineer units" -- Ft. Lewis, Ft. Ord, Camp Adair and San Luis Obispo are major training camps with enough support for the 2-4 divisions that will be training at each location. They are definitely *not* coastal defense units (esp. Camp Adair)

Ditto the USN Port Service detachments. Any unit with only "support" squads is considered an engineer unit. Btw, these port service detachments are *extremely* helpful if you're trying to move LCUs to an undeveloped friendly island (port of 0 or 1). Load LCUs in an Amphibious TF, use APAs and AKAs if available, and have enough naval support squads to make the "effective port" level a 3 -- otherwise you'll be unloading for a looong time, and some larger devices may never get off the ship.

Very good.

I think that what got me stuck was the term "coastal defense" and "engineering" units. One would expect a coastal defense unit to have guns and an engineering unit to have engineers, but sometimes they are mixed around. There are coastal defense units that have engineers only, or guns and engineers, or guns only; engineering units are exactly in the same situation. The only way to tell the true capability of the unit is by looking into the TO&E; the icon itself ("coastal defense" or "engineering") won't help, as the capabilities of the units with those icons is inconsistent.

Also some similar units get different types: United Kingdom Base Force is a coastal defense unit, while Canada Base Force is an engineer unit. Both do the same thing but have different types. Actually, all off-map bases are coastal defense if they are UK, or engineer unit if they are USA. Perhaps there is some underlying reason why they should be that way, but just seem to have been designed by different people.

Similar thing happens with units that have aviation support capability: sometimes engineering units have them, sometimes coastal defense units have them, and sometimes Air HQ units have them. And sometimes the units have aircraft support on the TO&E, but don't have any aircraft support squads yet (they will come through replacement). So if you have 6 units on a base, you need to look into the TO&E of each of them to find out which units will have the capability of supporting aircrafts in the near future.

I would find it easier to have a coastal defense icon for units with guns only, one engineering icon for units with engineers only, one air support icon for units that have air support only, and a general support icon for units that have mixed capability. But then we're probably past the time for that, and that's ok. I just love attention to detail, and these are minor issues that don't detract from the game - I'm still in awe with the product.

Thanks,
fbs

< Message edited by fbs -- 7/30/2009 7:09:27 AM >

(in reply to Blackhorse)

Post #: 1394

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/30/2009 7:08:15 AM

fbs

Posts: 1048
Joined: 12/25/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse
Unlike stock, in AE the TOEs themselves can upgrade (not just the devices in the weapons slots).

Yeah, that's pretty cool. I didn't know that, and was thinking per WITP.

Thank you for the explanation.

Cheers

fbs

(in reply to Blackhorse)

Post #: 1395

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/30/2009 7:35:15 AM

steveh11Matrix

Posts: 944
Joined: 7/30/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

7 is an army HQ its a different type that basically has the combat abilities of a corps HQ and the supply side of a command HQ we were hoping to do more but ran out of time

Thanks, Andy.

_____________________________

"Nature always obeys Her own laws" - Leonardo da Vinci

(in reply to Andy Mac)

Post #: 1396

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/30/2009 1:15:32 PM

Blackhorse

Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline

quote:

I think that what got me stuck was the term "coastal defense" and "engineering" units. One would expect a coastal defense unit to have guns and an engineering unit to have engineers, but sometimes they are mixed around. There are coastal defense units that have engineers only, or guns and engineers, or guns only; engineering units are exactly in the same situation. The only way to tell the true capability of the unit is by looking into the TO&E; the icon itself ("coastal defense" or "engineering") won't help, as the capabilities of the units with those icons is inconsistent.

Also some similar units get different types:. . . [Snip] [fbs]

fbs,

These are good points. Add others as you see them. At some point the AE team should review these "consistency" issues. I'm adding this to the Patch list -- but I doubt that we'll get to it in the first (30 days) or second (90 days) patch.

Early on we decided not to mess with the Location 'Type' or 'Suffix' categories in the editor, which limited some of our choices. For ex: USMC Defense Battalions are "Artillery", not "Coastal Defense" -- because there is a "Defense Battalion" suffix for Artillery but not CD. Why? I don't know.

As an all-volunteer effort, we divided into teams to get work done. We tried to coordinate all of our work for consistency, but with a game of this scale, there will be some things that we missed. So keep those cards and letters coming!

_____________________________

(in reply to fbs)

Post #: 1397

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/30/2009 8:34:52 PM

JuanG

Posts: 906
Joined: 12/28/2008
Status: offline

The following land units use the old radar devices, Sound Detector -> SCR-270 -> CPS-1 (ID #'s 143, 137 and 138 respectively) instead of the new ones like in their TOE (ID #'s 1190, 1191, 1192 respectively), and as used by several others.

TOEs;
2388
2441
2442
2448
2449
2468
2469
2518 through 2531
2687

Units;
5009
5011
5019 through 5034
5036 through 5038
5148
5172
5180
5270
5295
5527 (Matches TOE 2531)
5886
5892
5905
5910
5915
5919
5926
5932
6082
6220 through 6223
6442
7470 through 7472

Basically a bunch of Dutch/NZ/Russian forces are still using the old device progression here.

I do not know if this is intentional, but as most other use the new devices and the stats are identical, I assume its a mistake.

Would like a heads up if there -are- mistakes or is posting these as I comb through the DB with a fine comb worth it.

Brilliant work on the game otherwise guys!

_____________________________

Coral Sea HDM
AltWNT Scenarios

(in reply to fbs)

Post #: 1398

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/30/2009 8:52:39 PM

Andy Mac

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline

There are mistakes and we will be correcting them as we find them

(in reply to JuanG)

Post #: 1399

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/30/2009 8:53:51 PM

Andy Mac

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline

To many versions to many times changing them and devices withthe same names when we had to keep the old ones not an excuse but some error did slip through

(in reply to Andy Mac)

Post #: 1400

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/30/2009 8:58:42 PM

JuanG

Posts: 906
Joined: 12/28/2008
Status: offline

Then Ill keep posting everything I find as I prune it for my own purposes.

I hope the patch will include a comprehensive changelist so I can make sure I didnt miss anything!

The same for the Japanese, though theres much fewer mistakes;

The following use the old Sound Detector -> Type 13 Radar devices (ID #'s 142 and 139 respectively), instead of the newer system of SD to Ta-Chi Radars.

TOEs;
2138
2143
2144

These may be outdated, I dont know. Still changing them.

Edit - Yes, they appear to be outdated, as theyre not used by anything or get upgraded to by anything.

Ill try to check for that before posting in future.

< Message edited by JuanG -- 7/30/2009 9:00:14 PM >

_____________________________

Coral Sea HDM
AltWNT Scenarios

(in reply to Andy Mac)

Post #: 1401

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/30/2009 10:27:43 PM

fbs

Posts: 1048
Joined: 12/25/2008
Status: offline

Unit with morale of 2 on Dec 8, 1941, scenario 002. It could use a bit of a bump up there :)

Attachment (1)

(in reply to JuanG)

Post #: 1402

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/30/2009 10:41:37 PM

Andy Mac

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline

lol its now on the list

(in reply to fbs)

Post #: 1403

RE: Land OOB and AI Issues - 7/30/2009 10:59:12 PM

Charbroiled

Posts: 1181
Joined: 10/15/2004
From: Oregon
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fbs

Unit with morale of 2 on Dec 8, 1941, scenario 002. It could use a bit of a bump up there :)

With a leader with an aggression of 35, I can understand why they have such a low moral. He is more likely to run then to fight.

_____________________________

"When I said I would run, I meant 'away' ". - Orange

(in reply to fbs)

Post #: 1404

RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 7/31/2009 2:20:25 AM

Enforcer

Posts: 320
Joined: 3/14/2002
From: New Smyrna Beach, Fla
Status: offline

is the 48th Division in the game at the beginning or when does it arrive?

_____________________________

(in reply to Andy Mac)

Post #: 1405

RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 7/31/2009 2:21:26 AM

treespider

Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Enforcer

is the 48th Division in the game at the beginning or when does it arrive?

Its broken down into its component parts At start see the 1st Formosa Rgt at Pescadores and click on unit organization.

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Enforcer)

Post #: 1406

RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 7/31/2009 9:19:07 AM

Rainer79

Posts: 603
Joined: 10/31/2008
From: Austria
Status: offline

I am not sure if it is an error but is there a reason why the 11th Air Flotilla is the only sub-unit of the General Defence Army that is not restricted?

There is a similar case in the 13th Air Division of the Chinese Expeditionary Army.

The 21st Army (a subcommand of the Southern Area Army) also shows up as "Not in play" instead of "Yet to arrive" when trying to change HQs.

(in reply to treespider)

Post #: 1407

RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 7/31/2009 9:55:47 AM

Kereguelen

Posts: 1829
Joined: 5/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainer79

I am not sure if it is an error but is there a reason why the 11th Air Flotilla is the only sub-unit of the General Defence Army that is not restricted?

There is a similar case in the 13th Air Division of the Chinese Expeditionary Army.

The 21st Army (a subcommand of the Southern Area Army) also shows up as "Not in play" instead of "Yet to arrive" when trying to change HQs.

21st Army is only in Andy's 'Stronger Japan' scenario (scen #2). Historically it had been disbanded in February 1940. Will have to look at 11th Air Flotilla and 13th Air Division - should be restricted.

(in reply to Rainer79)

Post #: 1408

RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 7/31/2009 11:53:33 AM

Rainer79

Posts: 603
Joined: 10/31/2008
From: Austria
Status: offline

Thanks. I should have mentioned that I only have started to look at scenario 1 in any depth for now.

(in reply to Kereguelen)

Post #: 1409

RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 7/31/2009 12:22:07 PM

Speedysteve

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline

Intentional to have gazillions of Support in full TOE of these Philly guys?