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: IJ 16th Division

 
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: IJ 16th Division Page: <<   < prev  59 60 [61] 62 63   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: IJ 16th Division - 10/3/2009 7:44:05 PM   
pad152

 

Posts: 2871
Joined: 4/23/2000
Status: offline 		Playing Japanese I'm trying to take Manila, every time my forces try to advance from Bantangas the AI moves units to Bantangas, I attack they retreat, then as soon as I set my forces to move to Manila again, the same thing happens.  

Is the AI getting some sort of movement bonus?

(in reply to Sonny II)
Post #: 1801
RE: IJ 16th Division - 10/3/2009 8:06:15 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Nope AI gets no tactical movement bonus

(in reply to pad152)
Post #: 1802
Southeast Asia bases - 10/5/2009 9:03:20 PM   
fbs

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 12/25/2008
Status: offline
Can we change (in some patch, I mean) the Burma bases to be owned by Burma Command? The India bases are owned by India Command, and that makes it easy to list all Indian bases. Meanwhile, Burma, Malay and several assorted bases are all owned by SE Asia, and that makes a lot of them. If the Malay and assorted bases remained with SE Asia, but the Burma bases were moved to Burma Command, that make it easier to list the bases in these theaters.

Thanks
fbs

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1803
RE: Southeast Asia bases - 10/6/2009 2:52:21 PM   
EasilyConfused

 

Posts: 110
Joined: 6/11/2005
Status: offline 		RAAF OTU Canberra (6110) starts the game with 12 NZ Militia Sections (962) instead of CMF Militia Sections (964).

By the way, this and my above comments all refer to scenario 1.

(in reply to fbs)
Post #: 1804
RE: Southeast Asia bases - 10/6/2009 3:14:29 PM   
EasilyConfused

 

Posts: 110
Joined: 6/11/2005
Status: offline 		Don't know if this matters, but Fort Nepean (6165) is listed as a coastal artillery regiment rather than a fort.

(in reply to EasilyConfused)
Post #: 1805
RE: Southeast Asia bases - 10/6/2009 3:38:04 PM   
EasilyConfused

 

Posts: 110
Joined: 6/11/2005
Status: offline 		Christchurch Fort (6193) has several outdated device entries. Devices 2, 4, and 6 all point to pre-AE versions of weapons.
Rabaul Det. Base Force (6125) has device 5 pointing to an outdated entry.
Auckland Fort (6194) has devices 3 and 5 pointing to an outdated entry.
4th RNZAF Base Force (6223) has device 8 pointing to an outdated entry.

< Message edited by EasilyConfused -- 10/6/2009 3:53:54 PM >

(in reply to EasilyConfused)
Post #: 1806
RE: Southeast Asia bases - 10/7/2009 12:57:03 AM   
fbs

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 12/25/2008
Status: offline
Few odd things about 198 - RN South Atlantic HQ:

(a) It gets 50,000 supplies on 12/8/41 (that's not base, but unit supplies).. that's more than 200x its requirement
(b) It is a RN unit, but the commander is an Army guy
(c) Why do we need this unit, anyway? There isn't anything happening in Cape Town...

Thanks
fbs

(in reply to EasilyConfused)
Post #: 1807
RE: Southeast Asia bases - 10/7/2009 1:19:56 AM   
Wirraway_Ace


Posts: 1400
Joined: 10/8/2007
From: Austin / Brisbane
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: fbs


Few odd things about 198 - RN South Atlantic HQ:

(a) It gets 50,000 supplies on 12/8/41 (that's not base, but unit supplies).. that's more than 200x its requirement
(b) It is a RN unit, but the commander is an Army guy
(c) Why do we need this unit, anyway? There isn't anything happening in Cape Town...

Thanks
fbs


This represents your convoys from the UK of supplies to the Indian Theater. 100K+ will get dumped there every month. You need to set up regular long-haul convoys to Cape Town from Ceylon or India. Perth too if needed. Later in the war, with the Axis defeated in Med, Aden will probably be the main souce of supplies. In the mean time, your Brit reinforcements generally come from the Mideast through Aden via the Suez.

Your

(in reply to fbs)
Post #: 1808
RE: Southeast Asia bases - 10/7/2009 1:44:47 AM   
fbs

 

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

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace


quote:

ORIGINAL: fbs


Few odd things about 198 - RN South Atlantic HQ:

(a) It gets 50,000 supplies on 12/8/41 (that's not base, but unit supplies).. that's more than 200x its requirement
(b) It is a RN unit, but the commander is an Army guy
(c) Why do we need this unit, anyway? There isn't anything happening in Cape Town...

Thanks
fbs


This represents your convoys from the UK of supplies to the Indian Theater. 100K+ will get dumped there every month. You need to set up regular long-haul convoys to Cape Town from Ceylon or India. Perth too if needed. Later in the war, with the Axis defeated in Med, Aden will probably be the main souce of supplies. In the mean time, your Brit reinforcements generally come from the Mideast through Aden via the Suez.

Your




Sorry, I meant the unit itself has 50,000 supplies on the unit information screen. Usually units have only a little bit more than the required (like Bombay Fortress, requires 363 supplies and has 373 supplies). The base itself has more supplies besides that (like, Bombay has 27,575 supplies)

These units have too many supplies:

198 RN South Atlantic HQ (50,000 supplies)
6677 Rosyth & Plymouth Fortress (500,000 supplies)
6679 Simonstown RN Base Force (50,000 supplies)
6680 Mombasa RN Base Fort (50,000 supplies)
6681 Aden RN Base Fort (50,000 supplies)
6882 Kuwait RN Base Fort (50,000 supplies)

That seems to be an oddity, and for those bases alone; for example, Eastern US Base Force and Soviet Union Base Force both have a reasonable amount of supplies. This is for scenario #001 on 1.0.1.1084.

Thanks
fbs

(in reply to Wirraway_Ace)
Post #: 1809
RE: IJ 16th Division - 10/7/2009 4:05:08 AM   
Montbrun


Posts: 1498
Joined: 2/7/2001
From: Raleigh, NC, USA
Status: offline 		Unit 5201 - "871th Engineer Aviation Battalion" - also has 2x normal compliment of devices.

(in reply to pad152)
Post #: 1810
RE: IJ 16th Division - 10/7/2009 5:52:27 AM   
fbs

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 12/25/2008
Status: offline
Unit 7713 has a typo "9th Seperate Brigade" instead of "9th Separate Brigade"
Unit 7714 has same type "34th Seperate Brigade" instead of "34th Separate Brigade"

Cheers
fbs

(in reply to Montbrun)
Post #: 1811
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 10/7/2009 8:36:55 PM   
bstarr


Posts: 881
Joined: 8/1/2004
From: Texas, by God!
Status: offline 		I've made it to the middle of September against Japan. I've found two minor issues you might want to look at -

1) the AI seems to be very reluctant to form carrier task forces with more than one carrier and those single carrier forces are way too easy to beat.

2) there's a routine north of guadacanal where the carrier task force swings north then doubles back with Lunga as its final destination - the problem here is the computer will do this even when Lunga is controled by the allies, meaning these small carrier task forces steam right into whatever surface forces are guarding the base, initiating a quick one-sided slaughter that costs the japs a carrier every time.


Other than that, I like the AI improvements. I've even lost a transport fleet loaded with a full regiment to a carrier sweep east of hawaii.

_____________________________



(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1812
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 10/7/2009 9:49:06 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		OK I am doing the next patch AI scripts this weekend so I will taker a look at the late 42 scripts for IJN Carriers a save with waht you are talking about would be really good - c 1500 scripts its hard to nail down which one is flaky !!!

(in reply to bstarr)
Post #: 1813
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 10/7/2009 11:52:30 PM   
bstarr


Posts: 881
Joined: 8/1/2004
From: Texas, by God!
Status: offline 		I don't have a save, but I may can do better than that - I think the problem is AI Data space 231. The destination is set for Lunga. The carrier task force goes to those two waypoints, then beelines for Lunga and gets whacked.

_____________________________



(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1814
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 10/8/2009 12:28:05 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		OK thanks its not a straightforward one to fix as its a reaction script to an allied capture of Lunga so its designed to react to Lunga falling (or in other AI scripts other bases)
I will take a look at it to see if I can design it better.


(in reply to bstarr)
Post #: 1815
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 10/8/2009 12:57:24 AM   
bstarr


Posts: 881
Joined: 8/1/2004
From: Texas, by God!
Status: offline 		(delete)
this problem has already been addressed

< Message edited by bstarr -- 10/8/2009 1:10:05 AM >

_____________________________



(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1816
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 10/8/2009 4:13:44 AM   
fbs

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 12/25/2008
Status: offline 		I'm comparing the China map from my trusty West Point Atlas of War (Pacific), map 141, and I noticed these discrepancies compared to the scenario #001:

(a) The game has a lot of hexes with Chinese units between Sian and Chengting, when actually the Japanese were quite close to Sian by 1939.

(b) The game has Ichang conquered by 1941, when it was still in Chinese hands by 1944.

Cheers
fbs

(in reply to bstarr)
Post #: 1817
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 10/8/2009 11:41:11 AM   
Kereguelen


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

ORIGINAL: fbs

I'm comparing the China map from my trusty West Point Atlas of War (Pacific), map 141, and I noticed these discrepancies compared to the scenario #001:

(a) The game has a lot of hexes with Chinese units between Sian and Chengting, when actually the Japanese were quite close to Sian by 1939.


The war and the frontlines were not exactly static between 1939 - 1945.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fbs
(b) The game has Ichang conquered by 1941, when it was still in Chinese hands by 1944.

Cheers
fbs


The Japanese took Ichang on 10th June 1940 and were still holding the city when they surrendered in 1945. As far as I know the city did never change hands in the meantime. But I've read that the Chinese considered to try to take it back in 1944. If I remember correctly, the Chinese Military Council came to the conclusion that the Japanese fortifications were too strong and they abandoned any thoughts about it.

(in reply to fbs)
Post #: 1818
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 10/8/2009 5:21:26 PM   
fbs

 

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

ORIGINAL: Kereguelen

The Japanese took Ichang on 10th June 1940 and were still holding the city when they surrendered in 1945. As far as I know the city did never change hands in the meantime. But I've read that the Chinese considered to try to take it back in 1944. If I remember correctly, the Chinese Military Council came to the conclusion that the Japanese fortifications were too strong and they abandoned any thoughts about it.



You're right, holy macaroles, my West Point maps are incorrect. Can't trust anything nowadays!

Thanks
fbs

(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 1819
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 10/8/2009 5:23:32 PM   
fbs

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 12/25/2008
Status: offline
Unit 7544 18th Group Army HQ... this one is classified as a Command HQ and has a different icon, while all the other Group Army HQs are classified as Corps HQ and have a Corps icon. Is that on purpose?

Cheers
fbs

(in reply to fbs)
Post #: 1820
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 10/8/2009 5:44:19 PM   
Kereguelen


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

ORIGINAL: fbs


Unit 7544 18th Group Army HQ... this one is classified as a Command HQ and has a different icon, while all the other Group Army HQs are classified as Corps HQ and have a Corps icon. Is that on purpose?

Cheers
fbs


18th Group Army was a Chinese Communist HQ. Don't know if this was the reason for the difference but Andy can answer this.

(in reply to fbs)
Post #: 1821
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 10/8/2009 7:03:02 PM   
fbs

 

Posts: 1048
Joined: 12/25/2008
Status: offline 		Hmm.. talking about Communists.. can we get a different color for the Chinese Communist units in game? Right now all units are yellow, so they all seem to make one big happy party. One of the great things about WITP is that one learns a lot from the game, and by having Chinese Communists with a different color would give a better atmosphere.

I would suggest going as far as creating a different nationality "Chinese Communist", with specific rules:
- No supply exchanges between Chinese and Chinse Communist bases
- If a Chinese and a Chinese Communist are in the same location, something bad happens

On final notice... may want to change the Chinese color from yellow to something else. It doesn't matter to me, but some people may be sensitive about that.

Thanks!
fbs

< Message edited by fbs -- 10/8/2009 7:10:40 PM >

(in reply to Kereguelen)
Post #: 1822
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 10/8/2009 7:29:42 PM   
Kereguelen


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

ORIGINAL: fbs

Hmm.. talking about Communists.. can we get a different color for the Chinese Communist units in game? Right now all units are yellow, so they all seem to make one big happy party. One of the great things about WITP is that one learns a lot from the game, and by having Chinese Communists with a different color would give a better atmosphere.

I would suggest going as far as creating a different nationality "Chinese Communist", with specific rules:
- No supply exchanges between Chinese and Chinse Communist bases
- If a Chinese and a Chinese Communist are in the same location, something bad happens


Not possible with the game engine. Even adding new nations is not that easy

quote:

ORIGINAL: fbs
On final notice... may want to change the Chinese color from yellow to something else. It doesn't matter to me, but some people may be sensitive about that.

Thanks!
fbs


It is easy enough to change this (simply right-click on their art files and open in a paint program).

(in reply to fbs)
Post #: 1823
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 10/9/2009 7:17:06 AM   
Halsey

 

Posts: 5069
Joined: 2/7/2004
Status: offline 		OOB issue...


Merrill's Marauders Rgt.


The official designation is the 5307th Composite Unit (Prov).


Thanks!

< Message edited by Halsey -- 10/9/2009 6:03:48 PM >

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1824
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 10/9/2009 10:55:58 PM   
jcjordan

 

Posts: 1900
Joined: 6/27/2001
Status: offline 		Not sure if it's been mentioned or not or if it should be changed but as Allied player scen 1 started under original release but patched to last available, so would probably be in any other long campaign scen as well, but I get 2 land units mid Feb42 at Bora Bora near Tahiti which is a dot base, shouldn't they come in at Tahiti instead to allow loading or come in at US as there's a couple of units that arrived earlier in game that can combine w/ these to make a larger unit. I'm at work now so don't have particular names of units as I just ran turn but haven't finished doing my planning on new turn before I had to come into work.

(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 1825
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 10/10/2009 5:46:44 PM   
Andy Mac

 

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

(in reply to jcjordan)
Post #: 1826
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 10/11/2009 1:21:16 AM   
Halsey

 

Posts: 5069
Joined: 2/7/2004
Status: offline 		Thanks Andy...

The 5307th is the parent unit of the current day Ranger Rgt.
The Blue Diamond Rangers were a different breed, though they get a relation with todays Rangers by the name link they share.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1827
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 10/11/2009 1:36:21 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Ummm just because data is gathered doesnt mean I changed everything :)

I actually left merrils as is on the grounds that most folks would recongnise it easier......

(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 1828
RE: AE Land and AI Issues - 10/11/2009 12:21:13 PM   
Halsey

 

Posts: 5069
Joined: 2/7/2004
Status: offline 		That's true...

We could use nicknames for all the units.



< Message edited by Halsey -- 10/11/2009 12:37:27 PM >

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1829
RE: IJ 16th Division - 10/11/2009 3:38:38 PM   
EasilyConfused

 

Posts: 110
Joined: 6/11/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: EasilyConfused

Some oddities I've noticed that may be errors (apologies if already reported)
1. Auckland Fort (6194) has a Japanese 4.7in CD Gun (293) in slot 3.
2. A number of units are given devices that have a "9999" availability date. Not sure if that is intentional. If it isn't supposed to happen, I can make up a list for you.
3. Similarly, some units have a build rate, but are set to unbuildable. For example, 81mm Mortar (935).
4. Malayan Air Wing (6632) has a nationality of "none"
5. Many units set to withdraw have neither "1" or "2" selected next to the withdrawal date. Malayan Air Wing is an example of this too.
6. M10 Wolverine TD (1183), M18 Hellcat TD (1184), and M36 Jackson TD (1185) all have a start date 6/43.
7. Black Force (5980) is set to withdraw on 9/31/42.


Andy,
If number five is not an issue, can you explain what happens if neither button is selected?

(in reply to EasilyConfused)
Post #: 1830
Page:   <<   < prev  59 60 [61] 62 63   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: IJ 16th Division Page: <<   < prev  59 60 [61] 62 63   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.094