Odd HQ bug?

Post bug reports and ask for tech support here. Post any Community Site Requests here as well.

Moderator: Vic

Post Reply
User avatar
Ormand
Posts: 752
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:31 am

Odd HQ bug?

Post by Ormand »

Vic,

I have someone playing with my graphics/units mod and ran into an odd issue after creating a new combat unit. He was using a large random map with four regimes with an army to start. I modified the start so that there would be an HQ in each city to start. At some point, he created a new combat unit and wanted to assign it to an HQ. He gets the message that he cannot because it would exceed the maximum of four HQs in the chain of command. Which is odd, because it is a combat unit and not an HQ. In the OOB window, this unit actually shows up on the top line, with SHQ and all HQs subordinate to SHQ that have two other HQs subordinate to it (so that there is a chain of four HQs - I have noticed this is done because there is a limit of three lines for HQs regardless the number of chains allowed). Now that I think about it, this is probably because the unit is not assigned to an HQ.

I haven't seen this before, and I made a test where I created several HQs and a chain four deep, and have never seen something like this.

Is there something I could have done in the editor to cause this?

Could it be something in the random set up with the HQs? (I did this to help avoid the loss of readiness a player has to deal with trying to build a command structure in a random game).

Or worse yet, possibly a memory leak as the game goes on due to size?
One man alone can be pretty dumb sometimes, but for real bona fide stupidity, there ain't nothin' can beat teamwork -- Edward Abbey
User avatar
Ormand
Posts: 752
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:31 am

RE: Odd HQ bug?

Post by Ormand »

As an addition, when I do have an HQ created in each HQ two things happen: 1) production in the city is assigned to the HQ in the city, 2) a complex chain of command is created. 1) I can understand, while I tend to play with everything going to SHQ in order to help balance the AI. The chain of command is rather complex, and often units will be assigned to HQs in another city. I start with three combat units in each city plus an HQ. I personally follow the standard threes rule for command structure: 3-4 combat units and a support artillery for each HQ. It would be nice to have random games start this way if possible. (I have the maximum distance to HQ set to 3 hexes).
One man alone can be pretty dumb sometimes, but for real bona fide stupidity, there ain't nothin' can beat teamwork -- Edward Abbey
User avatar
Ormand
Posts: 752
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:31 am

RE: Odd HQ bug?

Post by Ormand »

Another observation with this issue is that it seems to be not possible to assign combat units to units that are in the 4th level of the chain of command that was set up by the random start. I have, in games built chain of commands that go to four levels and assigned them. So, I think it might be associated with the command structure built up at the start of a random game.
One man alone can be pretty dumb sometimes, but for real bona fide stupidity, there ain't nothin' can beat teamwork -- Edward Abbey
User avatar
Ormand
Posts: 752
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:31 am

RE: Odd HQ bug?

Post by Ormand »

I think I have found the problem. It seems that with an HQ in each city, the random start set up a chain of command with five HQs in it while rulevar 304 is set to 4.

The command structure is SHQ -> Darmstadt -> Kronach -> Roth -> Mertendorf

At start Mertendrof had no combat units assigned to it, and afterwards you can't assign a unit to it. You can reassign the HQ, say to SHQ, and you can't put it back under Roth. A different HQ in the same command structure, under Roth, did have units assigned to it.
One man alone can be pretty dumb sometimes, but for real bona fide stupidity, there ain't nothin' can beat teamwork -- Edward Abbey
User avatar
Vic
Posts: 9282
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 2:17 pm
Contact:

RE: Odd HQ bug?

Post by Vic »

I think the easiest way around this would be to modify rulevar 304 to a higher count. Like 99.

Best wishes,
Vic
Visit www.vrdesigns.net for the latest news, polls, screenshots and blogs on Shadow Empire, Decisive Campaigns and Advanced Tactics
Post Reply

Return to “Advanced Tactics Support”