Matrix Games

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

First thing to note is that not all engagements or activities in general for that matter appear in the unit log. IIRC we don't bother recording it in the log if a similar event has occured within the last 15 or 20 minutes. So the unit could have been firing non stop.

quote:

ORIGINAL: wodin

The casualty thing wasn't anything to do with ammo..lots of lead was flying around.

The unit may not have started the scenario with that much ammo?

If you sent the save to Dave then he will be checking it out..obviously if it happened before to you it isn't going to stop if there is a problem and if there is Dave will get to the bottom of it.

Did you check how many trucks the supply base had?

I did notice they where calling in supply every hour..so obviously they weren't getting that much each time. Again now Dave knows don't worry to much about it.

quote:

Did you check how many trucks the supply base had?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

BTW the ave rifleman carried 60 rds of rifle ammo on him and half that again at the unit reserve - ie on the back of the jeep. Let's be generous and say 100 rds. It's just enough for a 25 minute firefight.

quote:

ORIGINAL: navwarcol

The ammo thing I had seen from when I first got the game (a few days before the last build). The numbers do add up, and having seen some real firefights and the copious amounts of ammunition used in just 5-10 minutes, I could not complain about the game's data. Usually what I am trying to do is separate before the AI does its plan my own reserve from each btn, and from each level above btn... which in a large scenario leaves me with "micromanaging" at worst 8-10 units. These become the units that step in to continue the push where their pixel-brothers run low on ammunition, etc... This way the units that need resupply are not at the front in contact, when resupply comes also. I would like it if the AI did something like this also inside the individual companies, but that may be asking a lot.

Anyway..sorry for rambling.
Dave, I do notice one other issue that did not happen before...units in direct contact with each other, less than 100m away, sometimes disappear, even in areas with no concealment factored in.. " open areas". This could be because they are hunkering down during the firefight, but cannot imagine if an entire company is doing this at the same time.

quote:

This way the units that need resupply are not at the front in contact, when resupply comes also. I would like it if the AI did something like this also inside the individual companies, but that may be asking a lot.

quote:

To reduce the processor load, the transport column is not managed like a regular unit. So it does not move along the route each minute. Rather, when its scheduled Supply Transport Event occurs it reviews the situation at that time and determines whether or not it can get through to the unit. If not, it
165
will abandon and try to return to the Base. If it can get through, it determines any losses due to enemy threats to the route and deducts these from the assigned personnel, transport and supplies. It then delivers the supplies to the unit ( converting ammo into actual rounds as appropriate ).
At this time you will receive a message on screen ( and in the Message Log ) informing you of the delivery. This will be a routine message if all goes well. However, if it suffers losses it will be upgraded to Urgent and if it’s abandoned altogether it will be Flash.

quote:

Rationing
If there is insufficient supplies to meet all current requirements or there is insufficient handling capacity ( ie the ability to load the supplies on the trucks ) then a Depot may ration or limit the amounts it dispatches to its drawing units. When this occurs each request will only receive a proportion of its requirements. Emergency requests will get a greater proportion than routine requests.

quote:

ORIGINAL: dazkaz15

quote:

ORIGINAL: navwarcol

The ammo thing I had seen from when I first got the game (a few days before the last build). The numbers do add up, and having seen some real firefights and the copious amounts of ammunition used in just 5-10 minutes, I could not complain about the game's data. Usually what I am trying to do is separate before the AI does its plan my own reserve from each btn, and from each level above btn... which in a large scenario leaves me with "micromanaging" at worst 8-10 units. These become the units that step in to continue the push where their pixel-brothers run low on ammunition, etc... This way the units that need resupply are not at the front in contact, when resupply comes also. I would like it if the AI did something like this also inside the individual companies, but that may be asking a lot.

Anyway..sorry for rambling.
Dave, I do notice one other issue that did not happen before...units in direct contact with each other, less than 100m away, sometimes disappear, even in areas with no concealment factored in.. " open areas". This could be because they are hunkering down during the firefight, but cannot imagine if an entire company is doing this at the same time.

quote:

This way the units that need resupply are not at the front in contact, when resupply comes also. I would like it if the AI did something like this also inside the individual companies, but that may be asking a lot.

How is the game modelled for supplying units in close contact?

I have always assumed that unless you get the yellow message with a % of the convoy lost, that when you got a "Resupply Arrived" message in the log you got 100% of what was sent, or you got no Resupply Arrived message at all.

Can you actually get a "Resupply Arrived" message, without a warning that you only received a fraction of what was sent, if indeed you only get a tiny bit of that supply, as per the query I posted earlier in the thread, ref only getting a few tins of beans when I wanted ammo?

quote:

ORIGINAL: RockinHarry

Haven´t yet come to test the new build, although I´d already installed at day of release.

Since supply (distribution) is mentioned oftenly here, I´d like to ask if the small AT weaponry, like Panzerfaust could be somehow seperated from dedicated infantrymen and make them a weapon for all personnell to use and rise stocks to more appropiate levels, without substracting rifle strengths. A stock of 10 (s/b closer to 20-30 at least) an infantry coy, will quickly get it down for emergency resupply requests and thus an unnecessary strain on the supply system.

Now going to give St vith a try with the new build.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jimcarravallah

quote:

ORIGINAL: RockinHarry

Haven´t yet come to test the new build, although I´d already installed at day of release.

Since supply (distribution) is mentioned oftenly here, I´d like to ask if the small AT weaponry, like Panzerfaust could be somehow seperated from dedicated infantrymen and make them a weapon for all personnell to use and rise stocks to more appropiate levels, without substracting rifle strengths. A stock of 10 (s/b closer to 20-30 at least) an infantry coy, will quickly get it down for emergency resupply requests and thus an unnecessary strain on the supply system.

Now going to give St vith a try with the new build.

If you're looking for historical accuracy, you need to look at the basis of issue for the small AT weaponry at the time it was used in combat.

Military units are around what those who define battle doctrine think to be reasonable for the mission the unit will address in battle. The structure goes down to how many soldiers of the specialized skill (e.g. those primarily assigned close in AT responsibilities) would be assigned to the unit, and how many weapons were necessary to make them effective at their specialty (e.g. one heavy machine gun per two man crew, one AT weapon per AT soldier).

Under duress, any soldier with minimum training could use the weapon in combat, but it was still issued in relation to the number of soldiers assigned the weapon's primary task in the unit structure.

If you're interested in how the Panzerfaust was used by the Nazi Army, you have to look at the Table of Organization and Equipment (a US term) for those units to determine the basis of issue.

Changing the allocation can be addressed with alternate estabs, but the more tinkering done inside units on whim, the less historical fidelity for the simulation.

Hope this helps.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

I'm OK with increasing the number of fausts, Piats and Bazookas. I agree that historical accounts do indicate that these were carried in larger numbers than officially authorised.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

I'm OK with increasing the number of fausts, Piats and Bazookas. I agree that historical accounts do indicate that these were carried in larger numbers than officially authorised.

quote:

ORIGINAL: phoenix
It's not the first time I've noticed stuck units ...

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to phoenix)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.


In Advance to the Sure, the 317th Regt HQ units simply wouldn't move north to Bourscheid even after I gave it several orders to do so over three days of gameplay; the units had no fatigue, yet I kept getting those pesky "slipping" messages.

Further, I had numerous "application had to close" messages, usually when I tried to give units a line of march over terrrain with the shift key.

I have XP and suspect that some of these issues may have to do with all the .Net "fixes" I get almost monthy from MS, but I see that other players have had units stall, which reminds me of the "halting" issue that was causing so much agita in the HttR remake.