Matrix Games Forums

Deal of the Week - Pride of NationsA new update for Piercing Fortress EuropaNew screenshots for War in the West!Pike & Shot is now available!Server Maintenance Battle Academy 2 gets updated!Deal of the Week: Advanced Tactics Gold Ask Buzz Aldrin!Pike & Shot gets Release Date and Twitch Session!Deal of the Week Espana 1936
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback

 
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] >> Command Ops Series >> RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 6:07:44 AM   
Arjuna


Posts: 17790
Joined: 3/31/2003
From: Canberra, Australia
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: RockinHarry


quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

Re OnCall Support. Units that are routing or rout recovering cannot call for OnCall Spt. End of story.


Not retreating/routing, but sooner or later they recover to normal state (as happened in the same game as posted above and screeny below). Would be interesting to know, where the formerly routed UK unit is now moving to and who calls Arty on the german IG unit further down. As said, I also observed something like that in original St vith (german side played) and has nothing to do with my own files.




I agree that once that UK unit does recover then yes he can call in arty support. But I don't think that is a bad thing. Each company commander would be capable of calling in arty fire or would have a Forward Observer.

Recovered units replan their route to their original objective unless of cours they decide to abandon that and bunker down. If I had a save I could check out its route and advise.

_____________________________

Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com

(in reply to RockinHarry)
Post #: 61
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 8:49:13 AM   
wodin


Posts: 8014
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline
harry..mate you've got it all wrong. I want you to be more involved with Panther as you really test systems that will help make the future games even better. Not doing so is a disservice to you AND means we all wont benefit from your testing either. Your perfect for the job. Sometimes it can appear your abit blunt (hey I'm sure I'm the same) or at other times it seems you expect the worse i.e it's not a bug but an abstraction or lack of feature. I put the blunt bit down to English not being your first language. None of that bothers me. What does bother me is it seems unwilling to join the team and take a bigger testing part behind the scenes as you downplay what you could contribute. Obviously it's your decision but I truly feel the future games will be worse off if your not their testing the systems for Dave.

Your a good mate online Harry as I'm sure you know I think alot of you mate, certainly don't want you to give up here or feel you aren't an asset for the future of the game. Though I think your best off the forum and more one to one with Dave and Panther testing the systems and mechanics in the future games in an official capacity. I'd certainly jump at the chance to be more involved, it's a great opportunity mate to help mold the future game.


_____________________________

My Tactical wargame facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/Tacticalwargame


(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 62
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 8:52:36 AM   
wodin


Posts: 8014
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline
Another thing with routing is cos we see all the units on the map it seems odd why they go in a certain direction..yet the routing unit may not know where 99% of those units are.

I still think routing towards the higher level HQ would go someway into keeping people happy and may deduce the routes into enemy territory. Though even that could cause problems depending on their relative positions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna


quote:

ORIGINAL: RockinHarry


quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

Re OnCall Support. Units that are routing or rout recovering cannot call for OnCall Spt. End of story.


Not retreating/routing, but sooner or later they recover to normal state (as happened in the same game as posted above and screeny below). Would be interesting to know, where the formerly routed UK unit is now moving to and who calls Arty on the german IG unit further down. As said, I also observed something like that in original St vith (german side played) and has nothing to do with my own files.




I agree that once that UK unit does recover then yes he can call in arty support. But I don't think that is a bad thing. Each company commander would be capable of calling in arty fire or would have a Forward Observer.

Recovered units replan their route to their original objective unless of cours they decide to abandon that and bunker down. If I had a save I could check out its route and advise.


_____________________________

My Tactical wargame facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/Tacticalwargame


(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 63
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 9:25:58 AM   
phoenix

 

Posts: 1931
Joined: 9/28/2010
Status: offline
Thanks for the CTD feedback and fix, Dave.

For what it's worth, it seems to be playing fine to me. I think it's looking really good. Like Ramses, I guess only the CTDs are bothering me now, because they certainly are game stoppers..... But I'm sure they're all fixable. Was playing through various Maas-Rhein scenarios and I haven't noticed any odd routing behaviour in my games, for example (every game diff, I know - and Harry obviously has a more detailed focus than me, so maybe he would notice more.) Routing seems good to me now - very very far from what it used to be (way back, I mean, on original release). I just played some COTA games again and it was noticeable that in there tank companies of say 12 tanks quickly routed on losing 2. That used to happen a lot in BFTB too, but I haven't seen any of it so far. Dug-in units seem to me to be VERY much easier to flush out - there's no more getting stuck at all. In fact, it seems excellent. So, for example, every time I played From the Meuse to the Rhine prior to 257, that tiny 10 man dug in unit - Group Butler - just nth of Arnhem rail bridge held everythign up for several hours despite overwhelming superior forces going at it. Now it's more or less flushed out in the course of the advance. It's great.

I'm really pleased with it, Dave. Enjoying playing it again.

Aside from CTDs there's only - for me, so far - the question (already raised by others) of the shape of the targetting and task boxes to sort out. A small point, but looks visually confusing. It happens with arty and direct fire orders that the boxes are now open ended and point off in odd directions. It happens nearly every time you place a direct fire order.

Really looking forward to the COTA pack.

Peter

< Message edited by phoenix -- 3/14/2013 9:27:20 AM >

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 64
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 10:16:51 AM   
Ramses


Posts: 200
Joined: 2/11/2011
From: the Netherlands
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

It does not occur if the game is paused and you issue the waypoints. I have tried it on a vanilla run of the roadblocks scenario and cannot get it to occur - ditto on the tutorial.

Somehow the map search params are being corrupted. It may be that the scenario data is currupted. I am asking Miquel to look into this. Very interesting.


Thanks for looking into it Arjuna,

The previous ctd issue I sent also happened with time set to max, so maybe there is someting that triggers the ctd in there. Last night I also got another 'out of memory' popup while playing the same scenario. I was asked by Bletchley_Geek to run the game at normal speed and let it run without doing anything in the previous ctd (4.4.257). There were no strange results to be found; maybe you need to run the game at max speed and see if there are spikes in memory usage. Will do this myself later tonight.

One final question: loaded the ctd-causing save I sent earlier (4.4.257) and tried it in the new beta version. The ctd kept happening. Is this expected behaviour because it was a save from an earlier version, or should the issue have been fixed (in which case it is not; I read that Phoenix could reproduce it as well).

Thanks again,

Ramses

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 65
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 10:39:26 AM   
dazkaz15


Posts: 1272
Joined: 12/14/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

Chill out everyone. While I appreciate that everyone is trying, in their own way, to make this the best game we can my preference is to receive feedback from whatever bent. I'll make the call as to what we filter out and what we focus on in terms of development. I have no problems in saying we won't change this or that.


Thanks for posting that Dave.

That is what I hoped you felt about any feedback we post.

When I post about stuff I feel is not working right, I'm not calling for an immediate change, and its entirely up to you whether you feel it's working right, its beyond the scope of your game engine, or you just don't have time, or budget to look into it.

My feedback is not even aimed at you normally but to the forum as a whole, to try and drum up some conversation, and feedback from other people that have the same gaming, and historical interests as me.

No one in my social circle has the same interest. In fact, when they come into my office and see me moving square shapes around on the screen for hours, sometimes days at a time they think I'm mad

More worrying is that most of them have no idea what went on in WW2 other than the Holocaust. So it's nice to chat to others with the same interest.

This forum is not the most active on the internet that's for sure, and I think without your continual support, and feedback, it would become very stale.

So in that vane I'll continue to post feedback on my findings including game balance, and leave it to you to filter what you wan't to action., based on the above, and hopefully drum up a bit of conversation from the others on the process

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 66
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 10:46:45 AM   
phoenix

 

Posts: 1931
Joined: 9/28/2010
Status: offline
Since I was so enjoying my game, Dave, before the CTD stopped me dead - is there any way I can get round this static arty thing, meanwhile. Is there anything I can do to stop it crashing at that point? I've tried all sorts, no success.

(in reply to dazkaz15)
Post #: 67
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 11:07:34 AM   
dazkaz15


Posts: 1272
Joined: 12/14/2012
Status: offline
I would also like to mention that these Public Beta feedback threads are a great source for learning how much depth you have actually modelled into the game.

Some of the things mentioned here, that are working under the bonnet, I never would have thought had been implemented, like the retreat mentioned earlier, and other stuff in the other Beta threads.

Its all good stuff, and explains a lot of unexpected behaviour to the player

< Message edited by dazkaz15 -- 3/14/2013 11:10:30 AM >

(in reply to phoenix)
Post #: 68
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 11:39:03 AM   
Arjuna


Posts: 17790
Joined: 3/31/2003
From: Canberra, Australia
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: phoenix

Since I was so enjoying my game, Dave, before the CTD stopped me dead - is there any way I can get round this static arty thing, meanwhile. Is there anything I can do to stop it crashing at that point? I've tried all sorts, no success.



Peter,

I'm afraid with the build 4.4.258 you are stuck. It's an access violation - ie the code is trying to access some data on a null object. However, once the new build comes out you will be able to play that save and and continue on.

_____________________________

Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com

(in reply to phoenix)
Post #: 69
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 12:57:41 PM   
phoenix

 

Posts: 1931
Joined: 9/28/2010
Status: offline
Ok. Thanks Dave.

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 70
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 8:06:56 PM   
phoenix

 

Posts: 1931
Joined: 9/28/2010
Status: offline
I wonder, Dave - to avoid this bug meanwhile is it sufficient to play scenarios where there IS a static arty (bombard) unit in the OOB?
Peter

< Message edited by phoenix -- 3/14/2013 8:07:26 PM >

(in reply to phoenix)
Post #: 71
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 9:30:23 PM   
RockinHarry


Posts: 2948
Joined: 1/18/2001
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna


quote:

ORIGINAL: RockinHarry


quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

Re OnCall Support. Units that are routing or rout recovering cannot call for OnCall Spt. End of story.


Not retreating/routing, but sooner or later they recover to normal state (as happened in the same game as posted above and screeny below). Would be interesting to know, where the formerly routed UK unit is now moving to and who calls Arty on the german IG unit further down. As said, I also observed something like that in original St vith (german side played) and has nothing to do with my own files.




I agree that once that UK unit does recover then yes he can call in arty support. But I don't think that is a bad thing. Each company commander would be capable of calling in arty fire or would have a Forward Observer.

Recovered units replan their route to their original objective unless of cours they decide to abandon that and bunker down. If I had a save I could check out its route and advise.


Unfortunately save files are overwritten, as I kept the test run going. I agree with isolated units beeing able to call Arty here and there. It was just the way of creation of that isolated unit.

After recovering, the 40 brave Brits moved another 1 1/2 miles to the west, skirmished with a Para Bn HQ and finally routed again, settled to recover in "Hufsche Kath", a larger farmstead to the SE. I finally moved a reinforcement Stug unit of 9 pieces into that farmstead and after it unleahed its full complement of HE and MG ammo on the Brits, the matter got finally solved. Other para infantry reinforcement weren´t able to move to "Hufsche Kath", as they were constantly punished by UK Arty, causing some 20-30% losses. Thus the Stug unit had to do the job alone. Actually the reinforcements were needed elsewhere, but thus is (military) life.

_____________________________

RockinHarry in the web:

http://www.myspace.com/rockinharryz
http://www.youtube.com/user/rockinharryz
https://www.facebook.com/harry.zann

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 72
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 9:37:18 PM   
Ramses


Posts: 200
Joined: 2/11/2011
From: the Netherlands
Status: offline
Regarding the ctd i mentioned yesterday: after playtesting I have found that:

1) it has nothing to do with memory usage; played the Battle of the roadblocks scenario at maximum time, even gave a few orders to keep the units active during scenario time. The game started with 88 mb's of memory usage and ended with about 102. That's almost exactly the same that what I found earlier while testing in 4.4.257
2) it is not restricted to the roadblocks map, reproduced it on the Hell on wheels counterattack map and the Eddy's riposte map; it seems to be easier to trigger on bigger maps . So the maps themselves do not appear to be corrupt.

There are the same constants every time:

1) time needs to be at maximum
2) you have to set waypoints while holding the shift key
3) after multiple waypoints there will be a ctd, just keep clicking; it is more likely to happen somewhat later in the scenario

I can cause a ctd within seconds from starting a fresh Eddy's riposte scenario. Maybe someone else can confirm it as well.

Start the game
Set time to max
Select unit (see screen)
Give move order
Hold shift
Keep setting waypoints while holding shift
Ctd

Hope this helps Arjuna,

Ramses





Attachment (1)

(in reply to phoenix)
Post #: 73
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 11:16:34 PM   
Bletchley_Geek


Posts: 3065
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ramses

Regarding the ctd i mentioned yesterday: after playtesting I have found that:

1) it has nothing to do with memory usage; played the Battle of the roadblocks scenario at maximum time, even gave a few orders to keep the units active during scenario time. The game started with 88 mb's of memory usage and ended with about 102. That's almost exactly the same that what I found earlier while testing in 4.4.257
2) it is not restricted to the roadblocks map, reproduced it on the Hell on wheels counterattack map and the Eddy's riposte map; it seems to be easier to trigger on bigger maps . So the maps themselves do not appear to be corrupt.

There are the same constants every time:

1) time needs to be at maximum
2) you have to set waypoints while holding the shift key
3) after multiple waypoints there will be a ctd, just keep clicking; it is more likely to happen somewhat later in the scenario

I can cause a ctd within seconds from starting a fresh Eddy's riposte scenario. Maybe someone else can confirm it as well.

Start the game
Set time to max
Select unit (see screen)
Give move order
Hold shift
Keep setting waypoints while holding shift
Ctd


Thank you very, very much Ramses for your observations and your reports. Obviously not many people play the game at top speed and start issuing many move orders. Stressing the system like you do is a very, very welcome way of testing.

We can confirm all of your reports and I might add that Dave and me found that the chances of it happening - it doesn't happen always - are influenced by: issuing move orders on or nearby impassable terrain for the force (woods for wheeled units) and having the waypoints to overlap and the routes to cross over themselves.

I'm fairly optimistic we'll get on top of this sooner than later.

(in reply to Ramses)
Post #: 74
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 11:25:21 PM   
Arjuna


Posts: 17790
Joined: 3/31/2003
From: Canberra, Australia
Status: online
Ramses,

Yes I can get it to crash in the tutorial. You don't really need it to be running fast but it must be running so the AI can update the route. It's crashing somewhere inside the route finding code. I found one possible cause last night but ran out of time to test it. I will do so this morning. Thanks for the testing.

_____________________________

Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com

(in reply to Bletchley_Geek)
Post #: 75
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 11:31:59 PM   
Arjuna


Posts: 17790
Joined: 3/31/2003
From: Canberra, Australia
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: RockinHarry


quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna


quote:

ORIGINAL: RockinHarry


quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

Re OnCall Support. Units that are routing or rout recovering cannot call for OnCall Spt. End of story.


Not retreating/routing, but sooner or later they recover to normal state (as happened in the same game as posted above and screeny below). Would be interesting to know, where the formerly routed UK unit is now moving to and who calls Arty on the german IG unit further down. As said, I also observed something like that in original St vith (german side played) and has nothing to do with my own files.




I agree that once that UK unit does recover then yes he can call in arty support. But I don't think that is a bad thing. Each company commander would be capable of calling in arty fire or would have a Forward Observer.

Recovered units replan their route to their original objective unless of cours they decide to abandon that and bunker down. If I had a save I could check out its route and advise.


Unfortunately save files are overwritten, as I kept the test run going. I agree with isolated units beeing able to call Arty here and there. It was just the way of creation of that isolated unit.

After recovering, the 40 brave Brits moved another 1 1/2 miles to the west, skirmished with a Para Bn HQ and finally routed again, settled to recover in "Hufsche Kath", a larger farmstead to the SE. I finally moved a reinforcement Stug unit of 9 pieces into that farmstead and after it unleahed its full complement of HE and MG ammo on the Brits, the matter got finally solved. Other para infantry reinforcement weren´t able to move to "Hufsche Kath", as they were constantly punished by UK Arty, causing some 20-30% losses. Thus the Stug unit had to do the job alone. Actually the reinforcements were needed elsewhere, but thus is (military) life.


I agree that further refinement of the retreat code can be done in the future to try and minimise cases like this. We first need to analyse why they chose to go that way. If as I suspect it is because they deemed it too dangerous to go the other way, then we have two options, namely to allow that to happen or to tweak the probabilities a bit to try and make it less likely. To do the latter we need to identify the data values at play at that time. For that we need saves taken before it occurs. So when you next see this happen make sure you stop the game an send me your saves.

But overall I think we have a vastly improved retreat system now than we did before with the last pacth #3.

_____________________________

Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com

(in reply to RockinHarry)
Post #: 76
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 11:36:57 PM   
Arjuna


Posts: 17790
Joined: 3/31/2003
From: Canberra, Australia
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: phoenix

I wonder, Dave - to avoid this bug meanwhile is it sufficient to play scenarios where there IS a static arty (bombard) unit in the OOB?
Peter

Peter, if there is a static arty unit in the scenario then there is always going to be a chance that this may occur. But it is only a chance. It only fires if one of the sideTasks has been culled from the onMapBoss's priority list. This is more likely to happen where the side is going for objectives in a linear sequence, such as along a highway where you may have several objectives.

_____________________________

Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com

(in reply to phoenix)
Post #: 77
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 11:40:05 PM   
Ramses


Posts: 200
Joined: 2/11/2011
From: the Netherlands
Status: offline

quote:

Bletchley_Geek

Thank you very, very much Ramses for your observations and your reports. Obviously not many people play the game at top speed and start issuing many move orders. Stressing the system like you do is a very, very welcome way of testing.

We can confirm all of your reports and I might add that Dave and me found that the chances of it happening - it doesn't happen always - are influenced by: issuing move orders on or nearby impassable terrain for the force (woods for wheeled units) and having the waypoints to overlap and the routes to cross over themselves.

I'm fairly optimistic we'll get on top of this sooner than later.


Thanks for the kind words Bletchley_Geek, but I feel an explanation is in order. Usually I don't start the game full speed and start issuing orders; I do try to think before I act.
But because my time is scarce, which is not a surprise when having 3 young kids in the house and a busy job, I do need to speed things up on a regular basis. Because of this, I experienced ctd's on many occasions.
After hours of testing I was able to find out what triggered the stoppages. So you might say there was a deliberate search for it.

Anyway: I'm glad you are able to repeat the stoppages and I have no doubt that you will eradicate them sooner or later. You may count on me to test the issue to the fullest.....

Best regards,

Ramses

(in reply to Bletchley_Geek)
Post #: 78
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/14/2013 11:58:45 PM   
Joe D.


Posts: 3642
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

Ramses,

Yes I can get it to crash in the tutorial. You don't really need it to be running fast but it must be running so the AI can update the route. It's crashing somewhere inside the route finding code ...


I've had that problem in the previous build, but not in the tutorial, at least not yet.

In the latest beta, I've run the tutorial twice with my "adequate" machine and was surprised to see that the Axis managed both times to make it into St. Vith about the same time as the Allies; it makes for an interesting encounter.

Thanks, Dave.

_____________________________

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 Arjuna)
Post #: 79
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 12:18:42 AM   
Bletchley_Geek


Posts: 3065
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ramses
Thanks for the kind words Bletchley_Geek, but I feel an explanation is in order. Usually I don't start the game full speed and start issuing orders; I do try to think before I act.
But because my time is scarce, which is not a surprise when having 3 young kids in the house and a busy job, I do need to speed things up on a regular basis. Because of this, I experienced ctd's on many occasions.
After hours of testing I was able to find out what triggered the stoppages. So you might say there was a deliberate search for it.

Anyway: I'm glad you are able to repeat the stoppages and I have no doubt that you will eradicate them sooner or later. You may count on me to test the issue to the fullest.....


Rest assured you'll get a detailed post-mortem analysis, Ramses. I have the intuition you've got a technical background, so I think you'll enjoy it.

(in reply to Ramses)
Post #: 80
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 6:19:06 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1588
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
Can confirm what was already said, artillery boxes are sometimes open at the bottom but that doesn't seem to affect artillery fire.


Next what is up with the "Höckerlinie" at Elsborn Ridge? Some segments there are shown as major river when right clicking on it terrain there, is this on purpose or corrupted scenario/map data?


Now a point I don't look thru, I adjusted some values(As far as I can see just ONLY Aggro, ROF, Ammo) for a bat. attack and as these new orders arrive with the attack already rolling the 3 companies attacking get the order to fall back to the FUP for a reorg task, I can't imagine that it should work that way, shouldn't these kind of adjustments be put into the rolling attack "on the fly"?

I see also other bat. attacks fall back, maybe because of the same changes I made, I wanted to make sure that the first US line is crossed and that the attacks don't stop because of low ammo or high fatigue, that's why I adjusted some values of those attacks but nothing big, no moving of the target or change of formation or so.

For now I only attach the save(rename to .zip) where you can see what happens:
Check out the attack of the II Bn HQ 48 Gren Rgt, at 11:19 they get the new order and a reorg task appears almost at the FUP of the attack, also the old order seems to be cancel as the message log shows that it has "failed to complete its attack mission", let it run longer and you should see also other bat. attacks behave similar.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by BigDuke66 -- 3/15/2013 10:07:48 AM >


_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club

"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"

(in reply to Bletchley_Geek)
Post #: 81
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 10:11:47 AM   
Arjuna


Posts: 17790
Joined: 3/31/2003
From: Canberra, Australia
Status: online
BigDuke66,

In RL no good commander would change the orders after the troops have crossed the assault line. By that time the die is cast and you should just wait. If you do change the order then the attack will be replanned and yes you will end up back at the FUP if you had assigned one. My advice is to pause and issue the attack orders with all the setting you desire, then let it be.

_____________________________

Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 82
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 10:15:47 AM   
dazkaz15


Posts: 1272
Joined: 12/14/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

Next what is up with the "Höckerlinie" at Elsborn Ridge? Some segments there are shown as major river when right clicking on it terrain there, is this on purpose or corrupted scenario/map data?




Hi BigDuke

Hope this helps with that queston.

It's just not marked very well in the scenario map but it is there on the ground for real.

Not a major river obviously, but I think it was put there just to make it impassable terrain.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by dazkaz15 -- 3/15/2013 10:26:01 AM >

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 83
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 10:40:13 AM   
dazkaz15


Posts: 1272
Joined: 12/14/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

BigDuke66,

In RL no good commander would change the orders after the troops have crossed the assault line. By that time the die is cast and you should just wait. If you do change the order then the attack will be replanned and yes you will end up back at the FUP if you had assigned one. My advice is to pause and issue the attack orders with all the setting you desire, then let it be.


quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

Now a point I don't look thru, I adjusted some values(As far as I can see just ONLY Aggro, ROF, Ammo) for a bat. attack and as these new orders arrive with the attack already rolling the 3 companies attacking get the order to fall back to the FUP for a reorg task, I can't imagine that it should work that way, shouldn't these kind of adjustments be put into the rolling attack "on the fly"?



quote:


From Manual

Some other situations which generally don¡¦t cause replans or incur orders delay are listed below. The list isn¡¦t complete, so there is still room for you to experiment and discover some of this for yourself, but in general anything not specifically mentioned below will probably incur orders delay.

Move or Defend Orders
„b Changing Speed, Route, Aggro, ROF, and Losses
„b Changing Frontage, Depth, and Facing
„b Changing Formation, except for In-Situ, which does incur orders delay

Attack or Probe Orders
„b Changing Speed, Route, ROF, and Losses
„b Changing Frontage, Depth, or Facing
„b Changing Formation (except for In-Situ) during the move to FUP, or sometimes (but not always) during the assault


You might need to do some more tests to see if there was not somethng else going on BigDuke, because as far as I cas see from the manual, you should not have needed a replan, unless it was the agro change?

< Message edited by dazkaz15 -- 3/15/2013 10:53:25 AM >

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 84
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 1:22:46 PM   
dazkaz15


Posts: 1272
Joined: 12/14/2012
Status: offline
I have a stuck unit.

Think if I was to let it run, it will stay there for the whole 4 days, but I don't have enough time to find out

Two save games sent via email.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by dazkaz15 -- 3/15/2013 1:23:11 PM >

(in reply to dazkaz15)
Post #: 85
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 6:23:23 PM   
dazkaz15


Posts: 1272
Joined: 12/14/2012
Status: offline
Another problem here with a Bn HQ abandoning its assault due to lack of time even though its time was set to the end of the scenario.

A lot of the problems with the abandonment of orders, and even the stuck issue may be related to the timings.
They seem to be a little quirky at the moment?





Attachment (1)

(in reply to dazkaz15)
Post #: 86
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 6:39:21 PM   
navwarcol

 

Posts: 631
Joined: 12/2/2009
Status: offline
Daz...just from glancing at the image there..is it possible that it abandoned it because route planning is taking it along some strange path? I had this happen once. The way to check this I think is by the tool menu, check the route that matches the one you ordered "quickest" and see how long it is saying it expects that to take. Just an idea, as I said, something like that happened with mine in last patch, but it worked itself out of it, and for the life of me, I never figured out how.

< Message edited by navwarcol -- 3/15/2013 6:42:02 PM >

(in reply to dazkaz15)
Post #: 87
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 6:51:57 PM   
Rock64

 

Posts: 15
Joined: 11/16/2012
Status: offline
I strongly disagree that every company can call for fire 100% of it's "non-routed" time. WWII artillery radio sets were big honking things with limited range and not 100% reliable. The majority of fire missions were called in over wire. Just read thru the artillery section in the greenbook.

Artillery fire in BTFB is more responsive to calls for fire than even modern day military communicatins allow. It's like every officer has a cell phone to contact any and all batteries and is directing fire with hand held laser GPS devices. And I'm not really exagerating!

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 88
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 7:12:14 PM   
navwarcol

 

Posts: 631
Joined: 12/2/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rock64

I strongly disagree that every company can call for fire 100% of it's "non-routed" time. WWII artillery radio sets were big honking things with limited range and not 100% reliable. The majority of fire missions were called in over wire. Just read thru the artillery section in the greenbook.

Artillery fire in BTFB is more responsive to calls for fire than even modern day military communicatins allow. It's like every officer has a cell phone to contact any and all batteries and is directing fire with hand held laser GPS devices. And I'm not really exagerating!

What I read Dave saying, was NOT that all non-routing units CAN call for fire support. What he said, is that units which are routing(running away) or retreating, cannot call for it.

(in reply to Rock64)
Post #: 89
RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback - 3/15/2013 7:38:57 PM   
phoenix

 

Posts: 1931
Joined: 9/28/2010
Status: offline
deleted

< Message edited by phoenix -- 3/15/2013 7:43:55 PM >

(in reply to navwarcol)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command Ops Series >> RE: Build 4.4.258 Feedback Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   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

0.119