Leading the troops into Nirwana (V1.77)

[Woos]

I just noticed a new interesting behaviour when using the "set to follow" command:
Everything works fine at first (except that the followers always seem to move with half speed so one has to reset the leader once). But then the troops arrive and ..... tadaaa .... the leading unit vanishes. Neither in the old hex nor the new hex nor in the unit list.

Just happened to me in a Japanese against Allied AI game, main scenario, 19th turn, 4th Mixed Brigade leading the march from Mersing to Johore Baru just decide to quit the war when reaching the outskirts of Johore Baru. Game started with 1.75 (IIRC) and updated to 1.77 soon after, error is repeatable from save, save is available but uses Nick-Mod and Andrew Browns Map so probably nobody wants it.

Looks to me like the game is unfixably broken (my first attempt at the grand campaign (with 1.5) ended when a tank unit in China refused to move away from a base more than a few hexes by teleporting back otherwise)

[michaelm75au]

The following units moving at a slower (or different) rate than leader is normal. The leader waits until all following units catch up before they all move in to hex.

What did you doing to "reset" the leader? This may be what is causing it to disappear.

Michael

[Woos]

The following units moving at a slower (or different) rate than leader is normal. The leader waits until all following units catch up before they all move in to hex.

I always thought that the following troops wait for the leader (and not vice versa). This being the argument of trying to assign the slowest unit as leader.

What did you doing to "reset" the leader? This may be what is causing it to disappear.

Click on unit to get unit window, see that it moved 45km (when everyone else only has moved 22km), set target to start hex (in this case Mersing), set target to target hex (in this case Johore Baru), voila. Leader is back at 0km moved, all others are still at 22km (or whatever) moved.

I doubt that the resetting is the reason (as I have applied it on other occasions successfully) and even if, it shouldn't cause units to vanish.

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: Woos

The following units moving at a slower (or different) rate than leader is normal. The leader waits until all following units catch up before they all move in to hex.

I always thought that the following troops wait for the leader (and not vice versa). This being the argument of trying to assign the slowest unit as leader.

There have been bugs with the "follow" order. Now, all units in follow mode wait until all can enter the target hex. Sometimes, the leader unit travels faster, other times it is slower. But the faster ones will wait for the slower.

What did you doing to "reset" the leader? This may be what is causing it to disappear.

Click on unit to get unit window, see that it moved 45km (when everyone else only has moved 22km), set target to start hex (in this case Mersing), set target to target hex (in this case Johore Baru), voila. Leader is back at 0km moved, all others are still at 22km (or whatever) moved.

I doubt that the resetting is the reason (as I have applied it on other occasions successfully) and even if, it shouldn't cause units to vanish.

I am only trying to determine if there is a sequence of events that might cause the unit to vanish. Doing something similiar to above could cause a unit to jump back a hex or disappear in a previous patch.
BTW, by clearing the movement order, this unit could be considered no longer to be in the "follow" group. So the other units in hex may continue moving as a group, and this one unit may come as a seperate unit after them. It did when I ran a quick test just now.

[Woos]

There have been bugs with the "follow" order. Now, all units in follow mode wait until all can enter the target hex. Sometimes, the leader unit travels faster, other times it is slower. But the faster ones will wait for the slower.

Indeed. Tried it in another situation and whereas after the first turn it looks as if the leader is reaching the target way ahead of the rest, starting with the second turn everyone is in line.

Alas, it seems I must retract my statement that I did reset the leader in this case (I did successfully in several other ones and all units stayed one group). I went backwards through the saves and couldn't find the turn where I did it. So seemingly I didn't.
Only other somewhat unnormal thing was that 6th tank regiment was not completely unloaded when the whole march started so they joined in as "6th Tank Rgt/1". Later, when completely unloaded, they changed there name to the real "6th Tank Rgt" and automagically left the march group. But it is not 6th Tank Rgt which went missing.

[Woos]

OK and to correct myself another time (and worsening the bug):

The marching has nothing to do with the vanishing.

I canceled the march to keep the unit. Result after turn execution: 4th Mixed Bde is gone anyway. Not in Mersing, not in the unit list, not on any ship (not only was no ship loading at Mersing, I single-handedly (thanks to the UI) checked all transport TFs), it is not even on the Allied unit list (I checked due to all the recent talks about planes changing sides). 4th Mixed Bde was not a fragment (i.e. no "/1" to the name) and to my best knowledge it also didn't have a fragment anywhere else. No Japanese ship (especially no AP) was sunk in the turn resolution.

[Woos]

Only other somewhat unnormal thing was that 6th tank regiment was not completely unloaded when the whole march started so they joined in as "6th Tank Rgt/1". Later, when completely unloaded, they changed there name to the real "6th Tank Rgt" and automagically left the march group. But it is not 6th Tank Rgt which went missing.

But actually this is the reason.

I went back several saves one by one. Each time canceling the move to Johore Baru and rerunning the turn (thanks for a fast computer). It didn't help. 4th Mixed Brigade vanished during turn resolution. But when I canceled the move before the turn resolution in which 6th Tank Rgt/1 became 6th Tank Rgt and dropped out everything worked. Just putting 6th Tank Rgt/1 to Defensive Stance and letting the rest continue is enough.

So, beside hoping for a fix of this (which according to the latest comments will be some time from now), it is very adviseable not to put units into Follow mode while they are still being unloaded. At least not when they have a fragment designation. Otherwise you might irrecoverably loose the leader unit of the Follow.

[michaelm75au]

It makes sense. The 6th Tank/1 is NOT the same unit as 6th Tank. The orders to the 6th Tank/1 disappear when the unit merges to form 6th Tank. Also, the fragment bits should be scattered across the hex - /1 goes 22 miles. Next turn, /1 gets to 41 miles and /2 gets to 22, etc. Probably would need to be limit that sub-units can't merge because distance travelled not the same[:-]. We have enough confusion now with sub-units without adding to it.[:D]

I was toying with the idea to ask that fragments NOT be allowed to use Follow for the reason you describe. But then, there would be complaints about wanting to use fragments that are not formed from unloading. Catch-22.[;)]

This could explain other instances of vanishing/teleporting LCUs if fragments were in use at the time. To checkout case would need save from when orders were originally issued but in most cases, players don't notice units gone until several turns after the event.

I personally always let my units merge their fragments before I start issuing orders to them.
Michael

[Woos]

Well, my understanding of "it makes sense" is a bit different than "if you do something fishy but legal with unit A which marginally involves unit B, unit B will disappear several turns later". But at least it is a behaviour which one can avoid if one knows about it.

Best solution would IMHO be not to merge with a fragment which is involved in any move (regardless of distance), easiest one to program would probably to merge and keep the unit in the follow (so no data structures get mixed up) but that would allow gamey exploits. If dropping out of a following unit didn't meant for the leader to disappear later, that would also be a valid solution.

BTW I have saves from all turn ends, so also from the turn where the move started. But as I said, Nikmod with AB map.

[michaelm75au]

I meant in that I understood your reasoning/explanation.
Michael

ORIGINAL: Woos

Well, my understanding of "it makes sense" is a bit different than "if you do something fishy but legal with unit A which marginally involves unit B, unit B will disappear several turns later". But at least it is a behaviour which one can avoid if one knows about it.