Explain this please

Share your gameplay tips, secret tactics and fabulous strategies with fellow gamers here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Post Reply
User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3380
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

Explain this please

Post by topeverest »

I had a unique event occur, and I am trying to understand why it happened.

the allies invaded Kodiak in a good weather turn, unloading twice according to the replay. I also used sub transport and paradrop during the turn. At the end of the turn, my units were put back on the transports and the amphibious TF retreated. I can be sure becasue the marine raiders delivered by sub are now on the AP's. Only the paradrop unit is still on the island.

A little more information. I was careful to select excellent commanders on all key land and naval units. I had a BB TF escorting the amphib. The base was fully knocked out, and the empire has no CV's in the area. There is no enemy LBA within about 15 hexes. The allies own the skies literally. The empire has a BB tf about 8 hexes away. The enemy land units have long since been stripped of any supply due to constant bombardment.

Why would this occur?
Andy M
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24580
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: Explain this please

Post by Chickenboy »

Andy,

This sounds pretty 'buggy' to me. No way should the paras have disappeared before turn resolution, even if the amphib boys got back on the ships.

Was there any additional disruption or casualties associated with unloading the troops? That may help to convince you one way or the other if they got off the ships and then reboarded.
Image
User avatar
Barb
Posts: 2503
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:17 am
Location: Bratislava, Slovakia

RE: Explain this please

Post by Barb »

What was the planning of your ground forces? They could be completely disrupted by the landing.
Image
ADB123
Posts: 1559
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 10:56 pm

RE: Explain this please

Post by ADB123 »

With the latest mod, all landings "disperse" even when there are no enemy forces at the target base, unless the attacking unit is at the magical 100% prepared level.

Why is the "100%" so important? I certainly don't know, and I certainly don't believe that it is realistic or appropriate.

As far as I can tell, it is still a left-over from the original Gary G design in which he assumed that the entire game would be fought over a few islands, so that one would prepare several divisions for several months, invade, rinse, lather, repeat...

Of course, none of us actually play that way, so therefore we are stuck with one of the many little irritations in the Game Engine that makes us all try to find work-arounds.

So, you are always at risk of having an invasion "run away" for no obvious reason.

The most obvious solution is to isolate and ignore all island bases, and fight a "Great Asian War", thus the multitude of games with Burma as the main theatre of action...

Good luck -
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Explain this please

Post by witpqs »

ORIGINAL: ADB123

With the latest mod, all landings "disperse" even when there are no enemy forces at the target base, unless the attacking unit is at the magical 100% prepared level.

Why is the "100%" so important? I certainly don't know, and I certainly don't believe that it is realistic or appropriate.

As far as I can tell, it is still a left-over from the original Gary G design in which he assumed that the entire game would be fought over a few islands, so that one would prepare several divisions for several months, invade, rinse, lather, repeat...

Of course, none of us actually play that way, so therefore we are stuck with one of the many little irritations in the Game Engine that makes us all try to find work-arounds.

So, you are always at risk of having an invasion "run away" for no obvious reason.

The most obvious solution is to isolate and ignore all island bases, and fight a "Great Asian War", thus the multitude of games with Burma as the main theatre of action...

Good luck -

I don't know what you mean by "all landings disperse"? unless at 100% prep.
ADB123
Posts: 1559
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 10:56 pm

RE: Explain this please

Post by ADB123 »

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: ADB123

With the latest mod, all landings "disperse" even when there are no enemy forces at the target base, unless the attacking unit is at the magical 100% prepared level.

Why is the "100%" so important? I certainly don't know, and I certainly don't believe that it is realistic or appropriate.

As far as I can tell, it is still a left-over from the original Gary G design in which he assumed that the entire game would be fought over a few islands, so that one would prepare several divisions for several months, invade, rinse, lather, repeat...

Of course, none of us actually play that way, so therefore we are stuck with one of the many little irritations in the Game Engine that makes us all try to find work-arounds.

So, you are always at risk of having an invasion "run away" for no obvious reason.

The most obvious solution is to isolate and ignore all island bases, and fight a "Great Asian War", thus the multitude of games with Burma as the main theatre of action...

Good luck -

I don't know what you mean by "all landings disperse"? unless at 100% prep.

Send a good, small LCU to an unoccupied enemy base. Watch the messages you get when your troops are landing. You will see that the Game tells you that "xyz unit is dispersing". Afterwards, look at the unit - it will be in bad shape, despite landing at an empty base. When you land somewhere where there is an enemy force, your unit will be in even worse shape, and likely pull out of the invasion. That works if you use a Fast Transport, or an Amphibious Assault.
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Explain this please

Post by witpqs »

I haven't seen it myself. I can't offer any useful comment at this time.
User avatar
Rob Brennan UK
Posts: 3685
Joined: Sat Aug 24, 2002 8:36 pm
Location: London UK

RE: Explain this please

Post by Rob Brennan UK »

I'm doing landings all over the place in My game/AAR .. never seen this message or had
troops vanish on me either. And some have most definitely not been 100% prepped ..

Paras should shock attack on the turn of 'unloading' from the transports, This is a very odd
result . Maybe try posting in the tech support section as this is not right imo.

sorry for the spelling . English is my main language , I just can't type . and i'm too lazy to edit :)
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Explain this please

Post by witpqs »

Well, I've seen the message for LCUs in dire situations, whether landing, parachuting, or just in combat. But I've not seen it in landings just because they have less than 100% prep. At least not that I recall - I'm gonna watch for it now.
User avatar
Charbroiled
Posts: 1181
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:50 pm
Location: Oregon

RE: Explain this please

Post by Charbroiled »

Your Amphib TF leader needs to have high stats in "Land" and "Aggressiveness". There is a check made against those two stats and if the check isn't made, all units delivered by sea will load back up onto ships and go home.
"When I said I would run, I meant 'away' ". - Orange
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: Explain this please

Post by Canoerebel »

So good to see Charbroiled and TopofEverest posting. (I haven't seen them much of late, though if I'm wrong and they've been around, forgive me.)

I land partially prepped units all the time without having the problem described by the OP and by ABD. Of course, I try to limit this to vacant objectives or badly outnumbered objectives. I've never had a problem with this, either because I'm good or I'm lucky.

Nemo has posted at length about why overwhelming invasions with totally unprepped troops is an important tactic in the arsenal of an experienced or gifted player. I think some of these comments were in GreyJoy's thread.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”