CHS Scen 157 - apparent TF movement bug

[Local Yokel]

The screenshot shows a small taskforce that had been loading resources at Balikpapan to await passage to HI when a suitable convoy was going that way. As can be seen, the destination for the TF is given as Balikpapan (where it should have remained). In fact, the TF has set off on an unbidden voyage to a point about 300 miles east of Tokyo - a bug? Any way known to inhibit such behaviour?

Oh, and while I'm having a gripe I've seen numerous instances of ASW TF's separating themselves from TF's they are supposed to follow - going on ahead, that is, not falling behind. Sooner or later this is going to bite me, as I like to have an ASW group accompanying the merchant convoys so it can adopt a pouncing role.

This is from my PBEM in which (I think) we are both patched to 2.06, by mutual agreement.

[witpqs]

I see that sort of bug once in a while. It happens pretty infrequently - just watch out for it. You can chalk it up to bungled sailing orders! [;)]

[rtrapasso]

If you have ANYTHING on computer control, things like this can happen.

[witpqs]

Bob, just FYI I play with nothing on computer control (except a few CS convoys), and it still happens once in a blue moon.

[Feinder]

This sorta smells like an old bug where the destination location doesn't get cleared, when a new TF is created.  Say for example, you have TF 12 with it's destination to 19,24.  TF 12 then gets disbanded into TF 25.  You now create a new TF that uses the same memory location as the old TF 12 (it's not necessarily a new TF 12, it's just a TF that uses the same spot in memory).  For whatever  reason, the destination of your new TF doesn't get reset to "nothing", and it ends up being pre-loaded with the destination that lives in the memory location (from the old TF 12), which happens to be destination 19,24.
 
I got bit by this once in my game vs. LtFighter.  I had a (Allied) SC TF that was supposed to be sitting at Akyab to defend it.  However, the next turn, they had their destination hex set as Brisbane (or somethign).  They sailed right past the torpedo bombers of Rangoon and Ramilles ate 4 torps (glug, glug, glug).  Our rule was "play on!" no matter what (stupidity or game bug), so I just had to eat it.  It rather sucked, but oh well.
 
-F-

[witpqs]

When I've seen the bug it seems to happen differently than that. The TF has been happily sailing along for many turns and then - Bam! - it's sailing off for a close encounter of the third kind.

[Local Yokel]

Thank you, chaps!

Like witpqs, the only thing I gave under computer control is one, maybe two, CS convoys. But if leaving that door ajar is what starts the program misbehavin', I'd better consider dispensing with them.

Feinder, you may well have a point about the origins of this TF, as I think I created it from ships already in another TF at Balikpapan, then disbanded most other ships in that source TF into the port. But one thing I'm sure of is that neither the original TF that provided the ships for this Wandering Willie nor any other ever had its destination set for 71,44 - it's just not a place to which I've ever wanted to go.

<sigh> Just another of those things to live with, I suppose. No big deal now, but when the US starts fitting firing pins made of decent Japanese alloys to their contact exploders [:D]

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Bob, just FYI I play with nothing on computer control (except a few CS convoys...

[:-] [:-] [:'(]

Nothing means nothing... CS convoys can screw things up as well (imo).

[VSWG]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

CS convoys can screw things up as well (imo).

IMO no. CS convoys are something completely different than computer control of an area. Problems with the latter arise because the AI thinks he has not enough "stuff" to complete his tasks in his area(s), so it takes ships/planes/units from the human player. Setting a convoy to CS creates only a batch of movement orders for a TF that will be repeated until stopped by the player.