AE Land and AI Issues [OUTDATED]

fbs · Post by **fbs** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 11:57 pm

May want to review this unit, scenario 1, 1.0.1.1083:

Unit 5841 "Tapanoeli Gsn Bn", -perhaps- should be "Sibolga Gsn Bn"

Thanks! [:D]
fbs

Weidi72 · Post by **Weidi72** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 5:44 am

I 've got some units were the headquarter is lost. There's a "unknown" now. Scen6.

Smeulders · Post by **Smeulders** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 8:22 pm

I have a question about the 3" Mortars, devices 1040 to 1042. It seems you wanted more 3" production later in the war, but I am wondering how this upgrade works. Is it like normal weapons, so when they are 'upgraded' I end up with a whole lot of device 1040 3" Mortars in the pool, or is it an upgrade like we have for squads, where devices sent back to the pool are immediately upgraded ? And just out of curiosity, why is the 1041 device there ? No build rate, starts and ends 'production' on the same date, it doesn't look to useful.

fbs · Post by **fbs** » Sat Sep 05, 2009 10:54 am

Scenario 1, 1.0.1.1083:

Both the Cavite USN Base Force and Manila USAAF Base Force are depleted of engineers. So there are no engineers in Manila to build me a fort -- is that right?

This lack of engineers is extensive on the Phillippines, by the way: all bases have little or no engineering.

Cheers [:D]
fbs

Dutch_slith · Post by **Dutch_slith** » Sat Sep 05, 2009 11:22 am

Tapanoeli is the correct designation!

Andy Mac · Post by **Andy Mac** » Sun Sep 06, 2009 1:06 pm

Guys I am on Vacation for next three weeks - currently nursing a hangover in Las Vegas !!!

I have intermittent email contact and internet access especially for weeks in September when I will be in Canada.

keep posting feedback and I will consolidate it on my return

Viva las Vegas !!!

Andy

Andy Mac · Post by **Andy Mac** » Sun Sep 06, 2009 1:08 pm

Smeuldurs quite correct I wanted to steadily increase 3" mortar production so its the same device and it upgrades over time - you will end up with two pools of devices I may take another look at it for patch 2

Re the one in the middle it was a error but I ran out of time to fix it it should be irrelevant (at least I hope so)

Blackhorse · Post by **Blackhorse** » Sun Sep 06, 2009 1:27 pm

ORIGINAL: fbs

Scenario 1, 1.0.1.1083:

Both the Cavite USN Base Force and Manila USAAF Base Force are depleted of engineers. So there are no engineers in Manila to build me a fort -- is that right?

This lack of engineers is extensive on the Phillippines, by the way: all bases have little or no engineering.

Cheers [:D]
fbs

The US has one powerful Engineer unit at start -- the 14th Philippine Scouts at Clark. It is at battalion strength, but can expand into a regiment.

There are base forces at Bataan, Clark and Manila (x2) that will get a small number of engineers, if allowed to grow.

Between the end of December and mid-January three construction battalions (reservists mobilizing) will arrive on Bataan.

Montbrun · Post by **Montbrun** » Thu Sep 10, 2009 6:02 pm

Unit 5172 - 275th USAAF Base Force - permanently attached to SWPAC ("white letters" v. "yellow letters").

Rainer79 · Post by **Rainer79** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:22 am

1.00.84/ scen 1

The 4th Border Defense Fortress at Kotou has a few invisible guns (see screenshot). The unit TOE has the same problem.

Rainer79 · Post by **Rainer79** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:27 am

Also the other border forts do have 2 entries of 0 IJA infantry squads in their TOE while they currently possess none there. Is that intentional?

Andy Mac · Post by **Andy Mac** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:29 pm

OK guys patch 1 is now out there with new AI scripts (beta/Offical are identical for Japanese AI) so if playing v AI japan on the beta its identical.

I am going to need feedback to try and keep making it better - feedback against either side is good

witpqs · Post by **witpqs** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:37 pm

Andy - are those new scripts picked up mid-game? Started before beta. don't want to give you irrelevant feedback.

Herrbear · Post by **Herrbear** » Sat Sep 12, 2009 8:05 pm

ORIGINAL: Brad Hunter

Unit 5172 - 275th USAAF Base Force - permanently attached to SWPAC ("white letters" v. "yellow letters").

I think its HQ should be 100 West Coast instead of 104 SW Pac.

Herrbear · Post by **Herrbear** » Sat Sep 12, 2009 8:58 pm

ORIGINAL: Gary D

The 99th and 100th Indian Brigades posted to Colombo start scenario 6 with a morale of zero.

That is OK. From the editor manual on page 36. "Morale indicates the overall morale of the ground unit‘s personnel. This should be between 0 and 99. If a 0 is entered, the unit will assume the standard experience for a ground unit given the nationality and time of arrival."

Jonathan Pollard · Post by **Jonathan Pollard** » Sat Sep 12, 2009 9:19 pm

The absence of partisans on Hainan island could be an issue.  I read that partisan activity there was extensive.  I found a map of Japanese objectives in China for December 1941 that includes operations on Hainan Island on a par with the Hong Kong area.
 

Smeulders · Post by **Smeulders** » Sat Sep 12, 2009 10:00 pm

Question about Madras Fort, in it's TOE, there are 100 naval support squads, but even though replacements are on and many are in the pools, they aren't getting any. Looking at the editor, it is has an initial 100 motorized support squads in the same slot as the naval has in the TOE (weapon 8). Could this be the cause of them not upgrading and if it is, is this WAD ?

Also noticed that the 2/11 Armoured Car Bn (Australian unit) starts with device 1078 Marmon Herringtons, but has device 1094 Marmon Herringtons in its TOE.

Edit so I don't have to double post:

Found out that it is possible to 'skip' certain device upgrades, for example NZ militia upgrading straight to the NZ inf 43'. However, in other test this wouldn't work (for example, device 921 radar to device 1048 has device 922 and 923 in between). Interesting with this path is that the final device is available 6/42, but intermediary stages are only available 1/44. Is this WAD to eliminate the shortcut ?

Montbrun · Post by **Montbrun** » Sun Sep 13, 2009 5:59 pm

v1084d - Device 6082 - 3rd RAN Base Force - has British "colors" (tan) rather than Australian "colors" (green).

Dr. Duh · Post by **Dr. Duh** » Sun Sep 13, 2009 11:24 pm

v1084-Scen 1

There are several land units at Manila and Clark Field that start the scenario with movement orders already.
These movement orders are to either Bataan or Clark Field, yet the move direction on all these units is East, and they do in fact attempt to move to the east.

By reissuing the order (reset the destination), they start moving correctly towards the destination.

Dr. Duh · Post by **Dr. Duh** » Sun Sep 13, 2009 11:30 pm

I wasn't going to look through 100's of pages of posts, so I don't know if this is a known issue or not -

Since "Asiatic Fleet" is a subordinate HQ to a restricted HQ, it itself is restricted, however units reporting to it are not restricted. I have a feeling this is not intended. Is it a problem that you can't make subordinate HQ's restricted?

There is a similar issue with the AirHQ in Singapore.

AE Land and AI Issues [OUTDATED]

RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance

RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance

RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance

RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance

RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance

RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance

RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance

RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance

RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance

RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance

RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance

RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance

RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance

RE: AI Air Combat loss tolerance

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread

RE: Admirals Edition Land Thread