Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 January 2012 (2nd part)

[beppi]

Hello, i currentyly have a problem to recombine a unit in an ongoing PBEM. We currently use the m7 or m8 patch (not 100% sure which one) and i cannot recombine a unit. Unit is the 25th Indian at Bhamo. Switched targets and op modes multiple times but still unable to recombine. Did not see any fixes in that case for the newer patches so could you take a look at it.

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: beppi

Hello, i currentyly have a problem to recombine a unit in an ongoing PBEM. We currently use the m7 or m8 patch (not 100% sure which one) and i cannot recombine a unit. Unit is the 25th Indian at Bhamo. Switched targets and op modes multiple times but still unable to recombine. Did not see any fixes in that case for the newer patches so could you take a look at it.

The '**' indicates a weapon that is not the same between units. In this case the 3in Mortar. One or more of them have upgraded to the 43/06 version.

[jcjordan]

Just downloaded this beta & liking what changes I see but one question, if I buy a destroy land unit how long before it comes available?

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: jcjordan

Just downloaded this beta & liking what changes I see but one question, if I buy a destroy land unit how long before it comes available?

I comes back at 1% (?) strength. How long depends on available devices in pool for it to take replacements.

[michaelm75au]

I am adding a new column to the 'soft' values on the Army list screen.
It will show the % active strength of the unit - this corresponds to the first value of the (XX/XX) that shows on the unit screen itself (% of active devices compared to TOE numbers).
I found it useful after looking into another issue.

The next beta changes should be intersting when viewed with this value.[:D]

[PaxMondo]

Nice!!
 
Thanks.

[Rainer]

That's great!
Thanks Michael [:)]

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: michaelm


The next beta changes should be intersting when viewed with this value.[:D]

This column shall make me cry I fear. Too much knowledge. [8D]

[michaelm75au]

With that picture above, goes an analysis of a combat between those CHI units and some Japanese units.
Situation:
A base is held by those 10 CHI units - an INF and ENG unit with some combat potential, the INF having a reasonable amount of its TOE; 3 INF with little but ranged weapons (art and mortars); and a couple of HQs with support only.
The IJA has 5 INF divisions plus an ART unit; the ART and 2 of the INF are at almost full strength; the other 3 INF vary between 75% and 55% of TOE strength.
This is the result currently. Those 10 CHI wont budge, and take very little losses despite being out-numbered.
The breakdown and reason for this will follow.
-------------------------------------
Japanese Deliberate attack
Attacking force 58083 troops, 641 guns, 180 vehicles, Assault Value = 1858
Defending force 14065 troops, 119 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 505

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 0)

Japanese Assault reduces fortifications to 0
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), preparation(-), morale(-), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
      1582 casualties reported
        Squads: 7 destroyed, 119 disabled
        Non Combat: 4 destroyed, 82 disabled
        Engineers: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled


Allied ground losses:
      187 casualties reported
        Squads: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
        Non Combat: 3 destroyed, 26 disabled
        Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

[michaelm75au]

Attacks against the CHI INF and ENG with AV do cause some damage.
However, against the remainder of CHI little if any is being caused.
1. Most of these units consist of long-ranged devices. Devices with a range of 3+ are not affected by assaults (deemed behind the lines). So even if the IJA units managed to hit the unit, no damage is caused.
2. Most of the CHI units have a high number of support devices. The way that damage is spread is that there is an equal chance that any device will get hit. Thus if there is 80 Support and 20 squads, then 80% of the time expect a Support device to get hit.

My 'tweak' is twofold.
1. Combat assault units (INF, ARM, CD) with no AV will be treated as if ART when determing position in a stack of units - land combat stacks normally consist of assault-tye unit block followed by the non-assault unit block; each block is randomly sort so that the order/damage of combat varies. This means that assault units should be the brunt of attack/defence in a non-bombardment. Also, there will be some randomness whether the ranged device will be within range of the assault. eg the 81mm mortars might be up-front supplying direct support to the defenders.
2. Support devices will have less impact on losses. In the above example, the unit with 80 Support and 20 squads would have damage allocated as if it was 9 Support and 20 squads - higher chance that the squads will bear the brunt of the assault damage. Basic rule of thumb is count 1 for every 10 Support plus one for good measure.

It will be interesting to see how this will impact land combat, especially in China.

New results:
Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 58083 troops, 641 guns, 180 vehicles, Assault Value = 1858
Defending force 14056 troops, 119 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 503

Japanese forces CAPTURE

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), preparation(-), morale(-), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
2324 casualties reported
Squads: 21 destroyed, 209 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 24 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 21 disabled

Allied ground losses:
5785 casualties reported
Squads: 155 destroyed, 143 disabled
Non Combat: 138 destroyed, 60 disabled
Engineers: 34 destroyed, 4 disabled
Guns lost 16 (16 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units retreated 10


Defeated Allied Units Retreating!

[jmalter]

hi michaelm,

want to confirm that that 1108p3 beta has fixed my moan wrt refueling, also that at-sea re-arming from Repl TF AEs now seems to distribute equally amongst the available AEs instead of using them one-by-one. i really appreciate that you respond quickly to the user-comments on your betas, imo it's really high-end support & i thank you for your efforts.

i've also noticed your new fixes to the airbase counts, these seem to have calmed down for me in my Downfall scenario, i think they're pert' accurate. one prob i notice in my game-play, i can't tell when an airbase is truly overstacked, or whether it's getting a capacity-bonus from air-HQs that aid its capacity inside an HQ's command-radius.

best regards,
jM

[BigDuke66]

Is further testing of this new land combat way planed or will we see it in the next build?

[michaelm75au]

I can only test so much.[:D]

I intend to drop it here and see how flies.
If it doesn't work or causes too much strife, I'll just roll it back out.
It should only really affect combat where there is no 'real' combat units.

I have one or two people playing around with it.
These are the changes that may or may not be kept.
Tweaked Land combat: Made support devices less likely targets (basically every 10 counts as 1 for target purposes) [MEM]
(Took forever to get hits on combat devices if unit has large support base, like CHI LCUs)
Tweaked Land combat: Inf,Arm,CD LCUs with no current AV are treated like Art for stacking purposes (not made to bear brunt of attack if other AV units present) [MEM]
(Many CHI units end up with much ranged devices but nothing to defend with. But took no loss against the ranged devices in assault)

Other changes for [1108p4] include:
Fixed Overflow of pilot array corrupting map locations [MEM]
Changed Restricted HQ indicator changed from (R) to (R) for temp and [R] for perm attached [MEM]
Tweaked Added "Tonnage" to map taskforce mouse over [MEM]
Changed Made sure group secondary mission gets reset when primary mission changed from NAV_ATTACK [MEM]
Fixed Radar range on air detection was overstated by a factor of 2 or 3. Wrong mix of ft, yds, nm, miles [MEM]
Tweaked Added depth check on DC in ASW combat [DCB]
Added On Army list sceen, 'soft' value of %TOE strength and unit fortifcation level with 'p' to show unit is building them (LCUs in hex only) [MEM]

Due to the land combat changes, I would suggest that PBEM players might want to wait and see how these changes affect play first.

[Iron Duke]

request

on the load troops screen would it be possible to add the 'target' column from the LCU screen . To aid sorting/loading lcu on to TF's

thanks for the continued above and beyond support [&o][&o]

[BigDuke66]

GREAT!

Tweaked Added depth check on DC in ASW combat [DCB]

Will this mean more danger or less danger for subs? That is the only thing I feel at the moment that runs too good, the dutch subs are scoring a lot hits but losses are zero till now were historically they would have lost already 4 subs.

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: Iron Duke

request

on the load troops screen would it be possible to add the 'target' column from the LCU screen . To aid sorting/loading lcu on to TF's

thanks for the continued above and beyond support [&o][&o]

It already does. Or is there some else???

[Iron Duke]

sorry must have missed it - not running under a Beta -just the last official update

[Rainer]

I can only test so much.
Due to the land combat changes, I would suggest that PBEM players might want to wait and see how these changes affect play first.

I use it now for my ongoing campaign against AI (Allied vs AI, currently 8 Oct 1943).
Will report anything I spot.

I named the archived version 11084pre (the opening screen says "1.0.6.11084").
As I understand it this version is sort of pre-released 11084, correct?

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

I can only test so much.[:D]

...

Due to the land combat changes, I would suggest that PBEM players might want to wait and see how these changes affect play first.

Updating and testing. Let you know if anything untoward is found. The adjustments sound great though ...

[michaelm75au]

[1108p4]
Fixed Overflow of pilot array corrupting map locations [MEM]
Changed Restricted HQ indicator changed from (R) to (R) for temp and [R] for perm attached [MEM]
Tweaked Added "Tonnage" to map taskforce mouse over [MEM]
Changed Made sure group secondary mission gets reset when primary mission changed from NAV_ATTACK [MEM]
Fixed Radar range on air detection was overstated by a factor of 2 or 3. Wrong mix of ft, yds, nm, miles [MEM]
Tweaked Added depth check on DC in ASW combat [DCB]
Added On Army list sceen, 'soft' value of %TOE strength and unit fortifcation level with 'p' to show unit is building them (LCUs in hex only) [MEM]

I have excluded the land combat change at this time. They will form part of p5
Post #33 above still has the p4 plus the land combat changes in it.