Those single M8, AC's again

dazkaz15 · Post by **dazkaz15** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 5:45 am

Anyone else having problems with these single M8 AC's again?

In the total carnage patch the problem seemed to be cured, but I'm having problems again with them in v 4.6.274
They retreat readily enough once down to the last M8 but it just seems ridiculously hard to get that last one,
It wouldn't be so bad if you could just ignore them, but the problem is they spot for the devastating artillery.

Its very hard to provide a conclusive save for this as you have to chase them all over the map, while being bombarded.

Before I go to extreme lengths to provide saves for all these situations can anyone help to confirm this please?
The best place to find them is in the Losheim Gap scenario in the north.

To save chasing them all over the map, which is extremely difficult, due to being constantly bombarded, once you have reduced the unit down to 1 M8, bombard it with everything you have on the map, and see if you can destroy it.
If no one else is having the problem then I guess I am just fixated on them now, and I'm sure I can fix myself with appropriate therapy[:'(]

Repsol · Post by **Repsol** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 7:56 am

Hello

I'm not only having trouble with the M8s...I often have to chase all kinds of "almost" destroyed units around the map to finish them off.
Resulting in having to issiue a number of unnecesary attack orders and waisting time.
It would be good if we could get a DESTROY UNIT order that would tell a friendly unit to engage AND FOLLOW the enemy unit until it gets wiped out.
Or maybe even better to have some kind of checkbox in the attack order ("HUNT AND KILL DEPLETED ENEMY UNITS") to tell our units to do just that.

Almost killed off enemies is a pain in the ass...Like you said they provide spotting and also more ofthen then not mess with the supply lines

I understand that this could lead to some problems when motorised units are told to follow foot-units into woods or across crossingpoints for example but maybe when that happens we could get a message informing us that
"we are unable to follow the eneamy unit an further"...

BletchleyGeek · Post by **BletchleyGeek** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 8:42 am

Daz,

I just tried the test scenario simovitch made to get a hold on these 'super Greyhounds'. Check it out here

https://www.dropbox.com/s/w4e8yxrbkh3g6 ... n-Sqdn.cos

Just send the StuG company on an attack order right on top of the objective, leaving all settings to their defaults. After 5 runs, I see the all the Greyhounds being destroyed - and the squadron retreating - between 1 and 2 hours after the scenario starts. I reckon that's quite reasonable, as long as those vehicles aren't charging on the StuG's or something funny.

dazkaz15 · Post by **dazkaz15** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 10:30 am

Thanks Miguel
Maybe it is a problem with the smaller units then, Platoon size, rather than Coy size.

This is a situation I micro managed to achieve in the North.
After the initial orders at the start of the scenario I ignored the rest of the map and just concentrated on this Village, Krewinkel.
I never managed the attack properly, it was just a quick thing to recreate a situation.
This is the first try to do so, not some recreated situation that took X number of times to recreate.

During daylight I attacked it with just the 3 StuG Bty 244 StuG Bde, but this was unsuccessful, which was fair enough as the enemy unit was dug into the Village.
This series of saves picks up on the night attack by 2 Bty's of StuG and the Feldersatz Bn, micromanaged individually.
Ill Dropbox them later.

I have to get back to work so don't have time to annotate them I afraid.
The image is a surrender one.

dazkaz15 · Post by **dazkaz15** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 10:41 am

This is the situation at D1 2040

If you look around the map you will see it is littered with units with one M8 left (yellow circle)

Bare in mind that I have given no orders to the other units on the map for hours, I just concentrated on micromanaging the units in Krewinlel.

dazkaz15 · Post by **dazkaz15** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 11:11 am

This situation is particularly of interest.
It is the 1 Pl A Trp 18 Cav Rec Sqn trying to get past 3 Cay 294 Gren Regt who is dug in.

BletchleyGeek · Post by **BletchleyGeek** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 11:22 am

Daz,

thanks for the saves. I'll go through the logs we get of fires, and see if there's anything untoward.

Picture #1 is the interesting one. I need to see if those StuG's are engaging the Greyhounds, and if so, how is that engagement developing. The built-up terrain is certainly a complication. I need to assess if it's a reasonable complication, though.

In Picture #2 I don't see a problem at all, sincerely.

In Picture #3 I need to check ranges, but I am not too sure if that Coy is close enough to fire any panzerfausts. It should be using Panzerschreks at some point, though, if there are any on hand. Besides that, both units are resting, which seems to mean they're politely ignoring each other.

dazkaz15 · Post by **dazkaz15** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 11:53 am

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek

In Picture #2 I don't see a problem at all, sincerely.

Thanks for looking into this mate.

Picture #2 shows that there is always one that escapes, and then becomes a supper unit all on its own.
The rest of the members of the Platoon seems to take damage normally, and in what seems a reasonable time, but the remaining M8 then becomes a supper indestructible entity.

Also in that image you can see the proximity of the Recon Pl that retreated from Krewinkle, that then ran into the depooyed 3 Bty 244 StuG.
Also the heavily engaged 1 Rec Pl that manages to escape yet again.
Also 1 Pl A Trp 18 Cav Rec Sqn still with its full compliment of M8's as it starts to push into the dug in 3 Coy 294 Gren Regt, most of which are quickly destroyed except for the last one, that keeps going almost indefinitely [:'(]

dazkaz15 · Post by **dazkaz15** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:20 pm

Come morning it is still being engaged.
What is interesting and may be the problem is note how there is a discrepancy between the Genearl info and the E&S tab in the number of AFV in the unit.

dazkaz15 · Post by **dazkaz15** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 5:02 pm

I've just added another 3 files to your Dropbox Miguel, to cover the early morning engagement as in the image above.

dazkaz15 · Post by **dazkaz15** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 7:13 pm

This will be a mini AAR over the next few days to demonstrate the problem of these small units resilience.

The problem might not be specifically limited to just M8 AC's.
It may just be small units of Platoon size, and it happens to be that the ones with the M8's in are the first I have come across so far in the new patch.
Or it may just be that they have the speed and agility to get away.
Ill let you guys decide.

Image 1

dazkaz15 · Post by **dazkaz15** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 7:54 pm

Image 2

BletchleyGeek · Post by **BletchleyGeek** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 8:08 pm

Daz,

I've prepared three different tests to look into what you report. In the first test case, which you can download here

https://www.dropbox.com/s/i6kfxnw5udq2t ... on-Plt.cos

we have a US Recon Squadroon Platoon, equipped with M8's and Jeeps, confronting a StuG battery.

The result is compatible with my original test case. Note that in my screenshots I'm taking advantage of the debugging capabilities of the dev build, where one can lift FOW and get a peek into the "truth".

BletchleyGeek · Post by **BletchleyGeek** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 8:09 pm

Same participants, changing the setting from the fields NE of Manhay to Manhay itself. You can check the scenario here

https://www.dropbox.com/s/15sugo9n0gwzo ... errain.cos

and the result is not too different, maybe it takes somewhat longer.

BletchleyGeek · Post by **BletchleyGeek** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 8:11 pm

Third and final test, the same platoon, holed up in the town at night. Check the scenario here

https://www.dropbox.com/s/umgahjy820afe ... -Night.cos

In the first run one Greyhound survives (yet the platoon retreats from the town).

BletchleyGeek · Post by **BletchleyGeek** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 8:12 pm

Does this mean there is an issue? Second and similarly in further runs, we get this

BletchleyGeek · Post by **BletchleyGeek** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 8:13 pm

The Greyhounds have been destroyed. See the "true" unit details, without any FOW

BletchleyGeek · Post by **BletchleyGeek** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 8:24 pm

So really, there aren't super M8s any more. There are other things that worry me, but I defer to Dave to look into them:

[*] Units routing and retreating, shouldn't be able to spot for artillery. I just checked, and indeed, they're explicitly excluded when the engine checks for fires. Units recovering from a rout or a retreat can request artillery support. I'm not sure if we need to be here more 'pessimistic' about the abilities of 'defeated' units.

[*] In the runs where the Greyhounds are all destroyed in the third test case, I do see that the platoon isn't retreating when I reckon that a real-life platoon commander would recognize that its command is overmatched and would pull out quicker than I do see units in the game doing. Dave and me have been discussing this - whether or not, and how likely should units recovering from routs and retreats to abandon their positions if they find themselves under significant enemy threat. Dave can explain the rationale for the final decision better than I can. For full disclosure, this matter was brought up by davidx remarks, after I eliminated all other possible reasons for the kind of regular steadfastness that davidx was complaining about.

Let me suggest something to you Daz. I love your AAR's but I reckon you're working too much. If you want to illustrate particular situations, I invite you to make little scenarios like these I made. This will allow to test what you see in a "real" game, and see if it carries over to a test game where you try to reproduce the conditions you consider to be causing a problem. This has helped me a lot to understand CommandOps.

EDIT: Re-redacted the last paragraph.

dazkaz15 · Post by **dazkaz15** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 9:17 pm

Thanks for your time on this mate.
I'm starting to feel guilty I'm holding things up.
I don't mind at all if you want to sign off on this and move on.
A lot of this is subjective and situational.

I'm having problems playing the last 3 scenarios you sent. See the error in the image below.
I have made scenarios specifically for testing before, but I don't think you can get a good feel if things are right unless you play them.
That's why I much prefer the AAR way of doing things.
Besides I enjoy doing it [;)]

Just a note on your testing.
That was a bit of overkill, sending in the Elite 1 Coy 1 SS Pz Regt against an armoured car Platoon [:'(]

I think my way of doing things might be a bit more representative [:D]

The situation that worries me the most is the one from RE: Those single M8, AC's again - 3/5/2014 1:11:09 PM
What was going on there?
3 guys were causing casualties to a dug in Coy, and causing them to retreat? A ghost AFV that is in one list but not the other?

I'm going to carry on with my AAR but like I said, I have no problem if you want to sign off on it.
Other than this small issue it plays great so far.
Much better than v 4.6.272, I never did manage to play 4.6.273 first nor last.

Txema · Post by **Txema** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 9:26 pm

And what about this, Bletchey Geek?

Any explanation for that?

Perhaps the bug only happens when you are NOT in debugging mode...

ORIGINAL: dazkaz15

Come morning it is still being engaged.
What is interesting and may be the problem is note how there is a discrepancy between the Genearl info and the E&S tab in the number of AFV in the unit.