version 2.09

[JohnOsb]

When opening the scenario editor and selecting player 2, I see Soviet (1979-1989) User but don't see Soviet (1979-1989) Modified.

[cbelva]

John is the Modified version one that you did and resaved with name Soviet (1979-1989) Modified?

[JohnOsb]

No the database I created is labeled "WP-User" which shows, not the Soviet modified, the Soviet user shows.

Note: I just load version 2.09 on my other computer and it is not showing on it either.

[cbelva]

I think the "Soviet User" is the "Soviet Modified". At one time I believe that Jim used the world modified, but it was changed to User. But that was a long time ago. We have not had a data file named Soviet (1979-1989) Modified for a long time. I show Soviet (1979-1989) and Soviet (1979-1989) User which should be the only data files from us for the Soviets side. In fact each country should have only two data files, the locked official OTS data set and the USER data set. Other than that I don't know where the Soviet (1979-1989) Modified file came from.

PS--I just check my 2.08 version and it did not have a Soviet (1979-1989) Modified file.

PSS--There should not be a "Soviet (1979-1989) Modified" from us. If you have one, someone else must have created it.

[CapnDarwin]

"Modified" is a tag on a data file that is different from the OTS baseline. I will check with Rob this evening on the exact trigger for that too show up.

[Tazak]

Adding this as I think it may be related.

Using the scenario I'm working on, I updated via the "Refresh underlying scenario data", I then saved the scenario file (and renamed with new version number to v0.3e), played it a while then went to edit v0.3e file when I got the 2 following issues.

The right hand error message pops up first, then it blanks out the "player 2" selection and completely hides the player 2 force selection (literally its not there as in after "mission briefing for player 1" the next available screen is "mission briefing for player 2"

I was using the stock Soviet XLS rather than a custom xls. Whereas the US was a custom xls.

I've also tried editing a stock scenario and get the same error for both player forces and hides both force selection screens

It appears that the scenario editor doesn't like the old version stock XLS, will try creating a new scenario with 2.09b then saving and trying to re-edit

[CapnDarwin]

A few things for Rob and I to look at tonight. [X(]

[Tazak]

I've looked at 2.08 (steam version) against 2.09b (matrix version) and I suspect there is a naming convention issue.

In 2.08 there is a "US(1979-1989)" and a "US(1979-1989) User", but 2.09b there is "US(1979-1989) User" and "US(1979-1989)modified"

This might be why the game is blocking/ignoring the older stock XLS files

[CapnDarwin]

Looks like the file ID tags are messed up on 2.09. We should be able to hoxfix this quickly this evening I would think. Thanks for the pictures.

[JohnOsb]

Thanks, Tazak, next time I will add popup pictures [:)] at least I wasn't going crazy trying to explain this [:D]

[ivanov]

In my 2.09 the orders are still a complete mess. Take a look at the screenshot: the helo should be moving to the waypoint at 1348, while next action is going to take a place at 1402.


hosting imagenes

This is happening all the time. The orders don't get executed or the units move too fast ignoring the order delay. Am I the only one experiencing this? I haven't seen any other players reporting this serious issue.

[Tazak]

Katukov, your screenshot does show a unusually high amount of time to move 1 hex for a helicopter unit and the 'next action' timings seem 'off'

Key questions I think are - what scenario - what is the local EW hindrance level - what time did you issue the orders, what readiness levels

I suspect there may be an issue with airborne units which aren't the majority units in scenarios

Stock scenario played as Russians - WL_AS 3rd Herd

Both sets of orders are issued at 1328hours - local EW hindrance is High, both units are +95% readiness

Ground unit BRDM-2 AT4
assault move 4 hexes then assault move 1 further hex then hold (all on road)
first waypoint reached at 1422
final waypoint reached at 1424
next action at 1416

Helicopter Mi24V Hind
assault move 4 hexes then assault move 1 further hex then screen
first waypoint reached at 1345
final waypoint reached at 1345
next action at 1342

Edit: both units are within their HQ range and their HQ is within higher HQ range

The order delay can be seen in that it takes 48minutes for the ground unit to start moving (1328hours to "next action at 1416hours")
Helicopter/airborne units have always suffered less from order delays - 14minutes (1328hours to "next action at 1342hours")

The helicopter unit suffers 1/3 of the normal order delay but I'm not sure if that is inline with the Dev's expectations

[ivanov]

ORIGINAL: Tazak

Katukov, your screenshot does show a unusually high amount of time to move 1 hex for a helicopter unit and the 'next action' timings seem 'off'

I use liberally order delays. During the turn 1, I set 3 waypoints for the units and keep delaying the second and third, so they cannot be reached by the end of the order cycle. Then I edit them further during the next turn. So that's the reason why it takes the helo a long time to move between the waypoints. What I've noticed, is that sometimes the minutes from order delays get transfer to the next cycle and when you delete them, the delayed timing and the original timing don't add up. This doesn't happen only with the helicopters. Sometimes the units ignore the order delays. I often have units ordered to reach the first waypoint in the last minute of the cycle and remaining waypoints are supposed to be reached in the next cycle. But the units ignore the delay and move to the two remaining ones immediately.

I think that if you mess around a little with the waypoints, the whole timing of the game gets broken.

How does the EW should impact the orders? Can it delay only execution of the new orders or doest it affect also the orders that are already being executed? Can EW cause the units to skip or further delay the order delays?

[Tazak]

AFAIK order delay mainly affects the issuing of new orders and that EW does impact that, you can test it by changing low & high EW hindrance - there is a major difference.

As to delays in changing waypoint timings or just adjusting waypoints after the initial orders are given, there is a lower penalty compared to the order delay when issuing new orders, again I believe there is a EW impact but not 100% sure of the amount of impact

[cbelva]

katukov, First let me state that we will keep looking at and testing for this issue to make sure that timing has not becoming corrupted. We have had problems in the past with timing and I expect that we will again. Also, fixing one problem can cause others.

However, after reading your posts I am not so sure that this is a bug and in reality is an intended feature. As a former staff officer, I can tell you that one of the hardest elements to plan for in any operation is timing. And more times than we like to admit, our time tables rarely work the way we planned. There are so many variables in a military operation that can upset and change timing and time tables that neither the commander or his staff have control over. And these changes happen on the fly. Some of the variables in the game are EW (as previously noted), distance from hqs (are all involved hqs within the command radius of their next higher), morale of the unit, readiness of the unit, training, average readiness of force, radio activity, even luck us built into the game (I once was sent by jeep to deliver movement orders to a unit and got delayed because my jeep got suck in mud enroute--so the unit missed it time table). There are things that can happen during the turn resolution that can upset and change a units time table. You can plan and set your time table and then press the turn button and then the unit not move because of a number of things (enemy activity is just one thing). Even something bad happening to a sister unit can cause a unit to loose morale/readiness and affect its timing. These are some of the frustrating things that real live commanders have to deal with, but also learn to accept.

One thing that is very hard on a unit and makes it difficult for it to keep up with its time table is changing orders on the fly while the unit is executing its previous orders. I noticed that you are issuing orders and then changing them after the unit has started executing them. Right now we allow the changing of orders on the fly (i.e. adjusting of waypoints). This feature was debated by the development team. Some of the players after the game was released have not liked this feature and consider it a "cheat".  I argued for it because it is something that a commander can do. However, there are consequences built into the game for doing so. Anytime you make changes on the fly, you are causing major problems for the local commander. This is reflected in the game. In real life it is not easy to redirect a unit once they have started executing their orders. You will notice in your screen shot that their is a "+" after the times. This tells you that the time is an estimate. There are too many variables affecting the unit's ability to properly forecast its timing. It is the unit's way of telling you that it will get there when it gets there (sometime after the time shown). Is that frustrating to the commander--very much so. However a good commander and his staff will expect and plan for these problems.

Here is the bottom line, you should view the times listed as estimates. If everything goes as planned those are the times you should expect. Then expect things not to go as you planned. Is it frustrating--yes. It is in real life too. One feature that is not tracked in this game is units arriving in the wrong location. That happens too in real life You give a unit orders to move to A and then arrive in E telling you that they are at A. You believe that they are at A and then things go bad real fast.

Again, I am not going to say that there is NO bug in the timing chain. The other night I found a bug in the AI timing. Rob fixed it and broke something in the players timing. These things happen real easy. We will continue to track this. We also encourage you to continue posting (on this and any other issue) on what you think is not working or not realistic and we will look at it. We really do appreciate all the bug reports we get from you guys. And every one of them gets discussed in our meetings. 

I am not trying to dismiss your complaint, only give you some things to think about.

[ivanov]

I've always considered that the odd timing may be caused by some factors that you've mentioned. Sometimes it may be true to some degree, but not in extreme cases, when for example unit doesn't move at all, or in the situations when all the platoons of the company follow the delay order, while the company HQ charges towards the enemy. So I'm pretty much convinced that there's something wrong with the timing of order execution. Of course I will keep an eye on it and report back all the issues.

[CapnDarwin]

As for the "modified" files, I will post a replacement fpfiles.txt file this evening when I get home from work. It looks like an older version was folded into the zip files.

[cbelva]

katukov, As you find examples that you believe demonstrate a problem, please post a saved game file or send it to me directly along with an explanation of what you had done and we will look into it. Thanks

[ivanov]

Will do.

[governato]

Here is the bottom line, you should view the times listed as estimates. If everything goes as planned those are the times you should expect. Then expect things not to go as you planned. Is it frustrating--yes. It is in real life too. One feature that is not tracked in this game is units arriving in the wrong location. That happens too in real life You give a unit orders to move to A and then arrive in E telling you that they are at A. You believe that they are at A and then things go bad real fast.

A bit of a digression: I remember reading that Red Army FRONT commanders did not know (or had wrong info) about where entire ARMIES under their command where in Summer 41 and 42.. It will be great fun when these kind of eventualities will be incorporated into PC wargames. I definitely praise the FPC (and a few other games) of letting the AI handle the low level decisions. It is a great step in that direction and I think this is the way to go even for operational games at scales larger than FPC. You guys have a good plan for the next few years, but given the 'old' approach of other current games (WITE comes to mind) maybe one day you should consider taking on division+ scales as well.