Control of ports - bug

[pjg100]

Playing hotseat v 1.10.
Turn 1: One para lands in Portsmouth, another in the hex to the northwest. UK units in the two hexes to the west of Portsmouth, and a sub in the port. Axis units destroy the sub. So, at the end of the turn Portsmouth is Axis controlled and there is no Allied unit in the port. However, the port remains Allied controlled.
Turn 2: Allies run a CL into the port, past two Axis subs stationed outside the port. The port remains Allied controlled, even though Portsmouth is Axis controlled.
Turn 3: Axis destroy the CL in the port and retain control of Portsmouth. However, the port remains Allied controlled.
I then quit the game and reload. Upon reloading, the port is Axis controlled.

[Harrybanana]

I have noticed this before as well. If you capture a City with a port attached that is not occupied by a naval unit the port will automatically revert to your control. But if the port is occupied by an enemy units it will remain enemy controlled until you:

1. An enemy naval unit no longer occupies the port, and
2. You reoccupy the City with attached port (either by moving the occupying unit out an then back in or else moving a different unit in).

[Hubert Cater]

Hi pjg100,

If you have a saved turn or two where I can repeat the behaviour that would be great as I'm having a hard time repeating it on my end. Please send to support@furysoftware.com

For example, if I capture a town attached to a port and there is an enemy naval unit in that port, if I destroy that enemy naval unit with my land unit attacker the port immediately switches to my control. However, the only exception I've found is if I destroy the naval unit with an air unit (after I've already captured the adjacent town) then the port does not switch control over to me.

Is this similar in your case where you destroy the naval unit in port with your air unit?

Also, I am unable to re-create the situation where I load a save and the port control changes due to that so if you have a save that I can repeat this with, that would be great as well.

Hubert

[sschnar1]

Hubert,

This is similar, not the same, to the my report 'FYI:Santa Cruz' of 09/17/2017.
Where Spain has surrendered to the Allies, and there was a German Sub in the Port of Santa Cruz.
All the scripts fired properly, Island ALLIES, Port AXIS, for the rest of the game.

I would loved to have seen the script to do what it did, but the moment the Sub left port, the port should change to the control of what the island currently is.

[Hubert Cater]

With v1.10 this should now happen but there is a rare exception for the case where there is an enemy land unit adjacent that port at the end of your turn that is not in a town/city also adjacent to that port. I've corrected this for the next update.

This just means if in the example above the adjacent town is captured and the naval unit in the port is not destroyed by the capturing land unit, but rather by an air unit, at the end of the turn, if there are no adjacent enemy land units to that port then it will now switch to your control.

[pjg100]

Hubert,

The behavior you describe is exactly what happened in my hotseat game - captured the town then destroyed the naval unit in the port with an air unit.

I don't have a save to send you. However, upon reflection I think it likely that the port finally changed hands because I amphibbed an HQ into Southampton, not because I reloaded.

So do I understand correctly that in the next update the behavior described above will no longer occur, so if you capture a town attached to a port, then destroy a naval unit in the port with an air unit rather than the land unit that captured the port, and there are no other adjacent resources, then the port will change hands even if there is an enemy unit adjacent to the port?

[Hubert Cater]

Yes as there are two main routines that handle the capturing of an adjacent port, the first one is when a land unit captures a town (or adjacent hexes to the port) and if under the right circumstances as outlined in the rule changes for v1.10, the port will fall under the control of that land unit as well.

The second is at the end of the turn where there are checks to see if ports should switch control.

In your case, since you destroyed the naval unit by air after the land unit captured the town, the first check does not apply, so the second, at the end of the turn check would apply, but this second check was not quite working properly and should now work under the same set of port capturing rules outlined in v1.10 for when land units move and capture adjacent towns etc.

[pjg100]

Thanks Hubert. When do you think the patch implementing this fix will be released?

[Hubert Cater]

Looks like next week [:)]

[Hubert Cater]

Just a quick update that we are now in the process of finalizing the next update and due to the number of reports and required fixes it will be a Beta update before we push out the official update some time after that. This is just to double check and ensure that we haven't missed anything or even worse introduced an error accidentally.

We are just doing our last bit of testing on our end as well as coordinating with the Matrix Production team, so the word is it will be some time next week and it will be v1.10.01 Beta.

I strongly encourage those that want to play with all the latest fixes/adjustments including the Subs and ASW research fix, to test it out when it is ready, including in PBEM++ as this will give us our best feedback to ensure a smooth official follow up release.

Thanks and thanks again for your patience,
Hubert

[KorutZelva]

There is a case where a port is in a tile that's between two cities, they can retain control of the port even if its not connected.

Let's say the axis takes Antwerp but there is an allied unit in Ypres, they will retain control of Antwerp's port.

Dunno if its WAD.

[Hubert Cater]

That is working as designed as the port is 'technically' connected to both cities even if it looks like it favors Antwerp. It is a bit of a downside to the new rules, but to keep things simpler overall the code looks at it this way, i.e. being equally adjacent to both cities as otherwise we'd have to manually set this association per port in game.

For example, there are other parts of the map where the positioning of the port is not entirely obvious to be 'attached' to the adjacent city (if we tried to set it simply based on how the port is faced or positioned so we would still need to do manual associations) yet logically speaking we understand that it belongs to the adjacent city nonetheless when quickly scanning the map.

Danzig, Ancona, Thessaloniki, Corfu, Gallipoli, Norfolk, Port Said are examples of these.

A city/port area like Leningrad is probably the closest we have in game where it would make sense to need to control both those city hexes before the northern port is fully under control.

[KorutZelva]

I figured it might be ok because the UK AI needs that port to dunkirk it up at the first sign of trouble.