Asking for support for strange land movement problem in an assault.

Post bug reports and ask for help with other issues here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Post Reply
Diliwitm
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2024 3:54 pm

Asking for support for strange land movement problem in an assault.

Post by Diliwitm »

For more details https://forums.matrixgames.com/viewtopic.php?t=413039 - also can repost here if necessary.
PBEM version 1.8.11.28.4 Mar 04 2023

Assault/shock river attack from 88,43(from North) against Chengchow 88,44

D Day -1 24 September 1942
all units were in 88,43 and moved already in 44 miles to Chengchow 88,44. They were following in combat movement the 36 ID direct combat movement to Chengchow.

D day turn 25 September 1942

2 tank regiments the only armored units following and 36 Infantry division itself instead of going to Chengchow went magically to Kaifeng and these 3 units are now said to have moved 2 miles to Chengchow from Kaifeng.

It is important to stress that the 36 Infantry division that magically moved sideways to Kaifeng was the unit being followed by all others. But those units assaulted Chengchow, except 2 armored units that followed 36 ID to Kaifeng.

1- Can Matrix run the turn and check it, Both our sides would have to give the passwords. Since this is a PBEM has been a big investment from both sides that is why i am asking.

2- would a game version downgrade be a viable alternative to try?

2- other ideas?
User avatar
btd64
Posts: 14338
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:48 am
Location: Lancaster, OHIO

Re: Asking for support for strange land movement problem in an assault.

Post by btd64 »

Diliwitm wrote: Tue Sep 23, 2025 5:12 pm For more details https://forums.matrixgames.com/viewtopic.php?t=413039 - also can repost here if necessary.
PBEM version 1.8.11.28.4 Mar 04 2023

Assault/shock river attack from 88,43(from North) against Chengchow 88,44

D Day -1 24 September 1942
all units were in 88,43 and moved already in 44 miles to Chengchow 88,44. They were following in combat movement the 36 ID direct combat movement to Chengchow.

D day turn 25 September 1942

2 tank regiments the only armored units following and 36 Infantry division itself instead of going to Chengchow went magically to Kaifeng and these 3 units are now said to have moved 2 miles to Chengchow from Kaifeng.

It is important to stress that the 36 Infantry division that magically moved sideways to Kaifeng was the unit being followed by all others. But those units assaulted Chengchow, except 2 armored units that followed 36 ID to Kaifeng.

1- Can Matrix run the turn and check it, Both our sides would have to give the passwords. Since this is a PBEM has been a big investment from both sides that is why i am asking.

2- would a game version downgrade be a viable alternative to try?

2- other ideas?
Dili, if you read the posts from RJ and Pax from the post you attached, you will have all the information you need 😉....GP
Intel Ultra 7 16 cores, 32 gb ram, Nvidia GeForce RTX 2050

AKA General Patton

DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
WIS Manual Team Lead & Beta Support Team

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
Diliwitm
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2024 3:54 pm

Re: Asking for support for strange land movement problem in an assault.

Post by Diliwitm »

These for example are questions that are not answered.


Why ID36 went to Kaifeng instead of Chengchow?

Why all units say they made 44 miles to Chengchow but 3 of them don't go there? When an unit chooses a different path it shows in the movement info, it did not show.
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20410
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

Re: Asking for support for strange land movement problem in an assault.

Post by BBfanboy »

Most common reason I have seen for units moving sideways is that the hex side was owned by the enemy at the time of the attempted crossing.
If 36th ID started moving to the target hex from some distance away hex side ownership could have changed. I saw your hexside ownership post but I am not clear on whether that was before or after the turn was run.
And if the enemy owned the hexside at the time you gave orders, the unit might show direct movement but under the hood have orders to go around.

I know this is not definitive on my part but I do not track every move my units make, I just adjust the diversions and carry on. Perhaps as other posters have noted - It is what it is and all we can do is accept it as part of the randomness of war.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
Diliwitm
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2024 3:54 pm

Re: Asking for support for strange land movement problem in an assault.

Post by Diliwitm »

But why the others attacked?
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20410
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

Re: Asking for support for strange land movement problem in an assault.

Post by BBfanboy »

I don't know. Maybe they had better leaders or some of those other factors I speculated about?
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
homer82
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 8:38 pm
Location: Near Anchorage, Alaska

Re: Asking for support for strange land movement problem in an assault.

Post by homer82 »

1- Can Matrix run the turn and check it, Both our sides would have to give the passwords. Since this is a PBEM has been a big investment from both sides that is why i am asking.
Don't hold your breath. Matrix promotes WITP:AE, sells WITP:AE, and hosts a forum for WITP:AE that includes a section called Tech Support but no longer offers actual technical support for WITP:AE. Perhaps they offer technical support if there's a problem purchasing the game but... but of course they do!

Thanks to the infinitely more experienced players for filling the void.
SCPO USN (Ret.)
Post Reply

Return to “Tech Support”