A list of core game bugs left in WITP:AE

[Methuen]

Leader listed in the editor for a particular scenario and a particular unit, does not appear in game.
E.g For scenario 002 Hakko Ichiu, the leader of 31st Sentai (ID 1040) is listed as "Hayashi, Junji" (ID 181), but when you start a new game this unit is always given a random leader. Even if you use the editor to change the leader to someone else, you cannot force this change to take effect in a game.

[michaelm75au]

The leader is already assigned to a location. A case of duplication - not a code issue.

[RangerJoe]

One thing that would be nice is if a patrolling Surface Combat Task Force which either runs out of ammo or is low on ammo does not keep reacting to the same enemy task force and then evade combat. Time after time in the turn, instead of having the reaction temporarily set to "zero" so it will actually Return To Base and get resupplies . . . [:(]

[RangerJoe]

One other thing that would be really nice is if the computer did not hijack some of my TFs and put them on computer control. A IJN sub patrolling past Port Arthur in the Yellow Sea in 1942? The Akagi TF being switched to computer control?

How about an invasion that is supposed to follow an ASW TF that will not move for at least 5 days during the Japanese invasion bonus period? Even with 100 fighters in a CV TF? When then goes on its own to a port and the Claudes then upgrade to Zeroes? I like the Claudes down low to use against torpedo aircraft.

[Yaab]

British leaders can be selected to lead any Dutch LCU (infantry, armor, arty, BF etc) which is not directly attached to ABDA HQ. (bug last observed in January 2022, all stock scenarios)

Posts 134 and 137
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 8#p4630458

EDIT 07 2023: ABDA HQ has British nationality. KNIL Army Command(Dutch Army HQ) is subordinated to ABDA HQ. Dutch units which have KNIL Army Command as their HQ will have Australian and USA leaders in their leader selection list. Once you switch those units to ML KNIL or MLD (Dutch HQs subordinated to KNIL Army Command), non-Dutch leaders disappear from the leader selection list. What is strange though, the non-Dutch leaders will also disappear if you attach Dutch LCUs HQ directly to ABDA HQ.

[Alpha77]

Is there a chance that something will be fixed at all? Cause 2by3 is still busy w/ WITE2 I read. Also MG seems more concerned w/closing threads and suddenly "police" the forum (when it was kind of wild west for years [:D])... I doubt it, but I have a long list of "bugs" and suggestions some of which I posted already but scattered around.

Possibly our PBM is screwed as we had to update in different time scales and the opponent also got Win 10 and needed to re-install.

However here a pic a Judy unit which has clear order for ONLY nav attack, however they flew some kind of ground attack the animation showed ground and there is no ship to attack anyways..

Afternoon Air attack on Makin , at 136,125

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid spotted at 11 NM, estimated altitude 16,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 2 minutes

Japanese aircraft
D4Y1 Judy x 20

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 18

Japanese aircraft losses
D4Y1 Judy: 6 destroyed

No Allied losses

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb

CAP engaged:
VRF-1F with F4F-4 Wildcat (1 airborne, 1 on standby, 9 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
7 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 14000 and 16810.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 56 minutes

PLUS 21 (!!) Judy shot down, CR says 6 (I know there is a small variation to FOW) when 20 only attacked. PLUS Judy is faster than Wildcat and there is only size1 AF, most of Judys SHOULD have escaped - alone due to their better speed from Wildcat (which unit already lost some planes to an action before). Note it says too 2 minutes to target. LOL. So many FASTER planes shot down by an already weakened slower plane unit with the lowest AF size LOL PLUS it is heavy cloud, did the game confuse Wildcats w/ Eurofighters or F22s???

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Is there a chance that something will be fixed at all? Cause 2by3 is still busy w/ WITE2 I read. Also MG seems more concerned w/closing threads and suddenly "police" the forum (when it was kind of wild west for years [:D])... I doubt it, but I have a long list of "bugs" and suggestions some of which I posted already but scattered around.

Possibly our PBM is screwed as we had to update in different time scales and the opponent also got Win 10 and needed to re-install.

However here a pic a Judy unit which has clear order for ONLY nav attack, however they flew some kind of ground attack the animation showed ground and there is no ship to attack anyways..

Afternoon Air attack on Makin , at 136,125

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid spotted at 11 NM, estimated altitude 16,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 2 minutes

Japanese aircraft
D4Y1 Judy x 20

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 18

Japanese aircraft losses
D4Y1 Judy: 6 destroyed

No Allied losses

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb

CAP engaged:
VRF-1F with F4F-4 Wildcat (1 airborne, 1 on standby, 9 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
7 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 14000 and 16810.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 56 minutes

PLUS 21 (!!) Judy shot down, CR says 6 (I know there is a small variation to FOW) when 20 only attacked. PLUS Judy is faster than Wildcat and there is only size1 AF, most of Judys SHOULD have escaped - alone due to their better speed from Wildcat (which unit already lost some planes to an action before). Note it says too 2 minutes to target. LOL. So many FASTER planes shot down by an already weakened slower plane unit with the lowest AF size LOL PLUS it is heavy cloud, did the game confuse Wildcats w/ Eurofighters or F22s???

When a dive bomber is in its dive, it is not going at its fastest speed. Slats are deployed to slow the aircraft down and make it more stable for better aim. Ergo, the speed advantage over fighters disappears ...

[Alpha77]

I do not buy this cause the dive is only a short and last phase...

But this does not explain anyways why this "attack" even happened and the widely different losses (6 shown, 20 flew, 21(!) losses). As shown they had only nav attack orders there was no ship to attack and it showed ground attack animation..

Also why do Japanese escorts do not fight ?

Afternoon Air attack on Makin , at 136,125

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid spotted at 19 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 77
A6M5b Zero x 32
B6N2 Jill x 107

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 27

Japanese aircraft losses
B6N2 Jill: 2 destroyed, 2 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat: 3 destroyed
PBY-5A Catalina: 1 destroyed on ground

Allied ground losses:
8 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Airbase hits 1
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 19

Aircraft Attacking:
24 x B6N2 Jill bombing from 14000 feet
Airfield Attack: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb
12 x A6M5 Zero sweeping at 14000 feet
19 x B6N2 Jill bombing from 14000 feet
Airfield Attack: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb
24 x B6N2 Jill bombing from 14000 feet
Airfield Attack: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb
34 x B6N2 Jill bombing from 14000 feet
Airfield Attack: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb
7 x A6M5b Zero sweeping at 14000 feet
12 x A6M5 Zero sweeping at 27000 feet

CAP engaged:
VRF-1F with F4F-4 Wildcat (4 airborne, 10 on standby, 13 scrambling)
4 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 15000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 38 minutes


I have 3x as much BETTER fighters... the same happened already before against ca. 30 P40, the CAP got to the bombers while the escorts do nothing or what [>:]

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

I do not buy this cause the dive is only a short and last phase...

But this does not explain anyways why this "attack" even happened and the widely different losses (6 shown, 20 flew, 21(!) losses). As shown they had only nav attack orders there was no ship to attack and it showed ground attack animation..

Also why do Japanese escorts do not fight ?

Afternoon Air attack on Makin , at 136,125

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid spotted at 19 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 77
A6M5b Zero x 32
B6N2 Jill x 107

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 27

Japanese aircraft losses
B6N2 Jill: 2 destroyed, 2 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat: 3 destroyed
PBY-5A Catalina: 1 destroyed on ground

Allied ground losses:
8 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Airbase hits 1
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 19

Aircraft Attacking:
24 x B6N2 Jill bombing from 14000 feet
Airfield Attack: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb
12 x A6M5 Zero sweeping at 14000 feet
19 x B6N2 Jill bombing from 14000 feet
Airfield Attack: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb
24 x B6N2 Jill bombing from 14000 feet
Airfield Attack: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb
34 x B6N2 Jill bombing from 14000 feet
Airfield Attack: 2 x 250 kg GP Bomb
7 x A6M5b Zero sweeping at 14000 feet
12 x A6M5 Zero sweeping at 27000 feet

CAP engaged:
VRF-1F with F4F-4 Wildcat (4 airborne, 10 on standby, 13 scrambling)
4 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 15000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 38 minutes


I have 3x as much BETTER fighters... the same happened already before against ca. 30 P40, the CAP got to the bombers while the escorts do nothing or what [>:]

Dive brakes and not slats or not just slats . . .

That said, even the A6M2 with its wheels and flaps down went too fast against the SBD when it was diving on its target . . .

[Yaab]

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

Yaab, thanks! I'll have some free time after NY and get to those hopefully.

Supply cap though seems a scenario issue, not an .exe one?

Edit: oh, and maybe Michaelm picks them up before me

Re supply caps. It seems to be a problem of data transfer between the Editor and WITP:AE.

[Yaab]

Minelayers still load up mines if in Escort TF, even though the beta was supposed to fix it. HOWEVER, an easy solution is to put minelayers in Surface Combat TF (last observed in 12 2021, updated stock scen001)

[15.04.2016] 1125.11
tweak Minelaymission does not lay mines at home destination if withdrawing after combat
tweak Escort TF with minelayers defaults to 'do not lay mines'
tweak Don't override ESCORT mission of human TF if in a friendly base
tweak Don't auto load mines unless in MINE mission (limited device pool can be drained)

[LargeSlowTarget]

Not a bug, but something I would like to see "fixed" nonetheless - changing the HQ of unrestricted units should not cost political points, to allow the creation of a "clean" OOB without draining political points which are always in short supply.

[LargeSlowTarget]

There is potentially a problem with tender-supported land-based patrol planes flying naval search missions and the absence of supply consumption.

The manual states on page 252 that "All planes flying other Mission types (search, CAP) expend 1/3 of a supply point per plane per Mission.".

Yet, I experience naval search mission from a base with 0 supplies and no change in supplies carried by the tenders.

[michaelm75au]

'Seaplane support'. The missing component. I had to look thru the code to find it.[:D]

This is the number of 'seaplanes' that can be supported by the ship(s) before it needs to start looking for supply ( on tender or in base).
For this purpose, the Catalina is classed as a 'seaplane' as it is taking off from water. So based on 6 support per AVD, it should be supporting 12 Cats before it would start looking for supply.

I am having trouble trying to find where in the manual we mention 'seaplane support' as this is showing on the AVD ship screen. And has been around from the beginning.

The 'Active Ships' screen probably might need to show this, but I thought the Base screen should it?
Edit: Yes it does. Aviation Support: xx (+ yy) where yy is the seaplane support if present.

Now I recall one of my tactics as the Allied was to position these AVDs (with supply on the tender) on 'dot' bases and drop a Catalina detachment there. Using detachments of 6 or smaller meant I wasn't using up the supply unless I needed to increase/combine the attachments. Wow such a long time ago, and I can can still manage to recalled it.

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: Yaab

Minelayers still load up mines if in Escort TF, even though the beta was supposed to fix it. HOWEVER, an easy solution is to put minelayers in Surface Combat TF (last observed in 12 2021, updated stock scen001)

[15.04.2016] 1125.11
tweak Minelaymission does not lay mines at home destination if withdrawing after combat
tweak Escort TF with minelayers defaults to 'do not lay mines'
tweak Don't override ESCORT mission of human TF if in a friendly base
tweak Don't auto load mines unless in MINE mission (limited device pool can be drained)

This has been added to the next fix. The issue is that it should have been UNLOADING mines from the ships if it was not in a Minelaying TF as per the manual. If the mines were already on the ship, it allowed them still[:D].

[Chris21wen]

In my post on the subject of seaplanes it wasn't about the the supply more the fact that pilots under certain circumstances do not fly, ot apparently fly missions. See the circled missions above. This happens when a FP group starts off on a ship that is disbanded at the start of any scenario. Even puting the ship into a TF then disbanding does not work you have to move the TF to another base.

[Ian R]

ORIGINAL: Chris21wen

In my post on the subject of seaplanes it wasn't about the the supply more the fact that pilots under certain circumstances do not fly, ot apparently fly missions. See the circled missions above. This happens when a FP group starts off on a ship that is disbanded at the start of any scenario. Even puting the ship into a TF then disbanding does not work you have to move the TF to another base.

You might want to give Michael the results of your own tests and maybe a save game file or two, if you want to advance this.

And maybe add in a precise statement of what you think the problem is.

Particularly that thing about shipborne floatplane groups on ships disbanded in babeldaob apparently flying missions. Maybe they are, but they just don't use supply, and that is WAD.

Just sayin'.

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: Chris21wen

In my post on the subject of seaplanes it wasn't about the the supply more the fact that pilots under certain circumstances do not fly, ot apparently fly missions. See the circled missions above. This happens when a FP group starts off on a ship that is disbanded at the start of any scenario. Even puting the ship into a TF then disbanding does not work you have to move the TF to another base.

A save showing the issue would be most welcome to understand the issue.

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: michaelm75au

'Seaplane support'. The missing component. I had to look thru the code to find it.[:D]

This is the number of 'seaplanes' that can be supported by the ship(s) before it needs to start looking for supply ( on tender or in base).
For this purpose, the Catalina is classed as a 'seaplane' as it is taking off from water. So based on 6 support per AVD, it should be supporting 12 Cats before it would start looking for supply.

I am having trouble trying to find where in the manual we mention 'seaplane support' as this is showing on the AVD ship screen. And has been around from the beginning.

The 'Active Ships' screen probably might need to show this, but I thought the Base screen should it?
Edit: Yes it does. Aviation Support: xx (+ yy) where yy is the seaplane support if present.

Now I recall one of my tactics as the Allied was to position these AVDs (with supply on the tender) on 'dot' bases and drop a Catalina detachment there. Using detachments of 6 or smaller meant I wasn't using up the supply unless I needed to increase/combine the attachments. Wow such a long time ago, and I can can still manage to recalled it.

What about the planes onboard tenders disbanded in port not using endurance from the tender? Would they normally use endurance if the ship was in a TF, but don't while disbanded in port (and should they)?



The auto-load of mines being stopped unless it's a mine mission is going to be much appreciated.

[Mike Solli]

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
The auto-load of mines being stopped unless it's a mine mission is going to be much appreciated.

I have a simple solution for that. I set all my mines to stockpile. If I want a minelayer to load mines, I turn off stockpile for the proper mine, have the minelayer load, and turn stockpile back on.