Matrix Games Forums

Posted: **Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:30 am**

Sorry about the picture size. Has anyone else tried applying the beta patch to an ongoing game?

Posted: **Fri Dec 07, 2012 9:21 am**

Hi

I am playing the Allies versus thr jap ai in the ironman game.

This may be normal but looks odd so thought i'd check.

Its 10 Feb 1942 and in Bombay there is 577849 supplies and 729222 fuel - this sems an awful lot. If it is correct Should it pool here or Calcutta?

I have been shipping supplies and fuel to india from abadan and capetown but nowhere in those quantities.

thanks

Posted: **Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:21 am**

Scenario 4 Guadacanal: There are two "S11/No.700 Sqd FAA" air groups (2358 and 2360) and they are both on the HMNZS Achilles (which has a capacity of 1 A/C)

Edit: The HMNZS Leander has 7 air groups on board!!! [X(]
S10, S12, S13, S14, S15, S16 & S17/No.700 Sqn FAA (2359 - 2366)

Edit again: Looks like S12, S13, S14, S15, S16 & S17/No.700 Sqn FAA (2361 - 2366) have a delay of 9999 so they don't show in the game but are flagged as active in the editor as their location is listed as the HMNZS Leander.

Posted: **Sat Dec 22, 2012 8:21 am**

Just testes scenario 6. Japanese 88 mm AA gun is missing. There's no such gun in database, and units using it have just empty line.

I haven't check other scenarios.

Posted: **Sat Dec 22, 2012 8:52 am**

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: Reg

Blackhorse did say he was comfortable with the strategic movement of the USMC units.....

I missed that. Do you mean he said he was comfortable with them as is, or comfortable with them being able to move strat road?

I'm belatedly catching up with this thread. I'm comfortable with the strategic movement as is. (Yes to RD+ for USA; No to RD+ for USMC, USN).

USMC divisions were designed to be more strategically mobile by sea, than their Army counterparts. Consequently, marines had far fewer trucks in their organic TO&E, and far fewer trucks 'pooled' at the upper echelon corps/army/depot level.

I would not argue with anyone who said that the US had the ability to send more trucks to support Marine units engaged in long overland campaigns. Ultimately any US military force could have been made strategically road mobile. Even the game doesn't quite capture the amazing advantage America had in truck numbers, size and quality compared to any other ally or adversary. US Army leg infantry divisions in Europe generally had more truck lift assigned than some other countries' "motorized" divisions, fx.

But the Marines had fewer trucks by design, to make them more strategically mobile by sea, and the preferred option for island campaigns.

So I think the RD+ strategic movement restriction best captures the "flavor" of US historic doctrine / deployment. You want the US to help fight a land war in Asia? Fine, send in the Army. You need to invade a beach? Call out the Marines! [;)]

Posted: **Sat Dec 22, 2012 10:53 am**

Guadalcanal scenario, pilot file messed up badly. Ranks, groups, etc wrong resulting in western and Russian pilots filling out Japanese air groups later into game. Difficult to fix too, because you can't swap in a pilot file from another scen as air group numbers are different to other scenarios.

Posted: **Sat Dec 22, 2012 12:10 pm**

Hello Andy

All new Scenarios:

Ship Class:

1517 Tachibana

Wpn Slot 7: Type 2 Depth Charg Facing: "00- Front" ........ I think should be "02 - Rear"

Hope it helps...

Omat

Posted: **Sat Dec 22, 2012 1:32 pm**

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: Reg

Blackhorse did say he was comfortable with the strategic movement of the USMC units.....

I missed that. Do you mean he said he was comfortable with them as is, or comfortable with them being able to move strat road?

I'm belatedly catching up with this thread. I'm comfortable with the strategic movement as is. (Yes to RD+ for USA; No to RD+ for USMC, USN).

USMC divisions were designed to be more strategically mobile by sea, than their Army counterparts. Consequently, marines had far fewer trucks in their organic TO&E, and far fewer trucks 'pooled' at the upper echelon corps/army/depot level.

I would not argue with anyone who said that the US had the ability to send more trucks to support Marine units engaged in long overland campaigns. Ultimately any US military force could have been made strategically road mobile. Even the game doesn't quite capture the amazing advantage America had in truck numbers, size and quality compared to any other ally or adversary. US Army leg infantry divisions in Europe generally had more truck lift assigned than some other countries' "motorized" divisions, fx.

But the Marines had fewer trucks by design, to make them more strategically mobile by sea, and the preferred option for island campaigns.

So I think the RD+ strategic movement restriction best captures the "flavor" of US historic doctrine / deployment. You want the US to help fight a land war in Asia? Fine, send in the Army. You need to invade a beach? Call out the Marines! [;)]

Thanks!

Posted: **Sun Dec 23, 2012 5:48 pm**

ORIGINAL: Puhis

Just testes scenario 6. Japanese 88 mm AA gun is missing. There's no such gun in database, and units using it have just empty line.

I haven't check other scenarios.

Sorry, my mistake (scenario didn't install correctly). It seems to be alright.

Posted: **Sat Dec 29, 2012 8:15 pm**

ok ta

Posted: **Sun Dec 30, 2012 5:54 am**

Andy, could you fix one small thing? At least in scenario 1 Chinese HMG squad (japanese RGC-units) upgrades to Chinese infantry squad, which is wrong I believe (should stay HMG squad). This database error have been there since release, but I'm sure you can easily fix it now. [:)]

Posted: **Tue Jan 01, 2013 7:35 pm**

OK thanks will look into it

I will check scen 12 out

ORIGINAL: henry1611

Hi Andy,

Thanks for the updated scenarios.

I have one comment and one question on Scen 12 Marianas: Hakko Ichiu.

Comment: It may be because it is the Hakko Ichiu version of the scenario, but the upgrade paths on various USN and IJN vessels need some tweaking. Some vessels do not have the latest upgrade available for 5/44 and other vessels have upgrades that are not available until well past 5/44. Some examples: PENNSYLVANIA, CLEVELAND, SELFRIDGE, FULLHAM, HONOLULU, CASE, POLLACK, TAMBOR, THRESHER, VEGA, ARCTIC, GULFHAWK, GULFLAND AND OI.

Is there a way to use the Editor to change what upgrade a vessel is currently at in an on-going AI game akin to changing pool/production numbers for aircraft in an on-going AI game?

Question: Scen 12 has AI scripts but the "Use AI" button under the "Scenario" tab in the Editor is ticked "00 - No." Is that correct? What would the effect of ticking "01 - Yes" be?

Okay, that's more than one question . . .

I appreciate your efforts.

Henry

Posted: **Tue Jan 01, 2013 7:35 pm**

Any feedback on the new AI files

Posted: **Tue Jan 01, 2013 10:15 pm**

Scenario1 Allied vs Japan AI
March 1942
Game version please see signature.

AI Japan is attacking a base (Georgetown) since weeks where there are no Allied forces anymore.
The attacks are bombardment attacks only, presumably because there is no unit with an Attack Value (AV) present, e.g. only artillery units.
There is a chance the infantry part of the attacking force had been sunk earlier but I can't verify that.
The absence of units with an AV may be an oversight in the AI script. That's why I report this here.
For details please see Combat Report below.
Save available upon request.

Ground combat at Georgetown (49,74)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 2424 troops, 201 guns, 60 vehicles, Assault Value = 7

Defending force 0 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 0

Assaulting units:
18th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
3rd Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
5th Mortar Battalion
56th Field Artillery Regiment
3rd Mortar Battalion
3rd Medium Field Artillery Regiment
14th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion

Posted: **Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:38 am**

I posted in already in the "AE Naval and OOB Issues" thread but here seems to be the better place to post it:

What about the range of the SD Radar, looks to me like it is much to high:
http://www.hnsa.org/doc/radar/part4.htm#pgSD-5
Further down at that page you get the max range for detecting small planes above 1000 feet, that is 15 miles, in game it is 25.
Ok the value for large planes would be 20 miles but "large" would to me at least be some kind of level bomber I'm not sure if the Japanese Player would use them for hunting subs, they sure have something better to do with the bigger planes.

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2013 8:20 am**

Hello,

in the files

AHistory003.txt AHistory014.txt
JHistory003.txt
NHistory003.txt NHistory006.txt NHistory009.txt NHistory010.txt
JDetail006.txt JDetail009.txt
NDetail001.txt NDetail002.txt NDetail006.txt NDetail007.txt NDetail008.txt NDetail009.txt NDetail010.txt
Scen012.txt

there is a CR/LF missing in the last line preventing the last line from being displayed.

(didn't check 015 and onwards)

Cheers

Posted: **Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:32 pm**

Scenario 1, 1122a
What's up with the units having an 9999 days TOE upgrade? I guess that is not supposed to be this way.
I found these two:
2704 CMF Aus 41 Battalion Australian Infantry 2708 9999
2821 Medium Arty Regiment British Artillery 2673 9999

Posted: **Thu Jan 10, 2013 5:10 pm**

Do Monsson effects work?
Check this out:
fb.asp?m=3227676

Posted: **Sun Jan 13, 2013 1:51 am**

A bit on the defense of Hawaii:
fb.asp?m=3249955

Posted: **Mon Jan 14, 2013 11:57 am**

Yes Monsoon works as we defined it and yes I am happy with how we represented the Hawaii Div

I will look aty the upgrade issue tonight

Matrix Games Forums

Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD

RE: Patch 7 Data Update FEEBACK THREAD