Matrix Games Forums

Hi all,

We will soon be releasing the COTA Patch 3. Matrix is preparing the installer for testing and once that is done I'll announce its ready for download. In the meantime here are the notes from the Read Me.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This patch fixes all bugs reported since Patch 2, including the bug which could cause a crash to desktop ( CTD ) after a bridge was constructed if the user interacted while the terrain tables were being rebuilt. It also fixes the bug that sometimes erroneously reset the strength of reinforcements to 100%. And we have enhanced complex attacks, making it less likely that these will be called off and improving the force allocation to subAttacks. Some minor issues have also been addressed. Please see the items below for more details.

In addition we took this opportunity to enhance three scenarios – Parachutes over Corinth, Foothills of the Gods and Charge of the Centaurs. The latter two now have multiple reinforcement schedules, as well as the historical schedule, for added replay-ability. We also modified the German engineers in Parachutes over the Corinth, removing the bridge from the Abn Pioneer and adding instead to the LAH Bridging Column. And as a treat we are providing a brand new scenario called Gamble and Scramble.

Here are the individual task tracker ( TT ) items addressed in Patch 3:

• TT3227 - AI - Attacks - Complex - Ensure Sub-Attacks not positioned on other side of river
• TT3313 - AI - Attacks - Ensure Routers are only allocated to the Reserve Task
• TT3298 - AI - Attacks - Ensure subAttack offsets for objectives excluded from possible FUP locations
• TT3281 - AI - Attacks - Improve probability of launching attacks
• TT3278 - AI - Attacks - Modify AchievedObjective() to cater for large forces
• TT3283 - AI - Basing Code - Consolidate, make consistent and prevent rebasing during assault
• TT3302 - AI - Check out the calculating of Losses for Disbanded units
• TT3305 - AI - CTD - Check out Saved Game from Ogontion
• TT3309 - AI - Delay - Ensure revised blocking tasks are acted upon in ReceiveOrders()
• TT3308 - AI - Delay - Improve the fallback reassessment
• TT3304 - AI - Ensure Enemy Kills Total is factoring in Losses from Transport Columns
• TT3186 - AI - Ensure Sunrise/Sunset times stick when reloading saved game
• TT3271 - AI - Force Allocation - Ensure FP of isolated units is properly deducted
• TT3270 - AI - Force Allocation - Final HQ Check to try and reduce doubling up of subHQs
• TT3282 - AI - Intel - SpotEnemyForces() - Cull old sighting if within 500m and have LOS and no one there
• TT3279 - AI - Planning/Orders - Added TaskChangeRequiredType to BossTaskVersions
• TT3280 - AI - Planning/Orders - Ensure TaskChangeRequiredTypes handled correctly
• TT3311 - AI - Reassessments - Ensure Important Reasessments are not obviated by minor ones
• TT3262 - AI - Reinforcements - Fix bug in PlaceReinforcementsOnMapFunction that erroneously sets strength to 100%
• TT3284 - AI - Resupply - Ensure restricted sides do not initiate Resupply Determination at 0600
• TT3314 - AI - TaskSecureCrossings - Change Assert so it doesn't test for Achievement in last minute of AI objectives
• TT3266 - AI - UI - CTD in Mehring's Elasson Saved Game - bridge completion
• TT3267 - AI - Weather - Assert running Narvik 40 scenario - check out Greg's recording
• TT3269 - AI - Weather - Fix bug that fired when nightfall is midnight
• TT3296 - Scenarios - Charge of the Centaurs v2 - Added Reinforcement Schedules
• TT3265 - Scenarios - FOG - Ensure 72nd Base arrival locations is valid
• TT3297 - Scenarios - Gamble and Scramble v2.4 - New scenario
• TT3295 - Scenarios - Parachutes over Corinth v2 - Removed bridge from Abn Pnr and added bridge to LAH Bridging Column
• TT3285 - SM - Fix glitch that fails to display new Inf Gun icons in Force List
• TT3268 - SM - Sunrise/Sunset - Restrict Ranges and warn user
• TT3272 - UI - AI - Bridge Construction - Ensure thread safe when recalcing terrain after upgrading crossing
• TT3310 - UI - Force Data - Ensure summary data correct when displaying data for multiple units

Once again...



[:)]

*** edited because I was too quick on the send button and forgot to make the point I wanted to make [:D]

Hello Dave,

Thanks for this update! I doubt there will be another one, but if so, what do you think about providing a list of TT candidates and let the community vote for the ones they would like to see the most?
Of course the reason I am asking is that I would really like to have a way to improve the management of mortars i.e. not allowing them to take missions when the superior has issued a rest order for one, and I also like other improvements proposed on this list.
On the other hand, I wonder if the complex attack improvements were really a priority [8|]

Cheers,

Michele

Michele,
 
There will always be more features on the wish list than we can ever achieve. So it boils down to priorities. We give plenty of opportunity here for people to put forward their favourites and we do take notice. However, we also must balance this with other factors like the time it will take, the fit with other features/items, the needs of upcoming titles and our own preferences.
 
As far as I am concerned this should be the last update for COTA. Apart from work on a COTA Demo, which Paul should finish next week, we're now full steam ahead for BFTB. One option we have incuded in BFTB is a task option that will allow you to specify whether arty/depots should "base" or not - ie if checked they behave as is and can deploy off into a firebase. If unchecked they will move/deploy in formation with the main force. This doesn't have any effect on their propensity to provide on-call fire-support, but there is the Arty Direct Support Only option which restricts them to firing in support of their own forceGroup.
 
Or do you mean an option to enforce them to Rest and refrain from providing any on-call support?

Awesome! Now back to Narvik...

Hello again,

I realize that there are very many features/tasks/improvements/bugsFixing... etc... testament is the highest TT number in the list above (3313) and I would not imagine that they all get acted upon.
What I was suggesting (for BftB I guess) is that you pick a number of features that you believe are feasible and pass them through this forum to see which ones would result the most popular.
The example I gave was the combined attacks. Pergite started a post a couple of days ago and it seems that there is a strong preference to issue orders at Bn level, this makes me wonder if the improvement was badly needed or just a nice to have.

Anyway, I will restart this discussion between the BftB release and BftB patch 1 (hopefully soon! [:)])

Re my problem with the arty, basically I issue a rest order to a Bn HQ with attached a mortar Coy. If I select a decent location, all the coys actually get some rest with the exception of the mortar which keeps executing fire missions. So I have to detach the coy and put it under my direct control, then in the morning re-attach it. The direct support checkbox only helps partially because unless I am very lucky, the Bn will rest in an area not completely enemy free and therefore the HQ will request fire support.

In summary, I think what I mean is an option propagate the rest order given to a task force leader which includes arty (eg a Bn HQ with a mortar Coy) to the arty as well: rest means rest!
mmm... not sure I have been very clear [:)]

Cheers,

Michele

Michele,
 
It's already probably too late for BFTB as we are mostly done or committed and there is precious little time remaining for more changes before we need to lock things down if we are to meet a mid year release. However, we could do something for the following title.
 
Re the Arty. I'll look into this for you for BFTB. My gut reaction is to automatically prevent fire missions from arty that have been ordered to rest - ie where they have received a Rest mission as opposed to one they self impose. How's that?
 
TT3321 - AI - Arty - Ensure Arty ordered to rest do not fire unless directly attacked.

Re Arty: sounds very good. Thanks a lot, this will solve the problem I have experienced in many scenarios where the mortars end up being so knackered that the Bn had to stop moving altogether.

Please note that I already have a similar TT in your database (but still cannot use the search functionality in this forum therefore I cannot give you the number.

Cheers,

Michele

Correction: the search function works now and the TT I was referring to is

TT2966 - AI - UI - Add Ignore On-Call-Spt option checkbox to task settings for Rest Orders

as per
tm.asp?m=1180285&mpage=1&key=&#

Cheers,

Michele

Michele,
 
Thanks for that. looks like I'll kill two birds with one bit of code, hey?[;)]

While speaking about things on the wish lists...
 
I have read in morte than one occaision (e.g. both Monty and Guderian) that certain commanders would often leave their HQ's and go forward to critical points in the battle so that they can direct on the spot. I think this would be a neat feature to add where commanders (perhaps only certain commanders with the right leadership qualities) can split off from their HQ and move closer to the front lines. I would think that the command delays in the region they move to would be reduced (since they can more quickly assess and react) but the command delays elsewhere would be increased (since they are away from their staffs and the extensive communication nodes).

Dave, you've done an incredible job. [:)]

Can't wait patch 3!!

This looks very good.  The modified scenarios are a nice bonus-I've played all 3 of those in multi play; now I'll just have to do it again.[:)]
 

ORIGINAL: RedDevil
The example I gave was the combined attacks. Pergite started a post a couple of days ago and it seems that there is a strong preference to issue orders at Bn level, this makes me wonder if the improvement was badly needed or just a nice to have.

One of the other reasons why opted to address the complex attacks was because it would improve the overall effectiveness of the AI controlled side - ie it would make them a tougher opponent. This is always at the back of my mind when I consider features for possible inclusion. And I think you will find that this is the case in COTA Patch 3.

When can we expect the patch?

Soon. The beta testers are putting the installer through its paces as I type.

And when can we expect the demo? [:D]

ORIGINAL: Hentzau

And when can we expect the demo? [:D]

It will be a while yet. Paul is yet to finish it, though, if all goes well, he should do so very soon. Then it needs to be tested, an installer built and tested and then it will be released.

ORIGINAL: Major Disaster

While speaking about things on the wish lists...

I have read in morte than one occaision (e.g. both Monty and Guderian) that certain commanders would often leave their HQ's and go forward to critical points in the battle so that they can direct on the spot. I think this would be a neat feature to add where commanders (perhaps only certain commanders with the right leadership qualities) can split off from their HQ and move closer to the front lines. I would think that the command delays in the region they move to would be reduced (since they can more quickly assess and react) but the command delays elsewhere would be increased (since they are away from their staffs and the extensive communication nodes).

Dave, can you answer to this, once you have time? That's an excellent idea. Not an easy task, but a very interesting idea. I've proposed to reduce the order delay myself in another thread (BFTB forum), dealing with an imaginary retreat option. So, the case outlined by him is another case where a partial (local) reduction of the order delay would make sense.

Since BF Patch is out maybe COTA is on deck next!