Auto Convoy from Karachi to Pearl WTF Over?

[LowCommand]

I was rather surprised to discover that the AI had created an automatic convoy of an AK and a TK from Karachi to resupply Pearl Harbor. Aside from the problem of trying to resupply Pearl with just one of each and routing them through enemy territory, Karachi is only supposed to resupply west of hex 50. A quick look at the treads seems to indicate that the Auto Convoy system is much less than wonderful and should be turned off. Still this is so bad that I have to wonder if something is broken. I am running 1.806 under XP. My game has developed another weirdness. I can't seem to assign/transfer some Central Pacific squadrons to Wake.

[Yamato hugger]

Is this a modded scenario or stock? If it is modded, that is your answer.

[LowCommand]

Stock - scenario 41B (Dec 8 1941 to 46) date 3/9/42 playing as The Allies, AI controlling China and the Soviets.

[rtrapasso]

Auto convoy has never worked AFAIK. Never turn the computer on to control ANYTHING or unpredictable things will happen - including the computer's controlling troops, ships, planes that you wouldn't think would be affected.

[Rainer]

I know this problem, but with a twist.
If and when bases in India (notably Colombo, Trincomalee) are set to "Automatic Convoy OFF" Karachi sends Auto Supply Convoys to those bases, but these convoys are instructed to refuel at Pearl Harbor (which is absurd, of course).
Setting said bases to "Auto Supply ON" fixes that problem. Karachi still sends those convoys, but without that silly instruction.
Please be aware that there is another glitch in the Auto Convoy System: bases in the South West Pacific Area (namely Papua/New Guinea, Northern Australia) should not be set to "Automatic Convoy ON". If set to ON the Auto Convoy System will try to supply those bases out of Karachi, which most certainly will send those convoys through areas which are under Japanese air control.

The Auto Convoy System needs a major rework, that we probably all can agree to. However, switching off any computer control functions (which are meant and designed to help players, especially novices) will effectively prevent the developers/designers from learning about any glitches and bugs.
That's why I encourage you to try to live with AI support within its limits. Just report here what you think should be looked at.
That's what this forum is there for

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: Rainer

I know this problem, but with a twist.
If and when bases in India (notably Colombo, Trincomalee) are set to "Automatic Convoy OFF" Karachi sends Auto Supply Convoys to those bases, but these convoys are instructed to refuel at Pearl Harbor (which is absurd, of course).
Setting said bases to "Auto Supply ON" fixes that problem. Karachi still sends those convoys, but without that silly instruction.
Please be aware that there is another glitch in the Auto Convoy System: bases in the South West Pacific Area (namely Papua/New Guinea, Northern Australia) should not be set to "Automatic Convoy ON". If set to ON the Auto Convoy System will try to supply those bases out of Karachi, which most certainly will send those convoys through areas which are under Japanese air control.

The Auto Convoy System needs a major rework, that we probably all can agree to. However, switching off any computer control functions (which are meant and designed to help players, especially novices) will effectively prevent the developers/designers from learning about any glitches and bugs.
That's why I encourage you to try to live with AI support within its limits. Just report here what you think should be looked at.
That's what this forum is there for

Test all you like - there are no plans at this time to fix it, so i think there is no reason to test it further.

[Rainer]

You may be right, I'm afraid, although I hope the developers will not leave the people who cannot play PBEM in the dark.
The whole AI issue is not that much of a concern for PBEM players, at least, that's what I read here in the forums.
However, I do not really understand why customers who are using a product as advertised (read: using the features the products comes with) should not be entitled to improvements.
Well, that sounds like a customer who's complaining. And that's not really what I would like to sound like.
For the time being I'm fairly happy with the product (1.806) as it is.
Let's see what the future has in store for us all ...

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: Rainer

You may be right, I'm afraid, although I hope the developers will not leave the people who cannot play PBEM in the dark.
The whole AI issue is not that much of a concern for PBEM players, at least, that's what I read here in the forums.
However, I do not really understand why customers who are using a product as advertised (read: using the features the products comes with) should not be entitled to improvements.
Well, that sounds like a customer who's complaining. And that's not really what I would like to sound like.
For the time being I'm fairly happy with the product (1.806) as it is.
Let's see what the future has in store for us all ...

Stay tuned for breaking developments! You might want to refer to the enigmatic announcement made recently in the main WITP forum (see the "Any future patches coming?" thread...)

[Rainer]

You mean David Heath's enigmatic "announcement", I think.
Yes, that's a good one, at least for those who enjoy a good humored remark when they see one
However, David probably also wanted to hint (ever so carefully!) that wise men still are dealing with the code.
And THAT'S good news, isn't it? I mean, I bought my copy more than three years ago.
There aint that many companies who care about their products as much as Matrix/3 by 2.
Keep "The Winds of War" comming

[marky]

if wise men were dealing with the code there wouldnt be so many complaints and requested fixes/enhancements[:D]

[bradfordkay]

It took men far better than you or I, Marky, to write the code that runs this game we spend so much time discussing...[:-]