Page 1 of 1

Rommel attacks scenario - Rommel missing?

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 7:25 am
by szmike
Is it WAD or bug?

On T2 Italian leader (Bitossi) becomes commander of IT-GER Army and Rommel is on the list of leaders, but cannot be assigned to an army because of high rank.

RE: Rommel attacks scenario - Rommel missing?

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 10:00 am
by RedLancer
I think it's WAD but the issue is the cost to assign that is the problem and if you spend your APs on T1 you can't afford him.

RE: Rommel attacks scenario - Rommel missing?

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 10:55 am
by szmike
Well, the point is there is no Rommel in this scenario after T1. You can assign him in T2 to OKW or Army Group, but those have good enough leaders, so there is no real need for it.

I use my APs to replace XXX IT Corps leader, so I wouldn't be able to afford Rommel, but he can't be appointed in any army anyway. Army group is too high of a command to be worth it even if I could afford it.


RE: Rommel attacks scenario - Rommel missing?

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 11:19 am
by whoofe
ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

I think it's WAD but the issue is the cost to assign that is the problem and if you spend your APs on T1 you can't afford him.

so "Rommel attacks" but you cannot use Rommel?

RE: Rommel attacks scenario - Rommel missing?

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 11:50 am
by Great_Ajax
I just assigned Rommel to command Army Group Afrika on Turn 2.

Trey

RE: Rommel attacks scenario - Rommel missing?

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 12:44 pm
by Seminole
I just assigned Rommel to command Army Group Afrika on Turn 2.

Wow. That requires you to spend no points on the first turn and then expend all 37 on the second turn. Not sure that is worthwhile.

I just assumed he was fired for outright insubordination in my scenario, and that he delivered victory to his superiors with a fait accompli in spite of their trepidation.

RE: Rommel attacks scenario - Rommel missing?

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 1:13 pm
by LiquidSky


The scenario is mis-named anyways...It should be called Allies Attack!

I found it far more profitable to put Herman Balck in command of one of the corps. He is a far better leader then Rommel and far cheaper to appoint as well.

RE: Rommel attacks scenario - Rommel missing?

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 1:36 pm
by KWG
ORIGINAL: LiquidSky



The scenario is mis-named anyways...It should be called Allies Attack!

I found it far more profitable to put Herman Balck in command of one of the corps. He is a far better leader then Rommel and far cheaper to appoint as well.


What Herman Balck did in the winter 42-43 is amazing.

RE: Rommel attacks scenario - Rommel missing?

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 1:59 pm
by Joel Billings
What's interesting about this is that on T2 of the Torch scenario he doesn't disappear, so I'm not exactly sure why he is being replaced on T2 of this scenario. I don't think the AI is taking over, and if there is some incompatibility with him being in an Italian HQ, why doesn't it happen in Torch as well? This is a mystery. If anyone has any thoughts on why this might be please let us know. I'll try to have Gary or Pavel look at this at some point to see if they can determine what is causing Rommel's sacking. The scenario is misnamed because although the initial attack was Rommel's doing, since he didn't command all of the forces involved it got muddled.

RE: Rommel attacks scenario - Rommel missing?

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 2:27 pm
by Seminole
Another oddity I just noticed on this scenario. Look at my aircraft losses as Axis.
Who went joy riding(crashing) in captured Spits? And why should that count against me?
Seriously, none of my units were in Spits, but the numbers match with my total losses on the right hand side...

Image

Going back over my screenshots it appears they were stricken on turn 3. I overran an allied airbase on turn 2, they retook the empty airbase (my only 'destroyed' unit). Somehow I guess I got docked for losing Spits that I captured?
Don't know how far back you can pull saves.

RE: Rommel attacks scenario - Rommel missing?

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 2:30 pm
by LiquidSky


Holy crap..I knew he was good but I just read about what he did while in command of the 11th Panzer Division.

During the period from December 7, 1942, through January 31, 1943, the 11th Panzer Division was credited with destroying 225 tanks, 347 antitank guns, 35 artillery pieces, and killing 30,700 Soviet soldiers. Balck’s losses for the same period were 16 tanks, 12 antitank guns, 215 soldiers killed in action, 1,019 wounded, and 155 missing.

RE: Rommel attacks scenario - Rommel missing?

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 3:14 pm
by Seminole
interview(pdf) with Balck

RE: Rommel attacks scenario - Rommel missing?

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 3:19 pm
by zakblood
good to great commander, good equipment and men with high morale, with excellent training

RE: Rommel attacks scenario - Rommel missing?

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 3:55 pm
by szmike
I only found that Rommel id in editor is 157, while Bitossi who always replaces him has id 557. Might be coincidence, but...

RE: Rommel attacks scenario - Rommel missing?

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 5:22 pm
by whoofe
ORIGINAL: szmike

I only found that Rommel id in editor is 157, while Bitossi who always replaces him has id 557. Might be coincidence, but...

nice catch - that could have something to do with it *Shrug*

RE: Rommel attacks scenario - Rommel missing?

Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 10:04 pm
by Denniss
May also play a role, from scenario check tool:

***** Check for HQ leaders *****
Unit ID 1: OKW has leader mismatch
Unit ID 7: Afr. German-Italian Panzer Army has no valid leader assigned
Unit ID 354: AFHQ has no valid leader assigned
Unit ID 356: 18th BR Army Group has leader mismatch
Leader ID 96: Kesselring assigned to multiple (2) units(1,8,0)
Leader ID 1554: Alexander assigned to multiple (2) units(356,357,0)

Plus:
Unit ID 501: 105th US Coastal AA Battalion - bad HHQ is set: (406) 105th US Coastal AA Battalion US Infantry Division
->buggy display, attached to 2/1st US infantry div


RE: Rommel attacks scenario - Rommel missing?

Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2015 3:07 pm
by Joel Billings
No doubt that's because of the nationality of the HQ not matching the leader. However, it doesn't get Eisenhower fired, nor does it fire Rommel in the Torch scenario although the same message comes up. It going to take a coder stepping through the code in the debugger to find out why he gets fired.

RE: Rommel attacks scenario - Rommel missing?

Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2015 6:16 pm
by Denniss
Even more strange that this exchange does not seem to be reported anywhere (or do those with access to debug mode see something in event log?)