Matrix Games Forums

I've been bumbling along with the same misconception for, a long time that engineers need to be in combat mode to a repair base, AF, ports etc, further only engineers can do it. WRONG!

Back ground to this is the repair of Pakhoi in China. Took it with a Para unit but bombing has cause 50+ damage to all facilities. Not being of any great urgency I set the unit to rest and sent another unit to garrison it. When this unit arrived I went back to it and found runway completely repaired and service damage goind down. The Para unit has 9 Cbt eng but I repeat it was at rest.

Now I'm lost, so resorted to testing (v26b and 28) again. These are the conclusions and I'm not overly impressed with what I found.

Lets get building out of the way. It all works as it's supposed to. Eng need to be in combat mode to build.

Repair does not work as the manual (9.5) and numerous forum imply. From the manual;

'Engineers can be used to increase the size of airfields, ports, and fortifications at bases, and they can also be used to repair
damage to airfields and ports.
Each engineering vehicle is the equivalent of five engineering squads for these purposes. Each turn, engineers at a base
automatically attempt to repair any damage existing to their bases, repairing runways first, airfield service damage second
and ports last.... '

Conclusions
Engineers are not needed to repair a base.
Engineers do not have to be in combat mode.
Supply is not needed,
Any ground unit automatically removes 5 damage points per turn no matter how big the unit is, what mode it is in, ready units or not. The unit in this base has 1 Inf Sqd, I've tried 1 support, 1 gun, 1 eng, disabled or ready. It makes no difference, repairing 5 damage points per turn.
I might be able to accept 1 point of damage being repaired but not five.

I've had Marine reg in a hex repairing and it is because they have organic engineering squads....GP

So why can't engineers build forts first if there is airfield/port damage? Seems airfield/port repair can be handled by any non-engineer device.

The decision about what infrastructure to repair should be the player's, and I was hoping that would be allowed in the new 1128 game version.

The fact is that RUNWAYs can be repaired by any unit even if it has no engineers. It's slow, but it works. Different story for repair of Air infrastructure like hangars and barracks. You do need engineers to repair that. Ports require engineers too. Forts can only be built in a base if it has engineers, but in the field any unit can build field forts if they stay long enough in the hex. Engineers do speed up the building of field forts.

So, the algorithm dictates that runways must be repaired first (by anyone), air infrastructure next (by engineers), ports next (by engineers) and forts can then be built or extended by engineers (at the base) or by any unit outside the base.

I presume that if there is a battle in the base hex and Combat Engineers were in Combat mode, their repair points would not be applied to base needs that turn. I am not sure about a Base Force with engineers if it is in Combat mode during the turn. Since construction engineers are not involved in combat (SeaBees movie not withstanding) they could continue to use their construction points and the BF infantry/AFV elements would be available for the battle.

I think the point of this has been missed.

How can 1 support squad consisting of 12 men with wheelbarrows or 1x 70mm gun crew clear 5 points of damage from a runway in 24 hrs while resting. Not %^$^$&$ possible

Agreed, 5 points of repair is far too much.

BBfanboy wrote: Mon May 25, 2026 1:47 pm Agreed, 5 points of repair is far too much.

I think Chris' objection is not the 5 pts, but rather that they do ANYTHING AT ALL while in rest mode. I would agree, I think there is something 'hinky' in the code that got overlooked. I suspect is it WAY too late to get this into the "last" update. But try to get one of the dev's attention... Maybe ...


PS: I'm not a dev, I'm just a player. My opinion and $5 will get you a coffee at many, but not all, cafes.

Started out with just op mode problem but ended up with numbers as well as.

Chris21wen wrote: Wed May 27, 2026 6:21 am Started out with just op mode problem but ended up with numbers as well as.

I'm less about the number. 24 hrs to repair 5% of the craters in a runway? A level 1 air field is just a mostly level grass field. 100% damage means that there is no straight path on the field long enough for a plane to take off or land, thus 5% repair just means filling one, possibly 2 craters. 2 guys and a shovel can do that for most bomb craters, do it well enough for the take-off speeds and plane weights we're talking about anyway.

Yes, I know that this wouldn't apply to a level 9 AF which would have had improved runways with crushed rock and reinforced with steel mesh. But that's another variable to tackle later.

Bit related is inability to build forts without engineers in base.

At least in my time in military, everyone had entrenchment tool and should be able to create foxholes and trenches.

It'd be nice if everyone would be able to fortify lets say up to lvl 3 in base. AFAIK they fortify just fine outside the base.

I think lvl 4 and above would need dedicated engineers, but basically anyone can dig trenches and strew some barbed wire in real life.

*edited for horrendous spelling while under influence*

There is that.

Sardaukar wrote: Wed May 27, 2026 3:34 pm Bit related is inability to build forts without engineers in base.

At least in my time in military, everyone had entrenchment tool and should be able to create foxholes and trenches.

It'd be nice if everyone would be able to fortify lets say up to lvl 3 in base. AFAIK they fortify just fine outside the base.

I think lvl 4 and above would need dedicated engineers, but basically anyone can dig trenches and strew some barbed wire in real life.

*edited for horrendous spelling while under influence*

Agreed, and you never need to apologize for hoisting one too many schooners with this crowd!
(as long as you are not driving)

But back to the original point, either there is an oops (oversight, however you wish to phrase it) in the code OR mode=REST means something quite different than I have always believed it to mean. Re-building (or building fresh) forts while resting seems like a case of "words that do NOT go together". (No need to bring up other examples ... )

If Chris has seen this in testing, then I believe we have an oops. Sadly, not one that we will get fixed, but an oops nonetheless that we (as players) will need to be mindful of.

This is mostly an "Easter Egg" for the JFB's; late war, we now know that we can put our LCU's into rest to speed recovery AND they will still repair infrastructure for us. Yes, AFB's will also get the same benefit in the early war, but let's face it: fewer opportunities to take advantage of this and for a far shorter time (in most cases).

Just to ask a really stupid question (probably) -

Has this been tested with an EMPTY base (no units present) - I ask this just to make sure there isn't some block of code that automatically repairs 5 pts per turn.

zebrazwo wrote: Fri May 29, 2026 11:21 pm Just to ask a really stupid question (probably) -

Has this been tested with an EMPTY base (no units present) - I ask this just to make sure there isn't some block of code that automatically repairs 5 pts per turn.

A unit is needed, any unit, any size, any mode. I tested it again and found another oddity, Two bases identical damage, each with identical AA Co set to rest. One reduced 2 runway damage the other 5

The location might have something to do with it. The first base is Honshu the other is isolated island, If anything I expect the direct opposite.

As far as I'm concerned this is borked in more ways than one.

Thanks Chris!

Well, this got an explanation a little bit further.

Now we can say that it will repair some range between 2 and 5 points.

Would be nice with a dev explanation.

Port damage reduces port loading/unloading rates.
Airfield damage reduces first bomber operations, then fighter operations.

However, the damage does nothing for base supply capacity.

A base with airfield 1 can store 8000 supplies, no matter if airfield is 0% or 100% damaged. Same goes for ports.

What you can really destroy (other than firebombing industry centers) is supply, destroyed by ships bombardment/bomber raids.
They funny thing is that in the above-mentioned base with airfield 1, you could destroy i.e 8000 supplies without any damage to base's supply capacity (warehouses).






'

Yaab

so you are saying it doesn't affect the spoilage limits?

I think in the developers' minds the storage facilities at a base in the middle of nowhere were supply/ammo dumps with tarps pulled over the shipping crates and tied down. The size limit could be the number of hiding places around the perimeter of the base that are close enough to be accessed quickly when needed. Bigger base-bigger perimeter-more storage places?