LSA Outstanding Bugs

[CCDrizzt]

ORIGINAL: davidss

i realized the recycle option didn't work when set to "1" ... but I didn't know it was due to a bug. Thanks Drizzt for testing this and bringing it to the attention of Matrix.
But since there is no specific plan to correct this bug ... it's probably best to set this option to "0" for any projects you're working on.

It's not true that it doesn't work. It works only partially as I have written: only Bgs that start a campaign/operation on their own big supply depots, with recycling option set to 1 they all return.
Having said this, I had already finished to speak about this bad bug, so why you write here only to say me to give up? It has no sense for me (I don't have insisted without reasons and I have spoken with Steve with courtesy): probably you don't know it, but there are mods and upcoming mods that already need this correction, that's all. For sure if many users will post like you, bugs they will be never resolved.

Drizzt

[STIENER]

relax CCDrizzt. he didn't say give up. he said " But since there is no specific plan to correct this bug " AND there isn't a specific plan...as matrix said they would look at it and " evaluate next time there's work scheduled on the old releases."
that could and has been never in a lot of cases. were still waiting years later for stuff to be updated and FIXED or resolved.
many of us...including me ALOT ... post stuff to try and get issues fixed. we all try and do our bit. but don't hold your breath, matrix has moved on to another game and this is an ongoing battle with them.

also...he thanked you for bringing it to matrix's attention. you did some good work here, testing etc....SO ???????

[davidss]

Hi Drizzt,
sorry, I wasn't trying to discourage you.

[CCDrizzt]

ORIGINAL: davidss

Hi Drizzt,
sorry, I wasn't trying to discourage you.

Are you crewman? I ask you because I have seen that Steiner has replied for you. If you are Crewman, your previous post now it has more sense.
Anyway trust me, it's all ok for me: I have just written what I think, but of course I'm not angry with you.

Drizzt

[CCDrizzt]

ORIGINAL: STIENER

relax CCDrizzt. he didn't say give up. he said " But since there is no specific plan to correct this bug " AND there isn't a specific plan...as matrix said they would look at it and " evaluate next time there's work scheduled on the old releases."
that could and has been never in a lot of cases. were still waiting years later for stuff to be updated and FIXED or resolved.
many of us...including me ALOT ... post stuff to try and get issues fixed. we all try and do our bit. but don't hold your breath, matrix has moved on to another game and this is an ongoing battle with them.

also...he thanked you for bringing it to matrix's attention. you did some good work here, testing etc....SO ???????

I'm completely relaxed. I have just written what I think with a "clean intent": I don't use emoticons so sometime it's difficult to understand the spirit of some posts. Your last question (so????) it has simply no sense for me: you can try to read again my post with a spirit "less prevented" and you will see by yourself that there is nothing of bad in my post.

Drizzt

[davidss]

Hi Drizzt,
Yes, I am crewman at the Close Combat Series forum (also previously known as GameRat).
When I first figured out that Recycle BG's didn't work as I expected, I was disappointed. But I decided to continue work on the GJS update and be content with how the game is currently functioning.
I set this option to "0" ... in case it caused unexpected problems when set at "1".

I also removed Air Support, because at times, I think it causes the game to crash.

I also hope the Recycle BG's option gets fixed in a future patch. Steve has always been helpful to me, and he has released lots of good patches in the past. One of my favorites is his new vehicle path finding update.

I wish you good success with your modding projects

[Stwa]

Bump. Another month.... [Great Thread [:D]]

[CCDrizzt]

ORIGINAL: davidss

Hi Drizzt,
Yes, I am crewman at the Close Combat Series forum (also previously known as GameRat).
When I first figured out that Recycle BG's didn't work as I expected, I was disappointed. But I decided to continue work on the GJS update and be content with how the game is currently functioning.
I set this option to "0" ... in case it caused unexpected problems when set at "1".

I also removed Air Support, because at times, I think it causes the game to crash.

I also hope the Recycle BG's option gets fixed in a future patch. Steve has always been helpful to me, and he has released lots of good patches in the past. One of my favorites is his new vehicle path finding update.

I wish you good success with your modding projects

Thanks David!
Yes, for now it's better to set recycling option to 0.
Considering the fact that CC The Bloody firt should be ready in the next months, I really hope that there will be updates for old CC titles in the near future. For example, also the fact that in TLD the IA never assigns mortar/arty/air support to its battlegroups during campaigns/ops it's a really bad bug (and I don't remember if it's present also in WAR).

Drizzt

[Tejszd]

ORIGINAL: Stwa

Bump. Another month.... [Great Thread [:D]]

Thanks Stwa! The more who join in and do this the better...

[davidss]

Recycle BG option defect (bug) of BG's not being able to recycle back to the Strategic map after disbandment undermines the playability of LSA GJS 7.3 Grand Campaign, in my opinion. Unfortunate ...

[mooxe]

From the LSA manual...

17.8 DISBANDING
Battle Groups are disbanded whenever they are forced to leave a map, and can’t retreat, either
through loss of victory locations or from morale failure. A disbanded Battle Group becomes
unavailable for the reminder of a campaign or operation. However, some teams/units from a
disbanded Battle Group may be absorbed into nearby friendly Battle Groups as long as they are
under the same parent formation.

So this is conflicting with....

15.3 MORALE FAILURE
If a Battle Group is pushed off of a map, and there is an unoccupied, friendly map that it can
move to, the Battle Group will retreat to the available map. If the Battle Group is able to retreat
it is unable to move next turn as it regroups. If it cannot retreat, it is disbanded. If the Battle
Group was still in supply when it was disbanded, there is a 75% chance that each team makes
it back to be added to the Battle Group ‘s Forcepool.

From the CC5 manual. I only paste this because I assume there's existing code that made it from CC5 to LSA.

If a Battle Group voluntarily disbands while it is out of supply, it loses all of its vehicles,
and 50% of its infantry units are captured before they return to the group’s supply depot.
If an unsupplied Battle Group is forced to disband involuntarily, because it is forced off a
map, it loses all of its vehicles, then 75% of its infantry units are captured. This can be a
crippling loss.

The disband penalties of out of supply units in CC5 never applied, bugged. Disbanding has always been a mystery in Close Combat. Disbanding either doesn't work, partly works, and there's no easy way to verify the percentages when it does work. LSA further mystifies it within section 17.8 by using the words "some," "may" and "nearby." Something for the future to iron out...

[davidss]

Regarding LSA units of a disbanded BG being absorbed into other friendly BG's:

During a LSA GJS 7.3 Grand Campaign, two Allied BG's were disbanded.
From what I can see, it seems all remaining units from both BG's, and including future reinforcements ... where absorbed into one BG.
End result is similar to merging three BG's into one.

below link has more info:

http://www.closecombatseries.net/CCS/mo ... 3457#83457

[SteveMcClaire]

I suspect the confusion over disbanding is the distinction between teams in the Battlegroup and teams in the Forcepool. The Battlegroup teams are ONLY the ~15 teams that you have active. The rest of the teams available are part of the Forcepool. This is the way disbanding worked in the original CC4/5. In Wacht am Rhein (I believe it was) a reduction to the Forcepool teams was added for disbanding, though the loss percentage was lower for this (I think 20%, modified by difficulty.)

LSA BGs that disband are gone, though as Davidss noted the survivors are sort of 'auto-merged' into nearby friendly BGs (though they have to have the same parent formation, if I recall correctly.)

Steve

[STIENER]

Mooxe
well 15.3 morale failure doesn't apply in this case as were playing with it OFF, but your right 17.8 doesn't appear to work as it should. for sure the disbanded units are not absorbed by the parent formation in this case.
in my GC's in stock LSA we didn't have any BG's disband that I remember as we played with morale ON as the game is meant to be played, so I don't no if things work as they should in LSA.

steve...can you look into this rather large issue and perhaps fix it in the future? the disband feature and distribution of units and the recycle back after disband if turned ON.

[STIENER]

to clarify...the disbanded BG's were Canadian and they were absorbed into a brit BG.
looks like the future reinforcments might have been added NOW too....which doesn't make any sense to me.

so steve then if I understand what your saying then were going to see the majority of the disbanded BG's FORCE POOL absorbed into another BG not the active teams in the force pool.

[SteveMcClaire]

Hi Steiner,

Yes - most of the Battlegroup's active teams will be lost -- typically a forced disband is because you've lost a battle rather badly, and this usually means you don't have many active teams left in any case. Most of the Forcepool teams will be absorbed into friendly BGs that can be reached from where the BG was lost. From memory I believe the BGs had to be on the same map or in an adjacent map to absorb teams from the disbanded BG.

I am not sure what specific problem you're asking me to look into? I don't see anyone reporting a bug with disbanding and absorbing teams in this thread? Or are you saying that you have turned the 'Recycle BGs' switch ON in campaign.txt? If you do this them the original BG remains in existence, and no teams are absorbed by other friendly BGs. They're two different mechanisms.

Steve

[STIENER]

yikes....see above about the disband / recycle option being turned on or off. theres a bug I think. when its turned ON the bg's don't recycle back.

we do NOT have that function ON in our GC. we are playing with morale OFF also. so we expect the BG's to disband in the right circumstances. BUT from what I can see right now...
1]the disbanded BG's were Canadian and they were absorbed into a brit BG.so NOT the parent formation as the manual states. [ BUG ]
2] the were absorbed 2 to 3 maps away from where they were disbanded. [ BUG? }
3] they include FUTURE reinforcments as well.. NOW when they were absorbed [ BUG? ]
4] there was a Canadian BG in the next map beside the disbanded Canadian BG"S that didn't get any of the canadian disbanded units [ BUG? ]

[davidss]

To clarify:
LSA GJS 7.3 has the Recycle BG's option set to "0".
I would prefer disbanded BG's recycle back to the Strategic map, but when testing this option set to "1" ... it was found to not function correctly.
Therefore, it was set to "0" in order to avoid any unknown issues.

The above mentioned Grand Campaign Steiner and I are playing has Morale "Off".

Two Allied BG's were disbanded at Hermanville (7/3 CDN and 8/3 CDN). During this battle German forces captured all victory locations ... causing both BG's on that map to disband.
The next turn, large amounts of units were found in 56/50 Div ... located on Bayeux map (three maps away) ... and is the frontline BG on this map.
There was another Canadian BG (9/3 CDN) two maps away at Thaon, but it was reserve BG.
Also, Bayeux is first battle of next turn after disbandment of those two BG's.

It appears as if future reinforcements are included in units that were absorbed into 56/50 Div.

I personally don't have a problem with where units from the disbanded BG's are placed ... as long as they shown up somewhere.

[STIENER]

"There was another Canadian BG (9/3 CDN) two maps away at Thaon, but it was reserve BG."

Canadian BG (9/3 CDN) was ONE map away at Thaon. Thaon is beside hermanville.

[davidss]

ORIGINAL: STIENER

"There was another Canadian BG (9/3 CDN) two maps away at Thaon, but it was reserve BG."

Canadian BG (9/3 CDN) was ONE map away at Thaon. Thaon is beside hermanville.

Yes, Thaon is beside ... but you blocked the Hermanville VL at Thaon with your incoming BG. That makes the connection two maps away with open VLs.