SITREP

[MarkShot]

Dave,

Good news! "lizard drinking" I swear your Aussie English was one of the most confusing parts of working with Panther.

Well, do be careful. There are still around 1,000/month dying here; the population is pretty much the same between Australia and Taiwan. Of course, more the elderly and those with chronic conditions. Given that I have an auto-immune blood clotting condition that finds those viral/vaccine spikes very offensive; I never leave the house without a gas mask.

Ah, but you and I are old, and did have full lives. When I look at the World today, I mainly feel sorry for the youth and not myself.

 

[Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor]

Mark, the expression is "flat out like a lizard drinking". If you saw a big fringed lizard on its belly at a water hole in the desert you'd understand.

 

[JArraya]

I decided to give the game another go after having abandoned it for a while and sadly I was reminded how broken the latest version is. The supply system is completely broken, the new artillery logic doesn't really make much sense, and the game runs like a turtle pausing every two seconds for two seconds. Sad face : (

 

[john connor]

I've certainly noticed the chronic stuttering and it's very irritating. You have to have a bit of patience to play, for sure. I doubt anything Dave is presently working on is going to fix that either - so it's probably going to have to be picked up once the new patch lands and dealt with after that as it's very noticeable. However, I am still playing the game and having fun. I'm in the middle of Race for Bastogne now and there's still nothing like this game out there. The AI still does a wonderful job compared to anything else out there. Winning, as opposed to scraping a draw, is still a rare event for me in many scenarios. And it's still the most historical and natural-looking simulation of this level of combat. The maps are not an artificial hexy mess, they're beautiful. The arty model, I agree, could have done with some tweaking before all development of 'other issues' stopped to allow concentration on the present patch (some 2 years ago now!!!). But I have not noticed anything at all broken with the supply system. I wonder what you mean, JArraya?

 

[JArraya]

I agree with t

I've certainly noticed the chronic stuttering and it's very irritating. You have to have a bit of patience to play, for sure. I doubt anything Dave is presently working on is going to fix that either - so it's probably going to have to be picked up once the new patch lands and dealt with after that as it's very noticeable. However, I am still playing the game and having fun. I'm in the middle of Race for Bastogne now and there's still nothing like this game out there. The AI still does a wonderful job compared to anything else out there. Winning, as opposed to scraping a draw, is still a rare event for me in many scenarios. And it's still the most historical and natural-looking simulation of this level of combat. The maps are not an artificial hexy mess, they're beautiful. The arty model, I agree, could have done with some tweaking before all development of 'other issues' stopped to allow concentration on the present patch (some 2 years ago now!!!). But I have not noticed anything at all broken with the supply system. I wonder what you mean, JA

I've certainly noticed the chronic stuttering and it's very irritating. You have to have a bit of patience to play, for sure. I doubt anything Dave is presently working on is going to fix that either - so it's probably going to have to be picked up once the new patch lands and dealt with after that as it's very noticeable. However, I am still playing the game and having fun. I'm in the middle of Race for Bastogne now and there's still nothing like this game out there. The AI still does a wonderful job compared to anything else out there. Winning, as opposed to scraping a draw, is still a rare event for me in many scenarios. And it's still the most historical and natural-looking simulation of this level of combat. The maps are not an artificial hexy mess, they're beautiful. The arty model, I agree, could have done with some tweaking before all development of 'other issues' stopped to allow concentration on the present patch (some 2 years ago now!!!). But I have not noticed anything at all broken with the supply system. I wonder what you mean, JArraya?

I agree with you that this game is still outstanding and has all positives you mentioned and a few more. I got back into it with Race to Bastogne as well, but I’ve abandoned it on day 5 because it is literally like watching a one second on, two seconds off slide show for me, and I have a very high end computer, so it’s definitely a problem with the engine.
My issue with the supply is the loss of supply convoys/transports between units that have absolutely no logic. Every time I lose a transport or x% I try to figure out why, but most of the time there is no reason for it whatsoever. There are no enemies between the sender and the receiver, they haven’t even moved in the last 4 hours, but they still manage to lose transports. My only consolation is to imagine that the enemy must be losing transports to thin air as well and hopefully they run out before me.

 

[jimcarravallah]

My issue with the supply is the loss of supply convoys/transports between units that have absolutely no logic. Every time I lose a transport or x% I try to figure out why, but most of the time there is no reason for it whatsoever. There are no enemies between the sender and the receiver, they haven’t even moved in the last 4 hours, but they still manage to lose transports. My only consolation is to imagine that the enemy must be losing transports to thin air as well and hopefully they run out before me.

Pages 38 and 39 of the game manual explain a concept known as "line of sight." It deals in what a select unit can "see" at any point in the game.

Intel reports show what enemy units can be seen with the aggregate line of sight from all the friendly units on the board. It is guaranteed there are enemy units which can't be seen by friendly units.

Any of those unseen units could interdict a convoy either with their direct fire, or by calling in indirect fire so long as they have a line of sight to the route and sufficient weaponry and time to target and hit the site.

There was a serious effort several years ago to define supply routes by determining the type of route a supply convoy was most likely to choose among all available between the base and the unit it supports. They are largely a combination of the safest and the quickest route between the base and the supplied unit determined by the condition of a route which was previously used. In determining their safety, the game engine looks at the time of day, weaather conditions and the state of intervening terrain to pick routes which can't be seen or hit at least by direct fire.

In determining the quickest route, the convoy will be assigned (in order) to major highways, roads, railroad tracks, and paths before being asked to traverse open terrain between the supply base and the unit it supports.

The most immediate route being used in a pulse is selected from all available that hadn't been interdicted on a previous pulse.

Improved routes through woods and towns are the most problematic when selected because an enemy sited in them can't be seen except at a short distance and can inflict damage on a convoy from that unseen position.

If a commander wants to assure availability of safe routing of supply convoys, they should garrison at least the choke points along the most likely routes between a supplying base and the units which it supplies.

It provides three benefits:

1) It expands the aggregate friendly line of sight for detecting enemy units

2) "Safe" routes tend to use both terrain which avoids being seen or hit by fire and secondly routes through friendly unit areas of influence

3) Garrison units can be dispatched to chase away enemy units which locate in an area where they can interdict the most likely supply route

 

[JArraya]

Thanks for that Jim. I've been in several discussion in previous forums about the supply issue. I don't understand the programming logic behind supply (and I would love to) but I still believe there are errors in it. For example, I have a front line formation that advances, pushes the enemy to retreat, and then I use another formation to push past the first one, moving the enemy further. When the first unit requests supply it gets attrited. This makes no sense to me. It's just one example, and I'm happy to take screenshots, save examples, etc. if I it's going to be looked at, but I think with everything Dave has on his plate and how long it takes him to get through the programming it's best to just "live with it".

 

[john connor]

If you post a recording or save then either Jim or I can look at it using the dev build. We'll be able to see if there are enemy units you haven't detected which are in a position to snipe at supply runs.

 

[jimcarravallah]

If you post a recording or save then either Jim or I can look at it using the dev build. We'll be able to see if there are enemy units you haven't detected which are in a position to snipe at supply runs.

I lost my version of the development build in a computer crash. I'm waiting for Beta testing on the next release to ask Pavlo to help me to install it.

 

[jimcarravallah]

I lost my version of the development build in a computer crash. I'm waiting for Beta testing on the next release to ask Pavlo to help me to install it.

I straightened it out.

 

[JArraya]

Here's an example. This is the start of Bastogne. The supply unit is just behind the bridge (being built), and the unit being supplied has just started to move. Visibility is 0m. If I surrender and review the final situation, there isn't an enemy unit anywhere near this path. Somehow, the supply to one of the Regs is blocked but not to the others. The supply unit uses horse-drawn carriages, so they should be able to go anywhere the foot units can go.

 

[JArraya]

And here's another example that makes no sense. I get a message saying I lost x%, followed by a "route is blocked" - if it's blocked, shouldn't they just not send anything rather than lose a large % of the supply and transports?

 

[jimcarravallah]

And here's another example that makes no sense. I get a message saying I lost x%, followed by a "route is blocked" - if it's blocked, shouldn't they just not send anything rather than lose a large % of the supply and transports?

I explained it earlier.

The route used in the current supply pulse is selected from the routes determined to be safe during previous supply pulses.

A route doesn't get dropped from the list of potential routes until there is an interdiction of traffic during an earlier supply pulse or an enemy unit is detected within a range where it could observe the supply route.

Interdiction can be accomplished by direct fire that can reach a visible portion of the route, or calling in indirect fire by an observing unit.

 

[JArraya]

I explained it earlier.

The route used in the current supply pulse is selected from the routes determined to be safe during previous supply pulses.

A route doesn't get dropped from the list of potential routes until there is an interdiction of traffic during an earlier supply pulse or an enemy unit is detected within a range where it could observe the supply route.

Interdiction can be accomplished by direct fire that can reach a visible portion of the route, or calling in indirect fire by an observing unit.

I understand what you are saying, but it doesn't apply to my examples. There are no enemy units capable of interdicting these supply lines, visibility is 0m, so unless a unit is sat right next to mine they can't possibly call in artillery or affect the supply; there is no direct or indirect fire possible here. You can try this for yourself in the Bastogne scenario. Give no orders, let the game run, and the first thing that will happen is a bunch of units will request emergency supply; then you will get supply losses to the units just on the other side of the river. Why?

I'm not trying to be difficult, just understand.

 

[jimcarravallah]

I understand what you are saying, but it doesn't apply to my examples. There are no enemy units capable of interdicting these supply lines, visibility is 0m, so unless a unit is sat right next to mine they can't possibly call in artillery or affect the supply; there is no direct or indirect fire possible here. You can try this for yourself in the Bastogne scenario. Give no orders, let the game run, and the first thing that will happen is a bunch of units will request emergency supply; then you will get supply losses to the units just on the other side of the river. Why?

I'm not trying to be difficult, just understand.

If visibility is 0, then you can't see the units which are interdicting your deliveries. The intel reports showing enemy locations are a representation of what was seen currently, recently, or at all during the game. Units can't call in indirect fire if they can't see a target, but they can still attack a supply line if they're near enough to see and hit a target with their direct fire capability.

Emergency supply is a sticking point for me, because I believe it occurs too frequently and doesn't really put a burden on supplying units even if they're strained by an excessive Op Tempo during gameplay.
That said, units habitually request the emergency supply if the AI's health algorithm determines the unit can't accomplish the task it's assigned with supplies on hand before the next scheduled supply pulse. At game start that task can be embedded in the design by combinations of unit dispositions, the location of victory objectives as the AI is first programmed to move to those objectives absent other orders and discovery of at start enemy threats.

Those deliveries could be interdicted on the other side of the river because there are undetected enemy units deployed there. It;s quiet possible for the allies in the Bastogne scenario because allied units were in effect straggling toward the Bastogne crossroads after being cut off and bypassed in the early stages of the Axis attack.

Also, I'd suggest if you're really trying to understand the game mechanics, than you start a new discussion thread. This thread is used to discuss plans for the game releases. Addressing gaes concerns distort's its purpose.

 

[JArraya]

If visibility is 0, then you can't see the units which are interdicting your deliveries. The intel reports showing enemy locations are a representation of what was seen currently, recently, or at all during the game. Units can't call in indirect fire if they can't see a target, but they can still attack a supply line if they're near enough to see and hit a target with their direct fire capability.

Emergency supply is a sticking point for me, because I believe it occurs too frequently and doesn't really put a burden on supplying units even if they're strained by an excessive Op Tempo during gameplay.
That said, units habitually request the emergency supply if the AI's health algorithm determines the unit can't accomplish the task it's assigned with supplies on hand before the next scheduled supply pulse. At game start that task can be embedded in the design by combinations of unit dispositions, the location of victory objectives as the AI is first programmed to move to those objectives absent other orders and discovery of at start enemy threats.

Those deliveries could be interdicted on the other side of the river because there are undetected enemy units deployed there. It;s quiet possible for the allies in the Bastogne scenario because allied units were in effect straggling toward the Bastogne crossroads after being cut off and bypassed in the early stages of the Axis attack.

Also, I'd suggest if you're really trying to understand the game mechanics, than you start a new discussion thread. This thread is used to discuss plans for the game releases. Addressing gaes concerns distort's its purpose.

So I can't see the enemy units but the enemy units can see my supply units? These enemies would need to be to the rear of the starting position of the Germans. Sorry, but it just don't fit.

But I am grateful for you taking the time to explain it.

And I agree, emergency supply is too routine and it doesn't affect anything. I also don't think the supply setting (Low, Med, High) in the task does anything. The AI just sends supply to everyone regardless.

 

[jimcarravallah]

So I can't see the enemy units but the enemy units can see my supply units? These enemies would need to be to the rear of the starting position of the Germans. Sorry, but it just don't fit.

But I am grateful for you taking the time to explain it.

And I agree, emergency supply is too routine and it doesn't affect anything. I also don't think the supply setting (Low, Med, High) in the task does anything. The AI just sends supply to everyone regardless.

The visibility algorithms have been refined to a highly accurate degree. You're treating the combat field like it's a chess board where all the pieces are visible. It's not -- it suffers fog of war based on the quality of the unit doing the observation, the number of potential observers, the atmospheric conditions that affect visibility, and the terrain considerions that allow a unit to hide from sight.

Just because you fail to detect a unit doesn't mean it can't detect your activities -- particularly the movement of supply columns -- in its visibility area.

You've got to exercise the area visibility tool to see the areas your units can observe at a different degree of accuracy and what areas are blind spots on the map. If you do enough samples you'll find the blind spots where no unit can observe a unit that locates in it and the low resolution areas where something might be detected but it isn't necessarily returning the most accurate information -- including false positive sightings.
Even at 0 visibility there's an area around every unit where something can be detected. If a supply column passes in proximity to it, the unit can still interdict your supply column. It happens all the time in real war, and since this is a simulation of real war (it was originally built as a test bed for training software at military command training schools), it happens here.

 

[JArraya]

You can replicate this easily.
1) Run the Bastogne scenario as Axis and issue no orders.
2) As soon as you get a failed supply message, Click "Surrender" and "Review Final Situation".
3) The nearest enemy unit is nowhere near the strange supply route chosen by the AI.
4) Visibility is 500m and never got higher than that before the event.
I am not doubting that a lot of effort went into the programming of this, but in my humble opinion, it's broken.


The only option I am missing is that Surrendering and Review Final Situation doesn't show all enemy units.

 

[jimcarravallah]

You can replicate this easily.
1) Run the Bastogne scenario as Axis and issue no orders.
2) As soon as you get a failed supply message, Click "Surrender" and "Review Final Situation".
3) The nearest enemy unit is nowhere near the strange supply route chosen by the AI.
4) Visibility is 500m and never got higher than that before the event.
I am not doubting that a lot of effort went into the programming of this, but in my humble opinion, it's broken.
View attachment 9465

The only option I am missing is that Surrendering and Review Final Situation doesn't show all enemy units.

No!

You're wasting my time!

First off, you're posting in the wrong forum to report game problems.

Second, John Connor suggested you post a saved game or recording so it can be analyzed with development software.

Why you insist on complaining while admitting you don't understand the game mechanics and not following procedures recommended for you to obtain some clarity on the situation is beyond me.

This discussion belongs under the thread "Game Support" following the instruction in that thread about how to obtain a resolution of problems you perceive.

Move it there, with a gamesave or recording, and maybe I'll take some time to address your concerns.

Meantime, I suggest you read the game manual and take some of its advice while trying to play the game.

 

[john connor]

If you post a save JArraya I'll have a look. Maybe open a bug thread and post it there? Or, actually, just mail me it privately. Be sure to tell me exactly which unit you think is being wrongly interdicted and at what time. Thanks for taking time to report possible errors!

I tried your experiment, as requested. Everyone requested and got their supplies until 8.08am, when the 39th fusiliers reported as blocked (as in your above example). The dev build shows at that point 500m visibility and the nearest enemy unit about 1,300m away (also as in your example, I think). BUT, if you check the control map you will see that the stream/river behind the 39th fusilier formation shows as contested and not in Axis control (I assume it's that way from scenario start). When I check the actual supply route I see it carefully goes round the area of orange control, but skirts right up against it. I think this can result in interdiction. (I'm not certain - I haven't actually been able to find any clear explanation of the overlays in the manual.) At any rate, it would be better to find an example where the interdicted units are not having to trace a supply route very close to terrain shown as not in their control, and post me a save of that (to the private mail). I think this example is probably working as intended and you should expect that supply routes passing through or very near to areas of enemy control can be interdicted even if there are no enemy counters within LOS of that point, because the control pattern reflects a level of abstraction (scouts, recon, patrols, forward elements, intel from civilians, whatever). As to how that stream gets to be orange, I actually have no idea how that is done. It's interesting, because I know of no way a scenario designer could set it up like that, which means the control overlay code has determined it that way. Whether that's a bug or not is a different matter. The control overlays, at any rate, are there for us to use and see and work with. Thanks.