RetLT Scenario issues

[RetLT]

The Russian Fortified houses (formation B) use SS ID tags.

Since this is a very old scenario, this likely happened with the introduction of the SS ID tag.

The problem is only cosmetic. They are still under Russian control.

[Mobhack]

Moved post to correct forum.

[DRG]

That's an odd one but it's the result of its age. That "fortified house" was pulled from the German OOB. Thinking at the time there wasn't one in the Russian OOB but there is now and it's now corrected for the next update

[RetLT]

Both sides retreat in the wrong direction.

[DRG]

load the scenario in the game editor and it will show Hungary ( left ) and Russia ( right ).

On the left side of the menu you will see " map sides " and it will show "Locked" click on "Locked" and it will change to "Free" and the button below will now show "Swap"

Do that and restart the sceanrio and tell me if that solves the problem for you

[RetLT]

That worked.

[DRG]

OK. I have applied it to the one in the master game and it will go out with the next update

[RetLT]

The Finnish/Swedish units that have rifles in their 2nd weapon slot play LMG sounds when they fire them.

They are F0, G0, G2 and H1.

[Mobhack]

Scenario problem - moved to scenarios sub-forum.

If these things were modified by the scenario desiger and the original units had LMG in slot 2 then he may not have changed the sound byte (if they had one assigned). That could be the case if the sound is not the default 0 since if the sound is default (0) then the code checks the weapon type and generates an appropriate sound, but if the OOB designer assigns a sound byte then that overrides that.

[DRG]

I will look into this.....

Yeah.... the original weapon in that slot is a BAR with sound FX 56... it's also set up as an "M/91" rifle and there is no M/91 in the Swedish OOB but there is in the Finn OOB. I will sort this out and get the correction into the next patch. The problem is there is NO WAY to change the sound number either in the game editor or with ScenHack when a scenario designer decides to "be creative" like this so it may just go back to being a BAR or a Finn LMG unless I can find a way to change it......so far no luck and the "BAR" sound is unique. This may end up being something you just need to ignore

[wulfir]

IIRC, this was the first scenario I ever created, around 2003/4 something. Been a while since then. :)

I switched between OOBs to get Swedish ID flags but Finnish weapons, for the SFK ("Swedish Volunteer Coy"). The easiest fix is probably to re-buy the units for player 1 using the standard Finland OOB...

I have a few days off. I'll update the scenario and sort it out.

[DRG]

The problem did expose a gap in our editing ability for the game/scenhack that Andy thought was covered but isn't so the ability to edit the weapon sound may go into the next release.

BUT... if you want to update it please do.. I have no doubt you will tweak it a bit given it's age and it is far easier now to change ID tags for units than it was way back then

[wulfir]

That scenario needs an update, badly.

Starting with the map. For comparison:


Vintage map of the area:

https://64.media.tumblr.com/0eafcecc5a8b23ef90a39d357f0cc283/39461c3bccc7b843-19/s540x810/51dcc8f0bcf421af42952b42ad13023d957bbad4.png




Venhola (tilted, arrow shows direction of Soviet attack):

https://64.media.tumblr.com/86889d17db25dc023015813354f45d0b/39461c3bccc7b843-65/s540x810/01682a9dd628dad220eaafbd5f96cec9b45d4e80.png





Quick edit in the game:

https://64.media.tumblr.com/387ecc5441672a92c2809f44eded1d7e/39461c3bccc7b843-e0/s540x810/2f20021380ea11e246a8145f6cbdb17a92fa953b.png

[RetLT]

Going back through old scenarios and found 2 issues with this one.

1. The French 37mm AA guns are really 13.2 AAMGs

2. The German Stugs don't have ammo for their MP40s.

The variant is tough as the defender.

[DRG]

I will look into these and make the corrections for the next update.
Thanks for finding and reporting them.

EDIT

They have both been corrected but nothing much really changes except a name. The French don't have 37mm AA but they do have 13.2mm AAMG's and now the unit reports being what it actually is........ a 13.2mm AAMG.

The Stug issue is that the B model in the OOB now does have an MP40 for close self-defense but the B model was not in service at the time this scenario is set but the Ausf A version was and the Ausf A does not have an MP-40 for self-defense so now the scenario uses an Ausf A

Don

[RetLT]

Making my way through the very old scenarios and found 2 in this one.

1. The Hungarian air transports play jet noises. Probably a speed issue.

2. The Hungarian capital ships are listed as having 16 smoke discharger shots on the info screen but none on the main screen. These would have been helpful in screen the ships from the shore batteries.

[RetLT]

The German Stug Bs have no ammo for the MP-40s.

The British 40 MM Bofors AA guns are very odd.

First they are listed as 40 mm Bofors guns but on unit info screen they are listed as QF 2pounder AA guns. Click on the information tab and they are once again 40 mm Bofors AA guns.

I would write this off as a nomenclature issue but it gets weirder.

On the main screen they are shown as having a range of 3000 meters, on the unit info screen as 2000 meters and on the information tab as a range of 46 hexes (2300 meters).

I have attached screen shots of the AA gun issues.

[Mobhack]

If a designer alters a unit, the basic info will change to reflect his edits - but the unit still points at the original databse entry for the second "more info" data.

That's always been the case with edited units in scenarios. Usually not a problem since the edit is minor, but can be a bit ofputting if the scenario designer edits the thing into something utterly different.

[DRG]

Also, if the scenario was made 15 years ago it will record the unit info in use 15 years ago and that may not be the same as the encyclopaedia reports now as the encyclopaedia reports current information not what may have been in use at the time the scenario units were purchased so when you see info that differs it may be old OOB data, it may be scenario designer modified data and it may be a combination of both and the game system as been like that from day 1 and the earlier the scenario the more chance of finding something like that.

However, it's all corrected now

[DRG]

The German Stug Bs have no ammo for the MP-40s.

That is the same issue you brought up a couple of days ago but in this case the B version IS available in that time period but the unit bought at the time the scenario was made didn't have it but it is all corrected now and will be in the next patch as will any other little oddities you may find that aren't reported by our error checking programs in any of the other older scenarios you may play

[Imp]

If anyone has not played this one I recommend giving it a go.

[DRG]

The issue with the air transports has been corrected and it was an OLD speed value for that UC..... the smoke dischargers may take some code work

[RetLT]

Continuing my picking of nit:

1. The Stukas take one damage after they drop their bombs. Usually they can strafe for a few turns.

2. the 251/10s have a carry capacity of 13. Probably a designer mod but I would think such an old scenario would be stock.

3. The photo for the mech infantry is of a soldier with a STG-44. It is a 1941 scenario and the unit has Kar 98s.

All very minor issues but my detective background and OCD won't let me ignore them. :)

[RetLT]

If anyone has not played this one I recommend giving it a go.


Agreed. This one has a bit of everything. Amphibious operations, an air drop, and cavalry.

[DRG]

Did you skip 34 or was it OK:D

Will investigate but..

1/ I'm going to say that may be deliberate to stop players from using them more than once.

2/........ no early on there was more "creativity" from scenario designers poking around with little unit changes to customize things and that has tapered off over the years...thankfully..... it makes error checking much easier when the units haven't been changed but 13 carry DOES appear to be a scenario designer adjustment as the 251/10 has only had a 3 man carry capacity since the DOS days and changing that creates problems I'm just going to leave alone.

Carry capacity is fixed in the game but it is FAR more flexible in RL

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/15/4a/62/154a629416078964e93f27a61b5505c5.jpg

https://www.nps.gov/museum/exhibits/eise/Military/WWII_normandy_VEday/NARA_First-Army-Soldiers-Ride-Sherman-Tank-8-14-1944.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c8/b2/11/c8b2110a4e475d2c87d40889b15f79ad.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c1/25/94/c12594d9989a4207400aa0cc6c25b72f.jpg

3/ in the future, knowing which unit number is VERY HELPFUL.

When that scenario was built they were carrying K98's now that unit carries 7.92k Mkb 42(H) and their in and out of service dates are completely different which is why that photo is what it is and why the units still carry the old weapons. That's the way the game preserves the major data the Scenario designer was working with at the time it was built but unit photo is not critical data that could alter a scenario

[RetLT]

Did you skip 34 or was it OK:D



I skipped up because I remember not liking it. I just opened it up and saw the Brit flag for both sides so I will look further.

If anyone wants to send me scenarios to play test I can stop being petty about finding minor errors.

I need something to keep me busy in quarantine. :D

[RetLT]

3/ in the future, knowing which unit number is VERY HELPFUL.



Sorry about the F1, F2, G1, G2 had the wrong photo.

[RetLT]

34 Fallujah road only has the issue of both flag being British on the player selection screen.

The opposition uses black during the game.

[DRG]

34 Fallujah road only has the issue of both flag being British on the player selection screen.

The opposition uses black during the game.

Which is EXACTLY why the two Britain's were used !..... to give the enemy side the black flag as no Iraqi flag exists in SPWW2. He could have used Green, Blue or Red but in that case, used the same nation on both sides to generate the black (rebel) flags for the enemy. If you read the introduction to it you will find it can be played from either side which will keep you busy twice as long:)

[RetLT]

Why is not black and British flags on the player selection screen?

Seems like it would be clearer.

[DRG]

Entirely different code. There is no black nation flag button. The V hex and ID tags are from a different series. This is SOP for SP for decades.

Player one is the default and that is the British side. Once you get past the start screen it will all seem perfectly normal

[RetLT]

The text implies that the player should play the USMC side but does not specifically state it and the default for the human player is Japan.

The #2 unit in formations B-O, which includes Rifle Squads, Paras, and raiders, is missing the weapon in the 4th slot. I would assume this was intended but the unit is shown as having shots for the 4th weapon slot.

The same goes for the Engineers in formations T,U, V, and AK. The 0 unit is missing its 4th weapon and the others are missing their 3rd and 4th weapons.

Really doesn't matter much since it is pretty easy to get a DV as the USMC.

[DRG]

Well.......
...It is estimated there are between three to four thousand Japanese infantry advancing on your position. You are ordered to hold until relieved.

......seems clear (to me) that this is to be played from the USMC but yes I agree having the game start with the Japanese as the Human player is a bit odd and IIRC this had been brought up WAY in the past but I will look into it again.

Since it's "pretty easy to get a DV as the USMC"....MAYBE it might be better played as the Japanese? ( you have said you are looking for things to do......:D )

As for the "missing weapons" methinks you are looking too hard to find fault.( yes, I know ...... Covid quarantines and all that goes with it) There is NO weapon and NO ammo the fact it shows shots is a "bug" so small as to be nearly invisible. It does look like the scenario designer removed a weapon and the ammo it used but I suspect the "Shots" code is showing the original units 4 weapons shots means nothing to gameplay but this scenario probably started being built in the year 2000. (see below)

From what I can see nearly all of the regular USMC squads in that scenario came from the same OOB unit and in the scenario some have a fourth weapon and some don't and sometimes that fourth weapon is a sniper rifle and sometimes it's a SMG. The game allows these alterations to be made and scenario designers tended to do the more back in "the old days".........AS WELL that unit ( 39 ) has been changed since the scenario was built... it still has the same first three weapons but the fourth is a Rifle grenade and now it's availability ends 9 months before this battle was fought so the "problem" here is very, very minor..... the game is showing shots for weapons and ammo that don't exist in that scenario and the sum effect on gameplay is zero.

And further to this..... this is a scenario that goes back to the DOS days. The scenario text has been unchanged since Jan 21/2001.....Twenty years ago almost to the day... so it was release either for DOS v4 or v5 as both upgrades were released in 2001. the oldest OOB I can view with the current MOBHack is the last version of DOS --V7 and in that OOB the last date that unit used in that scenario is 9/41.... a full year before this battle is fought and at some point that availability was pushed to the end of 1941 so it MAY have been available when this scenario was built OR the guy who built it could have set the date for purchase to 9/41..... bought the units then adjusted the battle date to 9/42 just to get a basic unit armed the way he wanted and then he removed and changed weapons. But also this means it had to be updated with a long lost conversion program when we converted the game to Windows in 2006 so the fact it even exists to be played and critiqued is a miracle ( Don Lazov can tell you all about the joys of trying to resurrect old DOS scenarios.....) and FYI the last TXT file in the game for a scenario that would have been built for a DOS release scenario then converted to run with the Windows version is 308 so expect to find little oddities like these.. some might be fixable...some may be just relics that cannot.

And further to the further, yes it is odd that the game starts with the Japanese as the human player but it *may* have been originally designed to be played that way ( twenty + years ago )


EDIT....That scenario has now be set up to start with USMC as the Human player

[RetLT]

I played as Japan and I now think that this is what was the side intended for the human player. The text doesn't match though.

It is much more of a challenge and is winnable. I managed to take all but one of the v hexes and crushed the defenders. I took the v hexes on the airfield on the last turn so time is tight.

The trick is to use concentrated Danger Close artillery support (2-3 hexes in front of your own troops) followed by a massed thrust on an narrow front near the 1st hill. The reserve troops then widen and hold the gap while the others move on the airfield.

I would consider adding a text for a Japanese player and say that the scenario is playable from both sides.

[DRG]

I have added txt to the write up making those suggestions but I think I will leave it as I have changed it to start with USMC human now as that is the way the text was written way back when.

"a challenge and is winnable" is a good thing in a scenario and it's good to have one that can be played by novices and experienced players depending on the side picked.

Thank you for trying it that way. You should keep a "rating record" of the ones you have played. We have provided a basic list of beginner scenarios and although every player has different skill levels we have never had " reviews " unless they are WIP feedback. This is partly why we added the SQL function to Scenhack so players can check which might be the long ones and the short ones but we also understand that writing an SQL to extract the type of info you might be looking for isn't for everyone.

[RetLT]

You should keep a "rating record" of the ones you have played.

Can do.

What criteria would you like to see the scenarios rated on?

I can think of:

1. Difficulty (Beginner/experienced/expert or easy/average/difficult)
2. Length (short/medium/long/very long)
This could have predetermined parameters in turns for each rating.
3. Size (small/medium/large/very large)

Could these ratings be made searchable if we standardized them?


Perhaps we should set up a sub forum for this topic so we can have multiple players work their way through the scenarios.

[DRG]

I was thinking more general impressions as to if it's easy or difficult or in between. ScenHack allows players to check for scenario length using Sort which does not require writing an SQL to find that info but including its length in a "review" would be easy enough. Size IS something that would be informative and that does not mean number of turns although that can be an indicator of size. In this case I refer to the number of units.....some players love the big monsters but not everyone does and when you have an hour to spare you don't want to start something that's going to take days to play.

I would say if you were interested in starting something like that a new thread on this subforum would be all that's needed.

An easily winnable scenario might be a bore for an experienced player but just what a newbie needs to know ( that he's not likey to have his butt handed to him by the AI )..... and one that plays good from both sides is good info too. I don't expect anyone to play both sides but if it happens it's worth noting and if it plays interestingly from both sides that's a potential PMEM scenario.

Scenario 39 might be a good one to PBEM if the experienced player takes Japan and the less experienced player takes USMC. As you said it was an easy win from the USMC POV but a challenge as the Japanese.

The reason people still play SP after a quarter-century is because of things like that

[wulfir]

I reworked the map and scenario for 199.

Instead of a narrow focus on the hills themselves I opted to make the scen represent the roughly three days the II Battalion/JR13 fought in this location.

This setup gives the player a few choices from the get go, which is something I like.

Some of the Bn is in position far forward (as was the case historically) so the player can either reinforce this area with the rest of the force and attempt to hold here - historically the order was to hold as far forward as possible and means a shot at keeping all VHs.

However, the player can also fall back towards the hills where the line can be made shorter, and there is less open terrain.

(The player could even fall back behind the anti-tank obstacles of the VKT line but might be hard pressed to regain the Victory Hexes if doing so before the game ends.)

I opted to not make the forest too dense with trees as I think this makes for a better game. Historically the Russians made use of AT-guns firing but it would be difficult for the AI to handle I replaced them with something else...

[RetLT]

Can you repost using another file extension? My computer will not open .rar files.

[Mobhack]

search for winrar, its a free utility to deal with rar files. Or 7zip, which deals with most (including zip, 7z, rar, tar gzip etc).

[wulfir]

Can you repost using another file extension? My computer will not open .rar files.

RetLt - I can send you the files directly.

Are you still using the aol email adress?

[RetLT]

Yes, thanks.

[RetLT]

This scenario is an assault/defend but there are no mines or forts.

Also Canadian unit AHO has its slash going the other direction. This is trivial but it pegged my OCD meter.

[Mobhack]

There is no reason that an assault mission has to have mines or forts in it.

It does mean that the defender is dug in, unlike an advance v delay.

[DRG]

I suspect this was built as an advance then made an assault and saved to emphasize this is a full on attack but neither side is dug in or has any other defensive measures like mines etc so from that POV it's perfectly OK and it's perfectly OK to set it up that way. It's just one of the little "tricks" scenario designers can use to get the set up they want and that is why it's an assault and neither side is dug in

The deviant slash has been corrected and for the record, that scenario is 2 decades old. Built Jan 2001

[Ts4EVER]

Not that important, but it is also ahistorical, the infra red panthers were not used in the west. However, there is a lot misinformation floating around on the German infra red tech, with tons of "tall tales" that have little to do with reality.

[DRG]

https://worldwar2database.com/gallery/wwii0148
Caption:
Panzerkampfwagen V Panther ausf G with FG 1250 Sperber (Sparrow Hawk)

An infrared Nachtjager (Night fighting) vision scope installed on the commander's cupola in place of the MG42 machine gun. This advanced (at the time) device consisted of a 300mm (11.8 inch) Infrarot-Scheinwerfer (Infrared Searchlight) connected to a Bildwandler or "Biwa" (image converter) and a device that sensed the elevation of the main gun. Only the Panther commander could see the infrared spectrum; he had to give directions to his crew. Six Panthers with Sperber would work with one SdKfz.251/20 Uhu (Owl) half-track with 600mm (23.6 inch) infrared searchlight, which extended the range to 700 meters (765.5 yards). Additional infrared gear for machine guns and the MP-44 assault rifle were also developed to give escorting infantry infrared capability as well. The Panthers were upgraded with Sperber by Maschinenfabrik Niedersachsen-Hannover (MNH) between September and December 1944. Sperber was affected by shock and by infrared pollution; all Panthers had covers installed to hide the heat from their exhausts. The combat history of the Sperber is the subject of debate. Sperber was probably used on the Eastern Front during the battle for Hungary in 1945. Sources say either fifty, four, or one Sperber Panther was tested there. Other sources claim the Sperber Panther was issued to 3.Kompanie, 24th Panzerregiment, 116th Panzerdivision for Wacht Am Rhein, the Ardennes Offensive. But no record of Sperber being used on the Western Front is considered definitive.

Two stories of Sperber Panthers on the Western Front exist. One states that Sperber Panthers attacked American anti-tank artillery position at the Weser Elbe Canal and destroyed the unit; another Sperber Panther unit destroyed an entire platoon of British Comet tanks. Both stories are probably apocryphal; some researchers claim that Sperber was never issued to the Western Front.

Without the supporting halftrack an it's IR spotlight it seems the range in the dark was 400m. With the HT it was 700m

https://fingolfen.tripod.com/ir/irpanth.html

So maybe, maybe not. The only way to know for sure would be to capture one and if you don't then you'll never know how they managed to knock out tanks in the dark One thing that is certain is the 16 ( 800 m ) in the OOB now for night vision is a wee bit optimistic and will be adjusted

[RetLT]

I forgot to mention that the defenders are set to advance rather than stay put.

They do this from turn 1, even though they hold all the v hexes. It would be much harder if they stayed put.

Thanks for clarifying about assault/defend. I thought there had to be mines or forts.

[DRG]

I will assume that is deliberate in the way it was set up. Unfortunately, I cannot turn the clock back 20 years and ask

[troopie]

Don, don't worry about it. The designer may be dead for all we know. Deal with the stuff now.

troopie

[DRG]

I would draw attention to the scenario write up which gives BIG clues to why it is set up the way it is



After fighting through the Reichswald, the Canadian First Army advanced on Goch and Calcar as part of its bid to reach the Rhine River. The 4th Brigade of the Canadian 2nd Division was given the task of cutting the Goch-Calcar Road. This was accomplished on 19 February by the Royal Hamilton Light Infantry and the Essex Scottish Regiments. This Canadian advance could not be tolerated by the Germans since it cut off a major supply route to German forces further north. Accordingly, the XLVII Panzer Korps counterattacked on the night of 19-20 February with the objective of recapturing the Goch-Calcar Road. After a harrowing night of fighting between the tough Canadians and the seasoned Panzertruppen of the Panzer Lehr and 116. Panzer Divisions, the road remained under Canadian control.*
*
Your mission is throw the Canadians back and recapture the road between Goch and Kalkar. You have at your disposal 40-odd tanks of the XLVII Panzer Korps and six companies of veteran Panzergrenadiere. You also have a few of the very rare "Uhu" Panthers equipped with top-secret night vision sights. Use them well!*
*
Canadian resistance will be strong. They are veteran troops who overran one of our Fallschirmjaeger battalions in their initial attack. You will face at least two battalions of Canadian infantry.*
*


Is that clear enough as to why this is set up as an assault where the "defenders" are set to advance ??

It's a German counter-attack on advancing Canadians which is why there are no defences and both sides are moving toward one another which is very creative use of the game system.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/98/85/bf/9885bf3e3d57927829afcac57d717421.jpg


For more clarity should anyone else play this down the road I will change

Battle Type: German Assault vs Canadian Defend*

to

Battle Type: German night Counter-Attack on a Canadian Advance.*



FUTHER.... I did discover a problem with this scenario that will be corrected when we release the next update. The German HQ, two trucks and a HT start the game on a grey border hex which means they are removed at start up. Now corrected but anyone can do that now with the in game editor. Simply load it in the editor and find the grey hex units and move them onto the actual map area then save the scenario in slot 19

[RetLT]

Unfortunately, I cannot turn the clock back 20 years


I would like to turn the clock back 20 years for many reasons not related to the game. :)

[Anthony_Scott]

Unfortunately, I cannot turn the clock back 20 years


I would like to turn the clock back 20 years for many reasons not related to the game. :)

You're not kidding with comment comrade.

[DRG]

Did you skip 34 or was it OK:D



I skipped up because I remember not liking it. I just opened it up and saw the Brit flag for both sides so I will look further.

If anyone wants to send me scenarios to play test I can stop being petty about finding minor errors.

I need something to keep me busy in quarantine. :D

Look for a number of changes to that scenario in the next release. The basics are the same but a lot of little details have been improved using the new tools we've put in since it was originally built

[RetLT]

1. Bridge hexes at 35,17 and 30,18 are shallow water.

2. AI never plots B-26 level bombers

3. Graphic for H1 and H2 (B-26s) are wrong (See attached)

[DRG]

OK. I will look into that

[DRG]

1 / Fixed

2/ The problem with those is the scenario is too short to allow the AI to plot the level bombers with the games built-in delay for level bombers. With the delay, by the time the AI decides what to attack with the delay added the game is over. At best on a "good day" the strike *might* arrive on the last turn but the simulation I ran showed the AI was on an 8 turn countdown to the B-26 airstrike on turn 10 of a 14 turn game so my choices are give it a predetermined target or change the Level bombers to Fighter bombers and that shortens the call in to attack delay keeping the attack in the AI's hand. EDIT.. found the perfect solution. French Personal of RAF No. 342 Squadron operated Douglas A-20C Havocs and those Havocs in the Brit OOB are ground attack and now there are French versions in the French OOB as FB so the delay for FB is manageable for the AI in a 14 turn game.

3 / Fixed. The photo is a Baltimore and the OOB that has evolved since that scenario was built does not have B-25's in French service ( I'm looking into that. It appears they did....) but it does have Baltimores so now they are correctly Baltimores and they DID have pre-planned targets and still do

[RetLT]

1. The following hexes are wooden bridges but do not show a bridge on the map:

47,17
49,14
49,25
50,12
50,26

Since there are no roads leading up to them I suspect they were supposed to be fords.

2. The ford at 49,35 is inside a wooden building.

3. The railway line runs in a trench. This could simulate a sunken road but there is no height difference between the trench and the adjacent hexes.

4. The AI does not plot the TU-2 level bombers. I would plot them strike on turn 0.

[DRG]

I'll look into this

EDIT

Those issues have been corrected. NOTE TO SCENARIO DESIGNERS do not give the AI unplotted bombers to use in a scenario under 20 turns.

These early scenarios were created before we bumped up the delay for calling in bomber support and that's why they are not showing up in those early scenarios.

The AI needs time to decide where the best target is and in short scenarios by the time the AI picks a target and the countdown delay ends, so has the scenario so the AI DOES use them but it needs a longer than <20 turn scenario so do so properly.

We have TU-2's as UC 44 FB now so I changed the level bomber versions to those and the AI will have time to plot them and I would rather keep that random factor in the scenario rather than pre-plotting.

The "bridge fords" trick was the only way to add a dedicated ford in the early days. When we added the ability to edit terrain height fords could be created at will. The game has evolved over 2 decades

[RetLT]

1. Republican 65mm guns O0 and L0 use different icons than the other 65mm guns. They look like long barreled AT guns while the others look like infantry guns.

2. The text mentions the first use of Molotov cocktails but neither side's units have any.

3. The AI does not use the Nationalist SB-2s even though the scenario is 30 turns long.

[DRG]

1/ There are no Republican 65mm guns O0 and L0 guns in this scenario but there are on the Nationalist side and the oddballs have been corrected

2/ They do now

3/ There are no Nationalist SB-2s but there are Republican SB-2s and the recommended side to play from is the Republican and that is how it is set up to start


Just remember if there is purple in the ID tags, that's the Republican side

[RetLT]

Thanks. The Molotovs should make it less of a cake walk.

I never could keep track of who was who in the Spanish Civil War. Communists and Anarchists vs Fascists made it hard to determine who the "Good guys" were.

[DRG]

I sprinkled in a few Bomba Gasolina units on both sides....not all units.

A choice between which is the best and worst option when it comes to Communists / Anarchists / Fascists is a tough call and at the time I suppose it boiled down to who did you personally the least harm. There was nothing wonderful about all three choices and may have come down to the process of elimination that ends with "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" even if that is not the choice you really want....... That and if you are standing in a mob in a town leaning towards the Fascists you don't start singing The Internationale.(if you want to continue breathing...).

When political sides get that far apart there is no middle ground. Keep in mind Mussolini was a Socialist newspaper editor and a member of the National Directorate of the Italian Socialist Party before WW1. He was too much of an Italian nationalist to accept socialist internationalism but they are both two sides of the same coin.

[troopie]

The 'Good Guys' are the ones I am playing. Also all of the scenarios from the DOS version may have issues. Don't worry about them.

[DRG]

I don't mind fixing these things but there are about 300 that were made in DOS and converted to windows format.

The DOS-Windows conversion is not the issue. It's the way the OOB's evolved over time and as good as our DB checks are, there are still things only human eyes can catch. Like oddball gun Icons or that the bombers are not being used

[RetLT]

The stone bridge at 91,25 is shallow water

[RetLT]

The Russian wagons (Formation Q) play truck sounds instead of clip-clop.

The field carraiges play the correct clip-clop sound.

[DRG]

They won't when the update is released.........

[RetLT]

The US 57mm ATG (Unit D1) is really a 37mm gun.

[DRG]

.....not any longer........57 now

[RetLT]

Thanks. A 37mm ATG can't do much more than scratch the paint on a Tiger.

[RetLT]

The Russian IS-2 (E1) starts dug in on a wooden bridge over nothing at hex 36,28.

One stray round and the bridge collapses, destroying the IS-2.

[Ts4EVER]

I wonder if that isnt intentional. Sounds like something that could be based on some anecdote from a book.

[DRG]

I had a look and that one is so strange it might very well be intentional. There is no other way to get that to happen except deliberately as the hex height is -2 and the hex height N - S of that position is 11 as are the hexes E-W of it..... though WHY that might have been done will remain a mystery as the scenario is 2 decades old but there is a very deliberate hole put there then bridged over tells me this was intentional for some reason.

Perhaps to simulate an underground sewer that collapsed from arty?? ....IDK But yes, it is kinda weird but it does not look like something that was the result of game code changes. What it looks like is a deliberate "game changer". There are only three German Stugs and that one IS-1 on the Soviet side. If that hex is hit with arty the game will, I suspect, play out differently than if it's not.

[RetLT]

The reds have 3 ATGs and a tank destroyer so the IS-2 is not pivitol.

If it is intentional (as it looks like it is) perhaps the IS-2 should be immobilized so it does not move away from the trap.

[Ts4EVER]

IMO keep it at the back of your head. If you find a similar "setup" in a different scenario, it is probably some weird bug caused by some change. If not, I would leave it.

[DRG]

There is nothing we did that would create a hole in the road that would put a bridge over it so this is an original design issue not something that happened as the result of code changes and if you find it in another of CB's scenarios its the designer not the game

This is a SS from winSPWW2v1.......same issue and that was released before we started expanding the map-making ability

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16362&stc=1&d=1617474724


If you are REALLY that bothered by it then use the editor and change it because personally I think this was done deliberately

[RetLT]

With the exception of unit AB5 all of the Lloyd carriers use Halftrack icons.

Since AB5 has a carry capacity of 12 I think they were all supposed to be half tracks and they were just mislabled and AB5 used the wrong icon.

[DRG]

No , I suspect that 20 years ago when this was built the Loyd carriers were probably Bren Carriers and at the time they had been set to carry a full squad and 20 years of OOB adjustments we ended up with a Halftrack that will hold the full section but is still using the old name and at some point, I will probably fix this but unfortunately ATM my HDD is showing signs of failing so I will be doing nothing more until that issue is resolved. The current patches are build and Andy is doing final checks and with what we have now they look good but there will be no further work done until I get this computer fixed and it's Easter Monday during a pandemic during another frigging lockdown so just imagine how happy I am ATM.

The units using a "loyd carrier" that have infantry should be Halftracks in this scenario so that is just a name issue and the ones pulling 6 pdrs should be loyd carriers and that is an Icon issue....both are minor issues and maybe one day that will be corrected. I do appreciate your attention to detail for pointing this though. That scenario has probably been like that for most of it's existance

[RetLT]

The stone bridge at 20,23 is a ford.

[DRG]

better check your co-ordinates

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16378&stc=1&d=1617935162

[RetLT]

Wrong scenario. It is in Scn 56 King Tigers at Arnhem.

[DRG]

Ah! I went to the name you gave not the number

[RetLT]

1. The German 251/17s are 2 different types.

A1 and N2 are SPAA and J2, K4, L4, and M4 are gun APCs. They use different icons.

2. The Russian TU-2 level bombers don't strike. Same issue as the other old scenarios.

3. The German A0 panther has no main gun ammo.

[DRG]

Revised. This will not be in patch issued tomorrow.

Call it a 2022 sneak-peak

[RetLT]

patch issued tomorrow.



Drools in anticipation.....

[Ts4EVER]

Is it possible that the A0 Panther is supposed to be some kind of gunless "Befehls" model? I know these existed for some German tanks.

[DRG]

The early Befehls had their main gun removed ( like German unit 516 PzBfWg III D1 ) but not the Panthers that only had a slight reduction in main gun ammo



The Sdkfz 267 Command Panther proved highly effective; by retaining the standard Panther gun and armour, it could engage the enemy directly while simultaneously controlling the actions of the unit it commanded. Moreover, by looking like the standard Panther tank its battlefield survivability improved,


https://weaponsandwarfare.com/2018/12/26/befehls-panthers/

[Ts4EVER]

Ok, then it is probably an oversight.

[DRG]

It's possible it's been like that all along and the designer way back when thought, like you, that there was no main gun and just removed the ammo not realizing it would be fine-tooth combed 16 years later. It doesn't matter why. It was identified and corrected

[DRG]

If you check it now you will see why the Iraqi ww2 era flag was added in the last update so it no longer needs to be a Brit vs Brit scenario so now its Brit vs "Blue"

[RetLT]

1.The Jap 13mm AAMGs (BG/BH)play high velocity cannon sounds

2. the 4.7 gun emplacements show no armor on the main screen but 25 on the info screen. (See attached photos).

[Mobhack]

If something has been modified by the scenario designer - the encyclopaedia screen reference does not change to match, so only the basic information is worth looking at. He could (say) turn a mortar into an AT gun, new icon etc, and the end user going for the "full info" will get the data for the unit in the encyclopaedia that was the basis before fiddling about.

basic info - comes from the unit data as in the scenario
full info - the info read from disk for the unit number in the encyclopaedia data in the OOB.

[DRG]

2/ Is most likely the reason Andy gave for the difference. The name "4.7" is not used in any Japanese OOB I have but I only have back to 2004 and they are named 120mm which is what 4.7 is so either the name was 4.7 when the scenario was built twenty years ago or the unit was modified to not have armour and the name was changed at the same time so that one I will leave as is. The "tell" for that is shown in Scenhack which shows a YES under Changed? which indicates that unit had been changed along with a few pillboxes so that means it WAS the scenario designer who changed it

EDIT: Next time you see something like that, open up the scenario with scenhack and check its "changed?" status. If it reports YES it's a scenario designer change so intended and it does not need to be reported unless it's doing something highly unusual.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16414&stc=1&d=1619262022

...and if you play this series in sequence there are quite a number that will not agree with the current encyclopedia because they show YES for changes made by the designer.

1/ however is a mystery. The sound number assigned now is an HMG sound and that unit has been a twin 13mm MG for as far back as I can check but you are correct, it produces a high-velocity cannon sound but that I can correct by "changing" them to the same unit using Scenhack ( which I have now done ) and they now play the correct sound FX but in the process of that fix I discovered we had two Japanese twin 13mm AAMG's..... the problem is that one of them is only a single and the photo for it is a single so I removed "twin" from the unit name.

Also, there are 13mm AAMGs in the next one but they give the correct sound in the test I ran

[Mobhack]

Yep, I could change it so a "this unit has ben modified by a scenario desiger" message instead of bringing up the (potentially waay out of spec) full-info encyslopaedia screen, but there is just the one "changed" flag for the unit and that gets set if anything was edited - which is usually something simple like editing the unit name and not a major remodelling/hack.

So it remains as-is, with the usual occasional "I founda bug!!!" report on these forums when a major rework of a unit leads to a completely out-of-whack encyclopaedia screen being displayed.

[RetLT]

1. King Tiger formations I, J, and K are all titled MKVI SSPZ 502 but only formation I uses the SS flag.

2. The Ju-88p-1s use a rocket firing sound when they fire their 7.5cm cannon.

[DRG]

OK. Wil look into those two items

[DRG]

ID tag issue fixed and I found out today that the 7.5cm version was soon replaced by the dual 3.7cm version and few if any of all types of the JU 88 P series survived past the end of 1944.

[RetLT]

Chines Unit I1 (37 mm cannon) has HE rounds but can not fire them indirectly (grayed out). It can fire smoke.

Screen shot attached.

[DRG]

Now corrected

[RetLT]

1. The following beach hexes are secretly shallow water:

Row 48: 10, 14, 18

Row 19 9, 10, 11, 13, 14

2. The Japanese Hill and Trench squads play pistol shot sounds when they fire their Type 100 rifles.

[DRG]

IDK if this was how it was built or how things have evolved over a couple of decades but those hill and trench units show up as unit class "crew" and crew typically only have pistols and you cannot "buy" crews and crews have a fixed OOB index of 249 in all OOB's. It's how the game knows what to bail out of a tank. I can fix this easily enough but it's really weird. I'm thinking there was some " creativity" employed by the original designer with a temporary altered OOB as this was built before there was Scenhack

[DRG]

It's a minor point but I doubt PBY's were used for level bombing and I'm going to dig around a bit to see just what was available on the first day. More likely it was carrier aircraft

EDIT: Found it......
http://pacific.valka.cz/forces/tf52.htm

TG 53.7 - Guam Landing 44/07 - 44/08
CTG RAdm Van H. Ragsdale, from 07/27 RAdm Thomas L. Sprague
CVE
CarDiv22 (RAdm Van H. Ragsdale):

Sangamon (CVEG-37: VF-37,VT-37)
Suwannee (CVEG-60: VF-60, VT-60)
Chenango (CVEG-35: VF-35, VT-35)

CarDiv24 (RAdm Felix B. Stump):

Corregidor/UF,DF (VC-41)
Coral Sea (VC-33)
Kalinin Bay (VC-3)


Absolute for certain there were Avengers on those carriers

[RetLT]

I thought it was odd to be using long range float planes to cover an amphibious landing.

The scenario is difficult currently so some accurate strike aircraft and/or naval artillery would definitely help.

Good catch on the crews. I did not notice that.

[DRG]

When it was built he may have just wanted to use something different and PBY's qualify and was added to the game around that time. It had been updated for DOS v6 in 2003 but from what I can gather from the timestamps of it and the ones around it, it appears it was built using OOB's for DOS V5 or perhaps V4 and IDK what changes might have been made for V6 but my guess is it was those PBY's as they appear at the very end of the unit selection list separate from the main USMC units.

One other slightly odd thing about this one is the Japanese have an observer team that overlooks the beach but no indirect arty of any kind for them to spot for and there is mention in battle reports that "many casualties caused by both mortars and sniper fire."

Attached is my basic correction/ revision for that scenario. The Japanese "crews" are gone, the PBY's are replaced by Avengers each with different weapon loads (which means they will be used by the AI if it's played from the Japanese side ), the LCVP now use the updated icons instead of what was the one generic LC icon used back then and the shallow water on the beaches is gone.

I'm also looking into further info on this battle and it is looking now like LVT's were used instead of LCVP which would change things a bit but I have just started looking into that. This scenario was also built before barbed wire was added to the game which would also add a different spin to it

[Mobhack]

The original DOS code allwed you to buy crews IIRC. No use for anything. (It may be that you can change the type in the change unit code in the scenario editor, probably still can). But still notu use as they can only enter thier own bunker, gun or vehicle which they wont have.

Sometime way back when, removal of spurious crews was part of the "tidy-up" code I added (I think, its going back a looong time!). I think that is part of the save scenario cleanup code, but cannot swear to it, but I vaguely recollect that unassociated crews will be swept up somewhere.

So if those "flavour" items were C_CREW class then they should be removed.

If so and they have only now been removed by the tidy-up routines then it has been a long time since that particular scenario was ever saved!

[DRG]

Attached is a revision for consideration. The 2021 revision has the USMC in LVT's instead of Landing craft with a few more USMC infantry units and Avengers instead of PBY's for air support but to balance that added USMC mobility and firepower the Japanese have better defenses.*

This should be a different kind of nasty.

[DRG]

If anyone does play this out let me know if it's easier or harder with the USMC. The version *I thought* I had posted gave the Japanese a couple of mortars to give their observer team something to do but I was juggling two versions and ended up posting the one without the added Japanese mortars.

[RetLT]

I would add a mortar or 2 to the defenders.

I cleared the map in 16 turns losing only 2 LTVs and 45 men.

[DRG]

So it ended up being easier with the LVT's even with the Wire on the Japanese positions?

And yeah...... I really thought those mortars were in both versions I was working with.

I have looked at that area using a Venola map..... those hills were a LOT steeper in RL

[Karagin]

So it ended up being easier with the LVT's even with the Wire on the Japanese positions?

And yeah...... I really thought those mortars were in both versions I was working with.

I have looked at that area using a Venola map..... those hills were a LOT steeper in RL

Maybe adjust the hill heights will add to the Japanese side for slowing down the Marnies. What about adding in more snipers?

[Mobhack]

Or make some really steep slopes impassabel so vehicles cannot traverse them and grunts are really slowed by them?

[DRG]

I have been working on something just like that and digging around the net for more info

EDIT

I had what was shaping up to be an interesting variant with hills more like reality and I got it done to the point of running a playtest and it started with the message that "USMC Engineers clear dragons teeth" which is a really nifty trick given they were in LVT's over half a km away from the nearest DT.......I took them out... repurchased them, reloaded them and started the game....same message...then the screen greyed out and locked up so that's a "delete me!!" dead end.

Don Lazov will attest to the joy of trying to massage an old scenario. It can be quite an adventure but once they start going sour there is only one solution. It's too bad. it was really starting to get interesting.

[RetLT]

The wooden buildings at 54,45 and 55,46 are paved roads

The ones at 48,49 and 54,50 are rough.

The secondary road disappears at 54,81.

[RetLT]

The Russian Dug in T-34s (Formation B) and the AT bunkers (Formation C) use SS flags.

[DRG]

Well, that shouldn't have happened. Now corrected

[RetLT]

I found it odd too since the scenario pre dates the SS flag icon.

I even checked to see if they were originally purchased as captured German units but they are vanilla Russian ones.

[RetLT]

I forgot to mention that the German A0 has no main gun ammo. Probably meant to represent a command tank.

[RetLT]

The scenario is billed as Finn defend vs Russian assault and features the Finnish flag on the player select page but when you get to the actual game all the v hexes are SS flags and all of the units use SS flags except E3 which uses a Finnish flag.

The squads are titled as "Inf Gruppe SS" but the HQ, AT guns, and MMG units are "Finn/5SS".

I would suggest that the main screen show SS vs Russia and all units use the SS flag or keep it as Finn vs Russia and have all the units use the Finnish flag.

This is another one that predates the SS flag so I am not sure why most were converted to the SS flag but E3 and the Side selection screen were not.

[DRG]

They show the SS tag because I changed them to the SS tag because Wiking was an SS formation

We have been over this in the past.... the main screen cannot show SS vs Russia because the only nation buttons used in the game are the ones you see when you pick for a generated battle and there is no SS "nation" ( or Philippines or Bolivia or the host of other nation ID and V hex flags we now allow to be used to dress up scenarios ) so it's going to show Finn as it was designed to. It may be that in that battle most of the Wiking units were Finns which is why he made them Finn instead of German... that's his prerogative as scenario designer.

E3 was missed in the conversion and why it still showed the Finn ID tag but that's now been corrected

[DRG]

I found it odd too since the scenario pre dates the SS flag icon.

I even checked to see if they were originally purchased as captured German units but they are vanilla Russian ones.

They are there because I opened up some of the old ones and added in the tags but somehow during the "apply to all" phase some of the Russian units were picked up.

[DRG]

I forgot to mention that the German A0 has no main gun ammo. Probably meant to represent a command tank.

The D, E and H command variants had dummy main guns but the Ausf. J and K: types were armed with actual 5 cm gun so it will have ammo in the next release as the other PzIII's are later versions as well

[RetLT]

Since I see that my issues threads have taken up most of the campaign page, I will use a single thread going forward.

Issues in Scenario #88 The dark streets of Kiev

Road hex at 82,20 is a stone building
Road hex at 74,57 is volcanic sand
Building hexes at 72,18 71,18 70,18 68,17 69,17 68,16 are paved road

[DRG]

As you can see. I have merged them all into one thread

[DRG]

Building hexes at 72,18 71,18 70,18 68,17 69,17 68,16 are paved road

That was a real treat to get fixed but it seems to be OK now. A bit too much "creativity" with building placement and I suspect a lot of re-editing that was not cleared down fully

[RetLT]

As you can see. I have merged them all into one thread


Thanks. I didn't want to monopolize the campaign and scenario page with my nit picking. :)

[zovs66]

Keep em coming LT! I'll start to worry on the 200 and 500-800 series.

Hope to have a several packs to you by July ;-)

[RetLT]

Keep em coming LT! I'll start to worry on the 200 and 500-800 series.

Hope to have a several packs to you by July ;-)

These were all exquisitely designed and well tested. :D

I look forward to new ones soon.

[RetLT]

Scenario #90 Kowel Attacking Czerkasy

SS unit O2 (Captured SU-76) uses Soviet flag.

[DRG]

Not any longer.

[RetLT]

Scenario #92 Tigers at Narva

The Russian P-39s (Formation AD) have no ammo for their 37mm cannons

[DRG]

Actually they do.... they just don't have a gun. For Aircraft the AP line is the number of guns and the HE line is the ammo. Those units in that scenario show 2 HE and 0 AP

Now corrected

[DRG]

I just discover why it was 2 HE and 0 AP but that discovery raises other questions

The oldest OOB I can check is DOS 7.01 which goes back to 2004. The scenario description TXT files are generally a good indicator of when it was made but this one shows 2006 but others on either side show 2001 so I will assume this was made using OOB's from around that time which would be DOS ver 3 or 4.

But I digress.....

The DOS 7.01 shows the unit used in that scenario to have 2x 30cal MG, 2x 50cal MG and the 37mm cannon and all the ammo/gun info is correct in that there is ammo and the number of guns is not zero

This is where things go sideways. The unit in the game shows the third slot with the cannon set up like 2 bombs so IDK if the unit was modified or why it would be but it is correct now

[zovs66]

My guess is that it was modified by the designer. I know of few of them that do so. :D

[zovs66]

I know I have added sandbags or logs to few tanks here and there to help balance or historical records...

[RetLT]

Scenario #94 Romanian Spring attack:

Mud hexes 47,33 and 48,34 are paved roads

[RetLT]

Scenario #95 Wiking meets the red blitz

There are invisible wooden bridges at 80,26 80,16 80,40 and 79,49. Since there are no roads I think these were supposed to be fords.

The Russian level bombers do not attack. I would plot them to strike on turn 0. The scenario is hard enough as it is so I would not make them strike aircraft.

[DRG]

The bridge/fords I can fix and yes this was a way to create a safe crossing place before we added the ability to manually change hex height but as you noted the scenario is already difficult for P1 but Medium as played as P2 and I assume as P2 you used them as bombers so in this case rather than plot them for a first turn strike and either give them an actual target that if destroyed could tip the play balance making a difficult scenario for P1 even more so or simply target them someplace they will do nothing more than create an airshow, what I am going to do is remove them. That does not make the scenario more or less difficult for P1 but potentially makes what you rate as a medium difficulty scenario when played as P2 into something that potentially makes it equally difficult and balanced for both sides

[RetLT]

Scenario #98 Hell's Highway:

The German HS-129s (Formation BP) play a rocket firing sound when they use their 7.5 cm cannon.

[RetLT]

Scenario #99 Wiking's Castle

Russian TU-2s do not fly. I would eliminate them or set them to attack on turn zero.

When I played Russia all they did was kick up smoke and damage a squad.

[DRG]

Scenario #99 Wiking's Castle

Russian TU-2s do not fly. I would eliminate them or set them to attack on turn zero.

When I played Russia all they did was kick up smoke and damage a squad.

As you have rated this one easy for the German side I have changed them to FB versions

[RetLT]

Scenario #104 Katukov's escape:

German PZ1 (A0) uses a Panther icon

Russian wagons G6 and G8 play truck noises rather than clip-clop.

[DRG]

Scenario #104 Katukov's escape:

German PZ1 (A0) uses a Panther icon

Russian wagons G6 and G8 play truck noises rather than clip-clop.

Not a Panther. A Russian Camo M4A2 (76). That was put in place of a Pz1 Icon I didn't think was used any longer so I used the slot for the M4.

Both issues now corrected

[RetLT]

Scenario 105 Enemy at the gates:

The following hexes are shallow water but display a different terrain type:

48,30
49,31
50,31
50,33
51,33
53,33
54,33
55,33
56,33
75,25
87,24
87,22
88,23

48,31 is deep water but displays a different terrain type.

There are several stream hexes that read as shallow water but these are effectively the same so not an issue.

[RetLT]

Scenario #109 Danmark and Totenkopf:

Russian AT bunkers M0, M1, M2 use a German flag.

The road at 65,25 has a building on top of it.

[DRG]

I had a closer look at this one and those three bunkers all show they originally came from the Geman OOB then were altered... WHY ?..... IDK but I can guess, but that's why they picked up the ID tags like they did. Digging a bit deep it looks like they were selected because he wanted a log bunker with an AT gun showing and there are none like that in the Russian OOB so He poached them from the German OOB and changed the weapons

[RetLT]

Scenario #120 Smashing the crust

German FJ Groupe G0 has HE Panzerfausts but no AP ones

British halftracks O4 and O5 are labeled as Lloyd carriers

[RetLT]

Scenario #125 Lippert attacks the DZ

The German infantry is titled "Inf/SS NCO" and "Pioneer group SS" but use a standard German flag.

[RetLT]

Scenario #126 Attempt to relive Frost

Same issue as 125. SS labeled infantry units use German flags.

[RetLT]

Scenario #128 The battle for Nijmegen

Same issue. SS units use German flags

[RetLT]

Scenario #129 Crushing the pocket

Same issue. SS units use German flags

[DRG]

The SS units show German flags because that's the way it was built as there was no SS tag at the time the scenario was created.
When the SS tag was introduced, I changed a few scenarios to test it out but there was no plan or reason to change every one of them and there is no requirement to use them if someone built a new scenario using SS troops now. it's in the game as an option, but does not have to be used

[RetLT]

Scenario #130 Cutting Hell's Highway

The stone bridge at 64,45 is shallow water

[RetLT]

Scenario 131 Frundsberg defends Hill 112

Several of the British halftracks are labeled as Lloyd carriers

[RetLT]

Scenario #132 Frundsberg at Malot

British Lloyd carriers Q4 and Q4 are really halftracks.

[RetLT]

Scenario #133 Hohenstaufen at Hill 113

German infantry unit N0 starts on the map but is listed as loaded on on N4

[DRG]

And that's exactly why that feature was added to the game. It's an easy fix once the carrier vehicles is identified......unload it and the doppleganger goes away.... then reload the carrier:up:

[RetLT]

Scenario #134 Frundsberg at Hill 188

Hedgerow at 70,22 is clear hex

British halftracks AD4-7 are listed as Lloyd carriers

[RetLT]

Scenario #138 9SS PZ in the Ardennes

The building at 7,71 is really a rough hex.

[DRG]

That one was an easy fix. I clicked on that hex with clear terrain and it now reports the building.

[RetLT]

Scenario #158 The road to Kozani pass

1. The German Fahrrad units play motorized sounds instead of bicycle sounds

2. British patrol Co is set to a speed of zero.

[DRG]

Now corrected

[Imp]

Did not want to post in the other thread but man you are flying through these. Thanks for those with less time makes selecting what to play easier.

[DRG]

Agreed. This has got to be a big help to new ( or old ) players looking for a scenario to try.

Most of the early ones were made by CB Blackard and I might be wrong but his scenarios stopped coming around this date....

https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/72592887/caswell-bruton-blackard

I didn't know a lot about him but a couple of details fit but not all. The last scenario I have from him is timestamped June 29/ 2006 so it's still a mystery

[RetLT]

Did not want to post in the other thread but man you are flying through these. Thanks for those with less time makes selecting what to play easier.

I am retired and don't fish or golf so I have a lot of hours to fill. :D

[RetLT]

Scenario #162 Gliders at Crete

I landed all of my gliders together but they seemed to be demoralized by all the abandoned gliders lying around and stayed pinned or worse for the rest of the scenario.

Is there a way to stop them from getting suppression points from the gliders?

[DRG]

I will put it on the list to investigate. When you say you landed them all together do you mean the same LZ ?

EDIT: The first turn on landing in my test they were pinned but after that as the AA positions were neutralized I was able to rally enough of them to start taking objectives. In the end I squeaked out a draw. I don't think it's the gliders so much as it is the pounding they take from the AA positions

[zovs66]

Sad news about CB, may he RIP. I think quite a few have passed on.

[RetLT]

I will put it on the list to investigate. When you say you landed them all together do you mean the same LZ ?



Yes, I landed them all at the same DZ (Far right). The only good thing was that they retreated towards the other objectives.

I barely managed a draw too.

[DRG]

I landed 3-4 gliders on each LZ. He may have designed it to draw for historical reasons.. IDK

[DRG]

Sad news about CB, may he RIP. I think quite a few have passed on.

It may have been him or not. The last timestamp on a scenario of his was 6 months after death but there are a number of reasons it might have happened that way. I did discover there is a CB Blackard III so there does seem to be 3 generations with that name and the CB who produced these scenarios may be III.... IDK it's just that the scenarios stopped coming around the same time we were deep into converting to windows and a lot of the old crew left.

We are pushing close to a quarter-century of development so yes, some of the early contributors could have passed away

[Ts4EVER]

I seem to remember that wreck bug also happened on one of my scenarios (with the gliders). They certainly seem to suppress infantry.

[DRG]

It *may* be that glider inf are picking up suppression like the crew of a destroyed tank....... BUT, landing in a glider under fire from 40mm AA is no cakewalk so added suppression from a hot LZ is not out of line and has nothing to do with the glider "wreaks"

[RetLT]

Glider wrecks are definitely the main cause of the suppression.

I tried and experiment where I landed all the gliders together near the top of the map and out of range of the AA guns. This took 9 turns.

On the turn after they landed the squads were all ready. The next turn they were all suppressed without being fired on or seeing an enemy unit.

[DRG]

I ran some tests on a newly built scenario to eliminate any chance this was something baked into a 20-year-old scenario but it's not and it's something both Andy and I thought had been sorted out ages ago

On the list to investigate and correct.

There should be some suppression from the landing but it shouldn't linger or increase when nothing is happening to cause it to go up

[DRG]

I will put it on the list to investigate. When you say you landed them all together do you mean the same LZ ?



Yes, I landed them all at the same DZ (Far right). The only good thing was that they retreated towards the other objectives.

I barely managed a draw too.

Just FYI..... this is ( I suspect.... ) why it was designed the way it was

https://nzhistory.govt.nz/war/the-battle-for-crete/the-battle-day-1-3


In the Galatas–Canea area, the German attack began with a glider assault. Glider-borne troops landed near Canea but were unable to achieve their main objectives – the capture of Canea and Suda – and were forced to surrender a few days later. German casualties during this operation were appalling as many of the gliders were shot down or wrecked on landing.

[Mobhack]

I havent looked at the scenario, but landing gliders on adverse terrain (including rough) is a recepie for hard landings (causes casualties to passengers) or outright destruction - very bad for passengers!

Invesigating the suppression issues and one factor is that the game code rates an abandoned vehicle in there with destroyed ones so may have to filter out STATUS_ABANDONED from the check for any nearby wrecks and routers. Testing continues.

[DRG]

FYI, I have tested the fix and it does seem to solve the problem but testing will continue

[RetLT]

Scenario #165 The Axis breaks

The German trucks E3-E5 use the Italian flag. They should be set as captured.

[RetLT]

Scenario #173 Crossing the Meuse

1.French bunkers AD1 and B1 are at the top of the map well away from the rest of their companies. B1 has no firing arc on map.

2. German PZ2 L5 uses an armed truck icon

[DRG]

Scenario #165 The Axis breaks

The German trucks E3-E5 use the Italian flag. They should be set as captured.

I *assume* you mean I3-I5.

E3-E5 are FJg LMG

[RetLT]

Yes. I knew it was a vowel formation.

[RetLT]

Scn 174 Counter attack at Sedan

1. German PZ2s F0 and R0 use an armed truck icon. Oddly the other PZ2s use the correct one.

2. Wooden bridge hexes 95,84 and 79,44 are shallow water.

3. There is a building on the road at 94,156

[RetLT]

Scenario #176 DAK: KG Ponath

The British halftracks in formations G and I are labeled as Lloyd carriers

[RetLT]

Scenario #177 DAK: 5PZ in action

1. German PZ2 B3 uses an armored car icon
2. British halftracks are labeled Lloyd carriers

[RetLT]

Scenario #181 RK for Kummel

British A0 Lloyd carrier is a halftrack

[RetLT]

Scenario #184 Servas's cross in gold

Lloyd carriers are halftracks. Oddly the picture on the unit info screen IS a Lloyd carrier.

[DRG]

You are going to find a lot of that. The carriers were given the capacity to carry a full section simply because in reality, two carriers could usually carry a full section but I try to avoid things like Carriers(2) that use one Icon. Everyone accepted that until a few years ago when it was repeatedly pointed out one carrier could not carry 12 men so the "simplest" solution was to change the carrier to a HT that could carry 12. The game picks up the HT photo but scenarios allow custom photos AND NAMES to be added so the old scenarios happily show the "new" HT Icon but use the original name and in many cases, photo

Hindsight suggests perhaps simply renaming them carriers(2) would have, in the long run, saved a lot of aggravation if for no other reason than in scenarios pre 1942 ( like 181 and this one), HT's should not even be available.

In cases like this I may simply change the Icon back to being a carrier and change the name to just "Carrier" and leave it at that. Chances are you may see a lot of that in this scenario series

[RetLT]

All the DAK scenarios seem to have this.

[DRG]

It does not affect their playability so just ignore it for now and it does not affect them all

[RetLT]

I will increase the dosage of my OCD meds and move on. :)

[DRG]

:up::up:

You won't find it again until 191 then 198 and then not until 332

I've written an SQL to find them

[RetLT]

Scenario #193 Carretera de la Coruna

Player 2 can not be set to human. I have never encountered this before.

[DRG]

If you go to the scenario start screen and place the cursor over the Republican Player 2 button and look at the message bar you will get your answer..... It's set up as a Campaign game and in a Campaign game you cannot switch sides

Apparently, the designer really only wanted this played from the Nationalist side

[RetLT]

Thanks. I didn't notice that.

[DRG]

It is very rarely used but it is a way to ensure players only play the side it was designed for.

[RetLT]

Scenario #200 Operation Rosselsprung

JU-52s play jet sounds

[RetLT]

Scenario #222 Under the Noel trees

V hex 2,26 can not be captured by the US player. It will turn to German flag from SS flag though.

[DRG]

Scenario #222 Under the Noel trees

V hex 2,26 can not be captured by the US player. It will turn to German flag from SS flag though.


Hmmmm..... that's weird. Will look into it

[RetLT]

Scenario #224 NKVD HQ Rostov

Russian units F0 and F1 are both 76.2 IGs but F0 uses an long barreled ATG icon

[RetLT]

Scenario #229 Brest-Litovsk

The German Stugs have no ammo for their MP-40s

The stone bridge at 45,13 is shallow water

The building at 59,34 block the road

[DRG]

Corrected

[RetLT]

Scenario #230 Festungstruppen

German fortified house D0 has its two MG42s turned off.

[RetLT]

Scenario #232 Abwerschlact bei Leczyka

Polish wagons play truck sounds

[RetLT]

Scenario #233 Delaying action at Otta

German Fahrrads AB4-AB7 play motorcycle sounds.

[RetLT]

Scenario #238 Glider raid on Eben Emael

AAMG positions L0 and M0 do not shoot at aircraft

Couple Grande E0 does not rotate.

[RetLT]

Scenario #240 Dernaki attack

The Polish wagons play truck sounds

[RetLT]

Scenario #243 First shots of the LAH

Polish LMG squads H0 and H1 play rifle sounds when they fire their 7.92 WZ 28 LMGs.
The rifle squads play the correct sound when firing the same weapon.

[DRG]

Those two are units created from scouts by the designer and picked up the original weapons sound.....now fixed

[blazejos]

Scenario #238 Glider raid on Eben Emael

AAMG positions L0 and M0 do not shoot at aircraft

Couple Grande E0 does not rotate.

Couple Grande was existing under different name in Belgian OOB and is probably static icon without possibility to rotate. About AAMG's I remember when I created this scenario around 2003/2005 They fire some shots on landing gilders in times when game were still based on DOS. Meaby that doesn't mater too much they should fire on German soldiers when they move on top of the fort that is their main task.

[RetLT]

Scenario #244 Charge Broski!

Polish wagons play truck sounds.

[RetLT]

Scenario #258 Storm over Sawakow

Wooden bridge at 42,66 is a swamp hex

[RetLT]

Scenario #259 KG Kleenman attacks

Russian partisan units AG0, AG1, and AG2 play the wrong sound for their MG-34s.

[RetLT]

Scenario #269 Westerplatte: Crew of death

Hedgerow hexes 68,25-27 are clear

Buildings at 30,112, 29,111, 29,112 and 29,113 are invisible

[DRG]

Scenario #269 Westerplatte: Crew of death

Hedgerow hexes 68,25-27 are clear

Buildings at 30,112, 29,111, 29,112 and 29,113 are invisible

For a while, I thought you'd found one I could not fix but I eventually came up with a workaround. The Hedgerows were simple...... the buildings OTOH were a PITA. I suspect originally it was supposed to be a single multihex building but nothing would go and the neutral V hex disappeared when I tried to remove the "invisible" buildings OR allow more to be added until I cleared a lot away around the area then I managed to get in some single hex buildings and rebuild the tracks and tramlines and reset the V hex.

Fun. NOT ....but fixed now

[RetLT]

Thanks.

I discovered it by accident when I tried to move one of the armored cars into the v hex and got a warning message.

[blazejos]

Hello
I created this scenario around 2003/2004 and haven't much experience in scenario creation one of my firsts. Probably that is why was this problem with invisible building great that you both found this and solved this issue. I try to include in this scenario two events Westerplatte defence and fight in Polish post office in Danzig (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_of_the_Polish_Post_Office_in_Danzig)which probably will be now best done in separate sceneries. I remember that Don especially for that scn build ADGZ icon unit in that time. Scenerio also include German SA units and SS local army of free city https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Heimwehr_Danzig and was quite complicate in times of DOS SPWW2

[RetLT]

Scenario #270 Battle of Mokra

Polish wagons play truck sounds

German PZ2s have no HE ammo

[RetLT]

Scenario #274 Hold the Panzers

Polish wagons play truck sounds

German PZ 2s have no HE ammo

[RetLT]

Scenario #275 Even the bravest

Polish wagons play truck sounds

German PZ 2s have no HE ammo

German 75.5 le IG 18s of Formation BE use a long barreled ATG icon. The othe ones use the correct icon.

[RetLT]

Scenario #280 Counterattack of 121 RIM

There is a wooden building blocking the road at 72,79

German Farhads play truck sounds

German ATRs play KAR 98 rifle sounds

[RetLT]

Scenario #284 Tanks before Zaicnai

Building at 23,80 is a road

[RetLT]

Scenario #285 The brawl of Bratuseni

Russian SMG squads in formations AA, AB, and AC are labeled as "Riflemen"

German units are set to counterattack as soon as a v hex is taken. This needs to be pushed back since they leave cover to counterattack a numerically superior enemy during the attack.

[DRG]

The scenario notes do say........

If played against the AI the human player should take the German side.

German reaction to V hexes taken is only an issue if the scenario is played from the not recommended side.

They are all set up as '99' reaction which means the AI decides. To 'push back' the reaction turn it would have to be known within a turn or two exactly when they need to react and everyone plays differently so what might work for you may leave someone else scratching their heads as to why they aren't reacting at all.

Basically, if you play from the non recommended side WYSIWYG

When it comes to precisely setting a reaction turn a lot of factors have to be repeatible for everyone and that's damn near impossible

EDIT..... unless the game plays out in similar ways for a variety of playtesters and that is where "that's damn near impossible" comes from. The closest you can get to that is for a designer to play out the scenario past the time he remembers where everything is and note the turn a counter-attack would be most advantageous then set that as a reaction turn for the units in that area of the map which still assumes all will play the sceanario the same way ( see last line above )

However what these reviews do ( and they are being included in the scenario text ) is allow players to better judge what scenario might be enjoyable to them and in a case like this where the timing of a counter-attack could change who wins and who loses and needs to be made more precisely than the AI can when played from the "wrong" side, can indicate a scenario that might make a really good PBEM battle.

FURTHER EDIT

I discovered why this was happening. The battle is described as a German Delay vs a Russian advance but the scenario is set up as a German Advance and that is why when played from the Russian side the Germans start advancing right away.

This may have been an oversight or it may have been deliberate. If Ulf reads this he can let us know. For now, I am assuming it should be set up as described... a Russian advance and have adjusted it accordingly

[DRG]

ONE LAST EDIT in regards to Scenario #285 The brawl of Bratuseni

I checked back to an original copy of that scenario that, from what I can tell had not been altered in any way. The creation dates for the CMT and DAT were the same and the TXT file was created 3 days before......... that text file shows this as being a German Delay but the scenario is set up as a German advance and that is why the German units were reacting way too soon when played with the Germans under computer control..... the AI was just doing what it was set up to do. The scenario is now set as a German Delay vs a Russian advance

If you'd like to try it again from the Russian side simply change it to Russian advance in the in game editor and save.

[RetLT]

Scenario #287 Dnjestr Crossing

Russian SMG squads are labeled as Riflemen

[RetLT]

Scenario #291 Rangoon escape route

British 3 in mortars have their range set to 2750 but have a max range of 1450

[RetLT]

Scenario #292 Seething with fury

Stream hexes at b54,64 and 46,56 are clear hexes

[DRG]

Not sure what you mean by "have their range set to 2750"
Where are you seeing this exactly
There are two types of 3 in mortar neither of which has a 2750 range

[RetLT]

Screen shot attached.

[Mobhack]

That means nothing in the scheme of things. Maybe the scenario designer used the Y key to set that specific range, maybe they self-set it as reaction to being fired on, but either way - nothing to worry about. AI will plot them normally for indirect fires. Human can use the Y key if needed.

[DRG]

AH !

This is why I keep copies of old OOB's.

This scenario was built in 2005/2006 so it was built with OOB's that spanned the DOS/Win changeover

Back then the 3 inch mortar in the Indian OOB had a 55 hex range and that = 2750

If you click on the unit and the unit data is shows the correct range and more importantly can only be targeted to the current correct range not the 2750 range

That was based on erroneous information from early on in the OOB development and is supposed to be the max range that late war the Long Range version could obtain but even 55 is too far and the current LR is 51

Why that bit of code is reporting the original range but the game uses the correct range everywhere else is a mystery

[zovs66]

In some of mine I have set the range (y) for the AI to help it hurt humans lol.

[DRG]

The "solution" in this case is to use Scenhack to "change" those units to their current version and when that is done and saved the scenario will report the correct range that can be used even though the correct range is what is currently being used.. just being reported incorrectly

https://forum.shrapnelgames.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16554&stc=1&d=1642177427


However, as the original scenario's mortar ranges would have allowed use onto Japanese positions and the reduced range does not I have redeployed those units closer to the lead units to compensate

[RetLT]

Scenario #295 Shafer's bad luck

US Naval Artillery units S0 and S1 are listed as Immobilized landing barges and can't be used for indirect fire.

They are key to any chance of stopping the Tigers

[DRG]

Those units had been borrowed from the USMC OOB and when that scenario was built that slot was occupied by a Naval Fire Support unit that was removed the next year and replaced by the LC

So........ AFAIK you are the first one to mention it in a decade and a half

Corrected now

[RetLT]

So........ AFAIK you are the first one to mention it in a decade and a half



No one picks nit quite like I do. ;)

[DRG]

So........ AFAIK you are the first one to mention it in a decade and a half



No one picks nit quite like I do. ;)


I am surprised though that Scenhack didn't pick it up given all the times I have run the checks on the scenarios after OOB changes

[DRG]

RE:

Scenario #182 Italian YF defends
Difficulty: Impossible
Size: Medium
Time: Medium
Playable from either side: no
Enjoyability: 1

Can't stop the Matildas. The best you can hope for is a 1:2 draw.


I don't like to hear it's impossible unless it was designed to be. In this case, it should not be impossible from the Italian side.

The big problem is in reality this was an Italian victory and there were only Crusaders on the British side.

I won't include this review in the scenario write up as the Matildas have been removed and replaced with Crusaders which changes the dynamics of the scenario

[RetLT]

If you can send me the updated version I can retest it.

[RetLT]

Scenario #298 Vendes

1. British 3-inch mortars have their range set to 3500 when max range is 2550 same as scn 294

2. German "Tiger" is really a PZ4h

3. Nearly all of the "Infantry Groups" which arrive as reinforcements are really mech scouts.

[DRG]

If you can send me the updated version I can retest it.

Send me a PM with your email address

[DRG]

Scenario #298 Vendes


3. Nearly all of the "Infantry Groups" which arrive as reinforcements are really mech scouts.

Looking at OOB's from around the time it was built, that was what was intended. Half normal squad strength reinforcements. Then as now the OOB name for the units is PzAufkl Grp and they are 6 man units and they have been renamed for this scenario

Scenario #298 Vendes
2. German "Tiger" is really a PZ4h

That unit has been a PzKw IV H right back as far as I can check. It says "Tiger" but it's a PzKw IV H. Since the scenario plays out OK with it being a PzKw IV H I will rename the unit

Scenario #298 Vendes

1. British 3-inch mortars have their range set to 3500 when max range is 2550 same as scn 294

Now correct

[RetLT]

Scenario #304 The evil upland

Same issues as Scn 295. The US naval artillery is immobilized landing barges

[DRG]

Scenario #162 Gliders at Crete

I landed all of my gliders together but they seemed to be demoralized by all the abandoned gliders lying around and stayed pinned or worse for the rest of the scenario.

Is there a way to stop them from getting suppression points from the gliders?


I needed to resurrect this as it is the next Item on our list.

I ran a test with Japanese Glider units ( because that was the nation that was P1 and I knew they had gliders as I had just redone the main glider )

Anyway.........

I landed the gliders away from any enemy fire. They all landed OK and after landing I moved the troops a few hexes as if setting up a perimeter then ended the turn 6 times

After landing the troops all had 1 suppression which is normal.... after 6 turns at least half were zero suppression so in that test I did not see suppression climb as the game went on.

If ANYONE would like to run some duplicate test... just simple ones and tell us if you see suppression climb after landing when they are not under fire

Thanks

[RetLT]

Just tried US v Germany 1944.

Landed all and stayed by the gliders. No suppression after 2-3 turns.

Maybe it was scenario specific somehow?

[DRG]

Just tried US v Germany 1944.

Landed all and stayed by the gliders. No suppression after 2-3 turns.

Maybe it was scenario specific somehow?

That's what we started to suspect . It may be where they are plotted to land that is the reason. If I land them somewhere nice and quiet in that scenario they don't gain suppression

However. Landing under constant fire from small arms and 40mm flak is not a recipe for making troops happy and brimming with confidence in their mission and those that planned it. It may be the mother of all "Hot LZ's".

A compound word that starts with "cluster" comes to mind......They literally land into Hell on earth when you use the "historical" LZ's

Thanks for running a test. It confirms the ones we've run

[zovs66]

I have created at least three scenarios that use gliders (that I can recall) one might be a good testing scenario AFK but it has operation Veracity in its name IIRC and is fairly small, or I may be thinking of Pegasus bridge and I also did a smaller 1940 German glider one but they are set to land on elevated roads or in fields and the Dutch are in the LZ.

[DRG]

Don....... it's the LZ's in that scenario. Troops are landing and exiting gliders right into 40mm Bofors and small arms fire and since there are hardly any units that are capable of returning fire and if they do they have the undivided attention of aforementioned AA and small arms.

It's a good scenario to play if you like "a challenge" :rolleyes:

[DRG]

Did some digging....... glad I did. I have added this to the scenario write up

Historically this is what happened.....

: https://history.army.mil/books/wwii/balkan/20_260_4.htm*
*
'At 0800 the first gliders, each carrying twelve men, landed near the airfield and on the beaches near Canea. At the same time approximately 2,000 parachutists jumped in waves of 200 each at fifteen minute intervals. Two of every three parachutes in each wave carried containers with weapons and supplies. At Maleme, the parachute troops jumped into strong enemy fire from infantry weapons, em-placed in positions built into the hills south of the airfield. Many of the paratroopers were killed during the descent or shortly after landing. Because of the concentrated enemy fire most of the men were unable to recover the weapons containers and had to rely on the pistol, four hand grenades, and large knife they carried. One battalion of the assault regiment landed too far to the east among olive groves and vineyards near Maleme and was greeted by murderous machine gun and heavy weapons fire. Casualties were very heavy, and the medical platoon that had set up a first aid station in a farm house was overwhelmed by the constant influx of seriously wounded men. The gliders would have been completely destroyed by enemy fire, had they not been covered by clouds of dust which formed as soon as they touched ground.'

........and the scenario pretty much recreates that chaos and the units in the scenario are better armed than the actual troops