New host of issues with new update...

[Marquee]

Hate to have to bear bad tidings, but in the interest of getting this thing in shape, here is my list of issues with ver. 1.05i:

• Reserve craziness
  Just with the introduction of beta "i", I am getting tons of reserves in battle not just from my army's reserve and the GHQ, but also: Other armies' reserves, other nations' GHQs (in a Ger III Armee battle in Longwy, I had the Italian GHQ reserve present from all the way down in Provence!!). Something had to be drastically changed in the reserve code, because it's really FUBAR now.
• Redeployments
  I can't do anything. I try to transfer to Front GHQ, but nothing will go. Some detachments won't move to Army reserve even though within two regions and there being room in the reserve.
• AI Stalls
  I'm getting repeated AI stalls during its activations. The stall is fixed by saving, quitting and reloading, so no save game will show this. But it's always before or after opposition activations.
• Missing RRs
  I noted previously that there appear to be RR connections between areas that are not reflected on the map, but now I've found a region that has NO railroad through it yet moving into it creates a railhead marker and clicking on it shows it should have a RR w/ a capacity of 3. This is in Janow (Ru). Also in Gusyatin (Ru) where there appears to be an invisible RR w/ a capacity of 5. Another is Chelm (Ru) with a capacity of 3.
• Reinforcements
  I am having off and on difficulty placing corps in the HQ boxes during the Reinforcement phase. Sometimes I'll attempt to place it in a box, it won't go (get an error message repeatedly), then I'll try another corps in the same HQ and it will go, then another, then I go back to the original corps that wouldn't go and it will now go in. Don't know why the order makes any difference but it's extremely fiddly.

As usual, I'm playing Army-by-Army/2-Player/Central Powers.

[Kaiser1918]

Your fourth point is a problem for me, too...it's very erratic.

[calvinus]

Reserve craziness
Just with the introduction of beta "i", I am getting tons of reserves in battle not just from my army's reserve and the GHQ, but also: Other armies' reserves, other nations' GHQs (in a Ger III Armee battle in Longwy, I had the Italian GHQ reserve present from all the way down in Provence!!). Something had to be drastically changed in the reserve code, because it's really FUBAR now.

To be honest, this is coherent with the boardgame rules.
All armies and GHQs in range can help, provided the Firepower doctrine is in vigor.
But, like you, I do not like this rule. The number of reserve corps is enormous and offensives become a bath of blood even worst than in history...

Redeployments
I can't do anything. I try to transfer to Front GHQ, but nothing will go. Some detachments won't move to Army reserve even though within two regions and there being room in the reserve.

I commonly teleport detachments with no problem. Can you please post here a savegame telling me for example which stack gives problem exactly?

AI Stalls
I'm getting repeated AI stalls during its activations. The stall is fixed by saving, quitting and reloading, so no save game will show this. But it's always before or after opposition activations.

Already reported by an Italian player. I'm working on it.

Missing RRs
I noted previously that there appear to be RR connections between areas that are not reflected on the map, but now I've found a region that has NO railroad through it yet moving into it creates a railhead marker and clicking on it shows it should have a RR w/ a capacity of 3. This is in Janow (Ru). Also in Gusyatin (Ru) where there appears to be an invisible RR w/ a capacity of 5.

Ok, I will fix that "hole" asap. I will inform also Philippe, because Gilles is redoing the map, so he can double-check all railroads.

Reinforcements
I am having off and on difficulty placing corps in the HQ boxes during the Reinforcement phase. Sometimes I'll attempt to place it in a box, it won't go (get an error message repeatedly), then I'll try another corps in the same HQ and it will go, then another, then I go back to the original corps that wouldn't go and it will now go in. Don't know why the order makes any difference but it's extremely fiddly.

I will have a look here too.

[Frank]

To be honest, this is coherent with the boardgame rules.
All armies and GHQs in range can help, provided the Firepower doctrine is in vigor.
But, like you, I do not like this rule. The number of reserve corps is enormous and offensives become a bath of blood even worst than in history...

Maybe you could add an optional rule to disable this?

[calvinus]

Yes, the impacts are to be tested.

[dougbush93]

With regard to reserves being too large in number:

[*]Reserve craziness
Just with the introduction of beta "i", I am getting tons of reserves in battle not just from my army's reserve and the GHQ, but also: Other armies' reserves, other nations' GHQs (in a Ger III Armee battle in Longwy, I had the Italian GHQ reserve present from all the way down in Provence!!). Something had to be drastically changed in the reserve code, because it's really FUBAR now.
[/LIST]

As usual, I'm playing Army-by-Army/2-Player/Central Powers.

There is a way to address this without changing the reserve range rules, including those for GHQs:

In the LGG boardgame, rule 10-D prohibits Corps with Army numbers on them ever being placed in the GHQ reserve, or the reserve of an Army HQ. That rules does not appear to be in effect in the boardgame, where one routinely sees Corps with Army #s on them in reserve.

This rule would be a good one to consider for a couple reasons. It would make reserves easier for a player to manage, and it would give the attacker at least some chance of a breakthrough b/c the number and quality of corps in the defender's reserves would be lower.

Anyway, just a thought, but it is something from the boardgame that could be a good addition to computer LGG.

Doug

[calvinus]

Excellent suggestion dougbush93.

[Marquee]

Thank you for the reply calvinus. I did not realize that the firepower doctrine permitted this kind of reserve madness. Thing is, that Italian GHQ was not "in range". What was that all about?

I could see that, historically speaking, these reserves could reflect how the battles changed and where both sides could just pour in reserves to an ongoing battle so it all turned into a meat grinder. It's odd but if it's working as designed, then I have less qualms about it, except for that Italian GHQ.

I would guess that if WAD, it's a game design issue so it shouldn't just be turned off without addressing the rationale that counselled the rule in the first place. I would go cautiously, even if the rule appears odd at first blush.

[Marquee]

I will try to isolate the redeployment issue I'm having in a save game.

[calvinus]

Thank you for the reply calvinus. I did not realize that the firepower doctrine permitted this kind of reserve madness. Thing is, that Italian GHQ was not "in range". What was that all about?

Yes, the Firepower doctrine allows you to grab reserves from all armies and GHQs inside the same front. This is why the Italian GHQ is considered "in range". This is the original boardgame rule, that is a bit different for the Russian front, where the "range" is calculated differently (I remember max 6 areas). In fact, see the Options window: you will find the check-box for disabling the "special rule for battle reinforcements in Russian front".

I'm wondering if I should apply the "special rule" also to the Western Front...

Your opinion?

[calvinus]

Ok, after a short discussion with Philippe, we agreed to armonize the battle reserves rule of the Western Front with that one of Eastern Front.

Only armies and GHQs physically "in range" will be able to intervene!

[dougbush93]

That's a major change in the game, but if won't make that much difference given the short distances in the West. It will, however, require the British to move their GHQ into France, so it is in 6-area range of the British armies. The net effect will be that the French GHQ and German GHQ-West cannot send corps to Italy. If you implement that change + prevent corps with Army #s from being in reserves, it will give attackers a fighting chance to breakthrough.

Doug

[calvinus]

I already did the British GHQ free to move to France.
So I'm going to armonize the east-west rules and I will "prevent corps with Army #s from being in [GHQ] reserves" as you wrote, but not for corps whose numbered army HQ is still not in play, ok??

[Tamas]

it will give attackers a fighting chance to breakthrough.

Doug

Thats what I am worried about, also.

Basically, lets say the Allied player masses at the Belgium border for a Grand Offensive in 1916. That means, that under those new rules, if the Vosges are more than 6 areas away from that Grand Offensive, the Germans can launch a counter-offensive and hope for pretty decent odds for a breakthrough.
I am not sure I like it. Applying the "no corps-number labelled units in reserves" rule would be the best solution.

[calvinus]

What I can do is to introduce some rule on/off markers in the GameRules.CSV DB that will allow you to test separately all possible combinations among:
- not numbered corps
- max 6-area range

This inside the next official patch 1.05L.

So you will have some weeks for your personal tests and when we will reach a shared opinion on that, I can apply a new default setting in 1.06.

[Marquee]

I already did the British GHQ free to move to France.
So I'm going to armonize the east-west rules and I will "prevent corps with Army #s from being in [GHQ] reserves" as you wrote, but not for corps whose numbered army HQ is still not in play, ok??

Doug also stated that corps with army #s could not be placed in their army reserve either. I think this would be good and important to implement as well since it would limit somewhat the nature of reserves that could be shifted away from a given army.

I really like your "armonization" of the rules, calvinus. That seems more appropriate than permitting units from the south of France to participate in combat north of Paris.

@Tamas: I have Italy in the Central Powers and it is very strange to have their units from the south available to German armies in the north. There isn't even a valid movement path between them. I can see how you would view it differently if it were only German units in France (no Italy) and the GHQ could act with all German armies on the West Front. Still, I think having the GHQ in standard range is good in any event. It's still a long way for reserves to travel and is quite an advantage for the defense.

[Marquee]

Another invisible RR region is Chelm (Ru), where there should be a rail capacity of 3.

[dougbush93]

Doug also stated that corps with army #s could not be placed in their army reserve either. I think this would be good and important to implement as well since it would limit somewhat the nature of reserves that could be shifted away from a given army.

That's a key point. Full implementation of rule 10-D from the boardgame would also not allow corps with Army #s in Army HQ reserves, as well as not allowing them in the GHQ reserve.

Also, I like making both these changes as options players can select.

Doug

[Marquee]

I feel stupid for not knowing about the expanded reserves under the firepower doctrine. Yet I looked at the new full manual in the combat doctrines section and still couldn't find where this is all described. Is it in there?

Also, I couldn't find anything about Redeployment in the table of contents; is it in there and which section would it be in?

[calvinus]

I'm just finishing the army # corps restrictions stuff..

And I will do also the east-west rules "armonization" job (customizable via Options window).

For the manual, I will inform Martin about these new points to add/integrate.

Thanks,
Calvinus.

[calvinus]

Another invisible RR region is Chelm (Ru), where there should be a rail capacity of 3.

I'm going to check also all RR connections (I will build a graphic tool for that).

[calvinus]

I'm going to check also all RR connections (I will build a graphic tool for that).

Done! CTRL+R will allow you to check visually all actual rail connection. I already found some errors, not too many anyway.

[Winfield S. Hancock]

Calvinus, will these changes on the corps rules be compatible with saved games under a previous version of the patch? Will the RR changes be compatible or will they be a problem since they change the map?

[calvinus]

Calvinus, will these changes on the corps rules be compatible with saved games under a previous version of the patch?

This one yes, sure!

Will the RR changes be compatible or will they be a problem since they change the map?

This not, sorry.
But the missing connections are not so many...

[calvinus]

I feel stupid for not knowing about the expanded reserves under the firepower doctrine. Yet I looked at the new full manual in the combat doctrines section and still couldn't find where this is all described. Is it in there?

I checked the full manual. Look at chapter 11.8.5 "Pre-battle Reinforcements".

I thinks something has anyway to be added in the list, such as (bold):

These reinforcement corps may come from:
● his HQ reserve
● the GHQ reserve (See below)
● or from a stack of the same Army at a distance of up to 3 regions, but
leaving at least 1 corps in place
● only in Fire-Power doctrine: the corps in the HQ reserves of armies located on the same Front (see Russian front special rule), the intrinsic army corps are not counted.

[Marquee]

Heh, well the reason I didn't find that was because 11.8.5 is in the section dealing with "Preliminary Bombardment". I haven't even had a preliminary bombardment occur in my game (again, am I doing something wrong?).

I think the difference in reserves needs to be explained in both the "Field Combat" section under a separate heading or in the HQ/GHQ reserves heading, as well as the "Combat Doctrines" section. I mean, this is a massive change from the procedure under the initial movement doctrine in 1914.

I appreciate you locating that reference, calvinus. I still feel bad for not recognizing this was a game feature and not a mistake. Apparently everyone else experienced it and didn't think it was amiss like I did.

[calvinus]

No problem Marquee. I realise that working such a big manual is really a challenge... I'm now working on the Events section. Unfortunately I'm now overwhelmed by several jobs to undertake in "multitasking mode"
I will inform Martin about your doubts and compliants.

[Nial]

Just found a new one last night.

I attacked a German province in Africa with three French corps. All three were eliminated. These were the three corps France starts with in Africa. In the next reinforcement phase they were in the to be placed window. I could not place them in Africa or anywhere else. I got the red message that it was not allowed. I was finaly able to place them by placing them inside an existing British stack in Africa.

Nial

[calvinus]

Just found a new one last night.

I attacked a German province in Africa with three French corps. All three were eliminated. These were the three corps France starts with in Africa. In the next reinforcement phase they were in the to be placed window. I could not place them in Africa or anywhere else. I got the red message that it was not allowed. I was finaly able to place them by placing them inside an existing British stack in Africa.

Nial

Arghhh it's a WAD. Reinforcements can be placed only in major cities or supplied stacks.......

Philippe... do you think we have to override the major cities rule for Africa???

[Nial]

Arghhh it's a WAD. Reinforcements can be placed only in major cities or supplied stacks.......
:

*nod* I thought it might have something to do with that rule.

Nial