Serious recruitment bug/exploit and Bombard questions

[Yorick]

I ran into a pretty big bug in my current GC PBEM.
I conquered Penza as the Reds. I could recruit two conscript divisions there so I built them. Since I had Zhloba active I formed the two units under construction in a division under him. Then when I went in recruiting mode to build somewhere else I saw that I could recruit conscript divisions in Penza again. When I did so I saw all my resources go up.
It seems the game treats unbuilt units included in divisions as if they had been disbanded, refunds included.
I checked in many other situations and the recruitment bug kept happening. This means that as long as a player has enough active leaders in a region he can exploit this bug to effectively build infinite units there for no cost.

The attached savegame to reproduce this is on the 1.05b RC2 patch but this should reproduce in any game.

[ATTACH]19748[/ATTACH]

[jack54]

Nice post Yordick! it does seem to happen that way. I did the same with Denisov as Southern whites. Denisov and division elements now appear in units under construction window.

I always hesitated to place units under construction into divisions believing that they would then take from the reinforcement pool instead of manpower pool. Very Interested in what Lodi has to say.it may be WAD!

[Leibst]

I think is a known issue.

[lodilefty]

Should not be!
I recall this being reported before somewhere, but I'm having a Senior Moment...

Referred to The Master.....

[DarkGarry]

Issue with BOMBARD command.
When land formation got BOMBARD order it works for ships PASSING BY the formation(moving next to it), but it does not work for STANDING ships.

I have a formation locked in Archangelsk, several ships prevent me from crossing river, entranchement is 4 (maxed) and Bombard set. I tried all postures for several turns, but no shells fired at ships, that just standing nearby.

[lodilefty]

Issue with BOMBARD command.
When land formation got BOMBARD order it works for ships PASSING BY the formation(moving next to it), but it does not work for STANDING ships.

I have a formation locked in Archangelsk, several ships prevent me from crossing river, entranchement is 4 (maxed) and Bombard set. I tried all postures for several turns, but no shells fired at ships, that just standing nearby.

Correct. Bombard uses the "two adjacent regions" rule, and only shoots at ships moving throught two regions adjacent to the guns.
See many discussions in AACW forum.
WAD

[DarkGarry]

WAD???

Strange design decision. Allows to lock Archangelsk just by using Allied fleet.

In Kolchak's Coup Reds probably can lock entire Volga river completely (for a warm season ) because Siberians have only 2 Allied fleet formations in Caspian Sea. One ship placed at Kazan, Sizran, Saratov and no one can pass.

[Orel]

WAD???

Strange design decision. Allows to lock Archangelsk just by using Allied fleet.

In Kolchak's Coup Reds probably can lock entire Volga river completely (for a warm season ) because Siberians have only 2 Allied fleet formations in Caspian Sea. One ship placed at Kazan, Sizran, Saratov and no one can pass.

I agree with DarkGarry. I would even probably say that ships could possibly pass by through a certain river area unnoticed before artillery opens fire, but if they are there for months then it is far easier for the artillery to destroy them. Would it be possible to take a look at the discussions concerning this matter?

[lodilefty]

I agree with DarkGarry. I would even probably say that ships could possibly pass by through a certain river area unnoticed before artillery opens fire, but if they are there for months then it is far easier for the artillery to destroy them. Would it be possible to take a look at the discussions concerning this matter?

This has been the way the Game Engine works since BOA!!!!

After the intense discussions of same in AACW, I seriously doubt it will be changed.....
...but who knows, if The Master gets bored with new game dev, AI code, faster processing, etc etc, maybe he'll want to look at this yet again....

[lodilefty]

Let me try to explain why I think it is correct as-is:

1) The water region represents many square miles of water, much of it out of range of land based artillery and ships guns.
2) Ships stationary there are carrying out "brown water blockade", preventing supply to the port and attacking enemy shipping.
3) If those ships move in to support land combat [by selecting that special order], your land artillery with enough range WILL fire on them if they fire.
4) The "2 region passing" rule is a game aprroximation of ships attempting to pass "under the guns", which WILL cause exchange of fire. [Note that the port region itself might qualify as one of the regions, if you have artillery adjacent to an enemy port]

So, IMHO, if anything were to change, it would be to revise the "2 region rule" as in many cases there should be ample room in the water region to stay out of range of shore batteries!!!!! [See the eastern coastline of AACW: too much damage gets inflicted to passing Monitors that cannot go into deep water!]

[Taijian]

Let me try to explain why I think it is correct as-is:

1) The water region represents many square miles of water, much of it out of range of land based artillery and ships guns.
2) Ships stationary there are carrying out "brown water blockade", preventing supply to the port and attacking enemy shipping.
3) If those ships move in to support land combat [by selecting that special order], your land artillery with enough range WILL fire on them if they fire.

I think this is where the problem comes in when transferring a model that works fine on oceans to rivers. I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU with regard to the rules as they apply to ocean regions.

However, the OP was complaining about a boat that was blocking his movement across a RIVER while stationary, which he could thus not engage because of the 'double adjacency' rule. I personally think that what needs to be added here is the option for the ships to actively decide à la 3) of whether or not they want to block movement across the river. Because if they want to do that, then they have to get close enough that emplaced artillery will be able to fire upon them, too [supposing of course, that the army commander attempting to cross is smart enough to choose a suitable spot to do so]. If they do not want to contest the crossing, then they can stay out of range. If they do want to fight, they should have to!

[lodilefty]

For river crossings, there are several parameters that can be adjusted.

All located in \RUS\Settings\GameLogic.opt
Section on Bomard and Blockade:

bloValueBySU_LinkCut = 23 // Perc chance for each combat ship (cumulative) that a transition link over water is cut between 2 land regions.
bloMaxPerc_LinkCut = 90 // max chance to have the link cut.
bloMinSUForLinkCut = 4 // Min nb of elements in offensive posture in a water region to cut the transition link between 2 adjacents land regions
......

Reducing the percent per ship, the max percent should help.
Set them = 0 if you don't think ships should even block a crossing at all!

and to shoot at a MOVING ship you'll note:

bmbMinEntrenchLevel = 3 // Minimum level to reach by an artillery so that it can bombards or interdict ships& water supply
bmbRange = 5 // Minimum range a gun should have to fire on passing ships

If you decide to try modding these, let us know how it works.

Again, thisdiscussion has been long standing at AACW, with no change to game engine code!

[DarkGarry]

If I would be designer of the BOMBARD and BLOCKADE port or river crossing feature I would:
1. Make Land units in river/sea adjusting region fire AUTOMATICALLY at ships (no need to use BOMBARD command for Land units if Entranchement > 3) because everyone always want to shoot at approaching enemy fleet.
2. Land to sea fire inflicts damage with some LOW BASE PROBABILITY (10% or so).
3. Ships has Blockade command to blockade port or river.
4. Ships has Bombard command to actively engage with land units and come to supoport to battle in neighbouring region (like MTSOG).
5. Resulting damage probability for Land to sea fire equal BASE + EFFECT_OF_LAND_FORMATION_SIZE + EFFECT_OF_NAVY_FORMATION_SIZE + EFFECT_OF_NAVY_FORMATION_COMMAND + EFFECT_OF_NAVY_FORMATION_POSTURE + EFFECT_OF_WEATHER (land and sea regions)

Here EFFECT_OF_NAVY_FORMATION_COMMAND is effect of Blockade or Bombard command. It increases Land to Sea fire probabilty. Other effects self explanatory.

[lodilefty]

There is work in progress for both issues. Stay tuned, and be patient....
....much code being rewritten and debugged.....

[DarkGarry]

Addition: Need to add EFFECT_OF_LAND_MILITARY_CONTROL (the more control - the higher probability to inflict damage to fleet).

5. Resulting damage probability for Land to sea fire equal BASE + EFFECT_OF_LAND_FORMATION_SIZE + EFFECT_OF_NAVY_FORMATION_SIZE + EFFECT_OF_NAVY_FORMATION_COMMAND + EFFECT_OF_NAVY_FORMATION_POSTURE + EFFECT_OF_WEATHER (land and sea regions) + EFFECT_OF_LAND_MILITARY_CONTROL

Here EFFECT_OF_NAVY_FORMATION_COMMAND is effect of Blockade or Bombard command. It increases Land to Sea fire probabilty. Other effects self explanatory.