Unit issues 6.1.8

[GabeKnight]

About the AI's x-ray vision: it's more apparent with aircraft than land units.

That's true, noticed it myself. But the AI still does not know the type of the unit, I think (more like radar). It happened often that one enemy fighter flew into "visual range" of my planes, but not into attack range. And only then the rest of the enemy fighters began to chose its targets and attack my planes. At least that's my reasoning for this behaviour. But how else to execute the simple "Seek&Destoy" AI team order - as it usually has the range of "999" hexes preset. Maybe that causes the "cheating" of the AI....(?)

I created that last year where you can observe the AI moving a single unit to the player flag, but only if you away from your own flag.

Okay now, that's something I noticed, too...

BUT: I presume that the AI can, like the player, see movement of units into and out of camouflaged (high cover) locations if LOS is present. Usually you can not tell what unit was moved, but if you observe the AI turn carefully, you can definitely see the units moving in or ouf of camouflage (of course only if the neighboring hexes don't provide cover, too).
Additionally, as a player, you can spot enemy arty positions in the FOW when they fire and use your "indirect" fire trait to bombard them back. The AI can't do that.

However, I really don't know how to explain your little cheater scen.

[Horst]

Eh, could units always move past bunkers? Didn't they have a zone-of-control before the Sandstorm DLC? This kind of defeats the purpose of them to stop assaults. My best fighter was just smashed in the hangar by an infantry that wriggled through two bunkers of mine.

PS: Crap no, bunkers still blocked movement in 5.3.0. What the heck was changed?

PPS: Maybe it's related to the change in 6.1.8: Units no longer cause ZoC on hexes they cannot enter due to their terrain type or the
presence of escarpments.
As defensive structures can't move, they possibly lost their ZoC this way.

PPPS: A partial fix is to give the static-chassis movement points.
The only issue left is that all camouflaged units, like the MG-Nest but also commandos or snipers also provide no ZoC per se.
Doesn't look like the structures learned to retreat by this, but let's see. This issue really needs a hardcoded fix.

PPPPS: I've created a vanilla chassis.csv file that partially fixes the issue explained above and also added the wall column that aircraft can fly over the Chinese wall again. Use this file for a vanilla mod or replace the original one if you dare. The file's home is in Content\Data.

[terminator]

Eh, could units always move past bunkers? Didn't they have a zone-of-control before the Sandstorm DLC? This kind of defeats the purpose of them to stop assaults. My best fighter was just smashed in the hangar by an infantry that wriggled through two bunkers of mine.
PS: Crap no, bunkers still blocked movement in 5.3.0. What the heck was changed?

I do not remember how it was before but actually Bunkers do not have Zone-of-Control

Screenshot 497.png (469.94 KiB) Viewed 6176 times

Screenshot 498.png (436.6 KiB) Viewed 6176 times

[Asap]

I do not remember how it was before but actually Bunkers do not have Zone-of-Control

I want the old game rules back. I want to play OoB as it was when Burma Road came out.

[Horst]

I can imagine that most players didn’t notice this ZoC-bug as they have played through Sandstorm with v6.1.7 if this issue is actually related to the v6.1.8 change I’ve mentioned in my previous post.

Unfortunately, there is one issue with my chassis.csv: mines can attack!
To fix that, I had to set the AP (action point) value of mines to 0, but this can only be done in the units.csv file. I remember vanilla campaigns only use neutral mines, so that shouldn’t matter there. I’ve noticed it during playing the Desert Rats custom-campaign that uses faction-mines.
You see, even fixes have consequences that aren’t immediately apparent. I hope this can be fixed more elegantly in the ZoC-code somehow, as all faction structures like oil pumps would also receive a ZoC if you don’t add a noZOC trait to them.
Alright, I’m quiet again as no one could follow me anyway.

[GabeKnight]

I can imagine that most players didn’t notice this ZoC-bug as they have played through Sandstorm with v6.1.7 if this issue is actually related to the v6.1.8 change I’ve mentioned in my previous post.

Unfortunately, there is one issue with my chassis.csv: mines can attack!
To fix that, I had to set the AP (action point) value of mines to 0, but this can only be done in the units.csv file. I remember vanilla campaigns only use neutral mines, so that shouldn’t matter there. I’ve noticed it during playing the Desert Rats custom-campaign that uses faction-mines.
You see, even fixes have consequences that aren’t immediately apparent. I hope this can be fixed more elegantly in the ZoC-code somehow, as all faction structures like oil pumps would also receive a ZoC if you don’t add a noZOC trait to them.
Alright, I’m quiet again as no one could follow me anyway.

I can
And you're right. Thanks for pointing that out. I've noticed some strange behaviour myself, but I've attributed it to the general changes with the speed/movement definitions.
(why do pumps, radars, fuel depots need APs anyway?)

Bunkers with no ZOC, no way! That should break a whole of scens in WinterWar and BurmaRoad, at least!

PS: I think you should revise your chassis.csv, as even bunkers and such should not have a ZOC with the new ridge/escarpment mechanic.
PPS: Actually testing with the editor right now, I don't think that radar stations, pumps, hangars, depots should have a ZOC really. Is it possible to add a new movement type, like "staticZOC" and assign it to the units in question? I'll try that.

as it is now

Screenshot 706.jpg (389.53 KiB) Viewed 6157 times

as it should be

Screenshot 705.jpg (383.5 KiB) Viewed 6157 times

[GabeKnight]

@Horst

Now here's something interesting: If there's even one ridge/escarpment terrain on the map present, your whole chassis fix will not work anymore and all static movement type units have no ZOC again...

No fix without consequence...

Screenshot 707.jpg (695.44 KiB) Viewed 6152 times

Screenshot 708.jpg (401.81 KiB) Viewed 6152 times

[Horst]

It's possible to move further against zoc with high speed and roads.
I haven't fully tested this chassis.csv in vanilla, but if someone likes to improve it further then just go ahead and use my file as template.
Single unit stat bugs are often not that critical, but a whole Red Army racing past the Mannerheim Line in Winter War DLC should be.
While letting enemy units move past camouflaged commandos and snipers (or night-fighters) can be advantageous sometimes, hidden MG-nests should also always hinder enemy movement. Too bad, this can't be fixed without dropping camo as it seems.
I leave getting smart of this bug to someone who gets paid for it.

PS: Sigh, yes, correct about placing escarpments anywhere on a map. Luckily, this only affects desert maps. Maybe I figure something out, maybe not.

[GabeKnight]

I leave getting smart of this bug to someone who gets paid for it.

PS: Sigh, yes, correct about placing escarpments anywhere on a map. Luckily, this only affects desert maps. Maybe I figure something out, maybe not.

And I just finished Panzerkrieg and was about to start Sandstorm (finally for the first time, so to say) and now this...there's ridges all over!
Damn, back to BattleTech...

[Horst]

I've thought about adding "Escarpment" to the terrain.csv, similar like the "Wall", but that didn't help either. As long as custom-mappers won't start placing ridges everywhere, my rubbish fix works at least with older custom-content and original campaigns.

Hello official hotfix, where are you?

[terminator]

I wanted to continue a scenario Soviet side in January, 1945.
It is surprising being still able to buy these 3 types of tanks at this moment : T-28 C, BT-7 and T-60.

T-28 :
- Produced 1932-41
- In service : 1933-45

BT-7 :
- Produced 1935-40
- In service : 1935-45

T-60 :
- Produced 1941-42
- In service : 1941-45

Screenshot 523.jpg (387.75 KiB) Viewed 6096 times

[Horst]

Holy bug spawn!
By removing the action point from mines, they can't ambush enemy units anymore...
So in order to semi-fix the ZOC of bunkers, you have to create a new (immobile/static) chassis type for the mines.

Will this ever end?

[Horst]

Remember our old ugly friend here on the upper left corner? The Flying Prediction!
It should be quickly reproducible by this scenario: select the AA and then hover the cursor over a transport icon next to the mines.

The Flying Prediction.jpg (247.43 KiB) Viewed 6075 times

[GabeKnight]

Remember our old ugly friend here on the upper left corner? The Flying Prediction!

Yeah, you'll always get it if using the right mouse button (holding it down) for scrolling. I got used to it, to be honest....
(and if you watch closely, it's on many of the "victory" after-mission screenshots in the top-left corner... )

[Admiral_Horthy]

Hi Guys,

Checked MG flashes anim and it is faulty for stock units as well. I though I messed it up but no.

So, MG Flashes anim appears as if it was under the vehicle. if the effect should be above the tank completely, it is invisible. What happened? Again it is present on stock units as well... but can anyone reproduce this?

[GabeKnight]

Hi Guys,

Checked MG flashes anim and it is faulty for stock units as well. I though I messed it up but no.

So, MG Flashes anim appears as if it was under the vehicle. if the effect should be above the tank completely, it is invisible. What happened? Again it is present on stock units as well... but can anyone reproduce this?

While testing them, I've noticed something strange with the stock firing sequences of models with the "Flakvierling" MG. I'm not sure what it was anymore, it just looked "half-baked" (if I may quote myself from my mod-thread) then - and definitely not as it should with four distinct weapon points present.

[Admiral_Horthy]

That wasn't an issue since Ive redone that But otherwise true

[terminator]

While testing them, I've noticed something strange with the stock firing sequences of models with the "Flakvierling" MG. I'm not sure what it was anymore, it just looked "half-baked" (if I may quote myself from my mod-thread) then - and definitely not as it should with four distinct weapon points present.

I have the same impression. I do not think that it is only enough to modify the file "effectSequences.txt" :

FlakQuad20mm.png (51.52 KiB) Viewed 6007 times

[GabeKnight]

I have the same impression. I do not think that it is only enough to modify the file "effectSequences.txt" :

Actually it may be. I did not see the whole matter through then, just noticed something was off but didn't check the corresponding files or tried to fix it myself.

Now, as I see the firing sequence, all that's probably necessarry would be to include "MG_Flashes 2 and 3" to correct it.

[terminator]

The "normal" effect Sequences (MG_Flashes 0 & 1) :

Screenshot 631.png (19.84 KiB) Viewed 5992 times

The moded effect Sequences (MG_flashes 0,1,2 & 3) :

Screenshot 623.png (20.62 KiB) Viewed 5992 times

PS : The difference is not aslo obvious during the game because it is very fast
If we zoom and we pay attention, we notice the difference.
I would say in conclusion that there is a slight improvement.
I am going to test it on another unit which possesses the same effect Sequences but it is a top secret project