Questions to Scott

[HercMighty]

Email to Scott:

In this save game I have not given orders directly to any units. I have been using the staff officers for movement, targeting, and ARTY. I did notice in the middle section, the forces I control that the recon units are not scouting the way. Is there a reason for this, I would think that they should be able to move quicker and stealthier and should be scouting the area ahead.



I need to go and issue reaction orders for my units. I did notice that I have some IFV. I am setting the reaction orders but the Apply to all units of type is set to infantry\personnel and therefore the orders get copied to infantry personnel not to the other IFV’s present. Which isn’t what I want, I want to be able to tell my carriers to do one thing “Unload, and retreat to cover” (which does raise another question, can we set the order this is done? Like say in some situations I may want to unload then retreat and others maybe I want to retreat and then unload.) and maybe have the infantry “Advance to Cover” . Also is there a reason why if the unload (and this may hold to the other options here) get cleared if I go back and select this field? This is more of an annoyance than anything. I was just going back and looking at the reaction orders, it seems that the orders were applied to other IFV’s but on the SOP tab it still says no orders even though they are set in the reaction orders sub menu.



Now should I be giving orders to “D US Rifle Company (M) Group” or “1st US Rifle Platoon (M) Group” or is it okay to go to “1st US Rifle Squad (M) Group”? Still figuring out at what level I should be messing down to. It is kinda confusing because I believe I have to go down to the squad and individual unit level with reaction orders, but movement should be done at the Company level correct? Now if I give orders at the company level how does the AI know how to proceed? How does it know how to deploy it forces? Will it tie up an enemy in front of it and send a platoon force to flank the enemy? That is what I do not understand, if we play at the higher level is the AI smart enough to do this? With the FOW the way it is it is nearly impossible for the human player to do it.

What do you guys think?

[thewood]

Herc, I think you may have condensed the entire issue behind the philosophy behind POA2 into one or two questions. Even with the numerous "bugs" addressed, what is the main goal of this simulation? I have seen Scott write that it is meant to be at the task force commander-level, but I have yet to see the AI be able to handle low-level details needed to free us up to manage the bigger picture.

[XRAY]

HI Herc

Let us know what Scott’s reply is.

[HercMighty]

Other Email to Scott:

Targeting staff officer: Why does DF targeting not appear here more often, and why will the AI not issue more DF targets. There is plenty of action once the turn button is pressed, but this officer doesn’t do much it seems.

Operations staff officer: In this saved game this officer doesn’t do much except for the first turn. In the first game I ran this officer seemed to consider things more and issued more options. The only thing I did different was on the first turn I told it not to issue orders immediately with this game and the operations officer also says force composition is fine. Maybe more feedback as to what the AI is considering would be helpful.

ARTY Staff officer: I am happy with, seems to be working much better.

So targeting and operations officer at this point seem useless as far as interacting with my forces. I really think for the targeting officer more information on what the units are doing should be visible here so I don’t have to go searching through each unit (which seems to be useless anyways as no information is provided here for the next turn either). Seems to me that a unit that has been firing on the same enemy unit for three turns in a row should show something on the targeting officer screen depicting what this unit is doing. Also if the unit has been firing on the same unit for three turns then why when I ask the staff officer to issue DF orders does it not pre-issue the order? Operations officer is useful in looking at what forces have orders or not, but that seems to be about it. Having the AI issue orders from here seems to be about useless, as contact is made I would think I should see messages like “5 units are adjusting there movement orders” or “6 units have new orders” etc… I also think it would be nice if unit facing information could be here also.

I am awaiting responses from Scott at this time, as I hear I will post his replies.

I really think people need to play and send there savegame files along with question\comments\and critizisms. It is the only way this game will get molded into a better game. The simulation is there but what it needs is more of a game interface, what the military has in its real people who participate. I think Scott is about done with POA2 but I think POA3 is a strong possibility, and if enough support and some good suggestions for what we need could make the next version and finally bring the game and the simulation together.

Later,
Herc

[XRAY]

I’m guessing there are very few gamers actively sending of bug reports to Scott. You cant really blame players, POA2 must be one of the longest beta tested simulations in history apart from SNG which seemed to go on for ever.

Perhaps we should start a poll to see how many contributors are still sending off bugged files to Scott.?

[HercMighty]

Came up with a possible bug in LOS, sent info to Scott. See attached

[XRAY]

This is a new one on me Herc, let me know what Scott says?

[cbelva]

I don't think it is a bug, but it is confusing. I believe that the LOS is blocked due to smoke. I have seen the same thing it is is always involving locations with smoke. I have been meaning to point this out to Scott because the LOS tool should indicate this.

[HercMighty]

I don't think it is a bug, but it is confusing. I believe that the LOS is blocked due to smoke. I have seen the same thing it is is always involving locations with smoke. I have been meaning to point this out to Scott because the LOS tool should indicate this.

Okay, I will have to relate that to Scott. I will have to look but those enemies are able to shoot at me so maybe they are not being given the same penalty?

Also I will have to look, I would think my units have thermal sights which should see through the smoke I would think.

Reagards.

[HercMighty]

Email Sent To Scott:

I sent an Email and savegame late yesterday dealing with LOS. It was brought up on the Forum that maybe the smoke is causing the 100% blockage. 3 things:

1. Is the smoke penalty in effect for the red side?
2. I will have to look, but I am assuming that my units (at least the tanks) should have thermal sights which should see through the smoke.
3. What about the units in the same hex, I would think with all the units in the one hex that somebody should be able to spot for another of my units.

I have another question about carriers. It seems that you have to unload a carrier of all units. Can it be made so you can easily designate who you want to unload?

[HercMighty]

From Scott:

I haven't had a chance to look at your game yet, but it's next on my list
once I get a free minute from all this other "year end" kinda stuff I have
to do. I wish I could say I was at least watching the Super Bowl instead...
but I only saw the last 7 minutes of the game. :-(

Smoke is much less effective against IR sighting than visual, but it will
degrade IR sighting, and if there is enough of it, block it. There are also
special types of IR smoke that have a much higher effect. Also, if there is
something on fire nearby what you are trying to see, that will also affect
IR, as will the temperature difference between what you are trying to see
and the ambient. It is very hard to detect objects with IR if the
temperature gradient is small or zero.

Units can't directly spot DF for other units - only IF and air (the
definition of direct fire is that the firing unit can see and aim directly
at the target). Instead, what they do is report the contact back as a
SITREP, which is then filtered throughout the force. Then, when another
other friendly unit "learns" the enemy is in a certain location, is has a
much higher probability of spotting them directly (assuming the LOS is good
and the enemy hasn't moved much in the meantime).

You do not have to unload all of the units on a carrier. Right-click on the
carrier unit on the map, and then pick Orders -> Unload. You can also
unload individual units from the main movement orders form. It's only from
the unit info form we unload all the passengers (as a quick and easy
short-cut).

Also, on your movement issue, I think that you have the form in "compressed"
mode. Click on the arrow buttons at the right and bottom to expand the form
to show you all of your editing options.

I'll try to answer your other emails as fast as I can, and get the problems
taken care of, but I'm still not done with the IRS administrivia, plus I
have some medical appointments today.

See ya!
-Scott

[HercMighty]

From Scott:

Thanks for all of the files you’ve been sending. We’ve been able to reproduce many of them and get them squashed. Jeff is working on the placement stuff now (and he’ll email you when he gets done). Some was just the AI acting in a “non-intuitive” way (loading and re-placing units that it itself placed earlier), but it looks like there may be a few other issues hanging around.



On the AI stuff like this, though, unfortunately I’m not going to be able to tell too much from looking at these files. At least not for the helicopters and other units that are moving forward. The AI has already decided what it is going to do, and it’s too late to try and figure out (and verify) its logic. However, if you could get together a few “before and after” game files, that would help a lot. Then I could check out the AI “in action” and see what it is thinking (and see if there are any bugs at work).



When I get a chance I’ll see if I can see anything for the flank forces, however. I might be able to figure out why the AI is acting a little timid.



See ya!

-Scott

[HercMighty]

Another Email Sent tonite:

Some thoughts:



1. In the below combat log you can see the problem still with 1st US Rifle

2. I am curious as to why the AI wasted so many artillery missions to the North East corner, at the reveal all there was nothing there.

3. Artillery never hit anything. Not only did it not hurt any units I believe I never saw it hit a square where a unit was.

4. What are the show night effects supposed to represent other than turn my map blue?

5. Show weather effects do nothing. Might be because there is nothing to show is this correct?

6. What is show DF/TRP’s supposed to show?

7. The map overlay shows smoke over the entire map and chemical where smoke is displayed on the map with the smoke clouds, is this correct?

8. I do not trust this show all version of the map as targets are listed as 18 min old.

9. Can an option at some point be put in place to have contacts we no longer consider relevant removed from the map?


Okay that seems to be all I can think of for now on this game. Hope it helps.









MBAT ACTION REPORT TURN: 39

_________________________________________________



<PULSE: 1>



Artillery Fire:



Missile Launches:



Direct Fire:





Firing Unit: 1st US Rifle Squad (M) Loc: 1713

Fire Grp: 0 Trg No: 0

Wpn: 5.56mm M16A2 Rifle Ammo: M193 Ball 5.56mm

Target: 2 x Infantry (LMG). Stationary. Face: NW. Loc: 1768

Range: 94m (Est.) 3 % of max



Round: 1

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 2

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 12 Damage: 27 Supn: 0.75

Target: not damaged



Round: 3

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 4

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 12 Damage: 27 Supn: 0.75

Target: not damaged



Round: 5

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 6

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 12 Damage: 27 Supn: 0.75

Target: not damaged



Round: 7

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 12 Damage: 27 Supn: 0.75

Target: not damaged



Round: 8

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 12 Damage: 27 Supn: 0.75

Target: Destroyed



Firing Unit: 3 x Infantry (LMG). Stationary. Face: NW, W. Loc: 1818

Target: 3rd US Tank Platoon Loc: 1763

Range: 170m (Est.) 47 % of max



Round: 1

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 2

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 3

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 4

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 5

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 6

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 7

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 8

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 9

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Total Rounds Fired: 11 Hits: 8 Kills: 0



Firing Unit: 3rd US Tank Platoon Loc: 1763

Fire Grp: 0 Trg No: 0

Wpn: 7.62mm M240 Coax Machine Gun Ammo: M80 FMJ/Ball 7.62 mm +

Target: 3 x Infantry (LMG). Stationary. Face: NW, W. Loc: 1818

Range: 170m (Est.) 5 % of max



Round: 1

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 12 Damage: 30 Supn: 0.75



Round: 2

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 3

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 4

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 12 Damage: 30 Supn: 0.75

Target: not damaged



Air Missions:



Movement/Close Combat:



Moving Air Units...

Moving Surface Units...

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-2 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M) could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-3 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-4 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-1 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-2 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M) could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-3 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-4 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-1 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-2 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M) could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-3 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-4 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-1 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.



En-Route Munitions:



Environmental/Other:







<PULSE: 2>



Artillery Fire:



Missile Launches:



Direct Fire:





Firing Unit: 3 x Infantry (LMG). Stationary. Face: NW, W. Loc: 1818

Target: 3rd US Tank Platoon Loc: 1763

Range: 170m (Est.) 47 % of max



Round: 1

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 2

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 3

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 4

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 5

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 6

Misses Target

No effects



Firing Unit: 3rd US Tank Platoon Loc: 1763

Fire Grp: 0 Trg No: 0

Wpn: 7.62mm M240 Coax Machine Gun Ammo: M80 FMJ/Ball 7.62 mm +

Target: 3 x Infantry (LMG). Stationary. Face: NW, W. Loc: 1818

Range: 170m (Est.) 5 % of max



Round: 1

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 2

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 3

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 12 Damage: 30 Supn: 0.75



Round: 4

Misses Target

No effects



Air Missions:



Movement/Close Combat:



Moving Air Units...

Moving Surface Units...

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-2 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M) could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-3 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-4 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-1 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-2 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M) could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-3 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-4 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-1 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.



En-Route Munitions:



Environmental/Other:







<PULSE: 3>



Artillery Fire:



Missile Launches:



Direct Fire:





Firing Unit: 3 x Infantry (LMG). Stationary. Face: NW, W. Loc: 1818

Target: 3rd US Tank Platoon Loc: 1763

Range: 170m (Est.) 47 % of max



Round: 1

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 2

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 3

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 4

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 5

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 6

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 7

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 8

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 9

Misses Target

No effects



Firing Unit: 3rd US Tank Platoon Loc: 1763

Fire Grp: 0 Trg No: 0

Wpn: 7.62mm M240 Coax Machine Gun Ammo: M80 FMJ/Ball 7.62 mm +

Target: 3 x Infantry (LMG). Stationary. Face: NW, W. Loc: 1818

Range: 170m (Est.) 5 % of max



Round: 1

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 12 Damage: 30 Supn: 0.75

Target: not damaged



Round: 2

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 3

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 4

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 12 Damage: 30 Supn: 0.75



Round: 5

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 6

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 12 Damage: 30 Supn: 0.75

Target: not damaged



Round: 7

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 12 Damage: 30 Supn: 0.75

Target: not damaged



Round: 8

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 9

Misses Target

No effects



Total Rounds Fired: 12 Hits: 5 Kills: 0



Air Missions:



Movement/Close Combat:



Moving Air Units...

Moving Surface Units...

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-2 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M) could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-3 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-4 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-1 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-2 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M) could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-3 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-4 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-1 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-2 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M) could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-3 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-4 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-1 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.



En-Route Munitions:



Environmental/Other:







<PULSE: 4>



Artillery Fire:



Missile Launches:



Direct Fire:





Firing Unit: 3 x Infantry (LMG). Stationary. Face: NW, W. Loc: 1818

Target: B US Tank Company Loc: 1814

Range: 400m (Est.) 111 % of max



Round: 1

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.037

Target: not damaged



Firing Unit: 1 x Infantry (R). Stationary. Face: W. Loc: 1818

Target: 3rd US Tank Platoon Loc: 1763

Range: 170m (Est.) 47 % of max



Round: 1

Misses Target

No effects



Firing Unit: 3 x Infantry (LMG). Stationary. Face: NW, W. Loc: 1818

Target: 3rd US Tank Platoon Loc: 1763

Range: 170m (Est.) 47 % of max



Round: 1

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 2

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 3

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 4

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 5

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 6

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 7

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 8

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 9

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Total Rounds Fired: 13 Hits: 11 Kills: 0



Firing Unit: 3rd US Tank Platoon Loc: 1763

Fire Grp: 0 Trg No: 0

Wpn: 7.62mm M240 Coax Machine Gun Ammo: M80 FMJ/Ball 7.62 mm +

Target: 3 x Infantry (LMG). Stationary. Face: NW, W. Loc: 1818

Range: 170m (Est.) 5 % of max



Round: 1

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 2

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 12 Damage: 30 Supn: 0.75

Target: not damaged



Round: 3

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 4

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 12 Damage: 30 Supn: 0.75

Target: Destroyed



Firing Unit: 1 x Infantry (LMG). Stationary. Face: SW. Loc: 1877

Target: 3rd US Tank Platoon Loc: 1763

Range: 256m (Est.) 71 % of max



Round: 1

Direct Hit

Projections: Kill: 0.001 Damage: 0.001 Supn: 0.038

Target: not damaged



Round: 2

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 3

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 4

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 5

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 6

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 7

Misses Target

No effects



Round: 8

Misses Target

No effects



Air Missions:



Movement/Close Combat:



Moving Air Units...

Moving Surface Units...

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-2 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M) could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-3 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-4 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-1 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-2 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M) could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-3 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-4 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.

1st US Rifle Squad (M)-1 could not unload. Loc: 1713 Load delayed.



En-Route Munitions:



Environmental/Other:







Combat Phase Summary



Player: 1 United States



Total Firing Units: 5

Total Rounds Fired: 32

Total Hits: 15

Total Kills: 2



Player: 2 CIS



Total Firing Units: ?

Total Rounds Fired: ?

Total Hits: 31

Total Kills: 0





[Combat Report Complete]

[Hub]

"9. Can an option at some point be put in place to have contacts we no longer consider relevant removed from the map?"

I don't have the game in front of me right now, but there is a filter for contacts vs. time somewhere in the interface, I'm almost positive of that...

[HercMighty]

"9. Can an option at some point be put in place to have contacts we no longer consider relevant removed from the map?"

I don't have the game in front of me right now, but there is a filter for contacts vs. time somewhere in the interface, I'm almost positive of that...

If you find it let me know, I looked and didn't see anything under the "Display" or "Preferences".

Regards

[cbelva]

On the "Current Location Information" window (that is the window that pops up after every turn that we wish Scott would get rid of) there is a tab just up from the botton that allows you to set the filter as to what contacts you want displayed. You can set it to show all or only those sighted. You can also set it to displays those known for less than 1 minute, 5 minutes, 10 minutes, etc.

[HercMighty]

Okay, Got it. Thanks

[HercMighty]

From Scott:

First off, thank you again very much for the files and all of your reports. We are working our way through them, but unfortunately, it is taking a lot longer than I expected. So I don’t know when the next build will be posted. My guess is that it will be sometime next week.



That’s also why you haven’t heard anything from me lately...I’ve actually been working on this single issue since Monday <!>... or at least manifestations of it. I like to write only once I figure things out.... and well... that was today. :-S



Anyway, the problem with the units that aren’t moving in your turn 20 Scenario 4 game is that they have a bad command in their movement path in the very first position. In this case, the value is a “5”, which the computer doesn’t know what to do with (and which is why nothing shows up for it on the movement path display except a space). The “5” is followed by a “p”, which is a pause, and then a “9”, which is a directional. However, the computer expects the pause duration value to follow the “p”, so it interprets that as “pause for 9 seconds”.



Which is not correct. The “5” and “p” are simply garbage values.



This problem is not something you introduced into this game, however. I went back and found that the junk is present in the original scenario file. In fact, I found 19 units that had path issues in the original scenario file (see attached), compared to 6 in yours. So that means either the computer managed to correct the paths for some of the units on the fly, and/or you deleted and reissued them.



There is no way I can automatically correct these problems; the only way around this for now is to delete the unit’s movement paths and reissue them. I’m going to ask Joe Miranda go through all the saved scenario files and update any with problems. We’ll post the updates with the next patch.



Also, while I think that these problems are legacy and will not occur in games created with newer revs, I will also include a “bad path” tester in the next version. I will run at various times during the set up, player orders, and combat phases to trap any error(s) that just might still be lurking in there.



Aside from that, I’ve spent the past 3 days updating the way speed orders are given. From your comments, I realized it was it was structured was confusing and could lead to all sorts of unintended situations. I tried a couple of different schemes based on what we already had, but finally scrapped all that in favor of simplifying the process and providing more information to the player. This took a lot longer to do than I expected due to the “false starts” and also to the sheer complexity of the system. It seems like it should be simple, I know, but when you add FOW and composite units... it can get to be a real headache.



Anyway, that’s what’s going on with this stuff. Jeff is working on your LOS reports now, and he’ll get back to you with what he finds out.

[HercMighty]

Scott,

Thanks for the reply; it is good to hear I was able to give you some feedback that helps. I look forward to the next update; by the way things are going things just get better. I realize the military uses this as a simulation tool and have not maybe needed the amount of feedback and other tools we have requested. From a simulation standpoint POA2 is beyond anything out there. Unfortunately for your civilian market we want to use it as a game, and this need has at times conflicted with your vision of the simulation. Take movement orders. We as gamers still feel there needs to be more control from a task force commander point of view. Something along the lines of enhancing the victory point objectives for the player to use them in game (I am not saying this is the solution, just an idea I had thought of). Say for instance:

At the start of the scenario we as gamers would see the ultimate victory point(s) objective. To reach that goal we as gamers would be able to assign victory point objectives to the AI that it would try to achieve. If we as commanders do our job correctly by the time the simulation is done the units would be placed to win the victory points assigned by the scenario designer. Or call them objectives and give us the ability to define them. I want this hill defended, I want this area attacked, I want someone to go here and spot and report back what you see. I think something like this could give the gamer who is looking to see if they can be a commander something more tangible to do, than what we have now which is running a simulator. There is a difference, and I have stated it on WareFare HQ that if you brought the game to the simulation POA2 would be the one to beat in the civilian market also. I personally really think this is the last big soft part in POA2. It is not in our nature to be reactive, we want to be proactive and this game really doesn’t let us do that. Most of the time I feel as if we are just along for the ride hitting the turn button. I bought this game because I thought I could sit at the top and direct my forces, but really if I want to do things I have to get out on the battlefield as there really are no tools other than to work with the limited staff officer menus. These could be made more useful if they gave more feedback. Why does the operational staff officer feel that my forces dispositions are good enough?

Also sometime ago we had discussed helicopters and their use. Have you thought anymore of changing how we interact with them? Especially for DF. Helicopters with their height advantage ruin FOW as you can really find out in a hurry what is bad Intel.
I also had other questions in my other emails, I hope to hear on them or I will assume the will show up in the read me file as fixes.

[HercMighty]

From Jeff:

Thanks for the detailed reports, I'm still in the process of trying to get a definitive answer to some of your questions/comments, but here's where I am so far.

>
Reaction orders: When I set orders to the 1st US Rifle Squad M-5 I got the options I was looking for to apply my reaction orders to Armored Personnel Carriers.
<

If I'm understanding your point, this actually looks OK to us, your unit (Rifle Sqd M-5) is a loaded APC, so the 'Apply Orders To APC' check box should be active.

Generally regarding your comments as to the limitations in the system for issuing multiple 'con-joined' reaction orders (Advance to Cover, Unload and Retreat to Cover, Load and Advance to Cover) well... we agree! ;-) And that is a priority for the AI Order functions, but unfortunately, we probably will not be able to get that in until the next MAJOR numeric upgrade-- POA-3.

Now.. your LOS issues... on my installation, most of the locations you mentioned-- save (1763-1818) were NOT completely blocked, however the blocking points did range from 40 to 97 for the others. My initial estimation is that this is due to smoke, wrecks, hedges, and scattered trees.

As to why the enemy is firing in-- but you are not firing out (back) , I've still got to run a couple of checks, please hold on for that. I'm curious too.

Best, Jeff
HPS Sims

In regards to the reaction orders and applying them to the same type unit, in another email to Scott I believe I had the wrong unit selected when this email went out.

[HercMighty]

From Scott:

OK, I think we already got the first part squared away in a previous email - you just need to open up the movement form. We added the “shrunk” feature since a lot of players thought it was too big.



Recon units will normally be out in front of the main forces... however, that depends on a number of things - most importantly where they are presently located (in relation to the force main body). Sometimes scouts are help in reserve for various missions, or to fill gaps in the line. If the recon elements are not at the front, the AI will not put them there - figuring that the human knows what he is doing, or if placed by the AI, they are being held in reserve. A lot of this depends on the force’s mission, aggressiveness level, and for AI players, the overall strategy.



I think we already got reaction orders covered in another email too.



As for what level you should give orders... generally it should be the highest possible. For your game, I’d say by companies is good, although sometimes you may need to give individual platoons orders too. For the most part I’d leave the squads to themselves.



The AI will not break up movement orders to a formation into different avenues of approach. It basically moves everyone to the new objective area, keeping unit spacing and positioning, in either a tactical of constricted manner. So, no, it’s not going to send 1st and second platoons around the right while 3rd platoon keeps the enemy pinned down. If you want to do that, you’ll need to give the platoons specific orders.



However, in your game.. the scale and enemy dispositions are better suited to using company level units for that kind of maneuvering instead of platoons.

[HercMighty]

From Scott:

Missions (attack/defend) and aggressiveness are set when the scenario is created - on the form where the force values are set. You can also get the mission from the mission statement.



The aggressiveness level can’t be changed or even viewed once the game is underway, which is something we probably should allow for human players. So I’ve added it to the list.



Overall strategy depends is based on METT (mission, enemy, terrain, and time). Specifically the AI looks at (among other things):



1) the force balances in terms of total strength, weapon balances (range & firepower vs. protection), and support.

2) the map terrain characteristics

3) the mission and objectives

4) improved positions and protective opportunities.

5) enemy and friendly aircraft

6) friendly communications

7) how much of the enemy force is estimated to be known

8) aggressiveness

9) ammo levels

10) morale/fatigue levels



In some cases the AI may decide to minimize its own losses, in others it may aim at inflicting maximum losses on the enemy. Likewise in some cases it might hold positions, in other it will move more.



It’s really complicated, and the AI looks at a lot of stuff. It can also change over the course of the game.



From your comments and questions, one other thing I’d like to add is a more complete description of why the S-3 thinks that current orders are acceptable. But I don’t know when I’ll be able to get to it.

[MikeSinn]

I began experimenting with the scenario editor this weekend and encountered a few problems and sent the email below to Scott. I will post any reply I receive from him or Jeff.

Scott, Jeff:

I have started to experiment with the scenario creation process and encountered a what appears to be a couple of bugs and developed one suggestion.

Possible Bugs:
When creating a new scenario from scratch, you can not change or add victory locations. When clicking the save game as new scenario option, The game asks whether you want to adjust the victory locations. If you select "yes" the Objective window is displayed for a split second and then is replaced with the Save Game dialog box.

When placing units, you can not view computer placed IP, obstacles, or mines. I have deselected and selected the correct options in the display menu. I have scanned the map looking for placed objects at all zoom levels. The objects only become visible on turn 1. Can you add an option to remove all computer placed objects and allow the user to manually place them.

I receive a C++ error when attempting to place Attacking force using the Auto-place formation option. Game then locks up and must be cancelled through task manager. I can successfully place the units individually with out a problem.

Interface Suggestion:
Can you make it possible to quickly/easily copy obstacles/mines/IP. When building a line of anti-tank ditch or a minefield, it would be much easier to simply configure the first hex item and then copy it to other locations as necessary. I could then go back and "tweak" the individual settings as appropriate.

I have attached a copy of the saved game file for your review.

Thanks,
Mike

[MikeSinn]

In the response below, Scott provided a good description of how the "Check Selected Unit Targeting this Loc" option is supposed to work. Not quite sure if I fully understand the answer yet :confused:. Will need to run some experiments...


Hi Michael,

Thanks for your emails, and I'm glad you are enjoying POA-2 more with
all of
the changes and improvements we've made.

We've been doing a lot of work on the set-up routines in the past week
to
make them more "friendly", and also fix a few things that other users
reported. So I'm not sure if we already took care of the things you
found
or not. But we'll go down the list and let you know.

The "Check Selected Unit Targeting this Loc" routine shows you where
the
selected unit (from the force tree) can be placed to engage the right
clicked loc with DF. The shaded areas show locs from which the unit
cannot
engage with DF. They are either out of range, have no valid flight
path, or
something like that. Otherwise, it will show if the unit can use DF or
IF.

It is very useful when trying to figure out where to place units in the
defense to cover certain key target locations, or on maps with a lot of
terrain.

To remove the shading, click the "redraw" button at the top of the main
form.

The best place to get info on the latest composite unit scheme is from
the
"help form" with the edit composite units form. You can also access
the
help file directly from the POA-2\Help\ folder: Composite Units
Help.rtf

I think the LOS makes a lot of sense, and overall I'm happy with it.
We
have a couple of potential issues we're checking out, but overall I
think it
makes sense. Not to mention, users can change almost any aspect of it
they
don't like. :-)

BTW - Updating the manual is the next big goal, and I've some work on
it in
the past couple of months. Unfortunately, however, the program keeps
changing even as I try to write the thing. ;-)

See ya, and thanks again!
-Scott

[HercMighty]

From Scott:

First off, I wanted to let you know I have adjusted the AI movement/strategy routines to be more “objective-aware”. In the past, I had complaints that the AI didn’t move enough, and in tweaking that, I had taken out the limiting effect of the obstacles. However, I think I was able to rework the logic to include them, plus keep the force moving.



As for specific “why is this unit doing this” kinds of questions, I tried using your files, and it’s impossible for me to answer that from them. If you can send me “before” and “after” files I might be able to tell, but then again maybe not. There is randomness in the AI to keep it from being predictable.... and that makes it hard to try and figure out why it did something specific in one run of a certain scenario when it might not do it again in another.



However, if units seem to go so far and stop, you can probably assume either that they are “stuck” and cannot move any further due to terrain/movement/or some other restriction, or that they are positioned to provide supporting fire. Remember also that the flank units try to stay tied in to your force to some extent, but they also have their own schedule. So you shouldn’t expect them to act like they belong to your force entirely.



If you see units move to the rear, it probably means the AI has decided to place them in reserve, although it might also indicate that the AI believes forward deployment is either unnecessary and/or too risky for them.



I also want to talk about LOS’s a little to note that they are not always reciprocal. Just because unit A can see unit B it doesn’t mean that B can see A. There are a lot of reasons for this, but the most common is that A is in more concealing terrain than B. Think of some infantry in the forest as unit A looking out at unit B comprised of tanks crossing a field. The infantry can see the tanks just fine, but the tanks are not going to see the infantry - not until they open fire. And even then, the tanks are going to have a hard time picking out specific targets.



It gets even worse when the tanks are in the woods too. In this case, you might have a situation where the infantry has an LOS 90% blocked, but because they hide behind the trees, the tanks’ LOS back to them could be 100% blocked.



This is realistic... otherwise snipers would be sighted and killed immediately every time. Likewise there would be a lot less reason to take up positions in a treeline if it didn’t block the LOS coming in more than going out.



It is also why area suppressive fire is so important and useful - it’s what unit B uses against the unsighted (but known) unit A, until they can “sight” it.... i.e. they hose down the area with small arms while they maneuver closer or wait for infantry to come up.



Of course, thermal sights, suppression, morale, training, etc. also modify LOS’s, making it more complicated, but the basics are the same.



To duplicate this effect in POA-2, I default to using 70% of the normal LOS terrain value in the target hex, and 35% in the spotting hex. However, I do allow users to change these values from the Set General Conditions form when creating a new game. If you set them the same, you will get reciprocal LOS’s (minus the other unit-specific effects).



I haven’t talked to Jeff yet, so I’m not sure that’s what’s going on in the LOS cases you reported, but I just wanted to make sure that you understood the general LOS scheme.



Having said that, what we are working on now are more information provided by the XO on what units fired at last turn, what, if any, situations came up (target destroyed, out of ammo, etc), and what they will be expected to engage next turn (along with the time the next round will be fired). We’re also going to update the XO and S-3 screens so that when you click on units in the grid, you will immediately be put into the proper mode and giving orders to the units. That will make it a lot easier and quicker to go down the list and issue appropriate orders.



We’re also working to update the scenarios with units having “bad” movement paths and AI overlays. Joe Miranda will be doing it, but he’s on jury duty this week. So I don’t think I’ll have the updates until next week. Unfortunately, I can’t release the next update until that is completed, so we’re looking at next week for that as well.



So, that’s where we are in general terms... and we’ll continue to get back to you on specific issues as we investigate them.



Thanks again!

-Scott