Some issues?
 

1. On the first mission of a campaign, almost all my units had smoke. On the second and all subsequent missions none of my units have had any smoke and I've been in a defend, delay, assault, advance and river cross battles. Is this some sort of campaign bug that smoke never gets reloaded between missions?
2. In the river cross battle, I could not find any barges to buy and none of my vehicles could even try to cross the river. Didn't I read in the manual that barges were provided free in river crossings? You should at least be able to buy them.
3. Why do my units gets supression when they fire at units at '0' range? Are they really shooting themselves? I understand if a 'outside unit' fires in but do all gunners blow their toes off shooting at 50 meters? 50 meters is still lots bigger than a tank. I can accept SOME supression for friendly fire near fellow squad members spread over 50 meters but single armor vehicles?
4. BTW, how does an armor vehicle overrun infantry? Infantry in the same hex seem to be make a close assault after direct fire (and hence get suppression but never a casualty - both sides should take losses - their bayonets don't work?) but the tanks don't do anything but suppress themselves and sometimes kill a guy with direct fire.
5. Speaking of the ground pounders, infantry seem to close assualt infantry almost all the time at range '0.' Shouldn't there be an option to engage in close assault like hitting a button? And shouldn't both sides take some casualties or prisoners? (which is why you should be careful of getting too close.....unless you mean it!)
6. Back to tanks......My armor seems very ineffectual against infantry. Rifle fire from supporting troops do a great deal of damage but I've had my tanks blaze away with main guns and machine guns at all ranges from '0' to 'long range' without much effect. Also, the infantry is rarely frightened by the tanks rumbling near them. Only when the 'enemy side' infantry is routing away do the tanks do any real damage.
7. I got a few commanders with a '0' rally rating who are platoon cmdrs - nobody should be a zero in a regular, veteran or elite unit. Maybe a militia unit.....
8. I've never had the AI buy any mines, traps, trenches, etc. in any defend/delay mission. But man, does the AI buy artillery! 15-20 75mms is not unusual in a 2500 point buy.
9. Great game and great work, don't get me wrong - I love it. I just think the armor is getting blown up way too much from artillery and don't seem to work very well against infantry.

Re: Some issues?
 

******* I'll look into this. I know this had been brought up before and I'm certain it's been fixed at least once before



*****They are called Barge Carriers and they are found in the MISC section. It would be helpful when dealing with issues like this to know what nation you are playing.

******Becasue they are very close to the enemy and that's stressful. A saved example would be nice as you are the first to mention this as an issue


*****You "overrun" infantry the way it was really done....by getting close and opening fire with all your weapons and creating a panic. We have "tank panic" in the code applied ( in some cases, not all. You cannot assume it will happen ) to the infantry being overrun. What we do not have ( and some other games do have ) is a separate "tank overrun" bit of code that gives the tank mystical powers to shock and awe when it's close.


**** There is code for a melee where both sides battle it out but if you enter a hex with a highly surpressed enemy that's not a melee and will tend to be one sided


********* We've playtested this for months and nobody mentioned it. Everyone has their own ideas about what is "right". That's what the preferences screen is for.


***A save game would be useful. I've never seen it and it's never been mentioned in playtesting. This is not to say it doesn't exist. Just that you are the first to mention it. I assume this is in a campaign? Are these replacements?

********* How big a map, how many points, what nations were you playing..... ( I need info...) I just fired up a standard battle with German vs Russia with Russia defending against an assault with the Russians as Player 2 ( the traditional "AI" side ) and with purchase set to computer ( 9000 points for Germany and XXX for Russia on a 80 x 80 map )and deploy set to HUMAN you can see what the AI bought for the Russians and if you AUTO DEPLOY when given the option of manual or automatic deployment you will see what the AI bought and where it would typically be deployed ( pressing the = key while in the deployment screen will give you more versions of an typical AI deployement in defence ) It will also show mines..lots of mines and some barbed wire as well.

So who were you playing and who where you playing against and what year?

*****We are looking into the arty vs tank issue and running futher tests. It looks as if the code that handles damage to from shrapnel etc is affecting the wrong armour but that may or may not be the real problem. The code is not simple and requires more testing

Don

Re: Some issues?
 

Hi
Perhaps you are not aware that when a unit fails a rally that their rally rating (number) on the info page falls to zero.
Check the same unit next turn and you'll find that they have returned to a more normal figure.

Excuse me if you already know this and there is something else wrong. I have seen this question before and my answer solved the mystery http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif

Cheers

Re: Some issues?
 

Wow, I tend to the think that Arty is EXTREMELY effective vs Infantry in this version. Even 81mm mortars are flattening my line and either breaking or heavily pinning my troops (June44 US Standard Infantry). Now if they are entrenched, the effects seem far less (as they should) but even in buildings or rough etc the effects have been devastating.

Re: Some issues?
 

DRG,
I apologize. Let me add some info.
2. I did look for barge carriers and couldn't find any. I am familiar with them. I was Germany playing in a campaign and this was the first battle chosen against the French after several with the Poles. It was a river crossing (about 10 hexes wide, no bridges.) Since I couldn't buy any barge carriers (and I looked under every catagory except "allies."), I thought they might be provided like a beach assault. My men would reach the river and get into boats but the tanks just stopped. I wasn't surprised and just went back to the original save and got a different battle.
3. Well, my German guys suppressed very heavily (usually 5 with each shot.) That's quite a bit even for stress especially when the enemy is routed and not returning fire. Again, it was a campaign and has occurred any time I do it in any mission - easy to duplicate.
4. Fair enough but I've only seen it 2 or 3 times in about 6 missions. These were '39 missions against Poles in a campaign - I was German. In one mission, I moved about 15 armored vehicles against unsupported and pinned to routed infantry. I fired and fired and fired and just killed a few. So I moved into the hexes the next turn and fired and fired (now I was all suppressed and the Poles lost a few guys.) Next turn I moved back a hex or two and fired and fired and fired. Not much happening. Finally, about turn 6, the Polish Army hit it's morale and everybody started running. So I moved up and fired and fired and fired - no panic, some casualties and even some return fire. Finally, the next turn a few units began to surrender so I stopped firing altogether and just drove into the hexes each turn and let more and more surrender.
Sorry, but this doesn't seem realistic.
Note that throughout the mission my infantry fire, even at several hexes, was way more devestating killing 3 or 4 at a time while tanks firing every 6 shots of all weapons at 1 hex might match one long range rifle burst. This persisted until the Polish Army routed.
5. Even highly surpressed men will fight when cornered if they don't surrender. This 'event' seems to indicate that everyone in every squad surrenders and never fights back or kills an attacker. Close combat, surpressed or not, is not that one sided. IMHO.
6. I know the preference screen options but if you set an option like infantry easier to kill then EVERTHING kills them easily and I believe the artillery vrs infantry and infantry vrs infantry is about right at 100%. Only tanks can't seem to kill them and at range one blazing away as you said I should see effect.
7. I checked this and indeed it was a zero leader who had failed a check. Next turn he had a value.
8. Campaign game of Germans in '39. At least ten missions against Poles, French and Brits. The AI bought mines on one river crossing (I checked later) I couldn't play without barges. 3 other assaults and not a single obstacle. My campaign buy was 2500 points (later about 2800 with core increases) on a medium map about 80 by 80.
Twice the Poles had over 20 75mm howitzers (not counting several mortars) and never less than 15 total indirect fire weapons in even the non-defend missions. The other assault against France had them with 12 75mms, 8 81mm mortars, 6 105's and 6 attack aircraft.
The balance of forces seemd correct except for zero obstacles and a preponderance of artillery. Oddly, almost all the purchased art was on-board. Off-board amount seemed right with 3-6 batteries - what I am normally able to buy as the German if I spend 75% of my support points on art.
9. I would suggest that the skewed art vrs tank results are from way too many top hits which would kill a tank but I'm sure the majority of shells land around AFV's which would cause suppression. Don't get me wrong - AFV's should suffer lots of suppression in a barrage but the kill #'s are way too high. Immobilizations are about right, suppression seems correct. It's the outright top hit kills. It's so bad that if art lands near my formations, I always expect a kill with every barrage and I usually see it.
I actually think that the art vrs infantry routine is correct. I rarely see a lot of kills even moving in the open but I see lots of suppression which is good!

Re: Some issues?
 

2- you need to look for "Lastkahn-Transp"

3- closing with the enemy to range zero is not something done lightly. There is extra surpression.

4- Sometimes the enemy doesn't like to be killed. They find cover and hide sometimes the shoot back. I know some people expect more kills in the game. That's what the preferences are for. I can assure you if we cranked up the kills and it started to play like an arcade game LOTS of people would complain. Get a few hundred people to back you up that it's way too hard to kill infantry with tanks and we'll look at the issue. Maybe we can hear from a few infantrymen and they will explain that not getting killed by tanks is a top priority even if the tankers think thats the nature order of things

5- There IS surrender code it just doesn't kick in according to a script and it doesn't kick in every time and if we increased the surrender ratio people would complain about that too

6- "I believe the artillery vrs infantry and infantry vrs infantry is about right at 100%. " Me too. Others disagree. That's what makes the workd go 'round. Me, I don't think people should pull up to infantry in a 50 yard area in a buttoned up metal box and blaze away killing everything in sight and we have made numeous tweaks to the code while playtesting and nobody at the end said " I still don't think this is right" Im not saying you are wrong or your point isn't valid but we have encounted a WIDE range of opinions over the years as to what is "right"

7-OK

8- As Andy said.. they don't alway buy mines but they do generally. Your 2800 point core gives the AI defender around 1100 points to defend against your assault on a 80x80 map that's not much. If you want to see what that's like from the AI POV set up an assault with 2800 points and XXX for the AI then set player one to human play but computer buy and deploy and set player 2 to computer play and computer buy but HUMAN deploy then auto deploy them and take a look and you will see that even when the AI does buy mines ( usually ) there is a lot of real estate that you could cover and not find one

9- As I said, we are looking into the arty vs armour issue and there is more to that code than just a couple of simple lines


And please......NEXT TIME you have comments keep them one or two at a time because trying to answer and counter answer a 9 point essay is a bit of a PITA.

Don

Re: Some issues?
 

DRG: On the tanks suppressing themselves whilst in the hex with an enemy; it is very much going on and i've seen it several times. We're talking about units that aren't able to fire back in the same hex. Perhaps this will make things clearer:

1. You have a routed infantry in one hex.
2. Unsuppressed tank enters that hex and stays unsuppressed.
3. The tank fires with no reponse and gets suppressed.

This did not occur on the previous version of SPWW2. We understand that if you have two units of your own in the above example,that the 'other' unit will get suppressed, but not a single unit on it's own. BTW, there's no chance that any other unit fires into that hex, because the enemy unit is non-responsive and there was no fire even from any units whatsoever other than described above.

I was playing Germany against Poland in the LC.

Re: Some issues?
 

DRG: On the infantry getting killed issue. I'm sorry to disagree with snake, but it's working VERY well as far as I'm concerned. It was the prior version of SPWW2 that had practically invincible infantry. Snake has to get used to either/and the infantry being tougher in cover or dug in, and also for the increased difficulty of anything being hit when the targeting unit has moved the same turn.

Snake: Don't worry, it really is fine, and when your infantry is in cover and dug in you will benefit from that. Get them in the open against stationary gunners, and they're dead or falling back real quick. You don't know invincible infantry until you played the prior version of SPWW2.

Re: Some issues?
 

We'll dig around and build some tests and see what we can see. Save games for issues like this are always helpful as it saves us trying to guess about who's doing what while recreating what you saw

Don

Re: Some issues?
 

Charles,
My gripe is more along these lines:
My tanks move in close and blaze away with minor effect. Folks say thats OK, it's the way it should be - fair enough. I don't know, I guess tanks in WW2 weren't very good against infantry.......
Except, in the exact same game turn (replay a save), I don't move the tanks up but rather fire my infantry at the same targets at much longer ranges and the enemy gets chewed up.
So how come the tank main guns and MG's at 1 hex can't cause casualties but rifle and mg fire from several hexes distant can?
I figure it's the act of moving and shooting - not weapons. So I replay the save where I don't move the tanks and fire their guns and mg's.
Gee, same results.....why are the tank mg's not the equivalent of infantry rifles and mg's at the same targets?

My guess is the code that says 1 unit (the tank) fires so gets X times 1 shooter kills per shot where the infantry is X times 10 (10 men for instance) shooter kills per shot.
So do the tanks not do as well as an infantry unit with the same mg weapon because the casualty routine takes into account the number of men firing a weapon at a hex in which case a squad of ten men will get more results than a single man in a tank?

Is it one tank fires one main gun and one mg compared to ten men firing ten rifles and ten men firing ten mg's or something similar?
The reason I ask is because this was exactly an issue in some earlier versions of the 'other' steel panthers game. The fix was too adjust the values of the secondary weapons slots.

Re: Some issues?
 

The weapon in the first slot of an infantry type units gets a multiplier effect for number of men in the unit IF it is a primairy weapon type (rifle, carbine, smg, etc). Weapons in another slot don't get a multiplier effect (even if they're primairy ones) nor weapons in the first slot of an infantry unit that are not primairy weapons.

So part of the why a tank has more problems of hitting the infantry is that he has fewer weapons to aim and these often face the same direction (main gun and cmg for example). The enemy infantry is not conveniently packed together so they can't all be aimed at simultaneously by the tank. Although they can score the lucky hit that will take out multiple enemies, they'll usually have to pick them off one at a time (but splash effects can also result in additional casualties).
Infantry squads have many different weapons, usually a collection of rifles, an lmg and maybe something else of use against enemy soft targets. These can all aim at different targets at the same time, potentially taking out multiple targets with 1 'shot' (ie a shot in the game).

Narwan

Re: Some issues?
 

Narwan,
That seems to be the case as it's the infantry's rifle fire getting the kills and not the secondary mg, mortar, etc.
So I guess any tank's main gun and mg's are the equvalent of a squad's secondary armament.
I just can't rationalize that ten men shooting 6 bolt action rifles (6 men), 1 Lmg (2 men) and 1 mortar (2 men) at a target can put so many more rounds on a target than a tank crew firing a main gun and two Lmg's that the casualty results are so skewed.

After all, the 75 mm gun is better than a mortar, 1 LMG equals 1 LMG and the other LMG equals 6 bolt action.
But I suppose the number of targets chosen is a good thought since 6 rifles can pick 6 targets and 1 LMG can pick just one.

Re: Some issues?
 

Tanks are rather good against infantry, if you use the correct tactics!.

It is not the job of an AFV to close to knife range on enamy infantry. It is the infantrys task to do so.

If you charge in to sabre range with tanks, you will be firing from a bouncing moving target. Any enemy infantry left within 1 hex, may well rally and assault you in thier turn for your temerity http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

If you have infantry targets to engage with tanks, then stay at least 2 hexes away and within about 3-500m, and engage halted. Even a panzer 1, with its TMG used this way is a real killer for infantry. It is a nice stable, mobile pillbox which the infantry have no real reply to.

Always try to engage infantry with tanks from outside any anti-tank range the infantry have.

Do not expect "Hollywood" instant evapouration of the infantry, you will need a turn or 2 do deal with a rifle section. More if the enemy is dug in.

But the tanks engage the infantry from the halt, and supress or rout them. Your accompanying infantry can then close with the enemy, and if any are still around on the engagement line when these arrive, they can execute the survivors. Or if the enemy infantry is retreating or routed - simply gun them down while halted and stable, do not try to close with a "cavalry charge". The "charge" uses MP, which uses up shot opportunities, and the movement will tend to make these fewer shot opportunities at close range less accurate, and the act of closing can put you into danger from any of the infantry that happen to rally, or you may trip over previously unseen infantry or inf-AT. far better to stay halted and fire 6 rounds of CMG while halted at any infantry in LOS.

Meanwhile, as you have located enemy infantry, call in some mortars on the position. If they are still fighting back when these rounds arrive, they will help your task. if the enemy is departing when they arrive, mortar fire is an excellent way of killing off routers,or encouraging such to keep on going.

If you need to close, then your infantry skirmish line (one or 2 hexes in front of the tanks) should advance 1 hex a move (max), with your tanks advancing behind at a similar slow rate. The infantry should lead onto the objective and clear the route for the armour. Your artillery of course should prepare the position for your grunts as they do so. Remember that in real life (as opposed to Hollywood http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif, an attack is done in slow-slow time, and not as a wild "cavalry charge".

It is very rare for armoured forces to charge into the middle of an objective area. The only time to contemplate doing so is if you can guarantee that the enemy is 100% neutralised (retreat or worse), and you should really only do this with APC or tank rider infantry which will dismount and "take names". If any tanks join this charge - then they should remain behind the infantry line, or at least, share the same hex as the tank-desant infantry. About the only time you can be reasonably sure of such neutralisation is when running into the impact zone of a batallion (16 - 24 or so guns) of field arty, and even then if one or 2 squads have kept thier heads, this can be a recepie for disaster. Better to dismount on the forward edge of the beaten zone and fight through the objective cautiosly (1 hex a turn movement, max), while continuing the arty support on the area to be traversed, and tanks 1 hex behind the infantry skirmish line (or sharing a hex with a squad, with the riflemen advancing first, tank moving up only when the grunts have cleared the way).

Cheers
Andy

Re: Some issues?
 

I'm sorry snake, but in all my experience playing the various versions of SP, I've never seen that tanks were worse off than rifle fire. I'm just pleased to be hosing them down pretty much to any extent. Though if you're correct, be that a good thign or not I cannot say, but one of the things you may be seeing is taking account of the number of guns. Perhaps out of proportion, but perhaps that all the same. Is it reasonable at very close range that you can kill more men with 13 pistols (though we're not talking them here, I'm just trying to exaggerate the point more) from 13 men than with one MG? The end result is the same, but if the targets scatter the 13 pistols will do the job quicker. Why? Well part of the reason is the MG mount itself, as it has a very limited arc (as a BMG anyway) and the tank will have to turn to shoot all the scattered guys. Same with a CMG though with less restriction. OTOH, an AAMG comes pretty close to the pistols and in some cases might exceed them. If the men all stay together then the AAMG has the quickest kill, but if they do then you have the problem of only one gun though it shoots very rapidly. Sometimes, of course, the 13 guns having 13 shooters cam be a problem, as some of them can be really bad shots.

Naturally, you're wanting to say that these guys are at 50m and not a 0m (but of course they're never truly at 0m, but for the hex description this will pass for an adequate description), such that there is little angle and the tank has to turn very little if any. Well, then again, it may not be right, but the formula may have too high a respect for the advantage of having 13 guns as opposed to the more rapid one MG.

BTW, just for the respect that people would hav for MG's you would figure that it would have diminishing returns (sort of odd) for the longer it fires at the same target, because the surviving targets will be more apt to scatter and find cover, as opposed to mere pistols for example. The aim on the gunner will get better, but the men sometimes harder to hit (of course some could find decent cover, see MG shots closeby, panic, and then get out into the open again) with more shots.

You might be on to something, but for what little I've had of range 1 MG's firing off, not that much, I don't see a problem, but then again if I do any range 1 fighting it's almost always with AFV MG's and very little with rifle fire. I have had very little, if any, rifle fire at range 1 in this version.

Re: Some issues?
 

Wrong conclusion I'm afraid. You're assuming that although both units are in the same hex all the enemy are still in front of your unit. Not so. They can (and more often than not are) all around your tank, front, rear, side, possibly even up and under. So the tank has extreme angles to deal with at range 0.

Narwan

Re: Some issues?
 

I think I mixed you up on that one. I was triyng to make a point that gunning down men with a BMG, if they scattered, would not work as well as with pistols, BUT that would only be true at 0m. I was trying to then imagine that who I was responding to would then say "but we're not talking about 0m, we're talking about 50m."

In other words:

0m - good for pistols or rifles, no so good for BMG's.
50m - Not quite as good for pistols or rifles, better for BMG's.

Re: Some issues?
 

I suppose I should have mentioned that all the enemy infantry were routed. I would expect that AFV's chasing routed men at 0-50 meters would somehow have more effect than men shooting at them from 200-400 meters. I would expect more surrenders or dispersals from the remaning enemy squads from the tanks proximity and ability to pursue yet it's actually quite quicker to 'eliminate' the enemy by shooting at long range with infantry rifles rather than closing in and surrounding/overruning? them.

Certainly all the points mentioned earlier are excellent concerning infantry not running for the hills and only a fool would close with AFV's against entrenched/determined or well-supported infantry.

Re: Some issues?
 

Just to make it clear, routed units are not the equivalent of 'troops running for the hill', at least not if that means what I think it does. Casualties in this game are not just kills but also include WIA, MIA, those surrendering individually (so without the whole unit giving up), and those fleeing on their own probably without weapons anymore, being shellshocked, dazed, etc.
In other words, when units are retreating or routing, they are still exactly that, a UNIT, not a collection of individuals. They are still more or less functioning as a group of soldiers. The ones running off on their own, are part of the 'casualties' inflicted earlier.


Charles:
Okay, I see what you mean. I do think though that up to 10 rifles are probably more useful than a BMG for ranges up to several hundreds of metres when it comes to taking out multiple enemy troops per game shot.


Narwan

Re: Some issues?
 

Narwan Said:
Just to make it clear, routed units are not the equivalent of 'troops running for the hill', at least not if that means what I think it does. Casualties in this game are not just kills but also include WIA, MIA, those surrendering individually (so without the whole unit giving up), and those fleeing on their own probably without weapons anymore, being shellshocked, dazed, etc.
In other words, when units are retreating or routing, they are still exactly that, a UNIT, not a collection of individuals. They are still more or less functioning as a group of soldiers. The ones running off on their own, are part of the 'casualties' inflicted earlier.

I agree with you for the most part except routed troops (supressed enough to be listed as 'routing') can't move or fire without successful rally by their leader. So yes, they are still cohesive enough to be called a unit and any 'casualties' have already left but, are they not on the verge of collapse only salvageble by the possible force of leadership of the officer/NCO's? And if so, wouldn't the appearance of tanks chasing/firing at them from VERY close range make that rally a great challenge compared to taking cover from long range rifle fire?

What I'm hinting at is that given a 'routing' units state of existence, why does rifle fire from 200-400 meters cause more men to run away/surrender (become casualties) than tanks bearing down on them (scary enough if you aren't already retreating/routing)at 0-50 meters?

Let's remember these are not troops just supressed a little or retreating but routing. A retreat implies some rearguard retrograde movement to better cover/terrain as oppossed to rout which implies the unit is getting the hell out of Dodge City even if they are running close enough together to be called a unit. If left alone after army morale goes the units usually keep on routing right off the map!

It's just a game engine and you play with what can be accomplished - my hat is off to all the programmers and contributors.
I'm just trying to understand why there seems to be an inabilty for armor to 'persuade' routing infantry to give up either by surrender or fire (casualties) when the army is running and I'm all over these guys with my tanks. They give up just fine (casualties) from long range rifle fire, why not close range tank fire?
Where is the armor "shock value" factored in? I'm not seeing it. Perhaps I am but it does not have the effect that I thought blitzkrieg doctrine suggests.

Love the game BTW......

Re: Some issues?
 

Don, Andy, I know (think?) we had this licked once, but it was broken in the last (couple?) SPWW2 releases, and it's Broken here.

I've tried to do some poking around. The units that "lose" their smoke in a campaign game are armor units. Infantry and and artillery that start a campaign with smoke keep it through the campaign; armor that have it in the first battle, never have it again. This includes tanks, armored cars, tank destroyers.

As a hopefully-useful clue, the ONLY armor units I have seen NOT lose their smoke in a campaign are units with a "parent" artillery-class unit.

For instance, there is a unit available as an "OrPo Panzer" formation, the Geshtzwagn B2, a 105mm cannon on an ex-French carriage. It appears (the "parent") first as an SP arty unit, then later as an OrPo panzer. This sort of oddball keeps its smoke in a campaign; Panzer IV, VI, 75mm armored cars, etc, have smoke in the first game of a campaign, and then never again.

If you have trouble replicating this let me know and I'll generate some some campaigns and send you first and subsequent game saves to illustrate. But I think you see it as soon as you look.

Caveat; I am mostly playing German Long or Generated campaigns, if that matters.

Re: Some issues?
 

Nick said:
I've tried to do some poking around. The units that "lose" their smoke in a campaign game are armor units. Infantry and and artillery that start a campaign with smoke keep it through the campaign; armor that have it in the first battle, never have it again. This includes tanks, armored cars, tank destroyers.

I have done so as well. I restarted my long campaign as Germany twice. On the second mission of each game, all of the armor units have lost all smoke. Infantry, newly purchased units and any new core units are fine (for one turn if armor). All the 'vehicles' are without smoke as far as I can tell.

Here is a save of a long campaign, second mission after pruchase as Germany.

Re: Some issues?
 

It may be by unit class, with some not being added to the list for smoke replenishment in the code?.

The smoke rounds are credited as a random amount, and it may well be that this allows zero rounds to be allocated for some units in some circumstances.

On the to-be-investigated pile.

Andy

Re: Some issues?
 

The smoke replenishment in campaigns was slightly wrong. Now fixed.

Andy

Re: Some issues?
 

Thanks, Andy!