RetLT Scenario issues
 

The Russian Fortified houses (formation B) use SS ID tags.

Since this is a very old scenario, this likely happened with the introduction of the SS ID tag.

The problem is only cosmetic. They are still under Russian control.

Re: ID Tag error in Scn 80- Wiking in the suburbs
 

Moved post to correct forum.

Re: ID Tag error in Scn 80- Wiking in the suburbs
 

That's an odd one but it's the result of its age. That "fortified house" was pulled from the German OOB. Thinking at the time there wasn't one in the Russian OOB but there is now and it's now corrected for the next update

Bug in scn 78 Hungarian 2nd Motor
 

Both sides retreat in the wrong direction.

Re: Bug in scn 78 Hungarian 2nd Motor
 

load the scenario in the game editor and it will show Hungary ( left ) and Russia ( right ).

On the left side of the menu you will see " map sides " and it will show "Locked" click on "Locked" and it will change to "Free" and the button below will now show "Swap"

Do that and restart the sceanrio and tell me if that solves the problem for you

Re: Bug in scn 78 Hungarian 2nd Motor
 

That worked.

Re: Bug in scn 78 Hungarian 2nd Motor
 

OK. I have applied it to the one in the master game and it will go out with the next update

Sound error in scn 199 Desperate Hours
 

The Finnish/Swedish units that have rifles in their 2nd weapon slot play LMG sounds when they fire them.

They are F0, G0, G2 and H1.

Re: Sound error in scn 199 Desperate Hours
 

Scenario problem - moved to scenarios sub-forum.

If these things were modified by the scenario desiger and the original units had LMG in slot 2 then he may not have changed the sound byte (if they had one assigned). That could be the case if the sound is not the default 0 since if the sound is default (0) then the code checks the weapon type and generates an appropriate sound, but if the OOB designer assigns a sound byte then that overrides that.

Re: Sound error in scn 199 Desperate Hours
 

I will look into this.....

Yeah.... the original weapon in that slot is a BAR with sound FX 56... it's also set up as an "M/91" rifle and there is no M/91 in the Swedish OOB but there is in the Finn OOB. I will sort this out and get the correction into the next patch. The problem is there is NO WAY to change the sound number either in the game editor or with ScenHack when a scenario designer decides to "be creative" like this so it may just go back to being a BAR or a Finn LMG unless I can find a way to change it......so far no luck and the "BAR" sound is unique. This may end up being something you just need to ignore

Re: Sound error in scn 199 Desperate Hours
 

IIRC, this was the first scenario I ever created, around 2003/4 something. Been a while since then. :)

I switched between OOBs to get Swedish ID flags but Finnish weapons, for the SFK ("Swedish Volunteer Coy"). The easiest fix is probably to re-buy the units for player 1 using the standard Finland OOB...

I have a few days off. I'll update the scenario and sort it out.

Re: Sound error in scn 199 Desperate Hours
 

The problem did expose a gap in our editing ability for the game/scenhack that Andy thought was covered but isn't so the ability to edit the weapon sound may go into the next release.

BUT... if you want to update it please do.. I have no doubt you will tweak it a bit given it's age and it is far easier now to change ID tags for units than it was way back then

Re: Sound error in scn 199 Desperate Hours
 

That scenario needs an update, badly.

Starting with the map. For comparison:


Vintage map of the area:

https://64.media.tumblr.com/0eafcecc...3d957bbad4.png




Venhola (tilted, arrow shows direction of Soviet attack):

https://64.media.tumblr.com/86889d17...c9b45d4e80.png





Quick edit in the game:

https://64.media.tumblr.com/387ecc54...7a92fa953b.png

Issues in Scn 26 and 27 Amiens and variant
 

Going back through old scenarios and found 2 issues with this one.

1. The French 37mm AA guns are really 13.2 AAMGs

2. The German Stugs don't have ammo for their MP40s.

The variant is tough as the defender.

Re: Issues in Scn 26 and 27 Amiens and variant
 

I will look into these and make the corrections for the next update.
Thanks for finding and reporting them.

EDIT

They have both been corrected but nothing much really changes except a name. The French don't have 37mm AA but they do have 13.2mm AAMG's and now the unit reports being what it actually is........ a 13.2mm AAMG.

The Stug issue is that the B model in the OOB now does have an MP40 for close self-defense but the B model was not in service at the time this scenario is set but the Ausf A version was and the Ausf A does not have an MP-40 for self-defense so now the scenario uses an Ausf A

Don

issues in scn 32 Danube Rivermen
 

Making my way through the very old scenarios and found 2 in this one.

1. The Hungarian air transports play jet noises. Probably a speed issue.

2. The Hungarian capital ships are listed as having 16 smoke discharger shots on the info screen but none on the main screen. These would have been helpful in screen the ships from the shore batteries.

Issues in scn 33 Halfaya Pass
 

The German Stug Bs have no ammo for the MP-40s.

The British 40 MM Bofors AA guns are very odd.

First they are listed as 40 mm Bofors guns but on unit info screen they are listed as QF 2pounder AA guns. Click on the information tab and they are once again 40 mm Bofors AA guns.

I would write this off as a nomenclature issue but it gets weirder.

On the main screen they are shown as having a range of 3000 meters, on the unit info screen as 2000 meters and on the information tab as a range of 46 hexes (2300 meters).

I have attached screen shots of the AA gun issues.

Re: Issues in scn 33 Halfaya Pass
 

If a designer alters a unit, the basic info will change to reflect his edits - but the unit still points at the original databse entry for the second "more info" data.

That's always been the case with edited units in scenarios. Usually not a problem since the edit is minor, but can be a bit ofputting if the scenario designer edits the thing into something utterly different.

Re: Issues in scn 33 Halfaya Pass
 

Also, if the scenario was made 15 years ago it will record the unit info in use 15 years ago and that may not be the same as the encyclopaedia reports now as the encyclopaedia reports current information not what may have been in use at the time the scenario units were purchased so when you see info that differs it may be old OOB data, it may be scenario designer modified data and it may be a combination of both and the game system as been like that from day 1 and the earlier the scenario the more chance of finding something like that.

However, it's all corrected now

Re: Issues in scn 33 Halfaya Pass
 

That is the same issue you brought up a couple of days ago but in this case the B version IS available in that time period but the unit bought at the time the scenario was made didn't have it but it is all corrected now and will be in the next patch as will any other little oddities you may find that aren't reported by our error checking programs in any of the other older scenarios you may play

Re: issues in scn 32 Danube Rivermen
 

If anyone has not played this one I recommend giving it a go.

Re: issues in scn 32 Danube Rivermen
 

The issue with the air transports has been corrected and it was an OLD speed value for that UC..... the smoke dischargers may take some code work

issues in scn 35 HG In Russia
 

Continuing my picking of nit:

1. The Stukas take one damage after they drop their bombs. Usually they can strafe for a few turns.

2. the 251/10s have a carry capacity of 13. Probably a designer mod but I would think such an old scenario would be stock.

3. The photo for the mech infantry is of a soldier with a STG-44. It is a 1941 scenario and the unit has Kar 98s.

All very minor issues but my detective background and OCD won't let me ignore them. :)

Re: issues in scn 32 Danube Rivermen
 

Agreed. This one has a bit of everything. Amphibious operations, an air drop, and cavalry.

Re: issues in scn 35 HG In Russia
 

Did you skip 34 or was it OK:D

Will investigate but..

1/ I'm going to say that may be deliberate to stop players from using them more than once.

2/........ no early on there was more "creativity" from scenario designers poking around with little unit changes to customize things and that has tapered off over the years...thankfully..... it makes error checking much easier when the units haven't been changed but 13 carry DOES appear to be a scenario designer adjustment as the 251/10 has only had a 3 man carry capacity since the DOS days and changing that creates problems I'm just going to leave alone.

Carry capacity is fixed in the game but it is FAR more flexible in RL

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/15/4a...a61b5505c5.jpg

https://www.nps.gov/museum/exhibits/...-8-14-1944.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c8/b2...89b15f79ad.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c1/25...cc6c25b72f.jpg

3/ in the future, knowing which unit number is VERY HELPFUL.

When that scenario was built they were carrying K98's now that unit carries 7.92k Mkb 42(H) and their in and out of service dates are completely different which is why that photo is what it is and why the units still carry the old weapons. That's the way the game preserves the major data the Scenario designer was working with at the time it was built but unit photo is not critical data that could alter a scenario

Re: issues in scn 35 HG In Russia
 

I skipped up because I remember not liking it. I just opened it up and saw the Brit flag for both sides so I will look further.

If anyone wants to send me scenarios to play test I can stop being petty about finding minor errors.

I need something to keep me busy in quarantine. :D

Re: issues in scn 35 HG In Russia
 

Sorry about the F1, F2, G1, G2 had the wrong photo.

Re: issues in scn 35 HG In Russia
 

34 Fallujah road only has the issue of both flag being British on the player selection screen.

The opposition uses black during the game.

Re: issues in scn 35 HG In Russia
 

Which is EXACTLY why the two Britain's were used !..... to give the enemy side the black flag as no Iraqi flag exists in SPWW2. He could have used Green, Blue or Red but in that case, used the same nation on both sides to generate the black (rebel) flags for the enemy. If you read the introduction to it you will find it can be played from either side which will keep you busy twice as long:)

Re: issues in scn 35 HG In Russia
 

Why is not black and British flags on the player selection screen?

Seems like it would be clearer.

Re: issues in scn 35 HG In Russia
 

Entirely different code. There is no black nation flag button. The V hex and ID tags are from a different series. This is SOP for SP for decades.

Player one is the default and that is the British side. Once you get past the start screen it will all seem perfectly normal

Issues in scn 39 Bloody Ridge
 

The text implies that the player should play the USMC side but does not specifically state it and the default for the human player is Japan.

The #2 unit in formations B-O, which includes Rifle Squads, Paras, and raiders, is missing the weapon in the 4th slot. I would assume this was intended but the unit is shown as having shots for the 4th weapon slot.

The same goes for the Engineers in formations T,U, V, and AK. The 0 unit is missing its 4th weapon and the others are missing their 3rd and 4th weapons.

Really doesn't matter much since it is pretty easy to get a DV as the USMC.

Re: Issues in scn 39 Bloody Ridge
 

Well.......
......seems clear (to me) that this is to be played from the USMC but yes I agree having the game start with the Japanese as the Human player is a bit odd and IIRC this had been brought up WAY in the past but I will look into it again.

Since it's "pretty easy to get a DV as the USMC"....MAYBE it might be better played as the Japanese? ( you have said you are looking for things to do......:D )

As for the "missing weapons" methinks you are looking too hard to find fault.( yes, I know ...... Covid quarantines and all that goes with it) There is NO weapon and NO ammo the fact it shows shots is a "bug" so small as to be nearly invisible. It does look like the scenario designer removed a weapon and the ammo it used but I suspect the "Shots" code is showing the original units 4 weapons shots means nothing to gameplay but this scenario probably started being built in the year 2000. (see below)

From what I can see nearly all of the regular USMC squads in that scenario came from the same OOB unit and in the scenario some have a fourth weapon and some don't and sometimes that fourth weapon is a sniper rifle and sometimes it's a SMG. The game allows these alterations to be made and scenario designers tended to do the more back in "the old days".........AS WELL that unit ( 39 ) has been changed since the scenario was built... it still has the same first three weapons but the fourth is a Rifle grenade and now it's availability ends 9 months before this battle was fought so the "problem" here is very, very minor..... the game is showing shots for weapons and ammo that don't exist in that scenario and the sum effect on gameplay is zero.

And further to this..... this is a scenario that goes back to the DOS days. The scenario text has been unchanged since Jan 21/2001.....Twenty years ago almost to the day... so it was release either for DOS v4 or v5 as both upgrades were released in 2001. the oldest OOB I can view with the current MOBHack is the last version of DOS --V7 and in that OOB the last date that unit used in that scenario is 9/41.... a full year before this battle is fought and at some point that availability was pushed to the end of 1941 so it MAY have been available when this scenario was built OR the guy who built it could have set the date for purchase to 9/41..... bought the units then adjusted the battle date to 9/42 just to get a basic unit armed the way he wanted and then he removed and changed weapons. But also this means it had to be updated with a long lost conversion program when we converted the game to Windows in 2006 so the fact it even exists to be played and critiqued is a miracle ( Don Lazov can tell you all about the joys of trying to resurrect old DOS scenarios.....) and FYI the last TXT file in the game for a scenario that would have been built for a DOS release scenario then converted to run with the Windows version is 308 so expect to find little oddities like these.. some might be fixable...some may be just relics that cannot.

And further to the further, yes it is odd that the game starts with the Japanese as the human player but it *may* have been originally designed to be played that way ( twenty + years ago )


EDIT....That scenario has now be set up to start with USMC as the Human player

Re: Issues in scn 39 Bloody Ridge
 

I played as Japan and I now think that this is what was the side intended for the human player. The text doesn't match though.

It is much more of a challenge and is winnable. I managed to take all but one of the v hexes and crushed the defenders. I took the v hexes on the airfield on the last turn so time is tight.

The trick is to use concentrated Danger Close artillery support (2-3 hexes in front of your own troops) followed by a massed thrust on an narrow front near the 1st hill. The reserve troops then widen and hold the gap while the others move on the airfield.

I would consider adding a text for a Japanese player and say that the scenario is playable from both sides.

Re: Issues in scn 39 Bloody Ridge
 

I have added txt to the write up making those suggestions but I think I will leave it as I have changed it to start with USMC human now as that is the way the text was written way back when.

"a challenge and is winnable" is a good thing in a scenario and it's good to have one that can be played by novices and experienced players depending on the side picked.

Thank you for trying it that way. You should keep a "rating record" of the ones you have played. We have provided a basic list of beginner scenarios and although every player has different skill levels we have never had " reviews " unless they are WIP feedback. This is partly why we added the SQL function to Scenhack so players can check which might be the long ones and the short ones but we also understand that writing an SQL to extract the type of info you might be looking for isn't for everyone.

Re: Issues in scn 39 Bloody Ridge
 

Can do.

What criteria would you like to see the scenarios rated on?

I can think of:

1. Difficulty (Beginner/experienced/expert or easy/average/difficult)
2. Length (short/medium/long/very long)
This could have predetermined parameters in turns for each rating.
3. Size (small/medium/large/very large)

Could these ratings be made searchable if we standardized them?


Perhaps we should set up a sub forum for this topic so we can have multiple players work their way through the scenarios.

Re: Issues in scn 39 Bloody Ridge
 

I was thinking more general impressions as to if it's easy or difficult or in between. ScenHack allows players to check for scenario length using Sort which does not require writing an SQL to find that info but including its length in a "review" would be easy enough. Size IS something that would be informative and that does not mean number of turns although that can be an indicator of size. In this case I refer to the number of units.....some players love the big monsters but not everyone does and when you have an hour to spare you don't want to start something that's going to take days to play.

I would say if you were interested in starting something like that a new thread on this subforum would be all that's needed.

An easily winnable scenario might be a bore for an experienced player but just what a newbie needs to know ( that he's not likey to have his butt handed to him by the AI )..... and one that plays good from both sides is good info too. I don't expect anyone to play both sides but if it happens it's worth noting and if it plays interestingly from both sides that's a potential PMEM scenario.

Scenario 39 might be a good one to PBEM if the experienced player takes Japan and the less experienced player takes USMC. As you said it was an easy win from the USMC POV but a challenge as the Japanese.

The reason people still play SP after a quarter-century is because of things like that

Re: Sound error in scn 199 Desperate Hours
 

I reworked the map and scenario for 199.

Instead of a narrow focus on the hills themselves I opted to make the scen represent the roughly three days the II Battalion/JR13 fought in this location.

This setup gives the player a few choices from the get go, which is something I like.

Some of the Bn is in position far forward (as was the case historically) so the player can either reinforce this area with the rest of the force and attempt to hold here - historically the order was to hold as far forward as possible and means a shot at keeping all VHs.

However, the player can also fall back towards the hills where the line can be made shorter, and there is less open terrain.

(The player could even fall back behind the anti-tank obstacles of the VKT line but might be hard pressed to regain the Victory Hexes if doing so before the game ends.)

I opted to not make the forest too dense with trees as I think this makes for a better game. Historically the Russians made use of AT-guns firing but it would be difficult for the AI to handle I replaced them with something else...

Re: Sound error in scn 199 Desperate Hours
 

Can you repost using another file extension? My computer will not open .rar files.

Re: Sound error in scn 199 Desperate Hours
 

search for winrar, its a free utility to deal with rar files. Or 7zip, which deals with most (including zip, 7z, rar, tar gzip etc).

Re: Sound error in scn 199 Desperate Hours
 

RetLt - I can send you the files directly.

Are you still using the aol email adress?

Re: Sound error in scn 199 Desperate Hours
 

Yes, thanks.

Issues with scn 19 Goch-Calcar Road
 

This scenario is an assault/defend but there are no mines or forts.

Also Canadian unit AHO has its slash going the other direction. This is trivial but it pegged my OCD meter.

Re: Issues with scn 19 Goch-Calcar Road
 

There is no reason that an assault mission has to have mines or forts in it.

It does mean that the defender is dug in, unlike an advance v delay.

Re: Issues with scn 19 Goch-Calcar Road
 

I suspect this was built as an advance then made an assault and saved to emphasize this is a full on attack but neither side is dug in or has any other defensive measures like mines etc so from that POV it's perfectly OK and it's perfectly OK to set it up that way. It's just one of the little "tricks" scenario designers can use to get the set up they want and that is why it's an assault and neither side is dug in

The deviant slash has been corrected and for the record, that scenario is 2 decades old. Built Jan 2001

Re: Issues with scn 19 Goch-Calcar Road
 

Not that important, but it is also ahistorical, the infra red panthers were not used in the west. However, there is a lot misinformation floating around on the German infra red tech, with tons of "tall tales" that have little to do with reality.

Re: Issues with scn 19 Goch-Calcar Road
 

Without the supporting halftrack an it's IR spotlight it seems the range in the dark was 400m. With the HT it was 700m

https://fingolfen.tripod.com/ir/irpanth.html

So maybe, maybe not. The only way to know for sure would be to capture one and if you don't then you'll never know how they managed to knock out tanks in the dark One thing that is certain is the 16 ( 800 m ) in the OOB now for night vision is a wee bit optimistic and will be adjusted

Re: Issues with scn 19 Goch-Calcar Road
 

I forgot to mention that the defenders are set to advance rather than stay put.

They do this from turn 1, even though they hold all the v hexes. It would be much harder if they stayed put.

Thanks for clarifying about assault/defend. I thought there had to be mines or forts.

Re: Issues with scn 19 Goch-Calcar Road
 

I will assume that is deliberate in the way it was set up. Unfortunately, I cannot turn the clock back 20 years and ask

Re: Issues with scn 19 Goch-Calcar Road
 

Don, don't worry about it. The designer may be dead for all we know. Deal with the stuff now.

troopie