Need Help with Helo Unit Class Problem

[DRG]

Here's a few general rules of thumb for modifying an existing OOB

1-Do not remove units that already exist. If they are used in a sceanrio the scenario will be buggered up as a result. If you absolutely have to remove a unit renationalize it to nation zero

2-Do not remove units that already exist and replace them with something totally different. See 1 above. If you correct info for a unit that's fine, but don't change a tank to an infantry unit or an aircraft to a artillery unit

3- The picklist looks for specific formations for specific time periods. Therefore, it is possible to change a formations structure and the AI will happily buy it and use it but if you radically change the dates it exists you may run into problems. I do not recommend altering the picklists. Some people have done it successfully, I still recommend against it.

As for "TO's that include the "normal" attachments from the company weapons platoon" there is no reason both the existing method and this method of formation building couldn't be included in an OOB. That way anyone wanting to use a company with a separate weapons platoon could and anyone wanted them blended with the rifle platoons can as well

Don

[Suhiir]

DRG said:
Here's a few general rules of thumb for modifying an existing OOB

1-Do not remove units that already exist. If they are used in a scenario the scenario will be buggered up as a result. If you absolutely have to remove a unit re nationalize it to nation zero

2-Do not remove units that already exist and replace them with something totally different. See 1 above. If you correct info for a unit that's fine, but don't change a tank to an infantry unit or an aircraft to a artillery unit

3- The picklist looks for specific formations for specific time periods. Therefore, it is possible to change a formations structure and the AI will happily buy it and use it but if you radically change the dates it exists you may run into problems. I do not recommend altering the picklists. Some people have done it successfully, I still recommend against it.

As for "TO's that include the "normal" attachments from the company weapons platoon" there is no reason both the existing method and this method of formation building couldn't be included in an OOB. That way anyone wanting to use a company with a separate weapons platoon could and anyone wanted them blended with the rifle platoons can as well

Don

Let me take these one at a time so I'm sure I understand them, I'd VERY much like to create an OOB that will continue to work with existing scenarios yet allow players to access an "accurate" (I use quotes on stuff like this because its subjective) OOB.

#1
OK, there's enough empty slots in the OOB (unlike say the Russian) there's no need to remove units.
BUT - if I were to change availability dates would that effect existing scenarios? I'm assuming the dates are used for scenario creation but once a specific unit (for example Marine Squad 262 default dates 1/66-12/74) is selected for a scenario that unit number (262 in this case) will be used regardless of the dates or even a change in unit type (as you mentioned in your #2). I chose unit #262 for my example because it's primary weapon in #8, the M16 - while the Air Force got them in 1965, and the Army in 1967, the Marines didn't actually start using them until 1969 ... so I'd change the availability date to 1/69-12/74ish. The other "problem" is this squad has an M60 LMG as it's 2nd weapon - the Marines never used M60's at the squad level, and in fact in 1966 there's a good chance they would have had M14's and BAR's (the Marines hung onto the BAR until 1969ish officially and longer unofficially).
I've noticed (from experiments) that if you use the editor to change a weapon the information screen pulls it's data from the unit number not the unit itself. So should there be a change in weapons it appears the game will use the weapon data from the unit in the scenario rather then the weapon data from the unit number - correct? But any newly created scenario's (using the modified OOB) will use the "correct" weapons.

#2
Understood - infantry NEEDS to stay infantry and Lt Tanks NEED to stay Lt Tanks.
However - if the "new improved" Lt Tank now has an X3 radio code will it still be used in existing scenarios yet NOT be used when the AI decides to buy a Lt Tank formation? I assume it will look for another Lt Tank WITHOUT an X3 code (assuming the same availability dates) and select that instead.

#3
Much as I figured, the AI looks for specific formation numbers and expects them to exist from X start date to Y end date, but could care less what actually exists within the formation itself. So as long as an infantry formation stays infantry (as opposed to Mech, Armor, Helo, what-have-you), the AI picklists will function correctly.
You say not to "radically" change the formation dates. Can you define "radically"? Is it acceptable to alter them a couple years one way or the other? Or can you only change the start/end month?

I used the weapons platoon attachments as an example. A more "important" one would be say the size of an artillery battery.
In the current OOB Formation #28 Howitzer Bty 1/46-12/120 has 6 tubes, yet around 1986 when the Marines traded their old 105's in for M198 155's they also changed the battery from 6 tubes to 8. I can "fix" this by creating section type formation with 2 tubes and an availability date of 1/86-12/120 and put it in an empty slot in formation #28 (#7 in this case) so that from 1/46-12/85 a battery will have 6 tubes and from 1/86-12/120 it will have 8.
This will of course create a problem as a battery is now 33% more capable and expensive.
And while I could of course create a new battery formation with 8 tubes that the AI will ignore (it not being on it's pick list) and the players can use.

The "problem" is that WinSMBT is a game that's attempting to simulate "real" units and warfare. I AM NOT attempting to criticize the game or your truly excellent work. I am attempting to help improve the game.

[DRG]

Suhiir said:
if I were to change availability dates would that effect existing scenarios?

Short answer.....no it will not affect the scenario.

Suhiir said:

I've noticed (from experiments) that if you use the editor to change a weapon the information screen pulls it's data from the unit number not the unit itself. So should there be a change in weapons it appears the game will use the weapon data from the unit in the scenario rather then the weapon data from the unit number - correct? But any newly created scenario's (using the modified OOB) will use the "correct" weapons.

If you change the weapon data for a weapon the change will show up in the sceanrio

If you change a units weapon to something else ( say... a BAR to a Bazooka ) the the original sceanrio will retain the BAR but any new purchases will be the bazooka and any changes in ammo will also be carried over with the new change but the old numbers will be retained for the old weapon

Suhiir said:

Understood - infantry NEEDS to stay infantry and Lt Tanks NEED to stay Lt Tanks.
However - if the "new improved" Lt Tank now has an X3 radio code will it still be used in existing scenarios yet NOT be used when the AI decides to buy a Lt Tank formation?

Correct. Radio code changes do not affect sceanrios

Suhiir said:

You say not to "radically" change the formation dates. Can you define "radically"? Is it acceptable to alter them a couple years one way or the other? Or can you only change the start/end month?

It depends on the the picklist and how much you want to change things. The picklist looks for formation X and from year Y - year Z it picks it .

Suhiir said:
I used the weapons platoon attachments as an example. A more "important" one would be say the size of an artillery battery.
In the current OOB Formation #28 Howitzer Bty 1/46-12/120 has 6 tubes, yet around 1986 when the Marines traded their old 105's in for M198 155's they also changed the battery from 6 tubes to 8. I can "fix" this by creating section type formation with 2 tubes and an availability date of 1/86-12/120 and put it in an empty slot in formation #28 (#7 in this case) so that from 1/46-12/85 a battery will have 6 tubes and from 1/86-12/120 it will have 8.
This will of course create a problem as a battery is now 33% more capable and expensive.
And while I could of course create a new battery formation with 8 tubes that the AI will ignore (it not being on it's pick list) and the players can use.

Adding a section to the formation at a specific date to increase it's size is one way things like this have been used before in other OOB's

[Suhiir]

Thank you very much for the conformation/clarification.

Let me nit pick a bit here to be sure I understand. You said :

"It depends on the the picklist and how much you want to change things. The picklist looks for formation X and from year Y - year Z it picks it."

So for example, the AI wants a Rifle Company in 1986, at the moment that's formation #11 (Rifle Company 1/73-12/89).
Does it look specifically for formation #11 knowing from the internal pick list that it is an infantry company and available in 1986?

Were I to for example change Formation #11 from availability dates of 1/73-12/89 to 1/69-12/85 and formation #12 from 1/90-12/120 to 1/86-12/103 would it then select formation #12 instead?

I'm assuming that while you can add new formations to your hearts content the existing ones MUST remain in their current slots and of their current type. But can you alter the availability without causing problems as long as you stay in "the ballpark" - i.e. not change them from say 1/73-1/89 to 1/110-12/120?

[Mobhack]

AI pick lists

As stated in that reply - all that will ever be said regarding AI pick lists is what is supplied.

Cheers
Andy

[Suhiir]

Thanks much !
Now that I see some of the constraints you've been working under I can see why you've had to do some things as you have.
With luck, and a few "creative" solutions I can work around some of them. Being able to look at the picklists the game is actually using and knowing how it uses them will help a lot!

I also see why you have equipment the USMC never had in it's OOB - and that adding an X3 code to a many of them would be a very bad idea.

Time to get creative !

[RecruitMonty]

Good luck, I am still trying to figure mine out.