donaldseadog

I modified code in AIWindow to check if landed AC had valid loadouts and the "Ghost" landed aircraft (after landing a group with splitoff then rejoined AC) have invalid loadouts. If that helps?

Yay A good fun scenario, thanks Enrique. PS I wonder if that middle east map needs a tweak? That is an interesting area but the map is cut off a bit short.

Well I took my own advice and started in pause to go thru each group and set up as if we'd been steaming for a week. I'm doing much better, tho I lost two f35 a few mobile units and spent about $40M US on SDBs. Report to come soon

I've only had time to get started, my hint, start in 0 time compression to evaluate all the situations and set up assets. Otherwise you can have an early defeat 🙄😝

previous post, the saved games don't always result in landing at the next 1/2 secs, the attached files here are more reliable, ...004 should be 2 secs before, .....005 should be 1 sec before landing TGroupLandSplit-3b.0004.zip

My computer did not cope well with Eric's large scenario so I wrote a smaller one that while it doesn't match in that it doesn't relate to the number of runways it does confirm that under other conditions the same problem of groups not completing landing occurs. A test in BS westpac using DB HCDB2-170909 GE 2023.011. zipped scenario file and two game saves. Scenario is opened and a airgroup consisting of 3 Hawk and 3 Aardvark is launched on a patrol. Split off from the group are 2 Hawk and 1 Aardvark to be joined again to the original group so that it now consists of 4 units = 1Hawk, 2 Aardvark, 2 Hawk and 1 Ardvark. The group is ordered RTB. game save ..... 3a is 2 seconds before landing commences, save .... 3b is 1 sec before landing. NOTE next post has better gamesaves, these aren't always 1 and 2 second before landing Landing is incomplete and 1 Hawk and 2 Aardvark remain in loiter/landing state until they run dry of fuel. The landed aircraft include two mysterious units consisting of zero ac and two normal units comprising the landed Hawk and Aardvark. TGroupLandSplit.zip

Oh YES I'd completely overlooked that one. Very true.

There does seem to be a bug in the voting system, I think its been devised by some government, we can only vote they way they want? We can browse peoples comments for an idea of what people think I guess.

apparently I'm not allowed to vote I think if it joins a group that is destined to land at a different group or base then it's reasonable to change the units home base to that of the lead unit, but maybe not in other situations?

While looking at another issue it has become apparent that in a situation where a group has more than one unit that is capable of catering for aircraft, aircraft units launching from the group might have their home base changed for no apparent benefit during group split and join operations resulting in the unit RTB to a different base unit from where it tool off. Is this good/bad indifferent?

Wow, I can't wait to try this one! But I must wait at least until tonight 😋

Haha Enrique, I bet you do

THis scenario escaped my eye (I was on extended shore leave )

incredibly significant so strange it hasn't been already noticed

Low Priority: In the SE when moving the position of a group to a west longitude it lists the longitude as east.