Unit Errata

Place bug reports / problems here that are found within the game.

Moderators: Balthagor, Moderators

Message
Author
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20714
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Unit Errata

#31 Post by Balthagor » Aug 15 2017

dax1 wrote:I don't have yet SRGW, but in SRU database I found this one, which could also be in the GW database

unit id 18516 "F-486 De Andrade"
unit id 18157 "F-486 Baptista De Andrade"
could be a duplicate?
Does appear to be 18516 no longer active.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com

User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20714
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Unit Errata

#32 Post by Balthagor » Aug 15 2017

Draken wrote:Sandbox 14 / USA
Eng #87 / 88 / 89 are of "multiple" variant instead of the specific US one.
Sorry, you lost me on this one...
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com

Zuikaku
General
Posts: 2132
Joined: Feb 10 2012
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#33 Post by Zuikaku » Aug 15 2017

Not actually played the game, but saw it on Youtube gameplay video.

Why is Ehrhardt E-V/4 infantry class? Is that true? Shoul'd be recon, cause it is armourred car and not troop carrier.
And as long as I can see from all these videos, there is major problem with WW1 artillery. Seems to me the problem is you have been using your old "caliber equals range" formula, so most of the peaces got 2-3 hexes range which is higly ahistoricall. Most of WW1 era had only 1 hex range, WW1 artillery mostly had 10km and less range. I have corrected the WW2 and modern ranges in my mod, please don't do that to me again :-) With "caliber equals range" formula researching new artillery does not have much sense, at least regarding improved range.
Last edited by Zuikaku on Aug 15 2017, edited 1 time in total.
Please teach AI to liberate and colonize instead of only annexing!

Draken
General
Posts: 1208
Joined: Jul 14 2004
Human: Yes
Location: Space Coast, FL

Re: Unit Errata

#34 Post by Draken » Aug 15 2017

Balthagor wrote:
Draken wrote:Sandbox 14 / USA
Eng #87 / 88 / 89 are of "multiple" variant instead of the specific US one.
Sorry, you lost me on this one...
Out of the 10 Engineer battalions assigned to the US on the sandbox 1914, 3 of them (units named INF 87th Engineer, INF 88th Engineer and INF 89th Engineer) are from country of origin "multiple" instead of "United States"
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.
Isaac Asimov, Salvor Hardin in "Foundation"
-
Si vis pacem, para bellum
-
It is hard to free fools from the chains they revere.
Voltaire

Draken
General
Posts: 1208
Joined: Jul 14 2004
Human: Yes
Location: Space Coast, FL

Re: Unit Errata

#35 Post by Draken » Aug 15 2017

Zuikaku wrote:Not actually played the game, but saw it on Youtube gameplay video.

Why is Ehrhardt E-V/4 infantry class? Is that true? Shoul'd be recon, cause it is armourred car and not troop carrier.
All armored cars I've seen so far are classed as infantry
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.
Isaac Asimov, Salvor Hardin in "Foundation"
-
Si vis pacem, para bellum
-
It is hard to free fools from the chains they revere.
Voltaire

Zuikaku
General
Posts: 2132
Joined: Feb 10 2012
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#36 Post by Zuikaku » Aug 15 2017

Draken wrote:
Zuikaku wrote:Not actually played the game, but saw it on Youtube gameplay video.

Why is Ehrhardt E-V/4 infantry class? Is that true? Shoul'd be recon, cause it is armourred car and not troop carrier.
All armored cars I've seen so far are classed as infantry
And so we got swarms of mechanized infantry in WW1 era? That is so wrong, what is the reasoning behind that??
Please teach AI to liberate and colonize instead of only annexing!

Draken
General
Posts: 1208
Joined: Jul 14 2004
Human: Yes
Location: Space Coast, FL

Re: Unit Errata

#37 Post by Draken » Aug 15 2017

Zuikaku wrote:
Draken wrote:
Zuikaku wrote:Not actually played the game, but saw it on Youtube gameplay video.

Why is Ehrhardt E-V/4 infantry class? Is that true? Shoul'd be recon, cause it is armourred car and not troop carrier.
All armored cars I've seen so far are classed as infantry
And so we got swarms of mechanized infantry in WW1 era? That is so wrong, what is the reasoning behind that??
Not really...They all suck :lol: . I haven't found any real use for them other than recon (go figures :lol: )

The AI tends to use them quite a bit it seems but I don't thinks it made made any difference other that plugging gaps in the line quicker than leg units
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.
Isaac Asimov, Salvor Hardin in "Foundation"
-
Si vis pacem, para bellum
-
It is hard to free fools from the chains they revere.
Voltaire

Zuikaku
General
Posts: 2132
Joined: Feb 10 2012
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#38 Post by Zuikaku » Aug 15 2017

Draken wrote: Not really...They all suck :lol: . I haven't found any real use for them other than recon (go figures :lol: )

The AI tends to use them quite a bit it seems but I don't thinks it made made any difference other that plugging gaps in the line quicker than leg units

It doesn't matter. WW1 infantry shoul'd be slow, legged, just as artillery shouldn't have 40km ranges (3 ingame hexes).
Please teach AI to liberate and colonize instead of only annexing!

SGTscuba
General
Posts: 1777
Joined: Dec 08 2007
Location: Tipton, UK

Re: Unit Errata

#39 Post by SGTscuba » Aug 15 2017

1914 sandbox, Italy has a duplicate capital ship called Espana with 2 different spellings and different stats but only a year build difference.

Spain has same thing in 1917 sandbox
My SR:U Model Project, get the latest and post suggestions here:

http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=28040

User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20714
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Unit Errata

#40 Post by Balthagor » Aug 15 2017

can't remember why all the armored cars got put into infantry. I'll review.

Thanks for clarifying Draken.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com

vahadar
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 247
Joined: May 19 2010
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#41 Post by vahadar » Aug 24 2017

684 2 units with same id (btr-106, bumerang 8x8)
684, "Bumerang 8x8"
id error-> 685, "Bumerang 8x8"

2594, "M103A2 Conquerer II Heavy"
typo -> 2594, "M103A2 Conqueror II Heavy"

4286, "M-68 Soltam 155mm"
typo 2 spaces -> 4286, "M-68 Soltam 155mm"

4300, "M119 105mm LWH"
suggestion -> 4300, "M119 105mm LWH/L118 LG"

4362, "ATHOS 2052 155mm Howitzer"
typo -> 4362, "ATHOS 2025 155mm Howitzer"

4477, "PHZ-70 130mm MLRS"
typo 2 spaces -> 4477, "PHZ-70 130mm MLRS"

4682, "PTZ-89 122mm"
typo -> 4682, "PLZ-89 122mm"

4706, "203mm 8in Norinco SP Gun towed"
typo 2 spaces -> 4706, "203mm 8in Norinco SP Gun towed"

need to be corrected in both SRGW and SRU
Last edited by vahadar on Aug 24 2017, edited 1 time in total.

vahadar
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 247
Joined: May 19 2010
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#42 Post by vahadar » Aug 24 2017

1914 start
France has 2 deployed howitzer 1910/37 152mm Howitzer at 858*165 that need to be deleted from orbat

Wrong number and name for the 5 République Class battleships for France
Instead there were only 2 ships in that class : République, Patrie
http://www.navypedia.org/ships/france/f ... blique.htm

Also Courbet class and Bretagne class should be buildable, they are not in .UNIT (leftover from SR1936 i guess), might be the case for others non-buildable ships in SR1936 that should be in 1914 (havent checked them all yet).

Might consider adding Liberté class battleships, 3 ships out of 4 in that class active in 1914 (Justice, Démocratie, Vérité), it succeded République class and preceded Danton class. Only 3 ships saw action during WW1 since Liberté was accidented in Toulon and sunk before the war, they stayed in service until 1922.
http://www.navypedia.org/ships/france/fr_bb_liberte.htm
Last edited by vahadar on Aug 25 2017, edited 1 time in total.

vahadar
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 247
Joined: May 19 2010
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#43 Post by vahadar » Aug 25 2017

17210, "Duguay-Trouin Class" and 17214, "La Galissonnière Class" period of service is wrong since SR1936 (i'm surprised it wasnt corrected in SRU), it is still the datas from SRCW.

Duguay-Trouin Class cruisers served France between 1926-52 and not 1944-64, also it is not available for research or construction in Default.UNIT for SRU/SRGW (last update)

La Galissonnière Class were in commission between 1936-59 and not 44-64.

Required techs should be changed accordingly in order to build them in 1936.

need to be corrected in both SRGW and SRU

User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20714
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Unit Errata

#44 Post by Balthagor » Aug 25 2017

vahadar wrote:17210, "Duguay-Trouin Class" and 17214, "La Galissonnière Class" period of service is wrong since SR1936 (i'm surprised it wasnt corrected in SRU), it is still the datas from SRCW.

Duguay-Trouin Class cruisers served France between 1926-52 and not 1944-64, also it is not available for research or construction in Default.UNIT for SRU/SRGW (last update)

La Galissonnière Class were in commission between 1936-59 and not 44-64.

Required techs should be changed accordingly in order to build them in 1936.

need to be corrected in both SRGW and SRU
Both of those likely represent "modernized" versions.

http://www.navypedia.org/ships/france/f ... trouin.htm

Ideally we should add new entries for the original designs of these ships. It would be worth posting that in a new thread since these two entries are correct for what they are meant to be.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com

vahadar
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 247
Joined: May 19 2010
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#45 Post by vahadar » Aug 25 2017

Balthagor wrote: Both of those likely represent "modernized" versions.

http://www.navypedia.org/ships/france/f ... trouin.htm

Ideally we should add new entries for the original designs of these ships. It would be worth posting that in a new thread since these two entries are correct for what they are meant to be.
True :)
At least for SRU, make Duguay-Trouin researchable/buildable, since 2 units are already available at start in the 1936 scenario, even if it is the modernized version ;)

Post Reply

Return to “Issues and Support”