system Bde movement rule ambiguity/bug

[jamm40]

It appears theres still a bug or non mentioned change (in readmes) as to how bdes behave when an ab is capped.

Situation:

-2 axis KGs 2pdkg2, 2pdkg3 in euskirchen. 2pd HQ in Bruhl.

-All other links to euskirchen allied (ie: capping bruhl makes euskirchen 'cut off')

-Axis manual move both kgs to bruhl while its under attack. (and may have moved the HQ to koln but cant check wiretap to verify this)

- Both axis KG2 and 3 report next move as EUSKIRCHEN on the .ne command once they are in bruhl (being their last vacated location)

-Bruhl AB capped (last thing to be capped) and the 2 Kgs moved to koln.

To the best of my knowledge, previously, the system checked the previous location of the brigade FIRST for the system move, if that was legitimate, then the bde moved back to said location. The legitimacy of the move being based on an adjacent sister bde or HQ thereby allowing to to remain within 1 link of another element of the division. If this was not possible it would move back in the direction of the HQ. (koln)

Seeing as there were TWO bdes in Bruhl at the time of ab capture, and the fact the system moves the brigades in sequence of seniority, KG2 then Kg3, the first move to EUSKIRCHEN (as the place it came from) is legit while KG3 still has not moved from Bruhl for that split second it takes system to move the 2 units. The next move, again to euskirchen is legit, because there is now a sister KG in euskirchen (Kg2)

can we get confirmation if this has changed recently. and if so is it the correct sequence. Can see no info in last 2 patches readmes regarding this.

[GOPHUR]

Will need Doc and Oli to run through this. My limited understanding is, last place, place of another unit, place where I'm one away from HQ, in that order.

[KFS1]

The brigades aren't moved in order of seniority, they're routed based on the order they are stored in the CP's "who is here" list, which is unordered. If a unit's parent is present at the CP, then it will ask the parent to route itself first.

The route process occurs after posession of the town has changed. That means that the units inside the CP cannot be considered for qualifying movements.

So what would have happened is this:

1. Random unit 2pzX begins routing,

2. unit 2pzX notices 2pd is present and tells it to rout,

3. 2pd routes to koln,

4. unit 2pzX attempts to route:

4a. Option 1: Euskirschen. Moving there would put it 2 links away from the closest "in-play" unit, invalid move.

4b. Option 2: Bruhl, this is one link away and the Divisional HQ is located there. Move there.

This code was changed quite a long time ago, following public discussion of issues caused by units moving to their last location and resulting in a divisional split that prevented units moving. Moving the 2pzX units to Euskirschen would have cut the DivHQ off and prevented it moving.

[JOKER007]

Since the list is 'unordered': Are the next moves in a route then inherently unpredictable - until the first unit moves out?

Or, simple situations will be predicatable (1 brigade routing back with all but 1 connecting town available for move);

or, with complex situations (e.g. HQ potential cut-off, 1 or few links available to move, adjacent town for preferred move is under attack with linked depot capped) unpredicatable until some or most of the units have already moved?