Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Stock Data Base Update

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Stock Data Base Update Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Stock Data Base Update - 10/29/2006 8:54:05 PM   
pry


Posts: 1410
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Overlooking Galveston Bay, Texas
Status: offline 		OK Folks

Joel has given me permission and I am going to make another OFFICIAL pass thru the stock scenario data bases and try to correct all the remaining issues and errors.

This will be not be a Major Reworking of the Data Bases this is simply a fix for existing errors, so don't ask for new stuff.

PLEASE Keep this a fix list only, Thanks.

Pry
{Edit} 11/01/06
This always happens the fix thread always turns into a runaway train...

The scope of my review is strictly limited to existing typos and errors as follows, basically fixing items that do not require code changes to the game itself.

Ships with gun facing issues
Ships arriving with wrong configurations
Air groups with incorrect max aircraft or configurations
Radar set to wrong type
Duplicate leaders
Fixing the two major issues with scenario 2 (Withdraw port and Canton garrison)
Those kinds of changes…

This type of stuff will not be addressed, it is beyond the scope of this review and would require testing for game play and balance issues.

Adding new units
Changing Leader values
Changing aircraft performance and ordnance
Aircraft production numbers



< Message edited by pry -- 11/1/2006 2:11:24 PM >

_____________________________
Post #: 1
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/29/2006 8:57:58 PM   
Akos Gergely

 

Posts: 733
Joined: 4/8/2004
From: Hungary, Bp.
Status: offline 		Change real Balao class subs to Balaos instead of Gatos.

_____________________________



My blog: https://warshipprojects.com/

(in reply to pry)
Post #: 2
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/29/2006 8:59:50 PM   
pauk


Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline 		fixing japanese radar (type 13?) to air search radar

_____________________________


(in reply to Akos Gergely)
Post #: 3
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/29/2006 9:16:41 PM   
KDonovan


Posts: 1157
Joined: 9/25/2005
From: New Jersey
Status: offline 		air group 2122 (float plane group on CL Denver) has a max allotment of 44 planes instead of 4

(in reply to pry)
Post #: 4
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/29/2006 9:20:22 PM   
Bliztk


Posts: 779
Joined: 4/24/2002
From: Electronic City
Status: offline 		Fixing all the duplicate leaders in units, so we can kill the "Staff Officer" bug

_____________________________


(in reply to KDonovan)
Post #: 5
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/29/2006 10:00:34 PM   
kkoovvoo

 

Posts: 253
Joined: 10/1/2004
From: Slovakia
Status: offline 		Please, make possible to add database changes to existing saved games (like v 1.60 which fixed japan 4.7 DP base forces guns from naval guns to DP guns)

_____________________________


(in reply to Bliztk)
Post #: 6
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/29/2006 11:17:46 PM   
invernomuto


Posts: 986
Joined: 10/8/2004
From: Turin, Italy
Status: offline 		I agree with kkoovvoo. Please, make possibile to apply this official fix to existing games.

Bye


_____________________________


(in reply to kkoovvoo)
Post #: 7
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/30/2006 12:24:24 AM   
ctangus


Posts: 2153
Joined: 10/13/2005
From: Boston, Mass.
Status: offline 		HMAS Canberra has a belt armor rating of 25. That must be a typo. Probably should be 115 just as HMAS Australia.

(in reply to invernomuto)
Post #: 8
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/30/2006 12:40:16 AM   
YankeeAirRat


Posts: 633
Joined: 6/22/2005
Status: offline 		I would ask for an updating of the Allied Naval Commanders leadership and aggressiveness. A number of them espically the carrier admirals all seem to be in the low 50's or 40's. That doesn't seem realistic when there are surface commanders that are running in the high 70's and 80's

_____________________________

Take my word for it. You never want to be involved in an “International Incident”.

(in reply to ctangus)
Post #: 9
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/30/2006 12:57:41 AM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		Please fix the armor rating on all IJN heavy cruiser main gun turrets to 25mm, their real life protection.

Put something on the "Pensacola Convoy".  Actual units were the aircraft of the 27th Light Bombardment Group (53 x A-24s), 18 P-40e's and 2 x 2 battalion artillery regiments equipped with 75mm howitzers).  The P-40s were replacement or supplemental a/c for the Philippines so perhaps they belong in the pool.  They did end up participating or being available for the DEI campaign.  The personnel for the 27th Bomb Group were already in the Philippines.  These aircraft and personnel evacuated from the Philippines along with some from the States eventually formed the 8th Bomb Squadron in OZ.  One of the Battallions of artillery got to Java before the end...the others ended up deployed to Northern OZ reequipping with 105 mm's during mar-Apr 42, later fighting in New Guinea.  The Pensacola Convoy had substantial reinforcements for the Philippines on board and a significant portion of them got into the fight fairly early in the war.  The Louisville Convoy was actually empty though and returning to the States.

In the Rising Sun scenario (#2), start HMS Exeter in Tricomalee (since Colombo is not on the map).  Exeter was half the 8" gun power of ABDAFLOT during the Battle of the Java Sea but it never gets into the fight at all because of its starting location (Colombo).  I don't know if it is possible but this scenario also needs someplace to make withdrawals from...because neither Karachi nor Bombay are on the map.  British ship withdrawals that can't be made cost the Allied Player scarce political points. Frankly, since there's really no place to hide on the map the IJN Player doubles that advantage up by hunting down and sinking anything that can't withdraw to boot (once KB shows up).

      

(in reply to ctangus)
Post #: 10
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/30/2006 1:45:51 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Thanks Pry

RN and RAF Leaders are my main ones Air Commodores please for the Air Groups

Slim Arrives to late he should arrive as Burma Corps HQ commander and be available for redeployment as he was in theatre all through the period.

Somerville gets crap ratings all round for the ex commander of Force H - Surface 62, Air 42 Aggression 50 ????? this for the ex commander of Force H and the man who trie dto attack KB with Swordfish....sorry those ratings are just wrong add 20 to each IMO might be closer.

Pretty much all the RN Flag officers get a low comparative rating for some reason and Vice Admiral Bruce Fraser seems to be totally missing ?

On the RAF front a selection of the senior officers in theatre below

Air Marshall Park doesnt arrive at all
Air Commodore Alexander Gray 224 Group
Air Commodore Stanley Vincent 221 Gp
AVM the Earl of Bandon
ACommodore Sir Guy Garrod
AVM Sir Philip Joubert de la Ferte
Air Marshall Baldwin 3 TAF
Air Commodore Stevenson

Basically the RAF seems to have been ignored for higher commanders

If there is any possibility of getting leaders added I will do research not willing to waste time on a dead end though

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 11
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/30/2006 1:56:04 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		3rd Commando Bde would be a nice addition but that may be floggin a dead horse !!!

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 12
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/30/2006 2:00:33 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Hmm I think I may be misunderstanding the intent pry neither of the above especially the 3 Cdo point are actually required fixes they are just things that annoy me about the game so may not be appropriate for this refresh cycle

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 13
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/30/2006 2:16:14 AM   
RUPD3658


Posts: 6922
Joined: 8/28/2002
From: East Brunswick, NJ
Status: offline 		I never looked in the data base to confirm this but several people told me that the Japanese 105mm AA gun is coded wrong and won't shoot at planes.

It does not appear in the in game unit information database.

_____________________________

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits"- Darwin Awards 2003

"No plan survives contact with the enemy." - Field Marshall Helmuth von Moltke


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 14
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/30/2006 2:55:07 AM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		The ferry or max range of the PV-1 should be 36 with extended range 12 and normal range 9. This plane got really short-changed rangewise in Stock. Its top speed was also 307 mph - the figure in the data base of 280-290 something is appropriate for its derivative successor the PV-2 which is not in the game at all. The PV-1 was also built with the airborne surface-search radar ASV-1.

< Message edited by spence -- 10/30/2006 5:39:51 AM >

(in reply to RUPD3658)
Post #: 15
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/30/2006 10:09:38 AM   
wild_Willie2


Posts: 2934
Joined: 10/8/2004
From: Arnhem (holland) yes a bridge to far...
Status: offline 		My all time favorite typo :


Jap destroyer with 40 torps onboard




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by wild_Willie2 -- 10/30/2006 10:21:25 AM >

_____________________________

In vinum illic est sapientia , in matera illic est vires , in aqua illic es bacteria.

In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is strength, in water there are bacteria.

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 16
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/30/2006 12:09:19 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline 		Gato class subs have 30 torpedoes instead of the real life 24 (ammo for front tubes needs to be reduced from 3 to 2).

(in reply to wild_Willie2)
Post #: 17
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/30/2006 1:43:36 PM   
pry


Posts: 1410
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Overlooking Galveston Bay, Texas
Status: offline 		Data Collected.....

Thanks everyone for the most part these are the types of errors and typos I am looking for, keep them coming. I have a pretty long list already but I want to get as many as possible this pass, I don't know when if ever we will do this again so we need to get everything possible this time.

Please note the scenario(s) the error occurs in (or all 16) whenever possible that will help speed things up.

A few notes from the posted comments,

YankeeAirRat and Andy Mac, Leader Values will not change this is beyond the scope of this data base fix.

Spence,
I am aware of the scenario 2 withdrawal issue and the Japanese forces in Canton moving into Hong Kong and partisans destroying all the supply based there. I'll see what I can do about this.

RUPD3658, which device number are you taking about?
[Edit] Ok I see it device 276 thanks...




< Message edited by pry -- 10/30/2006 2:46:36 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 18
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/30/2006 4:26:58 PM   
BigJ62


Posts: 1800
Joined: 12/28/2002
From: Alpharetta, Georgia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pry

Data Collected.....

Thanks everyone for the most part these are the types of errors and typos I am looking for, keep them coming. I have a pretty long list already but I want to get as many as possible this pass, I don't know when if ever we will do this again so we need to get everything possible this time.

Please note the scenario(s) the error occurs in (or all 16) whenever possible that will help speed things up.


Will you be using any tools to look for errors such as my editor and witpchk? Also an officially corrected
Pwhex.dat file would be nice.

Thanks

_____________________________

Witp-AE
AeAi…AeAi …AeAi…Long live AeAi.

(in reply to pry)
Post #: 19
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/30/2006 6:06:14 PM   
spence

 

Posts: 5400
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline 		Along with Japanese Radar perhaps all radars need to be looked at.  The build rate for a lot of them is 0 with 0 (both sides) in the pool - so can these radars even enter the game?   If one gets damaged can it be fixed?  Looking at some obvious candidates for surface search radar (PB4Y-1, PV-1, Catalina) I didn't find any planes so equipped.  Also the penetration value for the Air Intercept radars seems to be 0 which as I understand things means they won't detect aircraft at all.  Could be why night fighters never accomplish much.

(in reply to BigJ62)
Post #: 20
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/30/2006 6:27:22 PM   
Speedysteve

 

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline 		How about the Rockets on later class Japanese ship upgrades? Unryu class for example?

They don't work properly IIRC?

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 21
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/30/2006 6:31:06 PM   
KDonovan


Posts: 1157
Joined: 9/25/2005
From: New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

How about the Rockets on later class Japanese ship upgrades? Unryu class for example?


or what about the "rocket" landing ships for the allies. At least remove these worthless ships since they can't be used as intended

< Message edited by KDonovan -- 10/30/2006 6:34:13 PM >

(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 22
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/30/2006 9:18:47 PM   
KDonovan


Posts: 1157
Joined: 9/25/2005
From: New Jersey
Status: offline 		i saw that the late war british CVLs (Vengence et al) have a 0 rating for belt, deck, and tower armor. Seems unlikely that they would be completely unarmored (like a CVE).

this is scenario 15

(in reply to KDonovan)
Post #: 23
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/31/2006 12:31:57 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BigJ62
Will you be using any tools to look for errors such as my editor and witpchk? Also an officially corrected
Pwhex.dat file would be nice.


I suspect that map corrections are not part of pry's review, but if you are aware of any errors in the stock pwhex.dat file, can you please let me know about them? I can add them to my stock map data fixes.

Thanks,
Andrew

(in reply to BigJ62)
Post #: 24
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/31/2006 12:33:52 AM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KDonovan

i saw that the late war british CVLs (Vengence et al) have a 0 rating for belt, deck, and tower armor. Seems unlikely that they would be completely unarmored (like a CVE).

this is scenario 15


Unlikely, perhaps, but nonetheless historical fact...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to KDonovan)
Post #: 25
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/31/2006 5:38:14 AM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		1.  Most of the R-class and QE-class BB don't have a float plane.  That -may- be historical.  But they have capacity, and no plane.

2.  Any chance of fixing the LCI(M), LCI(G), and LCI(R).  The weapons should be of type "Naval Gun" or "DP" gun in order to fire back at shore batteries and troops.  However, if you do that, they become nasty buggers in Surface Combat (unrealistic).  Whatever.  Right now, they do absolutely nothing.

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 26
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/31/2006 10:49:59 AM   
Andrew Brown


Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline 		I would consider the low build rate of the F6F in the stock scenarios as an error. After a bit of work on this for CHS I settled on a build rate of this aircraft of 230, as opposed to the stock value of 144. Quite a difference.

Of course there are issues with changing data such as this - namely play balance - but I am reporting it here as I view this as a genuine fault with the data.

There are other aircraft build rate and availability date errors as well - Allied and Japanese - but this is one I can recall from memory. I expect that others who are more knowledgeable that I am could come up with a good list...

Andrew

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 27
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/31/2006 11:15:30 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Oooh yes I agree that one Andrew !!!!!

I had nearer 300 total for F6F's of which c 30 should be the nightfighter variant but any improvement in this would be welsome

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 28
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/31/2006 1:40:17 PM   
BigJ62


Posts: 1800
Joined: 12/28/2002
From: Alpharetta, Georgia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigJ62
Will you be using any tools to look for errors such as my editor and witpchk? Also an officially corrected
Pwhex.dat file would be nice.


I suspect that map corrections are not part of pry's review, but if you are aware of any errors in the stock pwhex.dat file, can you please let me know about them? I can add them to my stock map data fixes.

Thanks,
Andrew


Unfortunately I've made corrections to my original so I can not give you a complete list. However you can d/l my editor and check for yourself. The routine looks for:

1. Checking for hexside mismatches.
2. Checking for land hexes adjacent to ocean. This is an error according Mike Wood, quote "Hello...I have noticed on some maps, that one hex will be ocean and the adjacent hex will be land. Just want to make sure you folk know that if you make a map, you must place a shore hex between an ocean hex and a land hex or the path finding routine will become very confused. Bye...Michael Wood"
3. Checking for hex type / terrain incompatibilities.
4. Checking for coastal atoll without a base/beach, most if not all Ca type hexes are base/beach hexes. It's been reported several times on the forum about troops unloading into seemingly ocean hexes only to discover that they have been mistyped as Ca.(while technically this may not be an error, everyone that I found turned out to be an error, 11 of these IIRC).

One error that it does not check for is coastal behind other coastal hexes when it should have been land, not sure if it matters that much but, I have found a few of these only by looking at the map.

Some of the errors the routine found can be corrected in more than one way so, that's why I was hoping for for an offically corrected version.

Hope this can be of some use.
Thanks

_____________________________

Witp-AE
AeAi…AeAi …AeAi…Long live AeAi.

(in reply to Andrew Brown)
Post #: 29
RE: Stock Data Base Update - 10/31/2006 3:34:09 PM   
pauk


Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Oooh yes I agree that one Andrew !!!!!

I had nearer 300 total for F6F's of which c 30 should be the nightfighter variant but any improvement in this would be welsome


says Andy Without Fighters I....



_____________________________


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Stock Data Base Update Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.324