Posts: 2013
Joined: 2/1/2001 From: Terra Status: offline
I'm getting weird sightings and I wonder if those are just made up by FoW or if something with the arc setting is wrong. This is from the CombatEvents file: Wirraway sighting report: 2 Japanese ships at 98,127 near Salamaua , Speed unknown
What seems so wrong is that the Wirraway unit is set to fly to the south of Terapo for ASW so I wonder how they can spot anything on the northern coast of New Guinea. There isn't any problem with the arcs for ASW?
Posts: 2013
Joined: 2/1/2001 From: Terra Status: offline
Why that? I just wonder that the range for ASW is halved but then they find time to do a 4 hex & 360 degree search, I would instead prefer to have the full range for ASW.
Anyhow again a nice point that should be added to the manual. Is that only for the two search missions or do other mission types do also such a search?
Why that? I just wonder that the range for ASW is halved but then they find time to do a 4 hex & 360 degree search, I would instead prefer to have the full range for ASW.
Anyhow again a nice point that should be added to the manual. Is that only for the two search missions or do other mission types do also such a search?
It is to depict normal air traffic from/to base that can spot enemy. There is always chance of detecting enemy 4 hexes from base 360 degrees if you have search assets. Search arc just intensifies seach to that sector. Without search arcs, chances are same to all directions, diminishing with range.
You are not losing anything with this feature, it is to depict that there is lot of air traffic from/to base via normal logistics air operations than what you actually set. It does not take anything away from main search effort by dedicated air search assets.
< Message edited by Sardaukar -- 2/29/2012 8:48:19 AM >
_____________________________
"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-
Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005 From: The Great White North! Status: offline
Michael
Got an interesting issue when I upgraded from Wirraways (Lt Bmbr) to Boomerangs (Ftr-Bmbr). The Wirraway was set to Nav Search, which the Boomerags cannot do (cuz their Ftr bombers) but they kept the search arcs and I believe thay are conducting the searches as well.
Pls see my posts her: (not at my main computer so don't have the screens handy)
Posts: 926
Joined: 4/12/2005 From: 519 Redwood City - BASE (Hex 218, 70) Status: offline
Michael.
Just wanted to chime in and say that I love the interface improvements and enhancements you've brought to the game. As a (former) Java student I have to say that work like this is really admirable. Anyone who's never done this sort thing can't possibly comprehend just how frustratingly finicky programming languages are, though recent compilers have made "cleaning up" less tedious! Your rapid responses to critical bugs has been appreciated, too. There is one thing that is worth considering, though.
ORIGINAL: jcjordan Ok I'm having a problem for something that was supposedly fixed but it looks like there's another case that needs to be solved. I have an ambhib TF that is to unload at Iba & for some reason 2 HQ become fragments during the turn execution w/ the main part due in 40+ days even thought the entire unit was in the tf before it unloaded.
I have the same problem; after unload my AirHQ is divided in 2 fragments; the fragment whit 'torpedo ordnance' has a delay of 52 days.
I'll not be tedious, but I think this problem is quite important. I (and jcjordan I suppose) can't use the torpedoes, bombs only. If there was a way to fix the problem I would be grateful. Thanks anyway.
diego
ah, I use the latest official patch (whit the beta I never had this problem).
< Message edited by cohimbra -- 3/21/2012 3:12:49 PM >
Posts: 13500
Joined: 5/5/2001 From: Melbourne, Australia Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Gunner98
Michael
Got an interesting issue when I upgraded from Wirraways (Lt Bmbr) to Boomerangs (Ftr-Bmbr). The Wirraway was set to Nav Search, which the Boomerags cannot do (cuz their Ftr bombers) but they kept the search arcs and I believe thay are conducting the searches as well.
Pls see my posts her: (not at my main computer so don't have the screens handy)
Just wanted to chime in and say that I love the interface improvements and enhancements you've brought to the game. As a (former) Java student I have to say that work like this is really admirable. Anyone who's never done this sort thing can't possibly comprehend just how frustratingly finicky programming languages are, though recent compilers have made "cleaning up" less tedious! Your rapid responses to critical bugs has been appreciated, too. There is one thing that is worth considering, though.
Thanks again.
You also have to realize that much of the base line code was written er more than a few weeks ago following different er "principles" than we would use today ... hence recoding a screen is even more tedious than you might think. Having done a few of our screen rewrites myself - I speak from experience. Basically everything is laid out - by pixel position .
ORIGINAL: jcjordan Ok I'm having a problem for something that was supposedly fixed but it looks like there's another case that needs to be solved. I have an ambhib TF that is to unload at Iba & for some reason 2 HQ become fragments during the turn execution w/ the main part due in 40+ days even thought the entire unit was in the tf before it unloaded.
I have the same problem; after unload my AirHQ is divided in 2 fragments; the fragment whit 'torpedo ordnance' has a delay of 52 days...my Betty needs torpedo!
Hi, I report this problem once again, assuming that someone is interested
< Message edited by cohimbra -- 5/20/2012 3:06:42 PM >
The underlying issue has been fixed but only after the last patch was released.
What does this mean?
Is the fix in the latest patch release, or is another patch file planned?
If it is in the latest patch release, to avoid any ambiguity, please state whether you mean 1108r9 or the most recent 'official' release that was published shortly after that.
< Message edited by bk19@mweb.co.za -- 5/20/2012 6:11:21 PM >
Posts: 2013
Joined: 2/1/2001 From: Terra Status: offline
What else can provide naval support? I don't look thru why some bases have naval support higher than the number of naval support squads, no HQ, no ships, nothing except that the numbers look like motorized support is used for this, should it be that way?
@michaelm Are you working on the manual? If so I added some comments to the WITP AE manual, maybe you are interested to look thruh them.
The underlying issue has been fixed but only after the last patch was released.
What does this mean?
Is the fix in the latest patch release, or is another patch file planned?
If it is in the latest patch release, to avoid any ambiguity, please state whether you mean 1108r9 or the most recent 'official' release that was published shortly after that.
It means that this fix is not avaiilable yet. It is not included in the last available patch. Michael just fixed it in his local version.Had to fight the problem myself and that bug hit THREE HQs with torp support on my side. A serious problem and i had the hope to get a hotfix for.
Posts: 2013
Joined: 2/1/2001 From: Terra Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: rjopel
Naval support can be provided by nearby bases.
I can't find anything in the manual so how does it work exactly?
Molokai would be a good example, 500 from a BF and 120 from a HQ in Pearl Harbor and 100 from a BF in Lahaina, and Molokai sits between with naval support of 60 without anything at that base.
< Message edited by BigDuke66 -- 5/24/2012 10:05:02 PM >
I guess you mean by the base itself and I also guess that the port level has an impact on this but I can't find anything in the manual so how does it work exactly?
If the available naval support at a base, is higher than the number of squads actual present. It's because there is a naval HQ present nearby, and the base in question is within its command range. Same thing goes for LCU support. If a unit is within range of a HQ, it will benefit from the HQ's support squads.
Hope it helps
_____________________________
It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time. -Sir Winston Churchill-
Posts: 2013
Joined: 2/1/2001 From: Terra Status: offline
Thanks I think I got it_ -Naval HQs provide naval support within their command range, depending on distance to the Naval HQ and what the HQ itself has the bases around it get: Distance = naval support value of the Naval HQ(minus damaged naval support) 1 hex = 1/2 2 hex = 1/3 3 hex = 1/4 4 hex = 1/5 5 hex = 1/6 6 hex = 1/7 7 hex = 1/8 8 hex = 1/9 9 hex = 1/10
Would be nice if someone with knowledge of the code could confirm or in case I'm wrong correct this.
@Atilla60 That Ground HQs can have a positive impact(raising the AV of units in their command range) I know but again not that they somehow help with support, at least I don't see that extra support is provide or needed support lowered.
Thanks I think I got it_ -Naval HQs provide naval support within their command range, depending on distance to the Naval HQ and what the HQ itself has the bases around it get: Distance = naval support value of the Naval HQ(minus damaged naval support) 1 hex = 1/2 2 hex = 1/3 3 hex = 1/4 4 hex = 1/5 5 hex = 1/6 6 hex = 1/7 7 hex = 1/8 8 hex = 1/9 9 hex = 1/10
Would be nice if someone with knowledge of the code could confirm or in case I'm wrong correct this.
+1
quote:
ORIGINAL: BigDuke66 @Atilla60 That Ground HQs can have a positive impact(raising the AV of units in their command range) I know but again not that they somehow help with support, at least I don't see that extra support is provide or needed support lowered.
If you open a LCU screen and check the number of required support, the number will be in red text if below the required. If the number is green, it means that a HQ is providing support. Example: If support available is 120 and required support is 150, normally the 150 would be displayed in red text, to signify that there's less support. If the 150 is displayed in green text, it means a HQ is providing support for the unit.
_____________________________
It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time. -Sir Winston Churchill-
Posts: 2013
Joined: 2/1/2001 From: Terra Status: offline
Of course they can provide their support for other units but not over the support value they have, naval HQs provide full value to their base and also a lot to bases around and counted together much more than the HQ itself as, that is somehow a bit weird.
I ran into a situation where I was giving orders that an air group could not follow because of the airfield size.
I was just thinking that maybe you could change the options available to air groups based on the size of the airfield they are flying out of?
Like - if I had fighters at a level 1 base and I was looking at my mission options, the Sweep mission would be grayed out or something like that?
I don't know if that's possible or not but I thought I'd ask.
I understand that you've been helping to tweak this game and provide even more features for us end-users. I'm finding this a fun game to play and I just wanted to say thank you for all of the help you've been able to provide.
ORIGINAL: jcjordan Ok I'm having a problem for something that was supposedly fixed but it looks like there's another case that needs to be solved. I have an ambhib TF that is to unload at Iba & for some reason 2 HQ become fragments during the turn execution w/ the main part due in 40+ days even thought the entire unit was in the tf before it unloaded.
I have the same problem; after unload my AirHQ is divided in 2 fragments; the fragment whit 'torpedo ordnance' has a delay of 52 days...my Betty needs torpedo!
Hi, I report this problem once again, assuming that someone is interested
I would like to know when we finally get a fix for that bug. It is VERY annoying and can ruin a game especially in the start. Why can´t we get a hotfix for this, Michael ? It happened now 4 (FOUR) times to me in my running game. I don´t want to use multiple taskforces because of the buggy torpedo support. I would like to get a fix for this especially since you said it is already fixed for a future release. PLEASE.
Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Tech Support >> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 January 2012 (2nd part) 
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 
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