RE: possible bug/error

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: possible bug/error

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: possible bug/error

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: possible bug/error - 11/9/2017 10:45:36 PM

decourcy2

Posts: 516
Joined: 1/29/2015
Status: offline

One of my chief beefs with the game as it stands is there is rarely any serious destruction of the Indonesian oil production or refineries. We all know this actually happened, and the Japanese only reached about 35-40% of pre war production in '43.
The code for this is beyond a modder though, it was something Don would have had to change, and it was not done for some reason.

I could in my mod make all of the Dutch oil start damaged to simulate this and limit Japan. What are everyones thoughts?

(in reply to decourcy2)

Post #: 31

RE: possible bug/error - 11/10/2017 12:47:59 AM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: decourcy2
One of my chief beefs with the game as it stands is there is rarely any serious destruction of the Indonesian oil production or refineries. We all know this actually happened, and the Japanese only reached about 35-40% of pre war production in '43.
The code for this is beyond a modder though, it was something Don would have had to change, and it was not done for some reason.

I could in my mod make all of the Dutch oil start damaged to simulate this and limit Japan. What are everyones thoughts?

I think every IJ player has experienced taking Palembang with over 1000 oil damaged more than once.

You are correct that IJ never got more than about 1/3 of the DEI oil production back in service, but I'm not sure about the why.
I suspect that the damage in the game should be skewed a bit more towards higher damage values, but then the allied players know how to skew that and very few do so.
On the IJ side, historically, they simply didn't commit the resources to rebuild the fields they took. Now, why is that is the really relevant question.

John argued that they didn't have the equipment to do so. True, but they could have built it. They had all the technology and did in fact build the equipment at the time, they just chose NOT to ramp up production to allow for more/faster repairs/recovery.
Could they have done so? Again, John argued that they couldn't. I've never been convinced of that. I think like everything else, it was a tradeoff, they chose something else.

My issue is something quite different. When Palembang does suffer 1000 oil damage, the player CANNOT decide to repair it. Why? because that takes 3 years to do so. You cannot repair more than one point per day.
This restriction works fine EXCEPT in the case where the factory is REALLY large like Palembang oil. The decision to repair at that point is largely out of the players hand because at 1/day repair the ROI on the repair is not too good after about 6 months or only 180 units of oil repaired.
Now, was this the same reason IRL that IJ did not attempt to repair more? Maybe.

Bottom line, the devs (you and Don) got this pretty close to spot on. As an allied player, if I want to nuke Palembang, I know how to do it ... I just need to act upon that. Most don't, I suspect, because with Palembang gone the IJ side become rather tedious quite a bit sooner and the games tend not to finish ...

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to decourcy2)

Post #: 32

RE: possible bug/error - 11/10/2017 2:38:22 AM

decourcy2

Posts: 516
Joined: 1/29/2015
Status: offline

The thing I wanted but Joe didn't was correct refineries, I wanted Balik Papan to be like 40% of the Dutch capacity not spread fairly evenly as it is in game. But Joe felt (as I understood him) that Balik Papan is too vulnerable to allied bombers in New Guinea so for game purposes the refineries are spread out more.

I cannot remember, I wonder if we can split oil 'factories' into two at one location the same as there can be more than one aircraft factory at one base. I will have to try it out.

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 33

RE: possible bug/error - 11/10/2017 3:02:33 AM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: decourcy2

The thing I wanted but Joe didn't was correct refineries, I wanted Balik Papan to be like 40% of the Dutch capacity not spread fairly evenly as it is in game. But Joe felt (as I understood him) that Balik Papan is too vulnerable to allied bombers in New Guinea so for game purposes the refineries are spread out more.

I cannot remember, I wonder if we can split oil 'factories' into two at one location the same as there can be more than one aircraft factory at one base. I will have to try it out.

Again, I can see the rationale. There are gameplay considerations, hindsight is huge and you cannot write it out of the game. If you make too many assets too vulnerable, you are more accurate, but there might not be as many players.

As I have said countless times: most times, the devs really got it right. Even in cases where I might have chosen another solution, I can see the merits of their decision and cannot argue too vehemently against them: the game in fact DOES work quite well. Proof: the longevity of the product.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to decourcy2)

Post #: 34

RE: possible bug/error - 11/10/2017 3:46:10 AM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

quote:

ORIGINAL: decourcy2
One of my chief beefs with the game as it stands is there is rarely any serious destruction of the Indonesian oil production or refineries. We all know this actually happened, and the Japanese only reached about 35-40% of pre war production in '43.
The code for this is beyond a modder though, it was something Don would have had to change, and it was not done for some reason.

I could in my mod make all of the Dutch oil start damaged to simulate this and limit Japan. What are everyones thoughts?

I think every IJ player has experienced taking Palembang with over 1000 oil damaged more than once.

You are correct that IJ never got more than about 1/3 of the DEI oil production back in service, but I'm not sure about the why.
I suspect that the damage in the game should be skewed a bit more towards higher damage values, but then the allied players know how to skew that and very few do so.
On the IJ side, historically, they simply didn't commit the resources to rebuild the fields they took. Now, why is that is the really relevant question.

John argued that they didn't have the equipment to do so. True, but they could have built it. They had all the technology and did in fact build the equipment at the time, they just chose NOT to ramp up production to allow for more/faster repairs/recovery.
Could they have done so? Again, John argued that they couldn't. I've never been convinced of that. I think like everything else, it was a tradeoff, they chose something else.

My issue is something quite different. When Palembang does suffer 1000 oil damage, the player CANNOT decide to repair it. Why? because that takes 3 years to do so. You cannot repair more than one point per day.
This restriction works fine EXCEPT in the case where the factory is REALLY large like Palembang oil. The decision to repair at that point is largely out of the players hand because at 1/day repair the ROI on the repair is not too good after about 6 months or only 180 units of oil repaired.
Now, was this the same reason IRL that IJ did not attempt to repair more? Maybe.

Bottom line, the devs (you and Don) got this pretty close to spot on. As an allied player, if I want to nuke Palembang, I know how to do it ... I just need to act upon that. Most don't, I suspect, because with Palembang gone the IJ side become rather tedious quite a bit sooner and the games tend not to finish ...

One of Japan's considerations may have been that they did not have the tankers needed to haul fuel or oil from the repaired oilfields anyway. They may have built some new tankers for the purpose but the Allies were already sinking the existing ones at a far faster rate. I think they looked to the Asian oilfields as more accessible because they could ship the fuel/oil overland to Fusan and only have a short tanker haul at Tsushima.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 35

RE: possible bug/error - 11/10/2017 4:33:42 AM

decourcy2

Posts: 516
Joined: 1/29/2015
Status: offline

Yeah, Japan was in the same situation as Italy/Libya... the big oil fields found in Manchuria were found in the 50's.

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 36

RE: possible bug/error - 11/10/2017 8:13:53 AM

RichardAckermann

Posts: 271
Joined: 12/4/2015
Status: offline

Maybe they did just not look for it. Japanese stupidity was one of the greatest enemies of the empire. In all areas imaginable.

(in reply to decourcy2)

Post #: 37

RE: possible bug/error - 11/10/2017 9:41:08 AM

Alfred

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

...Bottom line, the devs (you and Don) ...

I see that you, like others beforehand, has fallen for the "fake news" that decourcy2 is an AE dev. Just because he name drops real AE devs into almost every post of his does not make him one. You should take with a grain of salt every assertion he makes.

I first became suspicious of him when he asserted in a post that only Don Bowen "knew" how the AE air code worked. This was in the midst of other posts which emphasised how central his role was in developing the AE air component even though the final published product carried too many "air" errors because it somehow had not incorporated his work. Yes, no mention of theElf, michaelm or timtom ever having been involved in developing the AE air component; in fact their names have never been dropped in decourcy2's posts.

This constant dropping of Don Bowen's name (with the very occasional dropping of jwilkerson's name too) to lend credibility to his assertion's reminds me greatly of el Cid's assertions re AE knowledge. You will recall just how vehemently several real AE devs constantly set the record straight re el Cid's being neither an AE dev nor someone with inside knowledge.

It is a pity that the real AE devs no longer post as I am certain that they would have put the record straight regarding what role, if any, decourcy2 had with the creation of AE. In their absence I will step in and provide a few inconvenient facts which point to decourcy2 not being a central actor in the development of AE.

1. There are zero posts from decourcy2 in classical WITP. Not really surprising as decourcy2 only joined the forum on 29 Jan 2015. Yet rather significant in that all the AE devs were drawn from regular posters to classical WITP, many of them having collaborated together to produce the CHS mods in the 2005-2008 time period.

2. As "decourcy2" only enters the Matrix public record five and a half years after the release of AE and he has only in the last couple of months, some 8 years after the release of AE, actually posted on this forum, it is obvious that under that name, he could not have been an AE dev. Particularly when one remembers just how active were all the real AE devs in answering queries before its release and up to about 2013 (and in the case of Symon and michaelm well after 2013). This silence alone should trigger flashing red lights.

3. On the chance that "decourcy2" is not his original forum name, I then checked to see if there had been previously a "decourcy" and yes there is such a forumite with 65 posts, the last post dated 19 Dec 2004 coincidentally on the classical WITP forum. Both forum names point to a common individual, more so when one actually reads the contents of their posts. Whilst decourcy's last post is dated 19 Dec 2004 this followed 8 months of silence there. In reality his active but limited participation in the classical WITP forum ended in April 2004. All this predates the development of CHS. Certainly there is no indication in his own posts (or anyone else's that I can find) that he was participating in CHS development, although one can find in his posts there a common theme reprised in decourcy2's AE posts of just how "inaccurate" the game is. Again the silence on not disclosing any CHS development association, particularly in the light of his AE self promotion, should be a flashing red lights moment.

4. Don't just take my comments alone, lets see what jwilkerson the man in overall charge of the development of AE has to say about "decourcy" or "decourcy2" being part of the AE development team. Answer is zilch, nothing, nada, zero. Not only does his name not appear on the published list of credits which after including testers and special thanks totals about 36 named individuals, he doesn't appear in any of the several posts where jwilkerson explained who was doing what and how the development team came into existence. Let's look at just three relevant occasions.

(a) 9 Dec 2007, jwilkerson listed all the significant AE team members. No mention of decourcy/2

(b) 28 Feb 2009, jwilkerson provided an updated list of the significant AE team members. Again no mention of decourcy/2

(c) 23 July 2009, with the end of AE development (of course 6 official patches were still to come plus michaelm's beta work), jwilkerson provided an expansive post on the genesis (including identifying the key movers and shakers)and how work proceeded on the development of AE. I summarise below the key relevant points made by jwilkerson

(c1) The idea for developing AE took concrete shape in August 2005 with a meeting between Eric Rutins and jwilkerson and subsequent meetings between Eric and David Heath (Matrix) and jwilkerson and Don Bowen (devs)whereby Matrix accepted the 3 stage approach presented by jwilkerson. The first stage was to finish the patching work on classical WITP then being undertaken. This was critical as the patching team would be core AE devs. Not stated so but this 3 stage proposal gave Matrix opportunities to pull the plug on AE development if the promised performance was not forthcoming.

(c2) The AE project really started work (my emphasis) in May 2006 when they started to whittle down the 400 player requests for new features/enhancements/"fixing" into a development list of goals for AE. The key plank AE devs who started then were:

assembled from the key CHS contributors

Don Bowen
Andrew Brown
Kereguelen
Treespider
theElf
jwilkerson

assembled from WPO

Tankerace
Terminus

assembled from the classical WITP patch team

Nikademus
michaelm

It is very significant that in this July 2009 post jwilkerson stated "we actually have every one of the core contributors we started off with". Over the three years of the project some of the original core devs had gone to attend to RL issues but they had returned. Other core devs such as wdolson andd JWE/Symon had joined the team after May 2006 but their involvement had been acknowledged in previous and post jwilkerson forum posts.

It is impossible to believe that over all his many posts (not just the three above I have specifically mentioned) over so many years, that jwilkerson would have forgotten to identify and record their contribution to the development of AE of any significant individual. It is possible that someone who merely bought the morning coffee and donuts might have skipped jwilkerson's memory, but not someone with significant input. Certainly not someone who presents himself as being on such close working terms with Don Bowen and jwilkerson.

5. Other than certain individuals being involved in both, there is no connection between AE development work and CHS development work. If, and I have found no evidence to support it, decourcy/2 had some limited input into CHS development, that does not make him an AE dev. It might explain his choice of names to drop and why he quite erroneously believes that Don Bowen did the AE air component completely air brushing out of the historical record the men (theElf, michaelm and timtom) who both did the air component and answered the detailed air queries which Don Bowen always left alone.

6. There are no decourcy/2 posts in the private AE developers forum. It beggers belief that a significant AE dev would not have made a single post there.

It is unfortunate that over all these years so many people denigrate the efforts of the AE devs. Or take unjustified credit for their own endeavours. It is always extremely insulting and discourteous to the real AE devs. Made worse when some blown in who has absolutely no hesitation in blowing his own trumpet wants the rest of us to believe that for more than 10 years on this sole point of being a significant AE dev, he could remain silent and not blow his own trumpet.

Alfred

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 38

RE: possible bug/error - 11/10/2017 10:17:20 AM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

Thanks Alfred. Saved me from posting something silly about this guy.

It's clear that the OP has an axe to grind, and unfortunate he's doing it by whinging about the game because it won't work as he expects.

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 39

RE: possible bug/error - 11/10/2017 11:25:32 AM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

A tour de force, Alfred. Thank you.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 40

RE: possible bug/error - 11/10/2017 11:44:15 AM

btd64

Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline

Hum. The game works the way I expected it to

....GP

_____________________________

Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

WPO,WITP,WITPAE-Mod Designer/Tester
DWU-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 41

RE: possible bug/error - 11/10/2017 2:30:19 PM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

Good show, Alfred.

I read his first post of a possible bug about false sighting reports and I thought it was a post from a new player because the deliberate mis-direction of false sighting reports is so common it doesn't take terribly long for a player to experience it.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to btd64)

Post #: 42

RE: possible bug/error - 11/10/2017 2:43:42 PM

decourcy2

Posts: 516
Joined: 1/29/2015
Status: offline

Alfred, I did not work on AE, I thought I made that quite clear, I am sorry it was not clear enough. I left before it started as a firm project. I was co-founder of CHS with Don. I am sorry it upsets you that I know Don & Joe, but I know Joe less well. Don and I talked about what we would do if we had the source code, and how we could change the game. Much of what went into CHS also went into AE. Not all, we had barely started talking about pilot skills being a bunch of separate skills.

As far as I know Don is the only person who knows the AE air code, I am not sure what you were saying there.

'Decourcy' on the forum was not me, I wondered why I had to take Decourcy2. I was Lemurs.
Elf helped me test air systems in CHS, and was one of our biggest supporters, maybe things changed but I think you misunderstand what
'Program' means. Don, as far as I know, was the programmer as that was his skill and his job for many years in real life. I am not, and I don't think Elf is. When I left Elf took over for AE air team leader.

Joe was not part of CHS at start, that was Don, Ron and I. Joe was the one in touch with Erik at first we ran into each other when Erik put us in touch as we wanted the same thing; to have the source code. Our original idea was to do three stages, 1st being to continue CHS and learn as much as possible over why things worked the way they did, and about the situation through the war in more detail than any of us did.
The second stage was AE as an extension of what we had learned making CHS and Don working with the source code code to fix the fun bugs and what not, the third step was WitP2 which I have no idea if it was ever started, or if it is still being worked on. Joe and I play games by email still occasionally, but Don I haven't talked to since, maybe 2012? Nothing happened, just real life commitments on both of our parts.

I did not know MichaelM, Nikademus and talked some, we disagreed with each other often, but we worked together some on air questions.

I do not understand this 'name drop' that has your panties in a twist, again I am sorry it offends you that I worked on CHS and knew them. Also, saying that AE was born in 2005 is pushing things a bit, Erik was very hesitant to hand the code over to anyone and we plugged along on CHS for quite a bit. After a while Don got the code (and maybe Joe as well, I do not know) and Don and I started testing changes, he programmed, I checked to see how it affected things. But not really 2005.. I don't remember exactly.

Obvert, I do not have an axe to grind, I was just surprised that some of the air work we did in CHS did not make it into AE with ELf at the head. If i am 'whinging' in this thread I am also sorry, I thought it was a legitimate question.
I have forgotten so much of how WitP plays over the years and AE changed more than i had anticipated back in the day (for the good!) so I am trying to learn what I am screwing up as fast as possible to give Wargmr as good of a game as possible.

(in reply to btd64)

Post #: 43

RE: possible bug/error - 11/10/2017 4:19:26 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: decourcy2

Obvert, I do not have an axe to grind, I was just surprised that some of the air work we did in CHS did not make it into AE with ELf at the head. If i am 'whinging' in this thread I am also sorry, I thought it was a legitimate question.
I have forgotten so much of how WitP plays over the years and AE changed more than i had anticipated back in the day (for the good!) so I am trying to learn what I am screwing up as fast as possible to give Wargmr as good of a game as possible.

When you say "One of my chief beefs with the game as it stands" and stuff about how you wonder why your work didn't make it into the game, it sure feels like a dull axe to me!!

The Original topic is interesting. Maybe post some combat reports and pics if you really want the best results with feedback, and just kind of tone down the history lessons.

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to decourcy2)

Post #: 44

RE: possible bug/error - 11/10/2017 6:44:53 PM

decourcy2

Posts: 516
Joined: 1/29/2015
Status: offline

Obvert, who put you in charge, man? I will 'history lesson' if I feel like it, and they are legitimate (to me) concerns.
I feel like I am breaking into a girl's clique at a junior high school.

I actually received some excellent advice from a number of posters on my question already, I do not even remember if spotting your own TFs was a thing in WitP, but if it was I have totally forgotten. My 65ish nav search guys really like finding my Tfs.
I am glad that this is common I was legitimately afraid I had screwed Wargmrs game and work by my bone-headed forgetting to put the beta in before I started.

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 45

RE: possible bug/error - 11/10/2017 7:58:38 PM

rustysi

Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: decourcy2

We did the best we could (oil excepted) to limit the growth of the Japanese economy to historical proportions. I am sorry it was not good enough for you, but Don and Joe did their best.

In my mod the jets are removed as they were not developed in Japanese r&d facilities, but developed from German data. Other aircraft, such as the Ki44, could have been built in great numbers, like the Ki43 and A6M were, that was a real choice the Japanese made that we felt the player should have.

Economy growth is limited at the starting end by resources; there are more resources in the game than Japan used during WW2 but not much more, and a limiter is getting the resources to Japan for production. I have seen AARs where the allied player did not put much work into sinking merchants and the Japanese had a great economy, and games where the Japanese were unable to get their resources home and their economy tanked at the beginning of '45.

If you pay attention to games and tests, we found that the Japanese economy actually tends to implode several months earlier than historical, but I think that is players over producing and that is exactly what we went for.

So, no, Don & I did not feel that the Japanese favoritism that you allude to is very strong. I would maybe argue that Allied favoritism is just as strong, but you don't see what you do not want to.

Well, I for one think the game is fantastic, and applaud your efforts to tweak things to further improve on the accuracy of the OOB. Please continue, in spite of some negative reviews. If its in a mod those who wish may ignore the thing.

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to decourcy2)

Post #: 46

RE: possible bug/error - 11/10/2017 8:34:30 PM

rustysi

Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

quote:

Again, I can see the rationale. There are gameplay considerations, hindsight is huge and you cannot write it out of the game. If you make too many assets too vulnerable, you are more accurate, but there might not be as many players.

As I have said countless times: most times, the devs really got it right. Even in cases where I might have chosen another solution, I can see the merits of their decision and cannot argue too vehemently against them: the game in fact DOES work quite well. Proof: the longevity of the product.

+1

I'm a scenario 1 player and its obvious that a competent Allied player will beat Japan almost no matter what is given to the JFB. So if you wish to have no one play as Japan make the game truly historical. BTW, when I do get to PBEM I intend to stick around and take the beating that I know will come. The only reason I haven't tried PBEM yet is I wish to have enough knowledge to not wreak my economy and thus have to forfeit the game, as getting a beating after having broke the thing will be absolutely no fun at all. At least if I get the economy right I can take some pleasure from that.

_____________________________

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 47

RE: possible bug/error - 11/10/2017 9:05:23 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: decourcy2

Obvert, who put you in charge, man? I will 'history lesson' if I feel like it, and they are legitimate (to me) concerns.
I feel like I am breaking into a girl's clique at a junior high school.

Not a clique, but yes, an almost nine-year-old group of men (and one lady) who have played this monster every day. It's not uncommon at this point for regulars to have finished 6-7 full grand campaigns, many folks on both sides. So forgive comments that yawn at a "missing" six Claudes in Week 1 of a game. You just don't have cred to have an opinion on whether it matters.

Most of us played WITP too. I certainly did, for years. And those of us here from the start knew Don, and JWE, and Joe, and the Elf, and most especially, Michael. He of all of them at this point knows more about the code than any living human. But nobody seems to know you.

But OK. This place has survived and prospered because newbies are welcome. Lots have come in over the years, guns blazing, opinions a'flyin', and left just as fast. Hundreds. That's all obvert is saying. At this point nobody cares about CHS. Really. But if you want to be a contributor, that's fine. Learn AE, and offer up.

And if you want to learn, read obvert's AARs. He's probably in the top-3-5 best players of this thing, both sides.

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 11/10/2017 9:10:11 PM >

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to decourcy2)

Post #: 48

RE: possible bug/error - 11/10/2017 10:59:08 PM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
And if you want to learn, read obvert's AARs. He's probably in the top-3-5 best players of this thing, both sides.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 49

RE: possible bug/error - 11/11/2017 9:20:17 AM

RichardAckermann

Posts: 271
Joined: 12/4/2015
Status: offline

If decourcy2 has contributed to the database, I can understand him to be annoyed by little things he considers to be a mismatch. He is probably prone to seeing the product as being part of him (or vice versa), and does not want to see it go in a wrong direction.
I have a habit like that with all games I program.

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 50

RE: possible bug/error - 11/11/2017 12:44:47 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: decourcy2

Yeah, I know Hans. The problem I am having is the 10 hex range most of recon Sqds have. This does not give them the range to recon what I need.
The Japs start with a number of 9 plane chutai Nell units that I have taken off line and am training in recon. And in between raids I am training the larger Nell/Betty units in nav search.

Just the total lack of available air units is what is killing me; it does not help that 25% of the Japanese air force is not on map at game start as it should be.
Part of the reason I left CHS, and did not work on AE was the influx of AFBs fighting us on giving Japan what they historically had.

I guess you are complaining because you are having a tough time against a very seasoned AFB. Well, I got news for you...Wargamr will ratchet this up and up and up...so in other words, you haven't seen anything yet.

It is a good thing you didn't work on AE, since Japan has plenty of tools in the box already to make this game tons of fun. It is a game, btw.

Edit: Just finished reading the rest of the thread. What a can of worms. I got so confused.

Hard to see how listening to Obvert will steer you wrong...if your interest is to improve your play that is.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 11/11/2017 12:55:20 PM >

(in reply to decourcy2)

Post #: 51

RE: possible bug/error - 11/11/2017 6:37:27 PM

InfiniteMonkey

Posts: 355
Joined: 9/16/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: decourcy2
'Decourcy' on the forum was not me, I wondered why I had to take Decourcy2. I was Lemurs.

I remember the name Lemurs from my pre-IM days. He was a frequent enough poster that I remember him, but it's been so long I do not remember much. I took a very long hiatus from WitP because of real life... parents decline and passing away, new kid, new, much more stressful job situation, etc. I went from being able to play a couple turns a day to almost no time to play seemingly overnight.

quote:

ORIGINAL: decourcy2
Just the total lack of available air units is what is killing me; it does not help that 25% of the Japanese air force is not on map at game start as it should be.
Part of the reason I left CHS, and did not work on AE was the influx of AFBs fighting us on giving Japan what they historically had.

If your HR allows for resizing, there is no reason at all for you to have issues with IJN pilot training and you do not have to sacrifice much to do it. I can put every IJN replacement pool pilot into a training squadron within a few weeks of game start via resizing if I choose to.

(in reply to decourcy2)

Post #: 52

RE: possible bug/error - 11/11/2017 6:50:24 PM

Zecke

Posts: 1330
Joined: 1/15/2005
From: Hitoeton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: InfiniteMonkey

quote:

ORIGINAL: decourcy2
'Decourcy' on the forum was not me, I wondered why I had to take Decourcy2. I was Lemurs.

I remember the name Lemurs from my pre-IM days. He was a frequent enough poster that I remember him, but it's been so long I do not remember much. I took a very long hiatus from WitP because of real life... parents decline and passing away, new kid, new, much more stressful job situation, etc. I went from being able to play a couple turns a day to almost no time to play seemingly overnight.

quote:

ORIGINAL: decourcy2
Just the total lack of available air units is what is killing me; it does not help that 25% of the Japanese air force is not on map at game start as it should be.
Part of the reason I left CHS, and did not work on AE was the influx of AFBs fighting us on giving Japan what they historically had.

If your HR allows for resizing, there is no reason at all for you to have issues with IJN pilot training and you do not have to sacrifice much to do it. I can put every IJN replacement pool pilot into a training squadron within a few weeks of game start via resizing if I choose to.

No reason

(in reply to InfiniteMonkey)

Post #: 53

RE: possible bug/error - 11/12/2017 5:48:33 AM

wdolson

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: decourcy2

Alfred, I did not work on AE, I thought I made that quite clear, I am sorry it was not clear enough. I left before it started as a firm project. I was co-founder of CHS with Don. I am sorry it upsets you that I know Don & Joe, but I know Joe less well. Don and I talked about what we would do if we had the source code, and how we could change the game. Much of what went into CHS also went into AE. Not all, we had barely started talking about pilot skills being a bunch of separate skills.

As far as I know Don is the only person who knows the AE air code, I am not sure what you were saying there.

'Decourcy' on the forum was not me, I wondered why I had to take Decourcy2. I was Lemurs.
Elf helped me test air systems in CHS, and was one of our biggest supporters, maybe things changed but I think you misunderstand what
'Program' means. Don, as far as I know, was the programmer as that was his skill and his job for many years in real life. I am not, and I don't think Elf is. When I left Elf took over for AE air team leader.

Joe was not part of CHS at start, that was Don, Ron and I. Joe was the one in touch with Erik at first we ran into each other when Erik put us in touch as we wanted the same thing; to have the source code. Our original idea was to do three stages, 1st being to continue CHS and learn as much as possible over why things worked the way they did, and about the situation through the war in more detail than any of us did.
The second stage was AE as an extension of what we had learned making CHS and Don working with the source code code to fix the fun bugs and what not, the third step was WitP2 which I have no idea if it was ever started, or if it is still being worked on. Joe and I play games by email still occasionally, but Don I haven't talked to since, maybe 2012? Nothing happened, just real life commitments on both of our parts.

I did not know MichaelM, Nikademus and talked some, we disagreed with each other often, but we worked together some on air questions.

I do not understand this 'name drop' that has your panties in a twist, again I am sorry it offends you that I worked on CHS and knew them. Also, saying that AE was born in 2005 is pushing things a bit, Erik was very hesitant to hand the code over to anyone and we plugged along on CHS for quite a bit. After a while Don got the code (and maybe Joe as well, I do not know) and Don and I started testing changes, he programmed, I checked to see how it affected things. But not really 2005.. I don't remember exactly.

Obvert, I do not have an axe to grind, I was just surprised that some of the air work we did in CHS did not make it into AE with ELf at the head. If i am 'whinging' in this thread I am also sorry, I thought it was a legitimate question.
I have forgotten so much of how WitP plays over the years and AE changed more than i had anticipated back in the day (for the good!) so I am trying to learn what I am screwing up as fast as possible to give Wargmr as good of a game as possible.

As far as I know Don never had anything to do with the AE air code. He worked a bit on the original WitP air code after he and Joe began doing bug fixes on that code.

We had 4 programmers on AE with Joe filling in once in a while. michaelm was the air team programmer, BigJ62 was originally land and AI, but at the end was focused exclusively on the AI, Don was the naval programmer, and I was the utility infielder. I was only there for the last two years. I worked on the naval code for a bit when Don had to drop out for a couple of months, I also did a lot of the things that didn't fall into any specific team's area, and at the end I was the land team programmer while BigJ62 focused on getting the AI whipped into shape.

I know some ideas were on the list, but when push came to shove the effort needed vs the pay off was considered too high and they fell off the bottom of the to do list.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer