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: Making the last Beta Official

 
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: Making the last Beta Official Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/6/2021 9:37:00 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Am not on the Forum often right now but am very excited to see this thread.

Michael's comment about bases flipping ownership with nothing in them is very important. If the enemy has abandoned the base and is not there, then moving into the base SHOULD not cause damage to it.

Using DaBabes for scenario choice expansion is a solid idea. I really think that adding several of the home grown short Mods would be a good idea for helping new players learning curve. Really wouldn't recommend the big, revamped specialty Mods. Only players who have mastered the 'generic/vanilla' scenarios would have a real interest in heavily modded scenarios (like any of Michael and Mine plus many others). Might be wrong saying that but...

I greatly appreciated anything Alfred had to say. Always knew where he was coming from and what he was thinking. Nothing wrong with that.

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 91
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/6/2021 10:53:47 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Am not on the Forum often right now but am very excited to see this thread.

Michael's comment about bases flipping ownership with nothing in them is very important. If the enemy has abandoned the base and is not there, then moving into the base SHOULD not cause damage to it.

Using DaBabes for scenario choice expansion is a solid idea. I really think that adding several of the home grown short Mods would be a good idea for helping new players learning curve. Really wouldn't recommend the big, revamped specialty Mods. Only players who have mastered the 'generic/vanilla' scenarios would have a real interest in heavily modded scenarios (like any of Michael and Mine plus many others). Might be wrong saying that but...

I greatly appreciated anything Alfred had to say. Always knew where he was coming from and what he was thinking. Nothing wrong with that.


Not bug fixes for this.

But that sounds like a nice way to trash Palembang - just evacuate it!

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 92
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/6/2021 11:31:32 PM   
actrade

 

Posts: 283
Joined: 11/3/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Macquarrie1999


quote:

ORIGINAL: actrade

I would also add I was having "bleed through" of my Windows desktop while playing full screen, but upon searching found out that it was the "-dd_sw" command giving me bleed through in FullScreen, but apparently the command can be helpful in Windowed Mode. Once I deleted that command, no bleed through.


Unfortunately if I turn this off the lag becomes unbearable, so I just have to put up with the bleed through.


If you play in windows mode you don't have bleed. use the -wd instead of -fd switch

(in reply to Macquarrie1999)
Post #: 93
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/6/2021 11:48:58 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: actrade


quote:

ORIGINAL: Macquarrie1999


quote:

ORIGINAL: actrade

I would also add I was having "bleed through" of my Windows desktop while playing full screen, but upon searching found out that it was the "-dd_sw" command giving me bleed through in FullScreen, but apparently the command can be helpful in Windowed Mode. Once I deleted that command, no bleed through.


Unfortunately if I turn this off the lag becomes unbearable, so I just have to put up with the bleed through.


If you play in windows mode you don't have bleed. use the -wd instead of -fd switch


I will never play in windowed mode. Just a personal choice.

I did, however, experiment with removing the -dd_sw switch and have not experienced any bleed through, even of the kind I described about the combat report, in a limited test run. Also have not experienced any lag from the deletion of the switch.

So, thank you to the one who clued me in to deleting the switch.
Have been running the same switches for a very long time without any experimentation.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to actrade)
Post #: 94
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/7/2021 12:54:00 AM   
Panjack

 

Posts: 401
Joined: 7/12/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Erik,

Thanks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

We did use InDesign, but frankly I'm not sure if the files are still available. I'll have a look around.

Regards,

- Erik



(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 95
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/7/2021 4:12:50 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

Although it is discussed in the Bug Compilation thread I linked earlier, the "TRACOM Bug" is very serious and should be looked at. TRACOM is supposed to be a pilot training acceleration mechanism, but unfortunately it can do much more. Several players have reported that when TRACOM contains more than 100 pilots, it also increases the national experience number. When you look at the screenshot below, keep in mind that the IJN pilot national experience number (the highest level of experience a new pilot can graduate with) is supposed to be capped at 34 in 1943. Instead, the bug produces results like this:


quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull
... but a player who makes a serious effort to populate TRACOM (with say 100 or more pilots) is going to see some very noticeable improvements.


Oh yeah, improvements you might see. just maybe not what you could've expected

Both are stock 1 scenarios







This reminds me. Isn't it a bug that when you individually add a pilot to a group it takes weeks for them to arrive but when you add groups of pilots to a group it is instant? Aren't they supposed to work the same?



Your comment contains a sweeping generalisation which is incorrect.

If you add a group of pilots from the reserve list, filtered by highest skill, then some are immediately available, while others may take days or a week to get to the air group.




This is what I was referring to:

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4923122

quote:

9. 3 available ways of pulling a pilot into an airgroup from the reserve pool all produce different results with respect to arrival delay and XP loss. https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3847055&mpage=3&key=�




First:

You are citing a 2015 thread - at a time when the game was still being patched - the topic of which is, initially, Sangeli's pilot training assist tool, leading into a discussion of individual pilot experience losses resulting from moving pilots from one aircraft class to a different one.

Ironically, given a few hours ago on this thread you were, yet again, personally attacking and criticising him in his absence, the key post is Alfred's post # 53: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3847055&mpage=2&key=%26%2365533%3B. Had you actually read the thread GetAssista linked, you would have seen this further link: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3706882&mpage=1&key=� provided by Alfred. See particularly koniu's post #3.

You might have also read WITPQS' post #69, wherein he points out that all the assertions of a bug are incorrect, and why they are. Further, you might also have seen Kull's post #75. Perhaps you could do a search of the patch read-me notes and see of MichaelM subsequently made any change to the code with respect thereto; it was more than a year before the final patch.


Secondly:

Your post under reply referred only to delay times of arrival of pilots called into a group. It sweepingly asserted that "when you individually add a pilot to a group it takes weeks for them to arrive but when you add groups of pilots to a group it is instant".

Your sweeping generalisation is wrong, and the thread you linked provides zero evidence to support it. If you manually pull a group of 10 or 20 or 25 pilots from the reserve pool into an airgroup, you will see that some come with a delay quite often.








It drives me insane when people say "refer to post number 3" without just... citing the relevant part of the post. At least give us a quote so we have some idea WTF you're referring to and how it supports your argument, please. Not only is it better for us, but it actually serves your argument better, too, and more people will probably listen to what you have to say because they don't have to click fourteen bajillion links and then scroll to find the post number that you already found but didn't have the decency to cite for them. Geez.



To the point of this one: there is in fact a bug/workaround/exploit (whatever you want to call it) where you can avoid the days/week-long delay and experience loss by adding a pilot using the buttons instead of clicking on the pilot directly.

TBH, I'm not sure whether this is intended or not. It's not really a big deal either way, except for those whose first inclination is to click on the individual pilots instead of sorting and using "release" for the top 1 or top 5 pilots that they've sorted for.

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 96
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/7/2021 4:50:16 AM   
Tanaka


Posts: 4378
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

Although it is discussed in the Bug Compilation thread I linked earlier, the "TRACOM Bug" is very serious and should be looked at. TRACOM is supposed to be a pilot training acceleration mechanism, but unfortunately it can do much more. Several players have reported that when TRACOM contains more than 100 pilots, it also increases the national experience number. When you look at the screenshot below, keep in mind that the IJN pilot national experience number (the highest level of experience a new pilot can graduate with) is supposed to be capped at 34 in 1943. Instead, the bug produces results like this:


quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull
... but a player who makes a serious effort to populate TRACOM (with say 100 or more pilots) is going to see some very noticeable improvements.


Oh yeah, improvements you might see. just maybe not what you could've expected

Both are stock 1 scenarios







This reminds me. Isn't it a bug that when you individually add a pilot to a group it takes weeks for them to arrive but when you add groups of pilots to a group it is instant? Aren't they supposed to work the same?



Your comment contains a sweeping generalisation which is incorrect.

If you add a group of pilots from the reserve list, filtered by highest skill, then some are immediately available, while others may take days or a week to get to the air group.




This is what I was referring to:

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4923122

quote:

9. 3 available ways of pulling a pilot into an airgroup from the reserve pool all produce different results with respect to arrival delay and XP loss. https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3847055&mpage=3&key=�




First:

You are citing a 2015 thread - at a time when the game was still being patched - the topic of which is, initially, Sangeli's pilot training assist tool, leading into a discussion of individual pilot experience losses resulting from moving pilots from one aircraft class to a different one.

Ironically, given a few hours ago on this thread you were, yet again, personally attacking and criticising him in his absence, the key post is Alfred's post # 53: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3847055&mpage=2&key=%26%2365533%3B. Had you actually read the thread GetAssista linked, you would have seen this further link: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3706882&mpage=1&key=� provided by Alfred. See particularly koniu's post #3.

You might have also read WITPQS' post #69, wherein he points out that all the assertions of a bug are incorrect, and why they are. Further, you might also have seen Kull's post #75. Perhaps you could do a search of the patch read-me notes and see of MichaelM subsequently made any change to the code with respect thereto; it was more than a year before the final patch.


Secondly:

Your post under reply referred only to delay times of arrival of pilots called into a group. It sweepingly asserted that "when you individually add a pilot to a group it takes weeks for them to arrive but when you add groups of pilots to a group it is instant".

Your sweeping generalisation is wrong, and the thread you linked provides zero evidence to support it. If you manually pull a group of 10 or 20 or 25 pilots from the reserve pool into an airgroup, you will see that some come with a delay quite often.








It drives me insane when people say "refer to post number 3" without just... citing the relevant part of the post. At least give us a quote so we have some idea WTF you're referring to and how it supports your argument, please. Not only is it better for us, but it actually serves your argument better, too, and more people will probably listen to what you have to say because they don't have to click fourteen bajillion links and then scroll to find the post number that you already found but didn't have the decency to cite for them. Geez.



To the point of this one: there is in fact a bug/workaround/exploit (whatever you want to call it) where you can avoid the days/week-long delay and experience loss by adding a pilot using the buttons instead of clicking on the pilot directly.

TBH, I'm not sure whether this is intended or not. It's not really a big deal either way, except for those whose first inclination is to click on the individual pilots instead of sorting and using "release" for the top 1 or top 5 pilots that they've sorted for.


Could not agree more on the post referencing haha.

Thanks for the reminder yes that is what I had read about it I just could not remember the exact threads. I searched and searched to find it again but could not.

Yes that if you click on the specific pilot name you get delays but if you add in pilots by groups you don't get a delay. That was the bug/exploit I was referencing I had heard about in this instance. Seems like whether you click on the specific name or the add group it should be the same delay. Thanks for the clarification!

< Message edited by Tanaka -- 12/7/2021 4:55:20 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 97
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/7/2021 4:27:55 PM   
SuluSea


Posts: 2358
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Am not on the Forum often right now but am very excited to see this thread.

Michael's comment about bases flipping ownership with nothing in them is very important. If the enemy has abandoned the base and is not there, then moving into the base SHOULD not cause damage to it.

Using DaBabes for scenario choice expansion is a solid idea. I really think that adding several of the home grown short Mods would be a good idea for helping new players learning curve. Really wouldn't recommend the big, revamped specialty Mods. Only players who have mastered the 'generic/vanilla' scenarios would have a real interest in heavily modded scenarios (like any of Michael and Mine plus many others). Might be wrong saying that but...

I greatly appreciated anything Alfred had to say. Always knew where he was coming from and what he was thinking. Nothing wrong with that.


Yeah, I miss Alfred's contributions too, not that I need them to play but he was always good reading and helpful.

I wouldn't blame him if the guy stayed away, it looked like a number of parties casting vague insults, one person got upset (probably a party that has been involved with differences with Alfred in the past) reported it and then only ONE person gets 'shamed' for the event.





_____________________________

"There’s no such thing as a bitter person who keeps the bitterness to himself.” ~ Erwin Lutzer

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 98
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/7/2021 4:45:03 PM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


To the point of this one: there is in fact a bug/workaround/exploit (whatever you want to call it) where you can avoid the days/week-long delay and experience loss by adding a pilot using the buttons instead of clicking on the pilot directly.



To demonstrate that is not correct, I ran a test inside my current game, adding pilots by using the group buttons. It reproduced the result seen (by me, and I expect others) hundreds, and possibly thousands of times before. You might note I used a group in Palembang, about as far from San Fransisco as you can get, and overfilled it (which you can only do if some incoming pilots are delayed).

I emptied the pilots out of a fighter group, and then filled it with fighter pilots from the fighter subsection of the reserve pool, sorted by air-air skill, and using the add 10 button to take them in groups. Here is the result- some arrive straight away, some are delayed by varying numbers of days.

The Group:




Pilot delays after emptying & refilling the group:



Has it occurred to you fellows that if you just grab whatever the exe wants to give you via the buttons on the group screen (e.g. the 'any' button), or reserve pool screen, without any filtering, it gives you the ones most readily available, without sorting them other than (possibly) by experience? Looks WAD.

Further, if you filter the reserve pool to only fighter pilots, and then put them into fighter class airframes, there is no experience loss (c.f. the posts from Alfred and WITPQS already linked in above posts). So that is also WAD.


There is in fact no bug.





_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 99
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/7/2021 7:15:39 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


To the point of this one: there is in fact a bug/workaround/exploit (whatever you want to call it) where you can avoid the days/week-long delay and experience loss by adding a pilot using the buttons instead of clicking on the pilot directly.



To demonstrate that is not correct, I ran a test inside my current game, adding pilots by using the group buttons. It reproduced the result seen (by me, and I expect others) hundreds, and possibly thousands of times before. You might note I used a group in Palembang, about as far from San Fransisco as you can get, and overfilled it (which you can only do if some incoming pilots are delayed).

I emptied the pilots out of a fighter group, and then filled it with fighter pilots from the fighter subsection of the reserve pool, sorted by air-air skill, and using the add 10 button to take them in groups. Here is the result- some arrive straight away, some are delayed by varying numbers of days.

The Group:




Pilot delays after emptying & refilling the group:



Has it occurred to you fellows that if you just grab whatever the exe wants to give you via the buttons on the group screen (e.g. the 'any' button), or reserve pool screen, without any filtering, it gives you the ones most readily available, without sorting them other than (possibly) by experience? Looks WAD.

Further, if you filter the reserve pool to only fighter pilots, and then put them into fighter class airframes, there is no experience loss (c.f. the posts from Alfred and WITPQS already linked in above posts). So that is also WAD.




OK, so you're quibbling that sometimes, some pilots will be delayed by a few days if you use the mass release button method (I'm sure there's a method to this madness, i.e. a reason that occurs for those pilots, but I haven't sorted out why because it doesn't really matter).

That's kinda missing the point/question of whether those that arrive with no delay (which is the vast majority of those pilots) is intended or not. Saying "oh that must just be WAD" is... Well, has it occurred to you that you're just ignoring or not comprehending what we're saying?

Not to mention the experience penalty thing... I forgot to check whether that applied (read: I actually don't care because it wouldn't make a difference in my pilot choices, which are 100% ruthless in terms of "how can I best beat your pants off"). But oh hey I just went to test it to make sure my memory was correct, and whattaya know... Watch me add fighter pilots to a bomber unit using the "release pilots" button(s) without suffering any experience loss.




Oh yeah, they also arrived with no delay (remember that delay 1 = just needs to be turned active)! Golly gee whiz.

How do I know this? Because I often empty and re-fill attack bomber units specifically with fighter pilots with high strafe skill and do so with zero delay, teleporting high strafing pilots from a training unit in California to a front line unit in Port Darwin with no experience loss to boot.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

There is in fact no bug.


There's either no bug(s), or the instruction/documentation is incorrect. Pick one. Literally mutually exclusive.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lokasenna -- 12/7/2021 7:17:15 PM >

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 100
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/7/2021 7:27:10 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
And this is what happened when I picked those two pilots by hand, 3 times in a row. It doesn't appear to be that random, but the point is that I can use the "release pilots" button to secure no delay for any of the pilots and ensure no XP loss, while clicking on the actual pilots results in both* (although sometimes you get lucky and the guy is available immediately).

*if the pilot was last flying a different type of plane

So - bug, exploit, workaround. Call it whatever you want. But it's there.

One funny thing that I noticed is that their air skill actually while up by 1 point each while their XP went down by 2 points, compared to when I used the "Release pilots" buttons.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lokasenna -- 12/7/2021 7:45:38 PM >

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 101
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/7/2021 10:42:22 PM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline
Tanaka said:

quote:

Isn't it a bug that when you individually add a pilot to a group it takes weeks for them to arrive but when you add groups of pilots to a group it is instant? Aren't they supposed to work the same?


I pointed out that was incorrect, including running a test, the result of which demonstrates that it is incorrect.

You have added a different issue to the discussion - experience.

quote:

but the point is that I can use the "release pilots" button to secure no delay for any of the pilots and ensure no XP loss


On delays, see above. I tested it already ^^^^. I got delays on 17 out of 46 pilots. 2/3rd no-delay is hardly a "vast majority". So, no you can't secure it. It's not "sometimes", either, it's frequent and regular IME. It is not a mere quibble.

If the experience* loss thing is broken, I doubt it's going to make the "to do" list given Erik's comments above.

[* I always sort and select pilots by primary skill, and take little notice of experience, TBF.]














< Message edited by Ian R -- 12/7/2021 10:52:49 PM >


_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 102
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/8/2021 3:32:05 AM   
jdsrae


Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline
I’ll comment on this one as I do a lot of pilot shuffling, typically on the first day of each month.
Before I knew it was a bug/exploit I used the “release pilots” button and 99.9% get pilots with no delay.
The only times I have noticed a pilot have a delay is:
1. if they were released into the reserve pool by disbanding or withdrawing an air unit as that seems to give them a transit delay, but you can see this against their name in the reserve list
2. Some named pilots are scheduled to arrive on certain dates and they may have a transit delay.
I still use the same transfer mechanism because frankly I do enough clicks each turn as it is, and I don’t see it as a game breaking exploit.


_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 103
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/8/2021 4:37:06 AM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jdsrae

I’ll comment on this one as I do a lot of pilot shuffling, typically on the first day of each month.
Before I knew it was a bug/exploit I used the “release pilots” button and 99.9% get pilots with no delay.
The only times I have noticed a pilot have a delay is:
1. if they were released into the reserve pool by disbanding or withdrawing an air unit as that seems to give them a transit delay, but you can see this against their name in the reserve list
2. Some named pilots are scheduled to arrive on certain dates and they may have a transit delay.
I still use the same transfer mechanism because frankly I do enough clicks each turn as it is, and I don’t see it as a game breaking exploit.



How, then, do you explain my test which proves beyond any doubt that you get delays?

Edit - you say 99.9% no delay- I got more than a 33% delay rate with one (1) test. The generalisations being thrown about in this thread do not stand up to intellectually rigorous scrutiny.

More than 99.9%?




< Message edited by Ian R -- 12/8/2021 4:44:40 AM >


_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to jdsrae)
Post #: 104
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/8/2021 5:59:24 AM   
jdsrae


Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline
I can’t explain your results Ian as I see something very different.
Maybe something in our setups is different, does game version or mod matter?
What I’ve seen happens whenever I transfer pilots using this method, at least once a month for the last 28ish game months, so thousands of pilots and only a handful have had a delay.

Did the pilots in your test already have a delay shown against their name when they were in the reserve pool?

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 105
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/8/2021 7:38:01 AM   
Yaab


Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

I think the updated WITP:AE should ship with the altFont as the default font.

(in reply to jdsrae)
Post #: 106
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/8/2021 7:39:42 AM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline
No, they were all showing "due 1". I didn't take a screen shot, unfortunately.

Edit - what your comment does suggest is that there are factors at play which might include where the pilots come from, how long they have been on vacation in reserve, possibly even where they are going to. Meaning that the sweeping assertion that you can "secure" no delay merely by using a group button is incorrect. So sometimes you get delays. Sounds WAD to me.

< Message edited by Ian R -- 12/8/2021 7:42:55 AM >


_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to jdsrae)
Post #: 107
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/8/2021 11:34:44 AM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab


I think the updated WITP:AE should ship with the altFont as the default font.



+100

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 108
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/8/2021 2:29:09 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline
Hi everyone,

I have some very positive news for you all today. Some of the original WITP-AE team members have volunteered to work on this final update for WITP-AE and I think you will all end up being very happy with the result. Please let these folks know that their continued work on AE is appreciated!

Joe Wilkerson, who was the project lead for the AE team, will be posting here soon to define the scope of what they plan to do and most of the future communications on this detail-wise will come from him.

Regards,

- Erik




_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC




For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 109
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/8/2021 2:30:58 PM   
Lowpe


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Hi everyone,

I have some very positive news for you all today. Some of the original WITP-AE team members have volunteered to work on this final update for WITP-AE and I think you will all end up being very happy with the result. Please let these folks know that their continued work on AE is appreciated!

Joe Wilkerson, who was the project lead for the AE team, will be posting here soon to define the scope of what they plan to do and most of the future communications on this detail-wise will come from him.

Regards,

- Erik





Thank you for all your work! What great news, what a great community!

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 110
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/8/2021 2:31:52 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
oops, duplicate. my bad! I was so excited.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 12/8/2021 3:07:50 PM >

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 111
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/8/2021 2:49:04 PM   
jwilkerson


Posts: 10525
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Kansas
Status: offline
Greetings !

To clarify the scope of the proposed new release for AE. This is what we're looking at:

1 - New/updated scenarios

2 - New/updated map

3 - Updated manual

4 - A few bug fixes (no enhancements)

That said, we welcome all input and will consider all suggestions. But this is NOT planned as a major redo of AE. This effort is primarily to update the game as sold, because that hasn't really happened in many years.




_____________________________

AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 112
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/8/2021 3:14:42 PM   
littleike

 

Posts: 159
Joined: 10/3/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Hi everyone,

I have some very positive news for you all today. Some of the original WITP-AE team members have volunteered to work on this final update for WITP-AE and I think you will all end up being very happy with the result. Please let these folks know that their continued work on AE is appreciated!

Joe Wilkerson, who was the project lead for the AE team, will be posting here soon to define the scope of what they plan to do and most of the future communications on this detail-wise will come from him.

Regards,

- Erik






What to say!!!

A big hug and my best shake hand to you Erik, to Joe Wilkerson and to all the developers for this splendid new!!!

This community is definitely the best i have never seen before!!!
I think everyone will be astonished and glad of this incredible news!!

I also hope that Alfred too will be back soon to share this magic moment!!



(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 113
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/8/2021 3:15:37 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline
Joe, welcome news.

Some questions from me on this:

- Would you be able to share who from the original team is returning for this effort?

- In terms of "new/updated scenarios", what exactly is envisioned for this? User-made scenarios getting "official" badging, reworking of existing scenario set, totally new scenarios (or all three?)

- In terms of changes to the map, what exactly can we expect here? Is this tweaks, a la Andy Mac's recent work adding dot bases, or a comprehensive overhaul? Will the underlying art assets change?

- With regard to bug fixes, is there any consideration for elements of the code that were not implemented? Thinking here of aircraft rockets and the like that are evident in the game data yet not implemented.

Also excited to see "New Game Project Lead", looking forward to when you can tell us more.


(in reply to jwilkerson)
Post #: 114
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/8/2021 3:28:41 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: littleike
I also hope that Alfred too will be back soon to share this magic moment!!


I'll ask again that we keep this thread on topic. If you'd like to discuss Alfred, please PM or e-mail me. Alfred is welcome back if he agrees to follow the forums rules, so it's up to him.

Regards,

- Erik


_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC




For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to littleike)
Post #: 115
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/8/2021 3:54:16 PM   
Andy Mac

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Joe, welcome news.

Some questions from me on this:

- Would you be able to share who from the original team is returning for this effort?

- In terms of "new/updated scenarios", what exactly is envisioned for this? User-made scenarios getting "official" badging, reworking of existing scenario set, totally new scenarios (or all three?)

- In terms of changes to the map, what exactly can we expect here? Is this tweaks, a la Andy Mac's recent work adding dot bases, or a comprehensive overhaul? Will the underlying art assets change?

- With regard to bug fixes, is there any consideration for elements of the code that were not implemented? Thinking here of aircraft rockets and the like that are evident in the game data yet not implemented.

Also excited to see "New Game Project Lead", looking forward to when you can tell us more.





I am doing the scenarios so as you would expect I will be polishing the 24 that are more or less done above based on my previous work posted to the forum - its unlikely the abandoned ones will make the cut as its too much work for me to do and get the rest ready

So the list above is the list I am working on for now if anyone has a scenario they have finished especially more small map scenarios happy to look at them I have 24 more or less done just needing polishing and testing

Andy






Attachment (1)

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 116
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/8/2021 3:59:23 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline
My focus is going to be on polishing the above and the AI mostly

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 117
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/8/2021 4:03:00 PM   
Zovs


Posts: 6668
Joined: 2/23/2009
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Hi everyone,

I have some very positive news for you all today. Some of the original WITP-AE team members have volunteered to work on this final update for WITP-AE and I think you will all end up being very happy with the result. Please let these folks know that their continued work on AE is appreciated!

Joe Wilkerson, who was the project lead for the AE team, will be posting here soon to define the scope of what they plan to do and most of the future communications on this detail-wise will come from him.

Regards,

- Erik

quote:

Team members have volunteered


This is fantastic!!!

_____________________________


Beta Tester for:
Flashpoint Campaigns: Sudden Storm
War in the East 1 & 2
WarPlan & WarPlan Pacific
Valor & Victory
DG CWIE 2
SPWW2 & SPMBT scenario creator

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 118
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/8/2021 4:04:14 PM   
OnWargaming


Posts: 108
Joined: 9/13/2021
From: Italy
Status: offline
Amazing news!!!

First time that I see this kind of support for a digital game, very much impressed

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 119
RE: Making the last Beta Official - 12/8/2021 4:04:39 PM   
Zovs


Posts: 6668
Joined: 2/23/2009
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

Greetings !

To clarify the scope of the proposed new release for AE. This is what we're looking at:

1 - New/updated scenarios

2 - New/updated map

3 - Updated manual

4 - A few bug fixes (no enhancements)

That said, we welcome all input and will consider all suggestions. But this is NOT planned as a major redo of AE. This effort is primarily to update the game as sold, because that hasn't really happened in many years.






As a Newbie to WITP-AE all I can say is a great big Thank you!

_____________________________


Beta Tester for:
Flashpoint Campaigns: Sudden Storm
War in the East 1 & 2
WarPlan & WarPlan Pacific
Valor & Victory
DG CWIE 2
SPWW2 & SPMBT scenario creator

(in reply to jwilkerson)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Making the last Beta Official Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   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

2.953