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: Build 1.70 Status

 
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 >> RE: Build 1.70 Status Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/4/2005 11:24:09 PM   
ltfightr


Posts: 537
Joined: 6/16/2002
From: Little Rock AR
Status: offline
Are we there yet?

_____________________________


(in reply to Big B)
Post #: 31
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/4/2005 11:25:01 PM   
ltfightr


Posts: 537
Joined: 6/16/2002
From: Little Rock AR
Status: offline
Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?





_____________________________


(in reply to ltfightr)
Post #: 32
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/4/2005 11:50:12 PM   
michaelm75au


Posts: 13500
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline
Hi
I tried to get this to happen by following some instructions that you (I think) posted. [used version 1.602]

I could not get it to happen.
I also asked for any saves where this happened.
I got none.

PS
I also found a posting where it was reported that this happened in 1.5, but when they upgraded to 1.52, it went away.

Michael

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Wood

Hello...

Be advised. List of fixes, user requested changes for 1.70, so far:

BUGS FIXED:

1) When air group leaders were killed, ship, task force or land unit leaders sometimes died with them. This was the cause of a great many of the leader problems. Fixed.

2) One of the tests for long lance torpedo attacks was some times returning the wrong value, negating surprise. Fixed.

3) When Allied task force had no radar, Japanese were sometimes said to be spotted by radar, when they were really being visually spotted. Fixed.

4) Enemy units were showing up on bottom bar, when Japanese player selected unit at enemy base from list all units pop-out box. Fixed.

5) Game was running out of pilots. Fixed.

6) Rebuilt LCU was reverting to original device number despite being upgraded when split. Fixed.

7) Negative values were showing on Intel screen because of data overflow. Fixed.

8) Air groups which had been disbanded or withdrawn were returning with zero planes, even though planes were being taken from pool for the group. Fixed. Note that fix only applies to groups disbanded or withdrawn using version 1.603 or later.

9) A bug was causing ship captains to vanish. Fixed.

10) The 10” CD gun (device #516) was not being produced. Fixed.

11) Land units ordered to follow were not arriving in proper hex at proper time. Fixed.

12) Allied heavy bombers were using device #210, 2000 lb AP bombs, instead of device #205, 2000 lb GP bombs. Fixed.

USER REQUESTED CHANGES:

1) When an air group is divided, it may not reform unless all three sub-units are assigned to the same headquarters.

2) When an air group is divided into sub-units and each is reassigned to the same, new headquarters, say Central Pacific to South Pacific, when the sub-units reform, the parent group headquarters will change to that new headquarters.

3) When a land unit is divided, it may not reform unless all sub-units are assigned to the same headquarters.

4) When a land unit is divided into sub-units and each is reassigned to the same, new headquarters, say Central Pacific to South Pacific, when the sub-units reform, the parent group headquarters will change to that new headquarters.

5) Mine laying tenders (MLE) may now service ships of any nationality.

6) Destroyer tenders (AD) may now service ships of any nationality.

7) Submarine tenders (AS) may now ships of any nationality.

8) Repair ships (AR) may now help repair ships of any nationality.

9) Malaria zones have been slightly modified. Includes requested changes for CHS maps.

10) Anti-submarine attack routines have been rewritten. Now, seldom will more than 4 ASW vessels normally attack a submarine during a single phase. Number of attacking ships depends on task force type, ships types and lots of skill rolls. Instead of each ship making one or two attacks, they may now sometimes continue to attack until out of ASW ammunition. Number of attacks made depend on task force type, ships types and lots of skill rolls. Hits are now deadly much less often, usually doing a point or two of system damage and or occasionally a point or so of flood damage. I don't know if they are still around, but a while back there were some players screaming for this change. Just got to it. Long list of code requests.

Thanks for Your Patience...

Michael Wood



Mike thank you for all of your hard work! You guys never cease to amaze!!!



Just wondering....Is it possible to fix the "Get Pilot" button problem?

Has to do with the "Get Pilot" button...

What causes the problem:

"The only way a group can have more AC then pilots is if when group below max size in AC you draw AC and don't draw pilots." (Accept Replacements is OFF)

AND AT THE SAME TIME

Add some pilots by "Get pilot" a few pilots less than the planes... (which happens when you only want trained pilots)

when this happens airgroups will not fly...


here is the response I got from Mr. Frag. It doesnt sound good...


"I tried to get this fixed with CV aircraft in 1.6. Mike broke something with
turning off pilots as the code was designed originally to pull a pilot at
the time the mission goes should a plane not have one. Having it not able to
pull the pilot is causing a mission scrub condition. I am not sure if
anything can actually be done about this as it is working as designed. This
is one of those classic problems ... When you change a design after the
fact, it has unexpected consequences."




< Message edited by michaelm -- 10/4/2005 11:51:22 PM >

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 33
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/4/2005 11:52:23 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
I've yet to see it myself though just to be on the safe side i make sure there aren't more ready planes vs pilots for my critical airgroups (usually the CV)



_____________________________


(in reply to michaelm75au)
Post #: 34
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 12:07:28 AM   
Damien Thorn

 

Posts: 1107
Joined: 7/24/2003
Status: offline
) Malaria zones have been slightly modified. Includes requested changes for CHS maps.

10) Anti-submarine attack routines have been rewritten. Now, seldom will more than 4 ASW vessels normally attack a submarine during a single phase. Number of attacking ships depends on task force type, ships types and lots of skill rolls. Instead of each ship making one or two attacks, they may now sometimes continue to attack until out of ASW ammunition. Number of attacks made depend on task force type, ships types and lots of skill rolls. Hits are now deadly much less often, usually doing a point or two of system damage and or occasionally a point or so of flood damage. I don't know if they are still around, but a while back there were some players screaming for this change. Just got to it. Long list of code requests.

What changes were made to the Malaria zones? Once you posted the malaria code. Can you post the revised code so we can see the changes?

Does #10 mean there is no point in having more than 4 ASW ships in a task force now? Are certain ships more likely to engange subs than others (i.e. DD vs DMS)?

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 35
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 12:18:40 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
I'm trying not to think about the ASW too much. I'm having nightmarish visions of retuning dancing in my little pointy head.....

time for a

_____________________________


(in reply to Damien Thorn)
Post #: 36
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 12:32:03 AM   
Tanaka


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

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

I've yet to see it myself though just to be on the safe side i make sure there aren't more ready planes vs pilots for my critical airgroups (usually the CV)




its easy. just load up the south pacific scenario as japan. game settings are with replacements off. go to the tainan airgroup at lae. you start out with 24 pilots and 24 planes with a maximum of 27 plane potential. turn replacements on turn 1. once you get your full compliment of planes on turn 2 (27 planes) turn replacements off. press the get pilot button once. you will now have 25 pilots and 27 planes. now try to sweep port moresby. your airgroup will no longer fly but maybe a few measley planes...

see screenshot and fatigue of pilots. only a few are flying...

do the same thing with the IJN carrier groups in this scenario and you will get the same thing...




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Tanaka -- 10/5/2005 2:34:07 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 37
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 12:44:43 AM   
jcjordan

 

Posts: 1900
Joined: 6/27/2001
Status: offline
Mike I'd like to add a wish item for future updates -

How about making a British or CW Naval Pilot replacement for the British from say the Communist China or French listing using the proper naval ranks & maybe decrease the British replacement rate. As it is now they use Land Air ranks like WCdr or SL & also maybe add Sgt/Flying Sgt to the British flying ranks as there were quite a few especially at start.

In working on the CHS Leaders, I've also noticed in my game that all the Canadian squadron leaders are FLT & only those seem to be in the Canadian list to chose from for command but there are Cpts in the squadron. Shouldn't the Canadians follow the same as the CW or Brit structure of flying ranks?

(in reply to Mike Wood)
Post #: 38
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 1:05:37 AM   
Tankerace


Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline
Guys, let him finish this patch before asking more....let the man get his head above water, at least for a little while.

_____________________________

Designer of War Plan Orange
Allied Naval OOBer of Admiral's Edition
Naval Team Lead for War in the Med

Author of Million-Dollar Barrage: American Field Artillery in the Great War coming soon from OU Press.

(in reply to jcjordan)
Post #: 39
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 1:10:05 AM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Guys, let him finish this patch before asking more....let the man get his head above water, at least for a little while.



As opposed to asking for chrome, ask for bugs to be squashed and eradicated.

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Tankerace)
Post #: 40
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 1:12:07 AM   
Tankerace


Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline
Bingo bongo.

_____________________________

Designer of War Plan Orange
Allied Naval OOBer of Admiral's Edition
Naval Team Lead for War in the Med

Author of Million-Dollar Barrage: American Field Artillery in the Great War coming soon from OU Press.

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 41
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 1:36:57 AM   
Mike Wood


Posts: 2095
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Oakland, California
Status: offline
Hello...

Some one sent save for bug. Could not reproduce error. Air groups flew as should. Need save in which problem occurs. Send to mikew@matrixgames.com, along with description of bug in subject and in body instructions on how to make error occur. Do not worry about passwords. Never use them.

Bye...

Michael Wood

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

...Is it possible to fix the "Get Pilot" button problem...



(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 42
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 1:38:00 AM   
Mike Wood


Posts: 2095
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Oakland, California
Status: offline
Hello...

No. Not for now.

Sorry...

Michael Wood

quote:

ORIGINAL: Knavey

Mike,

Any chance of a toggle for repairing ports and airfields?

I sent you a PM about this a while back.

Dave


(in reply to Knavey)
Post #: 43
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 1:38:33 AM   
Mike Wood


Posts: 2095
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Oakland, California
Status: offline
Hello...

Correct.

Bye...

Michael Wood

quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Poor Mike.

And folks wonder why he doens't post very often...

===

Mike - "Just letting y'all know I fixed this."

"Thanks! What about this?!"
"And this?"
"And what about this?"
"When are we getting this?"
"Remember when we talked abou this?"



-F-


(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 44
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 1:40:06 AM   
Mike Wood


Posts: 2095
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Oakland, California
Status: offline
Hello...

Guess Eric has not posted it yet. Not sure where he posts public beta files.

Bye...

Michael Wood

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tallyho!


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Wood

Hello...

Be advised. List of fixes, user requested changes for 1.70, so far:

BUGS FIXED:

8) Air groups which had been disbanded or withdrawn were returning with zero planes, even though planes were being taken from pool for the group. Fixed. Note that fix only applies to groups disbanded or withdrawn using version 1.603 or later.




Good news thankyou
I didn't realise there was a 1.603 patch - where do i get it?


(in reply to saj42)
Post #: 45
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 1:41:00 AM   
Mike Wood


Posts: 2095
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Oakland, California
Status: offline
Hello...

Restart not required.

Bye...

Michael Wood

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberwop36

Great Thanks!!

But please don't tell me I have to restart my game.

Which changes require restarting? How do I get 1.603?


(in reply to cyberwop36)
Post #: 46
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 1:42:30 AM   
Mike Wood


Posts: 2095
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Oakland, California
Status: offline
Hello...

A week or two.

Bye...

Michael Wood

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735
...Here's the million dollar question. What time frame are we looking at for 1.7 release?
bc


(in reply to Bradley7735)
Post #: 47
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 1:53:04 AM   
Cpt.Buckmaster


Posts: 65
Joined: 9/16/2004
From: Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
Status: offline
Bless your hearts for continuing to support the game when other companies would have been long gone!

/wipes tear

_____________________________

"In life, as in a football game, the principle to follow is: Hit the line hard!"-Theodore Roosevelt

(in reply to Mike Wood)
Post #: 48
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 2:16:52 AM   
Mike Wood


Posts: 2095
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Oakland, California
Status: offline
Hello...

Yes. Yes, here is reason to have many escorts. A goodly number of escorts can scare the submarine skipper away or spot submarine first and allow the escorts to attack before the submarine can get into position for a shot.

Typically, you can expect the following:

Fast Transport TF: Up to one or two escorts will attack and unload one or two patterns, while other ships escape. Code assumes these folk have some where go and are in a hurry.

Air Combat TF, Surface TF, Bombardment TF: Up to one or two escorts will attack and unload up to one half ASW ordinance, while other ships escape. Code assumes these folks have some where to go.

Anti-submarine TF: Up to three or four escorts will attack and unload at least one half, up to all ASW ordinance. Code assumes these folk have no where important to go and will tarry.

Other TF: Up to two or three escorts will attack and unload between one pattern and all ASW ordinance. Code assumes these folk have somewhere to go, but leave escorts to pin submarine for long while, other ships escape. Will never use more than one half escorts, as others stay with main body.

Escorts with more ASW weapons and ammunition, a more aggressive skipper with a higher naval skill are more likely to engage in the attack.

This was the Malaria code request (quicker than looking up the code):

Malaria Zones
-------------
- The malaria zone does not encompass the bases of Aru Island (hex 39,80)
and Timoeka (hex 45,81). I believe that both of these bases should be
malarial bases.

- The malaria zone encompasses the base of Norfolk Island (hex 60,119).
This island is not tropical - pine tress grow there - and I believe
that it should not be in the malaria zone.

- The following Australian bases are hard coded to be malarial:
Wyndham (base 757)
Derby (base 758)
Broome (base 759)
Cooktown (base 770)
Cairns (base 771)
Thursday Island (base 738)

I believe that none of these bases should be malarial.

- On my map, Ponape (base 688) is in the malarial zone because it is
in a different hex than on the official map. If this base is added
to the malarial exclusion list that won't be the case. This would
not affect the official scenarios. This request is just asking for
a favour.


Weather Zones
-------------
- Along the Northern part of the map, there is a gap in the cold weather
zone, in hex columns 86 (rows 1 to 34) to 88 (rows 1 to 34) inclusive.

- The southern cold zone, which covers the bottom of New Zealand,
extends across the entire map. This is not a big deal on the official
map, but for my alternative map it means that this zone extends
quite close to the Society Islands (Tahiti). For my map it would be
better for the zone to stop somewhere to the East of New Zealand.
This would not affect the official map in any way. This request is
asking for another favour.



quote:

ORIGINAL: Damien Thorn

Malaria zones have been slightly modified. Includes requested changes for CHS maps.

10) Anti-submarine attack routines have been rewritten. Now, seldom will more than 4 ASW vessels normally attack a submarine during a single phase. Number of attacking ships depends on task force type, ships types and lots of skill rolls. Instead of each ship making one or two attacks, they may now sometimes continue to attack until out of ASW ammunition. Number of attacks made depend on task force type, ships types and lots of skill rolls. Hits are now deadly much less often, usually doing a point or two of system damage and or occasionally a point or so of flood damage. I don't know if they are still around, but a while back there were some players screaming for this change. Just got to it. Long list of code requests.

What changes were made to the Malaria zones? Once you posted the malaria code. Can you post the revised code so we can see the changes?

Does #10 mean there is no point in having more than 4 ASW ships in a task force now? Are certain ships more likely to engange subs than others (i.e. DD vs DMS)?



< Message edited by Mike Wood -- 10/5/2005 2:20:45 AM >

(in reply to Damien Thorn)
Post #: 49
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 2:19:05 AM   
Mike Wood


Posts: 2095
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Oakland, California
Status: offline
Hello...

Tried. Worked fine. What version are you running?

Thanks...

Michael Wood

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

I've yet to see it myself though just to be on the safe side i make sure there aren't more ready planes vs pilots for my critical airgroups (usually the CV)




its easy. just load up the south pacific scenario as japan. game settings are with replacements off. go to the tainan airgroup at lae. you start out with 24 pilots and 24 planes with a maximum of 27 plane potential. turn replacements on turn 1. once you get your full compliment of planes on turn 2 (27 planes) turn replacements off. press the get pilot button once. you will now have 25 pilots and 27 planes. your airgroup will no longer fly but maybe a few measley planes...

see screenshot and fatigue of pilots. only a few are flying...

do the same thing with the IJN carrier groups in this scenario and you will get the same thing...



(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 50
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 2:20:56 AM   
Mike Wood


Posts: 2095
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Oakland, California
Status: offline
Hello...

No time to address request in near future. Maybe later.

Bye...

Michael Wood

quote:

ORIGINAL: jcjordan

Mike I'd like to add a wish item for future updates -

How about making a British or CW Naval Pilot replacement for the British from say the Communist China or French listing using the proper naval ranks & maybe decrease the British replacement rate. As it is now they use Land Air ranks like WCdr or SL & also maybe add Sgt/Flying Sgt to the British flying ranks as there were quite a few especially at start.

In working on the CHS Leaders, I've also noticed in my game that all the Canadian squadron leaders are FLT & only those seem to be in the Canadian list to chose from for command but there are Cpts in the squadron. Shouldn't the Canadians follow the same as the CW or Brit structure of flying ranks?


(in reply to jcjordan)
Post #: 51
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 2:21:50 AM   
madmickey

 

Posts: 1336
Joined: 2/11/2004
From: Calgary, Alberta
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Wood

10) Anti-submarine attack routines have been rewritten. Now, seldom will more than 4 ASW vessels normally attack a submarine during a single phase. Number of attacking ships depends on task force type, ships types and lots of skill rolls. Instead of each ship making one or two attacks, they may now sometimes continue to attack until out of ASW ammunition. Number of attacks made depend on task force type, ships types and lots of skill rolls. Hits are now deadly much less often, usually doing a point or two of system damage and or occasionally a point or so of flood damage. I don't know if they are still around, but a while back there were some players screaming for this change. Just got to it. Long list of code requests.


I think I was the one of the more vocal member of that group... I think I started to lobby for this (4 ASW MAX and less damage) in UV days when WitP was still in it's infancy...

THANK YOU!!!


Leo "Apollo11"

Sorry apollo I think Ron win this award.

(in reply to Apollo11)
Post #: 52
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 2:27:05 AM   
Tanaka


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Wood

Hello...

Some one sent save for bug. Could not reproduce error. Air groups flew as should. Need save in which problem occurs. Send to mikew@matrixgames.com, along with description of bug in subject and in body instructions on how to make error occur. Do not worry about passwords. Never use them.

Bye...

Michael Wood

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

...Is it possible to fix the "Get Pilot" button problem...






mike save sent. please let me know if you have any questions about it! thanks!

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike Wood)
Post #: 53
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 2:32:32 AM   
Tanaka


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Wood

Hello...

Tried. Worked fine. What version are you running?

Thanks...

Michael Wood

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

I've yet to see it myself though just to be on the safe side i make sure there aren't more ready planes vs pilots for my critical airgroups (usually the CV)




its easy. just load up the south pacific scenario as japan. game settings are with replacements off. go to the tainan airgroup at lae. you start out with 24 pilots and 24 planes with a maximum of 27 plane potential. turn replacements on turn 1. once you get your full compliment of planes on turn 2 (27 planes) turn replacements off. press the get pilot button once. you will now have 25 pilots and 27 planes. your airgroup will no longer fly but maybe a few measley planes...

see screenshot and fatigue of pilots. only a few are flying...

do the same thing with the IJN carrier groups in this scenario and you will get the same thing...





using version 1.602/andrew browns map and scenario


_____________________________


(in reply to Mike Wood)
Post #: 54
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 3:05:00 AM   
ChezDaJez


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2004
From: Chehalis, WA
Status: offline
quote:

I'm trying not to think about the ASW too much. I'm having nightmarish visions of retuning dancing in my little pointy head.....


Poor Nik!!!

Chez

_____________________________

Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 55
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 5:23:40 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

quote:

I'm trying not to think about the ASW too much. I'm having nightmarish visions of retuning dancing in my little pointy head.....


Poor Nik!!!

Chez


yes indeed as ASW works (IMO) very very well as is in my mod. But i'll do what i have too to align it if there's a major change. (no rest for the pizza deprived)




_____________________________


(in reply to ChezDaJez)
Post #: 56
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 5:26:44 AM   
rockmedic109

 

Posts: 2390
Joined: 5/17/2005
From: Citrus Heights, CA
Status: offline
Hi Mike

I just sent you a save from my CHS game. No Get Pilot button on VF-42. Probably a deficient IQ on the part of the end user.

Not many games continue to get such service so long after the game is released. I am impressed and thankful that my favorite game of all time {at least till WITP II or FPS Football Pro 2007 comes out} has such support.

Thank You

(in reply to Mike Wood)
Post #: 57
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 5:46:12 AM   
Brady


Posts: 10701
Joined: 10/25/2002
From: Oregon,USA
Status: offline

Any chance of geting Japanese Bombers to use larger Bombs like the Allied ones do agasnt ships ?



_____________________________





Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view

(in reply to rockmedic109)
Post #: 58
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 6:10:09 AM   
FeurerKrieg


Posts: 3397
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Denver, CO
Status: offline
THANK YOU MIKE AND COMPANY!!!! Way to show those pessimists out there that said 1.602 was the last patch.

If it would help Matrix allow folks to keep working on code fixes, I'd make a donation to the 'Keep improving WITP fund'.

I suppose it takes more than a handful of 20 dollar donations to keep pay for a full time programmer though.

_____________________________


Upper portion used with permission of www.subart.net, copyright John Meeks

(in reply to Brady)
Post #: 59
RE: Build 1.70 Status - 10/5/2005 8:17:07 AM   
afspret


Posts: 851
Joined: 2/19/2004
From: Hanahan, SC
Status: offline
I don't see any mention of the disappearing LCUs after air transport problem. Did I miss seeing it somewhere?

(in reply to Big B)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Build 1.70 Status Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   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

1.641