RE: Unit Remnant Size 9999 Unloadable - Known Bug?

RE: Unit Remnant Size 9999 Unloadable - Known Bug? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945

Message

Yamato hugger -> RE: Unit Remnant Size 9999 Unloadable - Known Bug? (1/22/2009 3:43:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LowCommand Stock scenario 41B Dec 41 to Mar 46 against the AI game date Sep 14, 1944. Scenario 16? Its possible there is a database error on the size of one of the components of the unit. I know there are other flakey things about 16 like IJA transports upgrading to Tabbys for example. I have never gotten a scenario 16 past autumn 42.

Rainer -> RE: Unit Remnant Size 9999 Unloadable - Known Bug? (1/22/2009 7:26:53 PM)
Thanks for your ongoing interest, really appreciated [:)] The 117th is divided since many months - probably somewhere in 1942. One part (parent as in last screenshot) is sitting since then at Shortland doing nothing, the other part (child, see attached screenshot) is at Green Island, providing aviation support. None on ships, none destroyed. Note the current game date is August 44, which means the units have not been touched by me since many months. [image]local://upfiles/1851/2109CD25BC104EE3BD400F87DBB9DC44.jpg[/image]

LowCommand -> RE: Unit Remnant Size 9999 Unloadable - Known Bug? (1/23/2009 2:47:39 AM)
It turns out that I at least one more unit with the bug, 126 USAAF. And yes, the parent unit has 1 gun and 30 troops and the fragment is alive and well. That's why I got all confused and sent the wrong screen captures. To recap, I have at least 3 units with the bug, 3rd DAF, 122 USAAF, and 126 USAAF. I may experiment and see if this happens if the same unit is first loaded on an AP. Still, it is only a minor glitch. Now, if it had happened early, that could be another matter. There were times in early 42 when base units were more precious than combat units.

erstad -> RE: Unit Remnant Size 9999 Unloadable - Known Bug? (1/23/2009 3:27:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger Scenario 16? Its possible there is a database error on the size of one of the components of the unit. I know there are other flakey things about 16 like IJA transports upgrading to Tabbys for example. I have never gotten a scenario 16 past autumn 42. I played a stock scenario 16 PBEM to the bitter end (March 1946 or whatever). However, I was Japan, so if there were any anomalies in the load costs I might not have noticed them.

rtrapasso -> RE: Unit Remnant Size 9999 Unloadable - Known Bug? (1/23/2009 9:55:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rainer Thanks for your ongoing interest, really appreciated [:)] The 117th is divided since many months - probably somewhere in 1942. One part (parent as in last screenshot) is sitting since then at Shortland doing nothing, the other part (child, see attached screenshot) is at Green Island, providing aviation support. None on ships, none destroyed. Note the current game date is August 44, which means the units have not been touched by me since many months. [image]local://upfiles/1851/2109CD25BC104EE3BD400F87DBB9DC44.jpg[/image] OK - something definitely weird going on here - this is a fragment, yet it has more support squads then the "parent" shown in the previous screen shot: [image]local://upfiles/1851/296FF6E404C7412CA8AE23E810FDFE8A.jpg[/image] This isn't supposed to happen, so there is definitely some sort of bug going on... and since apparently the parent wasn't eliminated, that sort of shoots that theory down.

USSAmerica -> RE: Unit Remnant Size 9999 Unloadable - Known Bug? (1/23/2009 2:50:47 PM)
Dang, Bob, you were up really early this morning. [X(]

Rainer -> RE: Unit Remnant Size 9999 Unloadable - Known Bug? (1/23/2009 7:15:17 PM)
Bob, I think we all agree that this is mildly annoying, but not really a show stopper. That is, as long as there are no side effects we don't know about yet. If you have a pile where you store those "have to check this when I've got some spare time" I recommend you put it there. I understand WitP will see some patches in the future, may be some devs will take an interest (AFTER they managed to cope with AE). [;)] And once again, thanks for your support and interest.

AnGeliCo -> RE: Unit Remnant Size 9999 Unloadable - Known Bug? (1/24/2009 2:02:17 PM)
I think I can help, but you'll have to take my word for it as I can't replicate the unit display. Here's what happened. No. 104 RAF Base Force in India when loading left a remnant that wouldn't load, just as described above. The remnant initially showed as displayed above but later on the unit display showed that it contained: (0) x 1 14in/45 41YT Gun (Japanese naval gun) I think this was when the remnant was moving overland to rejoin its parent unit. (I giggled at the thought of a base force mounting such a trophy at the entrance to the airfield.) HTH

rtrapasso -> RE: Unit Remnant Size 9999 Unloadable - Known Bug? (1/24/2009 3:38:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AnGeliCo I think I can help, but you'll have to take my word for it as I can't replicate the unit display. Here's what happened. No. 104 RAF Base Force in India when loading left a remnant that wouldn't load, just as described above. The remnant initially showed as displayed above but later on the unit display showed that it contained: (0) x 1 14in/45 41YT Gun (Japanese naval gun) I think this was when the remnant was moving overland to rejoin its parent unit. (I giggled at the thought of a base force mounting such a trophy at the entrance to the airfield.) HTH [:D] This sounds like a corruption of a game file more than anything else that springs to mind... of course, i suppose the other problems could be due to corruption of game files as well.

AnGeliCo -> RE: Unit Remnant Size 9999 Unloadable - Known Bug? (1/25/2009 4:24:22 PM)
I found this in the v1.8.0.2 patch notes The text "Static" is displayed on the individual land unit screen for units that have static devices (load cost 9999). I understand that to mean that static devices have a load cost of 9999. And in v1.8.0.1 (Not fully relevant but perhaps a pointer) 6. LCU fragments improperly receiving reinforcements. During turn processing of Land Units with multiple fragments, the system could temporarily lose track of the proper unit(s) that should receive reinforcements. This could result in cut off or unsupplied fragments being improperly reinforced. Fix: Prevented focus shift away from the proper unit. No.104 RAF base force history from relevant save files Date Location AP load 12/8/41 mandalay 2168 1/1/42 mandalay 2258 7/1/42 asansol 32873 So it looks like a surviving cadre having completed "The Long March" (which probably took over 60 turns to complete) would have very few elements left on returning to supply. Could a similar issue to v1.8.0.1 (above) occasionally be affecting the reinforcement when units rebuild?

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.6870117