RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

PzB74 -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/28/2009 9:46:13 PM)

Suddenly got black squares popping up and dissappearing over air units after adding the beta patch.
Not sure if anyone else have reported this.

Got a multicore pentium and the following switches:
deepColor -altFont -dual -multiaudio -dd_sw -r -autosave

[image]local://upfiles/1466/ED8026729A0E4BDCBC6040C58E754D36.jpg[/image]



invernomuto -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/28/2009 10:45:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Well, anyone who's blown a fuse already has a very short fuse. I think folks who decided they knew everything there was to know about the original WITP one month after that was release were wrong too. For one thing, I think Japan will find that while 1941 and early 42 may be a bit more even in the air than WITP was, 1943-44 will also be a bit more even than they were in WITP. But please do give the new update a try and let me know how it goes.



Glad to read this. I am fine with the zero toned down, but I hope not to see Uber Corsair like in WITP in 43+





Admiral DadMan -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/28/2009 11:10:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PzB

Suddenly got black squares popping up and dissappearing over air units after adding the beta patch.
Not sure if anyone else have reported this.

Got a multicore pentium and the following switches:
deepColor -altFont -dual -multiaudio -dd_sw -r -autosave



"-dual" is not used any more. Take it out and use -SingleCpuStart or -SingleCpuOrders. I had to experiment to find the one that worked best for me, it turned out to be SingleCpuOrders.

I would experiment with taking out -deepColor and/or -altFont as well



PzB74 -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/28/2009 11:15:24 PM)

Thx I'll play around with the switches!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: PzB

Suddenly got black squares popping up and dissappearing over air units after adding the beta patch.
Not sure if anyone else have reported this.

Got a multicore pentium and the following switches:
deepColor -altFont -dual -multiaudio -dd_sw -r -autosave



"-dual" is not used any more. Take it out and use -SingleCpuStart or -SingleCpuOrders. I had to experiment to find the one that worked best for me, it turned out to be SingleCpuOrders.

I would experiment with taking out -deepColor and/or -altFont as well




DrewMatrix -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/29/2009 12:41:16 AM)

Allies vs AI Scen 6:



1) Abadan has max docked size of 48K. I had a TF that was 52K return to Abadan and it docked. (0r appears to have). Furthermore, if I try to add to that TF I can add some huge number (4 billion tons) to the docked TF. This may not actually be docked but it lists as docked.

2) the word "Upgd" doesn't register in the correct column if you look at A/C production in a port. See below.



[image]local://upfiles/13010/8F39CBA7C218445DA909063B66C364B4.jpg[/image]

Re 1 above:

Once you get a TF larger than the port sized docked, which seems to have happened here by having a very large TF return to the port and dock automatically, the limit stays "stuck on open" in that I can not only fill that TF as though it were legitimately docked, but other TFs that show up dock and I can add ships to them keeping the amount of shipping docked larger than the limit the port should allow.

Tell me if you need saves. I have a couple but should send them Email because there is more than one.




herwin -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/29/2009 7:32:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Valgua


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flying Tiger

great job. thanks!

i noticed that the map no longer scrolls when trying to set search arcs. i'm sure it scrolled before?

quote:

arc


I had the same issue. Is it a bug?


Looks like a bug!



Akos Gergely -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/29/2009 7:56:28 AM)

same here, no mapscroll while a window is open...



Don Bowen -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/29/2009 3:12:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Beezle

Allies vs AI Scen 6:



1) Abadan has max docked size of 48K. I had a TF that was 52K return to Abadan and it docked. (0r appears to have). Furthermore, if I try to add to that TF I can add some huge number (4 billion tons) to the docked TF. This may not actually be docked but it lists as docked.

....

Re 1 above:

Once you get a TF larger than the port sized docked, which seems to have happened here by having a very large TF return to the port and dock automatically, the limit stays "stuck on open" in that I can not only fill that TF as though it were legitimately docked, but other TFs that show up dock and I can add ships to them keeping the amount of shipping docked larger than the limit the port should allow.

Tell me if you need saves. I have a couple but should send them Email because there is more than one.




Please post a save just before the TF arrives at Abadan - in tech support forum. Also, is the allied side human or computer?



erstad -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/29/2009 6:09:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

Please post a save just before the TF arrives at Abadan - in tech support forum. Also, is the allied side human or computer?


Don, stock scenario 1 starts with Samah in this condition. It is overdocked at the beginning, and if you create new TFs from the disbanded ships they also start docked.




MechFO -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/29/2009 7:48:23 PM)

Hi

Just wanted to add that in Scen No. 2 Truk now has 2 (two) size 4 Repair docks. I suppose it should be only one.



Scott_USN -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/30/2009 2:41:54 AM)

Bad delay when opening base or any information window. Pauses for up to 5 seconds or more. As bad as it was before the hotfix few weeks ago.

I deleted all the switches but -cpu2






USSAmerica -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/30/2009 3:07:34 AM)

Scott, have you tried the "-dd_sw" switch?  It has really helped smooth out my operation during the orders phase.  [8D]



witpqs -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/30/2009 3:40:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: USS America

Scott, have you tried the "-dd_sw" switch?  It has really helped smooth out my operation during the orders phase.  [8D]


I second that. Really made things faster.



Scott_USN -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/30/2009 3:47:33 AM)

I will try that out thanks!



Scott_USN -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/30/2009 4:21:31 AM)

That worked, got some funky graphics glitches but I prefer that to 5+ second delay when I click on a task force or base.



sprior -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/30/2009 8:08:26 PM)

Playing as IJn in a pbem game and getting a persistent crash to desktop. Saved game file available if anyone is interested.



Scott_USN -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/31/2009 1:14:18 AM)

I took all switches but -SingleCpuOrders

When I restarted the game I seen no loading screen it just spalshing and went straight to the 010101010101 movie thing.

I have no delay when clicking info windows or selecting units. With the -cpu2 swith an -dd_sw I had horrible lag after a few rounds.

I will let you know, I guess every system is different and nothing works for everyone. It is blazing fast now.

I have a DualCore 3.0 ghz CPU



Joseph_Nevsky -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/31/2009 10:54:49 AM)

Thank you very much for this patch. For me, it´s working great! [&o]


My system = Intel Core 2 Quad CPU Q9550 2.83GHz (4 Gbs. RAM, Windows Vista 64 bits).

I´ve tried different switches combinations, and the following one is working fine in my case:

-cpu4 -altFont -multiaudio -dd_sw -deepColor -fd -r


At the begining, I wasn´t sure using "-cpu1" or 2, 3, 4... But at the end, I´m using "-cpu4". If I change them, I cannot see the difference.
Now game is running softer, and specially fonts are now more readable [:)]



Iridium -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/31/2009 8:20:05 PM)

Taiho's DP guns were not changed to 10cm/65 models in scenario 2 from what I saw.

I could be wrong but I thought Ibuki was to be equipped with 8cm/60 guns as her DP battery.

Just getting a good look at the beta patch now, looks great so far. Keep up the good work guys.[8D]



John Lansford -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (8/31/2009 8:35:31 PM)

Last night I had a repeating icon/nonrefreshing screen problem hit my patched game.  Scrolling across the screen, all the IJN icons started repeating down the screen and did not refresh when I stopped.  I rebooted the computer and everything went back to normal, but this is a brand new computer with much better hardware than the minimum required for AE. 

Also, the IJN seems to think they've taken Davao already, and have parked a TF in the harbor even though it's still Allied.



jb123 -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (9/1/2009 7:07:55 AM)

Ok this is all cool, but I don't get this one:

When calculating the bonus for land unit planning for a target, the land unit and its HQs (corps and command) must be planning for same target to get the bonuses.

So if SwPac is prepping for Townsville and the 32nd Div is prepping for PM the div doesn't get bonuses? The 32nd div has no corps HQ. And what about later in the war when I may have two or three assaults going on (such as the near simultaneous ozzie landings in the DEI). This means Prep points mean nothing if two assaults are taking place under the same HQ?

I think I love this game, it sucks a lot of my time, but I don't get it.




pturky -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (9/1/2009 8:56:29 AM)

Hi just loaded the beta patch and noticed the USA ENGINEERS are still set to enter date 99/99 are they going to sort this, sorry if this has been reported before.



Iron Duke -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (9/1/2009 9:23:39 AM)

Hi
Are you refering to an in game unit or in the database - ? what slot number ?
If the unit is labeled just USA ENGINEERS it is probably a TOE entry and sets the equipment level of other in game US enginering units



pturky -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (9/1/2009 5:19:30 PM)

In the resources pool last entry gets 9 per month just wondering what year it needs to be set at



Hanzberger -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (9/2/2009 11:48:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jb123

Ok this is all cool, but I don't get this one:

When calculating the bonus for land unit planning for a target, the land unit and its HQs (corps and command) must be planning for same target to get the bonuses.

So if SwPac is prepping for Townsville and the 32nd Div is prepping for PM the div doesn't get bonuses? The 32nd div has no corps HQ. And what about later in the war when I may have two or three assaults going on (such as the near simultaneous ozzie landings in the DEI). This means Prep points mean nothing if two assaults are taking place under the same HQ?

I think I love this game, it sucks a lot of my time, but I don't get it.



The way I understand it is: HQ will only give a bonus to whatever they are planning for and if they are in range of anything else they also give a bonus to that. If your outta range your outta luck.



rockmedic109 -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (9/2/2009 2:54:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pturky

In the resources pool last entry gets 9 per month just wondering what year it needs to be set at


I am not sure it makes any difference or not. THe Availability date in the editor is 9999 for all allied squad devices. If the allies do not get their engineers then this is a showstopper. If it still works then it is a non-issue. I haven't heard any of the developers weigh in on this.



JWE -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (9/2/2009 3:35:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rockmedic109
quote:

ORIGINAL: pturky
In the resources pool last entry gets 9 per month just wondering what year it needs to be set at

I am not sure it makes any difference or not. THe Availability date in the editor is 9999 for all allied squad devices. If the allies do not get their engineers then this is a showstopper. If it still works then it is a non-issue. I haven't heard any of the developers weigh in on this.

Squads and weapons that populate LCUs begin at device slot # 701. Land devices from # 258 to # 699, with 9999 in the “Available” field, are not used.

You will find your US Cmbt Eng Sqds starting at 1108. Others are grouped by nationality.



whitesd -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (9/2/2009 6:58:11 PM)

Erik
Just downloaded and applied to existing full campaign.
I have a problem on the Screen which summarises all the ground units within a base, the new option to toggle Replacements on / off.
Both do the same thing - they both toggle replacements ON :-)
Simon



KHawk -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (9/3/2009 12:02:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jb123

Ok this is all cool, but I don't get this one:

When calculating the bonus for land unit planning for a target, the land unit and its HQs (corps and command) must be planning for same target to get the bonuses.

So if SwPac is prepping for Townsville and the 32nd Div is prepping for PM the div doesn't get bonuses? The 32nd div has no corps HQ. And what about later in the war when I may have two or three assaults going on (such as the near simultaneous ozzie landings in the DEI). This means Prep points mean nothing if two assaults are taking place under the same HQ?

I think I love this game, it sucks a lot of my time, but I don't get it.



No this is not correct. The 32nd Div gets its own bonus it just does not get the additional bounes from the HQ.

Unit A preped for location X only gets the A bonus.
Unit B preped for location Y and HQ preped for Y gets B + HQ bonus.

Hope this helps.

KHawk



jomni -> RE: PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines (9/3/2009 12:23:38 AM)

I like the sound of Quite China.
China has been the most active front in my game as Japanese.
Forcing me to send troops to the font line and subject the cities to partisan attach.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.046875