RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k8 Resource Movement

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k8 Resource Movement (Full Version)

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

Message

Bradley7735 -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k8 Resource Movement (4/19/2011 4:37:22 PM)
Hi Michael, I have a small request. Can you change the wording of task forces that are at sea, but in a port hex? Currently they say "At sea at xyz location." I would like you to change it to "xyz location, at sea" This is so they show up alphabetically in the same location when viewing all task forces. See my pic below. (fyi, I made the screen shot using the last official patch, not the beta. The beta shows "at sea" task forces as "moving to". I believe you fixed this from my last post. Thanks, Brad [image]local://upfiles/12939/4CB7DC5A0FD647FB9F6F4BDF8DFBBD44.jpg[/image]

Bradley7735 -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k8 Resource Movement (4/20/2011 12:17:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: asdicus quote: ORIGINAL: michaelm quote: ORIGINAL: asdicus Michaelm have you had any chance to look at my savegame file re possible inactive defensive minefields ? I can't understand why the mines are not triggering enemy minesweeping or hitting any landing shipping. Sorry. I did take a look and it appears that the enemy fields are active, but generally will active new TFs entering the hex. Once a TF sits in the hex, the chance of encountering the mines lessen each turn. I suppose this would represent ships anchoring in fairly safe waters after awhile. Nothing has changed in this regard in the last set of patches, if anything the length of the "un-safe" turns in the hex has been slightly increased. Thank-you for your prompt and detailed reply. If it ok with you I would like to keep an eye on this. In my pbm the japs are soon going to invade some heavily mined dutch bases and I am hoping to see at least some minesweeping required and also perhaps a few hits. I must be very unlucky with my minefields because I cannot recall seeing a jap ship hit a defensively laid mine for ages but in very old patches I am sure I got hits. FYI, I placed a defensive minefield at Ambom in early Jan 42. The AI just landed there. An xAK hit 2 mines, and a PB hit 1 mine. (according to FOW anyway) You might need a significant number of mines to see hits. The hit percentage is very low (and realistic imo). I'd hate to see a larger number of hits from mines. There's enough to make you respect them, but not enough to make it "mines in the pacific"

trhinz -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k8 updated 16 April (4/21/2011 8:41:31 PM)
I'm running Scenario 1 with the April 16th beta. Six turns in, I'm not sure that resource movement is working correctly. No resources at all have been transfered to Port Hedland from Corunna Downs nor to Padang from Sawahloento.

asdicus -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k8 updated 16 April (4/22/2011 4:50:15 PM)
Using 1108k8 beta as the allies in my pbm game. When you click on an airgroup details and then click the 'back' button the list presented is not the list of airgroups at the airbase but the all land based air units list. Screenshot attached - airbase is Aden - clicked on 'back button' result is list of all land based air units. This problem only seemed to start with the recent beta patches.

witpqs -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k8 updated 16 April (4/22/2011 6:44:22 PM)
Can messages like: "Search <airplane model> destroyed by CAP" have "at <hex#>" added to them like other messages have? So they would look like: "Search <airplane model> destroyed by CAP at <hex#>"

treespider -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k8 updated 16 April (4/22/2011 7:59:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: witpqs Can messages like: "Search <airplane model> destroyed by CAP" have "at <hex#>" added to them like other messages have? So they would look like: "Search <airplane model> destroyed by CAP at <hex#>" Or a 50-50 chance of adding "at <hex #>"....perhaps search plane was destroyed before it could relay its coordinates.

Bongo -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k8 updated 16 April (4/22/2011 8:49:01 PM)
Having the same problem as well with the April 16 beta.

witp1951 -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k8 updated 16 April (4/23/2011 1:37:40 PM)
I'm on build k8 playing with stockpiling devices. I set SNLF squads to Y to stockpile and have been checking the results. I began with 27 in the pool and 134 used. After 2 weeks of 2 day turns, I still have 27 in the pool with 302 used. Is this WAD and if so, how can this option help me?

beppi -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k8 updated 16 April (4/23/2011 3:22:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: witp1951 I'm on build k8 playing with stockpiling devices. I set SNLF squads to Y to stockpile and have been checking the results. I began with 27 in the pool and 134 used. After 2 weeks of 2 day turns, I still have 27 in the pool with 302 used. Is this WAD and if so, how can this option help me? Are you sure that the option is supposed to work for all squads/devices which are built automatically as japan ? This option is more or less to incease the pool for everything which arrives at a fixed rate. In addition it could be possible that the used squads where just upgrades (i am not a japan expert so no clue if there can be any upgrades for that type of unit.) I am quite sure that michaelm will provide as always a good answer [;)]

michaelm75au -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k8 updated 16 April (4/23/2011 3:53:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: witp1951 I'm on build k8 playing with stockpiling devices. I set SNLF squads to Y to stockpile and have been checking the results. I began with 27 in the pool and 134 used. After 2 weeks of 2 day turns, I still have 27 in the pool with 302 used. Is this WAD and if so, how can this option help me? Japan builds devices as required for replacements and upgrades. Stockpiling should treat Japanese devices as a 'no build' situation. If you have a save, pls post here.

witp1951 -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k8 updated 16 April (4/23/2011 5:51:40 PM)
Here is the turn I set SNLF to Y.

witp1951 -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k8 updated 16 April (4/23/2011 5:53:42 PM)
This turn built and used a number of SNLF.

witp1951 -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k8 updated 16 April (4/23/2011 5:55:49 PM)
This is my latest turn. This may be working as intended. I'm trying to understand the purpose and usefullness.

beppi -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k8 updated 16 April (4/23/2011 6:08:21 PM)
Michaelm as a feature request which should not be too hard to implement the following question. Would it be possible to add the experience of an ship to the ship overview screen when creating an new task force ? For example in an carrier TF i want to have my fletcher class destroyers with as much XP as possible for a maximized anti ASW effect. In my surface combat TFS i want to have maximum xp units for a maximum combat efficiency. In my transport tfs i do not need the top xp units. As allied the XP rate of ships increases during the war and an early Baltimore CA does not have the experience of an late war one. Especially with the destroyers where you get so many of them the xp can differ by quite a large margin (up to 30 xp) and it is currently very painful to find the best ships.

michaelm75au -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k8 updated 16 April (4/23/2011 6:48:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: witp1951 This is my latest turn. This may be working as intended. I'm trying to understand the purpose and usefullness. From the Japanese player perspective, it is not too useful as production is only performed when devices are needed. So stockpiling in this case means 'no need to build at the moment'. I suppose you could use it to turn off some devices that you don't want to produce through using production MP/ARM/VEH points. Such as case might be that a better upgrade is due soon and you don't want to any units to waste said points on making the older device when the points can be used to get the next upgrade.

witp1951 -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k8 updated 16 April (4/23/2011 7:36:50 PM)
Thanks. [:)]

michaelm75au -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k9 updated 24 April (4/24/2011 12:28:27 PM)
Update [1108k9] Added Hotkey '5' will show the supply path from the selected base where the number shows the lessening effect of supply [MEM] Changed Made the location on TF list attempt to cater for "at base" loading as distinct from "at base, moving to" [MEM] Changed Naval bombardment will use the minimum range setting of TF when determining best target. If unit can't hit back at range, then "less" chance of being target [MEM] Reworked TFs that are not moving are prone to any minefields in current hex; seemed to have been broken by an earlier fix [MEM] Tweaked Added target/destination hex check to the AI Auto TF Build to exclude over-sized ships [MEM] Added After 6 months, an expired pooled device (sqd or engineer type) will slowly convert to the upgraded version; if japan, obsolete devices back to the raw materials [MEM] Added Auto-conversion is option in the in-game preferences. New games assume it is ON [MEM] (PBEM assumes on for both players - Japanese player can turn it off/on so it applies for synchronisation.) Fixed Wrong screen showing when returning BACK from Group screen to groups-in-base list screen [MEM] Fixed Error in some calculations of MP and ARM points for squad-type devices in some places [MEM] Fixed Not all devices being shown in the device/industry/resource pool [MEM]

beppi -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k9 updated 24 April (4/24/2011 2:17:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: michaelm Update [1108k9] Added Hotkey '5' will show the supply path from the selected base where the number shows the lessening effect of supply [MEM] Changed Made the location on TF list attempt to cater for "at base" loading as distinct from "at base, moving to" [MEM] Changed Naval bombardment will use the minimum range setting of TF when determining best target. If unit can't hit back at range, then "less" chance of being target [MEM] Reworked TFs that are not moving are prone to any minefields in current hex; seemed to have been broken by an earlier fix [MEM] Tweaked Added target/destination hex check to the AI Auto TF Build to exclude over-sized ships [MEM] Added After 6 months, an expired pooled device (sqd or engineer type) will slowly convert to the upgraded version; if japan, obsolete devices back to the raw materials [MEM] Added Auto-conversion is option in the in-game preferences. New games assume it is ON [MEM] (PBEM assumes on for both players - Japanese player can turn it off/on so it applies for synchronisation.) Fixed Wrong screen showing when returning BACK from Group screen to groups-in-base list screen [MEM] Fixed Error in some calculations of MP and ARM points for squad-type devices in some places [MEM] Fixed Not all devices being shown in the device/industry/resource pool [MEM] quote: Added After 6 months, an expired pooled device (sqd or engineer type) will slowly convert to the upgraded version; if japan, obsolete devices back to the raw materials [MEM] quote: Added After 6 months, an expired pooled device (sqd or engineer type) will slowly convert to the upgraded version; if japan, obsolete devices back to the raw materials [MEM] That is a very nice addition, especcialy with the option to turn it on/off.

michaelm75au -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k9 updated 24 April (4/24/2011 2:59:19 PM)
BTW, has anyone tried the password change function in last build? I thought it might be useful as I have had requests to change the password in the past.

USSAmerica -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k9 updated 24 April (4/24/2011 4:06:48 PM)
Another great update, Michael! [8D] Any idea of how solid this beta is getting, and how close it may be to an official update?

CaptBeefheart -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k9 updated 24 April (4/24/2011 5:42:18 PM)
Michaelm: Great work with all of these updates. I had the second ARD (AFDB-2) come in at Portland and when I form a Support TF out of it and try to select any new home port (for instance, Pearl Harbor) it comes up: "HOME BASE MUST BE ACCESSIBLE BY THIS TF!!" I noticed this in K8 and it's the same issue in K9. Interestingly enough, I tested AFDB-1, which I have parked at Rabaul, and I had no problem forming a Support TF out of it and selecting any home port. Cheers, CC

PaxMondo -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k9 updated 24 April (4/24/2011 5:54:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: USS America Any idea of how solid this beta is getting, and how close it may be to an official update? We have a LONG way to go as Michael has all these great ideas!!! [:D][:D][:D] Go Michael!!!! [&o][&o][&o] PS: No rush. Take all the time you need. The new features are AWESOME!!

berto -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k9 updated 24 April (4/24/2011 7:01:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: michaelm Added Hotkey '5' will show the supply path from the selected base where the number shows the lessening effect of supply [MEM] Another fantastic feature, but ... in some hexes by the absence of supply numbers, it seems I can infer the presence of enemy units, something that reconnaissance is otherwise not revealing to me. In other words, this feature is helping to dispel the Fog of War. WAD, or an unintended side effect?

bjfagan -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k9 updated 24 April (4/24/2011 7:39:12 PM)
I am sure Michael has some great new features that we will all like and I definitely look forward to them. However, leaving the official patch open ended seems unfair to the gamers. There are important fixes in this patch (eg search arcs and others) that I am sure people are eagerly awaiting, myself included. Couldn't an official patch go out now to give us these important fixes and then all the cool new features can come in another update in the near future? [sm=innocent0001.gif]

Bradley7735 -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k9 updated 24 April (4/24/2011 8:08:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Commander Cody Michaelm: Great work with all of these updates. I had the second ARD (AFDB-2) come in at Portland and when I form a Support TF out of it and try to select any new home port (for instance, Pearl Harbor) it comes up: "HOME BASE MUST BE ACCESSIBLE BY THIS TF!!" I noticed this in K8 and it's the same issue in K9. Interestingly enough, I tested AFDB-1, which I have parked at Rabaul, and I had no problem forming a Support TF out of it and selecting any home port. Cheers, CC Can that ship transit a river? I bet it's too big and it's stuck in Portland. It should have it's port of entry set to SF, but that's an oob change, not a code change.

Rainer -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k9 updated 24 April (4/24/2011 8:11:25 PM)
Manpower. The problem is probably to have enough manpower to do the full test (required by publisher) to finish the beta cycle and do the Public Release. I am runnung my campaign against Jap AI since about a year, using all patch updates as they come alive. So far no adverse side effects. However, with a long running PBEM I would not recommend to use the betas (as Michael says in the first post).

Mac Linehan -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k9 updated 24 April (4/24/2011 8:48:07 PM)
michaelm - k9 - cant thank you enough, Christmas in April! Mac

PaxMondo -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k9 updated 24 April (4/24/2011 9:23:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bjfagan I am sure Michael has some great new features that we will all like and I definitely look forward to them. However, leaving the official patch open ended seems unfair to the gamers. There are important fixes in this patch (eg search arcs and others) that I am sure people are eagerly awaiting, myself included. Couldn't an official patch go out now to give us these important fixes and then all the cool new features can come in another update in the near future? [sm=innocent0001.gif] My fear (suspicion) is that this will be the last patch that Matrix will support. There is a cost to publishing a patch. Based upon that fear, I would like to see the public beta run as long as possible to allow Michael to work on everything he feels like prior to the patch being issued. I hope I am wrong and that this next official patch is not the last ... but ....

Bradley7735 -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k9 updated 24 April (4/24/2011 9:33:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PaxMondo quote: ORIGINAL: bjfagan I am sure Michael has some great new features that we will all like and I definitely look forward to them. However, leaving the official patch open ended seems unfair to the gamers. There are important fixes in this patch (eg search arcs and others) that I am sure people are eagerly awaiting, myself included. Couldn't an official patch go out now to give us these important fixes and then all the cool new features can come in another update in the near future? [sm=innocent0001.gif] My fear (suspicion) is that this will be the last patch that Matrix will support. There is a cost to publishing a patch. Based upon that fear, I would like to see the public beta run as long as possible to allow Michael to work on everything he feels like prior to the patch being issued. I hope I am wrong and that this next official patch is not the last ... but .... I have the same suspicion. I really want the beta to become a true patch, but I don't want to hurry things along because I assume it's the last one. Better to let Michael proceed without pressure because every little crumb of new stuff is worth the wait.

berto -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108k9 updated 24 April (4/24/2011 11:38:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PaxMondo My fear (suspicion) is that this will be the last patch that Matrix will support. A major TOAW patch (3.4) was released several months ago, and work is said to have started on the next one. TOAW is much older than WITP:AE, and as evidenced by forum activity, apparently much less popular. The John Tiller Campaign Series are also scheduled for updates in the next year or two. Ditto about the age and popularity of JTCS compared to WITP:AE. If Matrix is still supporting TOAW and JTCS patches, why not also WITP:AE? Despite its relatively high price, WITP:AE is likely one of Matrix's biggest sellers, I reckon. Why would Matrix want to undermine that?

Page: << < prev 12 13 [14] 15 16 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

3.84375