RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (Full Version)

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



Message

m10bob -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/22/2011 11:35:00 AM)

Hello..Dunno if this is possible, but I have a major irk since day one.

When building a combat naval TF, I pay extra to be able to acquire my own TF commanders. (Willis Lee is my favorite BB CO), but once that TF comes back to port, I lose the commander of that TF and am left to re-purchasing my CO's all over again.

Is there a way to make this "loss" or swap optional?

Thank you.



Numdydar -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/22/2011 4:25:04 PM)

There seems to be a major issue with the Zero factory upgrade paths. The A6M2 factories upgrade to A6M2 Sen Baku which is not available until '44 (ID 604). The Sen Baku factory can then be upgraded to A6M5b which is available in mid '44. So it appears that any factories that start producing A6M2s have to be converted manually with the resulting damage penatlies. Is this correct?

Should not the A6M2 factories upgrade to the A6M3a instead? Seems a more logical path to me.



PaxMondo -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/22/2011 5:24:48 PM)

This has been the upgrade path for a long time. WAD. If you want to discuss, do so in the AIR thread.



wpurdom -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/22/2011 6:01:44 PM)

In using the patch, the industries don't show up at the bottom of the base display any longer. While I'm at it what are the other methods to turn repair of industries on and off?



PaxMondo -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/22/2011 7:27:44 PM)

Really? They work fine for me using m9....



inqistor -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/22/2011 8:24:54 PM)

I have a small problem with repurchasing of LCUs. 13 PP seems kinda low, 17 can be fine, but seriously 4 PP, or even 1 PP? I will pay more for exchanging ship captain, than repurchasing ground unit. I think minimum should be, at least 10.

Anyway, it seems there is a bug in calculation. I have observed it for units costing 30+. If you click on it, and only see their statistics (do not repurchase), and exit repurchasing screen, when you return to that screen, LCU which you checked, suddenly costs 10 PP more. It happens every time, its price will rise, and rise.


quote:

ORIGINAL: wpurdom

In using the patch, the industries don't show up at the bottom of the base display any longer.

There is sometimes error, where there are only empty boxes of everything in base shown. Just choose any empty hex, and it should fix itself. However, if this is only for industries, and planes/TFs/units show up, I have not seen this.



wpurdom -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/22/2011 8:59:06 PM)

Apparently, the bottom line was getting cut off. With these responses, I adjusted the screen resolution setting under properties on my desktop and now I see that line - but the WITPAE window takes up only a portion of the screen.

I'm (edit) not sure I can play with the settings to get the right size window, but I believe under prior versions of the game WITPAE was overriding and adjusting these settings to make the game fit the screen, but now my manual settings seems to be controlling.

EDIT: On the whole, I would prefer the previous setting if I knew another way to access the industries to turn repair on and off. Thanx for the advice witpqs - I'm at work now but will play with your suggestions tonight.



witpqs -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/22/2011 9:04:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: wpurdom

Apparently, the bottom line was getting cut off. With these responses, I adjusted the screen resolution setting under properties on my desktop and now I see that line - but the WITPAE window takes up only a portion of the screen.

I'm sure I can play with the seetings to get the right size window, but I believe under prior versions of the game WITPAE was overriding and adjusting these settings to make the game fit the screen, but now my manual settings seems to be controlling.


If you are playing in Windowed mode, then try using screen size switches somewhat like these, but substitute your won numbers of course. Play with the numbers until it takes up the amount of screen you want it to. BTW, when you first start the game (actually after it gets to the menu, click on the maximize icon in the upper right corner of the window - it's the icon in the middle between the X and the underscore, sort of looks like a box).

"-pxf1440 -pyf0827"



Roger Neilson II -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/23/2011 6:07:58 AM)

Can somebody remind me what the symbols next to the components in a ground unit mean - the = and + signs? I know its somewhere in this thread, but life is too short!

Roger



michaelm75au -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/23/2011 11:49:05 AM)

IIRC, = is device can upgrade, and + can take replacements.



Roger Neilson II -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/23/2011 12:58:34 PM)

Thanks Michael.


Roger



BigDuke66 -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/23/2011 10:09:17 PM)

Maybe letters like U for upgrade and R for replacements would be better.



Flying Tiger -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/24/2011 1:51:34 AM)

maybe a little mouse over pop up message explaining what the symbols mean? (ie. roll mouse over the '=' and message "device can upgrade" or something similar shows ). i can never have too many of the 'explanation' messages - unless they get in the way of the button i actually want to click on!!



Pascal_slith -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/24/2011 7:37:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pascal

Hi michaelm,

my PBEM oppent and I updated to m8, played two turns, then upgraded to m9. We had PDU OFF originally, but now in m9 even though PDU Off is indicated in the preferences settings after you load the turn, in the air unit display we found we do have a complete list of aircraft to potentially upgrade to as if PDU was On.

Do you need a copy of our latest turn to see this?

Best,

Pascal

Send me the save and which group to look at.


I've looked at it more closely (which I should have the first time). PDU of OFF in our game, but I can click on "Upgrade" in any air unit and look at the list of aircraft that would be possible. Contrary to what I thought the first time around, it is NOT possible, if PDU is OFF, to change the aircraft upgrade path, though you do see all the different aircraft (and pool numbers) available plus the listing of the aircraft in the upgrade path of the type.

Sorry for having stirred the pot unnecessarily.

michalem, you're doing a great job!



BigDuke66 -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/24/2011 8:30:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flying Tiger

maybe a little mouse over pop up message explaining what the symbols mean? (ie. roll mouse over the '=' and message "device can upgrade" or something similar shows ). i can never have too many of the 'explanation' messages - unless they get in the way of the button i actually want to click on!!

I would also like to get a symbol for devices that are understrength but can't upgrade or get replacements so I can see where the weak spots are. Overstrength would be nice too but I guess that is too seldom to be really useful.

How about the real McCoy and add (X/Y) at the end of the line where X shows the number of missing devices and Y the number of devices in pool?



inqistor -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/25/2011 7:37:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

IIRC, = is device can upgrade, and + can take replacements.


BigDuke66 just said it indirectly, but to be precise:
"+" means, that unit CAN get replacements, and those replacements ARE in pool.

No pool, no "+"



michaelm75au -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108p1 (6/25/2011 1:34:38 PM)

Updated 25 June

[1108p1]
Fixed Overflow of refueling arrays if large number of ships in TFs insame hex [MEM]




michaelm75au -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/25/2011 1:36:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

Hello..Dunno if this is possible, but I have a major irk since day one.

When building a combat naval TF, I pay extra to be able to acquire my own TF commanders. (Willis Lee is my favorite BB CO), but once that TF comes back to port, I lose the commander of that TF and am left to re-purchasing my CO's all over again.

Is there a way to make this "loss" or swap optional?

Thank you.


I'll have a look but not sure if forming a TF can be distinguished from updating TF as far as leader is concerned.
Setting the TF not to disband should allow you to keep the TF and just swap in/out ships, I would have thought.



PaxMondo -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108p1 (6/25/2011 2:42:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Updated 25 June

[1108p1]
Fixed Overflow of refueling arrays if large number of ships in TFs insame hex [MEM]



THANKS for the great support!!!!


[&o][&o][&o]



m10bob -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/25/2011 3:13:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm


quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

Hello..Dunno if this is possible, but I have a major irk since day one.

When building a combat naval TF, I pay extra to be able to acquire my own TF commanders. (Willis Lee is my favorite BB CO), but once that TF comes back to port, I lose the commander of that TF and am left to re-purchasing my CO's all over again.

Is there a way to make this "loss" or swap optional?

Thank you.


I'll have a look but not sure if forming a TF can be distinguished from updating TF as far as leader is concerned.
Setting the TF not to disband should allow you to keep the TF and just swap in/out ships, I would have thought.

Thank You michaelm..I have all along thought the only way to "freshen" my crews and ships in port was to "disband"..Old dogs learn tricks daily, if they are wise..(Maybe THAT is my problem?)..lol.



vonTirpitz -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/25/2011 3:51:01 PM)

Turn off auto-disband and manually transfer ships in and out of the TF when it reaches port. If you keep the TF alive the TF commander will always be in command of it and you can change missions or whatever ships you want without "paying" to reinstate the officer you want.


quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

Hello..Dunno if this is possible, but I have a major irk since day one.

When building a combat naval TF, I pay extra to be able to acquire my own TF commanders. (Willis Lee is my favorite BB CO), but once that TF comes back to port, I lose the commander of that TF and am left to re-purchasing my CO's all over again.

Is there a way to make this "loss" or swap optional?

Thank you.




Lifer -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/25/2011 5:53:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vonTirpitz

Turn off auto-disband and manually transfer ships in and out of the TF when it reaches port. If you keep the TF alive the TF commander will always be in command of it and you can change missions or whatever ships you want without "paying" to reinstate the officer you want.


quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

Hello..Dunno if this is possible, but I have a major irk since day one.

When building a combat naval TF, I pay extra to be able to acquire my own TF commanders. (Willis Lee is my favorite BB CO), but once that TF comes back to port, I lose the commander of that TF and am left to re-purchasing my CO's all over again.

Is there a way to make this "loss" or swap optional?

Thank you.




I may have done something wrong when I tried this. I transferred my carrier and ships into port for repair/upgrade and left one DD with the TF Cmdr. When the ship came back into service, I could not make my DD TF into an Air Combat TF to transfer the CV into it and when I made a CV TF and transferred the DD into it , the DD TF Cmdr disappeared into the pool.

Greg



Shellshock -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/25/2011 6:14:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lifer

I may have done something wrong when I tried this. I transferred my carrier and ships into port for repair/upgrade and left one DD with the TF Cmdr. When the ship came back into service, I could not make my DD TF into an Air Combat TF to transfer the CV into it and when I made a CV TF and transferred the DD into it , the DD TF Cmdr disappeared into the pool.

Greg


In order for it to remain a Air Combat TF it needs to have a least one carrier still in it. Otherwise, if left with just a surface ship, it becomes a surface combat TF. You can rotate all the other carriers out if you want to retain the original commander, but you need to keep at least one.



vonTirpitz -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/25/2011 6:40:14 PM)

Yep. Keep a spare CVE or CVL around to transfer into the TF first if possible otherwise you can just keep one of the original CVs in the TF.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shellshock


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lifer

I may have done something wrong when I tried this. I transferred my carrier and ships into port for repair/upgrade and left one DD with the TF Cmdr. When the ship came back into service, I could not make my DD TF into an Air Combat TF to transfer the CV into it and when I made a CV TF and transferred the DD into it , the DD TF Cmdr disappeared into the pool.

Greg


In order for it to remain a Air Combat TF it needs to have a least one carrier still in it. Otherwise, if left with just a surface ship, it becomes a surface combat TF. You can rotate all the other carriers out if you want to retain the original commander, but you need to keep at least one.




And as stated below


quote:

ORIGINAL: wpurdom

The work around is to make your existing DD into an escort group. Voila! you can put the CV's into the new group and then can convert to an air group or it will on its own if you do nothing.



Great input wpurdom. I completely forgot about the escort workaround.



wpurdom -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/25/2011 8:35:21 PM)

The work around is to make your existing DD into an escort group. Voila! you can put the CV's into the new group and then can convert to an air group or it will on its own if you do nothing.



koontz -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/26/2011 2:48:30 PM)

Do ive need the previous beta patch ?




cfulbright -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/26/2011 4:56:48 PM)

To get your carrier back into a Surface Combat group, first change the Mission of the SAG to Escort, then you can add CV's back into it.



Rainer -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/26/2011 5:46:46 PM)

quote:

Do ive need the previous beta patch ?


I don't think so.
The patches replace the exe file (War in the Pacific Admiral Edition.exe) and the dll (pwsdll.dll), so it should be good to go with the latest (1108p1). No data files are affected with the patches.

EDIT: If you want to make sure you have all data base changes applied load a save, pull down (from within the game) the preferences menue and check the message in the left down corner. There a hint will be seen if data base changes are available or not.



Nemo121 -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/27/2011 12:31:00 AM)

Couple of issues using M9.

1.Low level kami attacks again appear much more interceptable. It isn't a clear bug as it was previously but it is something for people to look out for to see if there's a pattern.

2. Kamikaze units set to train for Kamikaze missions -Primary Mission TRAINING, Secondary Mission KAMIKAZE and set at 100 feet do NOT increase their LOW NAVAL strike capability. Instead the improve their strafing capability. Could the code be changed so that units which are kamikazes automatically just train their general experience and low naval skills as those are the ones they use?

3. In a current PBEM the IJAAF has suddenly become incapable of pulling replacement pilots from the pool into units. I have lots of replacement pilots in the pool and I don't think we should be near a pilot limit. I can provide a mid-turn save.


Is it possible to play a game which has run a few turns under M9 using M7? I'm thinking of rolling back to M7 which I found stable... but I don't want to screw any current games up.



michaelm75au -> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108j (build03) (6/27/2011 10:54:41 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Couple of issues using M9.

1.Low level kami attacks again appear much more interceptable. It isn't a clear bug as it was previously but it is something for people to look out for to see if there's a pattern.

2. Kamikaze units set to train for Kamikaze missions -Primary Mission TRAINING, Secondary Mission KAMIKAZE and set at 100 feet do NOT increase their LOW NAVAL strike capability. Instead the improve their strafing capability. Could the code be changed so that units which are kamikazes automatically just train their general experience and low naval skills as those are the ones they use?

3. In a current PBEM the IJAAF has suddenly become incapable of pulling replacement pilots from the pool into units. I have lots of replacement pilots in the pool and I don't think we should be near a pilot limit. I can provide a mid-turn save.


Is it possible to play a game which has run a few turns under M9 using M7? I'm thinking of rolling back to M7 which I found stable... but I don't want to screw any current games up.


1. Nothing has been changed in kami attacks since m7
2. Kamikaze set to train Kami should improve skills (general and low level nav bomb). Putting them at 100' is triggering the straffe skill.
3. There was a bug to do with pulling replacements introduced sometime in m7(?), that was corrected as 7a the following day or so. There is a ceiling on the first 3 months of trainees, if the trained replacement pool is empty. These pilots will only come in with exp of very low (below 10 in most cases) but the code promotes these to over 10 EXP due to other limitations in the code. Thus they look more like 4-5 month trained pilots.

m9 save is readable and is playable by m7.



Page: <<   < prev  31 32 [33] 34 35   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
4.96875