Database changes to ongoing PBEM? (Full Version)

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



Message

Barb -> Database changes to ongoing PBEM? (10/27/2015 8:46:21 AM)

Hello,
IIRC there was someone who could/can enter the save file of ongoing PBEM and alter some database-related things - for example to fix the "Ohka" problem in official scenario 1. However I do forgot who... :)

Barb



koniu -> RE: Database changes to ongoing PBEM? (10/27/2015 12:47:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Barb

Hello,
IIRC there was someone who could/can enter the save file of ongoing PBEM and alter some database-related things - for example to fix the "Ohka" problem in official scenario 1. However I do forgot who... :)

Barb


michaelm



Barb -> RE: Database changes to ongoing PBEM? (11/24/2015 5:56:17 AM)

So, what is the list of database corrections in official scenario 1?
Ohka - what exactly should be changed to have them work?
IJAAF Bn - device 1647 should upgrade to 1648?

I have noticed some ship class having DC thrower to only one side (probably should have been to stern), but I do not remember what it was...
I hope you guys will come up with number of corrections for both Allied and Japanese sides...



BBfanboy -> RE: Database changes to ongoing PBEM? (11/24/2015 2:23:46 PM)

There was a base in Manchukuo that had an enormous garrison requirement - something like 10,000 - should have been 100. I will open the game and look for it.

EDIT: I looked at my current Scenario 1 game and could not find the garrison problem. Either it was fixed in the updates or it was from one of the DBB scenarios. IIRC, the PBEM players with the problem just went into the editor and changed their own game database to the correct garrison requirement. An annoyance, but not a big problem.



Lokasenna -> RE: Database changes to ongoing PBEM? (11/24/2015 4:15:19 PM)

If you update the database with the changes from AndyMac, it fixes the Okha production oversights.



Barb -> RE: Database changes to ongoing PBEM? (11/25/2015 6:33:30 AM)

I was looking for the Ohkas through the editor to scenario 1, Scenario 2 and DaBabes scen 28 - An I was puzzled by the find:
Scen 1:
Buildable = No
Built Rate = 0
Scen 2:
Buildable = No
Built Rate = 125
Scen 28:
Buildable = Yes
Built Rate = 90



Barb -> RE: Database changes to ongoing PBEM? (11/25/2015 6:41:21 AM)

Also Kamikaze class upgrades/conversions are interesting... I wish I had converted them before 12/42...

DD Kamikaze 12/41 -> DD Kamikaze 2/42 -> DD Kamikaze 3/43 ...
Bind 139 allows DD Kamikaze 2/42 to convert to APD Kamikaze 4/42
APD Kamikaze 4/42 -> APD Kamikaze 12/42
Bind 140 allows APD Kamikaze 12/42 to upgrade to E Kamikaze 1/43

However after 12/42 the game does not allow to convert DD Kamikaze 2/42 to APD Kamikaze 4/42 (and thus start the DD->APD->E path).



Uncivil Engineer -> RE: Database changes to ongoing PBEM? (11/25/2015 10:01:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

There was a base in Manchukuo that had an enormous garrison requirement - something like 10,000 - should have been 100. I will open the game and look for it.

EDIT: I looked at my current Scenario 1 game and could not find the garrison problem. Either it was fixed in the updates or it was from one of the DBB scenarios. IIRC, the PBEM players with the problem just went into the editor and changed their own game database to the correct garrison requirement. An annoyance, but not a big problem.


The garrison glitch is in the DBB data - Mukden has a garrison requirement of 2000 for the Japanese; should be 200 (which IS the Allied requirement).



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.316406