Bug reports after 4 patches? (Full Version)

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



Message


RSGodfrey -> Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/17/2005 10:43:11 AM)

As someone who is trying to decide whether to buy WitP (some time after GGWaW) why is it that so long into its development bugs are still appearing? To what extent do these bugs interfere with the enjoyment of this experience?

Will WitP ever be bug-free?

Richard




wild_Willie2 -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/17/2005 11:17:34 AM)

Most of the time the game is running 100% ok, but there are some known bugs like : leader and upgrade bugs.
these bugs SHOUL be finally ironed out in 1.5.

As stated earlier, the game was considered bug free when first shipped, but the database sometimes does some strange things after some playing time, but these bugs are not to bad (most of the time) and the game is VERY much playable (and HIGLY ADDICTIBLE)




Mike Wood -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/17/2005 12:39:56 PM)

Hello...

And, I added over a hundred new features, after release, which added new bugs that had to be fixed in follow up patches.

Have Fun...

Michael Wood

quote:

ORIGINAL: wild_Willie2

Most of the time the game is running 100% ok, but there are some known bugs like : leader and upgrade bugs.
these bugs SHOUL be finally ironed out in 1.5.

As stated earlier, the game was considered bug free when first shipped, but the database sometimes does some strange things after some playing time, but these bugs are not to bad (most of the time) and the game is VERY much playable (and HIGLY ADDICTIBLE)





Halsey -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/17/2005 12:42:37 PM)

It's still a great game Mike. Keep up the good work.[;)]

Even with all the moaning we do on the forum.[:D]




LargeSlowTarget -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/17/2005 12:47:35 PM)

IMO the bugs are not game-stoppers. They do not interfere with my enjoyment of the game. On the contrary - the leader bug has had the beneficial side effect of triggering some of the funniest post I have ever seen on any forum. [sm=00000280.gif] Too bad there is no hall of fame for funny posts - they get buried with new threads and are as good as lost...[:(]




Oliver Heindorf -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/17/2005 1:27:01 PM)

1. Do not forget the complexity of WitP - all other GG games compared to it are childs play imho.

2. I play it since day 1 of the release and I play it almost everyday for a couple of hours. Compared to the playing time, bugs I encountered where minimal. For example : The always counted leader bug - I had never seen it in my games so far. I encountered only some Database glitches ( which almost all are fixed ) and I have 2 Squadrons with planes but no pilots, no idea why, but if you have 100 Squadrons of Aircraft ready, I give a $hit about those 2 squadros anyway.






tsimmonds -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/17/2005 1:56:43 PM)

The only bugs I see are the leader bug and the disappearing unit bug. So far these are mere annoyances, nothing game-stopping. A few of the game's as-designed features are also annoyances, but you either find ways to deal with them (Andrew Brown's map data file mod, house rules, looking the other way) or else you learn to live with them, and hope for further tweaks.[&o]

Ahh, the old familiar smilies. I felt like I'd suddenly stepped into a foreign land where I did not speak the language.




Stavka_lite -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/17/2005 7:46:10 PM)

I particularly like the bug that allows aircraft to be captured and USED!!!!!

The turn I captured Kwajelein base a flight of 6 Rufes(replacements???) landed there and defected<G> to the Allied side. The next turn I was able to change their HQ to CentPac and use them. I didn't though because I thought it was gamey, even against the AI but it was kinda cool to examine the planes<G>




RUPD3658 -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/17/2005 10:28:04 PM)

The bugs are not fatal to the game. In a way they are the "Murphy's Law" element that add a touch of realizm.

Go ahead and but WiTP. You will not be disapointed. I have been playing at least 2 hours a day since July.




The Gnome -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/17/2005 10:57:54 PM)

There are a lot of annoying quirks to the game, but all things considered it's enjoyable to play and is holding my attention over a long period. My frustration stems from the fact that the game could be so much better if certain aspects were changed.




Ron Saueracker -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/17/2005 11:25:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: The Gnome

There are a lot of annoying quirks to the game, but all things considered it's enjoyable to play and is holding my attention over a long period. My frustration stems from the fact that the game could be so much better if certain aspects were changed.


I could not have said it better.




jwilkerson -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/18/2005 12:10:38 AM)

I haven't had the leader bug impact me negatively - though I have had it happen. But the disappearing unit bug ... I did lose an HQ one time when I was flying it between 2 friendly airbases ... 98% of it had arrived at the target air base in previous turns ... I was flying the last tiny bit ... and apparently something happened ... that little piece didn't make it ... and the whole HQ vanished forever. That was a bit more than annoying. The worst case of this I've heard is one guy lost the entire 18UK ... because the final bit of it failed to unload even though most of it had [ the failure to unload was due to enemy action .. but 95% of the division had unloaded in previous turns ]. So this bug seems to be related to an event in which the last final piece of a unit ( the piece with no /1 .. or /15 behind it ) is lost for any reason. This causes the entire unit to disappear. I'd certianly like to see this one fixed.





Zeta16 -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/18/2005 1:59:51 AM)

Losing over 700 AM5's and more AM3 and AM3's to thin is a real bigger bummer. Since this has been happing I can not get any new groups as I can never bulid my pool higher than 24 planes.




scout1 -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/18/2005 2:33:56 AM)

quote:

why is it that so long into its development bugs are still appearing?


Guess you've never used a Microsoft product [:D]
How many patches, how many bugs, ........

Microsoft is the Granddy of the Leader Bug [;)]




Tristanjohn -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/18/2005 4:25:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Wood

Hello...

And, I added over a hundred new features, after release, which added new bugs that had to be fixed in follow up patches.

Have Fun...

Michael Wood


We appreciate any and all support you give the game. Keep it up!




Tristanjohn -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/18/2005 4:27:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Wood

Hello...

And, I added over a hundred new features, after release, which added new bugs that had to be fixed in follow up patches.

Have Fun...

Michael Wood


quote:

ORIGINAL: wild_Willie2

Most of the time the game is running 100% ok, but there are some known bugs like : leader and upgrade bugs.
these bugs SHOUL be finally ironed out in 1.5.

As stated earlier, the game was considered bug free when first shipped, but the database sometimes does some strange things after some playing time, but these bugs are not to bad (most of the time) and the game is VERY much playable (and HIGLY ADDICTIBLE)


We appreciate any and all support you give the game. Keep it up!




ckk -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/18/2005 4:40:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: scout1

quote:

why is it that so long into its development bugs are still appearing?


Guess you've never used a Microsoft product [:D]
How many patches, how many bugs, ........

Microsoft is the Granddy of the Leader Bug [;)]

Well put scout1[:'(] And thanks Mike I guess you guys could have just fixed the bugs and not listened to the WITP community. Naaa you guys pushed it further[&o]




Cmdrcain -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/18/2005 7:32:58 AM)

No games ever bug free, no software ever is, it doesn't even need be microsofts [:D] c-64, Pc-dos, ms-Dos, Tandy-dos etc whatever, theres always bugs.

The serious ones need fixing, otherwise rest are glitchs that can occur also because theres so many different Pc's out there no two Pc are going be exact same, so theres hardware differences and some hardwares may cause a bug to occur where other hardware doesn't...

Now if all PC's were all made to same exact speciications, all using same parts, perhaps bugs occuring would decrease and it also be easier to fix a bug but its not that way..

Toss in also everyone has other programs likely running
and different types, different versions etc and the chance of a bug occuring can be dependent on other software running...

Expect bugs, there always will be,but what one doesn't want is a game so bug ridden its lousy to play (patriot comes to mind)




byron13 -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/19/2005 2:13:08 AM)

C'mon, we need a sticky thread for this type of question!




dtravel -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/25/2005 6:55:04 PM)

Below are a list of just some of the bugs that occured during two weeks of play under the latest patch. After that I just gave up trying to keep listing them:

1) Allied controlled Bangkok reverts to IJA 15th Army.

2) Air units at Bangkok reset the player-selected target to “Commander’s Choice”. Occurs during turn execution before any missions are flown. Most likely a side effect of #1 (above).

3) Level Bombers set to Naval Attack/Rest joining other LB types from the same base in making an Airfield or Port Attack.

4) TFs not moving. Task Forces stopping movement 1 day out from destination, do not move over multiple days even after resetting the destination to the same. Sometimes endurance drops as though they are moving, sometimes it doesn’t. Exiting program and rebooting computer sometimes appears to clear this and get TFs moving again, but not always.

5) Signal Intelligence entries are generated for Canadian bases and for mainland Asia bases captured by the Allies. Happens with captured bases in the Marshall Islands as well.

6) Leaders (mostly ship) replaced at random with officers from other service types (land/air/sea).

7) Unable to change commanders of ships disbanded in port.

8) Ship Commanders already assigned to ships still show up as available for assignment to other ships.

9) Air Missions being concatenated or collapsed into each other. I.E. Squadron 1 at Base A is assigned to attack Base B and mission is initiated in turn execution. Squadron 2 at Base C is assigned to attack Base D and mission is initiated in turn execution. Base B is outside the range of Squadron 2 and Base D is outside the range of Squadron 1. During turn resolution combat animations will show Squadrons 1 and 2 attacking Base B. On map attack vector (base-to-base red line) will only appear from Base A to Base B. Damage will only be done to Base B by Squadron 1 in combat reports but aircraft from both squadrons will be damaged by defenses (both fighters and flak). No attack on Base D will be reported or resolved. (May be related to #3 above.)

10) Some of the above bugs may be caused in part by a memory leak in the program. But this is impossible for a user to confirm, must be investigated by programmer with access to source code. (See #4 above.)

11) Second 40mm Bofors on LSTs has no ammo.

12) Air units with more than 50 aircraft slowly losing aircraft until only 50 remain, and no replacements filling out TO&E above 50. (Probably no maintenance or repairs being done on aircraft over 50 per unit.)

13) Night air-to-air combat causes the program to hang.

14) Australian divisions cannot be recombined if they are divided.

15) Combat animations and reports showing ships being hit by torpedoes when all aircraft involved in the attack are listed as “bombing from X,000 feet”.

16) There is insufficient room in the game database(s) for all the air units in the game; this sometimes prevents units from being divided. It would appear likely that ground and naval units have the same problem. (Related to #12, as this prevents the workaround for that problem.)

17) The Max Strength of carrier based air units is being reset (sometimes higher, sometimes lower) when the host carrier is damaged and part of the air unit gets redirected to a land base.

18) City attack maximum range is one less than for Port or Airfield attacks.

19) Land units do not move to the next hex when they have accumulated the required 60 miles of movement. (Related to #4?)

20) With nothing assigned to computer control, an Air Combat TF was formed by the computer from British ships disbanded at Camranh Bay and an Admiral was assigned to lead the TF. Under computer control the TF then sailed to Japanese controlled Jolo and docked there. Already existing Air Combat TFs docked at Camranh Bay are also pre-empted by computer control and sent to Jolo.

21) The “Follow TF” command does not work if the target is a submarine TF.

22) CL Perth, arrived 05/30/43 as a Cleveland class replacement for lost ship, is a ‘US Army’ unit.

23) LCU Reinforcements arrive one day prior to what is given by the Intelligence window.

24) LCUs moving between Hue and Hanoi do not follow the rail, instead moving inland and using the slower road.

25) Ships transferred from a TF set to “do not unload” to a TF set to “unload cargo” retain the flag to not unload.




Bodhi -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/25/2005 11:39:03 PM)

In a recent thread Mike Wood posted what appeared to be a bug fix line from the next patch readme that was numbered 39, so maybe he's ahead of you?




bradfordkay -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/26/2005 8:24:55 AM)

"In a recent thread Mike Wood posted what appeared to be a bug fix line from the next patch readme that was numbered 39, so maybe he's ahead of you?"

Which is why so many of us are so thankful for the guys at 2by3, even as we whine about those niggling little details. [&o]




Brady -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/26/2005 9:47:13 AM)


I have sean many of the bugs listed above, and to me the only realy anoying thing is having Units disapear, so far the only ones I have lost are freaking HQ's....




Andrew Brown -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/26/2005 10:11:32 AM)

quote:

LCUs moving between Hue and Hanoi do not follow the rail, instead moving inland and using the slower road.


This is a map data bug that I fixed in my LCU movement mod. If you don't like the idea behind my LCU movement mod, then I included a map data file in that mod that includes a lot of map fixes but NOT the LCU movement change.

I actually submitted the list of map fixes that I had accumulated to Matrix many months ago, but only one of them got fixed in 1.4 (or was it 1.3?). I think that they have bigger fish to fry than spend a lot of time fixing the map bugs...




Top Cat -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/26/2005 10:14:30 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: dtravel

Below are a list of just some of the bugs that occured during two weeks of play under the latest patch. After that I just gave up trying to keep listing them:

1) Allied controlled Bangkok reverts to IJA 15th Army.



I had this one too. The Japanese even have planes and pilots sitting on my runways, could be flying missions for all I know! That would suck, enemy planes being repaired and fueled by my crews!

This is my "most wanted" on the bug list.

Cheers
Top Cat




Apollo11 -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/26/2005 10:19:25 AM)

Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: dtravel

Below are a list of just some of the bugs that occured during two weeks of play under the latest patch. After that I just gave up trying to keep listing them:

1) Allied controlled Bangkok reverts to IJA 15th Army.

2) Air units at Bangkok reset the player-selected target to “Commander’s Choice”. Occurs during turn execution before any missions are flown. Most likely a side effect of #1 (above).

3) Level Bombers set to Naval Attack/Rest joining other LB types from the same base in making an Airfield or Port Attack.

4) TFs not moving. Task Forces stopping movement 1 day out from destination, do not move over multiple days even after resetting the destination to the same. Sometimes endurance drops as though they are moving, sometimes it doesn’t. Exiting program and rebooting computer sometimes appears to clear this and get TFs moving again, but not always.

5) Signal Intelligence entries are generated for Canadian bases and for mainland Asia bases captured by the Allies. Happens with captured bases in the Marshall Islands as well.

6) Leaders (mostly ship) replaced at random with officers from other service types (land/air/sea).

7) Unable to change commanders of ships disbanded in port.

8) Ship Commanders already assigned to ships still show up as available for assignment to other ships.

9) Air Missions being concatenated or collapsed into each other. I.E. Squadron 1 at Base A is assigned to attack Base B and mission is initiated in turn execution. Squadron 2 at Base C is assigned to attack Base D and mission is initiated in turn execution. Base B is outside the range of Squadron 2 and Base D is outside the range of Squadron 1. During turn resolution combat animations will show Squadrons 1 and 2 attacking Base B. On map attack vector (base-to-base red line) will only appear from Base A to Base B. Damage will only be done to Base B by Squadron 1 in combat reports but aircraft from both squadrons will be damaged by defenses (both fighters and flak). No attack on Base D will be reported or resolved. (May be related to #3 above.)

10) Some of the above bugs may be caused in part by a memory leak in the program. But this is impossible for a user to confirm, must be investigated by programmer with access to source code. (See #4 above.)

11) Second 40mm Bofors on LSTs has no ammo.

12) Air units with more than 50 aircraft slowly losing aircraft until only 50 remain, and no replacements filling out TO&E above 50. (Probably no maintenance or repairs being done on aircraft over 50 per unit.)

13) Night air-to-air combat causes the program to hang.

14) Australian divisions cannot be recombined if they are divided.

15) Combat animations and reports showing ships being hit by torpedoes when all aircraft involved in the attack are listed as “bombing from X,000 feet”.

16) There is insufficient room in the game database(s) for all the air units in the game; this sometimes prevents units from being divided. It would appear likely that ground and naval units have the same problem. (Related to #12, as this prevents the workaround for that problem.)

17) The Max Strength of carrier based air units is being reset (sometimes higher, sometimes lower) when the host carrier is damaged and part of the air unit gets redirected to a land base.

18) City attack maximum range is one less than for Port or Airfield attacks.

19) Land units do not move to the next hex when they have accumulated the required 60 miles of movement. (Related to #4?)

20) With nothing assigned to computer control, an Air Combat TF was formed by the computer from British ships disbanded at Camranh Bay and an Admiral was assigned to lead the TF. Under computer control the TF then sailed to Japanese controlled Jolo and docked there. Already existing Air Combat TFs docked at Camranh Bay are also pre-empted by computer control and sent to Jolo.

21) The “Follow TF” command does not work if the target is a submarine TF.

22) CL Perth, arrived 05/30/43 as a Cleveland class replacement for lost ship, is a ‘US Army’ unit.

23) LCU Reinforcements arrive one day prior to what is given by the Intelligence window.

24) LCUs moving between Hue and Hanoi do not follow the rail, instead moving inland and using the slower road.

25) Ships transferred from a TF set to “do not unload” to a TF set to “unload cargo” retain the flag to not unload.



Long list... [8D]

BTW, do you have savegame files for above mentioned bugs/problems/issues and have you send it to "Mr. Frag"?

IMHO, that is the only way Matrix/2By3 will look into this.


Leo "Apollo11"




Tristanjohn -> RE: Bug reports after 4 patches? (3/26/2005 10:55:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dtravel

Below are a list of just some of the bugs that occured during two weeks of play under the latest patch. After that I just gave up trying to keep listing them:

1) Allied controlled Bangkok reverts to IJA 15th Army.

2) Air units at Bangkok reset the player-selected target to “Commander’s Choice”. Occurs during turn execution before any missions are flown. Most likely a side effect of #1 (above).

3) Level Bombers set to Naval Attack/Rest joining other LB types from the same base in making an Airfield or Port Attack.

4) TFs not moving. Task Forces stopping movement 1 day out from destination, do not move over multiple days even after resetting the destination to the same. Sometimes endurance drops as though they are moving, sometimes it doesn’t. Exiting program and rebooting computer sometimes appears to clear this and get TFs moving again, but not always.

5) Signal Intelligence entries are generated for Canadian bases and for mainland Asia bases captured by the Allies. Happens with captured bases in the Marshall Islands as well.

6) Leaders (mostly ship) replaced at random with officers from other service types (land/air/sea).

7) Unable to change commanders of ships disbanded in port.

8) Ship Commanders already assigned to ships still show up as available for assignment to other ships.

9) Air Missions being concatenated or collapsed into each other. I.E. Squadron 1 at Base A is assigned to attack Base B and mission is initiated in turn execution. Squadron 2 at Base C is assigned to attack Base D and mission is initiated in turn execution. Base B is outside the range of Squadron 2 and Base D is outside the range of Squadron 1. During turn resolution combat animations will show Squadrons 1 and 2 attacking Base B. On map attack vector (base-to-base red line) will only appear from Base A to Base B. Damage will only be done to Base B by Squadron 1 in combat reports but aircraft from both squadrons will be damaged by defenses (both fighters and flak). No attack on Base D will be reported or resolved. (May be related to #3 above.)

10) Some of the above bugs may be caused in part by a memory leak in the program. But this is impossible for a user to confirm, must be investigated by programmer with access to source code. (See #4 above.)

11) Second 40mm Bofors on LSTs has no ammo.

12) Air units with more than 50 aircraft slowly losing aircraft until only 50 remain, and no replacements filling out TO&E above 50. (Probably no maintenance or repairs being done on aircraft over 50 per unit.)

13) Night air-to-air combat causes the program to hang.

14) Australian divisions cannot be recombined if they are divided.

15) Combat animations and reports showing ships being hit by torpedoes when all aircraft involved in the attack are listed as “bombing from X,000 feet”.

16) There is insufficient room in the game database(s) for all the air units in the game; this sometimes prevents units from being divided. It would appear likely that ground and naval units have the same problem. (Related to #12, as this prevents the workaround for that problem.)

17) The Max Strength of carrier based air units is being reset (sometimes higher, sometimes lower) when the host carrier is damaged and part of the air unit gets redirected to a land base.

18) City attack maximum range is one less than for Port or Airfield attacks.

19) Land units do not move to the next hex when they have accumulated the required 60 miles of movement. (Related to #4?)

20) With nothing assigned to computer control, an Air Combat TF was formed by the computer from British ships disbanded at Camranh Bay and an Admiral was assigned to lead the TF. Under computer control the TF then sailed to Japanese controlled Jolo and docked there. Already existing Air Combat TFs docked at Camranh Bay are also pre-empted by computer control and sent to Jolo.

21) The “Follow TF” command does not work if the target is a submarine TF.

22) CL Perth, arrived 05/30/43 as a Cleveland class replacement for lost ship, is a ‘US Army’ unit.

23) LCU Reinforcements arrive one day prior to what is given by the Intelligence window.

24) LCUs moving between Hue and Hanoi do not follow the rail, instead moving inland and using the slower road.

25) Ships transferred from a TF set to “do not unload” to a TF set to “unload cargo” retain the flag to not unload.



Not to be cruel, but I could add substantially to your list easily. I'm worn out, though. I post occasionally to the support forum, where I am usually ignored, and constantly bring stuff up in this forum that goes back to UV. One wonders what v1.5 might look like. I have my fingers crossed but I'm not holding my breath.





Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
4.28125