v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (Full Version)

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



Message

Erik Rutins -> v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/10/2005 6:41:32 AM)

These are the two new items for v1.52:

1) Build 1.51 introduced a “dot base” continual attack bug. Fixed.

2) When units received massive replacements, there was no experience reduction. Fixed.

We could use some testing on both once it's released, particularly computer vs. computer to see how the replacement exp reduction is working long-term and whether fix #1 introduces any AI garrisoning bugs.

Here's how the exp loss should work:

For each element (squad/gun) when it comes into a unit, a check is made to determine if the experience will drop by one point. Exp never drops if the exp is already under 51. The check is:

If Rnd(dif)>Rnd(wpn) and Rnd(exp).50 then subtract 1 from exp.

dif = Number of elements in TOE - Number of elements currently in the unit
wpn = Number of elements in the unit
exp = current experience

Units over 50 Exp should see a drop in exp as they get replacements, but slowly and only if large numbers of the unit were lost. Unist only slightly above 50 Exp won't see much decline. By our calculations, a 60 exp division that loses 20% of the unit will only lose around 3-5 points by the time it has rebuilt to full strength.

Looking at the formula, it seems that it is meant to function for divisions with many hundreds of elements, but smaller units with smaller actual numbers of elements lost will probably not be hit much even with high percentage losses. Let me know if you are seeing no exp loss at all by units over 50 exp once you install v1.52.

Regards,

- Erik



Erik Rutins -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/10/2005 8:37:48 AM)

As a heads up for modders, Paul just finished what should be the final file set for 1.52, which will hopefully end up as the official patch. Here's the OOB change list, thanks as always to Paul for his work on these.

Data Base Corrections for Patch 1.52

Fixed facing issue of Colorado Class 12/41 forward turret Scenarios 15-16
Fixed facing issue for North Carolina Class 20 mm (1203) 4/43 all scenarios
Fixed facing issue for South Dakota Class 20 mm (1205) 1/44 all scenarios
Fixed device list order for (336) O-19 class, subs should now be able to reload mines from MLE, all scenarios
Fixed device 294 Japanese 4.7 DP gun is now DP Gun
Fixed device 451 Allied 155mm Field gun is now Army Weapon.
Changed device 278 Japanese 20mm AA/AT gun to AA Weapon
Change aircraft slot #52 KI-45 KA1b Nick to maximum load 1102.
Device (61) Allied 4"/45 is now DP
Reduced the replacement rate of B-17E from 25 to 10, and weapon slot #12 (B-17E) of the Seattle location (#853) from 50 to 30. (Total B-17E production now 40 units per month, Campaign scenarios only)

Changed the Following Japanese device Penetration / Anti-Armor values.
Device 292 3" DP Gun 25 / 25
Device 293 4.7" CD Gun 50 / 50
Device 294 4.7" DP Gun 50 / 50
Device 295 5.5" CD Gun 60 / 60
Device 296 8" CD Gun 190 / 190

Regards,

- Erik



myros -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/10/2005 4:03:59 PM)

Im guessing the OOB changes are for a future update release and not actualy in 1.52 yet right? Before we start posting bug reports on the reported changes :) (ie the b17e rates are unchanged)

M




Mr.Frag -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/10/2005 4:13:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: myros

Im guessing the OOB changes are for a future update release and not actualy in 1.52 yet right? Before we start posting bug reports on the reported changes :) (ie the b17e rates are unchanged)

M




Correct, will be kicked out separately



scout1 -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/10/2005 4:17:48 PM)

quote:

Correct, will be kicked out separately


Why would it really matter either way ? If bundled with v1.52 the OOB changes won't/shouldn't impact existing games (pbem anyways). Or have I oversimplified something again [&:]



Mr.Frag -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/10/2005 4:27:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: scout1

quote:

Correct, will be kicked out separately


Why would it really matter either way ? If bundled with v1.52 the OOB changes won't/shouldn't impact existing games (pbem anyways). Or have I oversimplified something again [&:]


Yes, you have. [:'(]

Code comes from Mike ... Erik packages

OOB comes from Pry to Mike ... Erik packages

Extra step called "Pry has a life"

Some of the fixes such as sub mine loading while being code based also have an OOB part (code fixed to load device two, but oob fixed to put mine dispenser *in* device slot 2). To test them end to end requires both parts of the fix or you jumping in the editor yourself. [;)]

Obviously OOB changes only impact fresh games, but at the same time, testing things to be sure they work properly without the OOB changes means they will not pass the test. Catch-22 [:D]

Remember the goal of testing ... it is not having fun and playing a game, it is hard boring work doing the same thing over and over again. [;)]



scout1 -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/10/2005 7:01:01 PM)

quote:

Yes, you have.

Code comes from Mike ... Erik packages

OOB comes from Pry to Mike ... Erik packages

Extra step called "Pry has a life"


Now it's my turn to say, "Yeah but ....."

Erik listed OOB changes that already are included in the v1.52beta so these would already be inclusive of the patch, unless ......

a) There are additional OOB changes that are to be made, but not in v1.52beta
at this point
b) ????

[:'(]



Mr.Frag -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/10/2005 7:06:37 PM)

quote:

b) ????


(a) You could have waited longer for 1.52 and got the OOB stuff included.

or

(b) You could have gotten the 1.52 code fixes now.

Since the Dot base headache was hurting peoples ability to play existing games, (b) was the preferred path.



scout1 -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/10/2005 7:12:17 PM)

quote:

Data Base Corrections for Patch 1.52

Fixed facing issue of Colorado Class 12/41 forward turret Scenarios 15-16
Fixed facing issue for North Carolina Class 20 mm (1203) 4/43 all scenarios
Fixed facing issue for South Dakota Class 20 mm (1205) 1/44 all scenarios
Fixed device list order for (336) O-19 class, subs should now be able to reload mines from MLE, all scenarios
Fixed device 294 Japanese 4.7 DP gun is now DP Gun
Fixed device 451 Allied 155mm Field gun is now Army Weapon.
Changed device 278 Japanese 20mm AA/AT gun to AA Weapon
Change aircraft slot #52 KI-45 KA1b Nick to maximum load 1102.
Device (61) Allied 4"/45 is now DP
Reduced the replacement rate of B-17E from 25 to 10, and weapon slot #12 (B-17E) of the Seattle location (#853) from 50 to 30. (Total B-17E production now 40 units per month, Campaign scenarios only)

Changed the Following Japanese device Penetration / Anti-Armor values.
Device 292 3" DP Gun 25 / 25
Device 293 4.7" CD Gun 50 / 50
Device 294 4.7" DP Gun 50 / 50
Device 295 5.5" CD Gun 60 / 60
Device 296 8" CD Gun 190 / 190


Not trying to be a pain, but what I'm asking is that v1.52beta "appears" to include OOB stuff. See Erik's post. Now either
a) The OOB stuff listed isn't in the actual v1.52beta and will be released later (True/False)
b) The OOB stuff listed is in the actual v.152beta, but there are other OOB changes that
will be released later (True/False) [which means it is not inclusive of all OOB changes]
c) ????

All I ws trying to understand was whether the beta version contained the OOB changes or not. From Erik's post, I assumed yes. From your post, I read No. Just looking for a tie reaker before I go run a port bombing test case with AA units.




Erik Rutins -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/10/2005 7:19:08 PM)

Sorry if I was unclear, here's the (hopefully) clear answer:

Released to date:

v1.51 updated executable
v1.52 updated executable (replaces v1.51)

Not yet released:

v1.52 updated OOBs

I posted the OOB change list to give modders a heads up. The OOBs are still being looked at in internal testing. They may come out this weekend or early next week. They may be released together with a new v1.53 version of the executable.

So, no OOB updates are included in the v1.52 beta installer, just the exe changes.

Regards,

- Erik



Mr.Frag -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/10/2005 7:19:09 PM)

quote:

All I ws trying to understand was whether the beta version contained the OOB changes or not. From Erik's post, I assumed yes. From your post, I read No. Just looking for a tie reaker before I go run a port bombing test case with AA units.


The patch does not include the scenario files. They are about 9 megs worth. The executable is only a meg. When the patch is 10 megs vs 2 megs, you know they are included.



thebeis -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/10/2005 11:09:15 PM)

Scenario 12, Version 1.52, Japan AI, Allies Me.

Dot Bases do appear to be fixed.
Auto Convoy appears to be working.

Not sure if the "experience" drop applies to air units. Had massive "get pilot" performed on several units. Many took over 50%. Experience never dropped. Morale decreased and Fatigue increased.




Mr.Frag -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/10/2005 11:16:33 PM)

quote:

Not sure if the "experience" drop applies to air units. Had massive "get pilot" performed on several units. Many took over 50%. Experience never dropped. Morale decreased and Fatigue increased.


Land units only. Pilots have their own exp tracked separately.



Nikademus -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/10/2005 11:26:37 PM)

also note that when you click "Get pilot" and fill out an airgroup, the overall exp value will not recalculate until the following turn.



scout1 -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/11/2005 6:34:23 PM)

quote:

also note that when you click "Get pilot" and fill out an airgroup, the overall exp value will not recalculate until the following turn

When are the new pilots available for operations, the turn of "Get Pilot" or the turn after ?
If the first one, then I could have a airgroup of 26 ac, 1 pilot, Exp 99, fill out the remaining 25 slots, attack that same turn with an airgroup exp of 99. Then the following turn, they morph into a airgroup with low experience .....[&:]



Mr.Frag -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/11/2005 6:37:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: scout1

quote:

also note that when you click "Get pilot" and fill out an airgroup, the overall exp value will not recalculate until the following turn

When are the new pilots available for operations, the turn of "Get Pilot" or the turn after ?
If the first one, then I could have a airgroup of 26 ac, 1 pilot, Exp 99, fill out the remaining 25 slots, attack that same turn with an airgroup exp of 99. Then the following turn, they morph into a airgroup with low experience .....[&:]


Immediately. The exp shown has no effect on the mission outcome as it uses the real exp values, not the warm and fuzzy displayed value on the panel. The average is for display only.



bradfordkay -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/11/2005 6:42:19 PM)

Thanks for not including the OOB changes in v1.52 beta. I wanted to get rid of the v1.51 dot base bug, but the Japanese are threatening to try another invasion of Wake and I have two CD units there waiting to take them on.



Nikademus -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/12/2005 3:42:04 AM)

The new pilots are available immediately, the code simply doesn't recalculate the display value for the average experience of the squadron until the next turn. Doesn't impact combat resolution.



JamesM -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/12/2005 5:53:51 PM)

I do not know if this has already been mentioned.

When I load land units onto transports it seems that (even though there is enough capcity) a small chunck is left behind.

I have not noticed this in previous versions.



Erik Rutins -> RE: v1.52 Beta - Bug Reports Thread (6/12/2005 6:49:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jamesm
I do not know if this has already been mentioned.
When I load land units onto transports it seems that (even though there is enough capcity) a small chunck is left behind.
I have not noticed this in previous versions.


This has always been the case in my experience - there's a certain amount of inefficiency in the loading process. If you have a unit that needs 3800 to load and you load it on a single 4000 AP, for example, some might be left behind. Best to add another 2000 AP to split the unit and make sure you have more than enough room.

Regards,

- Erik



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.234375