Question on Beta 1.7.11.17 "E" Version (Full Version)

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



Message

1EyedJacks -> Question on Beta 1.7.11.17 "E" Version (10/3/2012 5:49:03 AM)

Why did the Destination change from this to Canton which is in the next post?





[image]local://upfiles/20162/4EFFED54739145B68138FC445058AD0A.jpg[/image]



1EyedJacks -> RE: Version 1.7.11.17 "D" Version (10/3/2012 5:51:53 AM)

Next pic...



[image]local://upfiles/20162/58D226019D8A4B69B1AC17E629E8E9A0.jpg[/image]



1EyedJacks -> RE: Version 1.7.11.17 "D" Version (10/3/2012 5:55:34 AM)

Turn



1EyedJacks -> RE: Version 1.7.11.17 "D" Version (10/3/2012 6:08:04 AM)

There were other things that went on during the processing of the turn that looked different than what I'm used to seeing in a PBEM. But I can't tell if it's just a sync error or some glitches in the way the "movie" is played or if it's something deeper tied to orders.

It's early in the game and I just want to make sure we don't have a glitch in the works.

Thanks for any assistance/insight you can give.

TTFN,

Mike



JeffK -> RE: Version 1.7.11.17 "D" Version (10/3/2012 6:36:18 AM)

Because they had a combat and got smashed, are they now heading for the nearest port?

You might want to alter the destination to Swatow rather than fight past Hong Kong!

(I also notice the TF number, leader & flagship changed? Also due to the combat?)



koniu -> RE: Version 1.7.11.17 "D" Version (10/3/2012 7:30:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffK
(I also notice the TF number, leader & flagship changed? Also due to the combat?)


Flag ship change because flag was moved to less damage ship ergo new TF commander.
As for number it change because mission change from combat to Escort and each mission have own pool of TF numbers

PS Move them to Swatow or Takao. They are not in sinking condition so you can go direct to Takao.




JeffK -> RE: Version 1.7.11.17 "D" Version (10/3/2012 8:37:40 AM)

Thought so, but I am avoiding sounding like I know everything.

(Even though I do, I think)



Sardaukar -> RE: Version 1.7.11.17 "D" Version (10/3/2012 1:11:04 PM)

It's because they are heavily damaged. Thus, destination changes to nearest available friendly port with sufficient size for emergency repairs.



Puhis -> RE: Version 1.7.11.17 "D" Version (10/3/2012 1:17:31 PM)

Yes. Small problem is that they are going past Hong Kong. IMO not very good idea... [:)]



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Version 1.7.11.17 "D" Version (10/3/2012 1:45:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: 1EyedJacks

Next pic...



[image]local://upfiles/20162/58D226019D8A4B69B1AC17E629E8E9A0.jpg[/image]


Mike IDed this potential problem to me in e-mail. I have not read his aAR (onviously), nor have I seen the combat replay. My quesiton/concern is those three Allied TFs near the damaged Japanese DDs. I have no idea what they could be. OK, one idea, but three?

I don't know how the Japanese work, but I've never seen the code try to route an Escort TF (due to damage) past an enemy CD base and up a river. This looks strange.

Question for Mike: we are playing the 'E' version of the beta, right? Not the 'D'?



1EyedJacks -> RE: Version 1.7.11.17 "D" Version (10/3/2012 2:43:31 PM)

Good catch Steve - the E Version. Sorry for any confusion. I see units on my side that seemed to perform other orders.

For the TFs it's hard for me to parse out as some (like the pair of DDs) had multiple engagements.




Dan Nichols -> RE: Version 1.7.11.17 "D" Version (10/3/2012 4:01:05 PM)

To be honest, I am having the same problem with a couple of damaged subs and I am not using the beta patch. I have two Dutch subs that will not return to either Perth or Colombo but will move to the nearest large port and disband. So I wonder if it is in the latest patch or something old.



witpqs -> RE: Version 1.7.11.17 "D" Version (10/3/2012 4:05:11 PM)

From what I remember that is a very old thing and I always interpreted it as the commander's discretion that the damage was great enough to warrant diverting to the nearest appropriate port. "Appropriate" being also the commander's discretion!



Dan Nichols -> RE: Version 1.7.11.17 "D" Version (10/3/2012 4:23:01 PM)

I have one that wants to go to Batavia, but there are Japanese forces there and I expect them to take it in a turn or two. I would hate to lose that sub
because of that( it is O-20, one of my few mine layers.)



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Version 1.7.11.17 "D" Version (10/3/2012 9:18:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: 1EyedJacks

Good catch Steve - the E Version. Sorry for any confusion. I see units on my side that seemed to perform other orders.

For the TFs it's hard for me to parse out as some (like the pair of DDs) had multiple engagements.




In case you see this before the e-mail, I did have DDs there, the HK refugees. I had routed them on Day 1 of a three day turn prep. Forgot them. They did quite well, aided by a collision. [:)]

I didn't see anything wonky in the combat replay you sent. The retreat to an up-river base seems odd, but maybe it's WAD. Probably is WAD.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.1464844