Matrix Games Forums

Deal of the Week: Combat Command Return to the Moon on October 31st! Commander: The Great War iPad Wallpapers Generals of the Great WarDeal of the Week Panzer CorpsNew Strategy Titles Join the FamilyTablet Version of Qvadriga gets new patchNew Command Ops: Battles from the Bulge UpdateCommand gets a huge update!Sign up for the Sovereignty beta!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 January 2012 (2nd part)

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Tech Support >> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 January 2012 (2nd part) Page: <<   < prev  50 51 [52] 53 54   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/25/2012 1:37:11 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
michaelm,
Thanks for the clarification. I'll run some tests this weekend as I really don't recall ( and can't find ) cases in my previous games where more than 200 strike aircraft were ever shot down irrespective of CAP. It may be my memory failing but it is worth setting up a late-war testbed and checking anyways.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 1531
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/25/2012 2:01:45 PM   
michaelm


Posts: 9049
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
The same applies to fighter vs bombers.
Each fighter flight (left alive from the earlier CAP vs Escort fight) attempts to engage a bomber flight.
If successful, then each fighter plane in that flight attacks one or more bombers in the bomber flight.


_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1532
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/25/2012 4:22:36 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Question: ( just to help me get my head around it ).

If there are 50 flights of fighters ( say 400 planes with 8 planes a flight ) and 400 bombers in 100 flights do 50 flights of fighters (400 fighters) engage 50 flights of bombers (200 bombers)?

If so, once all of the bombers are shot down ( let's assume each firing pass results in a kill to keep things simple ) do the 50 flights look for more bomber flights to attack or is each flight "exhausted" by combat with an enemy flight?

I'm asking because clarifying this is going to really help make any testing more valid and, obviously, it wasn't working quite the way I initially read it.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 1533
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/25/2012 5:05:49 PM   
kfsgo

 

Posts: 445
Joined: 9/16/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H


Missed that one but think it's wrong. These small commando units were used in small raids and should be capable of landing at an enemy base in combat mode.


They can't land in combat mode, but units can load onto transport submarines (and land at enemy bases) in 'move' mode. If I remember right they'll automatically shock attack if there's an enemy unit there; not 100% sure. They definitely can land, though.

(in reply to Chris H)
Post #: 1534
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/25/2012 5:42:03 PM   
beppi

 

Posts: 382
Joined: 3/11/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Question: ( just to help me get my head around it ).

If there are 50 flights of fighters ( say 400 planes with 8 planes a flight ) and 400 bombers in 100 flights do 50 flights of fighters (400 fighters) engage 50 flights of bombers (200 bombers)?

If so, once all of the bombers are shot down ( let's assume each firing pass results in a kill to keep things simple ) do the 50 flights look for more bomber flights to attack or is each flight "exhausted" by combat with an enemy flight?

I'm asking because clarifying this is going to really help make any testing more valid and, obviously, it wasn't working quite the way I initially read it.


I just again want to "comment" you post. I am quite sure that Michaelm will respond to your post and i hope you do not have a "problem" with me commenting it. But usually it is easier to if you use extremes to show how it works.

Assume you have 8 fighter on CAP. The fighters are superhuman, indestructible, always hit, always kill, cannot be damaged and so on. Just superhuman. They are in range, they always engage and so on. And they always kill.

Assume we have 800 bombers coming in. They are put into 100 groups.

So out CAP group engages the first group of bombers. Shots down all 8. Then our cap group engages the next group. Shots down all 8. Continue that for 100 "passes" until all incoming bombers are shot down.

From my understanding a firing pass is not actual a "firing pass". Instead it is a round of combat with 8 planes against 8 planes. As soon as two groups engage the actual combat kicks in. So they climb, drop, evade, accelerate, are in position, are out of position, shoot, hit, miss, suffer lack of fuel, suffer lack of ammo.

If you have time try a test with a lot of groups of fighters with enough forward firing guns, 99 accuracy, 99 effect, enough speed, 99 exp pilots, 99 AA skill, 99 durability against a group of bombers with no defensive guns, 1 durability, nor MVR (1), 1ex pilots, 1 AA skill. Just test the best against the worst. Then in theory it should be possible to shoot down > 200 planes. I will test it, but i cannot do it today.



In general a quite good model of combat. Problem i see is the factor "time" which is not really taken into account and this results in the "200 firing passes."

Actually i am no sure if it is even possible to implement but some sort of combat slots would be better.

As example:

We have 400 bombers coming in. We put them into 50 groups of 8 planes.

We have 400 fighers in cap. We put them again into 50 groups of 8 planes.
Detection range is 60 minutes. A combat slot is assumed as 10 minutes. And we have

I only take into account the combat until the target is hit. I do not take into account the 60 minutes it takes for the attacking planes to actual leave again. (Then you would have 13 slots -> 60 minutes to the target, 60 minutes to leave.)

So we have 7 time groups. The first time group are plane groups which are in range at the begin (T0). Second group is planes which are in range at T10. Third group are in range at T20. 6th group are in range at T60 (end of combat). 7th group are planes which do not participate.

So lets assume:

We have 10 groups (80 fighers) which are in range at T0(0 minutes -> detection until 9 minutes)
We have 10 groups in T10. 10 groups in T20, 10 groups in T30. 10 groups in T40, 10 groups in T50, 10 groups in T60 and 20 groups in T70 (which will never reach the incoming planes only on the approach).

So combat starts.

The 10 groups in T0 have 10 passes on the incoming planes. All other planes are out of range.
Lets assume, 2 groups get completely disabled (all planes out of fuel, out of ammo, destroyed, damaged). 8 groups still have combat ready planes. After all 10 groups have done their pass (or combat slot) the remaining 8 groups which are still combat worthy are added into the group T10.

Then T10 starts. We now have 18 groups in T10. So we have 18 firing passes (8 from T0, 10 from T10). After the combat 5 groups which started the combat at T10 are no longer combat worthy and 2 groups which started at T0 leave combat. So at the end of T10 we have 11 groups lefts (6 which entered combat at T0, 5 which entered at T10). So at the end of combat -> we put the 11 groups into T20.

Then T20 starts. Now we have 21 groups in T20 -> so 21 firing passes.
And so on and so on.

That would allow a dynamic system which does not kill small style combat and works in large style combat. Have doubt that i ever will get implemented and again i know that i am "oversimplifying" the problem cause there is much more which needs to be taken into account. I think such things would need a "WITP Grand Admiral Edition".

For me the basic problem is that you cannot squeeze a dynamic outcome of individual events into one fixed value.





< Message edited by beppi -- 1/25/2012 5:49:46 PM >

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1535
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 12:15:21 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
beppi,
No problem at all with you commenting. You've been right so far and have helped move the discussion forward so that's all good ( particularly the bit about you being right in your grasp of the combat model ).

What you've outlined in this post is how I ASSUME the combat model is working - each flight engages enemy flights in series until it runs out of "time" ( however that's calculated ) but given that I was wrong in my grasp of what a firing pass meant I'd rather check to avoid any additional misunderstandings since my goal isn't just to harp on and critique the game. I'm honestly trying to figure out if this model is working as designed and is giving reasonable results.



_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to beppi)
Post #: 1536
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 1:16:25 AM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6576
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline
Donít have an issue with what Brother Mathias is saying. Heís being very tactical and quite forthright. Just think about it.

My take is that the title is pretty much over. Itís worthwhile to fix bugs and such, but anything else is an attempt to stave off entropy. Entropy happens. People get bored. Things get tweaked.

The opposite of entropy is creativity. Making creative modifications, and explaining how and why, seems to work for many hundreds of people. Making piecewise tweaks to hold off entropy, for a few, just seems to make entropy everyone else so much harder.

Seems this thread topic has become the latest home for the loudest whiners. Strange they should decide to play here instead of the main forum, but perhaps not so strange if one thinks about it. Nevertheless, this thread is supposed to be about technical bugs. It has been hijacked long ago by #$%^^&**($ wannabes. So sad, but thatís what you get.

Babes people are negotiating with Matrix about letting us have our own code. A very bad thing for the game in general, I admit, but we just canít continue with the present code being jerked around by someone who doesnít understand the nominal algorithm.

Sorry, but there it is. Whine, scream, bitch, moan, hate, all you want. I think Mathias is right and Michael should sit back and take stock. Meanwhile, entropy progresses and there ainít nothing that nobody can do about it.

Ciao.


_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1537
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 1:40:39 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 3627
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
JWE,

Are you hinting that down the line, there is a possibility of DaBabes going commercial, a sort of AE II?

By commercial I mean a sort of add on which can be bought and supported by the DaBabes developers. If so that is quite an appealing possibility. It would only be proper for some recompense be made for all the gratis work provided to date.

Alfred

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 1538
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 2:05:44 AM   
SuluSea


Posts: 2053
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

Donít have an issue with what Brother Mathias is saying. Heís being very tactical and quite forthright. Just think about it.

My take is that the title is pretty much over. Itís worthwhile to fix bugs and such, but anything else is an attempt to stave off entropy. Entropy happens. People get bored. Things get tweaked.

The opposite of entropy is creativity. Making creative modifications, and explaining how and why, seems to work for many hundreds of people. Making piecewise tweaks to hold off entropy, for a few, just seems to make entropy everyone else so much harder.

Seems this thread topic has become the latest home for the loudest whiners. Strange they should decide to play here instead of the main forum, but perhaps not so strange if one thinks about it. Nevertheless, this thread is supposed to be about technical bugs. It has been hijacked long ago by #$%^^&**($ wannabes. So sad, but thatís what you get.

Babes people are negotiating with Matrix about letting us have our own code. A very bad thing for the game in general, I admit, but we just canít continue with the present code being jerked around by someone who doesnít understand the nominal algorithm.

Sorry, but there it is. Whine, scream, bitch, moan, hate, all you want. I think Mathias is right and Michael should sit back and take stock. Meanwhile, entropy progresses and there ainít nothing that nobody can do about it.

Ciao.



I'm onboard with Matt as well. No matter what is done someone will always be able to exploit it for their own gaming benefit.

MichealM has done an outstanding job but I'm afraid being he's a nice accommodating person he's being tugged along an avenue by some in which the finished patch may not be as good as the prior beta's.

Hopefully your negotiations pay dividends, always a fan of the modders and people that sacrifice for the community as a whole.



_____________________________


ĒHow strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!Ē ~ Samuel Adams

(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 1539
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 2:13:36 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1575
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
It's over when it's over.


quote:

ORIGINAL: SuluSea
...he's being tugged along an avenue by some in which the finished patch may not be as good as the prior beta's.

??? So fixing late air war makes the game worse not better, yea sure

< Message edited by BigDuke66 -- 1/26/2012 2:16:55 AM >


_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club

"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 1540
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 2:45:11 AM   
zuluhour


Posts: 3088
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline
wow, to deep.

witp-ae

witp-ae forumites

michaelm (and Alfred) for giving a sh*t when they probably don't have to.

I'd like to have all of you over for a bull roast.



< Message edited by zuluhour -- 1/26/2012 2:50:40 AM >

(in reply to SuluSea)
Post #: 1541
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 2:55:43 AM   
michaelm


Posts: 9049
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Question: ( just to help me get my head around it ).

If there are 50 flights of fighters ( say 400 planes with 8 planes a flight ) and 400 bombers in 100 flights do 50 flights of fighters (400 fighters) engage 50 flights of bombers (200 bombers)?

If so, once all of the bombers are shot down ( let's assume each firing pass results in a kill to keep things simple ) do the 50 flights look for more bomber flights to attack or is each flight "exhausted" by combat with an enemy flight?

I'm asking because clarifying this is going to really help make any testing more valid and, obviously, it wasn't working quite the way I initially read it.

If the fighter flight still have planes that haven't 'withdrawn' after engaging the bomber flight, then they have a chance be selected again to fight in that same raid.

The CAP participating in one raid does not exclude them from partaking in attacking other raids in the same hex.

_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1542
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 3:20:09 AM   
Budman


Posts: 33
Joined: 7/4/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

Donít have an issue with what Brother Mathias is saying. Heís being very tactical and quite forthright. Just think about it.

My take is that the title is pretty much over. Itís worthwhile to fix bugs and such, but anything else is an attempt to stave off entropy. Entropy happens. People get bored. Things get tweaked.

The opposite of entropy is creativity. Making creative modifications, and explaining how and why, seems to work for many hundreds of people. Making piecewise tweaks to hold off entropy, for a few, just seems to make entropy everyone else so much harder.

Seems this thread topic has become the latest home for the loudest whiners. Strange they should decide to play here instead of the main forum, but perhaps not so strange if one thinks about it. Nevertheless, this thread is supposed to be about technical bugs. It has been hijacked long ago by #$%^^&**($ wannabes. So sad, but thatís what you get.

Babes people are negotiating with Matrix about letting us have our own code. A very bad thing for the game in general, I admit, but we just canít continue with the present code being jerked around by someone who doesnít understand the nominal algorithm.

Sorry, but there it is. Whine, scream, bitch, moan, hate, all you want. I think Mathias is right and Michael should sit back and take stock. Meanwhile, entropy progresses and there ainít nothing that nobody can do about it.

Ciao.



I'm sorry, but the fixes Michael have made have dramatically improved the game since the last official patch. At least an effort is made to correct some of the more glaring shortcomings that are now evident as the game has had more exposure to more experienced 'game thinking' as well as the later war period.

These improvements don't just make the game better for a few, but also a large silent majority. If some change was so objectionable, I'm sure that more than a few people would speak up.
His efforts are commendable in making a product that we enjoy, even better.

As for entropy - whatever. This game, unlike many others has not left my drive since I bought it.

You can critique Michael if you wish, but in doing so you (and a select group of others) come across as elitist, know-it-all jerks.


(in reply to JWE)
Post #: 1543
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 3:37:17 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4717
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline
[edit]
Removed because I didn't want to lock the thread.

And as it would happen we're arguing about changes that haven't even made it into the "official" beta yet...

The late war air combat model should be tested more and I honestly can't understand how anyone could be against this.

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 1/26/2012 4:08:49 AM >


_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to Budman)
Post #: 1544
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 3:51:53 AM   
michaelm


Posts: 9049
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
Guys, please calm down.

I don't want to see this thread locked.

If we are gong to continue to discuss aspects not directly related to bugs or changes in this beta (inc the air rounds) can we move it to another thread. This discussion is making it hard for me to identify posts that relate to possible bugs.

It is possible that you will the official beta (based on R9) soon.



_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 1545
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 4:28:52 AM   
michaelm


Posts: 9049
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
Just for information before I 'duck and cover'.
I am the one who implemented the code for the air combat based on feedback from Elf.
As part of that, I am the one who pick 200 as the magic number based on a crash course of reading/researching about dogfights. I can't recall (from 2yrs ago) reading lots of instances of 1000 CAP fighters defending against 1000 escort fighters in a single raid from day 1 in the Pacific War.


< Message edited by michaelm -- 1/26/2012 4:29:35 AM >


_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 1546
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 4:47:32 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1575
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
As this topic came from this thread:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2989021
we should continue discussion there.

_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club

"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 1547
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 5:13:17 AM   
Itdepends

 

Posts: 692
Joined: 12/12/2005
Status: offline
Hmmm- so some people don't like the changes being made to the exe? The one that their being "forced" to use? Ahh - but if they don't use the new exe's they don't get the advantage of all the interface improvements made by Michael. I would take that as a backhanded compliment to Michaels work- they like the improvements he made so much that they can't bear to be unable to use them due to some of the other changes he's made.

Kind of like saying- I really like you're work- but only if you work on the bits that I want you to.

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 1548
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 5:28:04 AM   
michaelm


Posts: 9049
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
For those with a screen resolution ?? x 768 running in window mode, the last line with the industry icons tend to get cut off when centered at a base.

The latest beta (r9) allows you to pull down the game window to maximize this area. As a result it moves the screen so that the Windows info line (one showing the program name) gets cut off instead.

I only noticed this once I start using my new laptop which has 1322x768 as its default resolution and doesn't support any higher than 768. My other PCs use to have ??x800 or wider as the default or supported resolutions.


_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to Itdepends)
Post #: 1549
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 6:01:24 AM   
sdevault


Posts: 140
Joined: 10/28/2008
Status: offline
Thanks michaelm for all the updates and answers to questions!

You have helped me enjoy this gem of a game so much more. The WITP games I waited for 25 years for and I will continue to enjoy them for another 25 years. If ever I live that long.

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 1550
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 6:35:20 AM   
JeffK


Posts: 5108
Joined: 1/26/2005
From: Back in the Office, Can I get my tin hut back!
Status: offline
Maybe a small improvement to the chrome.
(I dont bother with combat animations)
After a combat you get a combat report, the spacing between lines is generous and you cant see the results without clicking on the box, as the game has so many small combats you click hundreds of times to see what's happening.
Can some of the spacing be minimized, so that 1 unit v 1 unit fits on the screen (Donth bother with GJ v Rader sized battles)

Plus, can the box be moved to a corner rather than right of the point of combat.

Morning Air attack on Kunming , at 69,48

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid spotted at 15 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes

Japanese aircraft
     G4M1 Betty x 20



Japanese aircraft losses
     G4M1 Betty: 1 damaged


Allied ground losses:
     4 casualties reported
        Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
        Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
        Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled


Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 53

Aircraft Attacking:
     20 x G4M1 Betty bombing from 5000 feet
              Airfield Attack:  2 x 250 kg GP Bomb,  4 x 60 kg GP Bomb

Morning Air attack on Kunming , at 69,48Weather in hex: Overcast
Raid spotted at 15 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes
Japanese aircraft
     G4M1 Betty x 20
Japanese aircraft losses
     G4M1 Betty: 1 damaged
Allied ground losses:
     4 casualties reported
        Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
        Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
        Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 53
Aircraft Attacking:
     20 x G4M1 Betty bombing from 5000 feet
              Airfield Attack:  2 x 250 kg GP Bomb,  4 x 60 kg GP Bomb




_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to sdevault)
Post #: 1551
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 7:47:38 AM   
michaelm


Posts: 9049
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
From memory, the report is centered on the map. This was fine when wide-screen support wasn't present.

However, changing to draw from the corner would involve creating a new screen drawing option. This involves modifying the old game engine which I am reluctant to do at this time. Also, the combat report (and the engine) would need to be aware that it is wide screen and if there is room to move the report in order to see the combat hex (which I assume you want to).

Yea, the spacing is funny sometimes. It spaces out and reserves lines for somethings that aren't displayed.
Again reluctant to change this in case it breaks the combat tool that some wrote.
(I have been accused of breaking too many things already.)


_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to JeffK)
Post #: 1552
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 8:59:53 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1575
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
Would a bigger size also mean creating a new screen drawing option?
Looks too me like you could almost double the height under my 1920x1200 so a longer combat report would be nice.

If that doesn't work what about the scrolling of the report?
1. Using the wheel is awfully slow, could the speed be changed?
2. Simply clicking further down in the scroll bar to flip thru the report(like you have it in Word for example) doesn't work as he instantly jumps to the point on the bar where you clicked, could it be changed to they way Word does it?

_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club

"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 1553
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 9:15:12 AM   
michaelm


Posts: 9049
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
Same issue, engine changes needed to control the scroll-bar and mouse roll lines.
[Mouse wheel only moves the scroll be 30 pixels, which tends to be only one line.]

Page up and down keys should work with the scroll box IIRC


< Message edited by michaelm -- 1/26/2012 9:47:36 AM >


_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 1554
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108p5 updated 24 Ju... - 1/26/2012 1:04:14 PM   
a_gonatas

 

Posts: 68
Joined: 8/20/2007
Status: offline
Correct me if I am not understanding how its suppose to work exactly, but with the newest update my long running PBEM game has just gone to August 1942. My Helen factories have failed to ungrade their production to the newer model.

Aren't they suppose to do this automatically? The new model is available on the change menu but I would have to manually convert the factory (tear it down and rebuild) to switch over from the old model.

(in reply to Itdepends)
Post #: 1555
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108p5 updated 24 Ju... - 1/26/2012 1:31:36 PM   
michaelm


Posts: 9049
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
The factory upgrade kicks in from a month after the new model is available.

_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to a_gonatas)
Post #: 1556
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108p5 updated 24 Ju... - 1/26/2012 3:19:32 PM   
a_gonatas

 

Posts: 68
Joined: 8/20/2007
Status: offline
Making me wait? That is so wrong...

Thanks.

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 1557
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 6:24:14 PM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1575
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm
Page up and down keys should work with the scroll box IIRC

*facepalm*
I did even tried those, thanks.

< Message edited by BigDuke66 -- 1/26/2012 6:25:26 PM >


_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club

"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 1558
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 6:44:59 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14493
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm
Page up and down keys should work with the scroll box IIRC

*facepalm*
I did even tried those, thanks.


So do the arrow keys (I use them all the time).

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 1559
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 Ja... - 1/26/2012 7:18:47 PM   
hades1001

 

Posts: 974
Joined: 12/17/2007
Status: offline
Hi Michael don't want to hijack the thread but one thing I got to ask:

Do you feel the current A2A model for later war have some problem?

If you do, do you have any plan to work on it any time soon?

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Just for information before I 'duck and cover'.
I am the one who implemented the code for the air combat based on feedback from Elf.
As part of that, I am the one who pick 200 as the magic number based on a crash course of reading/researching about dogfights. I can't recall (from 2yrs ago) reading lots of instances of 1000 CAP fighters defending against 1000 escort fighters in a single raid from day 1 in the Pacific War.



< Message edited by hades1001 -- 1/26/2012 7:19:46 PM >

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 1560
Page:   <<   < prev  50 51 [52] 53 54   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Tech Support >> RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 January 2012 (2nd part) Page: <<   < prev  50 51 [52] 53 54   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.137