Matrix Games Forums

To End All Wars Releasing on Steam! Slitherine is recruiting: Programmers requiredPandora: Eclipse of Nashira gets release dateCommunity impressions of To End All WarsAgeod's To End All Wars is now availableTo End All Wars is now available!Deal of the Week: Field of GloryTo End All Wars: Video, AAR and Interview!Ageod's To End All Wars: Video, AAR and Interview!To End All Wars: Artillery
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120c updated 25 November 2012

 
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 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120c updated 25 November 2012 Page: <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120c updated 2... - 12/1/2012 4:43:37 PM   
Dan Nichols


Posts: 863
Joined: 8/30/2011
Status: offline
If you will read what I wrote above, it is 6x for Allies ( 3x for Japan ). the information is found in table 6.3.2.5

As far as having the LCU tell you, it all ready does tell you how much troop and cargo space it takes. The problem is that if you use AK type ships with no troop space then the troop space needs to multiplied by 6. If you have a mixture of Allied AP and AK type ships, the calculations are a lot harder.

As I stated above, an Amphibious TF loads a slice of the unit on to all ships. It does not put the troops on troops ships and cargo only on cargo ships.

< Message edited by Dan Nichols -- 12/1/2012 4:48:27 PM >

(in reply to Chris H)
Post #: 361
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120c updated 2... - 12/1/2012 4:55:19 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14648
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Troops load space is 5x(?) the stated space when cargo space is used for troops.  Other factors involved too.  I suspect your math is not complete.  You need to review the manual on this.

When I do the calcs, I'm with a couple % of the stated load cost ... more than close enough.  And overstating the requirement slightly as the new beta does ensures that the unit will load.  Previously if you were a bit close, it might cause a fragment to be left behind.  Quite annoying that.


I thought it was 3x but I cannot find the info in the manual, mind you so much has changed since the manual was written it's often a futile exercise anyway. Even with 5x it comes nowhere close to the cargo figure being requested in the TF load screen.

This is not really the problem. Using the example of the 14th Garrison unit which according to TF load screen requires 3588 cargo space. How do I know this? It's fine if you have transports in the base you can find out by creating a single ship TF and testing the load but if you can't do that and need to send some to pick it up you how many do you send?. Very unsatifactory situation to be in. If this cannot be simply calculated in the head then another solution would be for the LCU unit information screen to have an amphious cargo load as well as a standard cargo load.

If I understand your question right, the information is on each LCU's display. Near the lower left-hand corner is the tally for the LCU's current values of Troop Load Cost, Cargo Load Cost, and Stacking Cost. IIRC there is also a sum of Troop and Cargo called something like Total Load Cost, but that one is not so useful. The Cargo Load Cost and Troop Load Cost is the same as gets displayed on the TF loading screen.

So if you are planning ahead for how much space will be needed to load an LCU, look at that area of the LCU display. Do also remember that is a tally and devices within an LCU do not always fit in a ship evenly. By that I mean suppose you want to load 20 devices of cargo size 57 each, and the ships you have available have cargo space 200. The tally would say (20 * 57 =) 1,140, which is 6 ships (1,200 with 60 space left over. But, only 3 of each device will fit on a ship of 200 (3 * 57 = 171) with 29 space left over (either for supplies or let empty). Because only 3 devices fit on each ship you wind up needing 20 / 3 = 6.666, rounded up to 7 ships (partial ships don't float!).

Notice that was a very over-simplified example. Most LCUs have a mixture of different devices with different sizes, some of those being cargo type and some being troop type. And when you "cross-load" cargo into troop space or troops into cargo space, the math is different. In fact it might be different for different types of ships when you cross-load (see the manual). And for amphibious TFs it is all adjusted by 20% inefficiency.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to Chris H)
Post #: 362
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120c updated 2... - 12/2/2012 2:46:01 AM   
michaelm


Posts: 9106
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
Amphib TF loads the units devices across all loadable ships in the TF. That means troops will be loaded onto AK at a higher space used than on a AP. That 'troop' space lowers the cargo capacity of the AK.
There is no way apart from actually loading the ships in the TF to know how much space will really be used, or is free.
Only other loading method would be like normal transport TF where troops usually go into troop space and equipment into cargo space.

The buffer I added for the last beta is obviously causing you issues so I will remove this but leave in the 3day supply that was missing.
You will need to base your loading requirements on the safety factor - i normally try to have a 100% margin for both troop and cargo for Amphib TF. This is sometimes too much but it does leave room for additional supply if the loading process has the space.

_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 363
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120c updated 2... - 12/2/2012 8:55:26 AM   
Chris H

 

Posts: 3584
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Bexhill-on-Sea, E Sussex
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dan Nichols

If you will read what I wrote above, it is 6x for Allies ( 3x for Japan ). the information is found in table 6.3.2.5



I thought it was 3x across the board, how I missed that one I do not know. You learn something every day in this game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

If I understand your question right, the information is on each LCU's display. Near the lower left-hand corner is the tally for the LCU's current values of Troop Load Cost, Cargo Load Cost, and Stacking Cost. IIRC there is also a sum of Troop and Cargo called something like Total Load Cost, but that one is not so useful. The Cargo Load Cost and Troop Load Cost is the same as gets displayed on the TF loading screen.



It is for transport but not amphibious, and that is were the problem lies.

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Amphib TF loads the units devices across all loadable ships in the TF. That means troops will be loaded onto AK at a higher space used than on a AP. That 'troop' space lowers the cargo capacity of the AK.



Now I understand why my figures and that given in the loading are so different.

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Only other loading method would be like normal transport TF where troops usually go into troop space and equipment into cargo space.



This is how I thought it worked and always have. Troops and cargo were loaded as per the transport routines but with a safety buffer (I thought is was around 20% but I don't know where or why I did). A further 3x of supplies was added (now I know it's different for Japan and the Allies).

It doesn't really matter how it's done, what matters to me is taking out the guess work when forming an amphibious TF. The LCU you are going to load needs show the cargo load required when loaded onto an amphibious TF if not you need to be able to work it out roughly. The unit below shows a cargo load of just 264 but when you form a amphibious TF the TF loading routines require 3536 cargo space. The question was how do you get to that figure.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 364
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120c updated 2... - 12/2/2012 8:56:14 AM   
Chris H

 

Posts: 3584
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Bexhill-on-Sea, E Sussex
Status: online
TF loading screen.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Chris H)
Post #: 365
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120c updated 2... - 12/2/2012 1:12:07 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 3650
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H


... It doesn't really matter how it's done, what matters to me is taking out the guess work when forming an amphibious TF. The LCU you are going to load needs show the cargo load required when loaded onto an amphibious TF if not you need to be able to work it out roughly. The unit below shows a cargo load of just 264 but when you form a amphibious TF the TF loading routines require 3536 cargo space. The question was how do you get to that figure.





You still don't get it. There is no bug here. The problem lies with how you play/understand the game workings.

1. A unit's cargo load cost, or for that matter it's troop load cost, does not change because one is loading onto an amphibious instead of a transport TF.

2. What has an impact is the type of vessel YOU are attempting to load the unit onto. If as a result of poor ship type selection you are forced to use cross loading which is not efficient, then the amount of space required will be adjusted accordingly.

3. When an amphibious TF is created, the loading screen will show the amount of cargo space available on that TF. That carrying capacity is already adjusted downwards to take into account the 80% carrying capacity of an amphibious TF.

There is no need to provide any more visual aids to the process. The information is already there. That michaelm attempted to assist you by changing the code and then returning back to what it was simply amazes me as to how generous he is of his own time.

Alfred

(in reply to Chris H)
Post #: 366
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120c updated 2... - 12/2/2012 1:23:21 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5698
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


There is no need to provide any more visual aids to the process. The information is already there. That michaelm attempted to assist you by changing the code and then returning back to what it was simply amazes me as to how generous he is of his own time.

Alfred

+1


< Message edited by PaxMondo -- 12/2/2012 1:24:19 PM >


_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 367
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120c updated 2... - 12/2/2012 5:06:14 PM   
Chris H

 

Posts: 3584
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Bexhill-on-Sea, E Sussex
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H


... It doesn't really matter how it's done, what matters to me is taking out the guess work when forming an amphibious TF. The LCU you are going to load needs show the cargo load required when loaded onto an amphibious TF if not you need to be able to work it out roughly. The unit below shows a cargo load of just 264 but when you form a amphibious TF the TF loading routines require 3536 cargo space. The question was how do you get to that figure.





You still don't get it. There is no bug here. The problem lies with how you play/understand the game workings.

1. A unit's cargo load cost, or for that matter it's troop load cost, does not change because one is loading onto an amphibious instead of a transport TF.

2. What has an impact is the type of vessel YOU are attempting to load the unit onto. If as a result of poor ship type selection you are forced to use cross loading which is not efficient, then the amount of space required will be adjusted accordingly.

3. When an amphibious TF is created, the loading screen will show the amount of cargo space available on that TF. That carrying capacity is already adjusted downwards to take into account the 80% carrying capacity of an amphibious TF.

There is no need to provide any more visual aids to the process. The information is already there. That michaelm attempted to assist you by changing the code and then returning back to what it was simply amazes me as to how generous he is of his own time.

Alfred


I'm not saying there is a bug and I do appreciate what michaelm is doing and has done. I can't be the only one to think that something needs to be done.

Let me ask you a question. 'How many ships whould you send and of what type to pick up this unit?'

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 368
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120c updated 2... - 12/2/2012 5:15:53 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14648
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H

... It doesn't really matter how it's done, what matters to me is taking out the guess work when forming an amphibious TF. The LCU you are going to load needs show the cargo load required when loaded onto an amphibious TF if not you need to be able to work it out roughly. The unit below shows a cargo load of just 264 but when you form a amphibious TF the TF loading routines require 3536 cargo space. The question was how do you get to that figure.





You still don't get it. There is no bug here. The problem lies with how you play/understand the game workings.

1. A unit's cargo load cost, or for that matter it's troop load cost, does not change because one is loading onto an amphibious instead of a transport TF.

2. What has an impact is the type of vessel YOU are attempting to load the unit onto. If as a result of poor ship type selection you are forced to use cross loading which is not efficient, then the amount of space required will be adjusted accordingly.

3. When an amphibious TF is created, the loading screen will show the amount of cargo space available on that TF. That carrying capacity is already adjusted downwards to take into account the 80% carrying capacity of an amphibious TF.

There is no need to provide any more visual aids to the process. The information is already there. That michaelm attempted to assist you by changing the code and then returning back to what it was simply amazes me as to how generous he is of his own time.

Alfred


I'm not saying there is a bug and I do appreciate what michaelm is doing and has done. I can't be the only one to think that something needs to be done.

Let me ask you a question. 'How many ships whould you send and of what type to pick up this unit?'


You have the list of ships available to you in-game. Asking Alfred to research some random ships that he could pick if they were available isn't really the point.

You did not specify Transport or Amphibious.

If Transport then I would send ships totaling at least 4,000 Troop Capacity and 1,000 Cargo Capacity.

If Amphibious then I would send ships totaling at least 5,000 Troop Capacity and 1,500 Cargo Capacity.

Note that I use round numbers and have good success with that. In fact I only said "1,500" because the Cargo Load Cost is so low. Ordinarily I use increments of 1,000.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to Chris H)
Post #: 369
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120c updated 2... - 12/2/2012 6:53:23 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5698
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

If Transport then I would send ships totaling at least 4,000 Troop Capacity and 1,000 Cargo Capacity.

If Amphibious then I would send ships totaling at least 5,000 Troop Capacity and 1,500 Cargo Capacity.

+1

<emphasis added>

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 370
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120 updated - 12/2/2012 8:44:12 PM   
daddy123

 

Posts: 4
Joined: 12/2/2012
Status: offline
Hi,

minor menu bug:

When selecting a hex containing a task force with the right mouse button, you can't open the task force info window by left clicking the task force icon(s) on the bottom. You have to left click the task force name on the bottom left or the task force symbol in the main map (air group info windows and ground unit info windows can be opened by left clicking the icons on the bottom after right clicking a hex). When selecting the hex with the left mouse button, accessing the task force info window by left clicking the icon on the bottom works.

Cheers

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 371
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120 updated - 12/3/2012 8:40:19 AM   
michaelm


Posts: 9106
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
Right-clicking the hex sets the focus on that hex. It doesn't open the TF, land or group screen.
It does usually open the base in the hex if player owns it.
Opening the TF, land or group icon(s) is done by the left click to the icon.

_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to daddy123)
Post #: 372
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120c updated 2... - 12/3/2012 8:58:59 AM   
Chris H

 

Posts: 3584
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Bexhill-on-Sea, E Sussex
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

You have the list of ships available to you in-game. Asking Alfred to research some random ships that he could pick if they were available isn't really the point.



Yes it is precisly the piont. Just asking for figure as you have given below.

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

You did not specify Transport or Amphibious.



May not have been mentioned it in the post you responded to but it was throughout the rest of the thread.


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

If Transport then I would send ships totaling at least 4,000 Troop Capacity and 1,000 Cargo Capacity.

If Amphibious then I would send ships totaling at least 5,000 Troop Capacity and 1,500 Cargo Capacity.

Note that I use round numbers and have good success with that. In fact I only said "1,500" because the Cargo Load Cost is so low. Ordinarily I use increments of 1,000.



I think the one in the picture fits the bill. Oops! seems I'm short 2168 cargo space. Just perhaps something is wrong?






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Chris H -- 12/3/2012 9:01:52 AM >

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 373
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120c updated 2... - 12/3/2012 9:00:10 AM   
Chris H

 

Posts: 3584
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Bexhill-on-Sea, E Sussex
Status: online
The load screen.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to Chris H)
Post #: 374
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120 updated - 12/3/2012 11:49:00 AM   
daddy123

 

Posts: 4
Joined: 12/2/2012
Status: offline
Hi,

sorry, the mentioned "interface-bug" is already fixed in the newest-beta version (I tested with some earlier version). Sorry again and thanks for the quick reply.

Cheers

< Message edited by daddy123 -- 12/3/2012 4:20:39 PM >

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 375
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120c updated 2... - 12/3/2012 1:04:12 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14648
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

You have the list of ships available to you in-game. Asking Alfred to research some random ships that he could pick if they were available isn't really the point.



Yes it is precisly the piont. Just asking for figure as you have given below.

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

You did not specify Transport or Amphibious.



May not have been mentioned it in the post you responded to but it was throughout the rest of the thread.


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

If Transport then I would send ships totaling at least 4,000 Troop Capacity and 1,000 Cargo Capacity.

If Amphibious then I would send ships totaling at least 5,000 Troop Capacity and 1,500 Cargo Capacity.

Note that I use round numbers and have good success with that. In fact I only said "1,500" because the Cargo Load Cost is so low. Ordinarily I use increments of 1,000.



I think the one in the picture fits the bill. Oops! seems I'm short 2168 cargo space. Just perhaps something is wrong?






quote:

Let me ask you a question. 'How many ships whould you send and of what type to pick up this unit?'


Chris,

I thought you asked Alfred this:
quote:

Let me ask you a question. 'How many ships whould you send and of what type to pick up this unit?'

You've given Michael good feedback on what was happening with the loading screen, and he has made prorgamming changes to the Beta to address that (see the first two posts in this thread for the new Beta).

But are you still saying that you can't get that unit to load? Did it actually fully load on the ship in the screen pic that you posted? Can you post a pic of the ship with part of the unit loaded and a pic of the remaining part of the unit on land?

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to Chris H)
Post #: 376
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120c updated 2... - 12/3/2012 2:47:30 PM   
Chris H

 

Posts: 3584
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Bexhill-on-Sea, E Sussex
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

But are you still saying that you can't get that unit to load? Did it actually fully load on the ship in the screen pic that you posted? Can you post a pic of the ship with part of the unit loaded and a pic of the remaining part of the unit on land?


Thanks to michaelm all fixed with the latest patch 2/12/12 1120d. I looked yesterday but must have done so before it was put up and I missed it this morning but time difference might have played a part here. This is how the screen looks now and I can fully load it onto the xAP.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 377
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120 updated - 12/3/2012 4:22:47 PM   
daddy123

 

Posts: 4
Joined: 12/2/2012
Status: offline
Hi,

sorry, the mentioned "interface-bug" is already fixed in the newest-beta version (I tested with some earlier version). Sorry again and thanks for the quick reply.

Cheers

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 378
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120 updated - 12/4/2012 12:21:41 PM   
traskott

 

Posts: 1145
Joined: 6/23/2008
From: Valladolid, Spain
Status: offline
I have discovered the "disband unit" on the LCU screen that can be used almost everywhere. If I click, where the devices go? lost or to the pool?

Thanks.

(in reply to daddy123)
Post #: 379
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120 updated - 12/4/2012 1:03:07 PM   
Oberst_Klink

 

Posts: 1299
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline
Hola!

According to the manual (might be out-dated) ->

Disband Unit:If located at a base with greater than 100,000 supplies or in a key base (Delhi,
Auckland, Sydney, Vladivostok, San Francisco, Osaka or Tokyo), then the player may manually
disband units which will return 100% of active devices to the pool and 50% of disabled devices.
If in a key base this is free; if in a base with 100,000 supplies it will cost a portion of the units
VP value. The player is given the option whether or not to have the unit disbanded rebuilt in 180
days as an administrative cadre.


I presume that when disbanding in non-supplied hexes or not according to above, they'll be chucked into the pool, 100% disabled equipment or more likely being captured by the enemy or destroyed; not sure if all the grunts of the unit prefer to become POWs. Perhabs Mike the Master can shed some light on it.

Klink, Oberst

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam
(Marcus Porcius Cato Censorius)

Visit the Gefechtsstand!

(in reply to traskott)
Post #: 380
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120 updated - 12/4/2012 1:58:08 PM   
traskott

 

Posts: 1145
Joined: 6/23/2008
From: Valladolid, Spain
Status: offline
Thanks ! Yeah, that's the problem. Acording to manual I would be only be allowed to disband IF located at any base, but currently I have troops in the middle of the jungle ( no hex base) with the disband buttom enabled.

I have even other troops on my bases without the button, so I'm a bit confused.

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)
Post #: 381
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120 updated - 12/5/2012 11:57:21 AM   
Oberst_Klink

 

Posts: 1299
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline
Hola!

Did you apply the latest 1120d beta and re-checked if it's still possible in your current game? If you don't want to apply the patch, just email me the save file and I'll check it up, aye?

Klink, Oberst

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam
(Marcus Porcius Cato Censorius)

Visit the Gefechtsstand!

(in reply to traskott)
Post #: 382
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120 updated - 12/5/2012 12:02:31 PM   
traskott

 

Posts: 1145
Joined: 6/23/2008
From: Valladolid, Spain
Status: offline
Yes, applied el 1120d beta ( I've been employing all the patches ) and some LCU can still be disbanded at Burma, betwwen Shwebo and Mandalay.

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)
Post #: 383
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120 updated - 12/6/2012 9:51:17 AM   
Oberst_Klink

 

Posts: 1299
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline
Hola compadre,

send me the save and I'll have a look; so far (I am still playing around with Guadalcanal) I haven't noticed such a behaviour.

Klink, Oberst

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam
(Marcus Porcius Cato Censorius)

Visit the Gefechtsstand!

(in reply to traskott)
Post #: 384
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120 updated - 12/6/2012 3:21:24 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14648
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
Michael,

What about possibly being able to toggle replacements and upgrades for individual devices within LCUs, something like this:

(I don't recall if this has been raised before. Please yell "Duck!" before throwing tomato! )




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)
Post #: 385
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120 updated - 12/7/2012 11:11:08 AM   
michaelm


Posts: 9106
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
For the next beta, I am making Replacements and Upgrades on the LCU screen independently selected.
At present, "No replacements" means both that and "No Upgrade".
There really isn't any reason to link the two as there may have been when first added.

Replacements and upgrades will now check the appropriate flag when applicable.

_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 386
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120 updated - 12/7/2012 8:21:39 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14648
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

For the next beta, I am making Replacements and Upgrades on the LCU screen independently selected.
At present, "No replacements" means both that and "No Upgrade".
There really isn't any reason to link the two as there may have been when first added.

Replacements and upgrades will now check the appropriate flag when applicable.

That's a big help - Thank You!!

The suggestion above still helps in a number of situations, but just decoupling upgrade and replacements is a big help.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 387
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120 updated - 12/8/2012 2:41:49 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5698
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

For the next beta, I am making Replacements and Upgrades on the LCU screen independently selected.
At present, "No replacements" means both that and "No Upgrade".
There really isn't any reason to link the two as there may have been when first added.

Replacements and upgrades will now check the appropriate flag when applicable.

That's a big help - Thank You!!

The suggestion above still helps in a number of situations, but just decoupling upgrade and replacements is a big help.


+1




_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 388
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120 updated - 12/8/2012 11:30:01 AM   
ny59giants


Posts: 7051
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
Michael just tweaked the code to have a Cripple TF that reaches its home port disband if it arrives after the first Naval Movement phase. I had a damaged PB reach Darwin last turn and saw numerous messages of it unable to control its flooding and sink in port. Yes, its only a PB, but I had Wasp reach Vava'u after the night movement phase and sink in a prior game.

Now, if he can add my reply suggestion of getting any damaged ship to automatically go into pierside repair mode if flood damage is over 50, I'll be very happy. If your TF has "Do Not Disband" set then you ship can continue to move further without this happening.

_____________________________


(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 389
RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120 updated - 12/9/2012 12:54:09 AM   
michaelm


Posts: 9106
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
I can change the Disband TF code to make a ship with 50+ float go to pier-side repairs, but it would apply to any mission TF being disbanded, which wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing.

If I did this, I would also like to have ships with 70+ system damage to do the same thing.
In addition, ships so actioned would not automatically re-arm when disbanded - save on supply, mines, etc - as would be tied up in repairs for some time presumably.

_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 390
Page:   <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Tech Support >> RE: Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1120c updated 25 November 2012 Page: <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   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

0.121