Matrix Games Forums

Civil War II Patch 1.4 public BetaHappy Easter!Battle Academy is now available on SteamPlayers compare Ageods Civil War to Civil War IIDeal of the week - An updated War in the East goes half Price!Sign up for the Qvadriga beta for iPad and Android!Come and say hi at Pax and SaluteLegends of War goes on sale!Piercing Fortress Europa Gets UpdatedBattle Academy Mega Pack is now available
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

gorn re-education bug

 
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 >> gorn re-education bug Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
gorn re-education bug - 4/23/2013 4:39:54 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 3971
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
Just to warn everyone, I've been experiencing a bug when choosing to resize units on carriers. First of all after resizing units on the Enterprise, then xfring them to a land base, the Enterprise info screen showed her having 72 planes aboard even though I only had one squadron of 18 planes that had not been resized. I docked her at a pier to repair some system damage to see if that would clear the register. She's still there so I don't know yet but then it happened on the Saratoga as well. I only had one squadron of fighters on her that had just upgraded to Corsairs but it also said it had 72 planes on it and I put it in for repairs of some superficial systems damage (rated "1") to see if that would clear it. The Corsairs had not been unpacked so I left them on her. Well, the Corsairs were all ops losses and when she came out of the repair the squadron was still there but with no planes. The ship's info screen said she had zero planes aboard, so I thought I had solved the problem. Well I filled the squadron with 18 more Corsairs and then the info screen said Saratoga had 72 planes aboard again.

I'm going to fiddle with this for a few more turns before submitting it to Tech Support, just to see if those registers clear after I take the Corsair squadron off, and then the next day put another squadron on.

Just wanted to warn everyone to be careful about resizing til this is solved.

edit: I don't actually know if the false planes aboard number affects the operations on the carrier.

< Message edited by geofflambert -- 4/23/2013 6:08:22 AM >


_____________________________

Darwin has his eye on me.
Post #: 1
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 4:51:18 AM   
jcjordan

 

Posts: 1693
Joined: 6/27/2001
Status: offline
I think you might have a non cv capable corsair. One of the early versions of corsair isn't cv capable so the cv will show an overstack on the # of a/c as well as higher op losses of used.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 2
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 5:16:40 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 3971
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
Well, the sqd still says carrier trained. How do you know if the planes are not usable. If they were, and I were just planning to use the carrier as a transport for them, why would they be lost? Of course, none of that will explain the carrier capacity used error.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Darwin has his eye on me.

(in reply to jcjordan)
Post #: 3
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 5:28:38 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 3567
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
This is not a bug; no need to post in the tech sub forum.

To operate off a carrier you need both an appropriately classified air unit + an appropriately classified airframe. The F4U-1 Corsair is not an appropriately classified airframe. Clicking on the "Aircraft Data" button, or looking it up on the aircraft info database, just underneath the airframe model name it will state if the airframe is carrier capable.

Alfred

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 4
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 5:31:17 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 3971
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
Thank you Alfred, now work your magic on why Saratoga allegedly has 72 planes on it while it only actually has 18.

_____________________________

Darwin has his eye on me.

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 5
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 5:34:11 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 3971
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
Also, per my question, were they lost because they were in training mode 100%? I should be able to load B-29s on a carrier for transport.

_____________________________

Darwin has his eye on me.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 6
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 5:35:00 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 3567
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
4 x 18 = 72

That is the loading cost for non carrier capable airframes.

Alfred

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 7
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 5:35:48 AM   
koniu

 

Posts: 1948
Joined: 2/28/2011
From: Konin, Poland, European Union
Status: online
F4U-1 is not CV capable. First Corsair CV capable is F4U-1A

When You enter aircraft data You will see if plane is or not CV capable.
Carrier trained mean only that Squadron is trained with CV ops but for that planes also have to have that ability.

As of carrier capacity used error. It is not error. When non CV capable plane is transfered to CV he will use 4x more place that CV capable place. 18x4=72

koniu




< Message edited by koniu -- 4/23/2013 5:38:22 AM >


_____________________________

"Only the Dead Have Seen the End of War"

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 8
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 5:38:04 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 3971
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
Thank you again. I will await the release of Enterprise from repairs. She did not have non-carrier capable aircraft on her yet showed capacity used = 72.

I think they were F4-F4s but I'll load an old turn and have a look.

< Message edited by geofflambert -- 4/23/2013 5:40:14 AM >


_____________________________

Darwin has his eye on me.

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 9
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 5:56:21 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 3971
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
Well I checked, and Alfred and koniu were correct, as they knew they were. I hate it when that happens. I had put ineligible Corsairs on Enterprise as well. Well, now I have a lot of experience pushing perfectly good aircraft over the side. I'm sure it will serve me well someday.

_____________________________

Darwin has his eye on me.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 10
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 6:14:23 AM   
koniu

 

Posts: 1948
Joined: 2/28/2011
From: Konin, Poland, European Union
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

Well I checked, and Alfred and koniu were correct, as they knew they were. I hate it when that happens. I had put ineligible Corsairs on Enterprise as well. Well, now I have a lot of experience pushing perfectly good aircraft over the side. I'm sure it will serve me well someday.


If You are in port transfer squadron to base. If not then You stuck with them until TF enter base hex with AF because they will not fly off from CV.

PS. Many Japanese players have the same problem when placing A6M3 on carrier or sometimes they do that with George or Jack.

_____________________________

"Only the Dead Have Seen the End of War"

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 11
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 6:19:10 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 3971
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
Let that be a lesson to all you kiddies out there. Don't be a shiftless moron like me but know what you're doing before you do it. And don't text or talk on your cell while driving.

I was doing that when my inter-stellar vehicle exploded. I said at the time I was over Magnetogorsk, but I was wrong, it was over Chelyabinsk. I was using Apple maps instead of Google. I just can't seem to be able to do anything right.

< Message edited by geofflambert -- 4/23/2013 6:24:56 AM >


_____________________________

Darwin has his eye on me.

(in reply to koniu)
Post #: 12
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 10:37:28 AM   
DivePac88


Posts: 3115
Joined: 10/9/2008
From: Somewhere in the South Pacific.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

Let that be a lesson to all you kiddies out there. Don't be a shiftless moron like me but know what you're doing before you do it. And don't text or talk on your cell while driving.

I was doing that when my inter-stellar vehicle exploded. I said at the time I was over Magnetogorsk, but I was wrong, it was over Chelyabinsk. I was using Apple maps instead of Google. I just can't seem to be able to do anything right.


You stupid dumb lizard you should have been in auto-pilot if you were texting, especially when in the vicinity of a planet, even your heap of junk Lepidosauria carrying crate should have auto-pilot.



_____________________________


When you see the Southern Cross, For the first time
You understand now, Why you came this way

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 13
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 5:51:18 PM   
Sredni

 

Posts: 700
Joined: 9/30/2004
From: Canada
Status: offline
I did this exact same thing long long ago , and I've seen a bunch of other posters post about their carriers being overloaded for the same "mysterious" reason. I think it may be a sort of right of passage.

I put corsairs on my carrier and then realized later it was overloaded. I just assumed a corsair was a corsair was a corsair and the "image" I had of corsairs was the folding wings so "obviously" they were carrier capable in my mind. After it was pointed out I just kinda grimaced and smacked myself in the face over how oblivious I was to the answer staring me in the face all along heh.

(in reply to DivePac88)
Post #: 14
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 8:57:28 PM   
Ddog

 

Posts: 206
Joined: 2/17/2005
From: Cincinnati, OH
Status: offline
Thought you might like this geoff:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6hemOCl-xk

_____________________________

"If you can't take a joke, don't start a war."
Tail gunner, Enola Gay


(in reply to Sredni)
Post #: 15
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 9:08:15 PM   
wyrmm


Posts: 214
Joined: 7/19/2004
Status: offline
Seems much like his gameplay as well.

(in reply to Ddog)
Post #: 16
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 9:43:37 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 3971
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ddog

Thought you might like this geoff:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6hemOCl-xk


That's excellent! All the surveillance cameras these days. I didn't know I was being recorded.

_____________________________

Darwin has his eye on me.

(in reply to Ddog)
Post #: 17
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 9:44:45 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 3971
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sredni
I think it may be a sort of right of passage.


Seems like a "wrong" of passage, am I rite?

_____________________________

Darwin has his eye on me.

(in reply to Sredni)
Post #: 18
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 9:46:10 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 3971
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wyrmm

Seems much like his gameplay as well.


Shut up Raiden! I can whoop your butt with both hands tied behind my back and both feet in snowshoes!

_____________________________

Darwin has his eye on me.

(in reply to wyrmm)
Post #: 19
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 9:51:43 PM   
wyrmm


Posts: 214
Joined: 7/19/2004
Status: offline
But you can't beat Shattner... Hmm....

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 20
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 10:17:29 PM   
Phanatik


Posts: 140
Joined: 10/22/2009
From: Nashville, Tn
Status: offline
The easiest way to solve this dilemma is to park the Enterprise 3 hexes SSE off Truk. Should only take a day...

(in reply to wyrmm)
Post #: 21
RE: carrier group resizing bug - 4/23/2013 10:46:16 PM   
Sredni

 

Posts: 700
Joined: 9/30/2004
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sredni
I think it may be a sort of right of passage.


Seems like a "wrong" of passage, am I rite?


that sounds rite!

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 22
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> gorn re-education bug Page: [1]
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

0.097