Updated 30/07/2022: Bottlenecks in the Pacific v1.3b

[Axe1999]

Well that sucks to hear, I was really hoping to give it a go.

Do you think it would be playable with regular scenario script? Considering Im not at all interested in CBI theater where most of the new bases appear to be and I dont care if something exclusive to that theater breaks.

[btd64]

ORIGINAL: Axe1999

Well that sucks to hear, I was really hoping to give it a go.

Do you think it would be playable with regular scenario script? Considering Im not at all interested in CBI theater where most of the new bases appear to be and I dont care if something exclusive to that theater breaks.

You can't play a grand Campaign, modded or not, without some attention to the CBI theater. I would suggest the 1000 miles war scenario....GP

[gervabit]

Very good, I am having a problem with the MOD, when I visualize the turn the game closes without giving any kind of warning.
We already did like 100 shifts and this is the second time the same thing happens to us.
If anyone can, I give him his turn and my password, to check that it is not my installation of the game that is wrong

Firma con problemas:
Nombre del evento de problema: APPCRASH
Nombre de la aplicación: War in the Pacific Admiral Edition.exe
Versión de la aplicación: 1.8.11.26
Marca de tiempo de la aplicación: 57dceacd
Nombre del módulo con errores: War in the Pacific Admiral Edition.exe
Versión del módulo con errores: 1.8.11.26
Marca de tiempo del módulo con errores: 57dceacd
Código de excepción: c0000094
Desplazamiento de excepción: 0011fdd2
Versión del sistema operativo: 6.1.7601.2.1.0.256.1
Id. de configuración regional: 3082
Información adicional 1: 0a9e
Información adicional 2: 0a9e372d3b4ad19135b953a78882e789
Información adicional 3: 0a9e
Información adicional 4: 0a9e372d3b4ad19135b953a78882e789

Has anyone else had a similar problem?

[LargeSlowTarget]

Gervabit, I understand you have a CTD when watching the replay?

[gervabit]

Yes

[LargeSlowTarget]

Strange finding in gervabit's save file - has anyone seen similar things?

[RangerJoe]

Are those extra as in random noise?

[tolsdorff]

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

Strange finding in gervabit's save file - has anyone seen similar things?

If I start a new Scen 59, I get the same empty line at Fukuoka.

The H6K4 Mavis at Osaka-Kyoto does show properly.

[LargeSlowTarget]

ORIGINAL: tolsdorff
If I start a new Scen 59, I get the same empty line at Fukuoka.

The H6K4 Mavis at Osaka-Kyoto does show properly.

Thx, I noticed that as well - now. Blame QA department...

Looking for possible causes, I have changed the Lorna to Toka and started a fresh game - and the Toka shows up at Fukuoka. There is no issue with Lorna at Fukuoka in scenarios 60 and 61 and I see nothing in the scenario 59 Lorna setup that looks out of ordinary.

Also no clue why the Mavis at Osaka/Kyoto went blank in gervabit's game.

Strange.

I have asked gervabit to take the last working turn and set the two slots to "do not upgrade" to see what it gives.

Will also run a h2h in continious mode to see if I can reproduce the crash.


Edit: @gervabit - in my PM to you I said that unfortunately the aircraft type of the blank lines cannot be changed. I was wrong. I usually govern the industry through the dedicated industry screen ("j" key) - and it is not possible to change the aircraft type for the blank lines on that screen. However, I just rediscovered that if you click on a base and then on the "Aircraft assembly" icon at the bottom of the page, you can switch the aircraft type. Just switched the blank line at Fukuoka to A6M2 - hope this helps to let you continue your game.

[tolsdorff]

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

ORIGINAL: tolsdorff
If I start a new Scen 59, I get the same empty line at Fukuoka.

The H6K4 Mavis at Osaka-Kyoto does show properly.

Thx, I noticed that as well - now. Blame QA department...

Looking for possible causes, I have changed the Lorna to Toka and started a fresh game - and the Toka shows up at Fukuoka. There is no issue with Lorna at Fukuoka in scenarions 60 and 61 and I see nothing in the scenario 59 Lorna setup that looks out of ordinary.

Also no clue why the Mavis at Osaka/Kyoto went blank in gervabit's game.

Strange.

I have asked gervabit to take the last working turn and set the two slots to "do not upgrade" to see what it gives.

Will also run a h2h in continious mode to see if I can reproduce the crash.

I think I found the culprit with regards to the Fukuoka and the Q1-W1 Lorna issue in Scen 59. The durability is set to 0. I changed it to 32 and now it shows both in the aircraft replacement pool, from which it was missing, and in the Industry screen.

[tolsdorff]

Again in Scen 59, the H6K4 has durability of 44. But it's successor the H6K5 has durability of 0. I am guessing that's the culprit in Osaka/Kyoto

[RangerJoe]

Talk about paper airplanes . . . [;)]

[LargeSlowTarget]

Excellent find, tolsdorff - you are da man! How could I have misssed that, guess I need new glasses... Must have been a fat finger mistake when doing editor or Excel file work during modding.

I see now that the Mavis K4 and the Lorna with durability 0 are missing in the in-game plane database.

The good news is - it can be fixed in-game! Just set the durability from 0 to 44 for the Mavis K5 and to 34 (!) for the Lorna (values from original DBB scenario 29), saved the scenario and hit the update button in the preferences screen - and the blank slot at Fukuoka now shows the Lorna.

I'm going to check all durability values.

Now fingers crossed that this is the cause for the CTD.

[tolsdorff]

You're welcome

The only other airplane with 0 durability I came across was the second B-17E entry. The regular one is 285. There is a second one at 288 with 0 durability, but it does not seem to be used for anything.

Ayway, I hope it fixes the CTD!

[LargeSlowTarget]

Corrected scenario files https://www.dropbox.com/s/amvx5tw09mmro ... a.zip?dl=0


@tolsdorff: Yes, me too I have only found Mavis K5, Lorna and the second B-17E with durability = 0 issue. The second B-17E in slot 288 was for testing bombloads and is not used.

[Cavalry Corp]

I also once had the durability 0 issue in my mod a long way back - I think thats the issue.

the same applies to ships if durability is 0 I think they cannot come on the map.

Hope my mod gains some traction eventually...

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: Cavalry Corp

I also once had the durability 0 issue in my mod a long way back - I think thats the issue.

the same applies to ships if durability is 0 I think they cannot come on the map.

Hope my mod gains some traction eventually...

Took a look at your mod post but do not see a summary of what the mod does or is or what the key features are? What your goal is? I would recommend putting something like that at the top of your post to gain more traction...

[Pascal_slith]

Back after a few years and I just discovered this work by good ole veteran Large Slow Target. Downloaded it and looking through the database in the next few days.

I have a huge treasure trove of electronic resources I can share if you need more details on things.

One question for LST: I wrote many years back about the excessive ship fuel sitting around in all the ports on the map. I haven't looked at the database just yet, but did you reduce the starting amounts in all the ports around the map in any substantial way? I'll check in the morning.

[Cavalry Corp]

Tanaka, There is an extensive PDF setting up the scene. But I will take your suggestion and write a short teaser for the main post as well.

[LargeSlowTarget]

ORIGINAL: Pascal_slith

Back after a few years and I just discovered this work by good ole veteran Large Slow Target. Downloaded it and looking through the database in the next few days.

I have a huge treasure trove of electronic resources I can share if you need more details on things.

One question for LST: I wrote many years back about the excessive ship fuel sitting around in all the ports on the map. I haven't looked at the database just yet, but did you reduce the starting amounts in all the ports around the map in any substantial way? I'll check in the morning.

Yes, I did reduce fuel levels at some ports like the Pescadores and Amami Oshima and a few others, but probably could reduce at more places. Biggest reduction IIRC was at Truk which went from 217200 in the DBB base scenario to just 17200, along with a huge reduction in port and airfield size. In 1941 Truk wasn't the "Gibraltar of the Pacific" and the major fleet base it became later due to the Guadalcanal campaign. Heck, it didn't even had an airbase. To quote from combinedfleet.com : "However, in strict observance of the postwar naval treaties, Japan did little to establish a naval base there. At the outbreak of the Pacific War, there was only one half of a completed airstrip on Takeshima (Bamboo Island), a small island less than 1,000 meters long. There was no underground oil storage, nor any repair facilities on land." I believe that the scenario design of stock and (maybe to a lesser extend) DBB scenarios has been based on the assumption that the majority of campaigns played will feature a human Allied player vs. Japanese AI, consequently the Japanese AI has received a lot of (ahistorical) help in regards to base sizes, supplies and fuel available, magic TF movement etc.

Looking forward to receive your comments and ideas for improvement.