2.50 Upgrade

[DEB]

My 2.42 beta UV has been "patched" up to 2.50.

Has anyone out there had any "Play" problems with this particular upgrade "type" ( after completion of the patch upgrade ) ?

[decaro]

Yes: Please see the "Fresh Install" post directly below yours.
FYI: there is a readme file(s) -- in both pdf and MS word w/the same info -- that is placed in the UV folder after you unzip the patch and then double-click its folder. The file describes what's fixed for versions 2.5, 2.4222 (?) and 2.41.
It also says the following: "Please delete uv.prfs file, before applying patch".
I have no idea what that means -- does anyone else? I don't even know what a prfs extention is!
However, after a fresh install -- 2.5 directly on 2.0 w/no other patches applied, I've played through 4 scenarios of various lengths -- Coral sea, Green Hell, 4 Weeks of Hell, Turning Tide -- as the Allies and have not experienced any of the problems I had when I patched on top of 2.3. In fact, I haven't really had any problems at all, except when I was beaten by the AI-- Jap marginal victory -- in the 4 weeks game!
After looking at the readme files for 2.5, you would think you should patch over 2.3 despite 2.5 being a comprehensive patch. One word: don't.

[Akos Gergely]

But what can one do if I have an already patched installer as a latecomer to UV? I have version 2.41 straight away from the installer file. Any ideas?

[decaro]

Try the Matrix support/services links at top of this page, but their staff may be sick of us UV types by now. Matrix is probably kicking itself for not stoping at 2.3. Oh well, no good deed goes unpunished.
 
Maybe the problem lies with this uv.prfs file (see above post)?

[DEB]

My query was regarding patching 2.5 onto 2.42 Beta, and not anything else. ( I am hoping that problems with 2.5 onto 2.3 will not apply to me. I have not noticed any text errors for instance. )

Re the prefs file, I have traced & deleted it ( prior to the final update with the 2.50 patch ); I had seen the readme after my initial download but whilst still having "path" problems ( now resolved ). If you look in the same area as the Readme file you will find it. I see that your problems appear to be resolved, so maybe you will not need to do anything now re the prefs. file. If you have future problems, however, maybe you should consider deleting it prior to a 2.50 re-patch.

[decaro]

So when you said "Has anyone out there had any "Play" problems with this particular upgrade type" ( after completion of the patch upgrade ) ? " you meant has anyone had any problems patching 2.5 on 2.4(beta).

Does that mean you are having problems or just has anyone had problems w/2.5 on 2.4?

What did Shaw say about the British and the Americans; two peoples separated by a common language?

The unofficial consensus was that v 2.5 was a comprehensive patch and (probably) didn't need other patches, which was the case with all of the previous UV updates.

But w/o any official word from Matrix, some UV players have been struggling to find their own answers.

In any case, a fresh install solved my troubles; hopefully that works for everyone else regardless of the UV version they purchased.

[DEB]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.
So when you said "Has anyone out there had any "Play" problems with this particular upgrade type" ( after completion of the patch upgrade ) ? " you meant has anyone had any problems patching 2.5 on 2.4(beta).

Yes. Note however that I prefixed my question with the statement: My 2.42 beta UV has been "patched" up to 2.50. I had thought that this would make that clear.

Does that mean you are having problems or just has anyone had problems w/2.5 on 2.4?

The latter.