Tokyo Times on Ike99-n-Miller

[borner]

Actually, in a way it is possible to get different results. I have had this happen to me in another game. the file run by player one will be the one that the game goes forward with. However, in 3 turns now, I have seen the combat replay I ran be different than what was sent to me. the only way to catch it is to compair your results as the allies, to the file player one sends you. I am not sure if this is what happened here, but thought it was worth mentioning.

[vonCommander]

I had this problem some time ago. In one game the the whole game was unplayable after a few turns. In another game it was the same, the combatreplay simply told a different story than actually happend and Fuelli asked in this forum if someone else had this experience but got no answer.............

[Miller]

I'm glad to know I am not the only one who thinks its possible[&o]

[borner]

the main issue will be to know, as the allies, the extent of any damage you do to enemy ships. on the combat reports, 1 bomb hit reads the same as another, but there is a huge difference between a 250lb and a 1000-pounder hitting. Plus, how do critical hits get passes on? Ect? I hope the powers that be at Matrix are reading this and can explain it. One person I am playing suggested that you exit and re-load UV before running a PBEM turn. I tried that following our last naval battle, and my outcome (as the US) matched his. However, I am not sure that long term this will solve the issue.

[Joel Billings]

The bug I remember that came up was that the replay that players watched did not match the game results. I think several attempts were made to fix that bug but I don't think it was ever fully eliminated (although I thought things were improved, but this goes back several years now). This is different from being able to generate different results by loading in the game multiple times and rerunning the turn to generate different results. To my knowledge this has never been possible. The problem with the replay not matching is not something that can be fixed as any further attempts at this point to attempt to fix it would be futile.

[Joel Billings]

ORIGINAL: borner

the main issue will be to know, as the allies, the extent of any damage you do to enemy ships. on the combat reports, 1 bomb hit reads the same as another, but there is a huge difference between a 250lb and a 1000-pounder hitting. Plus, how do critical hits get passes on? Ect? I hope the powers that be at Matrix are reading this and can explain it. One person I am playing suggested that you exit and re-load UV before running a PBEM turn. I tried that following our last naval battle, and my outcome (as the US) matched his. However, I am not sure that long term this will solve the issue.

The bottom line is that the results of the execution phase when it is first run are what apply and carry on through the game, and to my knowledge you cannot get different results by rerunning the same turn over again.

[borner]

it's really not an issue of differing results in my opinion, but both players having the same information on damage/losses.

[Ike99]

The bottom line is that the results of the execution phase when it is first run are what apply and carry on through the game, and to my knowledge you cannot get different results by rerunning the same turn over again.

I think we are going off in three different directions here.

I am not speaking about the ¨combat text¨ file not matching what happened in the turn.

I am not speaking about the replay not matching what happened in the turn.

I am asking...has anyone ever ran a turn. Had a sub torpedo a battleship, just for an example. Then Re-ran the same turn and this same event did not take place. Has anyone ever had something similiar to this happen.

That´s my question. (to be...or not to be...[:D])

If so, send that turn to 2by3 games ASAP and let them look into it.

I for one have never seen this.

[tocaff]

I've had reported bomb hits, etc. on my ships and when I went to do my turn I expected a damaged vessel and there was none.  I'm not talking about paint being chipped on a BB by small bombs here either.  Sadly I don't have the saves that show this and I think that it just might be a Fog of War thing.

[Canoerebel]

I just checked the thread for the first time in four or five days. Sorry to see it end in a dust-up. Two things:

(a) I've played long, long UV and WitP games against Miller. He's a great opponent - faithful to the game, easy to get along with, totally trustworthy (or I wouldn't be posting an exhaustive AAR in our current WitP game).

(b) In UV scenarios 17 and 19 the Japanese cannot win on point against any Allied player (unless that player is a novice or gives up). You would have indeed lost this game to Miller. Or, if the shoe were on the other foot and you were playing Allies and Miller didn't get an auto-victory, you would win.

[Ike99]

You would have indeed lost this game to Miller.

Ohhhh....I don´t think so....

I've played long, long UV and WitP games against Miller. He's a great opponent - faithful to the game, easy to get along with, totally trustworthy (or I wouldn't be posting an exhaustive AAR in our current WitP game).

Right...and I´m not. [8|] Sorry, he accused me of rerunning turns to get different results. Something that has never been reported in 5 years this game has been out. One of the very programmers of this game from the company has been on here and said bottom line this has never been possible.

So defend your friend all you want but I know what was happening here in this game and think the majority of everyone else does to.

The ¨impossible¨ was happening and going to happen.

Perhaps you and Miller have played too long against each other and when someone new stepped in and brought a little more to the table than you were used to some people couldn´t handle it.

I must take my hat off to Ike, he is putting up a stiff challenge.

[tocaff]

I think the following:

We have no idea who would've won this game as it ended long before it needed to.
Nothing is impossible.
Any further controversy of a personal nature is counter productive here.

[Miller]

Its time to put this to bed now.

I stand by my claim that it is possible to re-run a turn as the IJN and get 2 different outcomes. I don't care if no-one else has ever reported it. It happened.

I apologise to Mario as I believe he was probably innocent of any wrong doing. That said, I wish he could have discussed it with me rather than go straight on the forum. To say that I was using it as an excuse because I was behind on points is silly.

As to who would have won, who knows? Mario thinks he would have won. I think I would have won. It would have been close. Unfortunately we will never find out.

This is my final word on this thread.

[Ike99]

Its time to put this to bed now.

I stand by my claim that it possible to re-run a turn as the IJN and get 2 different outcomes. I don't care if no-one else has ever reported it. It happened.

I apologise to Mario as I believe he was probably innocent of any wrong doing. That said, I wish he could have discussed it with me rather than go straight on the forum. To say that I was using it as an excuse because I was behing on points is silly.

As to who would have won, who knows? Mario thinks he would have won. I think I would have won. It would have been close. Unfortunately we will never find out.

This is my final word on this thread.

Hi Paul, I admit I may have been a bit hasty in throwing my password out there but I add I feel you were a bit hasty in saying I was re running my turns to change results...Well so be it.

I will not go so far as to say you are lying about re-running turns can change results. However, I do believe you are mistaken in this belief in some way.

If you are not mistaken and it happens again keep the turn and send it to 2by3 and let them look into it.

That´s all I can say.

[Joel Billings]

Ok, I think that should be the last word on this subject. If you do have a turn that you think will create different results by reloading and running again, please send it to us as 2by3@2by3games.com so we can have a look. Thanks.