Reluctant Admiral Feedback

[yubari]

I wouldn't recommend trying to do changes during the game, it has caused problems for all of my US battleships upgrade sequences, as you can see in the picture below. I dont know whether this is a mod specific problem or a game problem. It is notable that only the US battleships are affected, all of the British battleships and US cruisers and destroyers still have their correct upgrade paths.

[FatR]

I found another bug: Myoko-class cruisers mysteriously don't have any belt armor until their first upgrade. Can anyone check if this is true for their versions of the mod?

[John 3rd]

Wow. That sucks! Hmmm...start a list...

[John 3rd]

HOW could this happen? Juan and I did the ship work so it is nuts to find this:

[FatR]

It is possible to reset a value to zero in the editor with an inaccurate click. I know this had happened with one of the planes before.

Anyway, I think this warrants a fixed version. I have a version with the fixed Japanese fighter speed issue, if you want, I can fix Myokos armor in it and upload it.

[Historiker]

afaik, there's no G5, is that correct?
Why? I liked having a 4e, too [:)]

[John 3rd]

FatR--Go ahead and take care of that. Guess this means we keep our Front Line CAs hidden in Port or only with the CVs until Nov 42? NEAT! Grrr...

[John 3rd]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

afaik, there's no G5, is that correct?
Why? I liked having a 4e, too [:)]

Sorry for not responding earlier. You are correct that there is no G5, however, the Japanese do have 4E Bombers.

Their 'best in the world' CAs don't have armor but we DO have 4E Bombers...

[FatR]

Well, at least only one class is affected...

I've sent you the link to the fixed version (it also resets Japanese fighters speed back to normal).

[John 3rd]

We need to get the updated RA fixing this to the Scenario Mod site.

[John 3rd]

Can we do a database change fixing the armor issue without having to restart?

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

We need to get the updated RA fixing this to the Scenario Mod site.

I've sent you the link.

As about the database update, theoretically it can be done through the Preferences screen, but, as you can see above, bugs can happen.

[guctony]

Currently I have a PBEM playing Reluctant Admiral. I have two issues I could not solve. I cannot reload Yamato main guns. She is in tokyo with 400 naval supply and with largest avaible AKEs she wont load. Second issue is I just discover some of my CVs air group count is doubled.

Is there any suggestions
Here is their jpgs

[guctony]

and this is airgroup jpg

[John 3rd]

I've got Yamato deployed right now (March 13, 1942) but haven't had to do a reload of her main battery. There is no reason why that won't reload. WE changed nothing with that in RA. You tried that in Tokyo?!! Supply is a little low but everything else appears OK.

Anyone have any suggestions here? Is this a bug?

Can you Post your picture of the Air Group re-size issue?

[Local Yokel]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Anyone have any suggestions here? Is this a bug?

One thing that does strike me is that Yamato's ammunition load has been increased from 9 factors (per rifle, I believe) in the standard scenario to 22 in RA.

In the test I've just set up to check whether in principle a Yamato can replenish main batteries from an ammunition ship, I was able to replenish the magazines only for the 6 forward rifles, at a cost of 722 operations points, from memory. I infer that to arrive at the operations point cost per ammunition factor, it's necessary to divide that 722 point total by the number of rifles times the number of ammunition factors in the standard load; i.e. 6 rifles X 9 factors yields a divisor of 54. Applied to the ops points total that means a cost of 13.73 operational points per factor loaded.

It looks to me as though Guctony partially succeeded in replenishing Yamato's main battery magazines, as she is showing a full load for the magazine of her aft main battery turret. If I'm right about the operational points calculation for such partial replenishment, the relevant calculation will be 13.73 points per factor per rifle X 22 factors (standard load for this mod) X 3 rifles of the aft turret = 882.42. Had the forward magazines been replenished the cost of doing so would have been 1764.84, but I suspect that once the cost goes past 1000 points per weapon slot, the operation just gets aborted - and that may be why it's proving impossible to reload the forward magazines.

No doubt someone with knowledge of the code can correct me if my analysis is wrong, but this seems to be a feasible explanation of what is taking place.

[JuanG]

ORIGINAL: Local Yokel

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Anyone have any suggestions here? Is this a bug?

One thing that does strike me is that Yamato's ammunition load has been increased from 9 factors (per rifle, I believe) in the standard scenario to 22 in RA.

In the test I've just set up to check whether in principle a Yamato can replenish main batteries from an ammunition ship, I was able to replenish the magazines only for the 6 forward rifles, at a cost of 722 operations points, from memory. I infer that to arrive at the operations point cost per ammunition factor, it's necessary to divide that 722 point total by the number of rifles times the number of ammunition factors in the standard load; i.e. 6 rifles X 9 factors yields a divisor of 54. Applied to the ops points total that means a cost of 13.73 operational points per factor loaded.

It looks to me as though Guctony partially succeeded in replenishing Yamato's main battery magazines, as she is showing a full load for the magazine of her aft main battery turret. If I'm right about the operational points calculation for such partial replenishment, the relevant calculation will be 13.73 points per factor per rifle X 22 factors (standard load for this mod) X 3 rifles of the aft turret = 882.42. Had the forward magazines been replenished the cost of doing so would have been 1764.84, but I suspect that once the cost goes past 1000 points per weapon slot, the operation just gets aborted - and that may be why it's proving impossible to reload the forward magazines.

No doubt someone with knowledge of the code can correct me if my analysis is wrong, but this seems to be a feasible explanation of what is taking place.

Interesting theory; would be nice to know if there is infact a hard coded limit on it of some kind.

Im going to run a few tests of my own (since these ammo changes were my idea/fault), because if you're right then it may be more than Yamato that is affected.

UPDATE:
Yes, seems you were correct. There is a hard cap of 1000 ops points for loading, and as 'partial' loads arent possible, the most 46cm ammo you can load at a time is 12 'ammo units'. Not only does this affect Yamato, but I assume Nagato, Iowa and Colorado, etc all have the same problem.

There are a few ways to solve this in the short term;
1) Split turrets into small groups, so Yamato would have 3 '46cm/45' devices, 2 facing F and 1 facing R. This is the most elegant solution, but also monstrous amounts of work - I will probably do this for my Mk2 scenarios which have the same ammo changes. Might have a beneficial side effect of BBs using their main guns more often in Surface Combat.
2) Cut ammo counts for BB guns - simple, but also quite a bit of work, and sort of defeats the point of the changes in the first place. Would mean a max of 12 for Yamato, and 14-15 for the 16" crowd.
3) Drop the load cost - I think gun load cost is based on the Soft Attack value of the weapon, not effect, and so lowering this might allow the guns to load at the expense of weaker bombardment; which may or may not be a good thing. I will run some tests to see if this is correct and possible.

In the long term, it might be worth asking to see if this could be fixed in the code.

UPDATE 2:
Seems option 3 is not possible, it looks like the load cost is derived directly from effect. Guess this means its either gonna be 1 or 2 or something else altogeather.

[John 3rd]

This is good to know Juan. How can we replenish these big BBs if we have this problem? Will we simply have to settle for partial loads?

[guctony]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

This is good to know Juan. How can we replenish these big BBs if we have this problem? Will we simply have to settle for partial loads?

That what I wonder also. at least I dont spend points to mushashi

[JuanG]

Well, basically, as things stand, if these big BBs go down below a certain amount of ammo (10 for Yamat0's) the front guns cannot be reloaded. At all. Unless this is changed in a code patch, then it will remain that way.

My suggestion is to do two things; release an interrim update to your scenarios that reduces the ammo load on all these BBs to 12 or so (solution 2 above). This should be the only change, and this update is intended for those who are already running a game.

The second is to make a modified version of the scenario with main batteries broken down further, into say a maximum of 4 devices per group (so an 8 gun BB is 4(F) and 4(R), a 9 gun BB is 3(F),3(F) and 3(R), and things like Fuso are 4(F) and 4(C) and 4(R), etc). This is solution 1 above, and takes a lot of work - basically having to modify most of the devices on all of the BBs. I can get started on this if you'd like, but it may take me a week or so. This one should be done in a seperate scenario slot (#71?) as changes like this tend to screw with ongoing games (as happened with the whole US BB mess; also my fault for not realizing how the update system worked).