Moved to another Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108p3 updated 10 July

[berto]

A tooltip bug, in the 1108k9 beta build.

For the 7th JAAF Base Force



its Aviation Support is 46 (verified also in the Pisanuloke base screen), but in the tooltip for that unit



there is no "V46" for either the unit itself or in the Total line at the bottom.

I am seeing V numbers and totals for Aviation-Support-capable units elsewhere on the map.

save

edit> This problem went away after a while.

[CaptBeefheart]

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735


Can that ship transit a river? I bet it's too big and it's stuck in Portland. It should have it's port of entry set to SF, but that's an oob change, not a code change.

Thanks for the explanation.

Cheers,
CC

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: berto

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Added Hotkey '5' will show the supply path from the selected base where the number shows the lessening effect of supply [MEM]

Another fantastic feature, but ... in some hexes by the absence of supply numbers, it seems I can infer the presence of enemy units, something that reconnaissance is otherwise not revealing to me. In other words, this feature is helping to dispel the Fog of War. WAD, or an unintended side effect?

Unintended.
Ignoring presence of enemy units would make showing the path useless as path would change.
Absence of supply numbers could be due to other factors apart from enemy.
The strength of enemy units is still unknown.

If the use of '5' is detrimental, I'll just drop it or limit it to just AI games.

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: Commander Cody

Michaelm: Great work with all of these updates. I had the second ARD (AFDB-2) come in at Portland and when I form a Support TF out of it and try to select any new home port (for instance, Pearl Harbor) it comes up: "HOME BASE MUST BE ACCESSIBLE BY THIS TF!!" I noticed this in K8 and it's the same issue in K9.

Interestingly enough, I tested AFDB-1, which I have parked at Rabaul, and I had no problem forming a Support TF out of it and selecting any home port.

Cheers,
CC

Do you have the save where it is in Portland?
I thought that if a 'too big' ship arrived in a smaller port, the ship got moved to the national home base on arrival.
[edit]
Do worry I just found a save.

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: Commander Cody

Michaelm: Great work with all of these updates. I had the second ARD (AFDB-2) come in at Portland and when I form a Support TF out of it and try to select any new home port (for instance, Pearl Harbor) it comes up: "HOME BASE MUST BE ACCESSIBLE BY THIS TF!!" I noticed this in K8 and it's the same issue in K9.

Interestingly enough, I tested AFDB-1, which I have parked at Rabaul, and I had no problem forming a Support TF out of it and selecting any home port.

Cheers,
CC

I thought that this had been corrected in a previous patch by changing the arrival base to Seattle in the scenarios.

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: berto

A tooltip bug, in the 1108k9 beta build.

For the 7th JAAF Base Force



its Aviation Support is 46 (verified also in the Pisanuloke base screen), but in the tooltip for that unit



there is no "V46" for either the unit itself or in the Total line at the bottom.

I am seeing V numbers and totals for Aviation-Support-capable units elsewhere on the map.

save

edit> This problem went away after a while.

Loaded the save and the AV total for that unit in save was '0'. It would have happened in the previous turn as this total is generated as part of the supply check at end of each turn. [I can't see how it would not have been set if the other support totals were set as they happen at the same time]
It was correct when I ran the save for the next turn.

[edit]
I noticed in another thread, you mentioned that the 7th JAAF BF had recently arrived.
This seems to be it - the support totals are not being updated for newly arriving units until the supply phase of the next turn.(WAD)

[Sardaukar]

I wonder if it would be possible to get a hotkey for "Patrol around target" for TF waypoints selection..that would save several clicks for my sub TF assignations...

[USSAmerica]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

ORIGINAL: berto

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Added Hotkey '5' will show the supply path from the selected base where the number shows the lessening effect of supply [MEM]

Another fantastic feature, but ... in some hexes by the absence of supply numbers, it seems I can infer the presence of enemy units, something that reconnaissance is otherwise not revealing to me. In other words, this feature is helping to dispel the Fog of War. WAD, or an unintended side effect?

Unintended.
Ignoring presence of enemy units would make showing the path useless as path would change.
Absence of supply numbers could be due to other factors apart from enemy.
The strength of enemy units is still unknown.

If the use of '5' is detrimental, I'll just drop it or limit it to just AI games.

Love the added feature, Michael, but if there's no way to avoid this unintended side effect then I would vote for dropping it. To me, even the knowledge of otherwise unspotted LCU's in a hex is "spoiling the surprise." [:D]

[michaelm75au]

I will drop it back to AI games.
Didn't think about the effect on PBEM.[&:]

[berto]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

ORIGINAL: berto

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Added Hotkey '5' will show the supply path from the selected base where the number shows the lessening effect of supply [MEM]

Another fantastic feature, but ... in some hexes by the absence of supply numbers, it seems I can infer the presence of enemy units, something that reconnaissance is otherwise not revealing to me. In other words, this feature is helping to dispel the Fog of War. WAD, or an unintended side effect?

Unintended.
Ignoring presence of enemy units would make showing the path useless as path would change.
Absence of supply numbers could be due to other factors apart from enemy.
The strength of enemy units is still unknown.

If the use of '5' is detrimental, I'll just drop it or limit it to just AI games.

Supply paths are vital information. On balance, I would say keep them. The pros outweigh the cons.

edit> At least make it an optional rule. I'd hate to lose this wonderful feature.

[michaelm75au]

I may compromise (as usual) by just showing the 'green dots' of the hexes within the supply range.
You wont know if the path ended due to running out of supply points or presence of enemy unit.

[berto]

The numbers are good to know. But too much bean counting is bad. So, yes, maybe half a loaf is better than none.

Maybe wait to see what others have to say about this.

[KittyHawk]

Michael

Thanks for all your work on the Betas.

After updating my diagram for bombing altitudes, I was wonder if you see anything out of place with the changes made over the last few betas.

KHawk

[foliveti]

I thought dive bombing worked at 10K?  Does it need to go up to 11k?

[KittyHawk]

That is kind of why I am asking. I go in at 12000 just to be safe.

There has been changes with the attack bombers and torpedo bombers.

Recently I tried using fighters at 12000 and they seamed to Level Bomb.

Was hoping to get the facts.

KHawk

[Buck Beach]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

I may compromise (as usual) by just showing the 'green dots' of the hexes within the supply range.
You wont know if the path ended due to running out of supply points or presence of enemy unit.

The problem with green dots is that for us color blind people (and there are a lot of us)it provides no information. This is just not for this issue but for all such color items in the game.

That would be red/green color blind.

[USSAmerica]

Don't know about fighters, but DB's do dive attack from 10,000'.  

[USSAmerica]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

I may compromise (as usual) by just showing the 'green dots' of the hexes within the supply range.
You wont know if the path ended due to running out of supply points or presence of enemy unit.

Seems a very good compromise to me. [:)]

[michaelm75au]

Still not happy with resource/oil movement.
Seems that bases are holding onto too much and not letting it flow to ports. The fuel/supply seems to flow okay.

[berto]

A move tick bug, in the 1108k9 beta build.

For the LCU icon in hex 57,53 (just west of Chiang Mai)





the move tick is pointing east, but all LCUs in that hex are moving west, to Paingkyon hex 56,53.

save

This was a concern for me in an earlier turn. Elements of this stack were then at Chiang Mai. My orders were for them to march west, but the move tick was pointing southeast. Concerned that somehow the game really would have them move down the rail line southeast despite my orders for them to move west along the secondary road, I cancelled the move.

So, just a cosmetic issue? But maybe has a real effect on game play.