Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 January 2012 (2nd part)

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: bbbf

ORIGINAL: michaelm

ORIGINAL: bbbf

I've tried reading through the patch notes, but can't find this request, my apologies if it is already in there somewhere.

Is it possible to have the aircraft (& engine) pool numbers shown in the industry management screen somewhere? Even if it only comes up when you click on the aircraft/engine and it appears in the change box.

It would make management a lot easier.

Thanks.

IIRC, the 'In pool' totals for Engines and Air are the totals from the pool.

Sorry, didn't make myself clear - I am talking about the actual airframe/engine numbers per type, i.e. A6M2 172 in pool.

I don't believe that information is in the overall industry management screen - but Ihave been badly wrong more than once before!

The Industry Management screen is for the overall view, not specifics which is under the Aircraft/Engine screen from the Intel screen.

[beppi]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

ORIGINAL: beppi

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Good.
It is repeatable under the current beta.
However, I can only fix it with the current code. Not older one.

The issue was a combination of number of aircraft in the air combat.
One of those 'the right combination of events'.

Wow that was quick, and thanks a lot for the quick fix. Should we install the newest beta patch prior to your new .exe or is it enough to just copy it over ? We have 1108p9b.

You can download and unzip into the beta directory to replace the EXE. No need to run the intermediate installer.
It should also address the VF-6 issue too.

Again many thanks regarding the fix against the crash. But it seems the second unit is still unable to upgrade. It attached a save of the correspond "message". The unit has size 40, and all remaining fragments are "unknown" -> as far as i remember they are destroyes. But still unable to uprade. This is not a high priority issue.

[m10bob]

(Bump from a coupkle of days ago)..

Hello michaelm..Would it be possible/feasable to make 2 forms of auto convoy:Sea-going and coastal..?

The latter would be entirely historical and could allow smaller craft like LST's to engage in those duties, as IRL..

I like chrome as much as the next guy..

[jmalter]

want to post here my thanks to michaelm for some recent fixes:
[1108q2]
Tweak Allow ships to refuel small amount from port without excessive Ops expenditure [MEM]
[1108q3]
Tweak Limit Ops expenditure for docked TFs to those ships actually doing something [MEM]

they seem to be working well.

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: m10bob

(Bump from a coupkle of days ago)..

Hello michaelm..Would it be possible/feasable to make 2 forms of auto convoy:Sea-going and coastal..?

The latter would be entirely historical and could allow smaller craft like LST's to engage in those duties, as IRL..

I like chrome as much as the next guy..

I can look into it, but I doubt the current AC structure will support it when large changes.

[bbbf]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

ORIGINAL: bbbf

ORIGINAL: michaelm



IIRC, the 'In pool' totals for Engines and Air are the totals from the pool.

Sorry, didn't make myself clear - I am talking about the actual airframe/engine numbers per type, i.e. A6M2 172 in pool.

I don't believe that information is in the overall industry management screen - but Ihave been badly wrong more than once before!

The Industry Management screen is for the overall view, not specifics which is under the Aircraft/Engine screen from the Intel screen.

True, but it's quite annoying to be managing your aircraft/engines and having to jump out, look in the intel screen and then return to the industry screen.

I could understand if you couldn't manage production of aircraft and engines by type in the industry screen but you can. Having the info right there would stop a lot of extra clicks to and fro.

[m10bob]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

ORIGINAL: m10bob

(Bump from a coupkle of days ago)..

Hello michaelm..Would it be possible/feasable to make 2 forms of auto convoy:Sea-going and coastal..?

The latter would be entirely historical and could allow smaller craft like LST's to engage in those duties, as IRL..

I like chrome as much as the next guy..

I can look into it, but I doubt the current AC structure will support it when large changes.

Thank you michaelm..........[:)]

[hades1001]

anyone experiencing inconsistency of combat report and 001 after upgrading to 1108q3?
We didn't have the problem when we start the game with 1108q2, but after that I'm have this problem as Allied player.

Any one have the same problem as I do? Thank you.

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: hades1001

anyone experiencing inconsistency of combat report and 001 after upgrading to 1108q3?
We didn't have the problem when we start the game with 1108q2, but after that I'm have this problem as Allied player.

Any one have the same problem as I do? Thank you.

I suppose it depends if you both are using the same EXE.
The q3 installer and a hotfix q3. Probably is that the save can't tell which one.
I suggest you both compare the date stamp on the EXE in the Beta2 directory.

[undercovergeek]

Michael do you have access to any code that changes the positioning of the text on the ship info screens, as mentioned in the modding section i want to drop the lines down a tad to free up the top half of the info screen for a bigger .bmp and therefore more detail

[undercovergeek]

Michael do you have access to any code that changes the positioning of the text on the ship info screens, as mentioned in the modding section i want to drop the lines down a tad to free up the top half of the info screen for a bigger .bmp and therefore more detail

[hades1001]

Problem solved, thank you

[Numdydar]

Well I have to admit that something is definately wrong with Japenese R&D in the p2 patch. It is accelerating planes FAR too fast for some reason. It seems like the R&D factories are producing points based on their monthly totals on a daily basis versus a monthly one. As I have been closely tracking this I can confirm the following as an example of the problem.

I am producing 64 R&D points (under p2) per month for a plane type. This should mean that in about 45 days, I should get a one month advance.
However, I am getting advances every 6 days [X(]. Obviously WAY too fast lol.

So while imho R&D factories SHOULD produce points even if damaged, obviously I will need to upgrade ASAP. Otherwise I am going to have 1945 planes in just a few months lol. While I may not mind so much, somehow I think my opponate may [:D]

I can only hope that the fix of the fix did not go too far the other way.

[n01487477]

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Well I have to admit that something is definately wrong with Japenese R&D in the p2 patch. It is accelerating planes FAR too fast for some reason. It seems like the R&D factories are producing points based on their monthly totals on a daily basis versus a monthly one. As I have been closely tracking this I can confirm the following as an example of the problem.

I am producing 64 R&D points (under p2) per month for a plane type. This should mean that in about 45 days, I should get a one month advance.
However, I am getting advances every 6 days [X(]. Obviously WAY too fast lol.

So while imho R&D factories SHOULD produce points even if damaged, obviously I will need to upgrade ASAP. Otherwise I am going to have 1945 planes in just a few months lol. While I may not mind so much, somehow I think my opponate may [:D]

I can only hope that the fix of the fix did not go too far the other way.

Not that I agree with Numdydar on what he wants from R&D, but I have just done a cursory test under 8q3a and I seem to be getting double the points. I'll test some more as time allows.
Regards,

[michaelm75au]

[edit]
removed incomplete formula

[Numdydar]

Really?

So according to this, 4 cities with 1 factory each of worth 5, i.e. 5(0) could produce the number of points as 4 cities with 1 factory each worth 1 point each, i.e. 1(0)? So the number of points an R&D factory produces is meaningless? it is just based on number of factories/cities? So any expansion of R&D factories is a waste of time? Talk about not intutive as this is completely different than the regular production.

So a
1 city with 1 factory can produce 1-3 points/turn (I assume that you are garrentteed a 1 point minimum) regardless of factory size
2 cities with 1 factory can produce 2 -6 points/turn
2 cities with 2 factories can produce 4 - 12 points/turn

Well this certainly explains a lot as to why the R&D factories always start damaged. Of course it does not explain why the Hellen Ias are not damaged though (plus one other I can't recall)

So if I had 10 cities with 1 factory each, I could get 10-30 points/day? So every 10 days minimum I would get an acceleration (once all the factories were repaired of course)? All I can say is wow. As far as I know, no one (including me, and I REALLY dug into this to make sure I uderstood this) understands this is the way this works.

It really seems to me that the size of the factory should matter. Below is how I thought it worked and truly think how it should work

Damaged R&D factories produce 0 points towards acceleration
Repaired R&D factories produce their value towards acceleration. A 5(0) will produce 5 points/MONTH, a 20(0) will produce 20 points/month, etc. So factory size will matter [:D]

So only the thing that would matter is the factory size versus the number of cities/factories combination. This would match the normal production better and slow down acceleration to a more 'historical' pace.

Because at the rate I am going I will have over a year's advance in a very short period of time lol.

[michaelm75au]

[edit]
removed incomplete formula

[FeurerKrieg]

Wow - this is all very eye opening.

I haven't been following this beta thread until Numy posted in the accelerating frames thread.

So, michaelm, is what you are describing (the factory size of 1-19 = 1, 20-29 =2, 30-39 = 3) the way things are in the currently official build?

Talk about going back to the drawing board. Glad I haven't yet made production changes in the game I'm about to start up. Given the amount of time it takes to repair R&D factories, I think the optimal R&D factory size is 1 then. And for targeted models, you would want to convert several factories to that model in order to gain as many single R&D points per day as possible.

Unless I'm reading this wrong of course.

EDIT: And the random number is just the chance of 1, 2 or 3 right? Zero is not a possible outcome?

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: Feurer Krieg

Wow - this is all very eye opening.

I haven't been following this beta thread until Numy posted in the accelerating frames thread.

So, michaelm, is what you are describing (the factory size of 1-19 = 1, 20-29 =2, 30-39 = 3) the way things are in the currently official build?

Talk about going back to the drawing board. Glad I haven't yet made production changes in the game I'm about to start up. Given the amount of time it takes to repair R&D factories, I think the optimal R&D factory size is 1 then. And for targeted models, you would want to convert several factories to that model in order to gain as many single R&D points per day as possible.

Unless I'm reading this wrong of course.

EDIT: And the random number is just the chance of 1, 2 or 3 right? Zero is not a possible outcome?

It is possible but because there are no damaged devices, '1' gets added as a bonus.
When I had incorrectly allowed factories with damaged devcies to produce R&D, it was possible to get '0'.

[FeurerKrieg]

Hmmm.. so are you saying a factory with 1(0) device is actually a chance of 1 OR 2?

So, +1 automatically because of zero damaged devices, and then a random chance of one more (due to having 1-19 devices)?