Reluctant Admiral 3.0

[John 3rd]

YIKES. I remember a long time ago with RA I accidently hit the fillout all LCU button. FatR: You had this last. Do you think you accidently hit it? This is certainly not the case in Bill and I's 3.0 Game.

[FatR]

Oh god damn. Looks like we (or, most likely, I) screwed the pooch again, probably when correcting the numbers of construction squads/devices. John, I might still not be available to work on this in the next 2-3 days (sorry for being slow to answer your letters, BTW, the reason is the same, personal problems). Can you fix it, using the version 3.3 as a base? And explain to me how you actually set available percentage of TOE, so I won't do this again (I still thought that it is done on per-unit basis...)?

[FatR]

I think I figured out what happened - if a unit should be undestrength, this must be set manually for each unit in the editor, by reducing the number of devices. However indiscriminate use of the option "Update using TOE info", which, I belive, was my mistake, when I needecd to make actual units reflect changes to construction devices, sets the actual combat strength of units to its TOE!

I offer my apologies to everyone affected by this bug. The version 3.4 of Scen 70 with the fixed OOB will be available by the end of this week (I'm still not entirely free, and fixing every unit by hand is a lot of work).

[fcharton]

Thanks a lot, FatR !

And no rush for the update, our game hasn't begun, and we have a lot to do anyway, so chinese strategy (the part that needs those figures) can wait.

Francois, very impressed by the fast feedback he always gets...

[John 3rd]

THANKS!

Juan or JWE fixed this when I accidentally did the same thing when we first started this Mod. Is there a way to do this easily instead of one-by-one?

[SgtSwanson]

Has 3.4 been posted yet?

[Pascal_slith]

Why not set up a website through the Google system like Big B and others so it is easier to find the files to download?

[John 3rd]

We're headed that way for RA and the 'Perfect War' Mods.

FatR said he would be working to fix the issue. We've been crazy-busy so I apologize for both of us.

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: SgtSwanson

Has 3.4 been posted yet?

Expect it tomorrow. The cause of delay (which I thankfully noticed before posting 3.4) is that a lot more than Chinese units were affected. Lots and lots of starting Allied units or early reinforcements enter the game understrength or with various fluctuations in device lists compared to TOEs. Thankfully most of the work is complete now.

[John 3rd]

Thank You FatR!

[bk19@mweb.co.za]

Will it be possible to continue a game in progress once these corrections are installed?
Will the game in progress also be updated to reflect these corrections?

[SoliInvictus202]

ORIGINAL: FatR

ORIGINAL: SgtSwanson

Has 3.4 been posted yet?

Expect it tomorrow. The cause of delay (which I thankfully noticed before posting 3.4) is that a lot more than Chinese units were affected. Lots and lots of starting Allied units or early reinforcements enter the game understrength or with various fluctuations in device lists compared to TOEs. Thankfully most of the work is complete now.

that's great news - thanks a lot for the work!

[John 3rd]

ORIGINAL: bk19@mweb.co.za

Will it be possible to continue a game in progress once these corrections are installed?
Will the game in progress also be updated to reflect these corrections?

Well...the GOOD news is that you'll have some experience playing the Mod...and BAD news is that you'll need to restart...

Sorry.

[bk19@mweb.co.za]

Things could be a lot worse, my PBEM is still on its first turn, my AI version is a 1 game week old.

Thanks for the warning though.

[SoliInvictus202]

another thing I just came across as I was checking the ship availability:

is it intentional that the main armament of the Kawachi-Class CBs doesn't have any pen listed and also don't show any devices?

[John 3rd]

Well...THAT is a new one! Mine is fine with the 3.0 I am running. Stanislav?

[SoliInvictus202]

another, this time probably stupid, question:

the G3M4-Q Nell is the ASW patrol plane - is it just patrolling (like an Emily) or does it have something to shoot at the damn buggers as well? - especially since it seems to auto-upgrade from one of my favourite flying torches - the G3M3 Nell...
because if it is just patrolling in the sky above the SS - then I'll stick to the usual "gamey" procedure and simply train my Helen and Sally pilots to 70 ASW...

[FatR]

Not sure why these problems are surfacing again, SoliInvictus, most likely I forgot to reenter thi Kawachi maingun device after second replacement of the device list to one including improved stuff from DaBabes. What's bizarre, I clearly remember inserting it back again... Anyway, I double checked to see that these problems are not present in the version 3.4:

http://www.box.net/shared/0fap9a1q81p9p7fib9v2

OOB fixed, so that Chinese and other Allied units don't start with full strength where they shouldn't. Extra started Australian CD units fixed so that they do not register as Dutch and have correct guns (CD units from Cocos and Christmas IO removed, don't know what they were doing there, Rabaul unit is toned down, Moresby unit is actually stronger now due to superior guns).

John, please update the link in your signature.

Frankly, I feel very demoralized by all these repeated flaws. We need to dedicate far more time, including at least running a test turn 1 with full order routine for both sides, specifically to testing, before we release any major version in the future, because I, at least, clearly don't have necessary perceptiveness to spot mistakes. Full and detailed changelist is also clearly necessary for the work on Perfect War mod.

[fcharton]

Hi FatR,

First, thanks a lot for the quick response.

ORIGINAL: FatR
Frankly, I feel very demoralized by all these repeated flaws. We need to dedicate far more time, including at least running a test turn 1 with full order routine for both sides, specifically to testing, before we release any major version in the future, because I, at least, clearly don't have necessary perceptiveness to spot mistakes. Full and detailed changelist is also clearly necessary for the work on Perfect War mod.

I believe it is, unfortunately, related to the fact that there are less mod players than there used to be. Test base is smaller.

What could be done to help checking new versions? I have the impression that 3.0 is better tester, because it was played more. Could we then have Tracker, or similar, exports, for 3.0 at start, and perhaps a minimal changelog? Comparing nr of units, AV, supplies, sum of base sizes, nr of planes, devices, is pretty easy to do in Excel, using Tracker.

This would not detect everything, but I'm sure it would eliminate frustrating flaws as this one (and of course it is not specific to RA, this approach could be used to any mod currently in development)

Francois

[John 3rd]

THANKS Stanislav!

Not a bad idea. The Change Log for 3.0 is, more-or-less, included at the start of this.

Several of these problems that FatR just fixed are perplexing. HOW did the Chinese go to full strength? How did we lose the 12.1" Guns for Kawachi when I know they were put back in not once but TWICE?!! 'Tis a puzzlement...

Playtesters are most definitely needed for the Mods. Ours may not have the following of DaBabes but we still need help in spotting errors and issues. This will be even more true for the Perfect War Mod since the changes there are much more detailed and pervasive.