Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r9 updated 21 January 2012 (2nd part)
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
- USSAmerica
- Posts: 19211
- Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2002 4:32 am
- Location: Graham, NC, USA
- Contact:
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r8 updated 14 January 2012 (2nd part)
When you call him on the phone, he will say his name is Jimmy, and he's located in Indiana. [:D]
Mike
"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett
"They need more rum punch" - Me

Artwork by The Amazing Dixie
"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett
"They need more rum punch" - Me

Artwork by The Amazing Dixie
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r8 updated 14 January 2012 (2nd part)
[:D] No offense to Indians, but I do not want to put to sea with Wasp with an 800 help line in charge.
- michaelm75au
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: Sat May 05, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r8 updated 14 January 2012 (2nd part)
Attach a save plsORIGINAL: zuluhour
FUBAR: see below (2-posts)
![]()
Michael
- michaelm75au
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: Sat May 05, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r8 updated 14 January 2012 (2nd part)
Updated installer.
Sometimes air ground attack with friendly LCUs in hex wouldn't rebuild list of units in hex to get the enemy ones.
Sometimes air ground attack with friendly LCUs in hex wouldn't rebuild list of units in hex to get the enemy ones.
Michael
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r8 updated 14 January 2012 (2nd part)
When the indian Cricket Team sent out for a new captain that isnt quite what they meant!!
(Commonwealth joke only!)
(Commonwealth joke only!)
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r8 updated 14 January 2012 (2nd part)
I had this same error - only Indian commanders available.
Latest patch, Aug. 1942.
I think the carrier was either the Wasp or Hornet in a single carrier TF.
Latest patch, Aug. 1942.
I think the carrier was either the Wasp or Hornet in a single carrier TF.
Ubique
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r8 updated 14 January 2012 (2nd part)
Michael,ORIGINAL: michaelm
Updated installer.
Sometimes air ground attack with friendly LCUs in hex wouldn't rebuild list of units in hex to get the enemy ones.
Thanks for the great ongoing support!!!
[&o][&o][&o]
Pax
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r8 updated 14 January 2012 (2nd part)
save attached: ref: Wasp FUBAR
- Attachments
-
- wpae010.zip
- (2.61 MiB) Downloaded 11 times
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r8 updated 14 January 2012 (2nd part)
MichaelM; I hope I did the save correctly, its been awhile.
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r8 updated 14 January 2012 (2nd part)
Oh Yeah, PS [&o][&o][&o]
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r8 updated 14 January 2012 (2nd part)
ORIGINAL: BigDuke66
@Califvol
Switch to Foobar, never had problems running that in background, who needs Real Player anyway?
Thanks for the tip! It appears that solved my issues.
Why am I sharing my opinion? Because I am such a special snowflake that others need my knowledge. What…there are like a billion snowflakes? Oh, well isn't that special.
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r8 updated 14 January 2012 (2nd part)
My pleasure.
@michaelm
Any chance for a filter that shows idle(no loading or unloading) task forces on the TF list?
@michaelm
Any chance for a filter that shows idle(no loading or unloading) task forces on the TF list?
- Treetop64
- Posts: 933
- Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 4:20 am
- Location: 519 Redwood City - BASE (Hex 218, 70)
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r8 updated 14 January 2012 (2nd part)
ORIGINAL: michaelm
Attach a save plsORIGINAL: zuluhour
FUBAR: see below (2-posts)
![]()
It could be worse. All your ships could be taken over by Japanese commanders! [:D]
Those were the days...

- michaelm75au
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: Sat May 05, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r8 updated 14 January 2012 (2nd part)
ORIGINAL: zuluhour
save attached: ref: Wasp FUBAR
The IND is in charge of Wasp and thus that seems to be the controlling factor in regard to the TF leader.
Changing the Wasp to a US leader, makes the TF leader list pop up with many choices.
The initial issue would have been why IND leader was made the captain of the Wasp!
Michael
- Oliver Heindorf
- Posts: 1911
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 2:49 am
- Location: Hamburg/Deutschland
CV TF Force allocation
Despite the Ghost Indian take over over the Wasp, another thing catched my Eye:
"He who combines Semi-modern CV's (Wasp) with slow old Battle wagons ( pre War BB's) and slow CVE's ans Semi modern CA's deserves it exactly the way it goes."
No american Commander really wanted to reign this crappy combination of forces and thats why the IND took over sayin' "Hey, I'll do the job". [:'(][:D]
"He who combines Semi-modern CV's (Wasp) with slow old Battle wagons ( pre War BB's) and slow CVE's ans Semi modern CA's deserves it exactly the way it goes."
No american Commander really wanted to reign this crappy combination of forces and thats why the IND took over sayin' "Hey, I'll do the job". [:'(][:D]
RE: CV TF Force allocation
I would have to agree with you Oliver..
Life is tough. The sooner you realize that, the easier it will be.
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r8 updated 14 January 2012 (2nd part)
Thanks MichaelM!!! I never put into a foreign port with Wasp, so I'm unclear how the situation arose.
My friend Oliver, the task force was for viewing pleasure[;)] as I was trying alot of stuff to figure out why I had an Indian Admiral.
My friend Oliver, the task force was for viewing pleasure[;)] as I was trying alot of stuff to figure out why I had an Indian Admiral.
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r8 updated 14 January 2012 (2nd part)
In the same vein, the two Kiwi cruisers begin the war with ensigns in command ...
"Conquer, or Die!"
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r8 updated 14 January 2012 (2nd part)
Another thread reminded me to ask: When making an amphibious landing, I may deploy capital ships with the landing forces, but in so doing, also commit their fire power to enemy land suppression, therefor, I like to keep a friendly surface force in the same hex to ward off enemy suface raiders and neutralize most air intruders.
Problem:Once a friendly suface force is engaged, the force commander allows his force to sail away, leaving that hex weakened. Might there be a way to keep that force in that hex?
Thank you michaelm for your consideration.
Problem:Once a friendly suface force is engaged, the force commander allows his force to sail away, leaving that hex weakened. Might there be a way to keep that force in that hex?
Thank you michaelm for your consideration.

- michaelm75au
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: Sat May 05, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108r8 updated 14 January 2012 (2nd part)
One interesting thing brought to my attention on the Industry Management screen.
[ No change is being made. This is just for my information.]
1. The Engine column shows the total production as the total number of active devices. Which would equate to the likely number of engines for the 30-day month. As a result, the HI required total is for the same time period.
The actual production would more likely be 1/30 of that total, and thus 1/30 of the required HI.
2. The Air column doesn't show the required HI for production. Again both these figures are (or would be) for a 30-day period.
As it has been this way since the introduction of the screen, no one obviously has any issue with this.[:D]
But should it really show this (the required HI) as a 30-day total when all the other totals basically show as a turn requirement??
Or are players using the 30-day totals as a guide to ensuring that they keep plenty of HI to support the continual production of engines and aircraft.
[edit]
The other thing I just noticed is that even when production is turned off, the 'required' totals are still updated with them.
[ No change is being made. This is just for my information.]
1. The Engine column shows the total production as the total number of active devices. Which would equate to the likely number of engines for the 30-day month. As a result, the HI required total is for the same time period.
The actual production would more likely be 1/30 of that total, and thus 1/30 of the required HI.
2. The Air column doesn't show the required HI for production. Again both these figures are (or would be) for a 30-day period.
As it has been this way since the introduction of the screen, no one obviously has any issue with this.[:D]
But should it really show this (the required HI) as a 30-day total when all the other totals basically show as a turn requirement??
Or are players using the 30-day totals as a guide to ensuring that they keep plenty of HI to support the continual production of engines and aircraft.
[edit]
The other thing I just noticed is that even when production is turned off, the 'required' totals are still updated with them.
Michael







