Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1126b updated 17 Sept 2016

[bk19@mweb.co.za]

Hi Michaelm,

I have completed a reboot of my machine and then reinstalled *e.exe and *f.exe. The installers no longer request a reboot......

To answer your last questions I am running Win 7 Ultimate 64 bit with an Intel I7 chipset...

The AE Install directory is: "E:\Extended Disk\Matrix Games\War in the Pacific (Admirals Edition)" and has been that ever since the initial release.

Things have sorted themselves out now.. I think there is little point in pressing the issue further... thanks for your help all the same though...

best wishes

[Uncivil Engineer]

Does the 1119 update run OK with the extended map and RA (or Babes) data? I'm trying to get an RA PBEM game started and we're running into differing install issues. Thanks.

[michaelm75au]

yes

[John 3rd]

I was about the ask the same thing. Both my RA Games have decided to bring forward our update to the current Beta. Will there be another coming out soon or are we good for the immediate future?

[n01487477]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I was about the ask the same thing. Both my RA Games have decided to bring forward our update to the current Beta. Will there be another coming out soon or are we good for the immediate future?

I'd be cautious about that decision John, I know Micheal is doing yeomans work but given the patch is still experiencing some prob's .. (see Movement bug thread tm.asp?m=3204169), well it's up to you mate ...

I've not seen Micheal comment on this issue, nor tested it either.

[viberpol]

ORIGINAL: n01487477

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I was about the ask the same thing. Both my RA Games have decided to bring forward our update to the current Beta. Will there be another coming out soon or are we good for the immediate future?

I'd be cautious about that decision John, I know Micheal is doing yeomans work but given the patch is still experiencing some prob's .. (see Movement bug thread tm.asp?m=3204169), well it's up to you mate ...

I've not seen Micheal comment on this issue, nor tested it either.

Glad to see you in here Damian.
I've got an issue while trying to load new save under 19f into Tracker.
Seems like a problem comparing databases...? [&:][:(]




------- EDIT --------

ORIGINAL: n01487477

Hi Arkadiusz (Viperpool),
If you've gone from a save under the patch to the beta within Tracker there will probably be problems. You need to use the new beta dll in the tracker folder and also probably a reinitialising of the database.

Cheers

OK. That .dll movement fixes the issue.
Thanks a lot! [&o]

[n01487477]

ORIGINAL: viberpol

ORIGINAL: n01487477

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I was about the ask the same thing. Both my RA Games have decided to bring forward our update to the current Beta. Will there be another coming out soon or are we good for the immediate future?

I'd be cautious about that decision John, I know Micheal is doing yeomans work but given the patch is still experiencing some prob's .. (see Movement bug thread tm.asp?m=3204169), well it's up to you mate ...

I've not seen Micheal comment on this issue, nor tested it either.

Glad to see you in here Damian.
I've got an issue while trying to load new save under 19f into Tracker.
Seems like a problem comparing databases...? [&:][:(]

Hi Arkadiusz (Viperpool),
If you've gone from a save under the patch to the beta within Tracker there will probably be problems. You need to use the new beta dll in the tracker folder and also probably a reinitialising of the database.

Cheers

[LargeSlowTarget]

Request for michaelm (stop me if I say something silly):

In the TF screen > Set Patrol Zone screen there are the "Clear Patrol Zone" and "Restore Patrol Zone" buttons.

They do work fine during the same order phase i.e. patrol zone can be cleared and restored at will during order phase (as long as TF composition remains unchanged after clearing).

However, if a TF spends a turn in port with patrol zone cleared, in the next order phase the option to restore the patrol zone is gone.

Furthermore, if you clear a patrol zone, then transfer a ship out and another ship in, the restore option is gone immediately i.e. in the same order phase.

My request is to make the clear/restore patrol zone option permanent as long as the TF exists, regardless of how long the TF spends at port with patrol zone cleared or whether ships are being transferred from/to the TF while the patrol zone is cleared.

This could make managing patrol zones easier - esp. for submarines and permanent ASW and MSW patrols around ports etc.

I discovered this 'button behavior' when I was tinkering in my mod with the idea of "relief crews" for submarines.

I have created a "relief crew" submarines class with no weapons, minimum endurance etc. which could be transferred at port into a sub TF while the sub is being transferred out - the idea being that the relief crew would act as placeholder for the TF and its cleared patrol zone while the sub spends a few days in port to repair the customary 1-3 points of minor "cruising" damage (or battle damage if any). After repairs finished the sub would be transferred in, the relief crew out and the sub could resume patrol with the restored patrol zone > no need to set the patrol zone "manually" all over again, yippee!

Well, due to the clear/restore button behavior mentioned above this does not work as intended...

Currently, only way I know to avoid setting patrol zones manually over and over again is to catch the patrol TF with the damaged ship in port and have an undamaged ship of same type available for exchange (which is not always the case) which will continue the patrol while the damaged one is being repaired - without touching the clear/restore option.

[Kull]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

02/11/12: 1119g - Discrepancy in base AV on some lists
Switch to mission speed for quick move in a phase (bombardment, near destination) check change.

Excellent! Was getting ready to start my first "spreadsheet driven" Japan game, and was REALLY hoping this would be fixed before the week-end! Many thanks.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: Kull

ORIGINAL: michaelm

02/11/12: 1119g - Discrepancy in base AV on some lists
Switch to mission speed for quick move in a phase (bombardment, near destination) check change.

... was REALLY hoping this would be fixed before the week-end! Many thanks.

+1

Thanks for the ongoing support!

[Halsey]

Will we be seeing the extra passes exe in these updates?

Great work, really appreciate the EXTRA effort.[;)]

[Mac Linehan]

Michael -

Re 1119g: I can only add my gratitude and appreciation for you excellent work - above and beyond. It is the mark of a professional.

Mac

[viberpol]

The new beta handles very nicely reusing/scrapping the unused/unnecesary devices.
For example I am observing very well welcomed increase in armament/vehicle points from scrapping the now unnecessary Type 1 medium tank (see the printscreen).

However, there still are strange devices that have been produced, are not used, but their numbers exploded in the past due to some calculation pattern change in on of the previous betas... (see next post).

[viberpol]

See those radars or sound detectors.
Type 13 Radar device ID 1701: pool 740, Active: 0, Need: 0.

Notice the strange production before turn no. 1010.
Under current beta those numbers (all unnecesary radars/detectors) are not getting smaller...

This is a PBEM (end of '44) so all armament/vehicle points back in the pool are gold. [:)]

[michaelm75au]

I don't think that the device 1701 has an expiry date so it is not converted.

[witpqs]

The Betas posted in the first two posts in the thread are a bit confusing now: Post #2 has a note for 1119h, although the attachment is 1119g but a text note says "previous version" so OK clear enough. But Post #1 is modified 4-Nov-2012 and the attachment is version 1117h.

Is there a version 1119h out there yet?

[viberpol]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

I don't think that the device 1701 has an expiry date so it is not converted.

Well, I wonder what made it to be produced in such big quantities? [&:]
if it has never been "Active"... never used from the pool etc.

(Please notice the numbers in columns, there maybe some in between changes but still the number from "used from pool" should at least say it had been used)...
Maybe it's just a strange Tracker's glitch?
Or maybe it's a "metaphore" of radar used by ships (after the refits)? (A pure quess...).
Nothing to kill the game but an interesting issue.

[With sound detectors it's quite similar: I mean there's no lowering it's numbers even if they're no needed, nor active devices (since turn no 600).
It even seems that those Sound Detectors are still produced (ID 1473: 434 -> 439) even if not needed and should be upgraded into ID 1474.

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

The Betas posted in the first two posts in the thread are a bit confusing now: Post #2 has a note for 1119h, although the attachment is 1119g but a text note says "previous version" so OK clear enough. But Post #1 is modified 4-Nov-2012 and the attachment is version 1117h.

Is there a version 1119h out there yet?

The first post is the latest beta.
The second post has the previous beta as a backup copy in case it was needed by players.

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: viberpol

ORIGINAL: michaelm

I don't think that the device 1701 has an expiry date so it is not converted.

Well, I wonder what made it to be produced in such big quantities? [&:]
if it has never been "Active"... never used from the pool etc.

(Please notice the numbers in columns, there maybe some in between changes but still the number from "used from pool" should at least say it had been used)...
Maybe it's just a strange Tracker's glitch?
Or maybe it's a "metaphore" of radar used by ships (after the refits)? (A pure quess...).
Nothing to kill the game but an interesting issue.

[With sound detectors it's quite similar: I mean there's no lowering it's numbers even if they're no needed, nor active devices (since turn no 600).
It even seems that those Sound Detectors are still produced (ID 1473: 434 -> 439) even if not needed and should be upgraded into ID 1474.

The only reason I can think of for them to be continually produced is that they has a 'build rate' from the editor, in which case I don't think that it would use any resources to make them.
If you have the turn from when they exploded (game turn or replay), I can try to verify what was happening.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

ORIGINAL: witpqs

The Betas posted in the first two posts in the thread are a bit confusing now: Post #2 has a note for 1119h, although the attachment is 1119g but a text note says "previous version" so OK clear enough. But Post #1 is modified 4-Nov-2012 and the attachment is version 1117h.

Is there a version 1119h out there yet?

The first post is the latest beta.
The second post has the previous beta as a backup copy in case it was needed by players.

Thanks! [:)]