New! v1127 Public Beta Available

[Meaneye]

I didnt imply that he was stupid. If I thought he was, frankly I would probably say it.

I just came to the realization that it didnt matter how I explained it, he was still going to find a way to argue about it, and frankly I dont need that. Doesnt mean he is stupid. I offered a bug report to the team, and frankly unless he is on said team, I dont know why he even bothered to comment to begin with. But its a free country, which is why I excused myself and said "have a nice day".

So - have a nice day.

[RangerJoe]

.
.
.
(BTW I used to train Rangers back in the 70s)

What does that have to do with this discussion?

Also, what did you teach? Something like Home Economics, Shop, Auto Mechanics, Music, or English Literature?

[Platoonist]

Simple, my account was banned for posting stuff from the devs forum on the board that showed Ian was lying to people about things that were implemented in the air system. You can probably still find the thread. My original account was yamato hugger... Recently retired and blew the dust off this thing although I did do some stuff with Bill in the early days of mods way back when but was working too much to keep putting time into it.

Wow. Yamato Hugger. Long time. No see.

Testers.jpg (22.68 KiB) Viewed 1170 times

I can't recall the repair delay issue ever being different than the way it is now, but that was many moons ago. That being said I can't recall how repair was practiced in the original 2004 War in the Pacific either.

[BBfanboy]

I don't recall anyone mentioning the "out" that prevents the 3 day penalty when you try the pierside or drydock options to see how that affects repair time. You simply have to remember to hit the "Cancel Changes" option before doing anything else. If you move on to another ship or leave that screen the repair option you selected will be applied along with penalties if you try to undo it early.
There is some justification for 3 days to undo pierside repair. When you dock a ship pierside you shut down your boilers and hook up power and water from the pierside facilities. You also get a gang of workmen, tools and machines, and materials brought aboard. They will not wait for the Admiral to change his mind before they start cutting and welding. And ammo must be removed from any area near the repair/refit work. OTOH, we are spared the time to prepare a drydock to accept a ship (the bottom blocking must be configured by divers for the hull of the ship to properly support it). So there is that!

[Meaneye]

Simple, my account was banned for posting stuff from the devs forum on the board that showed Ian was lying to people about things that were implemented in the air system. You can probably still find the thread. My original account was yamato hugger... Recently retired and blew the dust off this thing although I did do some stuff with Bill in the early days of mods way back when but was working too much to keep putting time into it.

Wow. Yamato Hugger. Long time. No see.


Testers.jpg


I can't recall the repair delay issue ever being different than the way it is now, but that was many moons ago. That being said I can't recall how repair was practiced in the original 2004 War in the Pacific either.

Thanks. I posted how it worked on the last page, but that version didnt have the "set all ships" function in the port repair options, so this may have happened when Bill installed that. I cant say. But the repair part worked the same in the original game as it did in the release version of AE.

Ran into something else. Never really played the AI version (Me and Mike Scholl tested together - game after game after game after..) But I think I confused the AI - something the dev team might want to look at.

ai.png (1.9 MiB) Viewed 1108 times

Current date is Jan 1 42. The allied unit is one of those Malayan battalions that cant change the HQ (I have already pulled the "sir Robin" in Malaya - all changeable troops are already in (or on their way to) India, and have scattered forces to delay in place. If you look at the movement orders for the Jap units, they dont know how to react to this unit of mine.

[Meaneye]

I don't recall anyone mentioning the "out" that prevents the 3 day penalty when you try the pierside or drydock options to see how that affects repair time. You simply have to remember to hit the "Cancel Changes" option before doing anything else. If you move on to another ship or leave that screen the repair option you selected will be applied along with penalties if you try to undo it early.
There is some justification for 3 days to undo pierside repair. When you dock a ship pierside you shut down your boilers and hook up power and water from the pierside facilities. You also get a gang of workmen, tools and machines, and materials brought aboard. They will not wait for the Admiral to change his mind before they start cutting and welding. And ammo must be removed from any area near the repair/refit work. OTOH, we are spared the time to prepare a drydock to accept a ship (the bottom blocking must be configured by divers for the hull of the ship to properly support it). So there is that!

Well see that is the problem. The way I personally use the port repair option is I put all units in the port in pierside first. Then I put any "#" ships in drydock. Then I go back and return any unneeded pierside ships to readiness to see how it affects other ships still in pierside. Once upon a time, this USED to work fine. It no longer does....

Its like saying to the dock supervisor "well when can you do these if we repair everything at once?"
"well, I can have this ship ready tomorrow, this one in 2 days, that one in a week"
"Ok, how about if we leave this ship out?"
"Ok, than I can have that ship in 5 days"
"ok, lets do that..."

And then the turn is run and the order is executed. This is how (IMHO) it SHOULD work, and is indeed how it USED to work. The way you guys seem to be understanding it just because I ask the dock guy how long, he is actually pulling the ships up to the dock the instant I ask, and there is no reason for that.

Edit: I mean the "set all ships to <this repair mode>" option is kind of pointless if you cant change them back if you want to, isnt it?

[Gratch1111]

So me and another player is trying to setup a new game using the latest version but get the mismatch map that shows on page one in this thread.

His game looks fine he says but when he send me the file I get the map mismatch. Is the problem on his side or mine?

I also have another game and in that we dont have this problem. That leads me to think the problem is on his side but shouldnt he have the problem as well? Or could it look fine for him but wrong for me even if he has the wrong install? I hope I make sense.

Now I also play another game and in that game we have no map mismatch.

[Meaneye]

.
.
.
(BTW I used to train Rangers back in the 70s)

What does that have to do with this discussion?

Also, what did you teach? Something like Home Economics, Shop, Auto Mechanics, Music, or English Literature?

Well, it was an olive branch, but I can see it was a wasted effort. Please dont be offended if in the future I ignore you and I hope you will do the same with me. I dont feed trolls.

Have a nice life.

[RangerJoe]

.
.
.
(BTW I used to train Rangers back in the 70s)

What does that have to do with this discussion?

Also, what did you teach? Something like Home Economics, Shop, Auto Mechanics, Music, or English Literature?

Well, it was an olive branch, but I can see it was a wasted effort. Please dont be offended if in the future I ignore you and I hope you will do the same with me. I dont feed trolls.

Have a nice life.

Well, you wrote that you used to train which I took to mean that you were a teacher so I just wanted to know which subjects that you taught. Also, I forgot to ask if you taught at the preschool level, the elementary school level, the junior high school level, the senior high school level, or even at the college level.

[Meaneye]

When disbanding a TF, the YES/NO options are in yellow (which indicates they can be mouse selected) but they cant. Should be in white with a (Y) for Yes and (N) for no instead.

Personally I disagree with this change. The only real reason I can see for it is to remind US players that if they disband TF 406 they can never have Halsey as a TF commander again. Simplest solution is to make Halsey a valid TF commander and get rid of this change.

[Platoonist]

Personally I disagree with this change.

I haven't been very fond of this change either. It always felt like a solution in search of a problem. Too bad it can't be a game preference switch for those who enjoy burning out their Y and N keys.

[Meaneye]

Personally I disagree with this change.

I haven't been very fond of this change either. It always felt like a solution in search of a problem. Too bad it can't be a game preference switch for those who enjoy burning out their Y and N keys.

I dont know why it cant be both, I mean either the mouse or keyboard - both options valid. I mean I understand the logic behind it - to keep players from being complacent and think about what they are doing before they do it, but I find myself being just as complacent after a few turns, so the effect is nil.

[BBfanboy]

The initial issue with the Disband line is that it is next to the Transfer Ships To/ From Port line. For various reasons - eyesight, mouse not stopping movement before you click (there is a small lag) and unsteady senior hands it was too easy to disband all of a TF when all you wanted to do was transfer some ships to port for repairs and perhaps take on some others from port. The rebuilding of a TF is a clickfest, and the aforementioned loss of PP if you lose an Admiral in command are the two issues.

I suggested the disband line be moved to the bottom area of the TF screen so it would not be easy to accidentally click it, but the programmers went with the Y/N option instead. Mouse enablement was supposed to be fixed but there are dozens more issues being worked on. Patience is needed.

[btd64]

The other reason for the key action is if you bought a leader with a large PP price tag to command the TF, you will want the option of loosing the leader or not....GP

[Meaneye]

The other reason for the key action is if you bought a leader with a large PP price tag to command the TF, you will want the option of loosing the leader or not....GP

Honestly, that is one of the fundamental flaws with the game from the very beginning of the design. The PPs were NEVER set up in a coordinated manner. The air team decided how many PPs it would cost to do one thing, the ground team set up what they wanted for theirs and the naval did their thing. Its was NEVER coordinated. Thats why ground units cost to change HQs is based on the current strength of the unit, where as air units are based on the TO&E strength. Because the air team did it one way and the ground did it another. Just an example, but there are literally dozens more examples. My personal opinion, it shouldnt cost a thing to change commanders. My opinion is when you form the TF, get a list of available commanders and pick one. Simple. But I wasnt the person that made those decisions...

There was never enough time to make it all work. Same with HQs. Thats why they dont really mean a lot in the game. There wasnt enough time to implement it the way it was conceived of to work.

(And for the record, there is a "workaround" for expensive TF commanders. Just keep making TFs with the "auto select commander" turned ON until you get a commander you like, then merge all the other TFs into that one. Its a pain in the ass, yes, but in the early weeks when PPs are tight, its a solution.)

[Meaneye]

UPDATE on that AI confusion above: Jan 5th the AI finally moved into the hex and killed my unit and is finally advancing south from Taiping. So I tied it up a couple of weeks (maybe 3) with nothing but a unit that was going to die anyway.

The unit was never in a position to keep Jap units from moving south from Taiping, but they just didnt until the unit was dead.

[Meaneye]

The initial issue with the Disband line is that it is next to the Transfer Ships To/ From Port line. For various reasons - eyesight, mouse not stopping movement before you click (there is a small lag) and unsteady senior hands it was too easy to disband all of a TF when all you wanted to do was transfer some ships to port for repairs and perhaps take on some others from port. The rebuilding of a TF is a clickfest, and the aforementioned loss of PP if you lose an Admiral in command are the two issues.

I suggested the disband line be moved to the bottom area of the TF screen so it would not be easy to accidentally click it, but the programmers went with the Y/N option instead. Mouse enablement was supposed to be fixed but there are dozens more issues being worked on. Patience is needed.

Makes sense. Naval stuff was always a clickfest. Would have been worse. Don did NOT want to put the option into the game for the players to be able to change the default settings when you create a TF. We fought tooth and nail on it until I suggested it go to a vote. Only 3 people voted to keep it like it was (Don, JWE, and Joe - because he didnt want to piss Don off by voting against him).

You're welcome.

[joey]

The initial issue with the Disband line is that it is next to the Transfer Ships To/ From Port line. For various reasons - eyesight, mouse not stopping movement before you click (there is a small lag) and unsteady senior hands it was too easy to disband all of a TF when all you wanted to do was transfer some ships to port for repairs and perhaps take on some others from port. The rebuilding of a TF is a clickfest, and the aforementioned loss of PP if you lose an Admiral in command are the two issues.

I suggested the disband line be moved to the bottom area of the TF screen so it would not be easy to accidentally click it, but the programmers went with the Y/N option instead. Mouse enablement was supposed to be fixed but there are dozens more issues being worked on. Patience is needed.

Makes sense. Naval stuff was always a clickfest. Would have been worse. Don did NOT want to put the option into the game for the players to be able to change the default settings when you create a TF. We fought tooth and nail on it until I suggested it go to a vote. Only 3 people voted to keep it like it was (Don, JWE, and Joe - because he didnt want to piss Don off by voting against him).

You're welcome.

So we are stuck with a feature some of us do not like - because of a vote. It sounds like the government!

[Meaneye]

So we are stuck with a feature some of us do not like - because of a vote. It sounds like the government!

You dont like being able to change your default from "normal" to something else? Then whats the problem? Just leave it at "normal" (which is the way Don wanted it to be anyway).

[Meaneye]

Another issue I see with the new map. Keep in mind I am still in early Jan 42 (the 6th), so this may change. I am sending ships to ENGLAND to ship supplies BACK TO EASTERN USA.

This seems... Ahhh...

Wrong.