New Public Beta - v1128 Live Now!

[BBfanboy]

Diliwitm, can you identify at what stage in loading or game play the game crashes? The game executes the turn in a series of steps and announces each one with a text statement as it proceeds. If you slow down the text messages by setting the message delay longer, you can note what was the last step before it crashed. That would help isolate what is going wrong.
That said, it is possible that you have a corrupted install or that another program on your computer is interfering with the game (anti-virus, perhaps?). The fact that no one else is reporting this problem means it is on your particular set-up, so stop blaming the game.

[Diliwitm]

I had crashes from almost just start loading to say 1/4 of the turn It seems the game is accumulating some issue as i am loading turns. I had nothing like this with V26.

[RangerJoe]

I tested v28 for awhile, I stopped counting with over 40 errors/issues and I reported others after that. I really don't remember crashes.

[Tanaka]

Got difficulty following this but you said install v28 in it's own directory. How you do this could be the answer. It sounds as if some part of you v28 install is pionting some part of v26 the easiest way is, assuming v26 works is to:

Delete the v28 folder completely
Copy v26 to new folder v28
Copy and rename v26 shortcut to v28 and edit to point to the new v28 folder and exe etc. Keep any command line switches. The game will now run in the new folder.
Run the patch for v28 making sure you install it to v28 folder.

This is where it can get tricky as v28 does not use an exended map so if v26 was using an extended map then v28 will not work correctly and you will have to patch the map files with the original or any map mod that is standard. The mods usually tell you how.

If it was me coming back after a long time I'd simply uninstall all WitP AE and reinstall the original with patches upto v26b. Longer process but you will have a clean install.

I'd not bother with v28 yet, still a number of problems.

I would say there are no more problems with v28 than v26. In fact many problems were fixed or the game was improved. If no one is playing and testing the beta things might be missed. This is our last chance to improve the patch and the game. If you think there are any problems please list them here. There have been very few problems posted. I really don't understand all of the encouragement to avoid playing the beta. This is it.

I disagree, i have crash to desktop in V28 once for 6 or 7 times i load a PBEM turn , jap PT boats don't fire torpedoes.

No one else has reported any crashes. I have had crashes in the past before I learned how to use the different command line switches correctly. If the Jap PT boats are not firing torpedoes thank you for reporting an issue. That is what we need.

[RangerJoe]

I would say there are no more problems with v28 than v26. In fact many problems were fixed or the game was improved. If no one is playing and testing the beta things might be missed. This is our last chance to improve the patch and the game. If you think there are any problems please list them here. There have been very few problems posted. I really don't understand all of the encouragement to avoid playing the beta. This is it.

I disagree, i have crash to desktop in V28 once for 6 or 7 times i load a PBEM turn , jap PT boats don't fire torpedoes.

No one else has reported any crashes. I have had crashes in the past before I learned how to use the different command line switches correctly. If the Jap PT boats are not firing torpedoes thank you for reporting an issue. That is what we need.

Not if you are an Allied player!

[Cavalry Corp]

ok, waiting for this. Please make sure you list all the changes in case I need to change things in my mod vis DB.

Then ok wish list

ITEM 1
I can tell you I still seem to have a big issue with Kamikaze 44 into 45 (despite modding a lot of other weapons like the Okha,Kaiten,etc., which I have working well). I have done a lot of work to make them more effective in the editor, but fundamentally, they should be much more difficult to detect and intercept. Please check out K tactics online, etc and in books; they attacked in small groups, spreading right out or even singles at a time to distract defenders. The chance of interception by CAP should be reduced for sure. About 1 in 5 should hit after getting through. It seems in-game that if one of their bomb hits, then they hit as well. This though was a genuine tactic as bombs were sometimes released before impact on other occasions. In the game I could mod this by giving them a unique, more accurate bomb, ( or more bombs) but its open to gamey tactics.

I also wonder if, when they carry drop tanks, these start fires or do more general damage to AA guns and so on.

I addition, wooden-framed trainers should have an even better chance as they were not radar-detected. Also K should probably be allowed night attacks if over a certain exp level.

ITEM 2
Light industry should only use say 200 supply to fix.

ITEM 3
Make bombers' MVR rating count - or does the base level apply in all situations? I am still not sure what the game is doing on bombers??

ITEM 3
Personally, I would like to see about 10 AC maintenance SR bands

ITEM 4
Allow attack arc for bombers

ITEM 5
Make only AA guns fire that can reach the target altitude. This issue is open to a lot of abuse just now.

ITEM 6
More Japanese Engine types hard-coded to 12 is silly.

ITEM 7
Have Typhoon storms as a weather effect, damaging and sinking/ damaging ships, including aircraft on CV deck parks.

ITEM 8
Reduce the effect of altitude advantage in air battles, it should be there, but I feel it's too much just now.

ITEM 9
Allow fuel to be removed from ships.

ITEM 10
Stop ships from auto-refuelling in ports

ITEM 11
Have a limit on the number of tons of ships disbanded in ports.

ITEM 12
Make PT boats more more aggressive in attacking - both sides need this.

ITEM 13
Monsoon effects on air need to be more - not sure I ever notice much at all.
they probably need to be higher on land units as well.

ITEM 14
Add air collisions with less exp more and high ex less. add night and twilight landings on CV with high attrition on low skilled pilots.

ITEM 15
Naval collisions under air attack should happen. Naval collision-avoiding sub attacks should happen.

ITEM 16
raise a catastrophic event on ship repair, it's tough, so it can happen about 3 times in the game??
Never had it happen in all the years I have been playing.

ITEM 17
Ships carrying ammunition AKE / AE should be destroyed by very modest hits and or fires.

ITEM 18
Official extended and updated standard map?

ITEM 19
Mine degradation seems a bit high TBH

ITEM 20
Side line - There are quite a few things in the DB which seem to be errors, omissions or mistakes.... I fixed many into my mod. I believe as the game evolved and was tested, odd things were changed without the other similar weapons being checked etc... weapons listed but not used. For instance almost all Japanese TT types have been put in but not used ( I have), and AC loadouts are very inaccurate, that's another discussion....

ITEM 21
Allow starting mines to be added in the editor.

ITEM 22
Allow fuel and cargo to be added to AO etc in the editor- right now its does some odd things

ITEM 23
I wish to allow all sunk ships to be listed on the map!

ITEM 24
Separate CV-trained pilots in terms of replacements - its really silly just now. CV-trained units should only be able to receive CV-trained pilots. this should be easy to introduce.



I cannot think of anything now and have to go out(beer) . I am sure there are others, and I have no idea how difficult improvements to the program are. Its good now but it could be supreme with a few more fixes.

the other items we can comment on when we see a full list and thansk for all the good work so far.

thanks.

[btd64]

ok, waiting for this. Please make sure you list all the changes in case I need to change things in my mod vis DB.

Then ok wish list

ITEM 1
I can tell you I still seem to have a big issue with Kamikaze 44 into 45 (despite modding a lot of other weapons like the Okha,Kaiten,etc., which I have working well). I have done a lot of work to make them more effective in the editor, but fundamentally, they should be much more difficult to detect and intercept. Please check out K tactics online, etc and in books; they attacked in small groups, spreading right out or even singles at a time to distract defenders. The chance of interception by CAP should be reduced for sure. About 1 in 5 should hit after getting through. It seems in-game that if one of their bomb hits, then they hit as well. This though was a genuine tactic as bombs were sometimes released before impact on other occasions. In the game I could mod this by giving them a unique, more accurate bomb, ( or more bombs) but its open to gamey tactics.

I also wonder if, when they carry drop tanks, these start fires or do more general damage to AA guns and so on.

I addition, wooden-framed trainers should have an even better chance as they were not radar-detected. Also K should probably be allowed night attacks if over a certain exp level.

ITEM 2
Light industry should only use say 200 supply to fix.

ITEM 3
Make bombers' MVR rating count - or does the base level apply in all situations? I am still not sure what the game is doing on bombers??

ITEM 3
Personally, I would like to see about 10 AC maintenance SR bands

ITEM 4
Allow attack arc for bombers

ITEM 5
Make only AA guns fire that can reach the target altitude. This issue is open to a lot of abuse just now.

ITEM 6
More Japanese Engine types hard-coded to 12 is silly.

ITEM 7
Have Typhoon storms as a weather effect, damaging and sinking/ damaging ships, including aircraft on CV deck parks.

ITEM 8
Reduce the effect of altitude advantage in air battles, it should be there, but I feel it's too much just now.

ITEM 9
Allow fuel to be removed from ships.

ITEM 10
Stop ships from auto-refuelling in ports

ITEM 11
Have a limit on the number of tons of ships disbanded in ports.

ITEM 12
Make PT boats more more aggressive in attacking - both sides need this.

ITEM 13
Monsoon effects on air need to be more - not sure I ever notice much at all.
they probably need to be higher on land units as well.

ITEM 14
Add air collisions with less exp more and high ex less. add night and twilight landings on CV with high attrition on low skilled pilots.

ITEM 15
Naval collisions under air attack should happen. Naval collision-avoiding sub attacks should happen.

ITEM 16
raise a catastrophic event on ship repair, it's tough, so it can happen about 3 times in the game??
Never had it happen in all the years I have been playing.

ITEM 17
Ships carrying ammunition AKE / AE should be destroyed by very modest hits and or fires.

ITEM 18
Official extended and updated standard map?

ITEM 19
Mine degradation seems a bit high TBH

ITEM 20
Side line - There are quite a few things in the DB which seem to be errors, omissions or mistakes.... I fixed many into my mod. I believe as the game evolved and was tested, odd things were changed without the other similar weapons being checked etc... weapons listed but not used. For instance almost all Japanese TT types have been put in but not used ( I have), and AC loadouts are very inaccurate, that's another discussion....

ITEM 21
Allow starting mines to be added in the editor.

ITEM 22
Allow fuel and cargo to be added to AO etc in the editor- right now its does some odd things

ITEM 23
I wish to allow all sunk ships to be listed on the map!

ITEM 24
Separate CV-trained pilots in terms of replacements - its really silly just now. CV-trained units should only be able to receive CV-trained pilots. this should be easy to introduce.



I cannot think of anything now and have to go out(beer) . I am sure there are others, and I have no idea how difficult improvements to the program are. Its good now but it could be supreme with a few more fixes.

the other items we can comment on when we see a full list and thansk for all the good work so far.

thanks.

Hi Michael. Thanks for the list but I think that we are done making code changes. Some of the items are interesting. Item 10 is in the TF screen. Turn off refueling....GP

[Cavalry Corp]

Dear GP

OK and thanks hope we have some moves towards some of these things as they must be in many players minds.

Would you say it will be best to wait to start any new game unti this finalised patch is out.

Michael

[RangerJoe]

You can remove fuel from ships by refueling other ships, then having the emptied ships move to a port without refueling and then disbanding.

But you can't move the fuel from a ship to an oiler or tanker nor to the cargo hold of another ship.

[btd64]

Dear GP

OK and thanks hope we have some moves towards some of these things as they must be in many players minds.

Would you say it will be best to wait to start any new game unti this finalised patch is out.

Michael

Due to priorities, I wouldn't wait....GP

[Tanaka]

I'm noticing that none of my Nate fighters set to 100% train in China are getting any fatigue even though this patch is supposed to give training fatigue? While everything else seems to be getting the fatigue. I am wondering if setting to 100ft sweep training has anything to do with it?

Started a new game and yep my fighters set to 100% train and sweep are not gaining any fatigue but the bombers set to train are. Recon planes training 100% recon not gaining fatigue either...

What's interesting is it seems to only be the planes in Manchukuo. Fighters in Japan on the same setting gain fatigue...weird

[Chris21wen]

Setting F/FB to 100' sweep is pointless, it will not train in the skill required for sweep missions. At 100' all you train is strafe and def. Putting them at any other height or flying escort training will train air instead of strafe.

As I understand it training fatigue is primarily driven by range although low/high height can also play a part. Setting zero range and 5-10K height keeps fat at a minimum.

It's the AI that decides who trains based on skills and fatigue to rotate their training to such an extant that you might not even notice they are gaining it.

Then there's aircraft type, it's harder to fly a big boy so bombers at low altitude will gain more fatigue.

[Tanaka]

Setting F/FB to 100' sweep is pointless, it will not train in the skill required for sweep missions. At 100' all you train is strafe and def. Putting them at any other height or flying escort training will train air instead of strafe.

As I understand it training fatigue is primarily driven by range although low/high height can also play a part. Setting zero range and 5-10K height keeps fat at a minimum.

It's the AI that decides who trains based on skills and fatigue to rotate their training to such an extant that you might not even notice they are gaining it.

Then there's aircraft type, it's harder to fly a big boy so bombers at low altitude will gain more fatigue.

I was under the impression that the patch was was trying to address the 0 fatigue training issue as the zero range thing was kind of an exploit. Yes it is the defense you want to get up as well.

02 - Add fatigue for pilot training based on exp level.
4. Tweak what is an 'instructor' for TRACOM purposes and allow casualties to them
5. Tweak group training mission not getting many op losses for low experience pilots (increased fatigue of low experienced pilots and aircraft)

[Chris21wen]

Setting F/FB to 100' sweep is pointless, it will not train in the skill required for sweep missions. At 100' all you train is strafe and def. Putting them at any other height or flying escort training will train air instead of strafe.

As I understand it training fatigue is primarily driven by range although low/high height can also play a part. Setting zero range and 5-10K height keeps fat at a minimum.

It's the AI that decides who trains based on skills and fatigue to rotate their training to such an extant that you might not even notice they are gaining it.

Then there's aircraft type, it's harder to fly a big boy so bombers at low altitude will gain more fatigue.

I was under the impression that the patch was was trying to address the 0 fatigue training issue as the zero range thing was kind of an exploit. Yes it is the defense you want to get up as well.

02 - Add fatigue for pilot training based on exp level.
4. Tweak what is an 'instructor' for TRACOM purposes and allow casualties to them
5. Tweak group training mission not getting many op losses for low experience pilots (increased fatigue of low experienced pilots and aircraft)

I should have added this is under 26b, I have not play 28 but the tweaks won't change the basic training, low altitude will still create more fatigue etc. Its just there will be more of it but how much more and how efficient the AI is at choosing who flies may result in little major visible difference.

There was never 0 fatique in training and never an issue as far as I'm concerned. The problem is the AI is so good at managing it, picking those that fly based on exp and fat. See this example taken under 26b, 0 range 5K and full time general training. Those with lower exp tend to get more fat mainly because the AI flies them more. As you can see a number have 15+ fat. I could show any number of examples but all follow the same trend, those with lower exp all have the highest fat within a group.

The biggest difference in the treaks should be accidents which I do agree where few and far between when there were many training accidents. To put some context on it this unit has suffer zero losses. It has never been in combat.

Screenshot 2025-06-21 074935.jpg (71.22 KiB) Viewed 339 times

[BBfanboy]

Setting F/FB to 100' sweep is pointless, it will not train in the skill required for sweep missions. At 100' all you train is strafe and def. Putting them at any other height or flying escort training will train air instead of strafe.

As I understand it training fatigue is primarily driven by range although low/high height can also play a part. Setting zero range and 5-10K height keeps fat at a minimum.

It's the AI that decides who trains based on skills and fatigue to rotate their training to such an extant that you might not even notice they are gaining it.

Then there's aircraft type, it's harder to fly a big boy so bombers at low altitude will gain more fatigue.

I was under the impression that the patch was was trying to address the 0 fatigue training issue as the zero range thing was kind of an exploit. Yes it is the defense you want to get up as well.

02 - Add fatigue for pilot training based on exp level.
4. Tweak what is an 'instructor' for TRACOM purposes and allow casualties to them
5. Tweak group training mission not getting many op losses for low experience pilots (increased fatigue of low experienced pilots and aircraft)

I should have added this is under 26b, I have not play 28 but the tweaks won't change the basic training, low altitude will still create more fatigue etc. Its just there will be more of it but how much more and how efficient the AI is at choosing who flies may result in little major visible difference.

There was never 0 fatique in training and never an issue as far as I'm concerned. The problem is the AI is so good at managing it, picking those that fly based on exp and fat. See this example taken under 26b, 0 range 5K and full time general training. Those with lower exp tend to get more fat mainly because the AI flies them more. As you can see a number have 15+ fat. I could show any number of examples but all follow the same trend, those with lower exp all have the highest fat within a group.

The biggest difference in the treaks should be accidents which I do agree where few and far between when there were many training accidents. To put some context on it this unit has suffer zero losses. It has never been in combat.

Screenshot 2025-06-21 074935.jpg

Many years ago the developers explained the decision not to have training losses because they adjusted to aircraft availability and pilot numbers to account for such losses. That's good enough for me. It saved them a bit of programming and some program size at a time when that was an issue.

[Tanaka]

Setting F/FB to 100' sweep is pointless, it will not train in the skill required for sweep missions. At 100' all you train is strafe and def. Putting them at any other height or flying escort training will train air instead of strafe.

As I understand it training fatigue is primarily driven by range although low/high height can also play a part. Setting zero range and 5-10K height keeps fat at a minimum.

It's the AI that decides who trains based on skills and fatigue to rotate their training to such an extant that you might not even notice they are gaining it.

Then there's aircraft type, it's harder to fly a big boy so bombers at low altitude will gain more fatigue.

I was under the impression that the patch was was trying to address the 0 fatigue training issue as the zero range thing was kind of an exploit. Yes it is the defense you want to get up as well.

02 - Add fatigue for pilot training based on exp level.
4. Tweak what is an 'instructor' for TRACOM purposes and allow casualties to them
5. Tweak group training mission not getting many op losses for low experience pilots (increased fatigue of low experienced pilots and aircraft)

I should have added this is under 26b, I have not play 28 but the tweaks won't change the basic training, low altitude will still create more fatigue etc. Its just there will be more of it but how much more and how efficient the AI is at choosing who flies may result in little major visible difference.

There was never 0 fatique in training and never an issue as far as I'm concerned. The problem is the AI is so good at managing it, picking those that fly based on exp and fat. See this example taken under 26b, 0 range 5K and full time general training. Those with lower exp tend to get more fat mainly because the AI flies them more. As you can see a number have 15+ fat. I could show any number of examples but all follow the same trend, those with lower exp all have the highest fat within a group.

The biggest difference in the treaks should be accidents which I do agree where few and far between when there were many training accidents. To put some context on it this unit has suffer zero losses. It has never been in combat.

Screenshot 2025-06-21 074935.jpg

I think you mean high altitude will create more fatigue? Ah I am looking at the whole group fatigue and not individual pilots. Maybe the Dev team can speak more on this if all of this still applies as far as range and altitude and fatigue...

[Chris21wen]

Many years ago the developers explained the decision not to have training losses because they adjusted to aircraft availability and pilot numbers to account for such losses. That's good enough for me. It saved them a bit of programming and some program size at a time when that was an issue.

I missed that and it explains lack of training losses. As you, I don't have a problem with pilot training.

[Tanaka]

Setting F/FB to 100' sweep is pointless, it will not train in the skill required for sweep missions. At 100' all you train is strafe and def. Putting them at any other height or flying escort training will train air instead of strafe.

As I understand it training fatigue is primarily driven by range although low/high height can also play a part. Setting zero range and 5-10K height keeps fat at a minimum.

It's the AI that decides who trains based on skills and fatigue to rotate their training to such an extant that you might not even notice they are gaining it.

Then there's aircraft type, it's harder to fly a big boy so bombers at low altitude will gain more fatigue.

So I tested and you are so right here. Training on escort is much better than sweep as it increases the air and experience and defense stats for fighters. I had read 100 sweep was better for fighters.

And yes you are right raising the strafing stat is useless. Strafing at 100 feet is useless in this game as you will destroy no planes on the airfield and get all of yours shot down. It used to be better at one time and you could actually destroy aircraft in the Pearl Harbor attack but they nerfed it to useless which I hate...

Found some of that sweep train advice. I don't know why everyone says train strafing?

https://forums.matrixgames.com/viewtopic.php?t=231265

"Fighters benefit from high Defense skill (train sweep at 100')"

"Strafe will need sweep mission & I found 100ft best alt for gain"

"For training fighters-use sweep/escort at any altitude to train air/def skills, then train strafe. This will raise air/def into the high 60s."

https://forums.matrixgames.com/viewtopic.php?t=252204

"1) Fighters. Training Air and Strafe, as well as Exp, is necessary here."

"I use CAP squadrons as "Level 3" training for fighter pilots, skill training in Escort and Strafing being the first two levels."

"My fighter pilots seem to have little problem gaining experience by training them in sweep and then stafing."

[Chris21wen]

Tanaka all the training plus lots of other stuff is in here

https://forums.matrixgames.com/viewtopi ... 3&t=396274

[Tanaka]

Tanaka all the training plus lots of other stuff is in here

https://forums.matrixgames.com/viewtopi ... 3&t=396274

Very nice thanks for making! It seems the strafe training part is all about attacking shipping with fighters and fighter bombers...