8.00.00 Huge delay when moving naval units, any workaround?

[Joseignacio]

Hi guys.

We all know that there are huge lags when moving HQs, when you progress in the game, especially in areas where the supply calculations are more delicate, however I don't recall having had or having heard of those lags when moving a ship or a fleet at sea, since these ships are always in supply.

Now my mate is planning his next impulse and he tells me even using H2H for his planning (H2H uses to work better than NP), it is worse than being killed through pinches

Now, any idea on how to solve or bypass this? It is not only a problem for the planning but i am worried about our next NP session.

[Orm]

I always found it laggy when moving things at sea that affects sea supply. Even worse if isolated reorganization is in play.

Could the cause be the sea supply here? If so, maybe turning off the isolated reorganization option during movement helps?

[Andres71]

t's infuriating; it doesn't happen every time, in every maritime area, or with every ship. I can't see a pattern.

H2H - Return To Base - United States.zip

(1.57 MiB) Downloaded 14 times

[Joseignacio]

I always found it laggy when moving things at sea that affects sea supply. Even worse if isolated reorganization is in play.

Could the cause be the sea supply here? If so, maybe turning off the isolated reorganization option during movement helps?

Can you? This could be a workaround. Will try.

Thanks

[Orm]

You can turn most options on/off by right-clicking on them in the optional rules form (extra units are forbidden to change).

However, I have not tried this in netplay mode.

[rkr1958]

(1) I've got good news and bad news or more accurately I've got bad news but I do have a workaround that will save you from all that pinching and frustration.

(2) Whether this is usable is up to you guys, but is an approach I used in my last (solo) AAR that went the distance in late game to keep me from pulling out my hair.

(3) But let me start at the first ...

(4) I loaded your game file in my beta tester version (8.1.0) and on long noticed a significant delay.

(5) I then RTB 3 or 4 US ships in Cape St. Vincent and saw a several seconds delay for each ship.

(6) The delay is maddening and no way I could keep my sanity through the entire RTB phase.

(7) By the way, before doing any RTB I shut off isolated reorg but that didn't matter a bit.

(8) Also, I converted your game file from H2H to solitary, so everything I saw/did is based on solitary mode.

(9) Next I retro-graded your game file to 5.0.0, loaded and RTB 3 or 4 US ships.

(10) The maddening/hair pulling delay was still there.

(11) Next I retro-graded to 3.2.0 & no noticeable delay!

(12) The reason I didn't retro to that version vs 5.0.0 initially is because there's a format difference in stored trade agreements and you'll have to keep a copy of those trade agreements from 8.0.0 to copy back over when going back from 3.2.0 to 8.0.0.

(13) I'm not familiar with H2H play so don't know if this would work? But it would definitely work for solo.

(14) But, you could change mode to solo & retro grade like I did during RTB then go back to 8.0.0 & H2H play after?

(15) Again, this would require saving your 8.0.0 trade agreements and copying them back over when going back to 8.0.0.

(16) Or, you could permanently convert to solo play & version 3.2.0 and convert to PBEM style game.

[Joseignacio]

We play with NP.

My pal and I revert to Solitaire or H2H just to prepare the next session. Or solve some problem.
It seems interesting the solution that you suggest, but would we need to have two MWIF installations?

Also, we would need to copy/paste the Trade Agreements, is this in your editing document? I have to check because I dont have your document right now.

Thanks very much for all the interest you took in our problem, Ronnie

[rkr1958]

Difference in trade agreements is in my editing document.

[Joseignacio]

Thanks again

[rkr1958]

Thanks again

Good luck.

[rkr1958]

(1) The following pages are take directly from (the latest) of my game file editing captured document.

(2) If I could figure out a way for this document to be hosted I'd be happy to continue providing this community with my latest version.

(3) Also, I'd be happy to share ownership of this document with someone that would be willing to better organize it.

(4) Currently, sections are in order that I created them, in scrambled order & with no table of contents.

Installing and running Multiple Versions (page 5).

999-Instailling-and-running-multiple-verisons.png (212.88 KiB) Viewed 360 times

Trade Agreements Editing (pages 12 - 14)

999-Trade-agreements-1.png (234.87 KiB) Viewed 360 times

999-Trade-agreements-2.png (272.29 KiB) Viewed 360 times

999-Trade-agreements-3.png (270.08 KiB) Viewed 360 times

[Joseignacio]

Thanks, you are too kind.

After some days of indisposition, while visiting my parents, i have recovered and in some hours we'll play.

It is true that, alas, unchecking the optional Orm suggested doesnt work. Thanks anyway, Orm.

I told my pal to install 3,2 as another version to run through these (and maybe other possible future) glitches, and he doesnt seem to prone to that. We may be using MAGIC to edit the locations instead. Will report.

[rkr1958]

Thanks, you are too kind.

After some days of indisposition, while visiting my parents, i have recovered and in some hours we'll play.

It is true that, alas, unchecking the optional Orm suggested doesnt work. Thanks anyway, Orm.

I told my pal to install 3,2 as another version to run through these (and maybe other possible future) glitches, and he doesnt seem to prone to that. We may be using MAGIC to edit the locations instead. Will report.

Good luck.

[Joseignacio]

We have endured till end of turn, in the hope that the pass of one more turn may solve it, but it has been challenging to deal with so much delay.

If this isnt magically solved next turn, I guess we'll have to go back to 3.2 OMG. What changes may happen? I mean, there is a list of changes from each upgrade, but what will happen to existing CBVs already on map for example? Or other matters? If somebody has gone through this.

[Centuur]

The game should run the same. There's no other way than to take a deep dive in this case.

[Joseignacio]

Thanks

[Joseignacio]

It seems that, as predicted, the problem goes on. We are moving to 3.00.00.02.

In the file name we need to change from 8.0.0 to 3.0.2? or 3.2.0 or what?

Captura de pantalla 2026-08-28 184336.png (1.11 KiB) Viewed 40 times

Thanks in advance

[Joseignacio]

Never mind, checking rkr's previous post (although it was for a different matter, I see it is 3.2.0

Edit: For now it doesnt work, it seems I will have to check all the changes from 3.2 to 8.0 and unselect the possible optionals that were not in the older version, as I see now that is explained in the Editing document.

You can tell by the version number used in the example above that the example and description are from 2016, almost 7 years ago at the time of THIS paragraph’s writing. We are now up to 5.0.0.10 (debug). I currently have installed and frequently run versions 5.0.0.10 (debug), 4.4.1.0 (debug), 4.2.3.2 (debug) and 3.2.0. All game version 4.x game files and higher are compatible with all these versions and 3.x game file are mostly. To run a higher version game file (e.g., 5.0.0.10) in a previous version (e.g., 3.2.0) requires that the version being edited and retro-graded to that earlier version number. If you retro-grade then the you’ll have to “turn off” any newly coded optional rules (as covered in that section) and if you retro-grade from 5.x/4.x to 3.x you may need to fix one or more trade agreements as covered in that section.