Scenario database checker

[michaelm75au]

The message means that the item (eg Class ID:1507) exists, but no other records (eg Ships) uses this item. This is done by a simply keeping count of how many times an item is used by an active item.

This would be the case if ,say, I wanted to define all the types of Classes of ships available in the Pacific.

However, I only enter ships within a certain timeframe (eg 1941-42).

Thus the Class Ids that have no ships in the database would come up "defined but not referenced".

Limited timeframe scenarios would generate more of these messages than a longer camapign scenario because a short one would generally not use all the entries.

Michael

[LTCMTS]

Is this a bit of rewriting history? Croatia was part of the Military Frontier (Grenz) of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The "Tegethoff" BBs were built by Austro-Hungary for the Kaiserlische u. Koeniglische Marine and were launched, completed and served under the Austro-Hungarian flag in WWI. "Viribus Unitus", a very Imperial name that, was sunk by Italian naval spec ops just after the ship had been turned over to the YUGOSLAV National Council in Pola Harbor in 1918.

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: LTCMTS

Is this a bit of rewriting history? Croatia was part of the Military Frontier (Grenz) of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The "Tegethoff" BBs were built by Austro-Hungary for the Kaiserlische u. Koeniglische Marine and were launched, completed and served under the Austro-Hungarian flag in WWI. "Viribus Unitus", a very Imperial name that, was sunk by Italian naval spec ops just after the ship had been turned over to the YUGOSLAV National Council in Pola Harbor in 1918.

Croatia was ancient kingdom that was part of Hungarian kingdom that together with Austria (andits dependent kingdoms - like Czech kingdom) created Austrian-Hungarian empire.

Also it was not "YUGOSLAV National Council" - it was National Council of Slovenians, Croats and Serbs that was founded in Zagreb (the Serbs in the Council were representing the Serbs from Croatia, not Serbia).


If you want to know more about "Viribus Unitus" and her 3 sisters please read:

http://www.geocities.com/pentagon/bunker/5294/main.html


Leo "Apollo11"

[Don Bowen]

War in the Pacific checker
Version 1.14
...
B. Classes

Message
...
Class ID: # (Unknown) – AK/PG conversion ship class missing
...

Kind of curious about this one. Is there a link somewhere that defines the classes to which AKs can convert? If so, does that mean that we could create other possible conversions?? And, if so, do you know how???

Also, since you obviously known your way around the data files, may I ask if there is a breakdown of the usage of devices by slot? If, for instance, one was to add a new device into (currently empty) slot 104 would it be:

• A Torpedo (like 87-103)?
• An ASW Weapon (like 105-117)?
• Ignored?

Thanks again for the checker - it is providing ample proof of my clumsiness.

[michaelm75au]

This is the in-game conversion of Large AKs that can occur at SF or Osaka. This is controlled by the (WITP) program. The ship classes used are listed below.
SHIP CONVERSIONS
(a)
Certain Ship Class are used within WITP itself. The ones I show below are the ones used when converting Large AK ships at the player's Home base.
Converting the AK type to
type.........IJN ship class#..................USN ship class#
AE............92 (Kashino).....................353 (Pyro)
AR............90 (Akashi).......................357 (Vulcan)
AS............106(Nagoya Maru).............375 (Otus)
AV............56 (Akitsushima)...............261 (Tangier)
MLE..........108(Large MLE)..................359 (Large MLE)

Michael

[pad152]

michaelm

Will the current version of Witpchk work with soon to be released witp 1.3?


Thanks

[michaelm75au]

As far as I know, but I will be doing some checking myself to verify that things haven't changed.
It is unlikely the database structures have changed.
Michael

[pry]

it will work in 1.3 nothing has changed [:D]

[Spooky]

It is now available at the WITP Fansite ...

[LTCMTS]

Whatever. The "Viribus Unitus" never sailed under a Croatian flag. It was paid for with funds voted by the Dual Monarchy, built at a port considered part of the Hungarian administration of the Dual Monarchy, and sailed under the Austro-Hungarian flag during WWI. If she was Croatian, is wasn't during the war and only for a very, very limited time. Sort of like calling the "Canada", a Chilean WWI dreadnought, when she was completed for and manned by the RN throughout the Great War, and was only returned to Chile in 1920.

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: LTCMTS

Whatever. The "Viribus Unitus" never sailed under a Croatian flag. It was paid for with funds voted by the Dual Monarchy, built at a port considered part of the Hungarian administration of the Dual Monarchy, and sailed under the Austro-Hungarian flag during WWI. If she was Croatian, is wasn't during the war and only for a very, very limited time. Sort of like calling the "Canada", a Chilean WWI dreadnought, when she was completed for and manned by the RN throughout the Great War, and was only returned to Chile in 1920.

Ahhh... here we go again... [8|]


Let me ask you just few questions:

Who did you think mostly manned Austro-Hungarian ships during empire?

What other sea the empire ever had except Croatian Adriatic?

Whose ports and bases were used?


It is the same thing to say that Ukraine and Russia never had any navy because navy belonged to USSR...


If you really want to know more here is link about "Viribus Unitis" and her 3 sisters (I always post this but it wouldn't hurt if it is posted one more time):

http://www.geocities.com/pentagon/bunker/5294/main.html


Leo "Apollo11"

P.S. I choose my signature file to differ for all other "fanboy-ism" graphics.

[Nikademus]

She would have sailed under a new flag if not for the Italians. The Party poopers.......

[;)]

[pad152]

Hey michaelm

1. Is is possible to add a check to make sure a unit is assigned to a correct HQ command?

2. A check to make sure a unit is assign a nationality?

[michaelm75au]

1. What do you mean by "assigned to a correct HQ command" ?
2. Generally, nationality checking is done. Do you have any particular test in mind?

Michael

[Arkady]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

1. What do you mean by "assigned to a correct HQ command" ?
....

maybe if LCU's Supreme HQ is one of Command Organizations HQs ? For example in scenario #15 is one Japanese Base unit (114th IJN Base Force) subordinated to 5th Fleet HQ which is not Command Organization HQ (see manual, chapter 9.5 for details)

[pad152]

1. What do you mean by "assigned to a correct HQ command" ?
2. Generally, nationality checking is done. Do you have any particular test in mind?

Michael

1. In play testing my scenario, I found 2 airgroups that stayed at organizing, the problem seem to be they were assigned to an incorrect HQ.

2. The checker didn't seem to catch a land unit with no nationality assigned, (IJA, IJN, etc.).


thanks

[michaelm75au]

Try this and let me know if it is okay, and I will then forward to Spooky.

Basically, checker does more intensive nationality check on Location file; checks for Command HQs assignment in Location and Groups.
Note that unit/bases are assigned to Command Organisations according to manual. But these are not actually flagged in database. So I am assuming a Command HQ (which most of the Comm Orgs are) for the test, and this gave some interesting results.

File is a zip so D/L and renam to .zip. File contains a README.

[18/11/04]
I have redefined how I am recognising a Command Organisation. If a HQ reports to itself, then I am classing it as "Command Org". This seems to be the case in the scenarios 15&16. In addition, I am specifically looking at the ID #s of the HQs listed in section 9.5. and reporting them if NOT reporting to themselves.
Things may come slightly adrift in small map scenarios, because you can define any non-standard Command Orgs in the AI modules. These then will show up in the Strategic Map plus any of the standard ones if in the scenario.

[27/11/05 Attachment deleted]
Michael

[pad152]

I'll try it out![;)]





Thanks

[pad152]

Michaelm

It looks like I broke the scenario I working on, witpchk just hangs on the wph030.dat file.

Any Ideas?

Thanks

[michaelm75au]

It should hang.
The program should either crash (GPF) or print out an error message.

If you like, send me the leader file (wph) and I will trace the program tomorrow.

Zip the file and it should fit on a PM

Michael