Leader Bug

[pasternakski]

I posted in the other thread before I saw this one. My most recent games, both PBEM and AI, are v. 1.30 patched to 1.40, so I know that they are not helpful. I have XP, both of the people I have been playing against have XP. Mike Wood's work on 1.40 seems to have helped (I no longer lose carrier captains or TF commanders, and I can get rid of the dreaded WO 0/0s when they show up). When I was playing before 1.30, the problem was so severe that by mid-42, I was in danger of having the entire US Navy being run by Japanese pilots.

[mogami]

Hi, Are the non XP players running the Japanese or Allies and if Allies what OS are the Japanese players using?

[kellyc]

PBEM

Updated to 1.4, started under 1.4
Playing as Japanese with WINME.
Opponent is using 98 I believe.
Haven't seen any leader bugs yet but I haven't talked it over with my opponent.
You have to understand we're both 'Nick the new guys' so not overly sure what
to look for.
Kelly

[2ndACR]

I play nothing but the Japanese side. I am using ver 1.4 and running it using WinME.

2 PBEM games are fresh starts under 1.4 using Lemurs 4.0
1 PBEM game continued from 1.21 using Lemurs 3.1 Beta

The fresh games are with Ron and Pzb
Continued game with Panzer Hortland.

Ron has seen the leader bug already, both Ron and Pzb report wild differences in playback
Have heard nothing from Panzer on anything wrong yet.

I have had units vanish with Ron and Panzer.

[dtravel]

W98SE, as Allies vs. Jap AI, standard Matrix scenario.

[dday]

The only bugs ive encountered are:

1) My allied TF suddenly recieving a jap commander!

...and...

2) The commander called ,WO (Not sure if it was a bug)


Windows XP, started new game with 1.4.

I was using Win ME, now using XP. I found alot of problems with Me, but now its the leaders bug.

[Tankerace]

Win XP Pro

WitP v 1.40

Have found it bad (although not nearly as bad in 1.3) in;

Official Scenario 15 and 16
Modded Scenario 15 and 16
Test verisions of War Plan Orange

I have found that I really now only lose leaders when a TF seperates at sea due to damaged ships. When it happens, it replaces the TF leader.

EDIT: I play only Allied, but when testing Japan in War Plan Orange I have still found it, although not to the same extent.

Also, under new 1.4 games, leader bugs seem, instead of replacing with Majors or 1LTs, are replacing with unkown Staff Officers more than anything.

EDIT 2: Also, I never use auto anything.

[pompack]

It's going to be certain combinations probably.

1. Never Experienced
2. XP Home
3. Allied & Japanese
4. Matrix Scenarios
5. AI only
6. All patch versions
7. Leader selection:
7a. When leaders important, auto selection ON and then change leader if needed (rare)
7b. When leaders not importent, auto selection OFF then never change leader

[mogami]

Hi, I never use auto leader. When a new TF is formed changing to a new leader is free so if TF requires more then a ship CO to command I pick the leader when I make the TF.
I do not assign leaders to TF composed only of transports and escorts.
Once I form a TF that I assign a leader to the TF is maintained (ships may come or go but the TF remains) If I do disband a TF and then reform it later I assign the old leader again (unless he has really screwed up a few times)
I don't auto anything but that is only because early in game I worry about the enemy. After I have a secure route between bases I form a TF assign a mission (normally supply runs) and then set to auto control. But these TF never have leaders other then ship CO.

When flagship of TF is sunk the leader is considered killed. You may get a message "so and so killed" or you may not.

If you leave "Leader Auto select" ON then everytime a TF is formed a leader is selected from pool to command TF. I don't want Admirals commanding solo AK or PC or what not and then have them exposed to being lost if ship sunk by sub or other enemy attack.
That is reason I leave it set to off

I will claim this feature as one of mine. Before every TF was assigned a leader and I had to remove flag officers from TF where I didn't want them. I cried to Mike Wood and he installed this option for me.

[jwilkerson]

Hum - didn't know about the free choice after forming ... I had been paying for the important ones when forming until I found the auto leader button ... but I've been clicking it every time I form a TF ( where I care ). And I started noticing the bug right after that - at least for TF. This wouldn't seem to explain how allied leaders get into Japanese air units though.

[scout1]

I play nothing but the Japanese side. I am using ver 1.4 and running it using WinME.

2 PBEM games are fresh starts under 1.4 using Lemurs 4.0
1 PBEM game continued from 1.21 using Lemurs 3.1 Beta

The fresh games are with Ron and Pzb
Continued game with Panzer Hortland.

Ron has seen the leader bug already, both Ron and Pzb report wild differences in playback
Have heard nothing from Panzer on anything wrong yet.

I have had units vanish with Ron and Panzer.

2nd ACR,

I'm not sure that this is the same or not, but your missing unit may just have teleported somewhere else. I had a Japanese unit (China) teleport into the bay off Port Arthur (for a turn) and a Manchurian command unit teleport into Russia (which of coarse activated the Red Bear).

[2ndACR]

Nope. The units are not even listed as reinforcements or on the find all LCU list anymore.

They are just gone.

[Zeta16]

I have had the problem in my PBEM with Dude. The game was started under 1.21 and now we are playing 1.4. I never really checked the leaders for a long time, but in mid 43 I looked and a lot of my ships had Jap leaders or the WO. Also a ton of ground units had the WO leading them.

[BPRE]

Win ME
Playing as Allies against the AI.
Scenario 15 started on 1.10c (I think). Original save is from 1.30 but since I upgraded to 1.40 I've been rerunning the execution phase and it happens every time (2 out of 2).

I've disbanded a TF with two AKs in Karachi. One of them is AK Siantar with LCDR Aarsen R. as commander. The save is from immediately before I end the phase. After the AI phase and execution AK Siantar has a new commander with a Japanese name and the grade CDR. Different names each time. Ship is still in the port of Karachi.

Let me know if you want the saves even though it's from before 1.40.

/BPRE

[Zorfwaddle]

Ive just started checking. Windows XP, Non-pbem, allies. It doesnt bother me that much, as the leaders seem to have good stats. Ran a check today, I have 21 vessels in TF's who have "bad" leaders. Tried running down where they changed up, got a good fix, but it isnt repeatable.

George

[pasternakski]

But George, how do you know if those "stats" have any meaning? The leaders are stated to be qualified for something other than what they are doing. There is no guarantee (and I have asked repeatedly for an explanation) that the ratings for these "substitute" leaders affect, or are even applied to, the units and TFs to which the leaders are assigned.

The red flag for me is the "WO 0/0" phenomenon. These worthless (and worse) leaders get assigned to your ships and units and, if leadership has any tangible effect in the game, adversely affect the performance of whomever and whatever they command.

Somebody needs to step up and take responsibility for this whole mess. In particular, that person needs to make a thorough explanation to customers of what the situation is, and what is going to be done about it.

If not, just fix the goddamned thing and be done with it . But stop pretending that somehow it's my fault because I can't produce a "repeatable save."

[Zorfwaddle]

Who knows. I havemt seen any effect of those leaders (most of them are in transport units, going on their way). Ihave saved about 12 days of saves and I went thru each one to try to find where they started. It might take a total restart with all saved games deleted.

George

[ZOOMIE1980]

What in the world would the OS be significant for a bug like this? The code is compiled as a 32 bit WIN32 app no matter what OS is used, isn't it??? I remember the sizeof(int) being a problem back in the Win 3.1 (16bit)-Win95 (32bit) days because variables declared as type int in 'C' were 16 bit values in Win3.1 but 32bit values in Win95 and later? But all supported OS's are now all 32 bit and all use 32bit defaults for common datatypes???? If someone has a technical reason as to why the OS has any bearing, whatsoever, on a bug of this type I'd love to hear it!!

[pompack]

ORIGINAL: pasternakski



If not, just fix the goddamned thing and be done with it . But stop pretending that somehow it's my fault because I can't produce a "repeatable save."

But pasternakski, there simply is NOT any way to fix it without a repeatable save. Mike has got to have something to work with. I have not seen any thread where a dev or mod has said or implied that this is a customer's fault; even Mr Frag just comes across as frustrated because he can't give Mike anything to work with.

[pompack]

ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980

What in the world would the OS be significant for a bug like this? The code is compiled as a 32 bit WIN32 app no matter what OS is used, isn't it??? I remember the sizeof(int) being a problem back in the Win 3.1 (16bit)-Win95 (32bit) days because variables declared as type int in 'C' were 16 bit values in Win3.1 but 32bit values in Win95 and later? But all supported OS's are now all 32 bit and all use 32bit defaults for common datatypes???? If someone has a technical reason as to why the OS has any bearing, whatsoever, on a bug of this type I'd love to hear it!!

ZOOM: are you saying that is is not possible for the OS to be a factor in this bug?