I Thought This Got Fixed

Post bug reports and ask for tech support here.

Moderators: wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

Post Reply
User avatar
jubail1999
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 1:23 am
Location: Arizona

I Thought This Got Fixed

Post by jubail1999 »

Playing PBEM with stock scenario 15, program version 1.6. I set a mission for 2 squadrons of aircraft to Naval Attack with a secondary mission of Airfield attack. In AM turn they attacked ships, and in PM turn they both attacked the airfield. Hey, great for me, but I was under the impression that this bug got squashed in version 1.5. Am I mistaken?
User avatar
ADavidB
Posts: 2464
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

RE: I Thought This Got Fixed

Post by ADavidB »

ORIGINAL: jubail1999

Playing PBEM with stock scenario 15, program version 1.6. I set a mission for 2 squadrons of aircraft to Naval Attack with a secondary mission of Airfield attack. In AM turn they attacked ships, and in PM turn they both attacked the airfield. Hey, great for me, but I was under the impression that this bug got squashed in version 1.5. Am I mistaken?

Why do you think that it is a "bug"? It almost sounds like a "feature" to me...[;)]

I'm guessing that the "Great Dice Gawd in the Machine" decided that your guys couldn't find those ships for the second air turn and so sent the planes off to hit the airbase.

The moral of the story is - don't mix up missions unless you really, really want to...[;)]

Cheers -

Dave Baranyi
User avatar
dpstafford
Posts: 1329
Joined: Sun May 26, 2002 5:50 am
Location: Colbert Nation

RE: I Thought This Got Fixed

Post by dpstafford »

ORIGINAL: jubail1999

Playing PBEM with stock scenario 15, program version 1.6. I set a mission for 2 squadrons of aircraft to Naval Attack with a secondary mission of Airfield attack. In AM turn they attacked ships, and in PM turn they both attacked the airfield. Hey, great for me, but I was under the impression that this bug got squashed in version 1.5. Am I mistaken?
You are mistaken. It is not a bug. That's the way it is supposed to work IMO.
User avatar
ChezDaJez
Posts: 3293
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:08 am
Location: Chehalis, WA

RE: I Thought This Got Fixed

Post by ChezDaJez »

I think you might be getting confused with the Pearl harbor issue of the Japanese setting naval attack primary and port secondary and blasting the heck out of the battleships on the 7 December.

Chez
Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98
User avatar
saj42
Posts: 1132
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 12:02 pm
Location: Somerset, England

RE: I Thought This Got Fixed

Post by saj42 »

My memory is somewhat shakey but I read somewhere that if the primary mission is Naval attack and the distance is short, then there is a chance the sqaudons will also launch their secondary attack in the p.m. phase. How you define 'short' is a mystery.
Image
Banner by rogueusmc
User avatar
michaelm75au
Posts: 12467
Joined: Sat May 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

RE: I Thought This Got Fixed

Post by michaelm75au »


I think this is what you are referring to from patch 1.5
53) Assigning a primary mission to air groups with a secondary mission of port attack sometimes allowed the groups to fly both missions in a single day. Fixed.

IIRC, what this was doing was letting aircraft attack ships in AM and PM of the same turn without regard to range. ie only can fly AM and PM if "short ranged" as mentioned above.

Michael
Michael
Post Reply

Return to “Tech Support”