Page 7 of 7
RE: War In The Pacific Updated to v1.801
Posted: Sun May 21, 2006 3:23 pm
by Brady
I agree with what Kid just posted 100%, aircraft should not nead to be operational, befor they can take them apart for rail shipment.
RE: War In The Pacific Updated to v1.801
Posted: Sun May 21, 2006 4:02 pm
by Cap Mandrake
This pilot pool thing makes my head hurt.
So is there a "named pilot pool" and a "pilot pool"? Aj Caramba!
What is the difference?
Are they both heated?
Folks were moving groups around just to game pilot experience?? Just bombing a poorly defended base isn't good enough? Aj Carmaba again!
Please use only two syllable words in your explanation.
Thanks.
RE: War In The Pacific Updated to v1.801
Posted: Sun May 21, 2006 4:10 pm
by Don Bowen
ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake
This pilot pool thing makes my head hurt.
So is there a "named pilot pool" and a "pilot pool"? Aj Caramba!
What is the difference?
Are they both heated?
Folks were moving groups around just to game pilot experience?? Just bombing a poorly defended base isn't good enough? Aj Carmaba again!
Please use only two syllable words in your explanation.
Thanks.
Read This:
tm.asp?m=1137365&mpage=2?
Hum - how many syllables in "read" and "this"??
RE: War In The Pacific Updated to v1.801
Posted: Sun May 21, 2006 4:48 pm
by witpqs
ORIGINAL: Kid
give the ability to load airgroups without planes onto transport ships and make the automatic supply “push” to outlying bases smarter and more efficient.
You know what esle is needed along these lines is the Ability to move these types of units by rail.
Or units that have all damaged planes. Think about it, here is an air unit that wants to be moved by rail and the conductor insist that they have at leat one operational plane before they can board.
Don,
Yes to what Kid said! In addition, the ability to move air units by rail for short distances (within the a/c transfer range). Consider what happens now.
Example:
You ship a bunch of air units to a port. The port is
not the final destination, and base units are very dear at the time, so the base only has a small cadre of air support. Aircraft can be shipped by rail to a
distant base with no problem. But to send them to a base
within range - forget about it! You have to wait forever while they are reassembled.
This makes no sense. At the trans-shipping point the crates get load on flatcars or trucks. In the game,
everything flies out if the destination is within range. Nuts.
In a place like Australia or on the Asian mainland you might ship by rail/truck several turns in a row before beginning to assemble the aircraft.
RE: War In The Pacific Updated to v1.801
Posted: Sun May 21, 2006 5:01 pm
by Don Bowen
I need to let you all know that I am not the one that decides what will be done in WITP.
Anything that is not an obvious bug needs to be posted in the WIPT Wish List thread for consideration. This saves us searching through all the various threads looking for suggestions.
tm.asp?m=687130&mpage=19&key=
I know that there are a lot of things that you-all think do not work like they should, but the proper definition of a bug is "not working as designed". If it is a disagreement with the design - it really needs to go to the wish list.
Don
RE: War In The Pacific Updated to v1.801
Posted: Sun May 21, 2006 5:57 pm
by witpqs
Aw, come on - we all know you're really the power behind the throne! [;)]

RE: War In The Pacific Updated to v1.801
Posted: Sun May 21, 2006 7:42 pm
by scout1
Question regarding the disband feature. Don't have the save, but noticed a trend.
Brought back a Jake outfit and disbanded, no problem. Back to the pool for the boys. However, brought back a 2nd group of Jakes and didn't get the question whether to put them into the named pool. Is this becuase they didn't go there or once answered, don't ask again ? had a similar experience with another pbem with another type of unit, but again was a 2nd similar unit disband. Had the same experience......
RE: War In The Pacific Updated to v1.801
Posted: Sun May 21, 2006 8:23 pm
by Don Bowen
ORIGINAL: scout1
Question regarding the disband feature. Don't have the save, but noticed a trend.
Brought back a Jake outfit and disbanded, no problem. Back to the pool for the boys. However, brought back a 2nd group of Jakes and didn't get the question whether to put them into the named pool. Is this becuase they didn't go there or once answered, don't ask again ? had a similar experience with another pbem with another type of unit, but again was a 2nd similar unit disband. Had the same experience......
This is a confirmed bug. Not actually part of the new Disband function but was exposed by it.
The Disband function is detecting another group in the base without checking to see if that group has a delayed arrival.
Working on it...
RE: War In The Pacific Updated to v1.801
Posted: Sun May 21, 2006 8:30 pm
by scout1
Thank you ..... Always good to know that I'm not alone ....
RE: War In The Pacific Updated to v1.801
Posted: Sun May 21, 2006 10:02 pm
by Major SNAFU_M
I just logged into the member's area to down load this update and I cannot find it.
There is patch listed as available under WitP (looking from my registered user page), and if I go to the general pages I see neither the 1.8 patch or the 1.801 patch.
Am I missing something here?
Thanks!
RE: War In The Pacific Updated to v1.801
Posted: Sun May 21, 2006 10:57 pm
by DuckofTindalos
Erm, it's right there in the GAMES section for WitP, under "Downloads" (second from the top)...[&:]
RE: War In The Pacific Updated to v1.801
Posted: Mon May 22, 2006 12:16 am
by Major SNAFU_M
Okay. I'll look again.
I didn't see it the first time (or second or third).
I'll look again.
Thanks[8|]