PLEASE READ: Public Beta Guidelines and Change List

[V22 Osprey]

Hmmm, after I installed the patch, now in air battles the graphics of guns on planes firing don't show up, instead it's just a black box appears when the aircraft fire.I'll try a reinstall, but other than that it's a great patch!

[Erik Rutins]

Works fine for me, I assume this is in Windowed Mode? Try running Full Screen and that should not happen.

[AttuWatcher]

Thanks! will give it a try tonight.

[V22 Osprey]

Yep, worked fine on Full screen, then when I tried to play windowed mode again it was fine.Very strange, what do you think it was Erik?

[witpqs]

Erik,

Fantastic list - thanks much! [:)]

Two quickies, one question and one comment.

I have a single 'hyper-threaded' Intel cpu. The -dual switch was a fantastic step up (didn't need any of the fancy work-arounds you helped people with). Do I understand correctly that I need no switch to do that now (with the public beta)?

Second:

41. Gameplay Change: The way that surface radar is used in naval combat has been modified as follows: Visual confirmation is now required before ships will open fire, meaning that ships must close to visual range first. Also, in situations where range is increasing, if it goes beyond visual range (factoring in Detection Level) fire ceases.

I respect your call for results after rubber meets the road, and I almost always have such in hand when I give feedback. In this case I beg your indulgence to offer an observation. The absolute nature of not allowing opening fire with radar only may present a realism problem with surface combat as the USN improves skill-wise and equipment-wise (as time passes in the game/war). Please hold for consideration checks along the lines of crew skill, leader skill, equipment, date, as in:

- Earlier in war = Less chance of fire with radar only, progressively increasing as time goes on (but never even close to 100%).

- Better crew skill = Better chance of fire with radar only (low crew skill = NO chance).

- Leader checks (captain and TF flag) for fire with radar only.

- Better equipment (the radar sets) = Better chance of fire with radar only.

As the USN improved there were times when opening fire and/or launching torpedoes based on radar only had a major impact. If it could be worked in - but only in the right situations of crew, leaders, equipment, and date (for doctrine implementation) - that would be best for the long run.

As I said, if you would be good enough to 'hold this thought' for consideration at the appropriate time.

[Oliver Heindorf]

ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey

Yep, worked fine on Full screen, then when I tried to play windowed mode again it was fine.Very strange, what do you think it was Erik?

well, I am not Erik but this happes often in windowed mode back to the ols witp days in 2004....when you alter the tasks too often...

it gets fixed by itslef with a simple restart of AE/WITP

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: witpqs
I have a single 'hyper-threaded' Intel cpu. The -dual switch was a fantastic step up (didn't need any of the fancy work-arounds you helped people with). Do I understand correctly that I need no switch to do that now (with the public beta)?

No, -dual is gone and we've replaced it with the other switches to allow for more resolution since we found that there was no "one size fits all" as we were originally attempting. I would start by trying -cpu1 and see if that gives you the same benefit you previously had. If not, try the other switches too.

I respect your call for results after rubber meets the road, and I almost always have such in hand when I give feedback. In this case I beg your indulgence to offer an observation. The absolute nature of not allowing opening fire with radar only may present a realism problem with surface combat as the USN improves skill-wise and equipment-wise (as time passes in the game/war). Please hold for consideration checks along the lines of crew skill, leader skill, equipment, date, as in:
- Earlier in war = Less chance of fire with radar only, progressively increasing as time goes on (but never even close to 100%).
- Better crew skill = Better chance of fire with radar only (low crew skill = NO chance)
- Leader checks (captain and TF flag) for fire with radar only.
- Better equipment (the radar sets) = Better chance of fire with radar only.
As the USN improved there were times when opening fire and/or launching torpedoes based on radar only had a major impact. If it could be worked in - but only in the right situations of crew, leaders, equipment, and date (for doctrine implementation) - that would be best for the long run.
As I said, if you would be good enough to 'hold this thought' for consideration at the appropriate time.

Don't worry, we'll be watching and we're aware of the later war instances of radar fire as well.

[88l71]

I've noticed when you are looking at LCU's in a base and hit the "toggle all replacements for units on this list" the message: "all units on this list have had replacements turned on" pops up no matter whether you hit the ON or OFF button

[TheTomDude]

Fantastic patch. Many thanks.

Two questions Erik:

- What about the "PT TFs not leaving a conquered port" or "No scuttling of costal ships in conquered port" problem? Will this be in the patch? Can't find it on the list.

- I see the IJA 80th Inf. has been fixed. What aboutthe 90th? As reported it has 108 Inf squads twice.

[Andy Mac]

90th is fixed as well it wasnt reqally broken it was a weird device issue
 
Scen 2 has better jap starting xp for pilots

[Mark VII]

Playing Guadalcanal PBEM. When is the best time to install the patch? Before running combat, after? Does it matter? thanks

[medicff]

quite a list of changes. I will be testing soon....

thanks for the support as always.

[scott64]

[&o][&o][8D]

[StoneAge]

55. When calculating the bonus for land unit planning for a target, the land unit and its HQs (corps and command) must be planning for same target to get the bonuses.
 
What Does this mean?
Does this mean that the 14th Army can only have 1 planning target set for the whole 14th Army at one time
 

[Bullwinkle58]

Erik: I think I know the answer from your very long and welcome list of changes/fixes, but just to confirm, the beta patch does not have anything or do anything with the "hotfix" involving the "staff utility"? I haven't loaded it, played with it, or looked at it as I was waiting for the first patch. All I recall was there was a Java problem or something?

So, I should do the hotfix now, after the beta patch is installed, after the final is installed, or it doesn't matter? Did you consider folding the hotfix into the beta?

[erstad]

ORIGINAL: StoneAge

55. When calculating the bonus for land unit planning for a target, the land unit and its HQs (corps and command) must be planning for same target to get the bonuses.

What Does this mean?
Does this mean that the 14th Army can only have 1 planning target set for the whole 14th Army at one time

As it reads literally, it's even worse. Everything within Southern army only gets a bonus if Southern Army HQ is planning for the same target they are. Is that really what this means? That's quite a change...

Also, does it matter how much prep the command HQ has? Could you have units, at, say 100 prep for various spots and change the command HQ each day to change the unit(s) that get the bonus?

I don't want to start a flamewar, but I'm curious what the motivation for this change was? Not arguing, just seeking to understand...

[Rainer]

I have a single 'hyper-threaded' Intel cpu. The -dual switch was a fantastic step up (didn't need any of the fancy work-arounds you helped people with). Do I understand correctly that I need no switch to do that now (with the public beta)?

With my fairly old (Intel Pentium 4) "pseudo dual core" (read: Hyperthreading) system the switch described below seems to provide the same acceleration as the -dual switch did before. -cpu2 is random, could well be that -cpu1 will provide the same.
However, without the cpu switch the system response is very sluggish (as was with the initial release without any switches).
The effect shows in either windowed or full screen mode.


"J:\Matrix Games\War in the Pacific Admiral's Edition\War in the Pacific Admiral Edition.exe" -altFont -cpu2 -dd_def

[witpqs]

I have one also. In another thread Erik suggested I try starting up with -cpu1. As you say, it seems to provide the same nice performance as your -cpu2. I suspect it does basically the same thing.

I haven't tried -dd_def yet. Did that make a difference in performance or are you using it for other reasons?

[witpqs]

Double post!

[Rainer]

Firing two posts to make sure I catch at least one? [;)]

The -dd_def switch prevents on my system graphics glitches when in windowed mode (Nvidia 7600 GT). Especially when switching back and forth between applications (or minimizing).

Actually, I made myself two shortcuts: one to call the windowed mode (which I use mostly for testing and learning), and another for playing full screen (easier to read because the full screen is used). With the "full screen" shortcut I use only the cpu switch and the altfont switch.

EDIT: Quick rough test.
Without -cpu# the game boot phase is about 32 sec, the save loading about 25 sec
With either cpu1 or cpu2 the boot phase is 12 sec, the save load 6 sec.
All Full Sreen.