Leader an Beneifits

[Tankerace]

What did I do? Turn one. Allies. I made 2 surface combat TFs at Pearl. I ran the turn. The next turn, the CO of the Shaw (nnot even one of the ships in either TF) had a WCDR commanding it.

No, I did not assign a leader. I did this.

Click Pearl, form new TF. Choose ships, done.

Click Pearl, form new TF. Choose ships, done.

Run turn.

Turn 2, check ships. USS Shaw (not even one fo the ships) had its leader changed.

I assigned no leaders, no command changes. I didn't even do anything on the rest of the map, as I was trying to reproduce the bug.

[Mr.Frag]

To deassign the leader do I have to select WO as commander or some poor SOB from the bottom of the food chain?

Just put the original captain back in command of his ship.

[Mr.Frag]

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

What did I do? Turn one. Allies. I made 2 surface combat TFs at Pearl. I ran the turn. The next turn, the CO of the Shaw (nnot even one of the ships in either TF) had a WCDR commanding it.

No, I did not assign a leader. I did this.

Click Pearl, form new TF. Choose ships, done.

Click Pearl, form new TF. Choose ships, done.

Run turn.

Turn 2, check ships. USS Shaw (not even one fo the ships) had its leader changed.

I assigned no leaders, no command changes. I didn't even do anything on the rest of the map, as I was trying to reproduce the bug.

did you note the commanders before the turn ended? ie: did it happen when the turn ran or during the work before ending the turn. That type of info is critical.

[Tankerace]

I looked at all the commanders before the turn. The Shaws leader was the stock leader, leader 11356 Jones, W., LCDR, US Navy. The next turn, he was a British Wing Commander.

[Mr.Frag]

I looked at all the commanders before the turn. The Shaws leader was the stock leader, leader 11356 Jones, W., LCDR, US Navy. The next turn, he was a British Wing Commander.

I understand that, but what does that have to do with the TF's you created?

You are talking about them as if they are related. Does it only happen when you form 2 TF's at the port where the ship is?

[Tankerace]

You said this:

If you (a) don't use computer control and (b) take your leaders off ships *before* disbanding them, you will not loose a single ship based leader.

Don't know if you have read the updated workarounds posted here ...

I am making the point that this workaround does not solve the leader bug. I didn't have computer control, and I didn't disband anything, and I am still losing ship based leaders. I loose leaders (To quote Dtravel) when I breathe wrong.

[pasternakski]

Yes, TA, and none of this explains phenomena like WO 0/0s in command of submarines on patrol.

As Frag has noted, there are multiple variants on the leader leak. It's not just one bug, it's a whole nest of 'em - and they may not all be related to each other.

I doubt that sending saves and working on this in a "patch" mode is going to get the job done. I believe that the code has to be analyzed and reworked thoroughly, maybe even from scratch.

If this cannot be done, it may be time to send the message, "Scratch one flattop."

I can only say this. The problem did not exist in UV. It has to be something new that was added. I suggest sh1tcanning the whole replace-or-assign leaders idea and go back to "this is what the game gives you, so this is what you've got." Assign performance criteria based on hardwired numbers and let it go at that. Build in such changes as Nimitz-for-Numbnutz and Anybody-but-Heath. As the overmatched chess player said, "Simplify, simplify, simplify."

How can any self-respecting game company countenance customers being confronted with this nonsense:

[Tankerace]

Well, my beef is simply that they make it sound like it is fixed, when it is not. They might have fixed 1 of the leader bugs, but the main problem is still there.

[Bodhi]

"WO is known to be an inexperienced and very cautious officer.
He is best qualified to command a carrier" [:D]

Interesting how few people seem to quote which scenario they're playing, and if it's stock or modified.

[Tankerace]

The example I posted was Turn 1, version 1.3, scenario 15.

[pry]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

I looked at all the commanders before the turn. The Shaws leader was the stock leader, leader 11356 Jones, W., LCDR, US Navy. The next turn, he was a British Wing Commander.

I understand that, but what does that have to do with the TF's you created?

You are talking about them as if they are related. Does it only happen when you form 2 TF's at the port where the ship is?

Don't bother with this one Frag, already taken care of this is what we are tesing in the newest build...

[Tankerace]

LOL, I spammed pry with saves.

I wasn't meaning to be insulting or anything, if I came across that way I apologize It just seemed to me like Mr. Frag was saying that if you did this and this, you would lose no leaders, which is not the case.

Speaking of saves, pry, do you need me to purposely force the bug and get you a few more?

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: Bodhi

"WO is known to be an inexperienced and very cautious officer.
He is best qualified to command a carrier" [:D]

Interesting how few people seem to quote which scenario they're playing, and if it's stock or modified.

Sc. 15. No modifications. I state none of this because it is obvious what I am talking about: game design, not fiddling around later.

The "WO" and his characteristics are provided by some unknown-to-me subroutine. I can't imagine why it is so difficult to discern what is wrong.

[Mr.Frag]

Don't bother with this one Frag, already taken care of this is what we are tesing in the newest build

Ok, 3 down, 1 to go

[Mr.Frag]

I wasn't meaning to be insulting or anything, if I came across that way I apologize It just seemed to me like Mr. Frag was saying that if you did this and this, you would lose no leaders, which is not the case.

Gotta try harder to insult me. You always have to remember, I don't care what you think, I am just trying to get the game bugs fixed and if that annoys people along the way, who really cares in the end? All you'll remember in the end is there are no bugs, you will have forgotten about the trip and the beatings along the way [:D]

[Tankerace]

LOL. I wasn't trying to insult you, nor was I trying to say you don't know what you are talking about. I just want to do my part to see this bug die.... and die it shall.

[pry]

ORIGINAL: Tankerace
Speaking of saves, pry, do you need me to purposely force the bug and get you a few more?

I'l take all the saves folks have to offer until we kill this issue off once and for all... Just make sure they repeat

[testarossa]

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Well, my beef is simply that they make it sound like it is fixed, when it is not. They might have fixed 1 of the leader bugs, but the main problem is still there.

Leaders bug wasn't a game breaker for me, but after all this fun I've decided to check. Majority of my 1 sub TFs had a submarine commander and than a TF commander on top. So that's how i've found that Spruance in my game is commanding sub TF of SS Tambor.
So i've started to check them all - some of them had carrier TF commanders, but mainly Surface TF commanders. I'm not sure about all this as this is my first ever attempt to track down a bug. But may be this very sub TF creation process is sucking out commanders from all other TFs? Ehh and this is Lemur's scenario, so may be someone would check the stock scenario for this?

May be sub TF commander should be by default sub commander itself without any option to select the different commander as TF commander (to many commanders in one sentence, right?)

[2ndACR]

Hold off on some of these reports from Lemurs version. Me and Ron have a hunch we are going to test.

We think Lemurs added a leader or 2 to the game, so he may have bumped the list down and messed something all to heck and not known it. The editor is not user friendly IMO. A mistake is real easy to make and not catch it.

[pry]

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Hold off on some of these reports from Lemurs version. Me and Ron have a hunch we are going to test.

We think Lemurs added a leader or 2 to the game, so he may have bumped the list down and messed something all to heck and not known it. The editor is not user friendly IMO. A mistake is real easy to make and not catch it.

Based on the save Ron sent me the entire leader data base is hosed... How much of that if anything that Lemurs did when he created his scenario I don't know but what Ron did (inserting a few leaders into the database) absolutely messed your version up...

Issues like this are the main reason why I will not look at saves from non stock scenarios for bug reports.