Moved to another Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108p3 updated 10 July

[witp1951]

Here is the turn I set SNLF to Y.

[witp1951]

This turn built and used a number of SNLF.

[witp1951]

This is my latest turn. This may be working as intended. I'm trying to understand the purpose and usefullness.

[beppi]

Michaelm as a feature request which should not be too hard to implement the following question.
Would it be possible to add the experience of an ship to the ship overview screen when creating an new task force ? For example in an carrier TF i want to have my fletcher class destroyers with as much XP as possible for a maximized anti ASW effect. In my surface combat TFS i want to have maximum xp units for a maximum combat efficiency. In my transport tfs i do not need the top xp units.

As allied the XP rate of ships increases during the war and an early Baltimore CA does not have the experience of an late war one. Especially with the destroyers where you get so many of them the xp can differ by quite a large margin (up to 30 xp) and it is currently very painful to find the best ships.

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: witp1951

This is my latest turn. This may be working as intended. I'm trying to understand the purpose and usefullness.

From the Japanese player perspective, it is not too useful as production is only performed when devices are needed. So stockpiling in this case means 'no need to build at the moment'.

I suppose you could use it to turn off some devices that you don't want to produce through using production MP/ARM/VEH points.

Such as case might be that a better upgrade is due soon and you don't want to any units to waste said points on making the older device when the points can be used to get the next upgrade.

[witp1951]

Thanks. [:)]

[michaelm75au]

Update
[1108k9]
Added Hotkey '5' will show the supply path from the selected base where the number shows the lessening effect of supply [MEM]
Changed Made the location on TF list attempt to cater for "at base" loading as distinct from "at base, moving to" [MEM]
Changed Naval bombardment will use the minimum range setting of TF when determining best target. If unit can't hit back at range, then "less" chance of being target [MEM]
Reworked TFs that are not moving are prone to any minefields in current hex; seemed to have been broken by an earlier fix [MEM]
Tweaked Added target/destination hex check to the AI Auto TF Build to exclude over-sized ships [MEM]
Added After 6 months, an expired pooled device (sqd or engineer type) will slowly convert to the upgraded version; if japan, obsolete devices back to the raw materials [MEM]
Added Auto-conversion is option in the in-game preferences. New games assume it is ON [MEM]
(PBEM assumes on for both players - Japanese player can turn it off/on so it applies for synchronisation.)
Fixed Wrong screen showing when returning BACK from Group screen to groups-in-base list screen [MEM]
Fixed Error in some calculations of MP and ARM points for squad-type devices in some places [MEM]
Fixed Not all devices being shown in the device/industry/resource pool [MEM]

[beppi]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Update
[1108k9]
Added Hotkey '5' will show the supply path from the selected base where the number shows the lessening effect of supply [MEM]
Changed Made the location on TF list attempt to cater for "at base" loading as distinct from "at base, moving to" [MEM]
Changed Naval bombardment will use the minimum range setting of TF when determining best target. If unit can't hit back at range, then "less" chance of being target [MEM]
Reworked TFs that are not moving are prone to any minefields in current hex; seemed to have been broken by an earlier fix [MEM]
Tweaked Added target/destination hex check to the AI Auto TF Build to exclude over-sized ships [MEM]
Added After 6 months, an expired pooled device (sqd or engineer type) will slowly convert to the upgraded version; if japan, obsolete devices back to the raw materials [MEM]
Added Auto-conversion is option in the in-game preferences. New games assume it is ON [MEM]
(PBEM assumes on for both players - Japanese player can turn it off/on so it applies for synchronisation.)
Fixed Wrong screen showing when returning BACK from Group screen to groups-in-base list screen [MEM]
Fixed Error in some calculations of MP and ARM points for squad-type devices in some places [MEM]
Fixed Not all devices being shown in the device/industry/resource pool [MEM]

Added After 6 months, an expired pooled device (sqd or engineer type) will slowly convert to the upgraded version; if japan, obsolete devices back to the raw materials [MEM]

Added After 6 months, an expired pooled device (sqd or engineer type) will slowly convert to the upgraded version; if japan, obsolete devices back to the raw materials [MEM]

That is a very nice addition, especcialy with the option to turn it on/off.

[michaelm75au]

BTW, has anyone tried the password change function in last build?

I thought it might be useful as I have had requests to change the password in the past.

[USSAmerica]

Another great update, Michael!  [8D]

Any idea of how solid this beta is getting, and how close it may be to an official update?

[CaptBeefheart]

Michaelm: Great work with all of these updates. I had the second ARD (AFDB-2) come in at Portland and when I form a Support TF out of it and try to select any new home port (for instance, Pearl Harbor) it comes up: "HOME BASE MUST BE ACCESSIBLE BY THIS TF!!" I noticed this in K8 and it's the same issue in K9.

Interestingly enough, I tested AFDB-1, which I have parked at Rabaul, and I had no problem forming a Support TF out of it and selecting any home port.

Cheers,
CC

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: USS America


Any idea of how solid this beta is getting, and how close it may be to an official update?

We have a LONG way to go as Michael has all these great ideas!!! [:D][:D][:D]

Go Michael!!!!

[&o][&o][&o]

PS: No rush. Take all the time you need. The new features are AWESOME!!

[berto]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Added Hotkey '5' will show the supply path from the selected base where the number shows the lessening effect of supply [MEM]

Another fantastic feature, but ... in some hexes by the absence of supply numbers, it seems I can infer the presence of enemy units, something that reconnaissance is otherwise not revealing to me. In other words, this feature is helping to dispel the Fog of War. WAD, or an unintended side effect?

[bjfagan]

I am sure Michael has some great new features that we will all like and I definitely look forward to them. However, leaving the official patch open ended seems unfair to the gamers. There are important fixes in this patch (eg search arcs and others) that I am sure people are eagerly awaiting, myself included. Couldn't an official patch go out now to give us these important fixes and then all the cool new features can come in another update in the near future?

[Bradley7735]

ORIGINAL: Commander Cody

Michaelm: Great work with all of these updates. I had the second ARD (AFDB-2) come in at Portland and when I form a Support TF out of it and try to select any new home port (for instance, Pearl Harbor) it comes up: "HOME BASE MUST BE ACCESSIBLE BY THIS TF!!" I noticed this in K8 and it's the same issue in K9.

Interestingly enough, I tested AFDB-1, which I have parked at Rabaul, and I had no problem forming a Support TF out of it and selecting any home port.

Cheers,
CC

Can that ship transit a river? I bet it's too big and it's stuck in Portland. It should have it's port of entry set to SF, but that's an oob change, not a code change.

[Rainer]

Manpower. The problem is probably to have enough manpower to do the full test (required by publisher) to finish the beta cycle and do the Public Release.

I am runnung my campaign against Jap AI since about a year, using all patch updates as they come alive. So far no adverse side effects.
However, with a long running PBEM I would not recommend to use the betas (as Michael says in the first post).

[Mac Linehan]

michaelm -

k9 - cant thank you enough, Christmas in April!

Mac

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: bjfagan

I am sure Michael has some great new features that we will all like and I definitely look forward to them. However, leaving the official patch open ended seems unfair to the gamers. There are important fixes in this patch (eg search arcs and others) that I am sure people are eagerly awaiting, myself included. Couldn't an official patch go out now to give us these important fixes and then all the cool new features can come in another update in the near future?

My fear (suspicion) is that this will be the last patch that Matrix will support. There is a cost to publishing a patch.

Based upon that fear, I would like to see the public beta run as long as possible to allow Michael to work on everything he feels like prior to the patch being issued. I hope I am wrong and that this next official patch is not the last ... but ....

[Bradley7735]

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: bjfagan

I am sure Michael has some great new features that we will all like and I definitely look forward to them. However, leaving the official patch open ended seems unfair to the gamers. There are important fixes in this patch (eg search arcs and others) that I am sure people are eagerly awaiting, myself included. Couldn't an official patch go out now to give us these important fixes and then all the cool new features can come in another update in the near future?

My fear (suspicion) is that this will be the last patch that Matrix will support. There is a cost to publishing a patch.

Based upon that fear, I would like to see the public beta run as long as possible to allow Michael to work on everything he feels like prior to the patch being issued. I hope I am wrong and that this next official patch is not the last ... but ....

I have the same suspicion. I really want the beta to become a true patch, but I don't want to hurry things along because I assume it's the last one. Better to let Michael proceed without pressure because every little crumb of new stuff is worth the wait.

[berto]

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

My fear (suspicion) is that this will be the last patch that Matrix will support.

A major TOAW patch (3.4) was released several months ago, and work is said to have started on the next one. TOAW is much older than WITP:AE, and as evidenced by forum activity, apparently much less popular. The John Tiller Campaign Series are also scheduled for updates in the next year or two. Ditto about the age and popularity of JTCS compared to WITP:AE. If Matrix is still supporting TOAW and JTCS patches, why not also WITP:AE?

Despite its relatively high price, WITP:AE is likely one of Matrix's biggest sellers, I reckon. Why would Matrix want to undermine that?