Patch 01 ... Patch 02 ... Patch 03 ...

[Mike Solli]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

We will probably release a "hot fix" for patch02 - not sure exactly when of course - but shooting for end of this week. This will be an EXE ONLY patch.

Candidates for inclusion are:

01 - Supply/Resource overflow issues and related drag issues.

Yay! Thanks Joe!

[Admiral Scott]

Fantastic!
Thanks guys.

Throw in as many tweaks and fixes possible I say.

[khyberbill]

We will probably release a "hot fix" for patch02 - not sure exactly when of course - but shooting for end of this week. This will be an EXE ONLY patch.

Candidates for inclusion are:

01 - Supply/Resource overflow issues and related drag issues.

I have noticed sudden surges in supply. Frisco went from respectable numbers in one day to 999,999 fuel and supply the next day.

02 - Artillery - toning down some more - and increasing supply consumption.

It appears to me that the Chinese just die much easier than other units. That, coupled with their extremely low rate of recovery from disruption quickly leads to super weak units. I have noticed that Patch 2 does seem to limit the damage due to supply constraints in Darwin. Before Patch 2 I could bombard every day with 2000+ causalities inflicted on the Japanese, after Patch 2, it takes up to 6 days for supply to go from red to grey in the bombarding units. The result is casualties are now much lower if bombarding on a daily basis, each unit bombards every 4th or 6th day now in Darwin.

03 - Various display issues - such as the ASW/Cloud crash problem!

I haven't had this problem...yet.

04 - ASW/Submarines - looking at this - will tweak if we can find issues.

I didn't notice a problem before (probably a function of opponents' style of play-both are conservative with subs) and haven't seen enough action since Patch 2 to comment.

[Takeshi]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

We will probably release a "hot fix" for patch02 - not sure exactly when of course - but shooting for end of this week. This will be an EXE ONLY patch.

Candidates for inclusion are:

01 - Supply/Resource overflow issues and related drag issues.

02 - Artillery - toning down some more - and increasing supply consumption.

03 - Various display issues - such as the ASW/Cloud crash problem!

04 - ASW/Submarines - looking at this - will tweak if we can find issues.

Thanks for the quick response to problems. You guys are great!

[scott64]

Would like to see improved supplies in China. After 8 days almost all cities still have no supplies and none is moving other cities. [:@]

[cantona2]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

We will probably release a "hot fix" for patch02 - not sure exactly when of course - but shooting for end of this week. This will be an EXE ONLY patch.

Candidates for inclusion are:

01 - Supply/Resource overflow issues and related drag issues.

02 - Artillery - toning down some more - and increasing supply consumption.

03 - Various display issues - such as the ASW/Cloud crash problem!

04 - ASW/Submarines - looking at this - will tweak if we can find issues.

Joe will this mean a restart for ongoing games?

[Erik Rutins]

No WITP AE update (to date) has required a restart, though some changes (primarily date changes) do not take effect until a new game is started. I don't expect any of the code changes being looked at would only work with a fresh start, they should apply to ongoing games as well.

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: cantona2

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

We will probably release a "hot fix" for patch02 - not sure exactly when of course - but shooting for end of this week. This will be an EXE ONLY patch.

Candidates for inclusion are:

01 - Supply/Resource overflow issues and related drag issues.

02 - Artillery - toning down some more - and increasing supply consumption.

03 - Various display issues - such as the ASW/Cloud crash problem!

04 - ASW/Submarines - looking at this - will tweak if we can find issues.

Joe will this mean a restart for ongoing games?

Those "EXE ONLY" words I used above are code for "restart will not buy you anything' - since the restart is just loading up the data again [:)].

[Chickenboy]

Pardon me for being a dingbat, Joe, but would this require PBEMers to use Admiral Dadman's methodology for upgrading a PBEM or would each individual just hotfix their own .exe and be done with it?

Thanks,

[jwilkerson]

Not sure what the dadman process is - but I wouldn't change the process - do whatever you normally do - if it has worked before - it will work again.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

We will probably release a "hot fix" for patch02 - not sure exactly when of course - but shooting for end of this week. This will be an EXE ONLY patch.

Candidates for inclusion are:

01 - Supply/Resource overflow issues and related drag issues.

02 - Artillery - toning down some more - and increasing supply consumption.

03 - Various display issues - such as the ASW/Cloud crash problem!

04 - ASW/Submarines - looking at this - will tweak if we can find issues.

Nice. THanks for the great support.

[JamesM]

I do not know if this has been reported but I am encountering a graphics glitch (I would not call it a bug because I am able to work around it) when selecting damaged ships for surface combat task forces. It is easier to refer to the attached image then trying to explain it in words.

[stuman]

I have seen that as well a few times, but not always.

[vaned74]

Is the effect of forts on arty, air, or naval bombardment being looked at for inclusion in the hotfix?  Actually giving the defending troops some protections against bombardment for being in a fortification would make a big difference in the survivability of defending troops.

Also, note that even though we all talk about Japanese bombardments of Chinese troops being overeffective, this works both ways.  Try putting 5 US arty units on heavily fortified hex (level 6) like Iwo with 30,000 defending Japanese troops and see what happens after 10 days of bombardment.  You'll find the Japanese defense pretty well destroyed.  The net result is land combat is way too favorable to the attacker at this time.

Obviously fort effects and supply consumption are coding issues, but, on the effects in land combat and the massive casualties, has anyone thought to simply reduce the anti-soft values by say 25% across the board?

Is anti-soft the governing parameter for bombardment effects or is "effect" the parameter that matters and "anti-soft" only used for fire combat in deliberate or shock attacks?

[John Lansford]

I'm seeing the multiple names on top of the list also whenever picking ships for a new TF.  I'm not sure but it may be any of the combat TF's (Surface, bombardment, CV, etc) that it shows up on.

[GB68]

ORIGINAL: vaned74

Is the effect of forts on arty, air, or naval bombardment being looked at for inclusion in the hotfix?  Actually giving the defending troops some protections against bombardment for being in a fortification would make a big difference in the survivability of defending troops.

Also, note that even though we all talk about Japanese bombardments of Chinese troops being overeffective, this works both ways.  Try putting 5 US arty units on heavily fortified hex (level 6) like Iwo with 30,000 defending Japanese troops and see what happens after 10 days of bombardment.  You'll find the Japanese defense pretty well destroyed.  The net result is land combat is way too favorable to the attacker at this time.

Obviously fort effects and supply consumption are coding issues, but, on the effects in land combat and the massive casualties, has anyone thought to simply reduce the anti-soft values by say 25% across the board?

Is anti-soft the governing parameter for bombardment effects or is "effect" the parameter that matters and "anti-soft" only used for fire combat in deliberate or shock attacks?

I agree that the artillery effect seems to large.......

But to use the example of Iwo Jima in reality, a tiny islet, battered into the next century by weeks of air and naval bombardment, yet, IRL it still took the US 6 weeks to clear the island.

OK, maybe you could say effective resistance was defeated within 1 or 2 weeks, but it goes to show that battle results cannot always be effectively resolved in a turn resolution!

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: jamesm

I do not know if this has been reported but I am encountering a graphics glitch (I would not call it a bug because I am able to work around it) when selecting damaged ships for surface combat task forces. It is easier to refer to the attached image then trying to explain it in words.

Yes this is one of the display issues that has been addressed for the "hot fix" - I referred to this as one of the "various display issues".

[Nikel]

jwilkerson, any possibility of including the tutorial in the hotfix?

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

Not sure what the dadman process is - but I wouldn't change the process - do whatever you normally do - if it has worked before - it will work again.

@ jwilkerson:

This is the Admiral Dadman process on the forum sticky:

tm.asp?m=2233574

I'm assuming that we will need to do this for the hotfix? Thanks for your response.

[cantona2]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: cantona2

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

We will probably release a "hot fix" for patch02 - not sure exactly when of course - but shooting for end of this week. This will be an EXE ONLY patch.

Candidates for inclusion are:

01 - Supply/Resource overflow issues and related drag issues.

02 - Artillery - toning down some more - and increasing supply consumption.

03 - Various display issues - such as the ASW/Cloud crash problem!

04 - ASW/Submarines - looking at this - will tweak if we can find issues.

Joe will this mean a restart for ongoing games?

Those "EXE ONLY" words I used above are code for "restart will not buy you anything' - since the restart is just loading up the data again [:)].

Thanks