Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1126b updated 17 Sept 2016

[witpqs]

A continuing game, Babes 28-C started early December 2011 under whatever Beta was extant at that time. The date seemed OK. The only glitch is that the ones on the carrier didn't go automatically.

Oh, another slight issue but maybe better dealt with in scenario data than code - the groups for Wasp did not sync right. The VS group withdrew but planes and pilots did not go into the VB group. I suspect that's because they are different numbers (they were VS-71 and VB-72).

I'll send you a save so you can look at why it didn't work on the carriers.

[michaelm75au]

The Wasp groups don't get any default template - don't match the minimum a/c capacity of 85. Any change to them would have to be thru scenario data.

[witpqs]

I made a type BTW, it was Babes 28-C.

[michaelm75au]

The carrier groups will only re-size when in friendly base hex.

BTW, I found an issue with my own save in that the disbanding VS didn't automatically send its plane/pilots to the VB.

[PaxMondo]

Michael,
 
Thanks for the ongoing support!!
 
[&o][&o][&o]

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Oh, another slight issue but maybe better dealt with in scenario data than code - the groups for Wasp did not sync right. The VS group withdrew but planes and pilots did not go into the VB group. I suspect that's because they are different numbers (they were VS-71 and VB-72).

The name of the groups shouldn't matter (unless the scenario is relying on the default template). A disbanding group, that can pool its plane/pilots, will attempt to find a group that has same type of a/c and is either changing size or needs replacements.

[DOCUP]

Playing stock Scen 1 Allied patch 22a Mar 43.  My fighter sweeps are going in piecemeal.  25 operational plans with good CO's, good CO in Air HQ, great supply, Lv 8 AF, weather hasn't been a problem.  They go in 12 or 13 plane groups.  Before the patch they went in with ether all 25 or 20 and 3 or something close to it. Not saying anything is broken am I missing something?

[trhinz]

I saw this too a few turns ago in my Babes game with zuluhour. A 52 plane US fighter sweep came in in numerous packets, some as small as 4 planes. I've never seen this before.

[koniu]

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

Playing stock Scen 1 Allied patch 22a Mar 43.  My fighter sweeps are going in piecemeal.  25 operational plans with good CO's, good CO in Air HQ, great supply, Lv 8 AF, weather hasn't been a problem.  They go in 12 or 13 plane groups.  Before the patch they went in with ether all 25 or 20 and 3 or something close to it. Not saying anything is broken am I missing something?

Confirming that.
I start thinking You have start using small P-38 groups or giving % to rest.
It happens two times in two days over the same hex. Also as i remember when You sweep Magwe few day ago they come in full 25 size, and we had play that turn under 22a patch also(can be wrong). So maybe bad dice rolls only?

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

Playing stock Scen 1 Allied patch 22a Mar 43.  My fighter sweeps are going in piecemeal.  25 operational plans with good CO's, good CO in Air HQ, great supply, Lv 8 AF, weather hasn't been a problem.  They go in 12 or 13 plane groups.  Before the patch they went in with ether all 25 or 20 and 3 or something close to it. Not saying anything is broken am I missing something?

This has been in BETA the two times Erik and I tried it. When I reported the issue I was told a bug was found and fixed and that is what is causing this behavior. So I guess this is how its supposed to be.

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

Playing stock Scen 1 Allied patch 22a Mar 43.  My fighter sweeps are going in piecemeal.  25 operational plans with good CO's, good CO in Air HQ, great supply, Lv 8 AF, weather hasn't been a problem.  They go in 12 or 13 plane groups.  Before the patch they went in with ether all 25 or 20 and 3 or something close to it. Not saying anything is broken am I missing something?

This has been in BETA the two times Erik and I tried it. When I reported the issue I was told a bug was found and fixed and that is what is causing this behavior. So I guess this is how its supposed to be.

I realize that certain algorithums and the results of these algorithums adds to the fog of war. However, there is also the problem of identifying eroors with these algorithums when code changes. In one example, the LCU occupying a hex with LI/HI, a behaivor change happend with nobody realizing it .. until the Moose spoke up .. I am not sure that leaving the morale checks and other "fixable" variables hidden from the players is a good idea as opposed to the random variables being hidden. What if the code breaks and a skill/morale or whatever check fails and it should not have failed ... How would I know if the code was broken to report the error? Thus a balance between FOW and the fact this this game is the result of software code and software is inherrently full of faults. Maybe a combat message .. "Lt Dan fails air skill check groups fail to link up" .. or "Lt Bob fails morale check group fails to fly mission," even a message "the game has decided to randomly dispurse the mission so you will get frustrated and realize the stuff happends in war" would be helpful in identifying aberrant vs. expected software behavior.

On the other hand most games do not have such a dedicated indivudal to maintain the game long after its publication. For that the community must be grateful.

Just a thought . if you do want to catch more errors .. then plugging in some descriptive messages for the most controversial behaviors might be helpful in id'ing errors. .... and these messages would be helpful to the community to understand when the game is acting as designed -- lowering the number of false "bug" reports ...

[barkman44]

this may be regarded as a stupid question but how do i get it to run full screen?i'm running win7 1600x900 resolution.
never mind figured it out

[mikkey]

barkorn, you must improve your shortcut with something similar like this:
"I:\YOUR PATH WITH War in the Pacific Admirals Edition\War in the Pacific Admiral Edition.exe" -f -px1600 -py900 -deepColor -altFont -SingleCpuOrders -multiaudio -cpu2 -dd_sw
More information about shortcut switches are in WhatsNew.pdf in your game folder.

[henry1611]

In the TF Information Screen, there is block of info provided for the TF's total Gun, AAA, Torps and ASW values. Is there any way to get that same info added into the Create a TF Screen as illustrated below? I know that the Create a TF Screen for a Combat TF provides these values for the individual ships but it would be good to know the total values for the whole TF as it is being created. Also, the Create a TF Screen for a Non-Combat TF (e.g., Cargo) does not provide these values at all, so it would be doubly nice!

Just a hopeful wish if it can be done. Thanks!

[BigDuke66]

OK I'm not sure if this problem is scenario related or related to the program.
Let me explain:
Currently I'm playing the Guadalcanal scenario and when trying to move a unit by strategic move north it only works when I click the hex, clicking the base will either show "Unable to reach target, movement not allowed" or "Invalid destination" depending on where my map has "jumped" to.
The map "jump" itself seems to come from the fact that the playing field its smaller than my screen resolution and scrolling up or down makes the map view constantly jump left & right.
Jumped right gives "Unable to reach target, movement not allowed"
Jumped left gives "Invalid destination"
Strangely with bases a bit more right like Bundaberg the problem isn't so big, jumped right still gives the "Unable to reach target, movement not allowed" message but jumped left works.
So is this scenario related or an WITP problem?
I guess enlarging the play field could help, 1920 is a typical screen resolution on todays TFTs

[Quixote]

I think it's a screen resolution issue, not a game or scenario problem. I run on boring old 1280x1024 and strat movement in the Guadalcanal scenario works normally for me. Don't know if michael can do anything to alter the jumping you get playing on a screen that big, but you could always drop your resolution just a bit when playing this scenario (even for just a turn or two) if you had to do some strat movement, then go back to the settings you like. Not an ideal fix in your case, but I'm guessing it would work.

[michaelm75au]

I don't have the issue with my laptop (native res 1366 x 768) Game played with 1200x768 in window mode.

[Itdepends]

A wish list for the TF screen (or even on map). Would it be possible to quickly rank TF's in the TF list by detection limit? It would really help sub operations and help maintenance of surface TF's once you realise they've been detected.

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: henry1611

In the TF Information Screen, there is block of info provided for the TF's total Gun, AAA, Torps and ASW values. Is there any way to get that same info added into the Create a TF Screen as illustrated below? I know that the Create a TF Screen for a Combat TF provides these values for the individual ships but it would be good to know the total values for the whole TF as it is being created. Also, the Create a TF Screen for a Non-Combat TF (e.g., Cargo) does not provide these values at all, so it would be doubly nice!

Just a hopeful wish if it can be done. Thanks!

It sounds reasonable. However, the screen is full and we can't just overwrite the info where you had it.
So I have made the TF type a 'menu item' so it can show a mouse-over message as shown.

[n01487477]

While you're making changes, maybe I could request a change to TF display too. Out at sea, I sometimes want to split a larger TF into smaller TF's near a locale I am attacking multi-prong. The thing is when I want to split these I can only see troop numbers, not unit names...and chance of toggling this ? I can do this with tracker open tho


Thx for any consideration...