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

[zuluhour]

Here is mine. I just did an uninstall and reload again. I'm just scratching my head....damn I'm already a little thin up there..+

[zuluhour]

Maybe I missed a patch?
checked member download area. appears to try and install whole game not an update.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: zuluhour

Maybe I missed a patch?
checked member download area. appears to try and install whole game not an update.

The set of pwhex files is on the Babes web site. You have to get them separately and put them in. When you install the game, you are installing the 'default' pwhex files, which are fine for the stock scenarios.

There is more than one set available. For example, there is a set for the stock map but with optional stacking limits added. There is a version for the extended map with optional stacking limits, and another for that map without optional stacking limits.

[Czert]

03/02/13: 1123d - Tweak TF transfer screen for ships in TF
Write-off any active ships that are in enemy port base. Possible bug if ship repairing when base captured

It is posible (or to add it) that you have say 20% chance to capture enemy ship while under repir at port and add it to your forces ? Even is captured ship will have big damage, to simulate posible salvaging of sunk ship and/or combat when trying to capture that ship. And final - it will be captured ship remain original enemy name or it wil be renamed (from sunk ship of same clas of if NA by some random).

[zuluhour]

Thanks witpqs. We are playing stock (or want to) CG2 with latest Beta and Any's scenario etc upgrades. I'm just a "0" in computer literacy.[:(]

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: zuluhour

Thanks witpqs. We are playing stock (or want to) CG2 with latest Beta and Any's scenario etc upgrades. I'm just a "0" in computer literacy.[:(]

OK - did I misunderstand - are you playing with optional stacking limits or no?

If no, then you just want the default pwhex set of files. But, here is the thing, you must have the same versions of the files at both ends. If the player has a different set of files than the game was saved with, you will get a warning message. So, it's possible that you have the right ones but your opponent has the wrong ones!

[zuluhour]

Thanks again. Much appreciated. I believe we do have different "versions".

[Yaab]

I am experiencing a flak value bug using the latest beta in scenarios 1, 28(DaBigbabes A) and scen 31(AHMOD). First turn and dividing any division results in boosted flak values for the divided unit as well as all other units across the map. No save attached because the bug can be observed on the first turn ( 7 December, non-historical start). The flak values revert to the original ones on the next turn.

Image(left to right)
1) 3rd Division, flak vlue of 2.
2) 3rd Division/A, flak value jumps to 5.
3) 3rd Division, flak value jumps to 15 after the division have been rebuilt.

[zuluhour]

Problem solved. Thanks for your help with the handicapped (me) guys! I loaded his pwhex.exe and we are off. Now where did I put Halsey's art files??? just kidding.[:D]

[Chris21wen]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Is the problem when ships are converted? But okay if they follow normal upgrade paths?

edit
From what I can tell, it keeps the endurance/fuel amount when it converts. And as it expends endurance, the numbers go down.

I think so. I now have a save for the turn that I have put two ships in for convertion to TK. The two ships asre Shichiyo Maru a Std-CT TK class in Shanghai and Tsurushima Maru a Std-BT TK class currently in Tokyo. Both take 21 days to complete. Do you want me to wait until they are complete before posting the save?

[michaelm75au]

No. I managed to find 2 ships to convert in the save you gave me earlier.
The conversions don't use same update process as all other class upgrades.
I have changed it to use a common approach. It will offload any excess fuel back to the base if possible. If not for some reason, it will just have more fuel (and thus more endurance) until it burns off when performing movement. The opposite will also be true; if new class has more fuel, it will take it from the base if possible.
Currently, the class upgrades just replace the ship fuel value with the class fuel value. So the over/under fuel differences might even out over the long run, but it is cleaner if the fuel excess/shortfall is added/subtracted from the base.

[chaussej]

I am in the middle of a stock PBEM ... Can we update to the patch without screwing up anything?

[michaelm75au]

ORIGINAL: Yaab

I am experiencing a flak value bug using the latest beta in scenarios 1, 28(DaBigbabes A) and scen 31(AHMOD). First turn and dividing any division results in boosted flak values for the divided unit as well as all other units across the map. No save attached because the bug can be observed on the first turn ( 7 December, non-historical start). The flak values revert to the original ones on the next turn.

Image(left to right)
1) 3rd Division, flak vlue of 2.
2) 3rd Division/A, flak value jumps to 5.
3) 3rd Division, flak value jumps to 15 after the division have been rebuilt.

For some reason, flak is normal calculate as number of flak-type devices divided by 6. (I don't know the reason for division but that is the way it was in WITP). This value is basically calculated at start of the turn resolution and again at the the end for each unit.
When it does the mouse-over, it shows the flak number that was last calculated.
During a the turn resolution, the flak value is calculated with the '6' division - reason for the '2' in the first picture.
However, if changes are made during the turn, the flak is calculated as a raw number - reason for 5 and 15 in other pictures as the number of flak devices (7.7 .. AAMG) are 5 and 15.

Confusing, I know. Not sure if the unit's flak value is only divided by '6' for game resolution, and thus not the 'same' if it changes in turn.

[Chris21wen]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

No. I managed to find 2 ships to convert in the save you gave me earlier.
The conversions don't use same update process as all other class upgrades.
I have changed it to use a common approach. It will offload any excess fuel back to the base if possible. If not for some reason, it will just have more fuel (and thus more endurance) until it burns off when performing movement. The opposite will also be true; if new class has more fuel, it will take it from the base if possible.
Currently, the class upgrades just replace the ship fuel value with the class fuel value. So the over/under fuel differences might even out over the long run, but it is cleaner if the fuel excess/shortfall is added/subtracted from the base.

OK. Thanks again for your stirling work.

[Yaab]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

ORIGINAL: Yaab

I am experiencing a flak value bug using the latest beta in scenarios 1, 28(DaBigbabes A) and scen 31(AHMOD). First turn and dividing any division results in boosted flak values for the divided unit as well as all other units across the map. No save attached because the bug can be observed on the first turn ( 7 December, non-historical start). The flak values revert to the original ones on the next turn.

Image(left to right)
1) 3rd Division, flak vlue of 2.
2) 3rd Division/A, flak value jumps to 5.
3) 3rd Division, flak value jumps to 15 after the division have been rebuilt.

For some reason, flak is normal calculate as number of flak-type devices divided by 6. (I don't know the reason for division but that is the way it was in WITP). This value is basically calculated at start of the turn resolution and again at the the end for each unit.
When it does the mouse-over, it shows the flak number that was last calculated.
During a the turn resolution, the flak value is calculated with the '6' division - reason for the '2' in the first picture.
However, if changes are made during the turn, the flak is calculated as a raw number - reason for 5 and 15 in other pictures as the number of flak devices (7.7 .. AAMG) are 5 and 15.

Confusing, I know. Not sure if the unit's flak value is only divided by '6' for game resolution, and thus not the 'same' if it changes in turn.

It is pretty annoying. If I divide any unit on a given turn, flak values of all LCU units (AA units excluded) on the map are boosted.

Now here comes an interesting part. There are 3 Jap divisions in Wuchang, with initial flak value of 2 each. Divide just one division and then each of them has now flak value of 15. Yet, this new flak value does not translate into a boosted flak value of Wuchang as a base. It is still only a measly value of 2. It works the same way for all the cities on the map ( i.e. Tacoma base flak value is 10, divide a division in Tacoma, flak gets boosted in units instantly, but Tacoma's flak value is still 10).

And here is another interesting part. Start scenario one and compare flak value of Tokyo and Pearl.
Tokyo has flak value of 2. LCUs in Tokyo have the total flak value of around 13-14, so your number of AA guns/6 math fits. But now count Pearl Harbor's LCUs flak value (should read around 50-60 value - I am quoting from memory). Pearl's base flak value is equal to the flak value of its units ans sports a healthy 50-60 value. Here the flak value is not divided by 6. It is the same for any Allied city on the map.

Is this by design? A Japanese base flak value is six times lower than the Allied one. Does this represent lack of AA system at the Japanese base? That the Japs fire they AA weapons individually as units, and not as a "coordinated" base?

If so, the Japanese base flak is totally impotent. It is probably best not to bother with Japanese AA units at all.

PS. One more thing. For Tokyo, to reach Pearl Harbor's flak value of Decemeber 7, 1941, I would have to stick in Tokyo about 90 (sic!) Japanese AA regiments. A Jap AA regiment at full strength has flak value of 4. 4 x 90 = 360 flak value in units / 6 = 60 base flak value of Tokyo.

[Alfred]

Why is this a problem at all. There is no difference to the amount of flak able to shoot at enemy aircraft. The 3rd Infantry Division starts off with (3)15 x 7.7mm T99 AAMG, when you divide the unit the /A subunit has (1)5 x 7.7mm T99 AAMG, and when you recombine you return to (3)15 x 7.7mm T99 AAMG. IOW there has been no loss of anti-aircraft capability.

The mouseover has a small glitch but so what. If michaelm can fix it OK but it does not affect gameplay. Being concerned about the mouseover glitch is similar to a player who relies on two different ship classes having the same AA value even though one ship class has a ceiling of 6k from all its AA guns and the other has a ceiling of 27k.

There is no advantage given here to the Allied side.

Alfred

[Yaab]

Alfred, as for LCUs, you are right - it is just an annoying glitch.

But how do you explain the discrepancy of AA values on base screens between Japanese and Allied bases? Count the flak values of LCUs in Tokyo and Pearl Harbor on the first turn and compare it with
the bases' flak value. Japanese base values seem to be divided by 6, while the Allied ones are not. Why is this so?

[michaelm75au]

The flak value is divided by 6 regardless of side.

[Yaab]

I have just loaded scenario 001 for both sides.

December 7, 1941

Tokyo:

Total flak value in units: 14
Base flak value: 2

14 : 6 = 2 (the game seems to round the value down, the next treshold would be 18 and base flak value would be 3)

Pearl Harbor:
Total flak value in units: 76
Base flak value: 76 ( should have been 12 if divided by 6)

Base value of any Allied base is always equal to total flak value of units in the base. The value isn't divided by 6 as suggested by michaelm.

I haven't touched or divided any unit during this test.

What is wrong with my scenario 001?

[DaveConn]

I had always understood that the game's combat calculations were all done based on the number/type of devices, and that the various values shown in the mouseover were simply a "shorthand" for player reference. If that is the case, then the "shorthand" may be misleading, but the actual gameplay will be unaffected.