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

Post bug reports and ask for help with other issues here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
michaelm75au
Posts: 12457
Joined: Sat May 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

RE: Two problems with 1108m2

Post by michaelm75au »

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

I wonder if the movement of resources, oil & fuel should be limited like it is for supply for some bases.
Because if the change made to the resource movement a short while ago Pakhoi(my only port left) drew 36920 in a single turn what is almost as much as whole China produces in one turn, pretty overkill I would say.
And even before that I can see some weird fuel movements, Pakhoi has just a level 3 port so 3000 points of fuel are requested, I don't think WITP tries to double that like it does for supplies but despite that I had days where fuel ran over 10k points and that at a base with no heavy industry.

I also wonder if it wouldn't be better to let the player also set values for resources, oil & fuel like he can do it already for supply, so if he wants something there he simply raises the requested value and waits for the base to draw it.
which beta are you using?
Ports always request fuel equal to the size*1000. Old WITP did the same.
In addition, there is a hidden 'gotcha', that the port also needs enough fuel to refuel all the ships in port plus TFs based or assigned to the base. That was also in WITP, or was introduced with AE. That was toned back abit in one of the first patches IIRC, because all the fuel wants to go to port to refuel ships that wont get there for sometime.

Each base should get what it wants from nearby bases. The excess is then shipped of to coastal ports. If a base has no fuel for its industry, then there couldn't have been any in range of the base.

I tried to limit how much resource (res/oil/fuel) moved between bases each phase, but there were complaints that the coastal bases no longer had a large enough store to keep the resource fleets full.

I have been monitoring 'failed industry' as the guide to bad resource movement, and I have had few failures (apart from one bad beta).

If you only had one port left, I am not surprised that the excess fuel/oil/res migrated there. But I don't think that would have taken away the fuel required for industry in some other base unless the demands on fuel in the port were excessive.
Michael
User avatar
michaelm75au
Posts: 12457
Joined: Sat May 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m2 updated 2 May

Post by michaelm75au »

ORIGINAL: asdicus

ORIGINAL: michaelm

ORIGINAL: asdicus



michaelm thanks again for looking at this. In the example above Pakhoi may be sending supply to Chungking but where is Pakhoi getting the supply from ? I still think that china is drawing large amounts of supply from somewhere outside of china - india and/or burma. However if you think that things are ok or working as designed then that is fine for me. I just play and enjoy the game as it is. If you do want me to post any more save games let me know.
Did you have save from before Pakhoi became your main supply hub??[:D]
Michael
User avatar
viberpol
Posts: 858
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 3:16 pm
Location: Global village, Poland, EU

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m3 updated 9 May

Post by viberpol »

ORIGINAL: michaelm

[1108m3]
Tweaked Show the supply path as black dots in a PBEM rather than actual suppply numbers

I am little confused. Why did you decide to change the numbers?
I didn't have enough time to get used to '5' hotkey [;)] in the late beta before upgrading, but...
am I right, that the numbers were telling us how many supply points can one expect in such and such a position?
Black dots say nothing apart from the fact that there actually is a supply path (that no LCU blocks it), right?
Przy lackim orle, przy koniu Kiejstuta Archanioł Rusi na proporcach błysł
User avatar
michaelm75au
Posts: 12457
Joined: Sat May 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m3 updated 9 May

Post by michaelm75au »

ORIGINAL: viberpol

ORIGINAL: michaelm

[1108m3]
Tweaked Show the supply path as black dots in a PBEM rather than actual suppply numbers

I am little confused. Why did you decide to change the numbers?
I didn't have enough time to get used to '5' hotkey [;)] in the late beta before upgrading, but...
am I right, that the numbers were telling us how many supply points can one expect in such and such a position?
Black dots say nothing apart from the fact that there actually is a supply path (that no LCU blocks it), right?
Yep in a PBEM, the 'black' dot means a path can be traced to that hex. The last dot in a path doesn't necessarily mean that it has been stopped by an enemy LCU (concerns of some players as it acted as a free recon by showing a number to go); it just means it can't go further for whatever reason.
Michael
asdicus
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu May 16, 2002 6:24 pm
Location: Surrey,UK

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m2 updated 2 May

Post by asdicus »


[/quote]
Did you have save from before Pakhoi became your main supply hub??[:D]

[/quote]
michaelm I have save games available going all the way back to the start of my latest pbm game. The game is now is April 1942 and china has more supplies than I know what to do with ! I have even turned on industry repair at Chungking and Changsha. I have never had to ship any supplies by sea from india to rangoon - they all move by land. The supplies in china are moving by land either from burma and/or india (via Pakhoi ??). I think this problem arises because the allies hold burma and this is allowing supplies to flow in large amounts to china.
This save is from 4 march 1942 pakhoi has only 1k supply rangoon 295k all from india.




Attachments
wpae019.zip
(2.45 MiB) Downloaded 11 times
asdicus
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu May 16, 2002 6:24 pm
Location: Surrey,UK

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m2 updated 2 May

Post by asdicus »

ORIGINAL: asdicus

Did you have save from before Pakhoi became your main supply hub??[:D]

[/quote]
michaelm I have save games available going all the way back to the start of my latest pbm game. The game is now is April 1942 and china has more supplies than I know what to do with ! I have even turned on industry repair at Chungking and Changsha. I have never had to ship any supplies by sea from india to rangoon - they all move by land. The supplies in china are moving by land either from burma and/or india (via Pakhoi ??). I think this problem arises because the allies hold burma and this is allowing supplies to flow in large amounts to china.
This save is from 4 march 1942 pakhoi has only 1k supply rangoon 295k all from india.





[/quote]
This save is for 13 march 1942. Pakhoi now has 34k supplies rangoon only 134k.
As well as the movement of supplies into china I am sure that too much supply is moving by land from india to burma. There are no roads just muddy tracks and jungle. As the allies I should be forced to send convoys of supply by sea to rangoon. I am sure when the game was first released the supply system did not allow supplies to flow so easily by land over poor terrain.
michaelm if you would like more save games eg earlier in this pbm just let me know. Thank-you again for looking at this.
Attachments
wpae018.zip
(2.44 MiB) Downloaded 15 times
User avatar
m10bob
Posts: 8583
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2002 9:09 pm
Location: Dismal Seepage Indiana

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m2 updated 2 May

Post by m10bob »

OK, this is no fault of the excellent enhancements Michaelm is making, but since I know he checks this thread, I have some suggestions..

Colombo is a auto convoy supply port, but has no inherent oil/fuel supply of its; own and depends on the player remembering to get fuel there..I forgot and found 14 supply convoys sitting there, backed upp, all waiting for fuel, when they had taken on all the dry goods they might carry..I had ports starving waiting for the longshoremen to end their apparent strike!..

Suggestion..Lot of oil and fuel up north of there..If we could start auto convoys from Aden for tankers only, it would be nice, and more realistic than giving Colombo a source of those items automatically?

Suggestion#2.....If an auto convoy ship is at a port it cannot get fuel at, allow the Cpt of the ship to be bright enough to take off with the foodstuffs he already has on board........Thank you.......


It takes courage for me to admit my own weaknesses..[:D]
Image

User avatar
BigDuke66
Posts: 2035
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Terra

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m2 updated 2 May

Post by BigDuke66 »

Normally the player ships a lot fuel to India so maybe using a port there(Bombay) as auto convoy port would be better.
But I wonder how one can forget to supply his main naval base with fuel?
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m2 updated 2 May

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: m10bob

OK, this is no fault of the excellent enhancements Michaelm is making, but since I know he checks this thread, I have some suggestions..

Colombo is a auto convoy supply port, but has no inherent oil/fuel supply of its; own and depends on the player remembering to get fuel there..I forgot and found 14 supply convoys sitting there, backed upp, all waiting for fuel, when they had taken on all the dry goods they might carry..I had ports starving waiting for the longshoremen to end their apparent strike!..

Suggestion..Lot of oil and fuel up north of there..If we could start auto convoys from Aden for tankers only, it would be nice, and more realistic than giving Colombo a source of those items automatically?

Suggestion#2.....If an auto convoy ship is at a port it cannot get fuel at, allow the Cpt of the ship to be bright enough to take off with the foodstuffs he already has on board........Thank you.......


It takes courage for me to admit my own weaknesses..[:D]

I have no idea if the code allows, but I'd guess/bet that setting up any off-map base as an auto-convoy originaiton point would make the code scream in protest. Just sayin'.

Colombo can and should be serviced by several Abadan tanker CS TFs from very early on. I've run auto-convoys from there since the second turn, and have had over 1,000,000 fuel in Colombo, and up to 2.5M, continuously since Feb. 1942. This route is tailor made for the CS type convoy. Build and forget, except checking for upgrades every few months.

On your last point, I find that the AC system doesn't make mixed supply/fuel TFs very often. Usually one or the other. But I also do very, very limited fuel auto-convoying. Tankers are too precious to risk a mis-route. I've had a handful in the pool, but inevitably I end up pulling them away to send on some needed refuel run.
The Moose
User avatar
DivePac88
Posts: 3119
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 9:50 pm
Location: Somewhere in the South Pacific.

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m2 updated 2 May

Post by DivePac88 »

I are currently running Public Beta - Build 1108m3 in a PBEM game. I have a problem with not being able to pull pilots into a Mavis unit, can someone help please.

Image
Attachments
MavisProb.jpg
MavisProb.jpg (296.97 KiB) Viewed 183 times
Image
When you see the Southern Cross, For the first time
You understand now, Why you came this way
Alfred
Posts: 6683
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 7:56 am

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m2 updated 2 May

Post by Alfred »

That unit has a max TOE of 18 aircraft less its detached sub-unit of 18. Click on the OOB button. As it currently stands, it is being treated as if it were a fragment.

Alfred
User avatar
michaelm75au
Posts: 12457
Joined: Sat May 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m2 updated 2 May

Post by michaelm75au »

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
ORIGINAL: m10bob

OK, this is no fault of the excellent enhancements Michaelm is making, but since I know he checks this thread, I have some suggestions..

Colombo is a auto convoy supply port, but has no inherent oil/fuel supply of its; own and depends on the player remembering to get fuel there..I forgot and found 14 supply convoys sitting there, backed upp, all waiting for fuel, when they had taken on all the dry goods they might carry..I had ports starving waiting for the longshoremen to end their apparent strike!..

Suggestion..Lot of oil and fuel up north of there..If we could start auto convoys from Aden for tankers only, it would be nice, and more realistic than giving Colombo a source of those items automatically?

Suggestion#2.....If an auto convoy ship is at a port it cannot get fuel at, allow the Cpt of the ship to be bright enough to take off with the foodstuffs he already has on board........Thank you.......


It takes courage for me to admit my own weaknesses..[:D]

I have no idea if the code allows, but I'd guess/bet that setting up any off-map base as an auto-convoy originaiton point would make the code scream in protest. Just sayin'.

I have seen several saves from players where they have set up CS convoys from Aden and Cape Town.
Michael
User avatar
michaelm75au
Posts: 12457
Joined: Sat May 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m2 updated 2 May

Post by michaelm75au »

ORIGINAL: DivePac88

I are currently running Public Beta - Build 1108m3 in a PBEM game. I have a problem with not being able to pull pilots into a Mavis unit, can someone help please.

Image
Seems weird to have 18 planes in group with 18 in detachments. These are editor detachments rather than fragments from memory.

What does the "Unit OOB" show?

[Group 5015 does not exist in the main standard scenarios, so is this a user designed one?
Michael
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m2 updated 2 May

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: michaelm

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
ORIGINAL: m10bob

OK, this is no fault of the excellent enhancements Michaelm is making, but since I know he checks this thread, I have some suggestions..

Colombo is a auto convoy supply port, but has no inherent oil/fuel supply of its; own and depends on the player remembering to get fuel there..I forgot and found 14 supply convoys sitting there, backed upp, all waiting for fuel, when they had taken on all the dry goods they might carry..I had ports starving waiting for the longshoremen to end their apparent strike!..

Suggestion..Lot of oil and fuel up north of there..If we could start auto convoys from Aden for tankers only, it would be nice, and more realistic than giving Colombo a source of those items automatically?

Suggestion#2.....If an auto convoy ship is at a port it cannot get fuel at, allow the Cpt of the ship to be bright enough to take off with the foodstuffs he already has on board........Thank you.......


It takes courage for me to admit my own weaknesses..[:D]

I have no idea if the code allows, but I'd guess/bet that setting up any off-map base as an auto-convoy originaiton point would make the code scream in protest. Just sayin'.

I have seen several saves from players where they have set up CS convoys from Aden and Cape Town.

No, I meant I thought the OP was suggesting recoding the game to make Abadan an AUTO-CONVOY origination base rather than Colombo. CS convoys work fine from and to off-base locations. I use them a lot.
The Moose
User avatar
DivePac88
Posts: 3119
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 9:50 pm
Location: Somewhere in the South Pacific.

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m2 updated 2 May

Post by DivePac88 »

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Seems weird to have 18 planes in group with 18 in detachments. These are editor detachments rather than fragments from memory.

What does the "Unit OOB" show?

[Group 5015 does not exist in the main standard scenarios, so is this a user designed one?

Hi michaelm

We are playing the standard Scenario 002, and here is the OOB.


Image
Attachments
MavisOOB.jpg
MavisOOB.jpg (222.33 KiB) Viewed 183 times
Image
When you see the Southern Cross, For the first time
You understand now, Why you came this way
User avatar
DivePac88
Posts: 3119
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 9:50 pm
Location: Somewhere in the South Pacific.

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m2 updated 2 May

Post by DivePac88 »

Also this is the screen you get when you click on the location button for 22nd KuT-1 Det arriving in 81days.

Image
Attachments
5019.jpg
5019.jpg (290.76 KiB) Viewed 183 times
Image
When you see the Southern Cross, For the first time
You understand now, Why you came this way
User avatar
BigDuke66
Posts: 2035
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Terra

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m2 updated 2 May

Post by BigDuke66 »

@michaelm
Can you tell me what format the audio files(SFX) use?
User avatar
michaelm75au
Posts: 12457
Joined: Sat May 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m2 updated 2 May

Post by michaelm75au »

ORIGINAL: DivePac88

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Seems weird to have 18 planes in group with 18 in detachments. These are editor detachments rather than fragments from memory.

What does the "Unit OOB" show?

[Group 5015 does not exist in the main standard scenarios, so is this a user designed one?

Hi michaelm

We are playing the standard Scenario 002, and here is the OOB.


Image

Must have missed checking that one.

Ah there is the problem.
Notice that there are 2 detachments in the Unit OOB screen:
21st Ku T-1 Det and 22nd Ku T-1 Det.

I am guessing that the 22nd should not be there but be attached to the 22nd Ku T-1 group.

Yep. The editor shows that. Someone has keyed in the wrong parent group when setting up the scenario up. Easy enough to do.
Michael
User avatar
DivePac88
Posts: 3119
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 9:50 pm
Location: Somewhere in the South Pacific.

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m2 updated 2 May

Post by DivePac88 »

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Must have missed checking that one.

Ah there is the problem.
Notice that there are 2 detachments in the Unit OOB screen:
21st Ku T-1 Det and 22nd Ku T-1 Det.

I am guessing that the 22nd should not be there but be attached to the 22nd Ku T-1 group.

Yep. The editor shows that. Someone has keyed in the wrong parent group when setting up the scenario up. Easy enough to do.

Hi michaelm, thanks for confirming that.

We are 4 turns into a new PBEM game, is their anyway I can fix this. Or am I stuck with it, and may as well disband this unit?

Thanks Des.
Image
When you see the Southern Cross, For the first time
You understand now, Why you came this way
User avatar
michaelm75au
Posts: 12457
Joined: Sat May 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

RE: Patch 06 - Public Beta - Build 1108m2 updated 2 May

Post by michaelm75au »

Suggest you disband the second detachment.
The scenario editor file would need to be fixed and then the save update would kick in. Chance of un-intented chances though.
Michael
Post Reply

Return to “Tech Support”