Page 1 of 1

Two bugs for the price of one save

Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2014 7:23 pm
by WarHunter
Japanese Land Impluse. Naval Air phase. Bomber sent into China Sea to regain supply to China.
USA sends Fighters and NAV to protect Cruiser. Japan sends Fighter. The pawns are in place.

Search successful for USA. Picks both boxes to fight. 2 Surprise points used to make Air to Air -5/+4.
Japan clears US NAV. US Aborts Japan Fighter.
Japan Aborts Air to Air fight.


This is where it goes off the rails.

After 3 screens stating no Axis naval targets, no axis bombers and no naval units to attack in China sea.
Instead of allowing Stay or Abort in the China sea.
The program continues to Strategic bombing phase.

I have recreated this step by step as you can see. Using the ability to Set die rolls.
Save game is at the point where this all begins.
Screen shots below.

RE: Two bugs for the price of one save

Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2014 7:24 pm
by WarHunter
screen shot step by step

Image

RE: Two bugs for the price of one save

Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2014 7:25 pm
by WarHunter
Second bug.

Maybe there is an explanation for this screenshot.
The unsupplied status of the infantry unit adjacent to the HQ is a serious question.



Image

RE: Two bugs for the price of one save

Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2014 3:25 am
by AxelNL
Second problem is known. In this release the HQs on the coast are not acting as a supply source. Steve has fixed it already in 1.2.0.0
It is one of the supply bugs Steve mentioned in his monthly which are left when he decided to no longer wait and release 1.1.9.2 to the public in general. It is a regression bug which creeped in after one of the fixes earlier. I discovered it (too) late

RE: Two bugs for the price of one save

Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2014 7:20 pm
by WarHunter
So this will get fixed when the next update is released?

RE: Two bugs for the price of one save

Posted: Sat Jun 07, 2014 7:21 am
by Centuur
I think so...

RE: Two bugs for the price of one save

Posted: Sat Jun 07, 2014 7:18 pm
by AxelNL
ORIGINAL: WarHunter

So this will get fixed when the next update is released?

Yes - it is already fixed in our non-public beta version. Only if a regression occurs it can go wrong - but I'll check for that when that public beta version will become available.