Matrix Games Forums

I'm a beginner. When I look at the matchmaking, it seems like a lot of people are using patch 26b instead of 28.
Is using 26b the current trend?
What kind of issues does patch 28—which seems to be the latest at first glance—have?

This is what I use:
It fixes the NS not working with port 0(0) which is still in 1126, and a couple of other minor issues.

Patch 28 works well for me and it uses the normal map.

ham17 wrote: Tue Sep 15, 2026 9:02 am I'm a beginner. When I look at the matchmaking, it seems like a lot of people are using patch 26b instead of 28.
Is using 26b the current trend?
What kind of issues does patch 28—which seems to be the latest at first glance—have?

I'd stick to 26b until 28 has a new release but 28 does work.

Chris21wen wrote: Wed Sep 16, 2026 5:55 am

ham17 wrote: Tue Sep 15, 2026 9:02 am I'm a beginner. When I look at the matchmaking, it seems like a lot of people are using patch 26b instead of 28.
Is using 26b the current trend?
What kind of issues does patch 28—which seems to be the latest at first glance—have?

I'd stick to 26b until 28 has a new release but 28 does work.

Chris,

Does 26b have the NavSupport fix in it for bases that start with ports 0(0)?

PaxMondo wrote: Thu Sep 17, 2026 3:56 am

Chris21wen wrote: Wed Sep 16, 2026 5:55 am

ham17 wrote: Tue Sep 15, 2026 9:02 am I'm a beginner. When I look at the matchmaking, it seems like a lot of people are using patch 26b instead of 28.
Is using 26b the current trend?
What kind of issues does patch 28—which seems to be the latest at first glance—have?

I'd stick to 26b until 28 has a new release but 28 does work.

Chris,

Does 26b have the NavSupport fix in it for bases that start with ports 0(0)?

Nope, that is in a later update.

I didn't know there was a problem with 26 until recently, but I'll go with what Joe said.

What I can say is there is a problem with 28.4. There's a problem unloading at dot bases. An enemy amphib TF will unloads anything, irrespective of it's size without the need for naval support but NS does marginally increase the unload rate but is not needed. As it doesn't actively prevent unloading it not a problem but it just seems wrong.

Friendly Amphib TF unloading at a dot base requires the extra NS to do this.

Reason is NS only assists in handling cargo etc., it cannot do it on its own but a dot base has no port facilities and limited onboard facilities to lift large heavy objects. I can understand NS helping in a friendly base but not enemy.

If this is the same bug then the answer is no.

RangerJoe wrote: Thu Sep 17, 2026 5:25 am

PaxMondo wrote: Thu Sep 17, 2026 3:56 am

Chris21wen wrote: Wed Sep 16, 2026 5:55 am

I'd stick to 26b until 28 has a new release but 28 does work.

Chris,

Does 26b have the NavSupport fix in it for bases that start with ports 0(0)?

Nope, that is in a later update.

That's what I thought ... 1127

28 has several issues. Go for the last 26.

Diliwitm wrote: Thu Sep 17, 2026 5:27 pm 28 has several issues. Go for the last 26.

Or install 28 but then switch the .exe back to the 26. That way any map and data base changes will be in the game. Also, when the final 28 update is finally released then you can just update and your other information should be fine and not cause any problems.

One of the issues is possibly the map or the code vs new map. I was making a river cross assault on Chengchow from 88,43 instead several units went to Kaifeng, just some assaulted and the assault failed. I gave the files to Chris and he could not find the reason. I suspect that when the road was replaced by a broken bridge this affected the number units it can move across still it should not occur in an assault and why the units that did not crossed appeared in Kaifeng.

Edited: at the moment i am seeing apparently in random fashion that some pilots that i take from a Sentai to the pool just vanish, they do are not appearing in the reserve pool. But since the pilot list seem to not show all pilots sometimes i am not even sure.

Diliwitm wrote: Thu Sep 17, 2026 7:43 pm One of the issues is possibly the map or the code vs new map. I was making a river cross assault on Chengchow from 88,43 instead several units went to Kaifeng, just some assaulted and the assault failed. I gave the files to Chris and he could not find the reason. I suspect that when the road was replaced by a broken bridge this affected the number units it can move across still it should not occur in an assault and why the units that did not crossed appeared in Kaifeng.

Edited: at the moment i am seeing apparently in random fashion that some pilots that i take from a Sentai to the pool just vanish, they do are not appearing in the reserve pool. But since the pilot list seem to not show all pilots sometimes i am not even sure.

Just as there can be a delay in a pilot being brought from the reserve pool into the squadron, sending pilots to the reserve pool can have a time delay. Check again in a few days.

Ok.

Why would you choose 1126 over 1127?

That port issue that is still in 1126 is pretty annoying ... I mean Michael gave us 1127 for the sole reason of fixing that glaring oops while waiting for 1128 ...

Not aware that there was a 27.

Diliwitm wrote: Sun Sep 20, 2026 10:49 am Not aware that there was a 27.

Yeah, Michael released it in 2022 when they started the "last" update so that we could get the 0(0) port error fix. Allied players may not find this an issue, but as IJ, it is something that you really have to plan around ... and shouldn't have to. v27 got this fix in along with, I think 3 other, very, very rare fixes (meaning in all the turns I have played through the years I had never seen any of them, but obviously someone had ... and they were errors, so good fixes.)

EDIT: I do need to add that the annoying "keyboard to disband" feature is also present. I'm not a fan of this at all, BUT the 0(0) port error is not annoying, it negatively impacts that gameplay and there is NO work-around for it. So, 1127 it is for me.

Michaelm's 1127 unofficial patch is here:

https://forums.matrixgames.com/viewtopi ... 3&t=386537

It fixes few problems 1126 has.

Would a docked AG help?

jetjockey wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2026 7:55 pm Would a docked AG help?

?
Docked where? In a dot hex? (no dock there). Help what? AGs help only small warships - smaller than DD size. They can help whether docked, disbanded or still in a TF with replenishment. I think both ships need to be disbanded for the AG to help with repairs.