Arma 1.2 cumulative bug list

[Gormadoc]

I always assumed that they improved ASW mission effectiveness. That is the way it should work, imo.

Yes totally agree.

Gormadoc and Jia,

Won't add Suez canal access issues as bug. Interesting that HOI3 is being announced, hopefully patch will come out early enuf to be useful.

Lets call that perhaps announced noone outside Paradox knows whiich game they will announce.

1) is this a db or exe bug, sounds like a db bug but want to be sure

2) is this really a bug. Subs moving would be travelling fast and trying to avoid contact. If subs at sea had no mission wouldn't they attack any enemy naval units (including dds on ASW) if they entered their sea zone, thereby achieving the goal of the dds on ASW duty. Also not sure why you would want to have subs on naval interdiction or combat patrol, but if they were on such a mission wouldn't they also be "found" by dds on ASW mission because the subs would attack the dds?

3) that is good to know. I didn't now this but coincidentally my ASW fleets are comprised of 16 dds and 2 CVLs so sounds like a good mix.

1) Exe bug, since i dont think one can set "No Mission" to have 50% mission efficiency by mission efficiency command. 50% ME = 0% combat modifier.

2) No parking a subfleet on no mission, and having an ASW fleet looking for them will never result in combat. Tried for months without succes while combat patrols, Naval interdiction, rebasing and move ordered taskforces found the subs regularly. subs on asw mission (yes its possible) and Surface taskforces on ASW mission will also never engage eachother. Subs on Naval interdiction/combat patrol do engage asw taskforces sofar i havent seen the reverse asw fleets attacking subs on combat patrol/interdiction.

3) Is indeed good news. However if my CVL behaviour testing continue with the results i have sofar seen, i will soon have a gamebreaker bug to report.

 

[jeffery clark]

The Naval taskforce mission efficiency combat modifiers are bugged.

Naval taskforces with "No Mission" (parked in a seazone), gets a +10% combat modifier. Naval taskforces on ASW mission gets 0% to 10% combat modifier depending on mission efficiency (50% to 100%) 50% = 0% combat modifier, 100% = 10% combat modifier.

So untill player has researched the late war ASW boosting naval doctrines it is more efficient to hunt subs by parking ASW taskforces in a seazone than to put it on ASW mission.

"No Mission" should have either 0% or -X% combat modifiers.

See exe bug 129

 

[jeffery clark]

The ASW mission is only semi fixed.
Taskforces on ASW mission will only detect submarines on convoy raiding missions. Submarines on "No Mission", Move, Rebase, ASW, Naval Interdiction or combat Patrol will never be detected by taskforces on ASW missions.
Taskforces on No Mission, move, combat patrol or naval interdiction has no problem in detecting submarines on all types of mission.

I am making a guess this is an exe bug, No. 130

 

[unmerged(110676)]

Would subs not on convoy raiding be almost impossible to detect?

 

[jeffery clark]

Now now Jeff don't let the cat out of the bag ....

Well actually please do... it is cruel to keep a cat in a bag..... a cage on the other hand.....

I plead the 5th. We own a rabbit so cat can stay in bag

 

[jeffery clark]

However if my CVL behaviour testing continue with the results i have sofar seen, i will soon have a gamebreaker bug to report.

CVL (w/ closing bonus) and sub fleet cause CVLs to ram enemy fleet? CVL and transport fleet lead by blockade runner causes harddrive to crash (Do I stay or do I go)?

 

[jeffery clark]

Would subs not on convoy raiding be almost impossible to detect?

I think that's what Gormadoc is getting at with the flawed ASW mission and that is now EXE bug 130.

 

[unmerged(110676)]

I think that's what Gormadoc is getting at with the flawed ASW mission and that is now EXE bug 130.

No, he says the bug is they don't find them when they are not doing convoy raiding.

 

[Gormadoc]

No, he says the bug is they don't find them when they are not doing convoy raiding.

Problem is ASW mission which should be the best mission to hunt subs, will never detect subs that are on any other mission than Convoy raiding. Taskforces on combat patrol or just plain rebasing or moving will find subs without any trouble. But setting the same taksforce to actually hunt subs it finds nothing unless the subs are doing convoy raiding.

CVL (w/ closing bonus) and sub fleet cause CVLs to ram enemy fleet? CVL and transport fleet lead by blockade runner causes harddrive to crash (Do I stay or do I go)?

Very close indeed.
But iam afraid it seems to be much worse. Are you all rdy for it ?

Ok here we go and remember iam just the poor messenger plz dont hurt me :wacko:

Can you remember the good old submarine teleport machine back in plain hoi2, well its back with a vengeance, now in slightly disguised form as a CVL.
CVL's together with say BB's or any other capital for that matter and ofcourse screens, will when encountering a CV fleet teleport into 30 km range after 1 hour. This range will be the range for the reminder of the battle. Day or Night, Rain or Shine does not make the slightest difference, engagement range will be 160 km on contact, first hour slam 30 km, goodbye carriers. This has happened 100% of the time i have tested this under many different circumstances. lvl of CV's or Capitals or leaders does not make any difference.

Work around for this bug seems to be increasing CVL's firing range to something above max firing range of capitals. This has the bad effect that CVL + Capitals TF will never close on carriers. Which is the lesser evil.

Thinking about adding this as a workaround for the CDCP mod in a hotfix for this.

 

[unmerged(56137)]

I recently had a multiplayer abyss game with a 30 ship BB fleet and a CVL (13BBs +CVL), it was rarely able to close in on carriers and was harshly punished for being out of range, however I was using the US naval doctorine so it may have been a positioning issue.

Also the same BB fleet without its CVL engaged enemy CA/DD fleets with CVLs and sometimes the enemy fleet closed in on the CVL's range only, allowing me to fire a few shots with no enemy fire, this happens not so often though and usually lasts an hour or 2.

 

[Caesar_Augustus]

Interesting observations. I wonder if the CVE positioning issue matters differently with those mods using CAG units than those without CAGs. Personally, I use a home-made mod for both CVs and CVEs, in which each type of vessel is able to use CAG units set to "0" values, (combat stats that is) in such a manner that a specific class of CV or CVE is actually "fixed" with permanent unit stats.

This system has the advantage of eliminating earlier model CVs becoming unreasonably more powerful as later model CVs (i.e. conceptually it is unimaginable for a Great War CV or an Early CV using a turbojet CAG unit (!), etc. because of the updating of CAGs), and also allowing CVEs to undertake naval missions hitherto unavailable (such as not being able to order port strikes and airbase strikes due to a lack of CAGs on CVEs). The other advantage is firmly establishing the strength and capabilities of any determinded class of CV and CVE, respectively. The disadvantage of course is that CVs are not upgradable, since CAGs do not increase its stats, which are predeterminded and "fixed", but I find that the system works quite well, for my tastes, anyway.

But since Gormadoc has suggested that CVL/CVE have a firing range above the largest capital ships, in my mod that is already the case, but I guess I haven't been paying too much attention vs. sub units, but I will take note now, of course, and see what happens...

 

[unmerged(56137)]

Can anyone else confirm this bug ? I was running the game on very fast and whenever I click on the production tab and it happens to be the beginning of a new day (00:00) the game crashes.

edit:
Ok I've done a few more tests and it seems more random then I thought, however 90% of the crashes happen when the mouse is over some sort of command button (tech, production, resize map...etc) and almost always at the beginning of a new day. Any ideas what may be causing this ?

 

[Gormadoc]

Can anyone else confirm this bug ? I was running the game on very fast and whenever I click on the production tab and it happens to be the beginning of a new day (00:00) the game crashes.

edit:
Ok I've done a few more tests and it seems more random then I thought, however 90% of the crashes happen when the mouse is over some sort of command button (tech, production, resize map...etc) and almost always at the beginning of a new day. Any ideas what may be causing this ?

My gues is that its a hardware issue on your computer. I have run the game on full speed never had gamechrash when howering on some command button.

Its a gues. But the best i can offer.

 

[unmerged(74599)]

Can you remember the good old submarine teleport machine back in plain hoi2, well its back with a vengeance, now in slightly disguised form as a CVL.
CVL's together with say BB's or any other capital for that matter and ofcourse screens, will when encountering a CV fleet teleport into 30 km range after 1 hour. This range will be the range for the reminder of the battle. Day or Night, Rain or Shine does not make the slightest difference, engagement range will be 160 km on contact, first hour slam 30 km, goodbye carriers. This has happened 100% of the time i have tested this under many different circumstances. lvl of CV's or Capitals or leaders does not make any difference.

Work around for this bug seems to be increasing CVL's firing range to something above max firing range of capitals. This has the bad effect that CVL + Capitals TF will never close on carriers. Which is the lesser evil.

Thinking about adding this as a workaround for the CDCP mod in a hotfix for this.

This is a major problem with CVL's. In MEM, they consider CVL's to be an exploit.

Would the closing ability be something that can be modded through the Doctrines? But I like the CVL concept to make BB fleets somewhat useful, but they should not be totally unstopable.

 

[Gormadoc]

This is a major problem with CVL's. In MEM, they consider CVL's to be an exploit.

Would the closing ability be something that can be modded through the Doctrines? But I like the CVL concept to make BB fleets somewhat useful, but they should not be totally unstopable.

Hmm not sure Perhaps try to give the CVL bad positioning. I dont think it will help to be honest. Only thing is to increase range of CVL's so they wont teleport Capitals into range.

 

[MartinBG]

IMO increasing range of CVL's wouldn't help agains "teleporting". The range after 1st hour is ~90% of worst capital ship in the fleet with CVL (and no CVs) in most of my battles.

 

[Gormadoc]

hmm This is bad in so many ways that i dont even want to try to mention them all.

 

[Cyrus Spitama]

I am posting this here because I believe this is an oversight by the country revolt/event writers...

To see exactly what I mean, it's best viewed with your own eyes.

For Mengkukuo, in the earlier scenarios Japan must fight their way to their territory and Mengkukuo forms. The problem is this, load as any one of the later scenarios and you will see MEN is already formed... problem is this though...

In ALL cases MEN is slightly larger and has a few more cores. WAD or oversight? I meant to post about this a while back but I kept forgetting until I was messing around with Japan in the 1944 scenario... rough times there

I will let y'all decide on this one but I personally believe this is an oversight and needs correcting.

 

[Cyrus Spitama]

Can anyone else confirm this bug ? I was running the game on very fast and whenever I click on the production tab and it happens to be the beginning of a new day (00:00) the game crashes.

edit:
Ok I've done a few more tests and it seems more random then I thought, however 90% of the crashes happen when the mouse is over some sort of command button (tech, production, resize map...etc) and almost always at the beginning of a new day. Any ideas what may be causing this ?

This shouldn't be happening. In the past, I had issues similar to this though. In every case I nailed the crash down to interface/gfx tweaks I had done :/

 

[jeffery clark]

I am posting this here because I believe this is an oversight by the country revolt/event writers...

To see exactly what I mean, it's best viewed with your own eyes.

For Mengkukuo, in the earlier scenarios Japan must fight their way to their territory and Mengkukuo forms. The problem is this, load as any one of the later scenarios and you will see MEN is already formed... problem is this though...

In ALL cases MEN is slightly larger and has a few more cores. WAD or oversight? I meant to post about this a while back but I kept forgetting until I was messing around with Japan in the 1944 scenario... rough times there

I will let y'all decide on this one but I personally believe this is an oversight and needs correcting.

Added as Bug 5001DB in Post 4. I assume this is a dbase bug. Let me know if otherwise.