CDCP-mod

[xtfoster]

Also, assuming you haven't, you should remove the IJN and KMS prefixes from JAP and GER's unitnames, respectively.

Neither were historically used.

Easy quick way to fix this: open the file in notepad and replaceall 'KMS ' with nothing (leave the box blank).

Note the space after KMS. This will delete the prefix the easy way.

Also, the 'Graf Spee' should be the 'Admiral Graf Spee'

You are correct. Historically, and officially, the IJN, KMS, RM, and probably a few others were [EDIT - Oops] not [/EDIT] used, BUT, they were/are unofficially (sometimes even officially by their opponents) used by historians to differentiate them from ships from other eras.

 

[xtfoster]

I don´t know if someone already posted this but I found something in the ´38 Scenario: I wanted to play USA and as i went to research Screen, I´ve seen that they had Production Planning and Production Control researched but not Improved Machine Tools...

You have to remember that the '38 scenario isn't supposed to be 100% compatible with the other scenarios. It was originally designed as the first 'multi-player friendly' campaign so some changes were made to improve balance.

 

[Pioniere]

Beta tester

congratulation for the beta membership! Wish I would be beta tester to!

 

[Gormadoc]

congratulation for the beta membership! Wish I would be beta tester to!

thx.

If the same bug can come up anytime with other nations, then please tell me so I will reinstall the game with CDCP only. I have some ideas to replay my early years, anyway.

Ok, In that case i recommend you to reinstall. I tested the Philipines peace command in CDCP version 0.56 and it does not cause the CTD. Which means that there are something wrong with your install somewhere.

 

[Hubsi]

Will fix typoes.

One more typo in the Australian ship names:
AST;CL;HMAS CLnberra

Somebody seems to have replaced CA with CL in their ship names...

Sorry, I missed that the first time.

 

[Szabtom]

Quick question: should I use 1.3a patch? I used 1.2 so far.

 

[Fernando Torres]

If you're using Doomsday, then yes.

 

[Szabtom]

If you're using Doomsday, then yes.

OK, thx.

 

[unmerged(51416)]

Since we're talking about unitnames.csv recently, I'd like to offer to merge KerSev ships names mod (see sig) into CDCP. It only modifies unitnames.csv: fixing typos, bringing ships in correct order (so they are build in historical one), and adding great many ships names, for variety's sake. Additional feature is individual ships names for destroyers and subs, but only new ones will be affected (since we haven't toutch the files....yet ).

BTW, I'm not the mod leader, so I'm acting as mediator.

 

[Gormadoc]

Since we're talking about unitnames.csv recently, I'd like to offer to merge KerSev ships names mod (see sig) into CDCP. It only modifies unitnames.csv: fixing typos, bringing ships in correct order (so they are build in historical one), and adding great many ships names, for variety's sake. Additional feature is individual ships names for destroyers and subs, but only new ones will be affected (since we haven't toutch the files....yet ).

BTW, I'm not the mod leader, so I'm acting as mediator.

I will take a look on the file and see its something that stays within the limits of this mod. thx for the offer in any event.

One more typo in the Australian ship names:
AST;CL;HMAS CLnberra

Somebody seems to have replaced CA with CL in their ship names...

Sorry, I missed that the first time.

Looks like a consistent typo i will run a search for it in the intire file

 

[Pioniere]

Russia’s claims!

A liberated Russia would be best if it has claims on all the realms of TransUrals republic.
It will be nice if you can do something about that Gormadoc.

 

[unmerged(51416)]

I will take a look on the file and see its something that stays within the limits of this mod. thx for the offer in any event.

Ok If you decide you want to use it, I can contact you with Severian aka Oromis, as he has the newest version of the files - including fixes for missing UK Carriers

Another bug found in 1944 scenario (CDCP 0.55, but I don't recall anybody mentioning it) - US has 4 divisions guarding Panama Channel - 3 are actual, modern garrisons, while 1 is 1918 Inf with GW light art brigade :wacko: Probably leftover from earlier scen and - IMO - should be deleted.

EDIT: Yet another error, same scenario. American port, air base, med fleet and Oran Garrison are all misplaced. They are in Mostaganem (or something like that) instead of neighbouring Oran...

 

[Fernando Torres]

I have opened a thread concerning the mod at Strategium board : http://forum.jeux-strategie.com/index.php?showtopic=58472&st=0&#entry1052343751.

Feel free to add any information.

 

[unmerged(37697)]

You are correct. Historically, and officially, the IJN, KMS, RM, and probably a few others were [EDIT - Oops] not [/EDIT] used, BUT, they were/are unofficially (sometimes even officially by their opponents) used by historians to differentiate them from ships from other eras.

Indeed. However, I don't think this is sufficient to warrant their inclusion. I've removed all ahistorical prefixes from my unitnames file, anyway.

It's just a suggestion, and it is a 'fix' of sorts, albeit a relatively minor one.

 

[unmerged(102827)]

I don't Know if thay are fixed:

1) What is doing a spanish republican fleet in mission near Australia (in North Bismarck Sea)?

http://img377.imageshack.us/img377/immagine2by4.jpg/1/w881.
2) There isn't the name on the map for Attu Island;
[URL=http://imageshack.us][IMG]http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/4518/immagineasd5.jpg

3) The airfield in Truk is badly positioned;
[

 

[Fernando Torres]

The 1) cannot be fixed.

The "ignore" entry from the admiral section is bugged.

 

[unmerged(51416)]

Looking through names of Japanese Land Divisions: won't it be better to use their callsigns instead of their traditional 'garrison names'? I'd prefer to see "1 'Gem' Hoheishidan" then "1 'Tokyo' Hoheishidan".

IMO it gives divisions more character, in a way similar to US divisions

 

[Gormadoc]

Looking through names of Japanese Land Divisions: won't it be better to use their callsigns instead of their traditional 'garrison names'? I'd prefer to see "1 'Gem' Hoheishidan" then "1 'Tokyo' Hoheishidan".

IMO it gives divisions more character, in a way similar to US divisions

It would, but its pretty big task to edit all these unit names in.

 

[unmerged(102827)]

I have found an error in the graphic representation of the Armour TechTree: if you want research Self-Propelled Artillery you must have as prerequirements the artillery and the tanks, not only the artillery, so a possible representation could be:

 

[xtfoster]

I have found an error in the graphic representation of the Armour TechTree: if you want research Self-Propelled Artillery you must have as prerequirements the artillery and the tanks, not only the artillery, so a possible representation could be:

Your image isn't correct either. Each of the SPArt have a different Tank as a requirement.