Unit Errata

Place bug reports / questions here.

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

Post Reply
Message
Author
Evil Overlord
Sergeant
Posts: 20
Joined: Nov 14 2013
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#46 Post by Evil Overlord » Dec 28 2013

i guess i should include this information here too...

Chinese aircraft production
CAMCO http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Ai ... ng_Company production center

at hangzhou from 1933, then Hankou from 37-oct38
curtis f11c goshawk 52 in china as hawk II
hawk III http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtiss_BF2C_Goshawk was produced in china
Gamma 2e http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Gamma also under licence building in china
O3U china had 21 of these, bought 1933-34

US Interceptors
FF-1 was US navy carrier fighter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_FF
F2F-1 was US navy carrier fighter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_F2F
F3F-1 was US navy carrier fighter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_F3F
F4B-1 was US navy carrier fighter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_P-12
F4B (P-12) (F4B-1's) land varriant, rename to p-12 as this was the army version

US Tactical
BG-1 was US navy carrier divebomber http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Lakes_BG
BM-1 / BM-2 was US navy carrier torpedobomber http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_BM
T4M-1 was US navy carrier torpedobomber

US Patrol
SOC-1 was US Navy carrier and catapult launched observation/scout and amphibian

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtiss_SOC_Seagull



IJA

Ka-1 autogyro carrier ASW and army observation aircraft

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kayaba_Ka-1 *not modelled* 1941

IJN

B4Y was IJN carrier bomber http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yokosuka_B4Y
E7k was a catapult launched seaplane http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kawanishi_E7K
E8N was a catapult launched seaplane http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakajima_E8N 1000+ produced



General links
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_air_forces
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:C ... d_aircraft
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ca ... d_aircraft

User avatar
Zuikaku
General
Posts: 2279
Joined: Feb 10 2012
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#47 Post by Zuikaku » Dec 30 2013

This is kinda off topic but I have to ask:

How far did you got in the game? Anyone gone to the cold war era? I am interested if USSR now researches T-72 tank or is it still bugged in the unit database?
Please teach AI to liberate and colonize instead of only annexing!

geminif4ucorsair
General
Posts: 1286
Joined: Jun 08 2005

Re: Unit Errata

#48 Post by geminif4ucorsair » Jan 01 2014

Zuikaku wrote: Japan can research PG Guided missile in 1936. I know that Japan's naval tech was superior, but that's a bit too much :D Maybe navalized missiles should be prereq for researching PG guided missile boats....
Pointed this one out to Bathagor earlier....at that point, almost all regions could research....its been changed on my work copy (and I think BGs).

User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20448
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Unit Errata

#49 Post by Balthagor » Jan 02 2014

geminif4ucorsair wrote:
Zuikaku wrote: Japan can research PG Guided missile in 1936. I know that Japan's naval tech was superior, but that's a bit too much :D Maybe navalized missiles should be prereq for researching PG guided missile boats....
Pointed this one out to Bathagor earlier....at that point, almost all regions could research....its been changed on my work copy (and I think BGs).
No, not updated on our copy yet.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com

geminif4ucorsair
General
Posts: 1286
Joined: Jun 08 2005

Re: Unit Errata - missile PG design

#50 Post by geminif4ucorsair » Jan 02 2014

Balthagor wrote:
geminif4ucorsair wrote:
Zuikaku wrote: Japan can research PG Guided missile in 1936. I know that Japan's naval tech was superior, but that's a bit too much :D Maybe navalized missiles should be prereq for researching PG guided missile boats....
Pointed this one out to Bathagor earlier....at that point, almost all regions could research....its been changed on my work copy (and I think BGs).
No, not updated on our copy yet.
Oh, please hurry it along..... :-)

MK4
Colonel
Posts: 488
Joined: Oct 08 2011
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#51 Post by MK4 » Jan 08 2014

Balthagor wrote: Re; France and tanks - Actually in March 1936, they don't have any active designs. The FT-17 went out of production in the late '20s and full production of R-35 and S-35 tanks is still a few months away.
Shouldn`t they have access to the Char B1 design though? Series production started in December 1935.
Also, are you saying that in 1936 France should not be able to start researching (as opposed to producing) tanks like the Renault R35, Somua S35, AMR 35 and so on? Even though their actual production and finishing touches happened later on, their development had already started and prototypes were available at that time. What are you considering as the technological date? The entry into series production? If that`s it then wouldn`t these tanks end up being produced in game later than they were produced in reality? (I should mention that I don`t know what research duration one should expect for these particular designs in the game as it is now)

User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20448
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Unit Errata

#52 Post by Balthagor » Jan 08 2014

It would take about 100 days to research the tanks. They are supposed to have all the prereqs for the R35 and S35 but for some reason they aren't appearing. We're looking into it.
18372
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com

davidclaywood
Lieutenant
Posts: 90
Joined: Jun 18 2009
Human: Yes
Contact:

Re: Unit Errata Missing Italian Unit

#53 Post by davidclaywood » Jan 10 2014

Italian Tankette L3/38
In 1938, a further development of the L3 design was designated L3/38. The L3/38 had torsion bar suspension and two versions of a single mounted 13.2 mm machine gun. In 1937 Brazil bought 24 L3/38s which arrived in 1938

Good one to award the Italians when they discover 'Torsion Bars'.

User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20448
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Unit Errata Missing Italian Unit

#54 Post by Balthagor » Jan 10 2014

davidclaywood wrote:Italian Tankette L3/38
In 1938, a further development of the L3 design was designated L3/38. The L3/38 had torsion bar suspension and two versions of a single mounted 13.2 mm machine gun. In 1937 Brazil bought 24 L3/38s which arrived in 1938

Good one to award the Italians when they discover 'Torsion Bars'.
Sorry, I don't see what error you're pointing out in this post.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com

User avatar
Chesehead
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 637
Joined: Apr 19 2009

Re: Unit Errata

#55 Post by Chesehead » Jan 14 2014

Ehrenskold (Swedish DD) has a Sub attack value, but N/A for range on it.

User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20448
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Unit Errata

#56 Post by Balthagor » Jan 15 2014

Zuikaku wrote:Unfortunatelly, there are few more units missing:

A7M - advanced japanese carrier fighter, planned replacement for Zero ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_A7M )

J7W - advanced japanese canard fighter (both jet and piston engine versions are missing) - ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyushu_J7W )

Nakajima G5N - heavy bomber is also missing ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakajima_G5N )

B7N torpedo bomber is missing although it was operational and produced (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aichi_B7A)

Do-335 heavy fighter is missing although it's production started ( https://www.google.hr/?gws_rd=cr&ei=Pta ... g#q=do-335 )

Ho-229 flying wing ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horten_Ho_229 )

Me-264 heavy bomber ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_264 )


I'm thinking about starting separate thread for missing units and hypothetical units that should be used to fill axis unit tree . The way it is now, German, Italian and Japanese unit tree lacks units from 1945-1960 period. While this is understandable since they lost the war and were not allowed to develop units, we must think about the gameplay and in game situations where theay are not defeated. And is , for example, Japan survives WW2 it will become very handicaped in gameplay due lack of any post-WW2 units.
Starting a separate thread would be a good idea but this type of content is probably more for Update 1 than for release. Most of these were unlikely designs.

The B7N link is to the B7A. I don't have details on a B7N and the B7A is already in game.

Every other unit listed here is in our back end system and either incomplete or pending some issue.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com

georgios
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 591
Joined: Aug 13 2012
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#57 Post by georgios » Jan 19 2014

artillery units have the same range parameter? ballistic artillery range concerns artillery pieces firing missiles? I don't mean the missile units, but units that instead of a shell fire a missile..

User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20448
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Unit Errata

#58 Post by Balthagor » Jan 19 2014

Artillery unit ranges are whatever they are assigned to be by the equipment file.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com

georgios
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 591
Joined: Aug 13 2012
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#59 Post by georgios » Jan 20 2014

there is a choice if the unit is ballistic or not (missile launchers have false). In effects there is the ballistic artillery range effect and the MLRS range effect. I ask if the first effect is only for ballistic artillery with true in default.unit, and MLRS range effect is for all missile artillery launchers, not only for the multiple launchers.

User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20448
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Unit Errata

#60 Post by Balthagor » Jan 20 2014

georgios wrote:there is a choice if the unit is ballistic or not (missile launchers have false). In effects there is the ballistic artillery range effect and the MLRS range effect. I ask if the first effect is only for ballistic artillery with true in default.unit, and MLRS range effect is for all missile artillery launchers, not only for the multiple launchers.
yes, ballistic techs affect those with the ballistic flag and units with an attack range (not those that fire missile units only) are affected but the other types of techs.

This question is off topic and in the wrong section. Please post in the proper sections and start a new thread if you have a new topic.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com

Post Reply

Return to “Issues and Support”