October 6, 201312 yr Ok Tony, apparently everything is right now with 2009.099 In the new versión of the attached TESTNAME scenario, in the two southernmost blue groups SW of India we can see: - The control carrier group AZC, created previously under 2009.098. The CG Columbus (1963) has his individual ship name showed because "Columbus" has 8 characters, but the carriers Kitty Hawk (1973) and Forrestal (1975) classes don't show individual ship names, they're two blank spaces, should be read Kitty Hawk and Forrestal as individual ship names. - In the new surface group BAS created under 2009.099 everything is fine now. The three individual ship names of the CG Columbus (1963) class are now correctly show, Columbus (8 characters), Chicago (7 characters) and Albany (6 characters). I'm sure it's ok now, thanks Tony! TESTNAME (2).zip
October 7, 201312 yr Hi, sorry but apparently don't works with the Old Battlesets using 2009.099, as in the adjunt file provided, to test play in the HDSC HARPOON DESIGNERS SERIES III IOPG Indian Ocean. Also, building the test scenario I saw the individual shipnames represented probably by "+" in the not accesible legacy DB, lacks the first character of the concrete shipname when displayed in the Scenario Editor, but not later playing with the GE. But the names are not changed... TESTNMOL.zip
October 12, 201312 yr Author Great job Enrique, you exposed a very old bug in that the SE was writing out the wrong scenario file version for legacy battlesets! Please test again in (2009.100), all 12 test cases now work correctly for me but verification would be great.
October 12, 201312 yr Thanks Tony, not at home this week, but in some days I will get a look to the names issue.
Create an account or sign in to comment