View Full Version : forced retirment in patch 1.3 ?
Lt commander lare
07-10-07, 12:05 AM
they did not list the forced retirement option in the list has that been fixed or not ?
lt commander lare
Saintaw
07-10-07, 02:15 AM
*Punt!*
<pulls on bonnet>
Capt. Shark Bait
07-10-07, 06:09 AM
they had to have fixed it as it's likely a quite serious bug
ReallyDedPoet
07-10-07, 06:40 AM
Sure I saw this in the earlier 1.3 read-me's for items to fix.
RDP
Takeda Shingen
07-10-07, 07:18 AM
This is why it is wisest to wait for the official release. Betas are called Betas for a reason.
GakunGak
07-10-07, 07:54 AM
My question is this:
Is it gonna be A FEATURE or an OPTION?
Let me rephrase that: can I have a total control over that thing?:arrgh!:
As I remember from SH1 if you failed to be aggressive three patrols in a row you got a desk job. :rotfl:
Nightmare
07-10-07, 10:48 AM
As I remember from SH1 if you failed to be aggressive three patrols in a row you got a desk job. :rotfl:
Historically speaking, that was how it happened. Sometimes skippers were relieved after two unsuccessful patrols.
As far as career length, I believe the average was 5 patrols before being moved to a desk job. Isn't SH4 setup that after a set amount of patrols you need to spend renown to stay in command?
As I remember from SH1 if you failed to be aggressive three patrols in a row you got a desk job. :rotfl:
Historically speaking, that was how it happened. Sometimes skippers were relieved after two unsuccessful patrols.
As far as career length, I believe the average was 5 patrols before being moved to a desk job. Isn't SH4 setup that after a set amount of patrols you need to spend renown to stay in command?
Yeah, lucky Americans. German Kaleuns being too little aggressive were executed ... :-?
Von Manteuffel
07-10-07, 02:21 PM
The documentation with the beta 1.03 patch says that careers will end after between 5 and 8 missions. It claims this is historically accurate. We need to wait and see what the official patch does.
DimDoms
07-10-07, 02:41 PM
As I remember from SH1 if you failed to be aggressive three patrols in a row you got a desk job. :rotfl: Historically speaking, that was how it happened. Sometimes skippers were relieved after two unsuccessful patrols.
As far as career length, I believe the average was 5 patrols before being moved to a desk job. Isn't SH4 setup that after a set amount of patrols you need to spend renown to stay in command?
Yeah, lucky Americans. German Kaleuns being too little aggressive were executed ... :-?
Have to ask to where you got that from, I haven't heard of that before?
I don't mind forced retirement, me... <ducks>
D.
:ping:
Saintaw
07-10-07, 03:43 PM
Oh what a shame!!!
I personally don't care, as long as I get rid of that ********* BONNET!!!
Yeah, lucky Americans. German Kaleuns being too little aggressive were executed ... :-?
Have to ask to where you got that from, I haven't heard of that before?
It's a slight exaggeration. The only U-boat commander to be sentenced to death for 'lack of aggression' was Heinz Hirsacker, and he was given a gun with which to commit suicide before the sentence could be carried out.
I don't mind forced retirement, me... <ducks>
D.
:ping:
That kind of talk will get you stuffed in the deck gun and fired at a destroyer. :lol:
As I remember from SH1 if you failed to be aggressive three patrols in a row you got a desk job. :rotfl: Historically speaking, that was how it happened. Sometimes skippers were relieved after two unsuccessful patrols.
As far as career length, I believe the average was 5 patrols before being moved to a desk job. Isn't SH4 setup that after a set amount of patrols you need to spend renown to stay in command?
Yeah, lucky Americans. German Kaleuns being too little aggressive were executed ... :-?
Have to ask to where you got that from, I haven't heard of that before?
I don't mind forced retirement, me... <ducks>
D.
:ping:
I know of 2 U-Boot Commanders that were executed during WWII:
KpLt Hirsacker, U-572 (Court-Martial Shot for cowardice in 1942)
Oblt Oskar Kusch, U-154 (1943)
Source: Peter Padfield, war beneath the sea, submarine conflict 1939-1945
As I remember from SH1 if you failed to be aggressive three patrols in a row you got a desk job. :rotfl: Historically speaking, that was how it happened. Sometimes skippers were relieved after two unsuccessful patrols.
As far as career length, I believe the average was 5 patrols before being moved to a desk job. Isn't SH4 setup that after a set amount of patrols you need to spend renown to stay in command?
Yeah, lucky Americans. German Kaleuns being too little aggressive were executed ... :-?
Have to ask to where you got that from, I haven't heard of that before?
I don't mind forced retirement, me... <ducks>
D.
:ping:
I know of 2 U-Boot Commanders that were executed during WWII:
KpLt Hirsacker, U-572 (Court-Martial Shot for cowardice in 1942)
Oblt Oskar Kusch, U-154 (1943)
Source: Peter Padfield, war beneath the sea, submarine conflict 1939-1945Kusch was executed after his 1WO reported him for being defeatist and anti-Hitler. Several other commanders defended Kusch but he was found guilty and executed nonetheless.
Monica Lewinsky
07-10-07, 05:32 PM
This is why it is wisest to wait for the official release. Betas are called Betas for a reason.
Wise words.
Avoiding the entire thing until official is available, but reading all the rants plus and minus is amusing reading.
As I remember from SH1 if you failed to be aggressive three patrols in a row you got a desk job. :rotfl: Historically speaking, that was how it happened. Sometimes skippers were relieved after two unsuccessful patrols.
As far as career length, I believe the average was 5 patrols before being moved to a desk job. Isn't SH4 setup that after a set amount of patrols you need to spend renown to stay in command?
Yeah, lucky Americans. German Kaleuns being too little aggressive were executed ... :-?
Have to ask to where you got that from, I haven't heard of that before?
I don't mind forced retirement, me... <ducks>
D.
:ping:
I know of 2 U-Boot Commanders that were executed during WWII:
KpLt Hirsacker, U-572 (Court-Martial Shot for cowardice in 1942)
Oblt Oskar Kusch, U-154 (1943)
Source: Peter Padfield, war beneath the sea, submarine conflict 1939-1945Kusch was executed after his 1WO reported him for being defeatist and anti-Hitler. Several other commanders defended Kusch but he was found guilty and executed nonetheless.
Yep, but Padfield stated in his book, that it was only a pretence and that Kusch first was accused by his IWO, IIWO an LI of cowardice, but later the LI and IIWO withdrew their statements, so Kusch couldn't be convicted of cowardice and was therefore afterwards found guilty of being defeatist and anti-Hitler, because he removed Hitler's picture in his boat.
w-subcommander
07-10-07, 05:57 PM
The documentation with the beta 1.03 patch says that careers will end after between 5 and 8 missions. It claims this is historically accurate. We need to wait and see what the official patch does.
I think you re wrong. Because this information about 5-8 patrols career limitations {
"3.4.4 Carrer length and Time between patrols
Silent Hunter 4 simulates the career of a captain according to real practices of the US Submarine Force of the period.
Depending on your performance you can expect your career to last between 5 and 8 patrols.
Of course, real silly results such as sinking your own capital ships will lead to a quick and timely termination of your command." frov read me v. 1.0.0. *inserted 7/10/07}
belongs to original version of sh4 1.0.0. I believe you saw this in 1.3 beta readme but in sections belong to previous patches changes.
Torpex752
07-10-07, 06:34 PM
I don't mind forced retirement, me... <ducks>
D.
:ping:
That kind of talk will get you stuffed in the deck gun and fired at a destroyer. :lol:
Yea! But at what ROF? :rotfl:
Frank "Torpex" Kulick
Subsim Staff :cool:
John Channing
07-10-07, 06:35 PM
Hopefully using Beery's !
JCC
Excalibur Bane
07-10-07, 06:41 PM
Well, you can't go wrong with options. It should be up to the player to decide how realistic or historically correct they want to play the game like. Simply restore the "realistic career" under realism settings and every person can choose for themselves, at least that's what I think they should do. Forcing a player to play the game a certain way is generally not a good idea, it'll just end up chasing off all but the die-hard realists. :nope:
bookworm_020
07-10-07, 06:43 PM
I personally don't care, as long as I get rid of that ********* BONNET!!!
Don't worry Bonnet Boy! Your next avatar is Navy Dude! The reject from the village people!
American sub captains had a shorter number of patrols before being beached than German. But many German captain's never got the chance to get beached as they were sent to Davy Jones Locker!:dead:
GakunGak
07-10-07, 06:59 PM
Well, you can't go wrong with options. It should be up to the player to decide how realistic or historically correct they want to play the game like. Simply restore the "realistic career" under realism settings and every person can choose for themselves, at least that's what I think they should do. Forcing a player to play the game a certain way is generally not a good idea, it'll just end up chasing off all but the die-hard realists. :nope:
This is exactlly what I wanna!:rock:
I agree, Options would be a good place for a couple of items.
Forced - Retirement, How dare they? Hey it's my damn boat (i bought it from Ubi). I just get the boat the way I want in about 5 missions. If I want to drive my crew like slaves for 15 missions, then so be it. There is a war on, you know..
Radar - I want to be able to turn the F-%#$*&# thing off. I think this should be a realism option. When I am close to Peal in late 43 I don't need some jackass reporting radar contacts on ships I can see. If I am too dumb to turn it on when in emeny waters then someone hand me my Luger or P38 or in this case maybe a Colt 1911.
Weapons, Boats and Conning towers - should be able to be bought as soon as they become available. It really ticked me off to finally get a Balo and after two missions be forced to retire. Aaawwww - Crapo Maryland!!! (it is a place).
Options Damnit, We need more options. Oooops, sorry if my words offend anyone, but sometimes "Darn" just won't do.
"Damn/Darn, I Love This Game; Damn/Darn, I Hate This Game!!!" See what I mean?
I was waiting for that one:D
GakunGak
07-11-07, 10:39 AM
I agree, Options would be a good place for a couple of items.
Forced - Retirement, How dare they? Hey it's my damn boat (i bought it from Ubi). I just get the boat the way I want in about 5 missions. If I want to drive my crew like slaves for 15 missions, then so be it. There is a war on, you know..
Radar - I want to be able to turn the F-%#$*&# thing off. I think this should be a realism option. When I am close to Peal in late 43 I don't need some jackass reporting radar contacts on ships I can see. If I am too dumb to turn it on when in emeny waters then someone hand me my Luger or P38 or in this case maybe a Colt 1911.
Weapons, Boats and Conning towers - should be able to be bought as soon as they become available. It really ticked me off to finally get a Balo and after two missions be forced to retire. Aaawwww - Crapo Maryland!!! (it is a place).
Options Damnit, We need more options. Oooops, sorry if my words offend anyone, but sometimes "Darn" just won't do.
"Damn/Darn, I Love This Game; Damn/Darn, I Hate This Game!!!" See what I mean?
The best post I've read in years!!!:rock: :rock: :rock: :up: :rotfl:
I agree, Options would be a good place for a couple of items.
<snip>
Radar - I want to be able to turn the F-%#$*&# thing off.
Whoa whoa whoa.... you can't turn it off? This has some serious implications beyond just annoying! What about the enemy's ability to detect your radar transmissions miles before your get a good return from him? Or if the enemy is not listening for and reacting to your radar transmissions, that's an issue as well.
Oh, say it ain't so, Joe... say it ain't so!
Radar - I want to be able to turn the F-%#$*&# thing off. I think this should be a realism option. When I am close to Peal in late 43 I don't need some jackass reporting radar contacts on ships I can see. If I am too dumb to turn it on when in emeny waters then someone hand me my Luger or P38 or in this case maybe a Colt 1911.
Hmm? It's quite simple to turn off the radar.
Weapons, Boats and Conning towers - should be able to be bought as soon as they become available. It really ticked me off to finally get a Balo and after two missions be forced to retire. Aaawwww - Crapo Maryland!!! (it is a place).
For the 1,458,745,211th time, you DON'T BUY equipment. This isn't Final Fantasy. You acquire upgrades through renown, which is a measure of your prestige and influence within the squadron. When command thinks your boat is ready for a conning tower upgrade, they'll give it to you.
Excalibur Bane
07-11-07, 09:44 PM
For the 1,458,745,211th time, you DON'T BUY equipment. This isn't Final Fantasy. You acquire upgrades through renown, which is a measure of your prestige and influence within the squadron. When command thinks your boat is ready for a conning tower upgrade, they'll give it to you.
:rotfl:
Though, he does have a point. SH3 was much, much better in this regard. The whole upgrade screen for your sub is probably the worst thing in the game, not to mention the fact that you get no statistics anywhere on precisely what your sub is capable of, not even in the museum. (And no, sorry, but this isn't acceptable. You shouldn't have to know all the US subs capabilities by heart just for this game.:nope: ) Why did they change this? You got me. Another case of them fixing something that isn't broken.
I view Renown as a measure of my influence within the entire USN, the brass, command, etc. While it may be unrealistic to expect to request a new boat from command, this is one of those things where gameplay would be better served then history, by allowing the player to choose to upgrade or not to a new sub and adds more variety to the game without having to restart your career. SH3 had it right, SH4 has it wrong. Just my two cents tho. :)
Anywho, I did have a save where I had gotten a new Balao command from a Gato, and upon returning to base, I did not recieve the retirement and I was properly transferred to the new flotilla instead of being retired. So that appears to be fixed in the beta, and no doubt in the final 1.3. :up:
Forced retirement is B.S.
I know it was like that in real life but I didn't actually join the USN... I want to start a game at the begining of the war and go untill the end. I want my veteran crew and my previous patrol logs.
Make it an option or just get rid of it. Although I don't mind getting retired for lack of aggression, that's fair enough and a good consequence for being a wuss. But If i'm a good skipper I want to have 15 patrols if the length of the war permits it.
For the 1,458,745,211th time, you DON'T BUY equipment. This isn't Final Fantasy. You acquire upgrades through renown, which is a measure of your prestige and influence within the squadron. When command thinks your boat is ready for a conning tower upgrade, they'll give it to you.
:rotfl:
Though, he does have a point. SH3 was much, much better in this regard. The whole upgrade screen for your sub is probably the worst thing in the game, not to mention the fact that you get no statistics anywhere on precisely what your sub is capable of, not even in the museum. (And no, sorry, but this isn't acceptable. You shouldn't have to know all the US subs capabilities by heart just for this game.:nope: ) Why did they change this? You got me. Another case of them fixing something that isn't broken.
I view Renown as a measure of my influence within the entire USN, the brass, command, etc. While it may be unrealistic to expect to request a new boat from command, this is one of those things where gameplay would be better served then history, by allowing the player to choose to upgrade or not to a new sub and adds more variety to the game without having to restart your career. SH3 had it right, SH4 has it wrong. Just my two cents tho. :)
Anywho, I did have a save where I had gotten a new Balao command from a Gato, and upon returning to base, I did not recieve the retirement and I was properly transferred to the new flotilla instead of being retired. So that appears to be fixed in the beta, and no doubt in the final 1.3. :up:
This is very true, why on earth did they change something as easy and functional as the upgrade screen in SH3? Why? WHY!
Seagate
07-12-07, 03:13 AM
This is very true, why on earth did they change something as easy and functional as the upgrade screen in SH3) Why? WHY!
Not forgetting the torpedo loadout screen... SHIV:damn: SHIII:sunny:
w-subcommander
07-12-07, 03:33 AM
After testing 1.3 beta during last 36 hours(with short brakes for a job participation)
I found that
1(:cry: ) possibly devs didnt solve a career 'bug'. IMHO that career patrol limitation to real numbers (like 5 - 8 maximum limit of patrols ) ,makes game ( ok simulator) realistically boring. At least we need an option to choose between level of historical realism ( and jush wishful thinking option for level of opponent's AI)
I had to quote from their declaration of intentions" The players career is ended sometimes by high command, for inaccurate reasons such as perfectly good and new submarines being retired from frontline duty. This will be sorted out to work as intended." (But what does their "as intended" mean? )
2(:D ) devs made great job with improving JIN's AI, magniicent job with speed estimation ( it included inside even possibility for human error !!!) wonderful new radar, solving imperial / metric bug in stadimeter etc.
They did great job BUT:damn: Will we be send to the office job again after 5-8 patrols?
Fearless
07-12-07, 03:51 AM
I'm really not that fussed about career length. I just start a new one from the date I retired. True that the crew start from scratch but the amount of promotions that occur after each patrol, its no wonder why we end up with more officers and CPOs then crew with a lesser rank.
Promotions are too easy for the AI as well as issuing of medals.
That part was much more realistic in SH3 IMHO.
LukeFF, are you sure about that count? I thought it was 1,458,745,212th time. Yes, Yes - You are right. You do not buy upgrades. I understand this. HOWEVER, when you have renown for items that are available etc. mid war tower late 43, 40 mm AA. Why are they not offered? Mark 16s "Cost" 300 renown. I used the wrong word "buy", but that does not change my point.
You also stated, "Hmm? It's quite easy to turn off the radar." Please do tell and please don't say the button on the radar panel. I can assure you that was the first thing I did, but I still get radar reports when it is "game" off. So I can only assume you know of some mod or adjustment that can be made; if so I would be interested in learning of this and you would have a large amount of my limited gratitude.
I agree with most everyone else that if you don't sink emeny ships or do sink allied ships you should be discharged. Whoa, time to go I am on someone's elses clock.
Excalibur Bane
07-12-07, 08:31 AM
You also stated, "Hmm? It's quite easy to turn off the radar." Please do tell and please don't say the button on the radar panel. I can assure you that was the first thing I did, but I still get radar reports when it is "game" off. So I can only assume you know of some mod or adjustment that can be made; if so I would be interested in learning of this and you would have a large amount of my limited gratitude.
If you are using the 1.3 beta, turning off the radar will not turn off the SD radar, only the SJ radar, so aircraft will continue to be detected, regardless if it is on or off. It's a beta though, and that's to be expected. I'm sure it will be fixed in the final patch today.
If your using 1.2, then I have no idea. :(
Did the IJN even use radar detectors?
Sailor Steve
07-12-07, 10:17 AM
Forced retirement is B.S.
I know it was like that in real life but I didn't actually join the USN... I want to start a game at the begining of the war and go untill the end. I want my veteran crew and my previous patrol logs.
Make it an option or just get rid of it. Although I don't mind getting retired for lack of aggression, that's fair enough and a good consequence for being a wuss. But If i'm a good skipper I want to have 15 patrols if the length of the war permits it.
While I like the idea of forced (or even offered, ala SH1) retirement, I completely agree - it should be an option. We complained that it wasn't there in SH3, and JScones gave us the option in his brilliant SH3 Commander.
Options are good.:yep:
"It is a small matter." (13th Warrior)
Now that the patch is out - Offical I hope. All things become small matters. Torpedo loading screens, Forced retirement, Invincible AI, Renown for nothing. All these things are what they are. Beg for another miracle that will never suit everyone, I think not. Or, we mod the hell out of it and get used to it. Now we live or die by our own hand.
A friend of mind use to say to me when things were not right (in my opinion). "What's the matter Bear, is the world not turning your way today." Then he would laugh. Well over the years with different sims I found that the world NEVER turns my way.
There are many people on this forum that are so much smarter than I in the mod making ways, that I can do nothing but put my trust in them to mod right, what may still be wrong.
Time for a clean install and then "Damn the torpedos, full speed ahead." Fair Winds, Smooth Sailing and Good Hunting To Us All. :up:
I wonder what we will gripe about now?
Excalibur Bane
07-12-07, 02:00 PM
Nothing is perfect. At least, nothing created by humans. There will always be something left to gripe about. This much you can be sure of.
Werewolf13
07-12-07, 02:16 PM
As I remember from SH1 if you failed to be aggressive three patrols in a row you got a desk job. :rotfl:
Historically speaking, that was how it happened. Sometimes skippers were relieved after two unsuccessful patrols.
As far as career length, I believe the average was 5 patrols before being moved to a desk job. Isn't SH4 setup that after a set amount of patrols you need to spend renown to stay in command?Quite right. Many, many Captains were relieved after 1 or 2 patrols for lack of aggressiveness and/or poor performance. In addition after 5 Patrols or so a Captain got promoted and moved to command a Sub squadron, was sent to a staff job or went to new construction which took him out of the war for as long as a year. Some even left subs entirely and went to the surface forces.
John Channing
07-12-07, 03:35 PM
I agree... however I am on my seventh patrol and ComSubPac just keeps sending me out there.
COMPLETE ALL OF YOUR OBJECTIVES PEOPLE!
Renown alone won't keep you in the Fleet.
JCC
elanaiba
07-12-07, 05:58 PM
This is very true, why on earth did they change something as easy and functional as the upgrade screen in SH3? Why? WHY!
Well, its not as simple as it sounds...
First, you didn't want exactly the same screen, I mean uboats items and all, right?
Second, the whole upgrade and structure system got rewritten. Why? It was so hardcoded in SH3 no one would have touched it, so we couldn't get the US boats in the game. Adding one crewman to a sub was a Pain in the posterior. Try that in SHIV or ask a modder... is it better ?
so if you need to rewrite something, you need time. The upgrade screen didn't reach our original intentions.
But don't confuse this with the inability to "buy" submarines. This was expressely done - call it my wish. This is the United States Navy, and like in any Navy that we hold respect for, fighting ships are assigned to the people that deserve them, not sold on the market for the highest bidder.
I felt that the "I want to buy a type VII u-boat" system trivializes what we perceive as gallant fighting ships and lessens their importance to the player.
Now, yeah, we could discuss if the player should be able to use his renown in influencing the powers to get him a better command. Was on the to do list, in some form.
This is part game part simulation. We meant to give you a slice of the Silent Service in WW2. Like any game, it has some rules that need to be learnt and obeyed.
mookiemookie
07-12-07, 06:52 PM
This is very true, why on earth did they change something as easy and functional as the upgrade screen in SH3? Why? WHY!
Well, its not as simple as it sounds...
First, you didn't want exactly the same screen, I mean uboats items and all, right?
Second, the whole upgrade and structure system got rewritten. Why? It was so hardcoded in SH3 no one would have touched it, so we couldn't get the US boats in the game. Adding one crewman to a sub was a Pain in the posterior. Try that in SHIV or ask a modder... is it better ?
so if you need to rewrite something, you need time. The upgrade screen didn't reach our original intentions.
But don't confuse this with the inability to "buy" submarines. This was expressely done - call it my wish. This is the United States Navy, and like in any Navy that we hold respect for, fighting ships are assigned to the people that deserve them, not sold on the market for the highest bidder.
I felt that the "I want to buy a type VII u-boat" system trivializes what we perceive as gallant fighting ships and lessens their importance to the player.
Now, yeah, we could discuss if the player should be able to use his renown in influencing the powers to get him a better command. Was on the to do list, in some form.
This is part game part simulation. We meant to give you a slice of the Silent Service in WW2. Like any game, it has some rules that need to be learnt and obeyed.
Straight from the horse's mouth. I understand you guys had a tough time making decisions in order to strike a balance between realism and playability, since players fall across the spectrum in that regard. I think you guys did a commendable job. :up:
To paraphrase Abe Lincoln: "You may please all of the people some of the time, and part of the people all of the time, but not all of the people all of the time."
Excalibur Bane
07-12-07, 11:03 PM
Well, its not as simple as it sounds...
First, you didn't want exactly the same screen, I mean uboats items and all, right?
Second, the whole upgrade and structure system got rewritten. Why? It was so hardcoded in SH3 no one would have touched it, so we couldn't get the US boats in the game. Adding one crewman to a sub was a Pain in the posterior. Try that in SHIV or ask a modder... is it better ?
so if you need to rewrite something, you need time. The upgrade screen didn't reach our original intentions.
But don't confuse this with the inability to "buy" submarines. This was expressely done - call it my wish. This is the United States Navy, and like in any Navy that we hold respect for, fighting ships are assigned to the people that deserve them, not sold on the market for the highest bidder.
I felt that the "I want to buy a type VII u-boat" system trivializes what we perceive as gallant fighting ships and lessens their importance to the player.
Now, yeah, we could discuss if the player should be able to use his renown in influencing the powers to get him a better command. Was on the to do list, in some form.
This is part game part simulation. We meant to give you a slice of the Silent Service in WW2. Like any game, it has some rules that need to be learnt and obeyed.
Well, I agree with you to a certain extent. Though having the upgrade screen to replace the better screen that was present in SH3, was a mistake in my opinion.
As you know, the actual historical data and use of any equipment upgrade as well as the capabilites of your U-boat were nicely presently with the screen in SH3. I think that would of been more beneficial for SH4 then the current screen. It presented players with the opportunity to learn a little history about the equipment they were using without having to look it up outside the game.
This is your game though, so I can't really argue with you on the point, if this is how you wanted it and you did give some good reasons, then so be it. :)
elanaiba
07-13-07, 12:13 AM
There's no argument. The screen was meant to be there (with the relevant changes since the SHIV system was not identical) but we just didn't get to it.
Read above again.
Excalibur Bane
07-13-07, 12:39 AM
Point, I was meaning to the way sub command are handled. My bad, I phrased it wrong. Apologies. It's 1:42 am here :oops:
I've been running test after test to figure out the massive slowndown that seems to be occuring in campaigns, starting to get worn out. :)
EDIT: Yup. Time to start a new career. This one is completely, and utterly borked. Especially my medals:
PlayerCurrentMedals=NULL,CMOH,CMOH,CMOH,CMOH,Purpl e Heart,CMOH,CMOH,CMOH,Purple Heart,Navy Cross,CMOH,CMOH,Purple Heart,CMOH
:rotfl:
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.