JTS Gettysburg pdt bug

[-72-]

Using the Help Menu - Parameter Data option [...]

When I look at the parameter data for Gettysburg, I do not see the Whitworth listed.

That's the other bug I alluded to. Namely, weapon entries that have a '0' firepower in the first range band are not displayed in the parameter data menu in the game. You need to open the actual pdt file with another program to see the weapon data. Which is also why you won't see the entries for indirect fire weapons like mortars listed in the game either (though Gettysburg doesn't seem to include data for mortars anyway; it does affect the Overland game though). The weapons function correctly however.

I reported this to JTS.

To be fair, if the Whitworth is rated higher in other titles in the series, then they're too high as well.  I mean in all seriousness a Whitworth was never used in close proximity to the enemy.

If an indirect weapon, such as a mortar has a range of 1, then I don't know that that is right, either.  As a scenario designer I would really think seriously about changing that.

Overland? I tested Overland - weather?   To be entirely honest it wouldn't surprise me, as at one point I know of a PDT that had artillery coded at 0% ... pretty sure it was an accident - and it has been years, and to be entirely fair when I work with weather coding (the few times that I have), it has been in the Musket and Pike engine which may work generally the same, but may not be coded in the PDT exactly the same way. I guess I will find out if I can get to working within the CWB series.

You're arguing that it is not a bug because:

• it has a low probability of occurring and a low impact if it does;
  
  
• if it's in the pdt file, then it's as the scenario designer intended.
  
  

Neither of those points is an argument against it being a bug. The first point is simply your agreement with me that the bug only occurs in edge cases.

To be technically I would only argue the first bullet point.    I would change the second bullet point to ... 'it may be as the scenario designer intended' -may being the operative word.

I also am flat out saying that if it is the first bullet point, it wouldn't be a bug, and it wouldn't be one -if- the scenario designer had intended it that way.    Of course as you pointed out, that isn't automatically the case.

I can say that if I were rating that gun, I would be rating it as to how it was used -and based upon the top bullet point alone; I'd do the same with the mortars as well.   No one is using mortars as a defensive fire weapon in real life.


-I will agree with you, though, that if it is showing differently in the other titles within the series, that you are probably right about it having been missed. Call it a bug if you want. I think their idea is to have all of the weaponry rated uniformly across the various titles within the series- so good find.

I didn't look at all of the titles for that, and was only considering performance and use; I've found a few areas where I would probably do things differently than some of the scenario designers.