Probing the Editor...

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Probing the Editor...

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> Probing the Editor...

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Probing the Editor... - 5/12/2015 2:36:33 PM

Leandros

Posts: 1740
Joined: 3/5/2015
Status: offline

OK, so I've started to look seriously at the Editor. First I wanted to create a couple of transports which are not in the game but which were there historically.
I started out with USAT Ludington, a ship that was 18 Days out of LA, enroute the Philippines, when the war broke out.

I copied Joseph Lykes, also in the Pacific at that time but in the game it pops up somewhat later in Balboa. I corrected both ships' entry dates to Dec. 7th and
placed both in Bilbao (base) and saved the scenario. I'm on Dec. 8th. When I started the game it asked me to confirm the changes I had made, which I did.
However, no ships in Bilbao when starting the game, though. Ideas, anyone?

Fred

< Message edited by Leandros -- 5/12/2015 3:38:14 PM >

_____________________________

River Wide, Ocean Deep - a book on Operation Sea Lion - www.fredleander.com
Saving MacArthur - a book series on how The Philippines were saved - in 1942! https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07D34QCWQ/?ie=UTF8&redirect=true&ref=series_rw_dp_labf

Post #: 1

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/12/2015 2:49:41 PM

Buck Beach

Posts: 1973
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Upland,CA,USA
Status: offline

What scenario are you playing? I am sure you can't make changes to stock scenarios.

Buck

(in reply to Leandros)

Post #: 2

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/12/2015 3:18:09 PM

Leandros

Posts: 1740
Joined: 3/5/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

What scenario are you playing? I am sure you can't make changes to stock scenarios.

Buck

No 1. That is not how I have understood it. It would be a little strange as the Editor manual specifically says choose a scenario closest to the time period one
wants to build/play. Is it perhaps so that all changes have to be made before starting to play? It does after all ask me to verify Changes.

I tried something even simpler - just to change the starting base of a ship. It still does not react to the change. Seems like something doesn't work in the saving
process.

Fred

PS.: The manual: "To build a scenario from scratch, pick an existing scenario from the currently available ones that is
most similar to the one that is to be created".

< Message edited by Leandros -- 5/12/2015 4:36:48 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Buck Beach)

Post #: 3

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/12/2015 3:49:05 PM

US87891

Posts: 422
Joined: 1/2/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Leandros

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
What scenario are you playing? I am sure you can't make changes to stock scenarios.

Buck

No 1. That is not how I have understood it. It would be a little strange as the Editor manual specifically says choose a scenario closest to the time period one
wants to build/play. Is it perhaps so that all changes have to be made before starting to play? It does after all ask me to verify Changes.

I tried something even simpler - just to change the starting base of a ship. It still does not react to the change. Seems like something doesn't work in the saving
process.

Fred

Scenarios 1-25 are "restricted" scenarios. The editor will load them but will not save changes into the "restricted" set of slots. Scenarios 1-25 are maintained as "uneditable/pristine" so that unscrupulous players can't change the database, in-game, to their benefit.

If you wish to edit the stock 1-25 scenarios you must initially load them and do a "Save As" into a slot > 25. You may then edit and update that scenario to your heart's content, but you must start your game with THAT scenario #, in order for your changes to THAT scenario # to take effect.

Matt

(in reply to Leandros)

Post #: 4

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/12/2015 3:57:44 PM

tomed63

Posts: 35
Joined: 11/27/2012
Status: offline

Leandros: If you are trying to modify scenario #1, make your changes and save your new scenario with
a new name in a new slot, over slot number 60.
NEVER change and save an original scenario in its original slot.
Tom T

(in reply to Leandros)

Post #: 5

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/12/2015 4:01:19 PM

Leandros

Posts: 1740
Joined: 3/5/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: US87891

Scenarios 1-25 are "restricted" scenarios. The editor will load them but will not save changes into the "restricted" set of slots. Scenarios 1-25 are maintained as "uneditable/pristine" so that unscrupulous players can't change the database, in-game, to their benefit.

If you wish to edit the stock 1-25 scenarios you must initially load them and do a "Save As" into a slot > 25. You may then edit and update that scenario to your heart's content, but you must start your game with THAT scenario #, in order for your changes to THAT scenario # to take effect.

Matt

Thank you, Matt - I started out with that (I'm working out of a game saved in slot 26) as per the manual. I have made some minor adjustments on an a/c type which
have been registered but not the recent ship changes. Also, as mentioned above, it is asking for, and accepting, changes each time I start the game anew. It also
remarks that there has been previous changes.

Fred

< Message edited by Leandros -- 5/12/2015 5:03:53 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to US87891)

Post #: 6

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/12/2015 5:05:36 PM

JuanG

Posts: 906
Joined: 12/28/2008
Status: offline

If it's asking you to confirm/accept changes, then you're loading a save, not starting a new game.

If you make the changes and start a new game, it should not ask you about anything like this, and should include your changes.

The reason they aren't showing in when you apply them to a save is that they would be 'retroactive', as in the changes would have needed to happen before that save to take effect. Updating scenario data will not create TF's out of thin air with ships that didn't exist when you first started the scenario.

_____________________________

Coral Sea HDM
AltWNT Scenarios

(in reply to Leandros)

Post #: 7

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/12/2015 6:01:43 PM

Leandros

Posts: 1740
Joined: 3/5/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JuanG

If it's asking you to confirm/accept changes, then you're loading a save, not starting a new game.

If you make the changes and start a new game, it should not ask you about anything like this, and should include your changes.

The reason they aren't showing in when you apply them to a save is that they would be 'retroactive', as in the changes would have needed to happen before that save
to take effect. Updating scenario data will not create TF's out of thin air with ships that didn't exist when you first started the scenario.

I may have expressed myself clumsily but surely the Editor is meant to be able to create new vessels in an existing scenario? Or, am I wrong? I have created a new
ship out of an existing ship's type. It's there. I have assured that it is within the actual time frame and placed it on a base, not as a TF. Should it be a TF? I
am working out of a scenario "saved as" another, not the original. I tested to change the specs on an a/c - that was registered. I've checked that in the "specs"
of that plane in the game. But the ship does not turn up. I have also tried to change the station of ships already existing but it won't change.

The game ask for confirmation to update the changes in the Editor when I start the game.

Fred

< Message edited by Leandros -- 5/12/2015 7:14:25 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to JuanG)

Post #: 8

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/12/2015 8:47:45 PM

wdolson

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline

If you want to add ships, you might find it's already been done in DaBabes. They expanded the ship database to include a number of smaller ships that were not in the original game. Two of the principle people in developing DaBabes were on the development team for the game and one had been in the US Navy, so he has a soft spot for all things naval.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Leandros)

Post #: 9

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/12/2015 9:54:40 PM

Leandros

Posts: 1740
Joined: 3/5/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

If you want to add ships, you might find it's already been done in DaBabes. They expanded the ship database to include a number of smaller ships that were not in the original game. Two of the principle people in developing DaBabes were on the development team for the game and one had been in the US Navy, so he has a soft spot for all things naval.

Bill

Thank you, Bill - that is all well but as far as I understand it, it shall be possible to do this in the Editor. I need to have it work, anyway. It seems the Editor
and game won't communicate. It could be something simple but I'm not able to grab it at the moment. I believe I have followed the manual.

Fred

< Message edited by Leandros -- 5/12/2015 10:56:37 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to wdolson)

Post #: 10

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/12/2015 9:59:44 PM

jmolyson

Posts: 174
Joined: 11/27/2006
Status: offline

I have added and deleted ships from the Guadalcanal/Watchtower scenario. But first, as said before, you need to open the scenario you want to modify and save it to a slot >25.

Every time you edit you need to make sure you are saving to your modified scenario, not the original one.

Good luck, there are errors in the stock database, at least when the database is compared to historical texts. So it's a no-brainer that in the interest of historical accuracy you want to play with a player-edited database.

Good hunting,

Joe Molyson

_____________________________

Joe

(in reply to wdolson)

Post #: 11

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/12/2015 10:29:46 PM

Leandros

Posts: 1740
Joined: 3/5/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AYAAD

I have added and deleted ships from the Guadalcanal/Watchtower scenario. But first, as said before, you need to open the scenario you want to modify and save it to
a slot >25.

Every time you edit you need to make sure you are saving to your modified scenario, not the original one.

Thank you, I've done that all the time. Actually the game (my version, anyway) doesn't permit saving in lower slots. The Editor and the game don't seem to
communicate properly.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AYAAD
Good luck, there are errors in the stock database, at least when the database is compared to historical texts. So it's a no-brainer that in the interest of
historical accuracy you want to play with a player-edited database.

Good hunting,

Joe Molyson

I know, and that isn't really my intention. That said, the database, such as it is, should be very useful for my purpose.

Fred

_____________________________

(in reply to jmolyson)

Post #: 12

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/12/2015 10:37:12 PM

Andy Mac

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline

I think I understand maybe.

When you add ships or make any change to a scenario you pretty much need to start again.

Some changes e.g. aircraft stats I think and device changes can be updated in game but things like ships that have already arrived and LCU base changes can NOT be updated in a game in progress

There is no save game editor for WITP AE

So when you add ships you need to re start the scenario that you have saved to see them they will not appear in a gfame already in progress.

If I have mis understood apologies

(in reply to Leandros)

Post #: 13

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/13/2015 12:34:53 AM

wdolson

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

If you want to add ships, you might find it's already been done in DaBabes. They expanded the ship database to include a number of smaller ships that were not in the original game. Two of the principle people in developing DaBabes were on the development team for the game and one had been in the US Navy, so he has a soft spot for all things naval.

Bill

quote:

ORIGINAL: Leandros
Thank you, Bill - that is all well but as far as I understand it, it shall be possible to do this in the Editor. I need to have it work, anyway. It seems the Editor
and game won't communicate. It could be something simple but I'm not able to grab it at the moment. I believe I have followed the manual.

Fred

You can't make changes to a game in progress (to prevent cheating in PBEM games). The editor makes changes to the scenario files. You need to start a new scenario to see the changes.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Leandros)

Post #: 14

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/13/2015 8:47:43 AM

Leandros

Posts: 1740
Joined: 3/5/2015
Status: offline

It seems I'm getting somewhere now - and it largely conforms with Bill's and Andy's latest postings. First, I was able to untie a small procedural knot in
my mind (such as sequence of savings and loadings, etc.) and, after that...

..., found that data/specs., such as an a/c's speed, can be changed before
or after the game is started. Changes in the positioning of units, however, must be made before the game starts. Thank you!

IOW, all the "correctional" work must be done before the game starts in earnest. I must have a slot with an unstarted (and gradually corrected) game
always, and, for testing, "saving as" to a different slot from which I can verify the changes as they are made. Does that sound sensible or is there a
better system?

Fred

< Message edited by Leandros -- 5/13/2015 9:54:08 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to wdolson)

Post #: 15

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/14/2015 2:26:20 PM

m10bob

Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

If you want to add ships, you might find it's already been done in DaBabes. They expanded the ship database to include a number of smaller ships that were not in the original game. Two of the principle people in developing DaBabes were on the development team for the game and one had been in the US Navy, so he has a soft spot for all things naval.

Bill

quote:

ORIGINAL: Leandros
Thank you, Bill - that is all well but as far as I understand it, it shall be possible to do this in the Editor. I need to have it work, anyway. It seems the Editor
and game won't communicate. It could be something simple but I'm not able to grab it at the moment. I believe I have followed the manual.

Fred

You can't make changes to a game in progress (to prevent cheating in PBEM games). The editor makes changes to the scenario files. You need to start a new scenario to see the changes.

Bill

I am a big time fan of the editor and Bill is right...I have been able to introduce new aircraft mid-game, but never ships. Funny thing is the list of ships at the top left WILL show the newly created ships mid game but they will NOT show up on the ship reinforcement screen mid game..
Starting a new game WILL see your new ships coming in as you intended..

As for aircraft, the only real issue I have found is that no matter how many times you type in an accurate "date of entry", the "aircraft replacement pool" will always show 00/00/0000 instead of the dates you manually typed in. (This ONLY applies to new planes you have created..NOT a change of dates on existing aircraft.

BTW..In game, the "Beech mod 18" (in game name) is in reality the F2 Recon plane..I created the C45 Expeditor light cargo plane by copy/pasting the page for that Beech plane, made it a TRANSPORT, (carried 2000 lbs)..It was used by USAAC, USMC/USN (as the JRB), China..The RAF and Canada..No small numbers..hundreds!..The USMC and USN operated 1500 of them alone!
The RECON version used by USAAC was not in small numbers either..

_____________________________

(in reply to wdolson)

Post #: 16

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/15/2015 3:49:50 AM

wdolson

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline

Though I don't believe the Expeditor was ever put into many squadrons, so you don't see it in the game much. As far as I can tell, the F-2 was only attached to a couple of HQ aircraft pools, which are not depicted in the game.

The Grumman Duck and Goose were ubiquitous utility aircraft in the USN and USMC, but they did not tend to operate within squadrons of that plane, so they are not in the OOB. If a pilot automagically appears at a frontline squadron, he was probably flown in on one of these hacks invisible within the game.

The C-54 was used throughout the Pacific as a VIP and special use aircraft. My father's unit had one they used extensively. But you don't see any in game until quite late because it wasn't until near the end of the war that there were any C-54 squadrons.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to m10bob)

Post #: 17

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/15/2015 1:14:01 PM

m10bob

Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

Though I don't believe the Expeditor was ever put into many squadrons, so you don't see it in the game much. As far as I can tell, the F-2 was only attached to a couple of HQ aircraft pools, which are not depicted in the game.

The Grumman Duck and Goose were ubiquitous utility aircraft in the USN and USMC, but they did not tend to operate within squadrons of that plane, so they are not in the OOB. If a pilot automagically appears at a frontline squadron, he was probably flown in on one of these hacks invisible within the game.

The C-54 was used throughout the Pacific as a VIP and special use aircraft. My father's unit had one they used extensively. But you don't see any in game until quite late because it wasn't until near the end of the war that there were any C-54 squadrons.

Bill

The Brit models (430) were ALL used in the "far east" and used extensively to supply folks like Wingate,etc.
My sources indicate at least half of the American C45's were used likewise (rather than just hauling people around, much like an LST between short points), the rest were trainers..

The Chinese models filled the gap where their Hudsons proved deficient.

Most of the USMC/USN models were trainers.

Sources needed?, please lemme know....Bob

Here is a Marine SNB burning at Pearl on December 7th............

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by m10bob -- 5/15/2015 2:23:24 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to wdolson)

Post #: 18

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/15/2015 1:44:39 PM

Leandros

Posts: 1740
Joined: 3/5/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: The Chinese models filled the gap where their Hudsons proved deficient.

Are you sayng the Beech could do something the Hudsons couldn't...?

Fred

_____________________________

(in reply to m10bob)

Post #: 19

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/15/2015 2:12:36 PM

m10bob

Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Leandros

quote:

ORIGINAL: The Chinese models filled the gap where their Hudsons proved deficient.

Are you sayng the Beech could do something the Hudsons couldn't...?

Fred

They did not require the same amount of "downtime" and parts may have been easier to find.
Personally, I like the Hudson..Dad's female cousin used to fly them to Canada from here. (See "A Man Called Intrepid" for details....

The American cargo C 45's were C45b's and C45f's..

http://www.uswarplanes.net/c45.html

< Message edited by m10bob -- 5/15/2015 3:14:15 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Leandros)

Post #: 20

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/15/2015 6:31:29 PM

US87891

Posts: 422
Joined: 1/2/2011
Status: offline

As in all things computer, it�s not straight forward.
There are top level routines, second level routines, and third level routines.

Devices and Airplanes are top level routines because nothing else accesses and modifies them.
LCUs and Airgroups are second level because they depend on input from the Device and Airplane files.
Some Naval stuff is third level because it depends on Ship Class (in turn dependent on Nav Devices) and Ship stats (intro, sunk, etc..).
Just because you fiddle with an editor bit doesn�t mean it will port into your game. Sometimes it will if you understand the concept of writing new data into present memory.
Most of us who have been playing with this understand these things very well. Someone new, that has no experience with the editor/engine, needs to consult, if they are serious about development. Otherwise, hoo-pa.

Matt

(in reply to Leandros)

Post #: 21

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/16/2015 8:03:15 AM

Leandros

Posts: 1740
Joined: 3/5/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL:

http://www.uswarplanes.net/c45.html

Seems it can be compared with the Lockheed (212) Electra Junior as flown by the Dutch. Same engines, too. They used it as a bomber trainer, I Believe, and organized
it into a recce squadron when the war broke out, flown by the instructors of the squadron. It could carry 6-8 bombs on under-body racks.

Fred

_____________________________

(in reply to m10bob)

Post #: 22

RE: Probing the Editor... - 5/16/2015 12:37:29 PM

m10bob

Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

Though I don't believe the Expeditor was ever put into many squadrons, so you don't see it in the game much. As far as I can tell, the F-2 was only attached to a couple of HQ aircraft pools, which are not depicted in the game.

The Grumman Duck and Goose were ubiquitous utility aircraft in the USN and USMC, but they did not tend to operate within squadrons of that plane, so they are not in the OOB. If a pilot automagically appears at a frontline squadron, he was probably flown in on one of these hacks invisible within the game.

The C-54 was used throughout the Pacific as a VIP and special use aircraft. My father's unit had one they used extensively. But you don't see any in game until quite late because it wasn't until near the end of the war that there were any C-54 squadrons.

Bill

As ever, Bill is dead on the money..I used to think the Duck was used in groups, but they were simply a utility/odd job plane assigned to each naval squadron, used for errands..
As for the C45..the folks who really benefited from dedicated cargo squadrons (in WITP/AE)seem to have been the RAF in the far east.I suspect it would be natural to see India using them, but while I found pics of them in India, it is not clear if Indians were flying them in squadron strength as the Brits did.
I did find American squadrons using them in Australia.

_____________________________

(in reply to wdolson)

Post #: 23