RE: Features for ToaW 4 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III



Message

JAMiAM -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 (5/1/2007 7:32:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay


quote:

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick

quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy
Ralph, I caught you on the forums! how goes the debug on the fite stuff?

I see the event that caused it. I'll fix it, and verify that there aren't any other stray events. It will take me a day or two.


I'm confused by the above statement. Was the problem with FitE or was there a residual problem with TOAW that we didn't find last time?

LoL! I think it was a residual problem with an FitE game started with an earlier version of TOAW III, that needed to be fixed.



larryfulkerson -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 (5/2/2007 8:21:40 PM)

Here's what we need in T4.......move-able forts. Here's a fort with a movement factor of 11. What gives?

[image]local://upfiles/16287/0FE3CB306D5D4DA181A75B41A2984B5C.gif[/image]



el cid -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 (5/2/2007 9:17:07 PM)

Could TOAW 4 have the addition of grand strategy. Though it is an operational level game, I find that the most beloved scenarios usually are grand scale, and could probably benefit from some strategic aspects.



JAMiAM -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 (5/2/2007 9:53:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

Here's what we need in T4.......move-able forts. Here's a fort with a movement factor of 11. What gives?


That may be a unit assigned to a "fortress" or fortress region, but it is using a Machine Gun NATO icon. "Move-able forts" can be created with any type of equipment that reacts appropriately toward the other types, to gain the desired effect - in spite of the complaints of TO&E purists...[:'(]

Just how plausible in the scenario they may be, is up to the designer to account for, and is another story altogether...[;)]



JMass -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 (5/3/2007 7:33:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

For those trying to get TOAW III under Linux, try reading this thread http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1211390&mpage=1 and maybe pm'ing or emailing superdave56 for instructions and tips. He seemed to be able to get the game to work.


I have compiled Wine (0.9.36) and now TOAW 3 runs on Linux but very slowly... [:(]

[image]http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/8632/linuxfs2.th.jpg[/image]]



Dave Ferguson -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 (5/5/2007 10:40:21 AM)

Sorry if this has already been mentioned.

The Butterfly Effect

The law of unintended consequences can spoil long scenarios, especially irritating if you have just played 125 turns of FITE! The scenario just gets out of balance and there is nothing you can do about it.

What we need is the ability to dip into a scenario in progress and change stuff like formation composition, replacement rates etc etc.



Veers -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 (5/5/2007 5:41:47 PM)

Actually that ability was taken away with T3 to avoid the potential for cheating.

And, the law of unintended consequence is realistsic. It's a good thing. You can't win, or even do well, in every game you play.



Dave Ferguson -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 (5/5/2007 7:29:03 PM)

If it was taken away it should be put back because what I am talking about is unintended consequences of scenario design decisions. How many times has FITE been playtested for ALL its turns. I would not start a scenario that would involve months of effort, only to find you have to start all over. I am not suggesting a scenario dump that you can open with the editor just the ability to change some numbers. Of course it is the events that cause the most problems.
Or thinking about it another way maybe a scenario such as FITE should be several smaller scenarios, the problem being how do you have the end of one scenario be the start of another without a large amount of work?

As far as cheating is concerned it would be possible to have a log of changes embedded in the game so any change was agreed by the players, changes without agreement would mean a immediate loss.



Veers -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 (5/5/2007 8:19:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave Ferguson

If it was taken away it should be put back because what I am talking about is unintended consequences of scenario design decisions. How many times has FITE been playtested for ALL its turns. I would not start a scenario that would involve months of effort, only to find you have to start all over. I am not suggesting a scenario dump that you can open with the editor just the ability to change some numbers. Of course it is the events that cause the most problems.
Or thinking about it another way maybe a scenario such as FITE should be several smaller scenarios, the problem being how do you have the end of one scenario be the start of another without a large amount of work?

As far as cheating is concerned it would be possible to have a log of changes embedded in the game so any change was agreed by the players, changes without agreement would mean a immediate loss.

*shrugs* I suppose having a change log in there with some sort of notice to the other player that the scneraio has been changed durign the game would be a good idea.



LOK_32MK -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/8/2007 5:40:57 PM)

Jamiam/Ralph
Is there any hope of seeing naval improvements in TOAW IV (such as interception by enemy fleets and other fine ideas suggested by several people)? They don't have to be huge improvements. Just enough to make the naval aspects of the game slightly more realistic.
Any thoughts?



JAMiAM -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/8/2007 7:03:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LOK_32MK

Jamiam/Ralph
Is there any hope of seeing naval improvements in TOAW IV (such as interception by enemy fleets and other fine ideas suggested by several people)? They don't have to be huge improvements. Just enough to make the naval aspects of the game slightly more realistic.
Any thoughts?


We've got some ideas floating around that should improve naval interaction in future versions. I won't go into detail on any of them, as it's way too early, but yes, we are hoping to make that aspect better.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Then again, just about anything is "better" so the bar is, fortunately, set pretty low for us...[;)]



Veers -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/8/2007 7:40:52 PM)

Are those ideas floating around for T3, or T4?



Karri -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/8/2007 7:47:45 PM)

Is there any hopes of say doubling the unit limit?



larryfulkerson -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/8/2007 8:26:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veers
Are those ideas floating around for T3, or T4?


yes.



Veers -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/8/2007 8:45:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veers
Are those ideas floating around for T3, or T4?


yes.

[:D]



SMK-at-work -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/9/2007 1:07:50 AM)

Oh and multiple ressurection sites please - ones that have some bearing to where units might actually do some recovery........



JJKettunen -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/9/2007 1:22:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

Oh and multiple ressurection sites please


Blasphemy!



larryfulkerson -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/9/2007 2:09:07 AM)

I want to see the inclusion of Hospitals and Supply dumps etc. in the game. Hey you guys.....here's your Java code fix for the day:


[image]local://upfiles/16287/6E8CAE77C02A4354A9D2DC8CA31EF3CF.gif[/image]



JMass -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/9/2007 2:59:15 PM)

I would like a window containing a summary of all planned battles and relative %.

[:)][sm=sign0031.gif]



Telumar -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/9/2007 7:47:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

I want to see the inclusion of Hospitals and Supply dumps etc. in the game. Hey you guys.....here's your Java code fix for the day:


[image]local://upfiles/16287/6E8CAE77C02A4354A9D2DC8CA31EF3CF.gif[/image]


Terrain names, Unit type names etc can only be modified by a separate language file (like the translations)...either you manipulate/mod the strings from the language kit and compile a dll or you modify the .dll directly with a ressource editor (ResHacker or Xn Ressource Editor i.e.), both might be cumbersome. So Larry what's this screnshot from? Some kind of language.dll editor?



larryfulkerson -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/9/2007 8:54:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Telumar
So Larry what's this screnshot from? Some kind of language.dll editor?


I wrote the equipment editor in Java and it seems to be working. Now I thought I'd tackle the unit editor and maybe the OOB editor or something. I haven't given much thought to replacing the evil editor but that remains a remote possibillity.



redwolf -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/10/2007 12:42:41 AM)

I've seen some mention of running it under Linux.

I don't visit this forum very often, I'm easiest to reach on ACG or gamesquad. Maybe we should have a separate thread here, but somebody needs to notify me.

But anyway, I have it running in both Wine and VMware, and performance is quite good, except that occasionally it just sits there dumb fat and stupid for several minutes. Since it happens both in Wine and VMware it isn't simply a case of the Windows emulation being slow (VMware runs a "real" Windows) or massive I/O. It must be something like heavy use of a particular GUI routine in the Windows libraries that happens to be hard to emulate.



SMK-at-work -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/10/2007 2:01:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Keke

quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

Oh and multiple ressurection sites please


Blasphemy!



not to an atheist![8D]



JJKettunen -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/10/2007 2:19:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work


quote:

ORIGINAL: Keke

quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

Oh and multiple ressurection sites please


Blasphemy!



not to an atheist![8D]



Heretic! [;)]



freeboy -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/14/2007 6:17:59 AM)

I want to be more specific in the areas I assagn my air units to fly, IE cap along the rail from x to 7, or, combat support for this region. etc



larryfulkerson -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/14/2007 4:12:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: redwolf
But anyway, I have it running in both Wine and VMware, and performance is quite good, except that occasionally it just sits there dumb fat and stupid for several minutes.


Maybe it's doing garbage collection during those periods, like in Java's VM?



redwolf -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/17/2007 2:28:44 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: redwolf
But anyway, I have it running in both Wine and VMware, and performance is quite good, except that occasionally it just sits there dumb fat and stupid for several minutes.


Maybe it's doing garbage collection during those periods, like in Java's VM?



I think that is out of question. First of all we know TOAW is pretty plain C code, which makes it unlikely that e.g. the Boehm collector has been plugged in.

Then, GC is very memory intensive and leads to many TLB misses. TLB misses are very expensive in VMware (as the guest OS has no TLB hardware and every page fault is resolved by doing a page table walk in software), but very fast in Wine (where the native VM system of the host is used). The slowdown appears in very similar manners in both VMware and in Wine, so we know it doesn't have to do with the VM system and hence probably not some kind of GCing.

Also, the pauses are far too long.



JMass -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/17/2007 3:27:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: redwolf
The slowdown appears in very similar manners in both VMware and in Wine, so we know it doesn't have to do with the VM system and hence probably not some kind of GCing.
Also, the pauses are far too long.


On my box TOAW3 running smoothly using VMware and XP SP2, is just a few slow, but is unplayable in Wine.



ralphtricky -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/17/2007 5:11:54 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JMass

I would like a window containing a summary of all planned battles and relative %.

[:)][sm=sign0031.gif]

Would you settle for being able to go through them in the combat screen instead easily?



ralphtricky -> RE: Features for ToaW 4 - Naval improvements (5/17/2007 5:13:46 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: redwolf

I've seen some mention of running it under Linux.

I don't visit this forum very often, I'm easiest to reach on ACG or gamesquad. Maybe we should have a separate thread here, but somebody needs to notify me.

But anyway, I have it running in both Wine and VMware, and performance is quite good, except that occasionally it just sits there dumb fat and stupid for several minutes. Since it happens both in Wine and VMware it isn't simply a case of the Windows emulation being slow (VMware runs a "real" Windows) or massive I/O. It must be something like heavy use of a particular GUI routine in the Windows libraries that happens to be hard to emulate.

Is there a certain time when it does that? There are things like the Carrier AI that take a long time to process.



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.65625