Scenario Approval Discussion (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> Mods and Scenarios



Message

Vic -> Scenario Approval Discussion (2/10/2008 1:28:58 PM)

Dedicated thread for discussion about scenario approval.



IRONCROM -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (2/10/2008 8:03:22 PM)

Thanks Vic.

My first question is where to start?
Are we only concerning ourselves with scenarios that are waiting approval or are we also looking at scenarios that are in the testing phase.

Hi Jim and Rick



IRONCROM -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (2/10/2008 8:35:12 PM)

 Very quickly I have noticed a couple of problems with the scenarios in the testing area.
Both of these scenarios look like they have had a lot of work put into them and would probably be really great if not for these issues.

Indochina-(Lion of Judah) There are a lot of unit graphics missing that the game is looking for and can't find. 8-10 maybe.
probably not to hard to fix but should be addressed since having blank subformations at the bottom of the screen is not appealing.

Russia 41' extended-(dazoline) The river graphics are not loading properly. The game is searching for stream graphics where they don't exist. I even copied the stream graphics to where the scenario is looking for them and the rivers were still not displaying properly. Once again this is probably a minor fix, but needs to be addressed. Not knowing where the Rivers are in Russia 41' is a pretty big deal.

I sent a PM to Lion of Judah. No response yet.
I hope he is still interested in tweaking his scenario. It looks like it would be a real blast to play.







rickier65 -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (2/10/2008 10:56:11 PM)

Hi Jim and Kirk (and Vic of course),

How do things get from the Sandbox to the waiting for approval? Some folks put scenario in Sandbox expecting/hoping to have it tested, then go in and tweak based on the responses they get. When they're ready to have it approved, do they move it to the waiting for approval area? Or do they still send an email to Vic (or maybe one of us, to move it to the approval area?

I'd suggest we only approve from the list of scenarios waiting for approval, that way folks can get some feedback and make changes before having it go through process. But I'll do it however Vic prefers. It's probably a good idea to check out the ones in the Sandbox area though, since that would speed up the process. And also give folks some feedback on their work.

Vic - is there a way to allow authors of scenarios to move from Sandbox are to Waiting for approval themselves? That way they could tweak/adjust/fix the sandbox versions and put them up for approval when they were happy with results?

Seem like very few people put in reviews on the community site, but I do see some comments showing up in the Matrix AT-Mods forum section on a few of the sandbox ones.


Rick



IRONCROM -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (2/11/2008 2:05:52 AM)

 I'm giving SalernoVI Corps V11 a go.

So far it installs like a charm. 2 folders in the file. 1 graphic and 1 scenario.
In the Graphic there is a file called "salerno" I think. I just copied that file to the AT graphic file and copied the pt2 file in the scenario folder to the AT scenario file and it's all good.

Wish they were all that easy. (hint...hint...)

The scenario is very stable and AI capable. I have a few minor issues I want to talk Rick into incorporating and play around a little to check for balance.

All in all it's a great little scenario that I will probably give a high grade to once I talk Rick into a few things.[;)]

I think he may have a knack for scenario design.[sm=00000280.gif]



Vic -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (2/11/2008 11:25:14 AM)

hi guys,

Players can switch their own scenarios from sandbox to For Approval themselves (as can the deputees through admin edit).

as far as i am concerned we only check out the scenarios for approval to avoid double work in which players are still testing themselves and knowing the scenario isnt ready for "gold status" yet.

kind regards,
Vic



IRONCROM -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (2/14/2008 1:31:49 AM)

Sorry Vic.[8|]

I have finished testing SalernoVI Corps. I vote for approval.

Scenario has easy install, no major glitches, And has more than reasonable gameplay and balance.[;)]



Vic -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (2/14/2008 12:53:06 PM)

reasonably sure is good enough IRON!



Bombur -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (2/16/2008 2:48:35 AM)

Napoleonic era diplomacy seems a good scenario. It has some troubles with its diplomacy component, however, maybe tweber could help?



IRONCROM -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (2/18/2008 12:21:53 AM)

The scenario designer hasn't submitted that scenario for approval yet. I was thinking of contacting him and finding out if he is stuck or just looking for oppenents to help him play test it. It has been in the sand box longer than any I think.



IRONCROM -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (2/20/2008 11:11:29 PM)

Alright Rick and Jim. Who wants to do a PBEM test of Tom's GPW with me.[sm=00000280.gif]

Make sure you take a deep breath before we start. It's a big one.[X(]



IRONCROM -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (2/23/2008 7:43:01 PM)

@Rick
So we know that now AI can play GPW with one faction on each side it just takes something like 2 hours to take its turn(literally). I'm going to try and get involved in some PBEM games of GPW. No word yet from Jim if he wants to play a 2 player game of GPW. I'll find someone on the oppenents wanted forum if he is not interested.

Tom has posted a new version of WAW. He put a question mark on the the AI capable section. You interested in testing the WAW AI Rick? WAW has been through a lot of refinements and player testing already. Other than the AI question I think it's ready to go.



rickier65 -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (2/23/2008 7:53:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: IRONCROM

@Rick
So we know that now AI can play GPW with one faction on each side it just takes something like 2 hours to take its turn(literally). I'm going to try and get involved in some PBEM games of GPW. No word yet from Jim if he wants to play a 2 player game of GPW. I'll find someone on the oppenents wanted forum if he is not interested.

Tom has posted a new version of WAW. He put a question mark on the the AI capable section. You interested in testing the WAW AI Rick? WAW has been through a lot of refinements and player testing already. Other than the AI question I think it's ready to go.



I haven't tried the GPW Russian side versus the AI yet. I'll do that first, andthen yes, I'm going to try WaW v30 AI. I've been thinking about checking it out for a while. just never had time. Now I'll make time. I'm always intersted in how Twebers does his events, he seem to be pretty creative.

Rick



Vic -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (2/23/2008 11:18:16 PM)

To be honest you dont have to as thorough a check with my or toms scenarios since we are both pretty veteran scenario designers.

Furthermore you should keep in mind if some scenario is a completly new scenario or an improved/fixed version of an existing scenario. if the last thing is the case a very casual check should be enough since it was already approved before.

kind regards,
Vic



rickier65 -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (2/24/2008 5:21:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Vic

To be honest you dont have to as thorough a check with my or toms scenarios since we are both pretty veteran scenario designers.

Furthermore you should keep in mind if some scenario is a completly new scenario or an improved/fixed version of an existing scenario. if the last thing is the case a very casual check should be enough since it was already approved before.

kind regards,
Vic



Ah, but Vic, I wanted to try out Tom's GPW against AI. I just got control back to my comp. After about 3 hours for the AI to do the German first turn.

But being patient and it did come back to my turn.

I'd say you want to make sure you have a hefty PC if you plan to play GPW against the AI. And be patient with the AI.

Thanks Tom!

Rick



IRONCROM -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (3/17/2008 2:10:09 AM)

Hi Rick,

Age of Napoleon is progressing well. We are on version 3 now. There may yet be another version before were done testing.

Star Drek seems very stable. Not sure yet how it would play against AI. I will follow the designers PBEM game very closely.

Diplomacy Napoleonic Wars... I probably won't have time to take a look at this one til the other 2 have been approved. When I do get a chance to look it over perhaps we can do some PBEM testing with the designer.



rickier65 -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (3/17/2008 2:36:15 AM)



That sound fine.

I've also been watching the the threads on Napolean and Start Trek (Drek) mod, and plan to restart an AI version of Napoleon today or tommorrow.

I alos put up a guide for zipping scenarios for distribution. Certainly not needed by the experienced modders here, but maybe if some of the new guys get the modding bug, it'll get them a quick guide.

Rick



Vic -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (3/17/2008 12:22:04 PM)

Big thanks Rick! for the great guide!
And both of you for testing and playing the new scenarios.
its a load of my back. :)



rickier65 -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (3/17/2008 12:28:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Vic

Big thanks Rick! for the great guide!
And both of you for testing and playing the new scenarios.
its a load of my back. :)



You're welcome - glad to be able to give at least a little back - .

Rick



IRONCROM -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (3/17/2008 9:46:06 PM)

 It's been our pleasure Vic.



IRONCROM -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (3/17/2008 10:06:50 PM)

 @Rick

I'm thinking WAW v31 doesn't really need much in the way of play testing. Tom's changes sound pretty minor to a scenario that has already has tons of play testing. I think this one should get fast approval. What's your thoughts?



rickier65 -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (3/18/2008 12:23:26 AM)


Sounds fine to me - Tom probably knows what hes doing (and he fixes anything quicker than I can even play) - and thats a good thing.

Rick



BULLDOGINTHEUK -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (3/18/2008 11:01:24 PM)

I notice WAW v32 is now up for approval.  You all okay If we authorise this one?



IRONCROM -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion (3/19/2008 12:58:20 AM)

Yea I think we can safely send WAW on its way. Even though Tom found a bug in version 31 the same day he posted it...LOL

Seriously though. I think WAW has to be one of the most refined scenarios on here. My vote is for approval.



rickier65 -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion - WaW3.2 (3/19/2008 3:57:07 AM)


I wnet through and did a quick check. If you unzip Tom's latest WaW32 into the At bin directory it doesn't put the waw directory in the graphics directory - it leaves it in the bin directory. I'd suggest that Tom might want to redo the zip file before approving, (or I'd be glad to do it for him if he wants - though he's pretty much an expert I'd say - hes probably done it more than anyone except Vic.)

Haven't had a chance to play it yet.

Rick



rickier65 -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion - WaW3.2 (3/19/2008 4:21:04 AM)

I've installed the Diplomacy scenario but I see couple of problems with it.

If you unzip it to the bin driectory, it creates a folder named Alaric in the bin directory. That folder need to be copied to the graphics directory for it to work.

Also, even if you do the above, when you attampt to play it as is, it does a crash to desktop.

In scenario briefing Alaric says where to put the Alaric directory, and also notes a bug if one of the options is left at the default. I think I'd suggest moving this back to the sandbox and maybe Have it working and uznipping properly before approving.

Alaric, I'll be glad to take a look at the bug if I can sort through it. ANd if you want I can help you repackge so it unzips properly.

Rick



alaric318 -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion - WaW3.2 (3/19/2008 12:33:23 PM)


greetings, first, indeed, thanks you very much for take the time of make the test, i try to fix the bug but failed to do it, scenario is not upgraded to 1.15 still, the bug is for sure about i remove the "grant navy" for sweden, because it in the default Diplomacy scenario go to Riga and now Riga is a russian city, not swedish, last day i try to fix it, it works but all regimes received the "grant navy" of sweden, in add if i add a "check" to the event, only sweden receive the card but this time it is for grant navy to egypt as english colonial navy, at this point i revert to original status, i do not think that scenario at the moment is suitable for approval, just was wanting to make it available, only things to do is to make "treaties" between players trough chat or email and turn off the option "allow making peace", scenario is not suitable for AI play, i will like if it can be listed as Human Only, all sf and units builds are displayed under "no combat" type builds, and AI keeps, on the test, building only horses, not infantry, cavalry, etc, to make it playable by the AI will be much work, to make it playable by Human i thinks it only matters about the removal of the event (105, now "blank") of the sweden navy and the sweden navy card, Rick and IronCrom, thanks for the support, and for now on feel free to make any and all modifications on it, indeed i must say that will be a privilege for me if you, that have indeed more experience with the scripts, make the scenario playable, that will be the better about all it, excuse, please, my fault about left without support the scenario for some time, i have other projects on other games and have been working on them some months ago to now, if at last, you decide to take on the scenario i hope you find of help the info, i are very under concern about the bug is caused by the sweden navy card and event, i think the better way is to restore event 105 and make the action card for sweden to receive the navy, maybe in stokholm, his capital, just tried it and i failed to do it properly, any and all help, thanks in advance,

with best regards,

murat30.



IRONCROM -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion - WaW3.2 (3/19/2008 6:41:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rick


I wnet through and did a quick check. If you unzip Tom's latest WaW32 into the At bin directory it doesn't put the waw directory in the graphics directory - it leaves it in the bin directory. I'd suggest that Tom might want to redo the zip file before approving, (or I'd be glad to do it for him if he wants - though he's pretty much an expert I'd say - hes probably done it more than anyone except Vic.)

Haven't had a chance to play it yet.

Rick


Nice catch Rick. Guess I was to fast to judge that one.[;)]



rickier65 -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion - WaW3.2 (3/20/2008 6:05:02 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Murat30


greetings, first, indeed, thanks you very much for take the time of make the test, i try to fix the bug but failed to do it, scenario is not upgraded to 1.15 still, the bug is for sure about i remove the "grant navy" for sweden, because it in the default Diplomacy scenario go to Riga and now Riga is a russian city, not swedish, last day i try to fix it, it works but all regimes received the "grant navy" of sweden, in add if i add a "check" to the event, only sweden receive the card but this time it is for grant navy to egypt as english colonial navy, at this point i revert to original status, i do not think that scenario at the moment is suitable for approval, just was wanting to make it available, only things to do is to make "treaties" between players trough chat or email and turn off the option "allow making peace", scenario is not suitable for AI play, i will like if it can be listed as Human Only, all sf and units builds are displayed under "no combat" type builds, and AI keeps, on the test, building only horses, not infantry, cavalry, etc, to make it playable by the AI will be much work, to make it playable by Human i thinks it only matters about the removal of the event (105, now "blank") of the sweden navy and the sweden navy card, Rick and IronCrom, thanks for the support, and for now on feel free to make any and all modifications on it, indeed i must say that will be a privilege for me if you, that have indeed more experience with the scripts, make the scenario playable, that will be the better about all it, excuse, please, my fault about left without support the scenario for some time, i have other projects on other games and have been working on them some months ago to now, if at last, you decide to take on the scenario i hope you find of help the info, i are very under concern about the bug is caused by the sweden navy card and event, i think the better way is to restore event 105 and make the action card for sweden to receive the navy, maybe in stokholm, his capital, just tried it and i failed to do it properly, any and all help, thanks in advance,

with best regards,

murat30.



Based on these discusions, I've gone ahead and moved the Diplomacy - Napoleanic Wars to the sandbox until we can squash the bug. It's still available for folks to download there. And I'll take some time and look over the cards and events.

Rick



IRONCROM -> RE: Scenario Approval Discussion - WaW3.2 (3/21/2008 2:55:29 AM)

 Tom is working on a another version of "Age Of Napoleon" that will probable not be out for another week.

Star Drek is still going through testing. Going off of some of the comments on the forum I'm guessing bulldog may make some changes before there through.
Which leaves the "War for Eldorado"
I'll contact the designer and see if he is interested in doing some play testing with me. Is anyone interested in joining a game?(Bulldog, Rick)



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
4.015137