RE: Beta testing? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> The Operational Art of War IV



Message

sPzAbt653 -> RE: Beta testing? (12/4/2015 6:29:12 PM)

quote:

it's obvious that someone has to check all(ALL, not only the new scenarios) the scenarios to make sure they REALLY work in TOAWIV,


You've been around a lot longer than I have, so surely you know that scenarios are the responsibility of the designer. There isn't anyone at Matrix that sits around checking scenarios.

If the original designer doesn't test a scenario with a new version of the game, then it is up to us players to mod if needed and post that somewhere.



BigDuke66 -> RE: Beta testing? (12/4/2015 9:48:00 PM)

Well for a publisher it isn't nearly as easy as that, if there are scenarios not working who will be blamed, the designer or Matrix?
I would blame Matrix because it's their job to check Third party stuff that they take into the game and then take money for it, it's not too muhc to expect some quality control.

So there is obviously the need to check them all, but I wouldn't lay that on the shoulders of Matrix but of the beta testers, if you test the engine you always have to go through the scenarios, it's mandatory as a single scenario is unlikely to cover everything that the engine offers and so you simply have to use many if not all scenarios for a proper engine test, and by doing that you can right away test the scenarios too.

BTW Frontpage says big and fat BETA TEST, and the text within is "Thanks for your interest in becoming a beta tester for The Operational Art of War IV".
If all that is wrong someone should change it.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: Beta testing? (12/4/2015 11:00:31 PM)

The game just isn't ready for beta testing yet. We're working to get it to that point, though.



larryfulkerson -> RE: Beta testing? (12/4/2015 11:16:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
The game just isn't ready for beta testing yet. We're working to get it to that point, though.

I must be confused. I thought that's what I was doing all this time. Am I just a scenario tester now?



rhinobones -> RE: Beta testing? (12/4/2015 11:30:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
Am I just a scenario tester now?


Not just any scenario tester, but a TOAW IV scenario tester. Sounds like a pretty sweet job to me!!

Regards, RhinoBones



larryfulkerson -> RE: Beta testing? (12/4/2015 11:36:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rhinobones
quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
Am I just a scenario tester now?

Not just any scenario tester, but a TOAW IV scenario tester. Sounds like a pretty sweet job to me!!

Regards, RhinoBones

It's actually a lot of fun. I spend about 18 hours at my computer each day and have for the last four years or
so. I HAVE to take time off to eat and sleep. I feel like the captain of a combat ship, sleeping in naps, eating
standing up, solving problems by instinct. I'm glad I'm retired and can do the rest of my life this way. It's
giving me something useful to do with the rest of my life.



BigDuke66 -> RE: Beta testing? (12/5/2015 9:59:01 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

The game just isn't ready for beta testing yet. We're working to get it to that point, though.

I see, I simply had accepted that the beta was running because of the frontpage & that the original aim was a release this year.
To be honest I don't mind that it doesn't release this year, that goal sounded to ambitious from the start, I just had a beta test were the game could have really used at least some more weeks but the release was scheduled to benefit from Christmas.



r6kunz -> RE: Beta testing? (12/5/2015 11:58:45 AM)

Sorry Steve.That was actually a quote from Larry in post #5 above.



pz501 -> RE: Beta testing? (12/5/2015 4:01:15 PM)

Thought I'd take the chance, and so I applied to help test TOAW IV (using the form), and update the one scenario I designed that's included with TOAW III.

I figure it can't hurt to try, and that anybody's chances are at least 50-50.

I've also sent the suggested email as well, and I'll just have to see how things go....reply or no reply, and acceptance or rejection, at least I'll know that I've made the offer, and that's good enough for me.

EDIT: Just a few seconds ago I got an auto response from Tamas, saying he'll be out of the office until December 7th, so the earliest anyone is going to hear from him would be after that date, I think.



larryfulkerson -> RE: Beta testing? (12/5/2015 4:09:40 PM)

quote:

at least I'll know that I've made the offer, and that's good enough for me.

I've got my fingers crossed for you my friend.



hellfish6 -> RE: Beta testing? (12/5/2015 6:13:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Just to clarify, there is no Beta. Instead, scenario designers are invited to submit scenarios for approval and designer admission to the IV Development Forum. See here : http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3898970


I submitted a scenario, and was invited to join the beta.



scout1 -> RE: Beta testing? (12/10/2015 10:34:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

The game just isn't ready for beta testing yet. We're working to get it to that point, though.


Outta curiosity then, why is the site listing a sign up for beta testers for this game then ?



Curtis Lemay -> RE: Beta testing? (12/11/2015 12:50:41 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: scout1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

The game just isn't ready for beta testing yet. We're working to get it to that point, though.


Outta curiosity then, why is the site listing a sign up for beta testers for this game then ?


What site? It's not on this board anywhere - while there is a sign up for scenario designers.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: Beta testing? (12/11/2015 2:58:39 AM)

quote:

What site? It's not on this board anywhere


Its been brought to our attention - click on 'Home' at the top of this page, and on the left side of that page, near the bottom, is an advert for Beta Testers.



larryfulkerson -> RE: Beta testing? (12/11/2015 3:28:42 AM)

It's got an operational NDA signature button and everything. This looks like it's official and everything.

[image]local://upfiles/16287/0C8E614BE9FE43F39EFA18607E763F86.jpg[/image]



larryfulkerson -> RE: Beta testing? (1/11/2016 12:41:46 PM)

It's time for another update in the developers diary. Thomas Harvey finally captured Tokyo so we've
concluded our Pacific at War game and now we're trying to flush out some invalid parent errors
so we're playing Korea '50-'51 and I'm the UN player. We're on T4 and Thomas is still pushing
south into south korea and I'm scrambling to try to form some front lines north of Pusan to stem the
flow of communists. I've just received the 25th Inf Div as reinforcements so I've pushed them into the
front lines and I'm expecting miracles from them.

Also, the playtest on my B41 scenario continues. I'm adding 5 Soviet strategic targets for the
Axis to bomb. The targets are out near the Urals so there's going to have to be substantial progress
to bomb them but the drop in production is worth the effort.

[ More news about PAW ]:
Thomas is adding subchasers and other smaller ships to act as escorts for the LCU's that are embarked
on ships. We've found that the unescorted LCU's were going along without being intercepted for the
most part while the ships were intercepted almost all the time so a change is needed in the priority
routine to give the LCU's more sea INT "weight". Or something like that. Also, Thomas wants to add
some strategic targets to the Japanese home islands for the B-29's to have something to do. When
the changes are made we're going to restart to test them.

Ralph logs on every once in a while. We're glad to see him.



larryfulkerson -> RE: Beta testing? (1/11/2016 12:46:55 PM)

I decided to attach the Barbarosa '41 v.4.9 scenario here so you guys can play with it too. Just rename the file as a zip
and unzip it.

EDIT: Hey you guys......I think maybe this scenario has the Soviet replacement rates all zeros and that won't work ingame. You
can edit it yourselves to give some replacement rates or you can wait for the version 10 to come out either way.



mllange -> RE: Beta testing? (1/13/2016 7:40:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

I decided to attach the Barbarosa '41 v.4.9 scenario here so you guys can play with it too. Just rename the file as a zip
and unzip it.


Thanks Larry, I'll give it a run.



larryfulkerson -> RE: Beta testing? (1/14/2016 12:16:13 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: nim8or
quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
I decided to attach the Barbarosa '41 v.4.9 scenario here so you guys can play with it too. Just rename the file as a zip
and unzip it.

Thanks Larry, I'll give it a run.

I would be really interested in hearing about your experiences with it. Your first impressions. Be honest. Really. Give us a
review as it were.



mllange -> RE: Beta testing? (1/14/2016 8:45:09 PM)

I'll jot down some notes as I make my way through.



larryfulkerson -> RE: Beta testing? (1/15/2016 4:13:28 AM)

Time for another update. In my Korea '50-'51 game with Thomas Harvey I've made some landings at Inchon and the North
Korean's in South Korea have started streaming north to try not to get trapped in the south. He left a screen to hold the periimeter
and just moved everybody else north along the roads and rails. So I'm in pursuit and I'm wondering if I ought to stop at the 38th
parallel or not. There's a chance that China will come into the fight if I invade the north korean area and that might be interesting to
see if that works like it's supposed to.

In my B41 game with Thomas he has gotten his Soviets to start forming front lines already in T8 and the character of the game
is changing. It's no longer slash and dash round 'em up and finish 'em off. Now it's WWI-style warfare with actual front lines with
trenches and everything. My advance has stalled and the lines have formed and it's slow going measuring progress by the hex.

I'm getting the urge to mod the Korea '50-'51 scenario to change the max rounds per battle to 3 instead of 99 like it is now. I did
one, ( 1 ) three-dot attack and it burned the rest of my combat rounds. That needs to change. Also, this scenario just cries out for
some North Korean Strategic targets for the UN troops to bomb.

No parent invalid errors yet.



larryfulkerson -> RE: Beta testing? (1/18/2016 12:55:47 AM)

Time for another update in the Developers Diary.
Thomas Harvey and I are playtesting Korea '50-51 trying to flesh out an invalid parent error and so far no errors were found. But
we're having a blast. At least I am. It's T17 and I've landed at Inchon and spead out from there to the NE and captured Seoul and
the environs. And on the East Coast the coastal road is being cleared by Marines supported by South Korean infantry and some RCT's
put together in the heat of the moment. I'm trying to get organized in the midst of a huge push to the north all along the front lines
stretching across the waist of the peninsula. I expect the Chinese to interviene sometime soon and cause a larger war yet.

I've modded the Korea '50-'51 scenario and made a version 4.1 that I've attached to this post so you guys can try it out if you'd like. Just rename the file as a zip and unzip it. I've rearranged the formations so that the HQ unit is the first in the list.

I set the MRPB ( mas rounds per battle ) to 3 instead of 99 so there's no more turn burn. Also, I've moved the HQ of each formation
to be the first unit in the list so you could better tell where the different formations start in the OOB and so on. I was tempted to put
some strategic targets in the far north but decided to playtest these changes first because it might have been rendered unbalanced
if there's no turn burn. You never know.

Also in the B41 game I've got going with Thomas ( PBEM ) he's succeeded in putting up wall-to-wall front lines with stout units
and the game has decended into WWI-style fighting. It's ugly and not a little bit boring compared to the early turns but I'm making
slow progress. This game will probably be a Soviet victory. I can tell that much already.



Lobster -> RE: Beta testing? (1/18/2016 1:14:53 AM)

Is there any news about the game, TOAW4?



larryfulkerson -> RE: Beta testing? (1/18/2016 1:17:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster
Is there any news about the game, TOAW4?

I've posted an open letter to Bob asking for information, either for the team or public, and there's been no
reply yet. But it's less than an hour old at this point. Don't get your knickers in a twist.



larryfulkerson -> RE: Beta testing? (1/18/2016 1:49:44 AM)

quote:

Don't get your knickers in a twist.

I hope that remark didn't put your knickers in a twist. It wasn't meant too. Lame joke.



larryfulkerson -> RE: Beta testing? (1/18/2016 2:15:18 AM)

quote:

Is there any news about the game, TOAW4?

We've had a reply from Bob. The project is still a go for lift-off and Ralph is still working on it, it's just that it's not ready yet
for prime time. Sorry about that. But it IS news. Maybe Bob will post something here. .



Lobster -> RE: Beta testing? (1/18/2016 3:02:32 AM)

http://onlineslangdictionary.com/meaning-definition-of/get-(one%27s)-knickers-in-a-twist



Zap -> RE: Beta testing? (1/18/2016 11:40:39 PM)

All I know is that would be quite uncomfortable to have twisted underwear[:)]



larryfulkerson -> RE: Beta testing? (1/19/2016 6:52:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zap
All I know is that would be quite uncomfortable to have twisted underwear

I got my knickers in a twist last night. I received some moves from Thomas for our B41 game and he informed
me that my HE-111's are fully in range of his targets and that the reason I couldn't strike them was that they were
invisible. D'oh. So I thought the easiest fix was to bump up the theater recon value to 100. There was already an
event for that purpose I just needed to change it from 10 to 100. And then do a restart of the game.

But now I'm having second thoughts about using that method to fix the invisibility. Anybody have a better idea?

EDIT: I'm talking about those 5 strategic targets I installed.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: Beta testing? (1/19/2016 7:37:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zap
All I know is that would be quite uncomfortable to have twisted underwear

I got my knickers in a twist last night. I received some moves from Thomas for our B41 game and he informed
me that my HE-111's are fully in range of his targets and that the reason I couldn't strike them was that they were
invisible. D'oh. So I thought the easiest fix was to bump up the theater recon value to 100. There was already an
event for that purpose I just needed to change it from 10 to 100. And then do a restart of the game.

But now I'm having second thoughts about using that method to fix the invisibility. Anybody have a better idea?

EDIT: I'm talking about those 5 strategic targets I installed.


You can put some dedicated air units on them (in garrison). Then they will be visible so long as the recon level is >0. I use this in my Soviet Union 1941 scenario.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.6875