RE: ETA? (Full Version)

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



Message

ncc1701e -> RE: ETA? (10/27/2016 7:23:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

There is no built-in equipment editor.


Sorry but this, I really do not understand or I am lost with what you said in the "TOAW IV features" thread.

In the third bullet of the part "V. New Editor features", I could read:

quote:


• Scenario modified equipment files (including the new naval equipment file) are now saved with the scenario and save files. So, no more mismatching equipment files by players.


As such, my understanding was that the equipment files are now better integrated and that this would be the case also for editing them directly inside the game interface.

Since there are two of them now (air/ground and naval), is it still the TOAW3 Viewer/Equipment Editor that needs to be used if compatible?

I through, with a revamped UI, that we could get rid off third party tools and integrate everything needed in-game to design a scenario.

My fear is that third party tools are no longer supported/adapted to Windows OS evolution whereas the game is.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: ETA? (10/27/2016 8:25:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

I don't understand the first question. There is no built-in equipment editor.


In other words, does the revamped UI apply to the in-game scenario editor and ease the creation of scenario?

I could think of many small points like:
. Window size increase
. Less click to do
. Less scrolling to do

This would ease the selection of an equipment in the equipment list to fill an unit TO&E for example.

We could also imagine a radio button for selection of each equipment in the equipment list. I select all the equipment that I need in one single window and I have a button to click on that will automatically create a new unit with what equipments were selected.

I also wish a single window showing all units of one country allowing easy copy/paste of what is missing.


The new Force Editor will not be finished and will have to wait till a further update (this was mentioned earlier). Otherwise, dialogs in the Editor are to the same standard as the ones in the game. Scrolling will be eased by scroll bars where appropriate. Last two items had never even been suggested, to my knowledge. They can go on the, nearly infinite, wish list.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: ETA? (10/27/2016 8:29:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

There is no built-in equipment editor.


Sorry but this, I really do not understand or I am lost with what you said in the "TOAW IV features" thread.

In the third bullet of the part "V. New Editor features", I could read:

quote:


• Scenario modified equipment files (including the new naval equipment file) are now saved with the scenario and save files. So, no more mismatching equipment files by players.


As such, my understanding was that the equipment files are now better integrated and that this would be the case also for editing them directly inside the game interface.

Since there are two of them now (air/ground and naval), is it still the TOAW3 Viewer/Equipment Editor that needs to be used if compatible?

I through, with a revamped UI, that we could get rid off third party tools and integrate everything needed in-game to design a scenario.

My fear is that third party tools are no longer supported/adapted to Windows OS evolution whereas the game is.


Both statements were correct. There is no in-game Equipment Editor, and the equipment files (created by external editors) are included in the scenario/game saves.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: ETA? (10/27/2016 8:32:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe 98


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster
But it will still be a DOS game made in 1998 at it's heart. If that is really the problem you have with it then you are going to be unhappy with it because that most probably cannot be changed without remaking the entire game.




Most airlines use old computer mainframes from well before 1998. We airline users don't see black screens with green text. Rather, we users see apps and an easy to use interface on our computer screens.
.


I'm still stumped as to what you are talking about. Black screens and green text? If you've got a gripe, please make it clear.



larryfulkerson -> RE: ETA? (10/27/2016 10:20:36 PM)

quote:

There is no in-game Equipment Editor, and the equipment files (created by external editors) are included in the scenario/game saves

I usually start with an existing one and modify it. It's all in XML so it's not hard at all. I'm probably saying that because I've studied XML
and am familiar with it and used to work as a programmer, but really, it's just text and easy to modify.

I especially like the Naval equipment files because you can designate turrets on your ships now. Forward facing guns, left and right
side guns, and so on. It's actually fun.

EDIT: Here's some of the contents from the naval equipment file for Pacific At War v.3.4:

<ACOW_EXE>
<NAVAL>
<RIVERINE DURABILITY=082939 ARMOR=051987 AGILITY=210 ACCURACY=082939 SPEED=4200 />
<LIGHT DURABILITY=082939 ARMOR=051987 AGILITY=210 ACCURACY=082939 SPEED=10890 />
<MEDIUM DURABILITY=114241 ARMOR=248594 AGILITY=160 ACCURACY=114241 SPEED=9956 />
<HEAVY DURABILITY=159445 ARMOR=334704 AGILITY=75 ACCURACY=159445 SPEED=7778 />
<CARRIER DURABILITY=225100 ARMOR=203395 AGILITY=93 ACCURACY=225100 SPEED=9334 />
<EMBARKED DURABILITY=25000000 ARMOR=0 AGILITY=18 ACCURACY=25000000 SPEED=4200 />
<Akagi DURABILITY=90 ARMOR=144 AGILITY=95 ACCURACY=90 SPEED=9801 />
<Kaga DURABILITY=90 ARMOR=153 AGILITY=84 ACCURACY=90 SPEED=8712 />
<Soryu DURABILITY=65 ARMOR=29 AGILITY=102 ACCURACY=65 SPEED=10579 />
<Hiryu DURABILITY=70 ARMOR=50 AGILITY=102 ACCURACY=70 SPEED=10579 />
<Yorktown DURABILITY=81 ARMOR=69 AGILITY=96 ACCURACY=81 SPEED=9956 />
<Kongo DURABILITY=95 ARMOR=191 AGILITY=90 ACCURACY=95 SPEED=9334 />
<Tone DURABILITY=45 ARMOR=106 AGILITY=175 ACCURACY=45 SPEED=10890 />
<NewOrleans DURABILITY=40 ARMOR=114 AGILITY=164 ACCURACY=40 SPEED=10174 />




Curtis Lemay -> RE: ETA? (10/28/2016 12:25:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

I especially like the Naval equipment files because you can designate turrets on your ships now. Forward facing guns, left and right
side guns, and so on. It's actually fun.


There is no such ability, Larry. Not sure what you could be thinking of.



larryfulkerson -> RE: ETA? (10/28/2016 12:46:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
I especially like the Naval equipment files because you can designate turrets on your ships now. Forward facing guns, left and right
side guns, and so on. It's actually fun.

There is no such ability, Larry. Not sure what you could be thinking of.

I could have sworn I saw an NQP file that did that. I'm probably thinking of a different game. Also, maybe I should just shut up.



Lobster -> RE: ETA? (10/28/2016 4:03:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe 98


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster
But it will still be a DOS game made in 1998 at it's heart. If that is really the problem you have with it then you are going to be unhappy with it because that most probably cannot be changed without remaking the entire game.




Most airlines use old computer mainframes from well before 1998. We airline users don't see black screens with green text. Rather, we users see apps and an easy to use interface on our computer screens.
.



Wut?



Meyer1 -> RE: ETA? (10/28/2016 4:49:01 AM)

Many thanks to Larry for slipping some info for the people.



Fred98 -> RE: ETA? (10/28/2016 7:23:15 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster


Wut?


Many airlines use ancient computers that have black screens with green writing.

Some of us passengers use airline web sites and apps. The user interface is not black screens with green writing.

So, if the software underneath the game is ancient, the user interface can still be made to be slick and easy to use.

The testers are not allowed to show us so we cannot know. When the game is being marketed the developers needs to show us the user interface and compare it with TOAW 3.


.
.



larryfulkerson -> RE: ETA? (10/28/2016 7:31:01 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
I especially like the Naval equipment files because you can designate turrets on your ships now. Forward facing guns, left and right
side guns, and so on. It's actually fun.

There is no such ability, Larry. Not sure what you could be thinking of.

I could have sworn I saw an NQP file that did that. I'm probably thinking of a different game. Also, maybe I should just shut up.

I finally figured out what I was thinking of. I was earlier tinkering with scenario #76 of WITP-AE in the editor and they DO have
what are called devices that you can designate to be turrets with how many guns of what type per turret and what facing it has and
so on. We need to put something like that on the TOAW wishlist.

[image]local://upfiles/16287/805126DE48714AED867D8D0BBD9400B3.jpg[/image]



larryfulkerson -> RE: ETA? (10/28/2016 8:05:03 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe 98
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster
But it will still be a DOS game made in 1998 at it's heart. If that is really the problem you have with it then you are going to be unhappy with it because that most probably cannot be changed without remaking the entire game.

Most airlines use old computer mainframes from well before 1998. We airline users don't see black screens with green text. Rather, we users see apps and an easy to use interface on our computer screens.

I'm still stumped as to what you are talking about. Black screens and green text? If you've got a gripe, please make it clear.

WITP-AE has a DOS-like quality and people still play it. Religiously.

[image]local://upfiles/16287/0703E8A4123241CB907AF61BF84D26E8.jpg[/image]



Fred98 -> RE: ETA? (10/28/2016 9:05:31 AM)

War in the Pacific has a wonderful modern interface.

TOAW has a terrible interface. Being based on a 1998 game is not relevant.



Lobster -> RE: ETA? (10/28/2016 1:38:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe 98


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster


Wut?


Many airlines use ancient computers that have black screens with green writing.

Some of us passengers use airline web sites and apps. The user interface is not black screens with green writing.

So, if the software underneath the game is ancient, the user interface can still be made to be slick and easy to use.

The testers are not allowed to show us so we cannot know. When the game is being marketed the developers needs to show us the user interface and compare it with TOAW 3.


.
.


Wow. Just wow. [:D]

Edit:
You are missing some really basic understanding in computer technology. You are trying to say that a Model T should go as fast as a Ferrari simply because it's driving on the same road.

That airline mainframe that you keep bringing up needs a graphical interface to present something even remotely resembling your smartphone/computer/tablet/whatever screen. Why should they bother with one when they don't need it? Not having worked for an airline I really have to wonder if they ALL use what you claim.

Your digital device that shows you that fancy screen has the computing power via the cpu and gpu to throw up that fancy looking interface and the interface is designed around all of that computing power. But, if you took an earlier 1998 software program designed for a less powerful computer you would have to redesign the entire thing to make it look like the stuff that runs on the newer more powerful hardware (cpu,gpu). That means rewriting EVERYTHING. Ground up. Taking the Model T and throwing it all, lock stock and barrel, into the crusher.

Bottom line, if you want to make a 1998 game act like a 2016 game you are going to have to build a 2016 game. The 1998 does not have the framework you need to hang the fancy stuff from to do it. Maybe if you had enough time and monkeys and a big room they could get it done, eh?

Or a crapload of money you may never see again.



Lobster -> RE: ETA? (10/28/2016 1:40:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe 98

War in the Pacific has a wonderful modern interface.

TOAW has a terrible interface. Being based on a 1998 game is not relevant.


There are a plethora of games released yearly based on 1998 and earlier formats. Just say you don't like the game and get on with life.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: ETA? (10/28/2016 2:59:40 PM)

I still have no idea what his complaint is. Saying it has a terrible interface or a 1988 interface tells no one anything.

Be specific!! What is your gripe?



ncc1701e -> RE: ETA? (10/28/2016 9:37:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

quote:

There is no in-game Equipment Editor, and the equipment files (created by external editors) are included in the scenario/game saves

I usually start with an existing one and modify it. It's all in XML so it's not hard at all. I'm probably saying that because I've studied XML
and am familiar with it and used to work as a programmer, but really, it's just text and easy to modify.


[&o] Understood, a free XML editor may do the work.



ncc1701e -> RE: ETA? (10/28/2016 9:41:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

The new Force Editor will not be finished and will have to wait till a further update (this was mentioned earlier). Otherwise, dialogs in the Editor are to the same standard as the ones in the game. Scrolling will be eased by scroll bars where appropriate. Last two items had never even been suggested, to my knowledge. They can go on the, nearly infinite, wish list.


Sorry, I have missed this. At least, is it an update planned for version IV?

Regarding adding these items to the wish list, if possible, I would say yes. Just one thing, who is deciding the priority to give to all those items? Is it you?



larryfulkerson -> RE: ETA? (10/28/2016 9:45:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e
quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
quote:

There is no in-game Equipment Editor, and the equipment files (created by external editors) are included in the scenario/game saves

I usually start with an existing one and modify it. It's all in XML so it's not hard at all. I'm probably saying that because I've studied XML
and am familiar with it and used to work as a programmer, but really, it's just text and easy to modify.

Understood, a free XML editor may do the work.

I use Notepad++ and you can get your free copy here:

https://notepad-plus-plus.org/



ncc1701e -> RE: ETA? (10/28/2016 9:49:55 PM)

Thanks Larry, will try it.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: ETA? (10/28/2016 10:28:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

The new Force Editor will not be finished and will have to wait till a further update (this was mentioned earlier). Otherwise, dialogs in the Editor are to the same standard as the ones in the game. Scrolling will be eased by scroll bars where appropriate. Last two items had never even been suggested, to my knowledge. They can go on the, nearly infinite, wish list.


Sorry, I have missed this. At least, is it an update planned for version IV?


Yes. Hopefully there will be many.

quote:

Just one thing, who is deciding the priority to give to all those items? Is it you?


Hmm. Good question. Tamas is in charge, but Ralph is the guy who has to do it (discounting the limited contributions from me), so he sort of has a veto. So far, the only item for sure on the agenda is to finish the Force Editor. The release has priority over planning anything beyond it.



Lobster -> RE: ETA? (10/29/2016 9:24:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson


WITP-AE has a DOS-like quality and people still play it. Religiously.




Holy overpriced Batman. At $80.00 a shot you have to be a religious zealot to buy it. It's at least 7 years old and they want that much for it? Give me a break. Really. Give me a price break so I can afford it.



ncc1701e -> RE: ETA? (10/30/2016 7:50:09 PM)

If you could wait for the next sales, WITP-AE was 50% off last year.
http://www.matrixgames.com/news/1851/The.Holiday.Sale.is.here!



Catch21 -> RE: ETA? (11/7/2016 12:58:11 AM)

Well lads, it's that time of year again, Remembrance Day, Thanksgiving and Christmas. And some of us are looking at our gaming budgets.

Can we get some indication of whether it's worth keeping anything in reserve to buy TOAW IV between 11/11 and end of year (that's this year , to be clear) or should we look to go with some other purchase elsewhere?

Times are tough, a heads-up would be appreciated. Thanks.



LeeChard -> RE: ETA? (11/7/2016 12:54:57 PM)

The site hasn't been moved to 'coming soon' yet.
I'm not expecting anything this Christmas [:(]



larryfulkerson -> RE: ETA? (11/7/2016 1:00:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ranger5355
The site hasn't been moved to 'coming soon' yet.
I'm not expecting anything this Christmas [:(]

I will neither confirm nor deny that I have seen your post nor that have replied to it.



Catch21 -> RE: ETA? (11/7/2016 1:01:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ranger5355

The site hasn't been moved to 'coming soon' yet. I'm not expecting anything this Christmas [:(]
Yes, true, but we're well used now to news spreading somewhat 'glacially'.

Doesn't mean there isn't frenetic activity behind the scenes with all hands on deck to get TOAWIV out the door in time for Santa.



Catch21 -> RE: ETA? (11/7/2016 12:37:20 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ranger5355
The site hasn't been moved to 'coming soon' yet. I'm not expecting anything this Christmas [:(]

I will neither confirm nor deny that I have seen your post nor have I replied to it.
It's OK Larry, we know you're struggling to conceal your excitement about the imminent release.[>:]

All despite the NDA having you trussed or tied up- pick your season- either like a Thanksgiving Turkey or a Christmas present...

No need to reply, we know you haven't read this either.[;)]



larryfulkerson -> RE: ETA? (11/7/2016 1:06:18 PM)

I'm reminded of the time I went to the last football game I would ever see in high school.
All the seniors, me included, were in attendance at Flowing Wells high school established
for the indians at one time but incorporated into the Tucson School District at some
point in the early part of the 20th century. It was a really good school with about 250 in
my graduation class. Anyway, I tried to memorize the occasion knowing it was the last
time I would see some of these people. A lot of the guys had already joined the military
rather than wait for the draft, me included. A lot of us hung around after the game
walking the halls of the campus one last time out to the parking lot and said our
goodbys. I've never seen any of those guys again. I know of two that died in Vietnam.
One was Charles Frederick Fenter if memory serves. He was shot down over Laos but they
made it to Thailand before the plane went down in a ball of flames. He's listed
as missing still I guess. Last I heard he was being promoted along with his peers and
had made Master Sgt when I last saw his name on the wall 20 years later. I must
suppose I would have been an E-8 or so if I had stayed in, too cause he was about
my age, maybe a year younger. He lived here in Tucson, I went to see his mother
and she took my picture for his scrapbook. I gave her my autograph. I called her
first before I went over there. Some people don't want any ties to the past. I think
I can understand that. A lot.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: ETA? (11/7/2016 2:24:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

... were in attendance at Flowing Wells high school established
for the indians at one time but incorporated into the Tucson School District at some
point in the early part of the 20th century.


Gee, Larry. I went to Palo Verde HS in Tuscon for a couple of years (living at Davis-Monthan AFB). Moved back to Arkansas before I graduated, though.



Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.828125