RE: When? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames



Message


Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: When? (5/2/2011 7:55:53 PM)

Sorry for being late this month. The Phillies were on TV last night and their game ran to 14 innings. Living in Hawaii, I only get to see about 10 of their 162 regular season games. After the game finished there was a very rare thunder and lightning storm in Waikiki and all the flashes in the sky made me nervous, so I shut down my computer for the night as a precaution.

====================

May 1, 2011 Status Report for Matrix Games’ MWIF Forum

Accomplishments of April 2011

Project Management
I monitored all the threads in the MWIF World in Flames forum daily.

There are 73 bugs remaining in the sequence of play. I had the count down to a low of 71 this month. Half of these concern Production Planning (30) and Production (5), with the latter almost certainly caused by the problems in the former.

Rolf has been working on converting some old CWIF code so it will run under NetPlay. Mitchell’s home and work life have consumed his time this past month, leaving none for MWIF.

Hardware and Software
The open items for Theme Engine are: (1) scroll bars for the detailed map, and (2) its inability to display detailed listings of file directories (i.e., the dates and stuff when opening or saving a file). Neither of these is a crucial.

Beta Testing
I released versions 8.01.01 (23 fixes), 8.01.02 (5 fixes), 8.01.03 (9 fixes), 8.01.04 (10 fixes), 8.01.05 (17 fixes), 8.01.06 (27 fixes), 8.01.07 (15 fixes), and 8.02.00 (12 fixes) to the beta testers last month. I’ll upload version 8.02.01 (10 fixes) later today. This totals 9 new versions and 128 fixes, which is above my average number of fixes for a month. I changed the numbering to 8.02.00 because the number of patches was growing too large.

I’ve decided to give you a look into what I mean by fixes. I usually try to write a summary of all those fixes, but for this month I’ll let you read to gory details. Doing this took me very little time, since I prepare these lists for the beta testers every time I upload a new version. The full set of changes for the month is appended to this report.

Beta Testing Team - 2011
Just in case there any misconceptions about this, I do not work alone. Over the years there were/are more than 60 people (unpaid volunteers) who have been involved with beta testing and other aspects of MWIF. I have been terribly remiss in not mentioning them more often. For many, I could write pages of text and still only lightly cover their contributions. In the interest of brevity, for this report I have restricted myself to just the people who have been active in 2011 (and I truly hope I haven’t omitted anyone). Furthermore, I have imposed a limit on myself of 1 sentence per person. So, in alphabetical order:

Aaron (newest beta tester) tests the program 10+ hours a day, everyday, since he started a couple of weeks ago.
Adam (beta testing many years) has done extensive work authoring new land unit writeups.
Bjorn (beta testing several years) tested Barbarossa, (by-passing innumerable bugs) to completion, amongst other accomplishments.
Christian (beta testing several years) tests a variety of phases in the sequence of play.
Dave (beta testing < 1 year) testing naval combat.
Eric (beta testing many years) tests a variety of phases in the sequence of play.
Geoff (beta testing many years) tests Guadalcanal and naval operations heavily.
Giancarlo (new beta tester) just getting started.
Graham (beta testing many years) originated the idea of unit writeups and did all the original ones for all the air units and the 67 HQs.
Jeffrey (new beta tester) just getting started.
Lars (CWIF beta tester) immediately tests every new version as soon as I upload it, diligently checking whether I have fixed the bugs he has previously reported.
Matthew (new beta tester) just getting started.
Michael (beta testing many years) tests deep into scenarios, (by-passing innumerable bugs), especially land operations, to the point that major powers are conquered, or surrender, and/or are liberated.
Mitchell (programming help) has worked on the NetPlay communications technical code and resolved very difficult problems with Theme Engine.
Nils (beta testing many years) a very thorough tester of naval operations who double checks that a bug is actually fixed after I say I have fixed it.
Patrice (CWIF beta tester) has assumed all responsibility for the map and unit data, in addition to being my primary liaison with Harry Rowland at Australian Design Group.
Paul (CWIF beta tester) one of my main resources for WIF FE rule clarifications.
Peter (CWIF beta tester) working on the AI Opponent scripts.
Rob J. (beta testing many years) has assumed complete responsibility for the naval unit writeups and has written the vast majority of them.
Rob W. (new beta tester) tests a variety of phases in the sequence of play.
Rolf (programming help) has worked on the AIO parser and converting CWIF code for use in NetPlay.
Thomas (beta testing < 1 year) tests a variety of phases in the sequence of play.

Without the help of these individuals, and all the others in previous years, I would never have been able to get this monster of a game as close to being finished as I have. Truly, giving them sufficient praise and thanks is beyond me.

Saved Games
Nothing new.

Map and Units
Rob and Adam continue to send me new and/or updated naval and land unit writeups, respectively.

Scenarios and Optional Rules
Nothing new.

MWIF Game Engine and CWIF Conversion
Did some work on getting Search and Seizure to function. It can now identify when a search and seizure is possible and which major powers get to make those decisions. I still need to write new code to effect the results of search and seizure. Because that is closely related to Production Planning and am going to wait on working on the rest of S & S until I have PP bug-free.

Player Interface
Made some good progress on Head2Head (a.k.a., HotSeat) play with the help of Orm.

Internet - NetPlay
Rolf is working on the conversion of CWIF’s Windows Messaging code for communicating over the internet with MWIF’s Game Record Logs. I need to process the set of source code changes he sent me today.

PBEM
Nothing new.

Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Peter continues to made excellent progress on the geographic breakdown for the AI Opponent with advice from Patrice and myself. To date, he has finished 12 of the 16 TOs: Western Europe, Eastern Europe (up to Siberia), Mediterranean, East Africa, West Africa, Middle East, South Asia (i.e., India), East Asia (i.e. China & Japan), Southeast Asia, Oceania (i.e., Australia), Pacific Ocean, and North Asia (i.e., Siberia). All that remains are two TOs in the Americas and two in the Atlantic Ocean.

I still need to pick up the LAIO parser where Rolf left off. But that won’t happen until I kill off the last of the sequence of play bugs.

Player’s Manual
I made a couple of changes to bring Rules as Coded (RAC) up-to-date with MWIF deviations from Rules as Written (RAW). I also inserted the bibliographies from Adam Scott and Wosung on their writeups for the land units.

Tutorials, Training Videos, and Context Sensitive Help
Nothing new.

Historical Video, Music, and Sound Effects
Nothing new.

Marketing
Nothing new.

Communications
Nothing new.



Changes Since Versions 08.01.00
(as of April 8, 2011)

(1) I fixed the FTC problem with moving a minor country HQ into a minor country aligned to the same side (Michael, 7.01.03, Post #14; Michael, 8.01.00, Post #1).

(2) Modified the Overstacked form so only 1 unit can be selected at a time (Orm, 8.01.00, Post #17).

(3) Modified the text in RAC to clarify when rebasing a carrier air unit does not count against air mission limits (Orm, 8.01.00, Post #20). I also edited the text for the change in US entry marker distributions (Nils, 8.01.00, Post #30). The latter modification required a change in section 10 of the Players Manual which lists all the deviations from RAW.

(4) Added Auxiliary Cruisers to the Selectable Units form filters (Michael, 8.01.00, Post #35).

(5) Modified the code so the units that voluntarily abort from a naval combat force all units on the same side to abort except those belonging to a neutral major power or are uncommitted submarines (Nils, 8.01.00, Post #48; Doktor, 8.01.00, Post #82).

(6) Added code so carrier air units aboard carriers do not count towards foreign troop commitments (Orm, 8.01.00, Post #16).

(7) Corrected the determination of which resources and factories are in play for Barbarossa (Eric, 8.01.00, Post #10). This should also fix any problem with same for the half map scenarios (Guadalcanal does not use production planning). There were two problems: (1) Ukraine was not being included in the list of resources because the Ukrainian units are not part of Barbarossa, and (2) too many resources and factories were available in the summary information (e.g., Germany was getting credit for all the resources and factories in Germany).

(8) I made about 50 edits to support head-to-head play. These should have no effect on the other modes of play, but should handle all the places where the side changes. The Switch Sides form should appear in all the correct places (Orm, 8.01.00, Post #18).

(9) Fixed a weakness in checking if a unit was on a carrier where old/damaged saved games could generate a fatal crash when restored.

(10) Fixed a bug in Flyouts where picking up a transported unit did not record the hex from which is was picked up correctly.

(11) Enabled using the Naval Review Details form for selecting carrier air units for rebasing (Orm, 8.01.00, Post #19).

(12) Corrected the air mission count so it is not reduced when a carrier air unit rebases to another carrier in the same sea area section box (Orm, 8.01.00, Post #21).

(13) Made a small change to the Anti-Aircraft Fire form to enable the buttons as soon as the form is shown (Orm, 8.01.00, Post #23).

(14) Fixed the problem with Previous/Next where it would always go to the last moved unit if that unit has movement points remaining (Michael, 8.01.00, Post #32). Now it only does that if the unit just performed an overrun.

(15) Restored the missing line of code so the movement points expended to reach a hex during land movement is displayed correctly (Orm, 8.01.00, Post #96).

(16) Fixed the bug with restoring a saved game in the naval combat phases where sometimes the deciding major power/side was wrong (Lars, 8.01.00, Post #54; Orm, 8.01.00, Post #63).

(17) Removed a couple of blinks from the Load Saved Game - which were very annoying (Grotius, 7.02.02, Post #30).

(18) I inserted a call to recompute all Foreign Troop Commitments after the last unit has been set up (RedoAllFTC). I am not sure if this was the problem, but I have found that saved games worked correctly in calculating FTC, so my guess is that adding the same call that is used when a game is restored should solve this problem (Peter, 8.01.00, Post #85; Orm, 8.01.00, Post #84).

(19) Removed some CWIF code which was redundant/conflicting with new code I had added for handling multiple DOWs on/by major powers (Michael, 5.03.02, Post #18; Orm, 8.00.06, Post #44).

(20) Added a check so that after a naval interception combat in which moving units were sunk, the sunk units are not part of the Continuing On Stack (Nils, 8.01.00, Post #41).

(21) Revised page 1 of tutorial 5 so it gives some information about ASW factors (first impressions from Dr. S).

(22) Standardized the order in which the calculations are made in the Spend Surprise Points form. This should correct the irregularities in the estimated results (Nils, 8.01.00, Post #46). I left intact the ability to apply columns shifts to both your own and the enemy’s attacks simultaneously. We had had a discussion about this previously and my decision was that a player may want to see the effect of applying both shifts before deciding where to spend the available surprise points.

(23) Fixed the bug in Naval Movement where intercepted naval units, when the interception attempt failed, disappeared (Nils, 8.01.00, Post #42; Michael, 8.01.00, Post #55; Lars, 8.01.00, Post #61; Doktor, 8.01.00, Posts #81 & #98; Orm, 8.01.00, Post #95).

Changes Since Versions 08.01.01 & 8.01.02
(as of April 10, 2011)

(1) Corrected the Theme Engine background colors when restoring a saved game (Peter, 8.01.01, Post #1).

(2) Fixed the problem with FTC between minor countries (Peter, 8.01.01, Post #2). The problem here was that Ethiopia is on the Allied side but the Ethiopian territorial units are on the Axis side.

(3) Added a check that the optional rules for pilots is being used before giving minor countries extra pilots when they enter the war (Lars, 8.01.01, Post #3).

(4) Removed the diagnostic messages for naval moves (Lars, 8.01.01, Post #3).

(5) Removed a couple of spurious blinks of the whole screen when a new game is created.



(6) Fixed the problem with determining maximum sea box section after units have already been dropped off in a previous sea area (Nils, 8.01.00, Post #37).

(7) Fixed the problem in Naval Movement where after the enemy declines to intercept and units are dropped off, a selected unit could not be unselected (Nils, 8.01.00, Post #38). This also fixed the problem with unselected units not appearing as part of the Continuing On Stack.

(8) Fixed the bugs in the Select Naval Combat form in which the name of the deciding major power was wrong (Lars, 8.01.01, Post #9).

(9) Corrected the Unit Menu processing so when a land based air unit is returned to a land hex using the Return From Whence, a call is made to check for enabling the end-of-phase button (Doktor, 8.01.00, Post #107).

(10) Fixed the problem with determining maximum sea box section after units have decided to stop after being intercepted (Doktor, 8.01.00, Post #108).

(11) Added a check for a DOW on a minor country that is already in the war so an aligning major power is not asked again. This change is preparatory for implementing 2 DOWs on the same minor country in a turn.

(12) Caused a DOW on the same minor by 2 major powers in the same impulse to cause 2 US Entry Chits to be drawn (Orm, 8.01.00, Posts #112 & #114).

(13) Added code to clear the Selectable Units form at the start of NavalCombatA/D (Lars, 8.01.01, Post #13).

(14) Fixed the bug with moving loaded naval transports using the Flyouts form (Michael, 8.01.02, #1).

Changes Since Versions 08.01.03
(as of April 12, 2011)

(1) Fixed a couple more problems in dropping off units after a naval interception. The units dropped off and those continuing on no longer double count the cost of entering the interception sea area (Nils, 8.01.00, Post #39).

(2) Replaced the icons for damaged oil resources and major ports so the diagonal slash is colored red as it should be (Michael, 8.01.00, Post #115).

(3) Fixed the bug in drawing captured major ports so they are now shown as damaged (Michael, 8.01.00, Posts #70 & #115).

(4) Fixed the bug where light cruisers were selected in the SelectUnits form by mistake (Michael, 8.01.03, Post #1).

(5) Fixed the bug with moving units by rail through Sweden (Michael, 8.01.03, Post #2).

(6) Fixed the problem with Poland not being aligned to the Commonwealth (Doktor, 8.01.03, Post #5).

(7) Fixed the problem in Production where the number of build points that Germany could save was incorrect (Doktor, 8.00.00, Post #18; Doktor, 8.01.00, Post #6).

(8) I added a warning message when moving naval units into a port causes overstacking (Michael, 8.00.08, Post #28). The player can either confirm the move and voluntarily cause overstacking, or not.

(9) Added a dozen or more land units writeups from Adam.

(10) Fixed the problem with Air Rebase where undoing air rebase moves could be used to overstack air units on a carrier (Orm, 8.01.00, Post #22). I am not sure if this fixes the other problem with carrier air units ending up in the wrong hexes (Orm, 8.01.00, Posts #24, #26, #27). Unless I hear otherwise, I am assuming it does.

Changes Since Versions 08.01.04
(as of April 17, 2011)

(1) Fixed the problem with modifying trade agreements not working (Lars, 8.01.04, Post #3).

(2) Enabled the Initiate Naval Combat form’s UnitData panel to show the summary information for all units in the sea area when the cursor is not over an individual unit (Michael, 8.00.,06, Post #13).

(3) Fixed the bug with Anti-aircraft fire (Doktor, 8.01.03, emailed game).

(4) Fixed the problem with Naval Air Support so supply is recalculated after each air unit is flown for naval interception combats (Nils, 8.01.00, Post #43).

(5) Fixed the problem with intercepted naval units where after a successful interception, the search roll was applied to the wrong side (Nils, 8.01.00, Post #40).

(6) Fixed the problem with artefacts appearing when moving units (Lars, 5.02.00, Post #5; Lars, 6.00.00, Post #24, and numerous others). I had a minor celebration after solving this. I had spent time on it in August and then 4 days straight in October with limited success (I could choose between incessant blinking or artefacts). This time I spent 4 more hours split between a late night and early morning stints and got it to perform as desired. In fact, screen refresh when moving the cursor around on the map appears smoother to my eye. Note that I still do not understand exactly what is going on. The internals of how Windows processes mouse interrupts and screen refreshes is enclosed in a black box from my point of view.

(7) Fixed a problem in air-to-air combat where carrier air units were returned to carriers prematurely. This only happened after a non-carrier air unit aborted from an air-to-air combat (Nils, 8.01.00, Post #45; Nils, 8.00.02, Post#14; Doktor, 8.00.00, Post # 2).

(8) Added code so carrier air units that are still flying at the end of a naval combat round perform a return to base digression. For clarity, this phase of the game is shown as “Return to Carriers”, although it executes using the return to base digression code ().

(9) Removed the check after combat losses in an air-to-air combat where bombers were cleared through because there were no enemy fighters. This check now only occurs at the start of an air-to-air combat round (Nils, 7.02.00, Post#43; Orm, Rule Questions, Post #721).

(10) I believe I fixed (in a previous version) the problem in Naval Combat where after both sides have aborted from a naval air combat, only one side got to return their units to base. The other side’s units still needed to abort, but the first side got to select another sea area for combat (Nils , 7.04.05, Post #17 ).

(11) Fixed a bug where carrier air units that had returned to their carriers were still marked as ‘flying’.

(12) Added a check so carrier air units are not shown in the Choose Carrier form in the list “Ineligible Carrier Units”.

(13) Fixed a bug in the Naval Combat Results form where carriers were shown transporting carrier air units that were “in the air”; that is, the carrier air units were flying in a naval air combat.

(14) Added a line of code so when convoys belonging to another country than the controlling major power are split, the newly created convoys have both the same Source Country and the same Current Country (Michael, 8.01.04, Post #).

(15) Added a check for carriers that have aborted during the current naval combat so their carrier air units can no longer be used in subsequent naval air combats (Lars, 2.01.00, Post #47). Note that if a carrier that aborts enters a new sea area and another naval air combat occurs, its carrier air units are available to fight.

(16) Fixed the bug in Naval Combat where land based naval air units that aborted as part of a side aborting could not be returned to base (Lars, 7.04.01, Post #25; Grotius, 8.00.00, Post #11).

(17) Solved several problems in Naval Combat where a Return to Base Digression from an air-to-air combat brought the game to a halt (Nils, 8.00.02, Post#14; Doktor, 8.00.08, Post #25; Nils, 8.01.00, Post #44).

Changes Since Versions 08.01.05
(as of April 24, 2011)

(1) Added code to destroy all transported units when a naval unit is destroyed (Lars, 2.01.04, Post #46).

(2) Fixed the Surrender code so major powers that surrender can still be incompletely conquered (Michael, 8.01.04, Post #38).

(3) Fixed the problems with US Entry causing the program to hang when playing the half map scenarios (Doktor, 8.00.08, Post #37; Doktor, 8.01.02, Post #5).

(4) Fixed the code so naval units could be overrun and forced to rebase multiple times (Orm, 8.01.05, Post #7; Lars, 8.01.05, Post #110).

(5) Fixed a problem with the Flyouts form where a transported unit could be selected during Land Movement - and probably during other phases when they should not have been selectable (Aaron, 8.01.04, emailed bug report.).

(6) Added another check for a valid route when the Animate Route box is checked in Production Planning (Aaron, 8.01.04, emailed bug report).

(7) Corrected a MadExcept error in the Production phase when a Supply Unit was built (Aaron, 8.01.04, emailed bug report).

(8) Fixed a bug in the Naval Abort Queue form where clicking on a flag referenced the wrong major power (Aaron, 8.01.05, emailed bug report). This fixes the problem that Nils encountered with the buttons doing nothing (Nils, 7.02.01, Post #10; Nils, 7.04.03, Post #52).

(9) Added another check to avoid MadExcept errors when closing the program (Rob W., 8.01.03, emailed bug report).

(10) Added some more AutoSave locations: before each major power decides Choose Action, Return To Base, and Stay At Sea. These all contain the name of the major power (Orm, 8.01.05, Post #9).

(11) Added a line of code to fix the problem with Return From Whence not enabling the end-of-phase button (Doktor, 8.01.05, Post #29). I am not sure that this solves the problem, but if it doesn’t, then I would like a saved game so I can find a fix that does.

(12) Enabled the AOI territorial to be placed on the map as a reinforcement (Michael, 8.01.05, ).

(13) Added a text message to the form that reports when reinforcement units are being moved to arrive the following turn because presently there is no hex in which they can be placed.

(14) Fixed a couple of problems with how reinforcement units that are unable to be placed on the map are processed. This resolves a bug from 2006!!! (April 3, 2006, Terje437; Lars, 7.04.00, Post #9).

(15) Fixed a bug so when multiple neutral naval units are moved in a stack, the count of naval unit moves used isn’t decremented multiple times (Aaron, 8.01.05, Post #75).

(16) Fixed a bug so zero factor partisans can be overrun (Lars, 8.01.05, Post #57).

(17) Disabled bringing up the Plot AA Fire form if it is already visible. This prevents ‘firing’ the same unit multiple times (Aaron, 8.01.05, Post #78).

(18) Fixed a bug in Plot AA Fire where the selected hex was not highlighted. I also widened the form so the effect of the AA fire was fully visible.

(19) Added code to initialize the production points received from Food In Flames (Aaron, 8.01.05, Post #98 and emailed bug report #24).

(20) Added a check for visible component in the Production Planning form to avoid a MadExcept error (Aaron, 8.01.05, bug report #13).

(21) Added a check for a non-nil resource when displaying Routes in the Production Planning form (Aaron, 8.01.05, Email bug report #14).

(22) I am ignoring a MadExcept error that occurred after using the Debug Place form. Apparently some internal variables got messed up - which the Debug Place is quite capable of doing (Aaron, 8.01.05, email bug reports #20 and #21).

(23) Added a check in Production Planning when sorting a resource with no owner (not controlled by a major power), to avoid a MadExcept error (Aaron, 8.01.05, email bug reports #22 and #23).

(24) Removed the Netherlands East Indies from the list of valid countries for the Fascist Tide scenario (Doktor, 8.01.05, Post #105).

(25) Fixed the background color for the Selectable Units form (Nils, 8.01.05, Post #55).

(26) Added a few more checks for nil variables when destroying the game. This time it was for when the Plot AA Fire form was still visible.

(27) Made numerous changes to enable plotting AA fire when a single AA unit has multiple target hexes available. However, the Cancel button doesn’t work correctly on that form yet.

Changes Since Versions 08.01.06
(as of April 27, 2011)

(1) Added a line of code so Partisan units do not show up in the Scrappable list (Lars, 8.01.05, Post #115).

(2) Added a couple lines of code so when the flags are clicked on in the Naval Abort Queue form, the Current Flag changes and so does the internal variable tracking the current major power - so it matches LocalMajorPower, i.e., the current decision maker (Nils, 8.01.06, Post #4).

(3) Finally fixed the bug in Plot AA Fire so the Cancel button works correctly (Aaron, 8.01.05, Post #78).

(4) Fixed the bug with counting movement points for naval units after dropping some units off in a sea area (Nils, 8.01.05, Posts #54 & #103).

(5) Fixed a problem with Food in Flames counts (Aaron, 8.01.05, Post #11).

(6) Fixed the problem in Naval Combat abort digression where after aborting a NAV, the game stopped (Doktor, 8.01.05, Post #44; Nils, 8.01.05, Post #53; Lars, 8.01.05, Post #58; Aaron, 8.01.05, Posts #47, #49, & #71).

(7) Updated the Sequence of Play form to include the new phases added to the End of Turn Stage a few months ago: production planning final, search and seizure, and scrap destroyed units.

(8) Fixed the problem with finding a new home country when a major power surrenders (Lars, 8.01.05, Post #114).

(9) Added a line of code so once naval units are removed from the NavalAbortQueue form they are also removed from the NavalAbortQueue itself (Aaron, 8.01.05, Post #121; Cad908, 8.01.06, Post #31).

(10) Updated the AIO’s SAG data with the latest from Peter (April 26, 2011).

(11) Fixed the Search and Seizure code so it correctly displays where S & S can be performed. You still can’t actually execute a S & S, but at least the program identifies where it is possible and who the interested parties are (Aaron, 8.01.05, Posts #81 & #83).

(12) Removed US Entry Options Occupy Greenland & Iceland and Occupy Northern Ireland from the DOW Minors form Special Actions. Instead these are processed like any other US Entry Option (Michael, 8.01.06, Post #23; Aaron, 8.01.05, Post #27).

(13) Eliminated the DOW Minors phase for the US player unless he has chosen the US Entry option to declare war on minors (Michael, 8.01.05, Post #6).

(14) Fixed a bug in Use Oil where the unit selection was always on the first unit and the program did not reset the selected unit when a different one was clicked on. This also solved the problem with using the mouse wheel to scroll the unit list. There was no bug related to reorganizing the French units - it is simply that the units’ changed organization status is not effected until the end of the phase by all major powers (Doktor, 8.01.06, Post #9; Doktor, 8.01.05, Post #52).

(15) Made several changes to Vichy Creation so stacking is checked. Previously, in some situations, stacking was not checked when determining possible destination hexes; but then it was checked when the player tried to actually put the unit in the destination hex. This could result in the only ‘legal’ hex being one in which overstacking would occur. I straightened this all out - I hope (Lars, 8.01.03, Post #18; Lars, 8.01.05, Post #17; Cad908, 8.01.05, Post #36).

Changes Since Versions 08.01.07
(as of April 29, 2011)

(1) Added a check for no assigned destination when saving oil during Production Planning. This prevents a MadExcept error (Aaron, 8.01.06, emailed bug report #37).

(2) Added a check when creating Vichy France for a French controlled possession having just been conquered. Previously the newly conquered possession was processed to determine which Axis major power gained control of it. That caused a MadExcept error (Aaron, 8.01.06, emailed bug report #43).

(3) Removed some of my diagnostic messages when creating Vichy France.

(4) Fixed the problem with NEI being conquered at the start of Missed the Bus (Aaron, 8.01.07, emailed bug report).

(5) Updated the bibliographies for the unit writeups with those used by Adam Scott and Wosung.

(6) Added a check for nil stack in the Selectable Units form to avoid a MadExcept (Aaron, 8.01.07, emailed bug report #48).

(7) Aaron has been trying to recreate some old bugs for me. He says the following 2 no longer occur: Conquest of Rumania by the USSR - after demand for Bessarabia was denied, caused a MadExcept error (Lars, 7.02.01, Post #37); and Germany unable to enforce - Finnish-Russian peace (Michael, 2.00.02, Post #34).

(8) Fixed the problem with Head2Head play in Production Planning Prelim where switching sides once one side had complete the phase did not occur (Orm, 8.01.06, Posts #2 & #20). This also affected a lot of other phases: Production Planning Final, Scrap Destroyed Units, Search and Seizure, Intelligence, Production, Use Oil, Neutrality Pact chit draws, Reform, Breakdown, Naval Repair, Partisans, Factory Destruction, Reinforcements, Lending, when terminating a Naval Combat, when choosing a carrier on which to land at the end of a Naval Air Combat, and when choosing a plane role for a naval air combat.

(9) Added a check for no units present before updating a stack viewer (Michael, 8.01.07, emailed bug report). This occurred during the end of the Factory Destruction phase.

(10) Added a check to avoid a MadExcept error when updating the Flyouts. This came about during the Surrender Phase but what the original cause of the problem was is not clear (Aaron, 8.01.07, emailed bug reports #52 and #57).

(11) Added a check to the Units In Hex form to avoid a MadExcept error when there are no units in the unit list. This occurred during the Surrender Phase, although I have no idea what was its original cause (Aaron, 8.01.07, emailed bug report #56).

(12) Added a check for completely conquered major powers so they do not participate in the Choose Action, Use Oil, Production Planing Prelim & Final, and Production phases (Aaron, 8.01.07, emailed bug report).

Changes Since Versions 08.02.00
(as of April 30, 2011)

(1) Added some more checks to Flyouts to avoid MadExcept errors (Michael, 8.02.00, emailed bug report).

(2) Added some more checks to Production Planning to avoid MadExcept errors when no default destination has been defined (Dave, 8.02.00, emailed bug report).

(3) Updated the land unit writeups with the latest from Aaron (April 30, 2011).

(4) Corrected the bug where the USSR was permitted to DOW Rumania even though they had not yet claimed Bessarabia (Orm, 8.02.00, Post #5).

(5) Fixed a bug in Head2Head play where multiple switches between the sides could lose track of which major power on a side should be deciding (Orm, 8.02.00, Post #7). This occurred in the following sequence: USSR claims Finnish Borderlands, switch to Germany, Germany denies the claim, switch to US, US draws a chit, switch to Germany to report how many chits removed, switch to USSR, USSR continues DOW on minors. The program had been partially switching to Commonwealth at the last point.

(6) Added a check for moving convoys so that they do not automatically go into sentry mode when stopping in a port. They still automatically go into sentry mode when stopping at sea (Michael, 8.02.00, Post #19).

(7) Fixed a nasty little bug where if a unit left port loaded (e.g., a carrier air unit on a carrier), stopped in a sea area so another unit in the stack could load a unit from a coastal hex, then the original transport and its cargo became disassociated (Lars, 8.01.06, Post #30; Lars, 8.02.00, Post #20).

(8) Added a check to the Flyouts form to avoid a MadExcept error (Aaron, 8.01.07, Post #20, BugReport50).

(9) Corrected a bug in USA DOW on Japan where failure was reported as a failed attempt to DOW France.

(10) Fixed a bug where an extra entry chit was drawn when the USA failed in an attempt to DOW an Axis major power (Michael, 8.01.07, Post #24).




dogancan -> RE: When? (5/2/2011 8:15:15 PM)

In the last three months, the bugs in MWIF decreased approx. by 10/month. Relying on this trend, it seems that the game will be without any known bugs by December 2011.

So, we can expect to see MWIF before next christmas may be? [:)]




Joseignacio -> RE: When? (5/3/2011 7:41:54 AM)

I hope they can be reduced faster, but bugs is not the only matter to work in the developement. I would sign December now.




yvesp -> RE: When? (5/3/2011 9:51:59 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

I hope they can be reduced faster, but bugs is not the only matter to work in the developement. I would sign December now.


As you can see, Steve does about 130 corrections in a month. But in a complex game like that, crushing bugs often creates new bugs... So it's hard to foretell whether all remaining bugs will be crushed before the next report, or whether the average count will only decrease by the average ten. Also, new bugs come from the beta testers ; logically, the pace at which they appear should also go decreasing. Taking all this into account, I expect the pace of corrections to increase. Possibly no bugs in 2 or 3 months (I am an optimist.)

Still, the AI has to be built almost from scratch, even though the blueprints have been laid down. This remains a tremendous task, very bug prone ; especially with hidden bugs that just don't show up on screen, but manifest themselves through "strange behaviors" ; these bugs will be very difficult to tackle. I do not expect this part to be completed by the end of the year, although it could be well advanced. It remains to be seen whether matrix will stick to the current trend : a no-bug product. Or listen the songs of the sirens for a premature release for Christmas... (because at that times, a lot of things will look like they work.)

Just my two cents as a professional programmer and software architect.

Yves




Joseignacio -> RE: When? (5/3/2011 10:49:04 AM)

Yep, I didn't explain myself well, I meant that there can be bugs really annoying but others are more simple to solve. I have no experience in developing games but I have been following closely the creation of strategy games before, and I am afraid I have been (unvoluntarily) beta tester when I thought I was going to be client, so I know about reporting bugs... :)

I mean that Steve has not only solved 10 bugs but also made advances in other areas, had he been only working in bugs he would probably solved more.

And a different category is the AI bugs. It's good that a game doesn't have CTDs every time you press Enter or you Zoom in/ Zoom out, ..., but to have an AI that works is another world that even the creators of the series Total War still deal with. I have had serious problems fighting battles/sieges with STW2, only to see that sometimes, when everything is lost and you are waiting for the final attack that will collapse your last samurais, the enemy stands at the end of the screen till the time expires. ¡¡¡!!!

Because of this I said that I would sign (or buy) December, because i think it can take wayyyy more and I would gladly accept December. I was being ironic.

But I want an ended produt. My experiences with PatchDox taught me that. ;)




micheljq -> RE: When? (5/3/2011 2:18:35 PM)

Despites the bugs, they also have to develop the AI, since it was decided the game will ship with one. Frankly I don't think this game will release in 2011, let's be patient. [8|]




Joseignacio -> RE: When? (5/3/2011 2:19:41 PM)

True




HansHafen -> RE: When? (5/3/2011 6:59:54 PM)

I agree that it will not be done in 2011. I think we need to set our sights on, and hope, it is done and released in December 2012. The AI will truely be a bear to deal with. I wish them all the skill and luck in existence.




yvesp -> RE: When? (5/4/2011 12:29:00 PM)

I still stick to the forecast I made in mid 2010.

Yves




Sewerlobster -> RE: When? (5/5/2011 2:28:44 AM)

(9) Corrected a bug in USA DOW on Japan where failure was reported as a failed attempt to DOW France.

Kind of funny because of how low Americans generally score on geography tests. Excuse me Mr. Secretary, but France is in Europe.




thejamtin -> RE: When? (5/5/2011 4:28:00 AM)

These land unit writeups sound pretty interesting. Any chance of a preview on some? [:D]




Red Prince -> RE: When? (5/5/2011 4:52:52 AM)

quote:

These land unit writeups sound pretty interesting. Any chance of a preview on some?

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1284290

This will take you to the Unit Descriptions: Air, Land, Naval thread. There are several great examples to be found there.




kirkgregerson -> RE: When? (5/6/2011 8:32:33 PM)

I agree that it could take about another year to get a release. But, I'm ok with that. There's a tremendous amount of work left for the AI and to continue to squash bugs while dealing with regression. Don't forget a polished project will require many months of patches after the release as well. This is to be expected with such a complicated application with an immense code base. Even a seasoned and solid design team at 2by3 games needed about 5 months of patches on WitE to fixes a host of bugs and play balance issues. So I'm going to assume about the same for WiF.

Either way, I prepared to wait for a year or so for such a grandiose strategic WWII computer game.
[>:]




YohanTM2 -> RE: When? (5/7/2011 3:41:22 AM)

test




bo -> RE: When? (5/18/2011 5:36:53 PM)

I know better than to post this post[:-] but forgive me I just can't help it. I am over 60 years old with two grandchildren who love computer games, I only say this to show I am no jerk kid with a negative attitude, I am a grown man with a negative attitude, I personally do not like Matrix as a game provider for several reasons, one being they never or almost never put out a demo like Battlefront does for every game, I have heard all the fan boy excuses about its not the same as the game etc. That's bull in my opinion. To me their support is not good, take the game "Storm over the Pacific" that I had to remove from my computer because they screwed up the patches so bad, are they the company that made it NO! but they promoted it and they should stand behind it. But sadly they let the that whacko company get away with horrible patches. But really I want to talk about MWIF, . Well what next is that maybe just maybe MWIF is too much for one programmer, I just read well maybe dec. 2011 and then well maybe dec. 2012. I never played this game except ADG's game which I downloaded with no AI. It seemed all right as a game, no complaints. My problem is not with Steve who is doing the best he can with it at least to me, it seems like an impossible game to complete, or so it seems to me but what do I know. The posters here are the nicest most knowledgeable game players around there is no doubt in my mind about that, but they are fanboys and that irks me, I feel had they gone to Matrix as a group maybe something could have been done earlier and then again knowing Matrix maybe not. I love computer war strategy games but most of them are not well done and Panzer Corp looks a little outdated to me from the pictures of it. I was hoping for this game to be put out before I am in a nursing home with no internet, but I guess not, I could go on and on but you gentlemen have heard it all and you tuned it out. If someone here could show me it is worth the wait and its been handled properly I would appreciate a reply here or to my e-mail if you feel you don't like to offend Steve or Matrix. Could you please convince me that it is worth the wait, I am truly sorry for the negativity here but if I have an itch I usually scratch it.

Bo

Bowenw1@verizon.net




Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: When? (5/18/2011 6:53:32 PM)

Bo,

You should edit your post to remove any references to politicians.




bo -> RE: When? (5/18/2011 7:43:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Bo,

You should edit your post to remove any references to politicians.

Will do and already have done Steve, was not aware about the political stuff, but actually I did not see that as political, oh well good luck in your endeavors and thanks for the warning.



Bo




micheljq -> RE: When? (5/18/2011 8:37:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Bo,

You should edit your post to remove any references to politicians.

Will do and already have done Steve, was not aware about the political stuff, but actually I did not see that as political, oh well good luck in your endeavors and thanks for the warning.

Bo


Ever heard of paragraph use?




bo -> RE: When? (5/18/2011 9:00:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: micheljq


quote:

ORIGINAL: bo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Bo,

You should edit your post to remove any references to politicians.

Will do and already have done Steve, was not aware about the political stuff, but actually I did not see that as political, oh well good luck in your endeavors and thanks for the warning.

Bo


Ever heard of paragraph use?

It was meant that way Michel but still nice to hear from number uno fanboy.

Bo




michaelbaldur -> RE: When? (5/18/2011 9:13:56 PM)

quote:

If someone here could show me it is worth the wait and its been handled properly I would appreciate a reply here or to my e-mail if you feel you don't like to offend Steve or Matrix. Could you please convince me that it is worth the wait, I am truly sorry for the negativity here but if I have an itch I usually scratch it.


it is really worth the wait ... the game is a perfect simulation of world in flames ...

i´m spending 6-8 hours a day playing/testing it. and I have a had a big influence on the game. making things more logical and easy to understand.






bo -> RE: When? (5/18/2011 10:58:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

quote:

If someone here could show me it is worth the wait and its been handled properly I would appreciate a reply here or to my e-mail if you feel you don't like to offend Steve or Matrix. Could you please convince me that it is worth the wait, I am truly sorry for the negativity here but if I have an itch I usually scratch it.


it is really worth the wait ... the game is a perfect simulation of world in flames ...

i´m spending 6-8 hours a day playing/testing it. and I have a had a big influence on the game. making things more logical and easy to understand.




Thank you Michaelbaldur for your insight, I appreciate it, but do not understand the play/testing part, not being negative but play/testing what? Do you mean the actual game, and if so how close are you to completion? I have not posted for awhile because for some reason I get negative and that does not help things. Have to watch my paragraphs, trying to be careful Mich. Is everything ready to go like the board look or map look, all of the units etc.? What is the problem, rules, AI what? I understand bugs and such and most bugs will be found by the players after its released, only because there will be so many more hands in the pie so to speak. Thanks again Mich.

Bo




lomyrin -> RE: When? (5/19/2011 12:06:14 AM)

Yes, Michael means the actual game when he talks about playing and testing. As do I.

And although I am considerably older than you are Bo, I expect to see and play the released version one fine day.

Lars




bo -> RE: When? (5/19/2011 12:16:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: lomyrin

Yes, Michael means the actual game when he talks about playing and testing. As do I.

And although I am considerably older than you are Bo, I expect to see and play the released version one fine day.

Lars

Don't be so sure about the age thing Lars, I said I was over 60[&:]I would have appreciated it more if you had clued me in on some of my questions about what the hold up might be[&o]

Bo




lomyrin -> RE: When? (5/19/2011 12:29:29 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bo


quote:

ORIGINAL: lomyrin

Yes, Michael means the actual game when he talks about playing and testing. As do I.

And although I am considerably older than you are Bo, I expect to see and play the released version one fine day.

Lars

Don't be so sure about the age thing Lars, I said I was over 60[&:]I would have appreciated it more if you had clued me in on some of my questions about what the hold up might be[&o]

Bo


I am sure about the age. My avatar is a ship I served on in my youth a very long time ago. I even remember vaguely the time at the end of the war in Europe because in the spring of 45 we skipped a lot of school because refugees were housed there. You are still a relative youngster with most likely quite a few years ahead of you.




Red Prince -> RE: When? (5/19/2011 12:36:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bo


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

quote:

If someone here could show me it is worth the wait and its been handled properly I would appreciate a reply here or to my e-mail if you feel you don't like to offend Steve or Matrix. Could you please convince me that it is worth the wait, I am truly sorry for the negativity here but if I have an itch I usually scratch it.


it is really worth the wait ... the game is a perfect simulation of world in flames ...

i´m spending 6-8 hours a day playing/testing it. and I have a had a big influence on the game. making things more logical and easy to understand.




Thank you Michaelbaldur for your insight, I appreciate it, but do not understand the play/testing part, not being negative but play/testing what? Do you mean the actual game, and if so how close are you to completion? I have not posted for awhile because for some reason I get negative and that does not help things. Have to watch my paragraphs, trying to be careful Mich. Is everything ready to go like the board look or map look, all of the units etc.? What is the problem, rules, AI what? I understand bugs and such and most bugs will be found by the players after its released, only because there will be so many more hands in the pie so to speak. Thanks again Mich.

Bo

Bo,

Take a look at the most recent Monthly Report. Steve posted the full list of 128 bugs fixed in April. It should give you an idea of where things stand.

-Aaron




michaelbaldur -> RE: When? (5/19/2011 1:00:02 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: lomyrin

Yes, Michael means the actual game when he talks about playing and testing. As do I.

And although I am considerably older than you are Bo, I expect to see and play the released version one fine day.

Lars


yes the game is playable ..very much so .. there are still some minor bug, and a few areas that still need to be coded ..

but the game looks very good ..

I can promise you that. as soon as the last supply issues are corrected.. I will post a north africa campaign ..

and I have heard that there will be posted at least 1 Asia/pacific campaign ..




bo -> RE: When? (5/19/2011 4:47:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: lomyrin


quote:

ORIGINAL: bo


quote:

ORIGINAL: lomyrin

Yes, Michael means the actual game when he talks about playing and testing. As do I.

And although I am considerably older than you are Bo, I expect to see and play the released version one fine day.

Lars

Don't be so sure about the age thing Lars, I said I was over 60[&:]I would have appreciated it more if you had clued me in on some of my questions about what the hold up might be[&o]

Bo


I am sure about the age. My avatar is a ship I served on in my youth a very long time ago. I even remember vaguely the time at the end of the war in Europe because in the spring of 45 we skipped a lot of school because refugees were housed there. You are still a relative youngster with most likely quite a few years ahead of you.


Lars I can remember standing in line during ww2 hoping to get a piece of fleers bubble gum with my other school students, you imagine this, they were sending this gum to the GI's overseas and we were getting the left overs maybe! It shows you how the world and this country was screwed up when you could not get bubble gum[:-]

Bo




bo -> RE: When? (5/19/2011 4:50:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur


quote:

ORIGINAL: lomyrin

Yes, Michael means the actual game when he talks about playing and testing. As do I.

And although I am considerably older than you are Bo, I expect to see and play the released version one fine day.

Lars


yes the game is playable ..very much so .. there are still some minor bug, and a few areas that still need to be coded ..

but the game looks very good ..

I can promise you that. as soon as the last supply issues are corrected.. I will post a north africa campaign ..

and I have heard that there will be posted at least 1 Asia/pacific campaign ..

If you say so than I guess I have to accept what you are saying, also you seem very knowing about this product, but why are some saying next year? This does not make sense to me.

Bo




bo -> RE: When? (5/19/2011 4:53:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Red Prince


quote:

ORIGINAL: bo


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

quote:

If someone here could show me it is worth the wait and its been handled properly I would appreciate a reply here or to my e-mail if you feel you don't like to offend Steve or Matrix. Could you please convince me that it is worth the wait, I am truly sorry for the negativity here but if I have an itch I usually scratch it.


it is really worth the wait ... the game is a perfect simulation of world in flames ...

i´m spending 6-8 hours a day playing/testing it. and I have a had a big influence on the game. making things more logical and easy to understand.




Thank you Michaelbaldur for your insight, I appreciate it, but do not understand the play/testing part, not being negative but play/testing what? Do you mean the actual game, and if so how close are you to completion? I have not posted for awhile because for some reason I get negative and that does not help things. Have to watch my paragraphs, trying to be careful Mich. Is everything ready to go like the board look or map look, all of the units etc.? What is the problem, rules, AI what? I understand bugs and such and most bugs will be found by the players after its released, only because there will be so many more hands in the pie so to speak. Thanks again Mich.

Bo

Bo,

Take a look at the most recent Monthly Report. Steve posted the full list of 128 bugs fixed in April. It should give you an idea of where things stand.

-Aaron

I look every month at the reports and to be honest they seem to tell me and others here who shall remain hidden[;)]that we are a long way from being finished, I don't believe what I am about to say but hold up on the AI and get this game out.

Bo




Red Prince -> RE: When? (5/19/2011 5:34:51 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Red Prince


quote:

ORIGINAL: bo


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

quote:

If someone here could show me it is worth the wait and its been handled properly I would appreciate a reply here or to my e-mail if you feel you don't like to offend Steve or Matrix. Could you please convince me that it is worth the wait, I am truly sorry for the negativity here but if I have an itch I usually scratch it.


it is really worth the wait ... the game is a perfect simulation of world in flames ...

i´m spending 6-8 hours a day playing/testing it. and I have a had a big influence on the game. making things more logical and easy to understand.




Thank you Michaelbaldur for your insight, I appreciate it, but do not understand the play/testing part, not being negative but play/testing what? Do you mean the actual game, and if so how close are you to completion? I have not posted for awhile because for some reason I get negative and that does not help things. Have to watch my paragraphs, trying to be careful Mich. Is everything ready to go like the board look or map look, all of the units etc.? What is the problem, rules, AI what? I understand bugs and such and most bugs will be found by the players after its released, only because there will be so many more hands in the pie so to speak. Thanks again Mich.

Bo

Bo,

Take a look at the most recent Monthly Report. Steve posted the full list of 128 bugs fixed in April. It should give you an idea of where things stand.

-Aaron

I look every month at the reports and to be honest they seem to tell me and others here who shall remain hidden[;)]that we are a long way from being finished, I don't believe what I am about to say but hold up on the AI and get this game out.

Bo

This is a fairly uneducated opinion, but I don't know if it's possible to give a definitive estimate of release. If you look at the reports, Steve has yet to crack 70 bugs. Yet he fixes 100+ each month. There are only a few left which are not relatively new reports. This is because every time a major group of bugs is resolved we can move into an area of the game previously unavailable. That means fresh material to create bugs we haven't seen before.

For example:
Two areas are currently in revision that are of great interest to the beta-team: Production and Overseas Supply. Steve is getting close on production. Supply has our hands tied when working with major operations. For the most part, this means the USA has had much less testing time than the other major powers. When this issue is resolved it will let us test for USA related bugs on a much larger scale. When that happens, well, I'm betting Steve won't be seeing the south side of 70 soon.

If the title were released today it would fail, and you'd hate it. Not because it isn't superb, but because it just isn't done. Steve puts in more hours than is reasonable. At a guess, I'd say the beta-testers put in a combined 700 to 1,000 hours or more each week. It's an extremely complex game. It takes that much time to test, record the results, and fix.
-----
Edit: I want to clarify. The reason you'd hate it is that the bugs being worked out now often have to with smoothing gameplay out and preventing glitch-type crashes. These aren't the kind of bugs that a paying end-user should expect from a finished product.
-----
Edit: Michael made me check my math. I'm asleep on the job, I guess. [>:] The beta-testers actually put in about 500 hours a week, not the higher number (700-1000).




Page: <<   < prev  75 76 [77] 78 79   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.890625