quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Note that the Odds are updated as these decisions are made, though those decisions that require a die roll are only estimates until the die roll actually occurs. When there is a difference between Assault and Blitz odds, both are shown with Assault odds shown first (e.g., hex [49, 45]).

Any chances for the actual combat factor totals figures to be also displayed somewhere in this form ?
Knowing the total def factors is a help as t means that each time you add that number of attack factors, you are at +2 on the 2d10 CRT, so it is a good help to decide what unit attacks where when you have the correct data.
Having to count on the board would be a needless pain when playing a computer game.

But maybe this form only appears when all combat hexes have already been decided, in which case you can no longuer decide that a unit is attacking a hex or another. If that is the case, which I'm nearly 100% sure now that I think about it, let's just say that the total attacking / defending factors have to be displayed somewhere when the attacking units are affected to the various combats.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
At the top is the sequence of the subphases within the phase land combat resolution. RAC (rules as coded) follows RAW (rules as written), for this subphase sequence. Regrettably, RAW is somewhat vague about who decides to use snow units first/second and where the decision about using the engineer occurs.

About this, I have this feeling that the way the sequence of the subphases is show looks like the user could choose one of them, when in reality it is only showing (I believe) what subphase you're in.
So why not using some other kind of graphical way of showing the progression, like this example for example (a progression of a color on a colored line where the subphases are written).


[image]local://upfiles/10447/D1616E89F65D47C6BC76C9A61DE0FEB5.jpg[/image]

I forgot to say that I have the same bad feeling about the radio buttons that show the sequence of the subphases in the Air to air combat form.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
At the top is the sequence of the subphases within the phase land combat resolution. RAC (rules as coded) follows RAW (rules as written), for this subphase sequence. Regrettably, RAW is somewhat vague about who decides to use snow units first/second and where the decision about using the engineer occurs.

About this, I have this feeling that the way the sequence of the subphases is show looks like the user could choose one of them, when in reality it is only showing (I believe) what subphase you're in.
So why not using some other kind of graphical way of showing the progression, like this example for example (a progression of a color on a colored line where the subphases are written).


[image]local://upfiles/10447/D1616E89F65D47C6BC76C9A61DE0FEB5.jpg[/image]

I forgot to say that I have the same bad feeling about the radio buttons that show the sequence of the subphases in the Air to air combat form.

I agree.

Once I have things working correctly, I'll go back and change the graphic presentation fo the subphases. Though I would like to handle it the same way I do the Sequence of Play form with a flag (the decision maker's) adjacent to the current subphase, I doubt that I have sufficient room.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I reread the code and the decision about the engineer is made by the attacker when he commits the unit to the attack. This is a menu item on the unit pop up menu. It is the same way night missions are handled for air missions.

So I have deleted the engineer subphase from the list. In its place I have added converting shattered results to retreats. That occurs before selecting which units take losses.

quote:

ORIGINAL: csharpmao
I found the idea of Froonp not bad, but I'd add something to explain it's a sequence.
Maybe something like the following picture.


Sharpmao

[image]local://upfiles/17558/8CD4C5E400C047199D62C2B69482250E.jpg[/image]

quote:

ut this, I have this feeling that the way the sequence of the subphases is show looks like the user could choose one of them, when in reality it is only showing (I believe) what subphase you're in.
So why not using some other kind of graphical way of showing the progression, like this example for example (a progression of a color on a colored line where the subphases are written).



[image]http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/upfiles/10447/D1616E89F65D47C6BC76C9A61DE0FEB5.jpg[/image] 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I reread the code and the decision about the engineer is made by the attacker when he commits the unit to the attack. This is a menu item on the unit pop up menu. It is the same way night missions are handled for air missions.

So I have deleted the engineer subphase from the list. In its place I have added converting shattered results to retreats. That occurs before selecting which units take losses.

Why not have it the same with Snow Units : A menu item on the unit pop up menu, where the attacker selects "Snow units" (By the way, "Winterized units" is the term that is more commonly used, not "Snow units" -- as there is also blizzard).

quote:

ORIGINAL: abj9562

Regarding buttons. Since the buttoms seem to use an inset or inalid  property, perhaps a simple property change would lift them up and cause them to appear as buttons to be pressed like a keyboard instead of buttons flush to ythe form. I haven't dine any "screen painting" since my intern days many many years ago. Still I seem to remember it causes quite a dramatic difference  in forms without the need for additional graphics work.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Why not have it the same with Snow Units : A menu item on the unit pop up menu, where the attacker selects "Snow units" (By the way, "Winterized units" is the term that is more commonly used, not "Snow units" -- as there is also blizzard).

The use of snow units (blizzards usually involve a lot of snow[;)]) is associated with the attacked hex, not the individual units. If you are benefiting from the use of snow units, then all the snow units are vulnerable to taking losses. Engineers can be committed individually, with one engineer using its bonus, while a second one in the same attack does not.

quote:

ORIGINAL: abj9562

My apologies for an extreme failure to spell check and edit my last post. I was in a rush and posted the comment without due diligence. I am disgraced. [8|]

quote:

ORIGINAL: abj9562

If a failure to spell check is the worst thing I do in any day... Then it must be a good day indeed.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

2nd in series. Here is what the player typically sees first. The current subphase is Select Combat, which has an asterisk and has a 'raised' presence in the strip of subphases. I would like to do something more forceful to indicate the current subphase, but there doesn't seem to be component that has the features that I want. I am loathe to spend time developing a custom made component just for this.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
My main purpose in posting all these screens is to let you know what I have decided about who decides which units take losses. RAW says that the 'owner' decides, but leaves open the question of which player on a side decides when multiple major powers have units that mght take losses. There is a line in the rules about randomly choosing units if the major powers can agree. I didn't want to do that, since it adds a lot of complexity to something that should occur rarely.

quote:

Instead I have decided to designate one player for each side as the decision maker based on the units involved in the combat. Priority goes to:
(1) the player with the most valuable land units in the combat (i.e., build points), or in case of tie,
(2) the player with the most land units in the combat, or in case of tie,
(3) the player with the most valuable units in the combat (this includes land and naval units for the defender), or in case of tie,
(4) the player with the most combat factors in the combat (attack factors for attacker and defense factors for the defender - neither are modified whatsoever).

If things are still tied, then the order is: mcGermany, mcItaly, mcJapan, mcVichyFrance, mcChina, mcCommonwealth, mcFrance, mcUnitedStates, mcUSSR

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

2nd in series. Here is what the player typically sees first. The current subphase is Select Combat, which has an asterisk and has a 'raised' presence in the strip of subphases. I would like to do something more forceful to indicate the current subphase, but there doesn't seem to be component that has the features that I want. I am loathe to spend time developing a custom made component just for this.

Maybe use bold font, or another color, to do something more forceful to indicate the current subphase.

quote:

I would like to do something more forceful to indicate the current subphase, but there doesn't seem to be component that has the features that I want. I am loathe to spend time developing a custom made component just for this.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bredsjomagnus

But that did obviously not work.[:@]

How do i add image? The image is stored on my computer.