Admiral's Edition General Thread

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: Shark7
Another question concerning graphics, that being will our current still work with AE? I know there are several out there people have used to 'dress up' the game, and I've gotten quite used to the way it looks now.

Speaking only for the naval art portion, we are doing everything possible to accommodate existing art and existing ‘after market’ artists. Too many people have invested too much talent in enhancing the visual impression of this game to let it go to waste by a radical change of numerology.

There will be hundreds of upgrade and conversion models included, but the baseline models of the vessels will conform (as much as humanly possible) to the WiTP stock enumerations. The ideal is that the AE naval art pak will be suitable for all Matrix WiTP games. That means your ‘eye candy’ will continue to taste sweet.

Not for aircraft. It will be a completely new file with several hundred new Aircraft needing their own art.

[Dixie]

ORIGINAL: TheElf

Not for aircraft. It will be a completely new file with several hundred new Aircraft needing their own art.

I'm assuming that it's still the same format? One big file with all the art in the same 'picture' for each side.

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: Dixie

ORIGINAL: TheElf

Not for aircraft. It will be a completely new file with several hundred new Aircraft needing their own art.

I'm assuming that it's still the same format? One big file with all the art in the same 'picture' for each side.

SAIEW as far as the format except the file is MUCH bigger.

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: Drakken

I have two questions about leaders and rank :

1- Will something be done to make rank something to take into account? I always found weird that it is possible to replace a highly ranked General by a Colonel or a junior officer in total impunity, without penalty in political points. In real life, if a commander-in-chief would choose to place a Colonel to command a Corps HQ, he would logically have to expend a lot of political clout to have that person breveted to the rank of General AND pay the political price of passing over senior officers. No way this lucky officer would remain a Colonel, and no way senior officers wouldn't make a rack about it. Could it be possible to implement a system more a kind to the "seniority" rating in AGEOD's AACW, for instance?

2- Will leaders be forcefully restricted to command in their respective branch in AE? By that I mean, that Army officers will be restricted to LCU command, Air Force commanders to air units, and Navy commanders to TFs and ships?. Each time I wish to change leaders, officers from other branches are available to me whatever the branch is, which isn't right and is a little annoying.

OTS for this release. Maybe can be addressed in a future patch.

[viberpol]

Where (or when) can we see more screenshots?

I think I am not the only one who, having the screen opened, tried to scroll down to see the rest of the map... [:D]

[Terminus]

No more screenshots for the moment. Give us some time to actually work on the thing...

[Rainerle]

Hi,
will big coastal gun units have a permanent DL?

[cantona2]

Any plans in the pipeline for weekly screenies or things like that?
Cheers

[Terminus]

Not in the immediate future.

[cantona2]

erm ignore that post just read last few posts

post above T's i mean lol

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: el cid again

There is a problem with fortifications under siege. Fort Drum is the classic case - because it cannot go the way it did - or could have - IRL. When Gen Waynewright surrendered, the Commander Fort Drum called his staff together. They reported ALL systems were functional. The only problem - one they could not resolve - was there was no significant amount of food - so they honored the order to surrender. Had they had food, they would have continued to close Manila Bay - for a long time. [See The Concrete Battleship where this was first disclosed]

In the game, by the time of the surrender, Fort Drum assets are badly or even totally attritted. Enemy action took of 26 feet of concrete - without taking down any system or weapon at all. But the game will take down all the big guns quite soon - and the smaller ones (there are fewer) even sooner. It would be better if there was a mechanism to designate a fortification - and then to protect heavy assets in particular inside it. Also if there was a way to keep supplies in the fort. Right now - I can put 90000 supplies in Fort Drum as a unit - and they will be used to feed the neighbors within about 3 days.

I was only addressing the question about Corregidor from the map side of things.

Maybe Fort Drum cold be added as a separate unit and/or have distinct devices with higher armour ratings? Or the code may be able to be adjusted to handle such situations better? But these are all questions for the land team. I think it would be best to ask them in the land thread, but I can pass this on to them also.

Andrew

I extensively tested creating separate units. Indeed, I have separate CD units. I do give them fort values. I do give them private supply stocks. Nothing seems either to retain the supplies nor to prevent the devices in the fort from dieing for lack of them: big guns first because there are so few of them apparently. It isn't bombardment that hurts the forts - often there is none at all - it is supplies. I have found no way to make them survive UNLESS you can supply the whole hex. Hmmm - but I know how to supply a unit. Will go test.

[Sequoia]

ORIGINAL: TheElf


[Not for aircraft. It will be a completely new file with several hundred new Aircraft needing their own art.

Is there an interim list of aircraft you'd like to post?

[Dixie]

ORIGINAL: Sequoia

ORIGINAL: TheElf


[Not for aircraft. It will be a completely new file with several hundred new Aircraft needing their own art.

Is there an interim list of aircraft you'd like to post?

Yes, please do [:D] I have far too much spare time on my hands and Terminus is starting to get fed up with my questions on the naval stuff. I may have to move onto the air thread soon [;)]

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: Sequoia

ORIGINAL: TheElf


[Not for aircraft. It will be a completely new file with several hundred new Aircraft needing their own art.

Is there an interim list of aircraft you'd like to post?

Not at this time...

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: TheElf

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: Shark7
Another question concerning graphics, that being will our current still work with AE? I know there are several out there people have used to 'dress up' the game, and I've gotten quite used to the way it looks now.

Speaking only for the naval art portion, we are doing everything possible to accommodate existing art and existing ‘after market’ artists. Too many people have invested too much talent in enhancing the visual impression of this game to let it go to waste by a radical change of numerology.

There will be hundreds of upgrade and conversion models included, but the baseline models of the vessels will conform (as much as humanly possible) to the WiTP stock enumerations. The ideal is that the AE naval art pak will be suitable for all Matrix WiTP games. That means your ‘eye candy’ will continue to taste sweet.

Not for aircraft. It will be a completely new file with several hundred new Aircraft needing their own art.

Yes, I understood with adding so many new slots that this would have to change. I am actually referring to the wonderful UI mods that are out there, IE the load screens, the report screens, the buttons, etc.

Being that I primarily play as the Japanese for the added challenge, I have installed several of the Japanese UI mods, and am hoping that they won't be changed. That along with the the map buttons and symols (base flags, etc).

[Knavey]

1.  PBEM Passwords-will we be able to change them.  Need this in case we need to change players and I do not like having his password.
2.  Is Sigint going to be looked at closer?  Not really that helpful for either side, but it the Allies probably should have access to more info.
3.  Would it be possible to put a button on the individual unit screen that links to a document stored on the players computer.  It would then pull whatever info that player put in the document.  It would be useful for recording data such as your future plans for the unit, etc.  Since it is stored on the local machine, it is not accessible to the other player.  I think this would be pretty easy to implement with very little effect on the programming of the game.

[wworld7]

ORIGINAL: Knavey

3.  Would it be possible to put a button on the individual unit screen that links to a document stored on the players computer.  It would then pull whatever info that player put in the document.  It would be useful for recording data such as your future plans for the unit, etc.  Since it is stored on the local machine, it is not accessible to the other player.  I think this would be pretty easy to implement with very little effect on the programming of the game.

Nice idea, though I believe this is very far beyond "easy". But since I haven't progammed much in more than ten years beyond phone systems I may could be wrong.

From memory trying to access any "object" outside an application opens up a big can of whoop-ass. Not the least of which are the testing headaches it causes.

[Akos Gergely]

Wanted to ask for a long time if you consider true multi core support added to the game? I know this might involve changes to the engine and that currently on my Athlon X2 it seems to utilize both cores still I think it might be worthwile to give this a closer look (especially after seeing the new recommended harware specs).

As quad core CPUs tend to be cheap I think it won't be a wasted time...

[Terminus]

Not going to happen.

[Charbroiled]

I had read in one of the forums that save files are being handled differently. Is the size of the file going to increase (or decrease)? Important issue for us poor souls with slow dial-up.[:D]