WHEN WHEN WHEN (DAVE)???

[Phoenix100]

Sorry, Dave - perhaps this persistence is tiring, but it's important for all of us - when, WHEN WHEN is the add-on and the update going to appear? You must have some clearer idea now. Thanks.

[wodin]

as with all patch's and updates and add ons and games that you either really want or love waiting is the worse part....and many waits are very long indeed....but it will arrive at some point...we have to be very patient...a watched kettle never boils....or somehting like that...

[Phoenix100]

Yeah. But WHEN, Dave. When?

[Arjuna]

SHORT ANSWER = VERY CLOSE.

We put out Replacement Exes #13 for Build 4.2.239 last night. This has fixes to the resupply code to ensure better allocation of bases to supply entry points, exempting supply routes from enemy fire if friendlies present and modifying the drawdown of arty units in their emergency requests. These were required to get done for the upcoming HTTR expansion pack. According to Richard that should be the last of the changes he needs. There are still a few minor tweaks I need to make to satisfy our beta testers. With a bit of luck I'll get these done and dusted next week and put out a final candidate for the second pacth at the end of next week. Once that gets the all clear, it will go to Matrix to build the installer. That will need to be tested before release to the public. So I'd say we're looking at two to three weeks.

[Phoenix100]

Great Thanks. Mid-September, then, I will assume. Looking forward to it.

[Pawsy]

Great news, HTTR expansion pack? Havent seen any news on that?

[Phoenix100]

The implication would have to be - around the same time for the HTTR add-on, since Dave mentions that he has now finished all the chages Richard required for it.

[Pawsy]

Looks like I should buy HTTR then From what I have read though HTTR and COTA hasnt got the same functionality as the Bulge game? Will the patch bring them to a common standard? Really enjoying the Bulge game.

+1 for campaign game with roll over experience/units I remember Steel panthers

[Phoenix100]

Starbuck. The add-on will be an HTTR add-on for 'the Bulge game' (BFTB). So no need to buy HTTR, which is a great game, but has less features than BFTB. You will be able to buy the BFTB HTTR add-on instead, which will give you (probably for slightly cheaper, though who knows?) HTTR within the Bulge game. Much better.

COTA is a separate thing for which, as far as I know, there are no plans to convert the scenarios to BFTB format. However, COTA has much more 'functionality' than HTTR, and is more similar to BFTB, and certainly, imho, well worth buying. There are some great scenarios in COTA, which you can't do anywhere else.

Hope this helps.

[Pawsy]

Thank you - an assured purchase here then. I plan to get COTA as well. I think their great value I played scenarios over and over and each time they pan out different. The demo and video was brilliant.

[GBS]

I have been a Panther customer since the very first issue. Panther is one of the slowest arriving and updating games out there. Not complaining...it just is what it is. I won't speculate on the reason why but rest assured there is a reason as Dave seems to be one of the most conscientious developers in the market. Keeping things in perspective, when Dave says VERY SOON, that could very easily mean 6 months.... possibly more.

[Lieste]

Cogs are turning... its just complex and takes a while... and then a bit longer.

[GBS]

Is there any chance that we could hear from some of the beta testers on how the game is impacted by some of the changes and updates that Dave has mentioned? I am especially interested in how the fatigue and recovery model is presented.

[Arjuna]

Sorry guys. Please bear this in mind. The code base for this engine is HUGE. Making changes in one area often affects other areas and these need to be addressed to ensure all is kosher. When I said that before I was thinking of two weeks but then the beta testers did thier job and discovered some problems that required attention. I have been working flat out to address these. We released Replacement Exe #6 for Build 4.2.241 last night. The autotesters are reporting all OK this morning. I haven't checked our dev forum yet but if there is nothing untoward then I will upload a new patch installer for testing early next week. This will then need to be tested and it may take a week or so to confirm before it can be released to the public. So we are close.

[Arjuna]

By way of an example, one on the testers ( who will remane nameless to prtoect him from any public stoning [;)] ) pointed out that the range rings were not working for arty units who had lost their guns as they stiull showed that it had a bombardment range, when it shouldn't have. This was because the code was looking up the etab bombardment capability and firepower and modifying this by the current personell level. Now the unit still had 50% personnel and so it deemd to have 50% of its firepower when it fact it should have had zero.

To address this I had to replicate the code for determining the firepower in the estab class. But this required changes to the data structures of forces and the code for determining if the unit could bombard or not. This then required modifications in the foce allocation and scheduling code to use the dynamic versions rather than the estab versions and so on. It's like a ball of spagetti, each string has to be unravelled.

But one of the real benefits of this change, other than providing the user with a more realistic assessment tool, was tyhat all the movement and threat assessment code was now using more accurate data and this has enhanced the overall AI's performance. So yes I think it was worth the weeks delay.

By way of an answer to the question above about how this changes the AI performance in terms of fatigue and cohesion, I have not received any adverse comments on these aspect for some time from our beta testers. I think we have this right.

We have spent a lot of time addressing the base game mechanics of fire and movement. I have spent a lot of time on the scheduling code to try and prevent lockups and delays. The testers have commented favourabvly on how more responsive the AI is and how much better it is at maintaining tempo.

Another aspect I have endeavoured to improve is the prevention of HQs and support units from leading the charge into enemy territory. I won't be 100% happy with the HQs until I implement HQ basing for all senior HQs for all missions. At the moment we only implkement HQ basing for attacks. This would be a big undertaking and so will have to wait for another full release. For now, however, I have implemented a number of measures to mitigate against the worst cases of this behaviour. HQs and support units will stop if the immediate route ahead is threatened. They now stay in the reserve location rather than move to the objective for the final reorg on attacks. ( This alone has cut down a huge number of these cases. ) For the future I would also like to develop a new pathing algorythm that excludes enemy controlled territory, as opposed to known enemy controlled firepower influence, and then use this for basing units.

There is a whole lot more mods made and I will post up a full list next week.

[Phoenix100]

Thanks for the update, Dave. It sounds like absolutely awful kind of work to do. I know a little how it feels from re-writing thriller novels, believe it or not. You change something at one point (because an editor asks for a change) then I have to remember all the places where this change might impact throughout 100,000 words, from memory. Drives me crazy. Doing this with your code must be like that x 100, perhaps. I hope you can somehow enjoy the work, otherwise, I guess, what's the point? All the changes sound great. Myself, can't wait to try this and the HTTR add-on. Thanks again.

[Nikolaj]

Thanks for the update. Personally, I don't mind waiting a bit longer, since I'm pretty busy at the moment, anyway. Still, I'd be interested to know how the Arnhem expansion is coming along. Will it be ready to release alongside the patch (assuming the patch will be finished in 2-3 weeks), or will it take a bit longer?

[johndoesecond]

Since you ask, here's a word from a betatester ...

I was just thinking about the differences between the current game and the way the patch is shaping out, and I said to myself: wow, just wow!

Rather that just incremental improvements and bug squashing as it would be expected for a path, what you'll soon get is a deeply improved game engine.

I would say it definitely qualifies as a new game. If I wanted to make a comparison, I'd say it is much more improved from the original game than, say, the recently overhauled Close Combat series engine.

As soon as Dave publishes the changelog, you too will be overwhelmed by the sheer amount of things he has changed and put into the game, as well as improvements in scenarios and estabs Richard so patiently collected.

Don't think I'm usually so apologetic, and Dave only knows just how critical and PITA altogether I can be insisting on things.

But this will really (I mean really!) be an important leap.

So, how is the patch shaping out, you ask me?
Had I had just 160 characters to say it in an SMS, I'd say "I've seen things you people couldn't believe".

[PirateJock]

Well if that doesn't build the anticipation I don't know what would ... how long did you say we had to wait [;)]

Cheers

[Waffenamt]

I'm just thrashing away at Pz Corps in Field Marshal mode atm while patiently holding off. [:)] Can't wait and am really looking forward to the Arnhem add-on!