Limited Stacking

[witpqs]

You've described what you do before, but what does CPX stand for? (I googled with no joy.)

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: witpqs
You've described what you do before, but what does CPX stand for? (I googled with no joy.)

A bit OT, but briefly; it stands for Command Post eXercise. 2 sides with an umpire. We adapt the technique for AE so that Side A moves and sends a raw file to the umpire along with a brief description of what's going on. The umpire may or may not monkey with the file, depending. Umpire then saves and sends to Side B. Side B then moves and sends a raw file to the umpire along with a brief description of what's going on. The umpire may or may not monkey with that file, depending. The umpire then sends the final file to A and B for them to run and see what happened.

This is a quick explanation. If people want to learn more, please start a new thread. It's actually a quite exciting way to play AE.

[JeffroK]

I've done TEWTS and miniatures like this, be nice to the umpire man!!

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: JWE
Also think bases are best tweaked on a case by case. Stubs will work, and perhaps are necessary, to get the multipliers set up right, but certain bases will nevertheless need the base limits (BL) set manually. Lots of work, but still.

Using a bit of data manipulation in Excel I can change the values to account for base data fairly easily, and I currently think this might be the best approach. It would result in higher stacking values for most bases on the map, with the non-base hexes all retaining their original, "low" values. Small bases would not give a significant bonus, but large bases would.

My current thinking is that the bonus could be set to something like 5,000 points per point of port and airfield levels. So, for example, a base with port 5 and airfield 5 would provide a bonus of 50,000. As mentioned, these values would not change during the game, even if ports and/or airfields are built up, but I can live with that.

Andrew

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: JWE
Also think bases are best tweaked on a case by case. Stubs will work, and perhaps are necessary, to get the multipliers set up right, but certain bases will nevertheless need the base limits (BL) set manually. Lots of work, but still.

Using a bit of data manipulation in Excel I can change the values to account for base data fairly easily, and I currently think this might be the best approach. It would result in higher stacking values for most bases on the map, with the non-base hexes all retaining their original, "low" values. Small bases would not give a significant bonus, but large bases would.

My current thinking is that the bonus could be set to something like 5,000 points per point of port and airfield levels. So, for example, a base with port 5 and airfield 5 would provide a bonus of 50,000. As mentioned, these values would not change during the game, even if ports and/or airfields are built up, but I can live with that.

Andrew

That sounds like something you might query Michael on, as it changing in-game with base building is a really good idea if he can make it happen.

[Shark7]

I'm just curious is this is something the end user can do, or does it require access to the code?

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown
Using a bit of data manipulation in Excel I can change the values to account for base data fairly easily, and I currently think this might be the best approach. It would result in higher stacking values for most bases on the map, with the non-base hexes all retaining their original, "low" values. Small bases would not give a significant bonus, but large bases would.
Andrew

Um, not sure this is a good idea. Am sending you a pm as to why. In the meantime, please do not do the base account thing till we discuss this. You may, of course, do what you wish, but don't think this is good and I'll explain why off-line.

Ciao. John

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: JWE
Also think bases are best tweaked on a case by case. Stubs will work, and perhaps are necessary, to get the multipliers set up right, but certain bases will nevertheless need the base limits (BL) set manually. Lots of work, but still.

Using a bit of data manipulation in Excel I can change the values to account for base data fairly easily, and I currently think this might be the best approach. It would result in higher stacking values for most bases on the map, with the non-base hexes all retaining their original, "low" values. Small bases would not give a significant bonus, but large bases would.

My current thinking is that the bonus could be set to something like 5,000 points per point of port and airfield levels. So, for example, a base with port 5 and airfield 5 would provide a bonus of 50,000. As mentioned, these values would not change during the game, even if ports and/or airfields are built up, but I can live with that.

Andrew

That sounds like something you might query Michael on, as it changing in-game with base building is a really good idea if he can make it happen.

It sounds good in theory, but that would involve manipulating the map data values (which is where stacking limits are stored) during the course of a game, which is not a trivial task. So I don't think this is on the table right now or in the forseeable future...

Andrew

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown



Using a bit of data manipulation in Excel I can change the values to account for base data fairly easily, and I currently think this might be the best approach. It would result in higher stacking values for most bases on the map, with the non-base hexes all retaining their original, "low" values. Small bases would not give a significant bonus, but large bases would.

My current thinking is that the bonus could be set to something like 5,000 points per point of port and airfield levels. So, for example, a base with port 5 and airfield 5 would provide a bonus of 50,000. As mentioned, these values would not change during the game, even if ports and/or airfields are built up, but I can live with that.

Andrew

That sounds like something you might query Michael on, as it changing in-game with base building is a really good idea if he can make it happen.

It sounds good in theory, but that would involve manipulating the map data values (which is where stacking limits are stored) during the course of a game, which is not a trivial task. So I don't think this is on the table right now or in the forseeable future...

Andrew

I understand, but give him a chance to say that. He's already blasted through stuff I had previously thought was too much for the patch.

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: witpqs
I understand, but give him a chance to say that. He's already blasted through stuff I had previously thought was too much for the patch.

There's a lot of things that are going on, my friend, to define even the basic paradigm of this. Soon as it's set and understood, if there are any code hooks necessary, we'll be sure to ask for them.

Right now, ya'll might be grasping michaelm by the tail and having him wag a dog of indeterminate scope and quantity. Not goodnik. Let's get the dog defined first. [;)]

[bk19@mweb.co.za]

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Let's get the dog defined first. [;)]

It ain't a dog yet.... it's not much more than a new born puppy ah reckons!!

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: witpqs
I understand, but give him a chance to say that. He's already blasted through stuff I had previously thought was too much for the patch.

There's a lot of things that are going on, my friend, to define even the basic paradigm of this. Soon as it's set and understood, if there are any code hooks necessary, we'll be sure to ask for them.

Right now, ya'll might be grasping michaelm by the tail and having him wag a dog of indeterminate scope and quantity. Not goodnik. Let's get the dog defined first. [;)]

Understood - I just meant don't count him out without asking 'cause he is full of surprises (the good kind, not a 4th green cup full of pee!!! [:D] He has good aim, that pooch.)

[Andy Mac]

I agree with JWE define first code second - this is not straight forward if for no other reason than it cannot be an exe fix as it cannnot apply to core scens without buggering up the AI so it has to be something for Babes (or other modders) so its not an easy thing to do so need to define carefully 1st then ask michael to work his magic