Debug Mode

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

Nope, not a paying customer. That is correct.

I first criticized removing debug 3+ years ago, and received support from experienced CWiF players -- stubborn resistance to reintroducing the feature (and it is most certainly a feature) caused my resistance to the project to metastasize into refusal. If after all this time convoys are still bugged beyond all use, then I don't believe questioning whether Steve can ever repair them is unreasonable. Debug would certainly help you out with that, and then if Steve did manage to tame the bugs you would still have a tool for scenario building.

Again, Steve's excuse is ludicrous -- no debug because if you plop units from every nation in the middle of Nebraska in a neutral USA, some funny business may result? No s***. Just ignore bug reports from debug games, good lord...

Criticism should be based on ownership of the game or being a beta tester if you criticize a game before it comes on the market. You got two options: buy the game and know what you are talking about or don't buy it and don't bother us with an opinion which isn't based on the facts!

[Centuur]

I will now give an example on how things can go wrong using the debug tool... In my AAR I've run into troubles with setting up the US oil points (known bug). So I decided to use the debug tool for that. It worked fine at that moment, giving me three oil points in a city. Fine, everything is OK, so let's continue...

Now, Steve did rewrite the setup and reinforcement placement for units and suddenly after restoring the game, I'm having 10 oil points in that city and an overstacking regression happening, while all other oil points aren't involved. So I'm now deliberating how to proceed with the AAR. I probably have to use the Debug tool again to fix things... [:@]

Bad luck, but that's how it is when using the debug tool. Sometimes it's great but sometimes you can really, really get all kinds of strange things happening...

[CrusssDaddy]

ORIGINAL: Centuur

I will now give an example on how things can go wrong using the debug tool... In my AAR I've run into troubles with setting up the US oil points (known bug). So I decided to use the debug tool for that. It worked fine at that moment, giving me three oil points in a city. Fine, everything is OK, so let's continue...

Now, Steve did rewrite the setup and reinforcement placement for units and suddenly after restoring the game, I'm having 10 oil points in that city and an overstacking regression happening, while all other oil points aren't involved. So I'm now deliberating how to proceed with the AAR. I probably have to use the Debug tool again to fix things... [:@]

Bad luck, but that's how it is when using the debug tool. Sometimes it's great but sometimes you can really, really get all kinds of strange things happening...

You may have to adjust the oil points again? But... that could take a few seconds?!?!?

CWiF debug provides you multiple work-arounds for oil difficulties: adjust points for yourself or lend-lease allies, add synth oil resources, un-disrupt units manually, add units to the production spiral, etc.

[CrusssDaddy]

ORIGINAL: Centuur

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

Nope, not a paying customer. That is correct.

I first criticized removing debug 3+ years ago, and received support from experienced CWiF players -- stubborn resistance to reintroducing the feature (and it is most certainly a feature) caused my resistance to the project to metastasize into refusal. If after all this time convoys are still bugged beyond all use, then I don't believe questioning whether Steve can ever repair them is unreasonable. Debug would certainly help you out with that, and then if Steve did manage to tame the bugs you would still have a tool for scenario building.

Again, Steve's excuse is ludicrous -- no debug because if you plop units from every nation in the middle of Nebraska in a neutral USA, some funny business may result? No s***. Just ignore bug reports from debug games, good lord...

Criticism should be based on ownership of the game or being a beta tester if you criticize a game before it comes on the market. You got two options: buy the game and know what you are talking about or don't buy it and don't bother us with an opinion which isn't based on the facts!

If you are bothered by my opinion, simply don't read what I have to say. It's really that simple. From what I'm told the little green button can make my posts -- and your problem -- magically disappear. It's like a debug feature for the forum!

[AxelNL]

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

ORIGINAL: Centuur

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

Nope, not a paying customer. That is correct.

I first criticized removing debug 3+ years ago, and received support from experienced CWiF players -- stubborn resistance to reintroducing the feature (and it is most certainly a feature) caused my resistance to the project to metastasize into refusal. If after all this time convoys are still bugged beyond all use, then I don't believe questioning whether Steve can ever repair them is unreasonable. Debug would certainly help you out with that, and then if Steve did manage to tame the bugs you would still have a tool for scenario building.

Again, Steve's excuse is ludicrous -- no debug because if you plop units from every nation in the middle of Nebraska in a neutral USA, some funny business may result? No s***. Just ignore bug reports from debug games, good lord...

Criticism should be based on ownership of the game or being a beta tester if you criticize a game before it comes on the market. You got two options: buy the game and know what you are talking about or don't buy it and don't bother us with an opinion which isn't based on the facts!

If you are bothered by my opinion, simply don't read what I have to say. It's really that simple. From what I'm told the little green button can make my posts -- and your problem -- magically disappear. It's like a debug feature for the forum!

Done

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

ORIGINAL: Centuur

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

Nope, not a paying customer. That is correct.

I first criticized removing debug 3+ years ago, and received support from experienced CWiF players -- stubborn resistance to reintroducing the feature (and it is most certainly a feature) caused my resistance to the project to metastasize into refusal. If after all this time convoys are still bugged beyond all use, then I don't believe questioning whether Steve can ever repair them is unreasonable. Debug would certainly help you out with that, and then if Steve did manage to tame the bugs you would still have a tool for scenario building.

Again, Steve's excuse is ludicrous -- no debug because if you plop units from every nation in the middle of Nebraska in a neutral USA, some funny business may result? No s***. Just ignore bug reports from debug games, good lord...

Criticism should be based on ownership of the game or being a beta tester if you criticize a game before it comes on the market. You got two options: buy the game and know what you are talking about or don't buy it and don't bother us with an opinion which isn't based on the facts!

If you are bothered by my opinion, simply don't read what I have to say. It's really that simple. From what I'm told the little green button can make my posts -- and your problem -- magically disappear. It's like a debug feature for the forum!

I'm not bothered by your opinion. I'm bothered by the way you are behaving on this forum. You are claiming to have supreme knowledge of MWIF while you don't even own the game. You are saying you know exactly how the debug function operates, while you don't know if this function did change at all since CWIF. How can you tell, without being a beta tester?
And the green button? Why don't you press it, than you won't be bothered with my opinion on your contributions on this forum anymore. I won't, because I pity you and I still hope that you will make a positive contribution on this forum, using knowledge of MWIF instead of knowledge of an obsolete and absolutely non-functioning CWIF...

So surprise me, and spend the dollars to buy MWIF and start talking out of knowledge, instead of what we call in the Netherlands the proverbial thumb.

[CrusssDaddy]

I think in the Netherlands sitting on thumbs is perhaps more popular than talking from them (with? to? I don't get the idiom), judging by your tireless attempts to stifle discussion and maintain the status quo. Critical discussion is the only thing moving needle. If no one had spoken up beginning a couple years ago, and more intensely early last year, the game would still be unreleased while they waited for the AI to be finished (as if!). If no one had spoken up after release about download-only, that would not be available. Now people are talking about a debug mode (you may notice I did not begin this thread) -- maybe they will get one, more likely they won't, but I am happy to discuss the wonderful debug mode that was removed from CWiF that I think would really come in handy for MWiF players right now.

Efforts to derail discussion are typically a fear response. You do not need to fear alternative opinions, they do not invalidate your own.

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

I think in the Netherlands sitting on thumbs is perhaps more popular than talking from them (with? to? I don't get the idiom), judging by your tireless attempts to stifle discussion and maintain the status quo. Critical discussion is the only thing moving needle. If no one had spoken up beginning a couple years ago, and more intensely early last year, the game would still be unreleased while they waited for the AI to be finished (as if!). If no one had spoken up after release about download-only, that would not be available. Now people are talking about a debug mode (you may notice I did not begin this thread) -- maybe they will get one, more likely they won't, but I am happy to discuss the wonderful debug mode that was removed from CWiF that I think would really come in handy for MWiF players right now.

Efforts to derail discussion are typically a fear response. You do not need to fear alternative opinions, they do not invalidate your own.

Talking from you thumb means that someone is saying things they don't know anything about. Now, you may be an expert on CWIF, you may be an expert on Wif, that doesn't make you an expert on MWIF. But again, I am very disappointed on your answer. Buy the game and than you can put your neverending complaints and attacks in here. I don't care, since than you are contributing and have committed yourself. If you don't buy the game than you don't know what is important to have and what isn't in MWIF. You might guess, but that isn't good enough...

[David Clark]

I recognize the necessity to cut down on the bugfix support burden, and agree that enabling the debug menu now might be counterproductive. As a compromise, could we get a commitment from Matrix that when Steve's contract is cancelled and the product becomes unsupported, that the debug menu will be enabled so we can work around whatever bugs remain?

[Numdydar]

Why on earth would you even say such a thing? Would you rather not have any MWiF at all? Becasue without Steve, we would not even have a game to complain about. Personally I would much rather have the WiF game we currently have, bugs and all, versus not having one.

Of course if you are right, then that means, no AI, no additional features, etc. because if Steve goes away there is no one else to do this. ADG tried and failed with CWiF. No one else in the entire world was willing to take on this project execpt Steve. So unless you have lots of dollars to lose on putting togeather a programing team to 'fix' it the way you want it, it would be a far better path to try and HELP solve the issues in the game versus complaining about not having a debug mode. Geez.

[David Clark]

I've supported the product, purchasing it in its current state, and I have the highest hopes that Steve will improve it, as he has done so. However, as you know, all software has a life cycle, and at some point Matrix will determine that the declining volume of new sales no longer justify continued development resourcing. At that point, the game will become effectively unsupported, and it's my hope that the remaining players will have access to the debug menu so that we can try to work around bugs that persist.

[Numdydar]

Well that sounds much better than your initial post [:)].

I agree that at some point support will no longer be provided, but we are talking a long time from now, likely years. If WiF turns out like War in the Pacific and AE, (and AE is still being supported today) we could all be drooling in our beards before support was finally ended [:)]

[tdpyle]

Amen! I played ADG's debug version of CWiF. It was amazingly easy to screw up the game by using debug to vary the setup. Usually it crashed several moves later thus invalidating the game in progress. I'm not sure I ever got completely thru a debugged game. Using the consumer version of CWiF which ADG released later without the debug feature, I had few problems. Debug would likely cause more problems for Shannon than any of us could stand.

[Beryl]

If used appropratly, debug function in CWiF was very handy to work around bugs (like CW production) or redo forgotten land moves or air rebase. Setup/Minor alignement modifications were possible but not allowed in the rules and thus not fully tested. I rarely saw crash when playing by the rules with debug mode.

[Numdydar]

But unfortunately, that is the problem. Not everyone would use it to just 'play by the rules'. Once something like this is released to the public, then the developer will need to have planned for it to be used in ways it was never interded. Which will create major errors, crashes, etc. as the underliying game engine was not designed to do the things that people ask it to through using the debug tool.So instead of chasing real bugs/issue that affect the game, many cycles are spent chasing ghosts that were made by using a tool like this. Not a good way to get the existing code polished up and an AI developed.

[Dabrion]

CWiF was done by Chris and not ADG (as if anyone can program over there ^^), and is essentially the same as MWiF.

[Numdydar]

While you may think CWiF is the same as MWiF, I respectfully have to totally disagree. To me there is a huge difference between the two games. Even more so when CWiF will never have an AI and no further development of any kind will occur. While I do respect your opinions and I am glad you can enjoy CWiF, I am very gald we have MWiF as we will have a game that will continue to be developed at least for the next year.

Also CWiF is no longer even available on ADG's web site so anyone that does not already own it had better hope MWiF continues to be worked on if they want a WiF computer version. As I have said many times, I would much rather have MWiF as it is now, versus not having it at all. As far as I am concerned, it is still a much better product than CWiF ever was and will only get better as time goes on.

[Dabrion]

CWiF/MwiF.. enjoy.. same sentence.. does not compute..

[warspite1]

Dabrion, just out of idle curiosity, why do you waste your time hanging around here? The reason I ask is that sadly, but perhaps understandably given the bugs etc, MWIF has disappointed you, it has far from met your expectations and it seems like it will be sometime before that position is rectified if ever.

As you say, you enjoy neither CWIF nor MWIF and have said previously that you have stopped playing MWIF given the problems. That being the case, what's the motivation?

[Dabrion]

I never started playing.. it is unplayable. I allocated time and money towards something that doesnt materialise.. (aka scam). Now I do not get my money back and the project is mid development, I want to track progress. Or perhaps I am only around so you can ask an intelligent question from time to time (out of idle curiosity, you know..), take your pick.