change optional rules

[franklin1000]

Once you start a game, can you turn on/off an optional rule?

[paulderynck]

It depends. Your game might crash when you next load it, depending on the rule you change. The optional rule flags are stored near the beginning of the game file, you'd have to experiment using a new game each time to see which position corresponds to which optional rule. You have to be very sure of what you are doing. (Has anyone done this and published the results? - Ronnie, maybe?)

But one that you may be safe to change would be the one that allows the game to continue beyond JA45.

[Courtenay]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

It depends. Your game might crash when you next load it, depending on the rule you change. The optional rule flags are stored near the beginning of the game file, you'd have to experiment using a new game each time to see which position corresponds to which optional rule. You have to be very sure of what you are doing. (Has anyone done this and published the results? - Ronnie, maybe?)

But one that you may be safe to change would be the one that allows the game to continue beyond JA45.

I believe that that is the one rule that the game lets you change.

I have experimented with changing the optional rule flags, and I think it is OK, assuming that one is sensible about it. Do not change (either adding or deleting) an optional rule that adds units to the game. That is almost certain to break something.

[rkr1958]

The line ending with "OptRules" in the game file, which is line 6 is this example, contains the flags for all the optional rules. -1 means the optional rule is used and 0 means it's not. The order in which these flags correspond to specific optional rules is the same order as used in the *.OPR files which can be founded in the folder

*\Matrix Games\World in Flames\Optional Rules

[rkr1958]

As Courtenay cautioned I would be VERY CAREFUL about "switching" on/off optional rules by editing the game file. Specifically as he stated rules that add or remove units from the game or optional rules that haven't been coded yet.

But hey, what's the worse that can happen?! You screw up your game file. And I know if you do edit your game file you use the good practice of making a copy of the original (before the edit) which you can revert back to if you screw things up royally. [;)]

By the way, if anyone is interested I've figured out how to put CPs back on sentry and remaining at sea during the return to base phase. Or, am I the only one who's be surprised by returning CPs that I wanted to stay at sea but overlooked during that phase? [:D]

[juntoalmar]

If the game breaks afterwards, just remember to say you edited the file when posting about a bug!

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

By the way, if anyone is interested I've figured out how to put CPs back on sentry and remaining at sea during the return to base phase. Or, am I the only one who's be surprised by returning CPs that I wanted to stay at sea but overlooked during that phase? [:D]

No, it surprised our Allied player in our Temaviewer game. Maybe I should not have put us on version 2.2.7 - does anyone recall when the convoy system became less cooperative? If you do then I'd be willing to see what was fixed versus this CP RTB issue and the convoy regression bugs, and back us out to that version.

[Jagdtiger14]

In our game (version 2.2.5) 6 Jap cp's in the China Sea went off sentry. But there were other bigger problems that forced me to reconstruct the entire turn from scratch. During this reconstruction I was able to return the Japanese cp's back to sentry when Japan had naval moves. Its good to know this can be rectified at RTB! Thank you Ronnie!

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck
Maybe I should not have put us on version 2.2.7 - does anyone recall when the convoy system became less cooperative? If you do then I'd be willing to see what was fixed versus this CP RTB issue and the convoy regression bugs, and back us out to that version.

My understanding is that "this CP RTB issue" is not a regression bug but a design decision. A design decision, which I respectively disagree with, but one that results in surviving CPs going off sentry in a given sea area after any CPs are destroyed or aborted in that area.

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

In our game (version 2.2.5) 6 Jap cp's in the China Sea went off sentry. But there were other bigger problems that forced me to reconstruct the entire turn from scratch. During this reconstruction I was able to return the Japanese cp's back to sentry when Japan had naval moves. Its good to know this can be rectified at RTB! Thank you Ronnie!

You're welcome! Before this edit I was faced with the decision to either go back to an autosave and "waste" an hour or more getting back to where I was or accept the loss in production. Now I can take 5 minutes, or less, to "fix the problem" and move on with my game. [:)]