Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Take command of air and naval assets from post-WW2 to the near future in tactical and operational scale, complete with historical and hypothetical scenarios and an integrated scenario editor.

Moderator: MOD_Command

User avatar
Roby7979
Posts: 1030
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2018 4:12 pm
Location: Italy,Rome

Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by Roby7979 »

Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Image

Command’s “War Planner” update (aka “Tiny”) is set to release in less than a month. Are you ready for Command’s biggest update yet? In this multi-part series we take a look at the various key features introduced. Following the Overview, today it is the turn of general improvements and new UI features.

General speed improvements: A lot of individually small speed improvements both in the map/UI as well as the simulation engine combine together to provide an improved gameplay experience – as well as improved analysis throughout in the professional edition.

New “Double Flame” time acceleration mode: Command until now has been using two distinct time-slice settings for simulation fidelity: 0.1-sec (aka. “Finegrained mode”) and 1-sec (aka “Coarse mode”). Some of our users have asked for an additional “very coarse” 5-sec timeslice in order to achieve even greater simulation speed.

We were reluctant to step into this rabbit hole for some time, as once you start cranking up the timeslice length weird things start to happen (easy and classic example: weapon is at time-X in front of the target, at X+5 sec beyond the target, and no impact check can be easily made). However, we came up with a reasonable solution to this conundrum: automatically “throttle back” the timeslice setting to 1-sec whenever something that requires this precision happens or is about to happen, and freely let loose the speed demons in any other case. This has been tested extensively with very satisfying results, both in terms of simulation stability/integrity as well as the chief driver, performance. (Anecdotally, one of the early adopters used this feature to turn a nine-hour analysis into a three-minute run instead. Obviously, the performance benefits can vary wildly according to the scenario and use-case.)

And why is it called “Double Flame”, you may ask? This is why:

Image
 
New feature: Benchmark mode: This provides an objective way to measure & compare a system’s performance and suitability for CPE, by repeatedly running any selected scenario in headless mode (similar to Monte-Carlo execution, but without any analysis results). By default, the execution is run using fine-grained pulse mode (ie. 0.1-sec pulses) in order to stress-test the simulation engine and the hardware resources; however, “coarse” and “very coarse” options are also available.

Image

Some notes on this:

– The benchmark mode indicates the performance only for the simulation engine, not for the map/UI engine. For this reason, the rest of the UI (main window and map etc.) is hidden away while the benchmark window is active.

– It is best to run scenarios that can be run AI-vs-AI (e.g. “Duelists”, “The Tiger and the Dragon” etc.), otherwise one of the sides is going to remain idle during execution.

– Total scenario running time is not shown, because it can be an unreliable performance metric (e.g. did the scenario end quickly because it was run fast, or because an “end scenario” trigger was fired?).



Hypersonic glide vehicles (HGV) and directional-EMP (D-EMP) weapons: Previously available only in the Professional Edition, these two weapons types are now also available in the commercial edition.

Directional EMPs: CMANO v1.12 introduced omnidirectional tactical-EMP weapons. CMO now expands on this feature by also simulating directed-EMP warheads such as the one fitted on the USAF’s experimental CHAMP project. Using weapons with directional-EMP warheads is simple: Allocate the weapon at the desired primary target, and the weapon will first reach this target, “zap” it with its EMP payload, then head to the next nearest target, zap that one, then head to the next nearest target etc. until it runs out of fuel (or is shot down). This mode of operation makes D-EMP weapons very useful against clusters of closely-grouped targets with sensitive electronics, as is commonly the case for EW/GCI radars, C4 nodes, SAM batteries etc. The DB3000 currently has one directional-EMP weapon: Weapon #3407 – AGM-158B JASSM-ER [D-EMP], a variant of the common AGM-158B tactical cruise missile. By default, it is available for loadout #25091 (24x AGM-158B D-EMP), carried by: Aircraft #4325 – B-1B Lancer – USAF, 2018, IBS. Of course, weapon records holding this weapon can also be shoehorned into any aircraft loadout using ScenEdit, as normal.


HGVs: Hypersonic Glide Vehicles (HGVs) are boosted into near-space by rockets, then dive back into the atmosphere and glide towards their (usually distant) targets, optionally using a complex trajectory with pre-specified waypoints to complicate detection and interception. As many HGVs are still “developmental” systems with many aspects of the behavior of deployed systems (such as Avangard) are still subject to classification rules, Command’s implementation relies mostly on currently publicly available data, partially from the tests of experimental hypersonic vehicles like the HTV-2. Command’s current implementation assumes a sharp dive into the atmosphere after release from the parent booster, followed by a pull-up maneuver that establishes the HGV to a shallow glide trajectory towards its target. (In the database, the “Cruise altitude” value is used to mark the altitude at which the pull-up maneuver will start). This is an example of the trajectory shortly after atmospheric pull-up, as displayed on Tacview:

Image

Players can optionally also plot a waypoint trajectory, in the same way as they can plot a complex course for cruise missiles.


Separated autosave for each scenario: The “Resume from autosave” function now fetches from the new Autosaves folder the latest modified root scenario folder that contains the specific autosaves, and then uses the autosave.scen of this folder. If you want to load an autosave from a specific scenario, you can select a scenario in the “load scenario” window and a “load autosave” button will appear if a valid autosave exists. This ability can be very useful if you need to keep save copies from multiple different scenarios you may be playing.

Formation presets: You can now quickly arrange the members of a group using any of a range of formation presets:

Image

The presets work with any unit type and allow quickly positioning units relative to each other and to the group’s lead. There are various controls on a new toolbar within the formation editor:

- The “Formation” selector allows picking from a number of different presets. These are defined in the file \Resources\Formation\StandardFormations.txt, which also documents the format so that you can add your own variants if needed.
- The “Spacing” value sets the spacing between each unit, either in nautical miles or in meters.
- The “Heading” value sets the assumed heading when ordering the formation position.
- The “Assign” button arranges the formation stations based on the previous settings; all group members will do their best to get themselves into these positions ASAP (they may not be physically be able to, for example when a surface group transits a narrow strait; in this case they will converge towards the group lead).
- The “Place” button is visible only in ScenEdit mode, and instantly teleports the group members to their assigned stations (useful for quickly arranging a group without the real-world delay, e.g. when constructing the initial setup of a scenario).

Improved Mission Editor layout: This can sound minor initially, but the feedback we have received indicates a massive quality-of-life upgrade. The ME window has been significantly revamped, with the sections for assigning/unassigning units, configuring mission settings and selecting strike targets now all relegated to separate tabbed windows. This opens up the previously cramped space of the ME window and allows much more “real estate” on each of those sections, both making usage easier and also providing more room for future additions:

Image

Mission Editor – Generate flight plan for assigned aircraft: One of the new features added to the ME is the ability to generate a flight plan for any air mission before the assigned aircraft take off. This can be used either in close integration with the Multi-domain Strike Planner (more on that on a next post) or as a stand-alone feature.

Image

Mission Editor – Clone existing mission: Another “small but mighty” quality-of-life improvement: Copy an existing mission’s settings to a new one. If you need to create a lot of similar missions quickly and don’t want to use scripting for any reason, this can be a significant time-saver:

Image

New bathymetry layer: CMO’s original “Relief” layer was very warmly received, and a persistent request has been to provide a similarly rich visual layer for the bathymetry data. Such a layer was indeed made available, initially for the release of CPE 2.0 in 2021, and now we are glad to make it available in the commercial version:

Image

This layer can be very useful for all aspects of underwater operations, from submarine & ASW ops, to mine and counter-mine systems and tactics, UUV control etc.


Load/save doctrine XML templates: One more popular request is now realized: Players have long asked for the ability to customize a ruleset for Doctrine & ROE settings (including EMCON, WRA etc.) and then be able to apply that as a template to other units, groups, missions etc. This is now possible, by the ability to save and reload such templates. In addition, because the save file is in raw XML format, the contents of the template can be freely edited – by hand, or by automated XML-parsing tools or scripts. Obviously this opens up a variety of automation capabilities.


Expanded WRA range options: The introduction of realistic boost-coast kinematics for AAW missiles, and the accompanying changes to default aircraft missile evasion behaviors (more on both of these on a forthcoming post) has made players more interested in more WRA range options. So in addition to the existing absolute-number figures, percentages of nominal range are now also available (25%, 50% and 75% of nominal). Furthermore, given that the new missile kinematics now reward evasion behaviors favoring outrunning the missile rather than trying to beam/notch it, a no-escape zone (NEZ) range option has been added to WRAs for AAW targets:

Image

The logic of NEZ is actually pretty simple: If the target turns instantly at the moment of weapon launch and runs away from the firing unit, will the weapon be able to run it down? (If the target has been class-identified, its maximum possible speed at its current altitude is used as the reference “runaway” speed; if not, its current observed speed is used instead).

The benefit of using NEZ for a missile shot is that it makes it highly unlikely that the target will able to outrun the shot. On the other hand, against a high-performance target this leads to a severe reduction in practical launch range: Make your shot too conservative (to deny the adversary a chance to outrun your weapon), and you may possibly surrender the engagement initiative to the enemy. Again, a matter of trade-offs and risk management.


Revised message log: You generally liked CMO’s existing message log for its versatility and power, but you were not terribly fond of its “grouping by type” of messages. You told us you prefer a single waterfall-like flow of messages (ironically, much like CMANO’s original one) but with the option to dynamically show/hide messages by type. So this is what we came up with:

Image

- Messages can now be filtered by type directly by clicking on each of the type descriptions in the olive-green buttons (when a type is disabled, its corresponding button color changes to red).
- Clicking on the “All” button instantly enables/disables all types.
- Clicking on the “>Raw” button toggles between “raw” (aka “waterfall”) and interactive modes.
- Clicking on the red-circled icon will detach the message log to its own window, and clicking it again will re-dock it.

New logged-message category: Doctrine/ROE changes.Like all other message types, this can be configured to appear on the message log, raise a pop-up and optionally stop the clock, show a message balloon etc.


Area & reference-points manager: Another migrant from Command-PE, this very handy tool will be your new best friend if you use areas and zones a lot (and in non-trivial scenarios we’ll assume you do):

Image

This offers a centralized interface for editing reference points on large-scale scenarios. Ref-points and zones can be organized by tagging and visually distinguished by different colors. This can be superbly helpful, for example, for setting apart different patrol areas or exclusion zones.


Graphical Display of Satellite Pass Prediction: The “Satellite Pass Prediction” window now has an extra tab, which displays the same information in a more visual manner:

Image

The tabular “spreadsheet” display or orbital passes still remains available, and is still a very powerful way of obtaining the info you need (e.g. sorting by any information field), but this graphical way provides an at-a-glance ability to quickly compare satellite availability windows.


Quick manual weapon allocation: Don’t trust the AI to make the optimum weapon allocation (or you’re the kind of micromanagement freak that never appears in grognard circles), but the full manual weapon allocation window intimidates you with its myriad combinations of shooters, targets and weapons? There is now another way:

Image

Yes, it’s nothing Earth-shattering and if you’re a longtimer of the genre you’ve already seen this on other games. Still, you apparently like it well enough that you consistently asked for it in Command too, and we are happy to oblige.

Notice, too, the new “Investigate” and “Drop Target” commands. “Investigate” is another popular long-time request; the unit(s) will intercept and “shadow” the contact of interest but not engage unless in self-defense. Some additional new commands not shown in this screenshot:

- Refuel To Tanker
- Join Group As Escort
- RTB
- Assign New Home Base

Plot a course for the selected unit directly by right-clicking anywhere on the map: This is a boon to players coming from RTS games, where right-clicking to direct units is as instinctive as breathing. As in RTS titles, you can also plot multiple waypoints in succession by holding the shift key. During testing this was found to be annoying for some players who prefer the good old F3 way, so this behavior can be enabled/disabled through the game options window.


New optional UI/Map element: Barks: Barks are short text notifications that can be set to appear, briefly, anywhere on the map. Some examples:

Image
Image

The appearance and “styling” of the barks (color, text, duration etc.) is fully customizable through the Lua API, so you have full power to add them on any action performed. We can only begin to imagine what some of the more resourceful modders in the community will do with this feature.



New optional UI/Map feature: Slug trails: This something you may already be familiar with, if you have past experience with air-traffic control radar screens, sonar tactical consoles etc:

Image
Image
Image

Slug trails can be configured through the Game Options window:

Image

Flexible usage of CPU threads on LOS Tool: When we introduced the Line-Of-Sight (LOS) tool in CMO, some players whiplashed from “Meh, CMO does not utilize my multi-core CPU as much as I expected it to” to “HELP!!! When The LOS Tool is active, the rest of the game slows to a crawl!” (Don’t say we didn’t warn you…)

With this in mind, we added the ability to configure how many of the CPU’s available hardware threads (ie. virtual cores) can be allocated for use by the LOS Tool, therefore leaving the other cores/threads available to the UI and simulation engine:

Image

Improvements on replenishment menus: The “Replenish” context menu now displays which type to rearm and will find automatically the eligible supply platform with this weapon in store. The context menu only shows the relevant weapons that have missing ammo, so it is easier to replenish a unit from various wide-spread supply facilities/vehicles/ships and keep track of what is missing. Example:

Image

Ability to toggle more involved attacks (stick until winchester) in strike missions (toggle in strike mission UI):

Image

Configurable sim-pause behavior: You can now configure whether opening up certain windows such as the DB viewer or Air-Ops will implicitly pause the simulation execution or not:

Image

Include direct-path area in CZ rendering: When looking at a submarine’s sensor coverage of its CZ rings (if applicable), it can be easy to lose sight of the inner direct-path area where sonar detections are most feasible. This has now been rectified:

Image

Note that this range represents the surface-level detection ability (detection range against under-layer targets, for example, will likely be lower) and dynamically adjusts to weather & environment conditions (boosted by surface ducting if present, shrunk by bad weather if present etc.)


Minimap improvements: The different minimaps have been improved in their presentation and unit rendering, and they also now include land-cover type in their color. Example:

Image
GlassHoppa
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2014 2:02 pm

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by GlassHoppa »

Bravo on the Warplanner/Tiny Upgrade (can't call it just an "update)! Just the UI and ROI changes are already incredible, looking forward to your in-depth review of the engine changes.

Question regarding the Formation presets - Do formations include height? For air units, of course... For instance can you set a spread formation where one aircraft is some distance horizontally separated, and also 3k feet below the other aircraft?

Thank you in advance for your answer!
taylorgeorge
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 7:09 pm

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by taylorgeorge »

Good to see this come out in the "official'" updates. Would take it as a kindness if some official guidance could be posted describing the best option for those of us who have happily been soldiering along in the Betas. Thanks.
gennyo
Posts: 204
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:08 pm

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by gennyo »

I hope there will be a smaller update pack for anyone who is already on Tiny branch, because Tiny is so tiny, I can't imagining downloading and installing something this tiny again. :mrgreen:
rmwilsonjr
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 1:17 am

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by rmwilsonjr »

Other than "less than a month" has anyone got intel on when the release date will be? In other words, will this 'spoil' our Christmas or will it 'spoil' our New Year? Either way, Winter is looking more appealing all the time.
Richard
User avatar
BradOrbital
Posts: 329
Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2013 1:12 pm

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by BradOrbital »

Been hitting F5 all day on the blog to get the next post update....
DWReese
Posts: 2446
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 11:40 am
Location: Miami, Florida

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by DWReese »

I sincerely pray that this update comes COMPLETE, with EVERYTHING.

It has been an absolute NIGHTMARE using the BETA, and then trying to apply the update because it wasn't complete. Each time it has taken well over six hours of work to finally get the proper sequence of adding, and re-installing, etc., and re-adding, etc. All of that could have been avoided if the update had just come complete.

I don't care how long it takes to download it, the thing needs to come complete, and in working order, without having to immediately contact Tech Support because it won't load any further than the spinning world.

In fact, this time I'll wait for several days to see if everyone else gets it installed before I even try mine. I'm not going through all of that a third time. It's too stressful. I'll keep the BETA until I know that the update is safe.
Nikel
Posts: 2238
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by Nikel »

The beta patches are complete.

The problem arrives, I think, when you mix the official and the beta, that cannot be done, one or the other unless you have a double setup.
thewood1
Posts: 10091
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:24 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by thewood1 »

The issues are generally, though not completely, people not following instructions because they are trying to short cut or they lose track of versions/folders on their PC. I continue to say that only people willing to be very disciplined on managing game versions and willing to follow instructions should work with the beta. Others should stick with the release version. Will this solve all problems...no. Stuff still happens. But agonizing over the beta process is not necessary and probably unhealthy.

I have had to full reinstall twice myself from not paying attention to what I am doing. But I take it as just the price for staying on the edge.
thewood1
Posts: 10091
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:24 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by thewood1 »

I'll also point out that soon after the release, a new beta will show up and the process will start over. I think Steam has it right with betas. Force people to think about it a little before jumping in.
BDukes
Posts: 2678
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 12:59 pm

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by BDukes »

This kind of stuff like this happens in all betas, but files have been missing. Examples are the bathymetric layer, default formation editor template, and think Nikel just posted another example. Not exactly crimes against humanity but it did happen :)

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 9#p5062599

You can certainly see by looking into tech support who is contributing. DWReese is definitely one of them. His post was a bit more dramatic than usual but I wouldn't heckle him at all. He works.

M
Don't call it a comeback...
thewood1
Posts: 10091
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:24 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by thewood1 »

I'm not saying there aren't issues in the beta...as you would expect. Missing files, typos, just plain mistakes happen in all betas i have been part of in games and in professional life. If one can't handle the beta, don't participate. There is nothing that stops anyone from dropping out of the beta or not even participating. If you feel that you are giving labor away for free to the devs or they are somehow taking advantage of you, stay off the beta.

My opinion is that open betas on complex games like this shouldn't be open. This is what you get. Multiple people have complained about how long the beta is. I agree. I think it should have stayed private until just before the announcement. But the devs have their own reasons for shifting the focus to the public beta. And it does expose issues very quickly. But things like missing files and typos get exposed to the public in a way that might cause them to lose faith and patience with the devs.

The other thing to keep in mind is that the devs have done probably three years of development in less than a year. There have been some pretty big changes. That type of development with an obsessive and nit-picky customer base is prone to frustration. That speed is not for all customers. Things break, get missed, and can just plain be done wrong. If you aren't willing fo handle this high pace of updates and changes, again, this beta isn't for you. That should be a disclaimer up front.
BDukes
Posts: 2678
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 12:59 pm

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by BDukes »

thewood1 wrote: Sat Dec 17, 2022 7:20 pm I'm not saying there aren't issues in the beta...as you would expect. Missing files, typos, just plain mistakes happen in all betas i have been part of in games and in professional life. If one can't handle the beta, don't participate. There is nothing that stops anyone from dropping out of the beta or not even participating. If you feel that you are giving labor away for free to the devs or they are somehow taking advantage of you, stay off the beta.

My opinion is that open betas on complex games like this shouldn't be open. This is what you get. Multiple people have complained about how long the beta is. I agree. I think it should have stayed private until just before the announcement. But the devs have their own reasons for shifting the focus to the public beta. And it does expose issues very quickly. But things like missing files and typos get exposed to the public in a way that might cause them to lose faith and patience with the devs.

The other thing to keep in mind is that the devs have done probably three years of development in less than a year. There have been some pretty big changes. That type of development with an obsessive and nit-picky customer base is prone to frustration. That speed is not for all customers. Things break, get missed, and can just plain be done wrong. If you aren't willing fo handle this high pace of updates and changes, again, this beta isn't for you. That should be a disclaimer up front.
Sounds good.

All I care about is just getting a good end product so I can game. DWReese works to that end.

Thanks

M
Don't call it a comeback...
DWReese
Posts: 2446
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 11:40 am
Location: Miami, Florida

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by DWReese »

A great many people like me downloaded the Beta and have been constantly working on it. We (there are others) were not aware at the time that it was necessary to have TWO VERSIONS of the game. That's water under the bridge now.

The unofficial BETA test team has devoted hundreds, if not thousands, of hours to get this version where it is now--ready for release.

My point is, the devs should make every effort to make sure that their unofficial BETA team are able to make a smooth, effortless transition back to the new official version of CMO. As you know, the last official update was missing some files in an effort to reduce the size of the file. It wasn't a question of us not knowing how to complete the process as was suggested. Those that had trouble all experienced the same thing---The file format had changed and the new files were either missing or not compatible. This was not something that any of us did wrong. We followed the procedure, the same as usual. But, when the update had changed, we no longer had what was necessary to make things work. It was the BETA testers that suffered, from no fault of their own. They did nothing wrong.

So, I beg the devs to release a version that will not cause grief to BETA testers, for without them, this game would not be where it is today. This group worked hard, without pay or compensation, and they deserve a nice, seamless transition back to the official version, and not to be hung out to dry because they left out some files because some people are complaining about the size of the download file.

Please make it complete so that it will work without any headaches. I really don't want to uninstall, reinstall, re-install again, and screw with this for hours just to get it to work again. I believe that it is the responsibility of the devs to recognize the hard work of those who devoted so much time making this all come together, and to do the right thing by making a complete update that isn't filled with headaches for those who worked so hard.

That's my opinion.
thewood1
Posts: 10091
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:24 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by thewood1 »

I think what you are begging for is a move towards a more private beta. One of the issues with public betas is they are hard to manage. Private betas are invitation so you can recruit people that can be provided with more complex instructions and have more knowledge of how a PC game setup works. The downside of a private beta is it can slow down the development process with a more limited pool of players. The upside, as you can see from the tech support section here, is that you aren't dealing with people installing in the wrong directories, needing detailed updated manuals, confused my rapid releases and downloads, etc.

Its a balance for the devs. But insisting that the public beta process is broken will possibly force the devs to slow releases and move the beta to a more private process. Obviously, its their decision, but its been frustrating watching people complain about the beta process when they have a very simple recourse.

btw, how much work and hours you put into it isn't a factor. You can volunteer for the private beta testing if you want to put time into it. And you can choose not to put that time into that part of the game. Play release version and don't waste time feeling unappreciated.
BDukes
Posts: 2678
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 12:59 pm

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by BDukes »

DWReese wrote: Sun Dec 18, 2022 1:02 am
The unofficial BETA test team has devoted hundreds, if not thousands, of hours to get this version where it is now--ready for release.
Ha yeah. It is pretty visible who is doing the good work and the devs know their business. Not even sure why this needs to be written, but here we are.. :D
My point is, the devs should make every effort to make sure that their unofficial BETA team are able to make a smooth, effortless transition back to the new official version of CMO.

That's my opinion.
Nothing wrong with..hey devs.. last time was a bit of a bear. Any chance could do this? (list of suggestions). Delivery is everything sometimes. They can choose to do whatever with that. You did your due diligence by asking.

M
Don't call it a comeback...
BDukes
Posts: 2678
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 12:59 pm

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by BDukes »

thewood1 wrote: Sun Dec 18, 2022 1:15 am I think what you are begging for is a move towards a more private beta. One of the issues with public betas is they are hard to manage. Private betas are invitation so you can recruit people that can be provided with more complex instructions and have more knowledge of how a PC game setup works. The downside of a private beta is it can slow down the development process with a more limited pool of players. The upside, as you can see from the tech support section here, is that you aren't dealing with people installing in the wrong directories, needing detailed updated manuals, confused my rapid releases and downloads, etc.
He's never suggested stopping beta. You have, twice. What are you up to?
Its a balance for the devs. But insisting that the public beta process is broken will possibly force the devs to slow releases and move the beta to a more private process. Obviously, its their decision, but its been frustrating watching people complain about the beta process when they have a very simple recourse.
Take your own advice. You don't have to watch people doing anything. It is voluntary, right?
btw, how much work and hours you put into it isn't a factor. You can volunteer for the private beta testing if you want to put time into it. And you can choose not to put that time into that part of the game. Play release version and don't waste time feeling unappreciated.
Doug make me mad so I make him feel bad. It makes me look good to devs. Do I got that right?

The game and testing are fine. Doug does good things and can ask for stuff.

M
Don't call it a comeback...
thewood1
Posts: 10091
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:24 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by thewood1 »

OK. Complain about something that is completely in your control.
boogabooga
Posts: 985
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2018 12:05 am

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by boogabooga »

:o

Please, no.

The Tiny branch is NOT ready to come out of beta, IMHO.

Still too many unresolved bugs, especially in the strike missions and in the GUI and all over the place. It's good to keep a pre-Tiny option for when debugging becomes too frustrating.
The boogabooga doctrine for CMO: Any intentional human intervention needs to be able to completely and reliably over-ride anything that the AI is doing at any time.
Dimitris
Posts: 15322
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 10:29 am
Contact:

Re: Command War Planner: General Improvements and User Interface

Post by Dimitris »

boogabooga wrote: Sun Dec 18, 2022 6:03 am :o

Please, no.

The Tiny branch is NOT ready to come out of beta, IMHO.

Still too many unresolved bugs, especially in the strike missions and in the GUI and all over the place. It's good to keep a pre-Tiny option for when debugging becomes too frustrating.
Don't want to break your heart, but spoiler alert: The War Planner update (aka "Tiny") will be released with various known issues still unresolved.

For more than a year we have been assembling this release and our focus has been largely on this. Releasing Tiny will allow us to re-balance our effort between supporting the official release (ie. fixing known and new issues) and adding new major things that have been in development and are now ready for integration and testing. (I've mentioned some of them in the past)

We will keep working on fixing what we can, both pre- and post-release, but we are not aiming for a zero-bug release. If the latter is your expectation then we are sorry but you will be disappointed. Please read this again.
Post Reply

Return to “Command: Modern Operations series”