Game Interface - Place Units On Map

World in Flames is the computer version of Australian Design Group classic board game. World In Flames is a highly detailed game covering the both Europe and Pacific Theaters of Operations during World War II. If you want grand strategy this game is for you.

Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets

Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22165
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Contact:

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by Shannon V. OKeets »

ORIGINAL: scout1

Dumb question.....

Are the units tagged one at a time for placement, or can the player gang tag several at a time. Another pet peeve of mine form WitP, theybuilt the UI as if everyone wants to do everything ONE at a TIME. Can't hit multiple units at a single crack for orders. Makes data entry somewhat tedious.

Left clicking on a unit selects/deselects it. You can multiple select.

I am thinking about adding a check for stacking limits. If you select too many, then they won't fit in any hex. Stacking limits are enforced during setup so you can never over stack.
Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.
amwild
Posts: 105
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 9:31 am

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by amwild »

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
ORIGINAL: amwild

Can you dim illegal and fully stacked hexes - illegal hexes dimmer than otherwise legal but fully stacked hexes? That would give an idea of where units can be placed faster than is the case when waving the cursor over the map and watching it change. Keep the red X for illegal hexes as well, and it becomes even more obvious.

I like the idea of indicating where units can be placed without having to actually move the cursor over the hex. I will have to think about how to implement that (a faint X or target icon is a good suggestion).

What I meant by shadowing was, for example, overlaying a 50% translucent black hex object over illegal hexes and units stacked in them, or perhaps 33% translucent for illegal hexes and units and 66% translucent for hexes and pre-existing units which have their limit in units stacked in them. I have read elsewhere in this forum that you use Corel Draw or Photo-paint. This is the same effect as using a black transparency lens in those programs. The general effect would be that illegal hexes and fully stacked hexes would appear darker. By similarly shadowing existing units when placing reinforcements, the player could see which could be moved and which could not during placement and moving of reinforcements prior to acceptance of the setup. By knocking back (an artistic term) illegal hexes in this manner, legal hexes would appear brighter.

If this is still unclear, I could take one of the map sections you have posted around this forum and modify it myself so that you can see what I mean.
User avatar
Froonp
Posts: 7998
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Marseilles, France
Contact:

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by Froonp »

I like this, I agree with the argument too. You are a very logical beast.

With fear of straying a little off topic.. I have always found carrier plane assignment to need a little extra help with record keeping. Any chance of a special in-game window for CV plane management that could be called up..it would show all of the major power's CV and CV air units that are on map (and who is loaded on who?). Not just an on map filter but a place to see everything at one time. If done in the air rebase phase one could maybe rebase within the window as well? even if not, just gathering them all in one window would make it easy to see what is out there and appropriate notes can be taken for further attention.
Maybe this need can be answered by the "Unit" dialog. It is a dialog that allow to see all units of the same kind with the use of super powerful filters.
It would just need to ad some functionnalities to the units that are seen in this dialog. At the moment, I seem to rmember (but can be wrong) that you can only see them, you cannot give "orders" to them through right click menus.
Maybe Steve could expand the possibilities of this dialog by adding the context menus as if the unit was accessed from the map ?
That way, you'll have what you ask : All CVs in the same dialog,, All the CVPs also (the filters alow you to select virtually any kind of unit, friendly, ennemy, etc...). You can also have all your face-up TRS / AMPH, all your TRS / AMPH that are unsued in ports, it is terrific !!!!

Does it show that I LOVE this dialog ????
It may be the feature that excited me the most when Chris released it.

Cheers !

Patrice
Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22165
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Contact:

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by Shannon V. OKeets »

ORIGINAL: amwild
ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
ORIGINAL: amwild
Can you dim illegal and fully stacked hexes - illegal hexes dimmer than otherwise legal but fully stacked hexes? That would give an idea of where units can be placed faster than is the case when waving the cursor over the map and watching it change. Keep the red X for illegal hexes as well, and it becomes even more obvious.
I like the idea of indicating where units can be placed without having to actually move the cursor over the hex. I will have to think about how to implement that (a faint X or target icon is a good suggestion).
What I meant by shadowing was, for example, overlaying a 50% translucent black hex object over illegal hexes and units stacked in them, or perhaps 33% translucent for illegal hexes and units and 66% translucent for hexes and pre-existing units which have their limit in units stacked in them. I have read elsewhere in this forum that you use Corel Draw or Photo-paint. This is the same effect as using a black transparency lens in those programs. The general effect would be that illegal hexes and fully stacked hexes would appear darker. By similarly shadowing existing units when placing reinforcements, the player could see which could be moved and which could not during placement and moving of reinforcements prior to acceptance of the setup. By knocking back (an artistic term) illegal hexes in this manner, legal hexes would appear brighter.

If this is still unclear, I could take one of the map sections you have posted around this forum and modify it myself so that you can see what I mean.

Your additional explanation helps. I use CorelDraw mainly to measure the RGB values of different colors which I then include in the data files as hexadecimal digits for use in the program. CorelDraw has no direct involvement in MWIF any more than the WordPerfect editor I use all the time.

I achieve the various 'effects' in MWIF through the Delphi Draw Bitmap routines (at their most fundamental they are Microsoft's, but there are layers of wrappers from other vendors involved). I can do the 50% and 33% translucency with those routines.

When I said I needed to think about it, I was mainly concerned about all the other stuff that is going on in a hex.

1 - Combat: changes to the hexes indicating which units are attacking which hexes. This shouldn't be a problem because we are in a "setting up units" phase of some sort. No combat should be in progress.

2 - Movement: changes to the hexes indicating which units are being transported, paradropping, invading. Same as #1.

3 - Unit status: which units are disrupted, out of supply, isolated. May be a problem for the last two. Obscuring the status boxes could interfere with the player's ability to gather information about where to place units.

4 - Weather: the overlays for rain, storm, snow, and blizzard. This is my major concern. There already is a diminuation in clarity imposed by weather effects. Adding another might be too much.

I still like the idea, but I think I will delay working on it until after I have the weather effects implemented. I believe the weather effects are more important. Please remind me if I do not get back to this after you see screen shots with the weather effects. I will try to remember on my own.
Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.
stretch
Posts: 637
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2001 10:00 am

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by stretch »

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Does it show that I LOVE this dialog ????
It may be the feature that excited me the most when Chris released it.

I missed out on the end-game of the CWiF beta due to job discontinuity... I suspect the version I have lacks this dialog. It sounds like it does just what I want..
Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22165
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Contact:

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by Shannon V. OKeets »

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Maybe this need can be answered by the "Unit" dialog. It is a dialog that allow to see all units of the same kind with the use of super powerful filters.
It would just need to ad some functionnalities to the units that are seen in this dialog. At the moment, I seem to rmember (but can be wrong) that you can only see them, you cannot give "orders" to them through right click menus.
Maybe Steve could expand the possibilities of this dialog by adding the context menus as if the unit was accessed from the map ?
That way, you'll have what you ask : All CVs in the same dialog,, All the CVPs also (the filters alow you to select virtually any kind of unit, friendly, ennemy, etc...). You can also have all your face-up TRS / AMPH, all your TRS / AMPH that are unsued in ports, it is terrific !!!!

Does it show that I LOVE this dialog ????
It may be the feature that excited me the most when Chris released it.

Cheers !

Patrice

I, on the other hand, find the form too limiting. It indeed does all that Patrice describes. It does not let you enter any orders though, which is only reasonable since most orders in WIF involved moving a unit to a different hex or sea area.

My irritation with the form stems from two causes. It only shows one vertical list of units, which isn't very many. The filters have to be crafted by hand going through a series of commands. Even after you have created a nice set of filters you still have to use a menu to select which one you want to use. The design requires a lot of initiative and imagination on the part of the player to create the filters and more effort to use them.

Contrast this with the design for the Scrapping Units form (shown in earlier posts in this thread). There you get to see a lot of units simultaneously. The filters that you are most likely to want are a single mouse click away. Even a novice, seeing the form for the first time, can understand that clicking on the Fighters button will bring up a list of all the fighters. It's fast and painless. It does run the risk that you will want to look at some particular subset of units that isn't part of the design.
Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.
buckyzoom
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 9:26 pm

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by buckyzoom »

Is there an interface before the setup form that let's you choose options for the game. (I apologize if I missed this somewhere.) It seems that you'll have to do a little coding. I haven't seen how CWIF handles this if you're doing it the same way.
There are more things under Heaven and Earth than are dreamt of in your philosophies...
Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22165
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Contact:

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by Shannon V. OKeets »

ORIGINAL: buckyzoom
Is there an interface before the setup form that let's you choose options for the game. (I apologize if I missed this somewhere.) It seems that you'll have to do a little coding. I haven't seen how CWIF handles this if you're doing it the same way.

I haven't done much with this recently. This is a screen shot of what first appears when you start MWIF. It is just a dummy right now, with no code behind any of those check boxes or buttons. It is an amalgamation of several different forms from CWIF: choose scenario, choose optional rules, add players, set which player controls which major power(s). I disliked having to go through a series of forms so I came up with this design where you get to set all the various stuff from one screen. There is a sequence you have to follow but I will indicate that by graying out the portions that can't be used. For example, you have to list all the players before you can choose who is playing which country. You have to choose a scenario before assigning countries as well.

I expect players to be able to jump immediately back into a saved game from this opening form. Or to completely set up a new game without leaving this form. That is my design goal.

In the next couple of weeks I expect to transfer all the capabilities that CWIF had as separate forms into this one form. The color choices need work, but that is for the graphics guy. Until then I'll just go with these.

Image
Attachments
OpeningSc..092006.jpg
OpeningSc..092006.jpg (133.7 KiB) Viewed 340 times
Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.
Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22165
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Contact:

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by Shannon V. OKeets »

Here is a draft form for placing units on the map. It is taller than it will be when seen during setup. Those 6 buttons at the bottom won’t be shown and the whole form will be clipped so the Sub button will be at the very bottom. The form can be positioned any where on the screen.

I have two overriding, (and conflicting) design objectives for this form: (1) to make it as small as possible and (2) to included as many units as possible.

I want it to be small so the players will be able to see as much of the map as possible when deciding where to place units. If the form is large, then the visible map area will be small. In CWIF, this problem was solved by having the player select units for placement on the map and then having the form disappear. This required extra steps (button clicks) and left it up to the player to remember what unit(s) he had currently selected for placement and what other units yet remained to be placed. By keeping the form visible, I can streamline the amount of mouse movement and reduce the number of mouse clicks. Both of those are good things. In my opinion, it is even more important to keep the list of units being placed visible at all times.

At the same time I want the number of units visible on the form as large as possible. This gives the player a broader view of what the task before him is. It makes it easier for him to select combinations of units to go in a single hex, and place them all at once,

What you see in the draft form is my solution to this conundrum. The smallish white panel in the upper left lists the different set up areas. For the USSR in Barbarossa there are 3: (1) naval units that go in the Baltic Sea or adjacent ports, (2) naval units that go in the Black Sea or adjacent ports, and (3) all the land and air units that can go in any hex controlled by the USSR. The player selects one of these setup areas and the units shown to the right are only those units for that setup area. Essentially, you setup the units one area at a time.

The second white panel directly before the list of setup areas is the unit description panel. When the cursor passes over a unit in the last 2 panels on in this form, the details about the unit will be presented in the panel. It is the same as the unit description panel used in the Scrap Units form.

The other two panels will vary in their contents. The top right one will always have air units that have yet to be placed, and the bottom right one will contain either naval or land units. The Land and Naval buttons let the player toggle the bottom right panel between displaying land and naval units.

My logic here is that when setting up units, I want the 3 branches of service separated. Furthermore, when setting up the navy, I don’t really need to know about the army, and vice-a-versa. However, I do want to know about the air force in both cases. So, the air units are always present and you can switch back and forth between the land an naval units.

Which brings me to the little buttons - 6 in each set. These are the same 3 groups of 6 that the Scrap Units form used, though their labels have been abbreviated. The 6 lonely souls at the bottom are for the land units and will replace the 6 for the naval units when the player toggles to set up the land units. All of these buttons can be depressed and stay depressed; they can be toggled up and down with a mouse click. That means that the player can combine the unit types howsoever he desires. For example, you could have both fighters and bombers included in the list of air units or view them separately, or add air transport units to the list as well. Clicking All selects displaying all the units, or unselects displaying all the units.

This design permits the player to assign carrier air units to carriers rather easily by viewing only the carrier air units in the air panel (Car stands for carrier air units in the top set of 6 buttons) and the carriers in the bottom/naval panel (Car stands for carriers in the middle set of 6 buttons).

The only tricky bit with this design arises because the set up directions for WIF is so unusual. The carrier air units often have a wider range of placement options than the carriers themselves. For example, the US has some carriers on the east coast of the USA, some on the west coast, and some in Hawaii. The carrier air units that go on those carriers can be placed on any carrier, unrestricted by geography. I am going to solve that weirdness by listing all the carrier air units available for placement on the map when ever the Air Car button is depressed. This overrides the normal operating restriction of limiting units in the two right boxes only to those for the current setup area (upper left box).

As always, I am very interested in what you think, and will read all comments, suggestions, and criticism seriously.

Image
Attachments
SetupForm0111206.jpg
SetupForm0111206.jpg (70.13 KiB) Viewed 341 times
Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.
User avatar
SamuraiProgrmmr
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:15 am
Location: NW Tennessee

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by SamuraiProgrmmr »

I think that this form will work well for setting up new units as they come off of the production circle.

I think, however, for the original setup of the game or of a country newly entered into the war that another paridigm might be useful to think about.

When I would set up a game, I would select the counters randomly and then put them in a pile in the general vicinity of where they were to go. Then I would arrange them, rearrange them, put them back, etc. until I was satisfied.

What if the counters were placed on the map in the general area they belonged in and as each counter was selected, the part of the map that they were NOT allowed to go would gray out a little bit. At the end of deployment, a button or menu item could be clicked to end the process. It would also be nice to be able to 'lock' down (and gray out) a counter during placement.

One advantage would be that there would be no extra window obscuring the view.

Another advantage would be that the legal positions would be obvious as soon as the counter was 'grabbed'.

Another advantage would be that the user would be able to experiment with different positions.

A disadvantage would be that the user would not be forced to 'touch' each unit. This could be countered with a narrow vertical list box that listed the units to be set up that had not been 'locked' down.

Carrying this thought a bit further, it would be neat to be able to use the same kind of method to place new production. Perhaps the existing units would be 'locked' down and 'grayed' out and the new counters would be movable. Again, the map would be shaded in some way to delineate valid placement areas.

What do you think?
Bridge is the best wargame going .. Where else can you find a tournament every weekend?
User avatar
c92nichj
Posts: 345
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 1:15 pm
Contact:

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by c92nichj »

Contrast this with the design for the Scrapping Units form (shown in earlier posts in this thread). There you get to see a lot of units simultaneously. The filters that you are most likely to want are a single mouse click away. Even a novice, seeing the form for the first time, can understand that clicking on the Fighters button will bring up a list of all the fighters. It's fast and painless. It does run the risk that you will want to look at some particular subset of units that isn't part of the design.
I also like the Units dialog that Patrice is so find of. The thing I like with it is that it is so easy to get the informion you need, for example what ships do the US have uncommited, and where are they. How many transport do my enemy have and where are they, are they yet commited?
How much reorg capacity do my opponent have available, how much do I have left?

The possibilities were unlimited.
User avatar
Mziln
Posts: 667
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 5:36 pm
Location: Tulsa Oklahoma

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by Mziln »

Your Post # 1/9/2006 5:31:15 PM

You still plan for a player for each country [&:]

Your Post # 1/11/2006 4:27:35 PM

Could you use BB, CA, and CV instead of Bat, Cru, and Car [&:]
Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22165
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Contact:

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by Shannon V. OKeets »

ORIGINAL: Mziln

Your Post # 1/9/2006 5:31:15 PM

You still plan for a player for each country [&:]

Your Post # 1/11/2006 4:27:35 PM

Could you use BB, CA, and CV instead of Bat, Cru, and Car [&:]

Each player can play one or more major powers - they all have to be on the same side though. Some players can be 'watchers'.

I am undecided about enforcing WIF FE 'suggestions?' for which major powers each player controls in team games. For example, with two Axis players does one of them have to play Germany while the other one plays Italy and Japan? Or should this is wide open (my choice). If it is going to be wide open, then why impose the restriction on the players at all? Or even mention it when starting a new game? Perhaps it is just a "note to the players" somewhere?

Yeah, BB is better. I'll redo the abbreviations. Thanks.

You should refer to posts by their number (bottom right of the post). The time stamps you see on the screen are modified for your time zone (a Windows system variable as I recall), and yours from Tulsa don't match mine in Hawaii. I do a lot of posts so the number let's me know exactly which one you are refering to.
Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.
Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22165
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Contact:

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by Shannon V. OKeets »

ORIGINAL: c92nichj
Contrast this with the design for the Scrapping Units form (shown in earlier posts in this thread). There you get to see a lot of units simultaneously. The filters that you are most likely to want are a single mouse click away. Even a novice, seeing the form for the first time, can understand that clicking on the Fighters button will bring up a list of all the fighters. It's fast and painless. It does run the risk that you will want to look at some particular subset of units that isn't part of the design.
I also like the Units dialog that Patrice is so find of. The thing I like with it is that it is so easy to get the informion you need, for example what ships do the US have uncommited, and where are they. How many transport do my enemy have and where are they, are they yet commited?
How much reorg capacity do my opponent have available, how much do I have left?

The possibilities were unlimited.

I have no intention of doing away with the Unit View form. I do think it requires some sophistication on the part of the player to get maximum benefit from it.

I want to add a more accessible form so new players can quickly and easily get the information most commonly needed.
Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.
Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22165
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Contact:

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by Shannon V. OKeets »

ORIGINAL: SamuraiProgrammer
I think that this form will work well for setting up new units as they come off of the production circle.

I think, however, for the original setup of the game or of a country newly entered into the war that another paridigm might be useful to think about.

When I would set up a game, I would select the counters randomly and then put them in a pile in the general vicinity of where they were to go. Then I would arrange them, rearrange them, put them back, etc. until I was satisfied.

What if the counters were placed on the map in the general area they belonged in and as each counter was selected, the part of the map that they were NOT allowed to go would gray out a little bit. At the end of deployment, a button or menu item could be clicked to end the process. It would also be nice to be able to 'lock' down (and gray out) a counter during placement.

One advantage would be that there would be no extra window obscuring the view.

Another advantage would be that the legal positions would be obvious as soon as the counter was 'grabbed'.

Another advantage would be that the user would be able to experiment with different positions.

A disadvantage would be that the user would not be forced to 'touch' each unit. This could be countered with a narrow vertical list box that listed the units to be set up that had not been 'locked' down.

Carrying this thought a bit further, it would be neat to be able to use the same kind of method to place new production. Perhaps the existing units would be 'locked' down and 'grayed' out and the new counters would be movable. Again, the map would be shaded in some way to delineate valid placement areas.

What do you think?

I think you are working with one misconception that will answer most (though not all) of your concerns here.

After the player places a unit on the map, he is still free to move it around during set up. He can place a half a dozen units on the map and then rearrange them howsoever he desires. He can then go back to the place units on map form and fetch some more for placement. It is entirely open ended as to in which order he places units on the map. I want to provide the ability to return them to the set up form lists; that would enable the ability to "start over" which I have found myself wanting at times: "This was a very poor plan for how to position the Russians for Barbarossa - let's start again with a completely empty map."

When you talk about "putting the units in a pile", I think that the lists in the form is the 'pile' but grouped by restrictions on where they can set up and sorted by unit type. If you want, you can think of the form as a tray containing all the units that need to be placed on the map. You can position the tray where ever you like on the board.

I thought about your idea of just "dumping" the units somewhere but that doesn't really work when there are a lot of units and a limited amount of space. For example, when playing the USSR in Barbarossa over the board, I typically put all the units in the Pripet marshes because it is centrally located and in the end very few units will start the game there. However, there isn't enough room there to spread them all out. It is too small an area unless you start stacking the units and then the player has to remember what units are in each stack (only the top unit is visible). The Germans in Barbarossa are even more difficult because they have a LOT of units and a starting line that is very short. The area behind the starting line is only a few hexes deep. This gets very confusing very quickly. In fact, the separation into HQ, Armor/Mech, Fighters, and Bombers provided by the buttons was driven expressly by my desire to make setting up the Germans as easy as possible. Sometimes I like to place the HQs first, then the armor and mechanized units (for Blitz attacks), then the best tactical air units (for ground strikes), and so on. At other times, I build maximum point stacks with sacrificial divisions as hit takers and put them into position first. Other times I am thinking about land unit movement points and air unit ranges, etc..

Graying out illegal setup hexes was suggested in a post earlier this week. I think it is a good idea, but ... (see post #24 in this thread).

The concept of 'locking down' units doesn't apply during setup since all the units can be repositioned whenever the player wants. If you mean giving the player the ability to mark a unit as "ideally placed", so he doesn't have to think about it some more - I don't know. I could use the status boxes to do that during setup and clear them at the end of the setup phase. That is more or less what is done when placing reinforcements on the map. The units already on the map have different settings for their status boxes and cannot be selected for repositioning - you can look through stacks though and examine each one in detail.

If the Place Units On Map form really is in your way, obscuring your view of the map, you can minimize it to just a small icon and position it off to the side.
Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.
User avatar
SamuraiProgrmmr
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:15 am
Location: NW Tennessee

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by SamuraiProgrmmr »

Fair enough ;)

I still like the idea of the map letting us know where a unit may/may not be placed, though.

Keep up the good work!
Bridge is the best wargame going .. Where else can you find a tournament every weekend?
Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22165
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Contact:

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by Shannon V. OKeets »

ORIGINAL: SamuraiProgrammer

Fair enough ;)

I still like the idea of the map letting us know where a unit may/may not be placed, though.

Keep up the good work!

Yeah, so do I. I'll figure out some way to do that. But first I want to see the weather effects.
Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.
User avatar
c92nichj
Posts: 345
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 1:15 pm
Contact:

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by c92nichj »

After the player places a unit on the map, he is still free to move it around during set up. He can place a half a dozen units on the map and then rearrange them howsoever he desires. He can then go back to the place units on map form and fetch some more for placement. It is entirely open ended as to in which order he places units on the map. I want to provide the ability to return them to the set up form lists; that would enable the ability to "start over" which I have found myself wanting at times: "This was a very poor plan for how to position the Russians for Barbarossa - let's start again with a completely empty map."
An important point you make here is that you can move units around before all of them have left the "setup tray" this was very annoying in the current CWIF form as you have to place all units before you can rearrange them. I often find that I placed one unit in the wrong hex and just need to move it somewhere else, in it's current form you have to setup all units before being able to move the units around.
Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22165
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:51 pm
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Contact:

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by Shannon V. OKeets »

ORIGINAL: c92nichj
After the player places a unit on the map, he is still free to move it around during set up. He can place a half a dozen units on the map and then rearrange them howsoever he desires. He can then go back to the place units on map form and fetch some more for placement. It is entirely open ended as to in which order he places units on the map. I want to provide the ability to return them to the set up form lists; that would enable the ability to "start over" which I have found myself wanting at times: "This was a very poor plan for how to position the Russians for Barbarossa - let's start again with a completely empty map."
An important point you make here is that you can move units around before all of them have left the "setup tray" this was very annoying in the current CWIF form as you have to place all units before you can rearrange them. I often find that I placed one unit in the wrong hex and just need to move it somewhere else, in it's current form you have to setup all units before being able to move the units around.
It drove me crazy too.
Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.
User avatar
c92nichj
Posts: 345
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 1:15 pm
Contact:

RE: Game Interface - Place Units On Map

Post by c92nichj »

I am undecided about enforcing WIF FE 'suggestions?' for which major powers each player controls in team games. For example, with two Axis players does one of them have to play Germany while the other one plays Italy and Japan? Or should this is wide open (my choice). If it is going to be wide open, then why impose the restriction on the players at all? Or even mention it when starting a new game? Perhaps it is just a "note to the players" somewhere?
For speed of play I would prefer if you could choose countries as you want to. a four player game with:
Germany-Italy
Japan
US. CW. France
USSR, China (both commies & nationals)
This makes the operational coordination much easier and if you're in different locations it will take long time to discuss which hex of the french front that should be defended by BEF and which by the French.

Post Reply

Return to “World in Flames”