Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: ernieschwitz

It is more probable than not that it will become part of a steam upgrade, once an official patch is out. Or in other words: I am sure it will happen.

CORRECT. Its just all testing happens on the Matrix version. Final versions will make it to Steam for sure.

Thanks for all the further feedback. Happy to see no further bugs are found.

I think I am going to do one more round of polishing this feature in private beta (in a few days) and then move it to public beta next week if all goes well.

I am noting all ideas I like. You can keep track of the to-do/wishlist over here:
http://www.vrdesigns.nl/atwiki/doku.php ... _equipment

p.s : @E6Jarhead : well spotted that time allotment is indeed a limitation for ATG work. But I am trying to better myself and do more regular patches from know on. My objective is still to use the NewDawn games as a sandbox and template for the eventual Advanced Tactics Platinum game. A lot of stuff (even if in basic form) is now already in (since original ATG release) with officers, SFType models and TOE's.

p.s: Thing that I want to add next is a push on the FOW features. This feature push would partly be new FOW rules where you get much less information on enemy troops (and maybe even miss some sftypes completely or see the wrong type), hiding much more when just doing artillery attack or attack an enemy unit with like a 1 infantry unit, and partly a work on the sftype models to extend them to all kind of sftypes and scramble the statistics so that each game the strengths and weaknesses of sftypes are just a bit different (not enough to become unrealistic, but enough for the player to need to pay attention). Related to that last point I am planning to hide the actual detailed combat statistics completely (optional) so the player cannot compare statistics between own models of tanks and enemy for example. The idea here is you are going to have to find out on the battlefield. Of course this needs to come together with much improved historical statistics on Sftype performance (versus other sftypes as well). I think this direction is original, will provide some unique FOW rules and will move ATG in a different direction than my DC series.
I think once this rather huge to do list is done we can start thinking about ATP and a major AI overhaul.

best wishes and big thanks,
Vic

maybe add a programming for dummies ( ME) that will enable events such as A regime is activated once a certain terrain objective has been captured by regime B or something like that. I'm programming challenged, seriously very much so.

OK. Using the TO&E designer in game is easy, however, I can't seem to figure out how to use TO&Es in the editor. Has anyone else figured out how to set them up in the editor? Any help would be appreciated. [:(]

I am working on it When I learn enough I´ll try to give a good explanation, until then I can only refer you to Vics documentation, which is what I am working on too.

maybe add a programming for dummies ( ME) that will enable events such as A regime is activated once a certain terrain objective has been captured by regime B or something like that. I'm programming challenged, seriously very much so.

See the other thread you made about this

if I'm correct the way to use it in the editor is first you have to create a pre-defined unit that is not placed on the map, then tie it into the TO&E. I'll send you a screen shot if I can of what I'm talking about

first I created pre-defined units, see below

you need to create pre-defined units for them to be used in the TO&E section

then I take the ROK anti-tank Bltn which is number 0 in the pre-defined units, then go over to the TO&E section. Click add TO&E model, then give it a name (same as the pre-defined unit) attach it to the correct regime. Then click on the NATO button and match it to the correct NATO symbol, which is the anti-tank image. Then I click on the subpart unit enter 0 enter then -1 and it is added. You will do this for each TO&E model so the next one will be 1 and so fourth. Make sure it is the same number though as the pre-defined unit

this ghost producing bug is still present I think. I'm currently testing my Korean war scenario with the new auto replacement. The U.S. Eighth army is not producing anything yet but supplies. As of turn 2 I have six infantry and a few machineguns and mortars plus bazooka's.

while testing my Korean war scenario, I have noticed something weird. I have a US infantry Regiment which belongs to the Eighth army ( which is back in japan at a port).this regiment has taken losses in South Korea, and I was in the process of moving it back to a port to see if it would gain replacements just by being in a port. It was 3 hexes from there and next turn, all their losses had been replaced. The Eighth army is now producing infantry and such and has 6 naval transports so is this suppose to be happening, as in real life it would. So if this is the case, how cool is this.

I received this error just now while testing my Korean war scenario using the latest beta patch while viewing play back

OK. I know this is really nitpicky and anal but...
 
I sort of like a semi-historical looking OOB. So when I create different types of infantry divisions, it would be great if I could set it in the TO&E designer that certain unit types should be "grouped", meaning that when they are formed and pick up a number, the numbers will be consecutive through different types of TO&E designs.
 
For example:
 
Instead of: 1st infantry, 2nd infantry, 3rd infantry, 1st mountain infantry. (that's the way they would be numbered now because regular infantry and mountain divisions would have different TO&Es.)
 
It would be sort of nice to have 1st infantry, 2nd infantry, 3rd infantry, 4th mountain infantry. It would give a bit more historic flavor to the unit numbering on the counters when TO&E auto-reinforced units are created.
 
Just a thought...

ORIGINAL: lion_of_judah

I received this error just now while testing my Korean war scenario using the latest beta patch while viewing play back

It would be sort of nice to have 1st infantry, 2nd infantry, 3rd infantry, 4th mountain infantry. It would give a bit more historic flavor to the unit numbering on the counters when TO&E auto-reinforced units are created.

Could you send me a .zip file with a savefile from which this is repeatable and any gfx necc to load it?

Would be appreciated.

Going to make a new version tommorow (friday).

best wishes,
Vic

ORIGINAL: lion_of_judah

this ghost producing bug is still present I think. I'm currently testing my Korean war scenario with the new auto replacement. The U.S. Eighth army is not producing anything yet but supplies. As of turn 2 I have six infantry and a few machineguns and mortars plus bazooka's.

Are you sure it is not receiving any RETURNED troops from its subordinate units who started with some troops that where not specified in their TOE's ?

Did you check the detail tab of US 8th army for returns when they first appeared?

let me know.

best wishes,
Vic

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

OK. I know this is really nitpicky and anal but...

I sort of like a semi-historical looking OOB. So when I create different types of infantry divisions, it would be great if I could set it in the TO&E designer that certain unit types should be "grouped", meaning that when they are formed and pick up a number, the numbers will be consecutive through different types of TO&E designs.

For example:

Instead of: 1st infantry, 2nd infantry, 3rd infantry, 1st mountain infantry. (that's the way they would be numbered now because regular infantry and mountain divisions would have different TO&Es.)

It would be sort of nice to have 1st infantry, 2nd infantry, 3rd infantry, 4th mountain infantry. It would give a bit more historic flavor to the unit numbering on the counters when TO&E auto-reinforced units are created.

Just a thought...

No its actually a nice idea. Shouldn't be to hard to squeeze in.

best wishes,
Vic

Vic
you are correct, this is no bug. Sorry

Okay, I've tried several times but cannot seem to design units as a PLAYER. I can design units in the Editor but cannot figure out how as a PLAYER I designate which units are subject to a TOE design.

DO ALL TOE's have to be designed before the game starts using the editor?
When a SFT is replaced by a new design (such as Panzer II C being updated by research to the Panzer II Puma) does the TOE automatically update also?
TOE's change during the course of a war..is there a way to design new TOE's once the game is underway?
Is there somewhere where I can find what all the NATO symbols mean. Right now I use non-NATO symbols.
As a PLAYER how do I make a new unit up. I want to build a new infantry division (predesigned in Editor).

I will do more research and report back what I find.

ORIGINAL: Vic

ORIGINAL: lion_of_judah

I received this error just now while testing my Korean war scenario using the latest beta patch while viewing play back

It would be sort of nice to have 1st infantry, 2nd infantry, 3rd infantry, 4th mountain infantry. It would give a bit more historic flavor to the unit numbering on the counters when TO&E auto-reinforced units are created.

Could you send me a .zip file with a savefile from which this is repeatable and any gfx necc to load it?

Would be appreciated.

Going to make a new version tommorow (friday).

best wishes,
Vic

Vic
just sent you the files, thanks