Page 92 of 108
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 4:28 pm
by Orm
ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Ok, I'll look into adding the ability to sort by: (1) alphabetically by name of location, (2) controlling major power, and (3) by latitude. Any others?
---
I'll add the function that if you click on a city, the detailed map centers on the city. For players with a limited background in geography that should be a big help.
If it is not to much trouble it would be nice to be able to sort by area.
For example:
-Africa
-America
-Asia
-Europe
-Pacific
Or something like that.
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 6:23 pm
by Shannon V. OKeets
ORIGINAL: Orm
ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Ok, I'll look into adding the ability to sort by: (1) alphabetically by name of location, (2) controlling major power, and (3) by latitude. Any others?
---
I'll add the function that if you click on a city, the detailed map centers on the city. For players with a limited background in geography that should be a big help.
If it is not to much trouble it would be nice to be able to sort by area.
For example:
-Africa
-America
-Asia
-Europe
-Pacific
Or something like that.
That is difficult to do, since there is no underlying data for which continent a hex is in. I do know which country it is in, but some countries span more than one continent.
===
Here is today's version of this form. 1 of 2 screen shots.
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 6:25 pm
by Shannon V. OKeets
2nd and last of 2 in the series.
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 7:04 pm
by Froonp
ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
ORIGINAL: Orm
If it is not to much trouble it would be nice to be able to sort by area.
For example:
-Africa
-America
-Asia
-Europe
-Pacific
Or something like that.
That is difficult to do, since there is no underlying data for which continent a hex is in. I do know which country it is in, but some countries span more than one continent.
You can also sort by map. The map information is part of the map data files, but maybe the problem is that some countries are on 2 maps.
Well, both the screenshots you presented here are very satisfying to me, I need no more.
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 8:03 pm
by macgregor
ORIGINAL: Froonp
ORIGINAL: macgregor
I noticed this replacement unit for the Gneisenau, which I imagine assumes the Germans replace the 11" guns with 15-inchers, plus upgrades to the AA guns(re-adjusting the radar for slow moving biplanes) but I could not find anything about this kind of naval upgrade in the rules. Is this something that comes with one of the new addons? Naturally I think it's a great idea. I'm just not aware of it.
Here is the relevant part of RAW that deals with replacement naval units :
***************************************
4.1.4 Replacement naval units (SiF option 9)
A few naval units have a gold box around their availability year. In a later year, replacement units will turn up for these units. Their availability year will also be shown in a gold box.
If the original unit has been removed from the game when the replacement unit arrives, remove the replacement unit from the game.
Otherwise, during any reinforcement step, you can remove the original unit from the game and add the replacement unit.
Put the replacement unit in the force pool if the original unit is either in the force pool or face-down on the production circle; or
Put the replacement unit in the construction pool if the original unit is in:
ï the repair pool,
ï the construction pool,
ï on the map, or
ï face-up on the production circle.
***************************************
Available replacement naval units in WiF FE :
French CL De Grasse replaced by CVL De Grasse in 1940
French CL Guichen replaced by CVL Guichen in 1941
German CA Seydlitz replaced by CVL Seydlitz in 1942
German BB Gneisenau upgunned in 1940
German BB Scharnhorst upgunned in 1941
Japanese BB Hyuga replaced by CV Hyuga in 1942
Japanese BB Ise replaced by CV Ise in 1942
Japanese BB Shinano replaced by CV Shinano (2 possibilities) in 1942
Japanese BB Karyu replaced by CV Karyu (2 possibilities) in 1943
The Schnarhorst & Gneisenau upgrades came up with the latest CS23 in 2007 2 years ago.
Thank you so much for that Froonp. I'm astounded at the speed of these threads. It appears as thought there is a large contingent of community members that are rising to the challenge of making a game that is more complex, more capable, and more detailed than anything imagined 3 years ago. I may be 4f when it comes to programming, but I don't want to hide behind my lack of skills. If there is something someone needs that I can research and compose, I'd be happy to chip in even at this 11th hour. Just PM me.
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 7:01 pm
by Shannon V. OKeets
Here is the last of the major combat charts.
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 8:18 pm
by sajbalk
The format looks great.
I would remind you however that the neutral objective hexes trace to the closest major power capital. The CW has 6 such capitals.
Delhi is closer than Moscow to at least Teheran. Teheran should show as CW.
Oh, I see that Tehreran does not have an asterik, so it must have been captured by the USSR.
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 12:00 am
by Shannon V. OKeets
Here's a screen shot taken at the 2nd impulse of the first turn of the Global War scenario. There are only two victory hexes that might have split ownership. And I believe that is true forever in the game. Notice that China gets credit for Batavia until: the Axis declares war on the Netherlands and that country aligns to the Commonwealth.
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 1:05 am
by sajbalk
Shannon V. --
Batavia is closer to Delhi or Canberra, I think. If you have chosen to trace only to London, that is fine but you will need to recount the levels necessary for victory.
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 1:50 am
by Shannon V. OKeets
ORIGINAL: sajbalk
Shannon V. --
Batavia is closer to Delhi or Canberra, I think. If you have chosen to trace only to London, that is fine but you will need to recount the levels necessary for victory.
Welcome to the world of computers.[;)]
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 2:46 am
by paulderynck
Yes, some of those default distances on the WIF board map are different on the MWIF map.
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 3:34 am
by Shannon V. OKeets
Here is what the Barbarossa victory hexes look like after the form has been cleaned up for them. The x2 means the hex is worth double.
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 5:02 pm
by brian brian
does that scenario still award points for how many ARM you have left at the end?
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 5:45 pm
by Shannon V. OKeets
ORIGINAL: brian brian
does that scenario still award points for how many ARM you have left at the end?
No.
===
Victory conditions for Guadalcanal are tough to code - I'm working on that today. It awards points for sunk carrirers and cutting the Japanese convoy pipeline from Batavia et al (assessed at the end of each turn).
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 5:56 pm
by brian brian
ooooh, give out those POC points each turn. WiF owes a lot to VitP, a great game I would like to play again some day.
but both of those two scenarios are critical to have for new players.
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 6:02 am
by Shannon V. OKeets
Here is the new form for the ASW Combat Results table.
On the left is the AA table (slightly revised from yesterday). On the right is the new ASW table.
Neither of these will be used very much. The AA table is primarily for deciding when to use divisional AA units. The ASW table is even less likely to be seen since it is only used for the ASW pre-combat attack when playing with the optional rule for ASW Escorts and ASW Carriers. Most of the time players will use the 'standard' ASW table which is part of the more general purpose Naval Combat Results Table.
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 1:31 pm
by brian brian
personally I find it a shame that the ASW units are so neglected. The standard WiF system of using the capital ships as convoy escorts and just handing the Allies lots of free ASW as the game goes along is fairly silly compared to the detail in the rest of the game. It's quick and playable though.
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:39 pm
by Shannon V. OKeets
Here is something I tried to do over 3 years ago but had too much trouble with at that time. Today I returned my attention to it and debugged a key proble. So the global map now has two levels of resolution! The smaller scale is 4 pixels (2 by 2) per hex. This is 16 pixels (4 by 4) per hex.
To display the entire global map at this scale requires a monitor wider than 1280 pixels; I guess ~1500. But this map can be shrunk in size and scrolled if you have a smaller monitor.
What you get at this resolution is a better understanding of the convoy routes. Shown here are the US convoy routes late in the war.
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:42 pm
by Shannon V. OKeets
2nd of 3 in the series.
I still have some work to do to get this spiffed up. The lines separating the sea areas and the countries are all double. They should be single. This screen shot is of who controls each hex. I put in the Japanese convoys too.
RE: MWIF Game Interface Design
Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:43 pm
by Shannon V. OKeets
3rd and last in the series.
Here is the global map showing the weather world wide.
