Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
Both of these are already available except for the aforementioned BUG (that's what it is to me).

If they want it to forage then all they have to do is click the "forage button" for that unit (already available). If they want to pay by normal supply.. do nothing!

I don't see the need for order/checkboxes, can someone help me understand this better?

Propose your solution then.

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
Why it's a bug:

Corps in range of normal supply should be paid for with normal supply at the end of the land phase unless otherwise stated by the player. The way this game is implemented is that ALL corps WITHIN range of a depot (part of a vaild supply chain) should be paid for with normal supply UNLESS otherwise stated by the player. In my case I didn't state that so it's a BUG!

It's that simple right?

I don't understand the need for another bulky mechanism here, the UI is already bad enough why are you trying to make it worse?

It's just bad practice to add code to fix something that can just as easily be fixed by subtracting code.

Wrong. For two major reasons, both dealing with money:

First, this change would cost the average player something like several hundred pounds a game. That's non-trivial.

Second, what is the game supposed to do when you don't have enough money to pay for supply?

Marshall made the right decision initially, but there needs to be a more robust solution. Changing it to your model is unacceptable.

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
Why it's a bug:

Corps in range of normal supply should be paid for with normal supply at the end of the land phase unless otherwise stated by the player. The way this game is implemented is that ALL corps WITHIN range of a depot (part of a vaild supply chain) should be paid for with normal supply UNLESS otherwise stated by the player. In my case I didn't state that so it's a BUG!

It's that simple right?

I don't understand the need for another bulky mechanism here, the UI is already bad enough why are you trying to make it worse?

It's just bad practice to add code to fix something that can just as easily be fixed by subtracting code.

Wrong. For two major reasons, both dealing with money:

First, this change would cost the average player something like several hundred pounds a game. That's non-trivial.

Second, what is the game supposed to do when you don't have enough money to pay for supply?

Marshall made the right decision initially, but there needs to be a more robust solution. Changing it to your model is unacceptable.

First, why?

Second, forage.

I guess I'll build a state machine and upload it, may take some time, I have other work to do.

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
First, why?

Because now you are auto-funding corps which previously could have auto-foraged. With no choice available for individual corps, the game has to pick an option.

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
Second, forage.

Ummm, that's what you just ruled out as being a choice. This whole thread is a complaint that the computer did exactly this action. You can't have it both ways. Either the game forages or pays for supply. Or, do you really want it to randomly determine which corps get paid for and which forage?

Marshall put in what seemed to have been a good compromise: Auto-forage those that can. Then, pay for corps which can't auto-forage. Finally, forage those for which neither of the above applies (presumably randomly chosen).

Of course, you could always force the user to make a choice for each and every corps on the map. Which is precisely what my solution entails, except it does it en masse, rather than individually.

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
I guess I'll build a state machine and upload it, may take some time, I have other work to do.

???

Marshall, another idea: SOME corps will be candidates for "Never forage this corps except manually". This could be another checkbox choice that would remain through the end of land movement, unlike the other post stated. For example, ones guard corps, cavalry corps, British corps, etc, might all be candidates for a "do not forage for the whole game, except manually". If a corps with this box checked made it to the end of the phase without the player foraging it, then supply becomes the default.
 
Along with this, these corps should probably be the first corps in ones entire army to get paid for (in situations where limited funding is available). In fact, a player might even number them by priority in a table somewhere, if the option existed.

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
First, why?

Because now you are auto-funding corps which previously could have auto-foraged. With no choice available for individual corps, the game has to pick an option.

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
Second, forage.

Ummm, that's what you just ruled out as being a choice. This whole thread is a complaint that the computer did exactly this action. You can't have it both ways. Either the game forages or pays for supply. Or, do you really want it to randomly determine which corps get paid for and which forage?

Marshall put in what seemed to have been a good compromise: Auto-forage those that can. Then, pay for corps which can't auto-forage. Finally, forage those for which neither of the above applies (presumably randomly chosen).

Of course, you could always force the user to make a choice for each and every corps on the map. Which is precisely what my solution entails, except it does it en masse, rather than individually.

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
I guess I'll build a state machine and upload it, may take some time, I have other work to do.

???

Jimmer, but there is a choice for individual corps! Just click the "forage" button!!!

If the player wants to forage that corps that's all he has to do.

The problem with Marshall's setup is that there exists a button that does "auto-forage" so if the user wants the corps that can auto-forage to forage all the user has to do is hit this button, so why have this implemented TWICE!!?? This makes NO sense.

There are two buttons:
1. Forage this unit.
2. Auto-Forage all available units.

And a third option:
3. Any units not foraged at the end of the phase should either 1) be paid for with normal supply if available or 2) forage.

From these three already implemented thing it covers all scenarios... all that is left to do is remove the "auto forage all available" auto option.

Your solution is needlessly complex though it does allow for the user to be tremendously stupid.

Each corps should do one of three things:

1. Forage
2. Auto-forage
3. Normal Supply

The solution to each one:

1. Forage - a button exists
2. Auto-Forage - a button exists
3. Normal Supply - happens at the end of the land phase

Now we just need to remove the "auto-forage at the end of the land phase" option and everything is still covered WITHOUT this bug.

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
Jimmer, but there is a choice for individual corps! Just click the "forage" button!!!

If the player wants to forage that corps that's all he has to do.

It's too late for that! By your definition of the problem, since you clicked the "end turn" button, it has to make a choice. You no longer have the option of foraging it manually (unless the phase-end code finds something it can't deal with and then stops and asks you a question).

The problem is that YOU did not tell it what to do, so the game has to choose for you. You may not like its choice, but then you should solve it in advance.

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
The problem with Marshall's setup is that there exists a button that does "auto-forage" so if the user wants the corps that can auto-forage to forage all the user has to do is hit this button, so why have this implemented TWICE!!?? This makes NO sense.

There are two buttons:
1. Forage this unit.
2. Auto-Forage all available units.

And a third option:
3. Any units not foraged at the end of the phase should either 1) be paid for with normal supply if available or 2) forage.

This is incorrect. This may be what you WANT it to do, but it's definitely not what it does, and this is documented in the manual. The actual sequence in #3 is

A) Auto-forage if available
B) Pay for supply if available
C) Forage

Note that your whole argument in this section is fallacious. You are saying (paraphrased) that "there is an auto-forage button, so if the user doesn't use it, then the game shouldn't either". However, there is also a FORAGE button, yet "forage" shows up in your list of steps (3.2, 3.C in mine). All Marshall did was allow all three options to be tried (in a certain order), rather than just two of them.

One could make both 3.A and 3.C not part of the list, but you would be looking at a lot more interaction with the game in that case. I think Marshall made the right choice.

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
From these three already implemented thing it covers all scenarios... all that is left to do is remove the "auto forage all available" auto option.

Your solution is needlessly complex though it does allow for the user to be tremendously stupid.

I fail to see how it allows the user to be stupid. All it does is allow the user to not have to use up movement points before entering combat. I could see how that would make one lazy, but not stupid. Stupid would be, in the current setup, moving into an area without using up all of the corps movement points.

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

Each corps should do one of three things:

1. Forage
2. Auto-forage
3. Normal Supply

The solution to each one:

1. Forage - a button exists
2. Auto-Forage - a button exists
3. Normal Supply - happens at the end of the land phase

Now we just need to remove the "auto-forage at the end of the land phase" option and everything is still covered WITHOUT this bug.

See above. What happens when the user does not forage or auto-forage a corps that is out of supply? Marshall's solution answers that question unambiguously. Yours ignores it. A computer does not have that option. It MUST do SOMEthing.

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
Jimmer, but there is a choice for individual corps! Just click the "forage" button!!!

If the player wants to forage that corps that's all he has to do.

It's too late for that! By your definition of the problem, since you clicked the "end turn" button, it has to make a choice. You no longer have the option of foraging it manually (unless the phase-end code finds something it can't deal with and then stops and asks you a question).

The problem is that YOU did not tell it what to do, so the game has to choose for you. You may not like its choice, but then you should solve it in advance.

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
The problem with Marshall's setup is that there exists a button that does "auto-forage" so if the user wants the corps that can auto-forage to forage all the user has to do is hit this button, so why have this implemented TWICE!!?? This makes NO sense.

There are two buttons:
1. Forage this unit.
2. Auto-Forage all available units.

And a third option:
3. Any units not foraged at the end of the phase should either 1) be paid for with normal supply if available or 2) forage.

This is incorrect. This may be what you WANT it to do, but it's definitely not what it does, and this is documented in the manual. The actual sequence in #3 is

A) Auto-forage if available
B) Pay for supply if available
C) Forage

Note that your whole argument in this section is fallacious. You are saying (paraphrased) that "there is an auto-forage button, so if the user doesn't use it, then the game shouldn't either". However, there is also a FORAGE button, yet "forage" shows up in your list of steps (3.2, 3.C in mine). All Marshall did was allow all three options to be tried (in a certain order), rather than just two of them.

One could make both 3.A and 3.C not part of the list, but you would be looking at a lot more interaction with the game in that case. I think Marshall made the right choice.

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
From these three already implemented thing it covers all scenarios... all that is left to do is remove the "auto forage all available" auto option.

Your solution is needlessly complex though it does allow for the user to be tremendously stupid.

I fail to see how it allows the user to be stupid. All it does is allow the user to not have to use up movement points before entering combat. I could see how that would make one lazy, but not stupid. Stupid would be, in the current setup, moving into an area without using up all of the corps movement points.

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

Each corps should do one of three things:

1. Forage
2. Auto-forage
3. Normal Supply

The solution to each one:

1. Forage - a button exists
2. Auto-Forage - a button exists
3. Normal Supply - happens at the end of the land phase

Now we just need to remove the "auto-forage at the end of the land phase" option and everything is still covered WITHOUT this bug.

See above. What happens when the user does not forage or auto-forage a corps that is out of supply? Marshall's solution answers that question unambiguously. Yours ignores it. A computer does not have that option. It MUST do SOMEthing.

Jimmer, I think we are having a communication breakdown, so to speak.

Yes, I didn't tell it what to do (for a good reason: I wanted it to pay by normal supply!!)

This is how it SHOULD work, which is what I'm advocating here, that it be fixed to work the way I suggested.

Why do you need the option to auto-forage/forage twice???? That is redundant, adds needless code and is needlessly complex.

Why you can't see this is actually really blowing my mind.

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
Jimmer, but there is a choice for individual corps! Just click the "forage" button!!!

If the player wants to forage that corps that's all he has to do.

It's too late for that! By your definition of the problem, since you clicked the "end turn" button, it has to make a choice. You no longer have the option of foraging it manually (unless the phase-end code finds something it can't deal with and then stops and asks you a question).

The problem is that YOU did not tell it what to do, so the game has to choose for you. You may not like its choice, but then you should solve it in advance.

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
The problem with Marshall's setup is that there exists a button that does "auto-forage" so if the user wants the corps that can auto-forage to forage all the user has to do is hit this button, so why have this implemented TWICE!!?? This makes NO sense.

There are two buttons:
1. Forage this unit.
2. Auto-Forage all available units.

And a third option:
3. Any units not foraged at the end of the phase should either 1) be paid for with normal supply if available or 2) forage.

This is incorrect. This may be what you WANT it to do, but it's definitely not what it does, and this is documented in the manual. The actual sequence in #3 is

A) Auto-forage if available
B) Pay for supply if available
C) Forage

Note that your whole argument in this section is fallacious. You are saying (paraphrased) that "there is an auto-forage button, so if the user doesn't use it, then the game shouldn't either". However, there is also a FORAGE button, yet "forage" shows up in your list of steps (3.2, 3.C in mine). All Marshall did was allow all three options to be tried (in a certain order), rather than just two of them.

This is not true actually, this is not what I've said at all. He's allowing the forage option TWICE (once during the land phase and once at the end of it). WHY?? Why Twice?? If the player wanted to auto-forage/forage the unit then he would have hit the button to do just that!!! Why is this so puzzling to you?

One could make both 3.A and 3.C not part of the list, but you would be looking at a lot more interaction with the game in that case. I think Marshall made the right choice.

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
From these three already implemented thing it covers all scenarios... all that is left to do is remove the "auto forage all available" auto option.

Your solution is needlessly complex though it does allow for the user to be tremendously stupid.

I fail to see how it allows the user to be stupid. All it does is allow the user to not have to use up movement points before entering combat. I could see how that would make one lazy, but not stupid. Stupid would be, in the current setup, moving into an area without using up all of the corps movement points.

Why do we need to assume the user is so stupid that he needs to be allowed to forage TWICE? In case he forgot the first time??

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

Each corps should do one of three things:

1. Forage
2. Auto-forage
3. Normal Supply

The solution to each one:

1. Forage - a button exists
2. Auto-Forage - a button exists
3. Normal Supply - happens at the end of the land phase

Now we just need to remove the "auto-forage at the end of the land phase" option and everything is still covered WITHOUT this bug.

See above. What happens when the user does not forage or auto-forage a corps that is out of supply? Marshall's solution answers that question unambiguously. Yours ignores it. A computer does not have that option. It MUST do SOMEthing.

NO, mine doesn't ignore it, try reading my posts please... I've already said above that if the computer is paying for normal supply and a corps is out of range/supply then the computer should forage that unit. Why should the computer try to forage a unit BEFORE it checks to see if it can be paid for by normal supply????? THIS MAKES NO FUCKING SENSE!!

Neverman, your statements have given me another idea:
 
An alternative to the checkbox idea would be to stop and ask the user whether to forage or not. It could be done with one dialog box per army. It would only need to check field combat areas, since sieges would already be handled correctly. So, the game could simply scan for combat areas. If it finds one in which any corps is present and attacking, it would stop the end-of-phase processing and instead show the player the list of corps present, and which ones have movement left. The player could then choose, for the stack, whether to halt and manually deal with the corps, or to allow them all to forage (with or without movement being used).

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
Jimmer, I think we are having a communication breakdown, so to speak.

Yes, I didn't tell it what to do (for a good reason: I wanted it to pay by normal supply!!)

This is how it SHOULD work, which is what I'm advocating here, that it be fixed to work the way I suggested.

Why do you need the option to auto-forage/forage twice???? That is redundant, adds needless code and is needlessly complex.

Why you can't see this is actually really blowing my mind.

I CAN see it. You're just wrong. Answer the question. I'll not reply again until you do.

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
Jimmer, I think we are having a communication breakdown, so to speak.

Yes, I didn't tell it what to do (for a good reason: I wanted it to pay by normal supply!!)

This is how it SHOULD work, which is what I'm advocating here, that it be fixed to work the way I suggested.

Why do you need the option to auto-forage/forage twice???? That is redundant, adds needless code and is needlessly complex.

Why you can't see this is actually really blowing my mind.

I CAN see it. You're just wrong. Answer the question. I'll not reply again until you do.

What question?

"what does the computer do if the corps is out of supply?", is that the question because I've already answered that one TWICE in this thread.

Ok, let me know what I don't cover here, done for each corps:

States A, B, C, D, E

A: start state (A is always true if the land phase is entered)
B: player either auto-forages corps manually or forages corps manaully (true if the player does, false if not)
C: end of phase normal supply (true if corps is in supply and paid for, false otherwise)
D: end of phase forage (true if corps is foraged due to lack of money or valid supply chain)
E: end state

If A then B
If B then E
If not B then C
If C then E
If not C then D
If D then E

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
NO, mine doesn't ignore it, try reading my posts please... I've already said above that if the computer is paying for normal supply and a corps is out of range/supply then the computer should forage that unit. Why should the computer try to forage a unit BEFORE it checks to see if it can be paid for by normal supply????? THIS MAKES NO SENSE!!

Exactly how should said units be foraged? Using movement points? Or, not? And, which corps should get paid for, and which should forage (unless the player has $0 at the time this is checked, in which case all forage -- provided it is in the model).

Your model says don't forage anything, until you run out of money. But, the question still remains, "Use movement, or not?" Marshall simply chose to have his model deal with that last question first.

If done in the other order, players would be faced with a huge amount of randomness in choosing which of their corps forage when. And, they would lose a lot more troops if the auto-forage option isn't available.

How about an example: France is attacking with 6 corps. He has $6 to spend, and there is a depot 2 spaces from the attack site. The army consists of his guard, artillery, I cavalry, and I - III corps. Guard, and I corps each have 3 movement points remaining. Artillery has 2MP available. I Cav has 4 MP available. II and III have none. The attack is into an enemy's 5 forage area.

France has failed to manually deal with this whole stack, so the game must decide what to do.

Your model pays for 3 corps at random. The rest forage. We do not know whether movement points will be used or not, because your model doesn't address that. But, since this whole exchange is about avoiding using auto-forage with movement, I will assume that the other three all forage without using their movement points.

Congratulations! You just lost between zero and 9 factors from randomly-chosen corps that you didn't need to lose:

Marshall's model says guard, I cav, and I corps will auto-forage. The remaining 3 corps will be paid for. No corps will forage. And, because of the foraging having occurred, any siege attempt must wait until next turn.

Now, I grant that this example is contrived to put your model in a bad light. However, if you object, come up with a situation where Marshall's model loses more factors than your model (using the same die rolls for each corps in both models, and assuming no movement will be used for foraging).

Marshall made the right choice. But, there was an unforeseen situation: One can be prevented from besieging a city after a field combat, unless one is very careful (and, in rare circumstances, even if one IS careful). This problem needs to be solved, IMO. But, not by changing the model, since it's the best one ("best" = spends the least money and loses the least # of factors).

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
NO, mine doesn't ignore it, try reading my posts please... I've already said above that if the computer is paying for normal supply and a corps is out of range/supply then the computer should forage that unit. Why should the computer try to forage a unit BEFORE it checks to see if it can be paid for by normal supply????? THIS MAKES NO SENSE!!

Exactly how should said units be foraged? Using movement points? Or, not? And, which corps should get paid for, and which should forage (unless the player has $0 at the time this is checked, in which case all forage -- provided it is in the model).

Your model says don't forage anything, until you run out of money. But, the question still remains, "Use movement, or not?" Marshall simply chose to have his model deal with that last question first.

No, Marshall chose to put end of phase auto-foraging BEFORE normal supply. This is what I've been arguing should be flip-flopped. No movement points should be used, since that option has already been offered to the player DURING his/her land phase.

While we are at it why not make 100000000 popup boxes for EACH option each user has, maybe that will make things VERY simple? LOL.

Marshall's current implementation assumes that I want to do something (auto-forage) that I've already declined to do myself!! WHY???

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

Marshall's current implementation assumes that I want to do something (auto-forage) that I've already declined to do myself!! WHY???

Your model assumes that I want to do something (forage) that I've already declined to do myself!! WHY???

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

Marshall's current implementation assumes that I want to do something (auto-forage) that I've already declined to do myself!! WHY???

Your model assumes that I want to do something (forage) that I've already declined to do myself!! WHY???

No, it doesn't, not sure what you are talking about here... It only forages when it's the only choice left, the corps HAS to do something, it doesn't assume you want to forage at all... in fact, quite the opposite, it assumes you want to pay with normal supply and then only forages when you can't do that, not the other way around (as you suggest and per the current implementation).

Marshall,

What's your take?

Marshall's take in post #15 above was clear and should be fine.