Having trouble readjusting BP convoy lines.

[juntoalmar]

ORIGINAL: Centuur

You don't need to cheat, you need to grasp the logic of the forms. And that is the challenge you are facing.

I kind of disagree here. If the majority of players have problems using the production forms (which I don't know because I haven't tested quantitatively), that means that the design "isn't talking the users' language". The form design has to match the players' mental model and way of working/playing, not the other way around.

One of the first mantras of usability testing is "don't blame the user".

[michaelbaldur]

As I said there are a redesign of the form planned. to make it more user friendly

but as I also said, its not a priority right now. I know its annoying not having 100% production. but we can live with 95%
steve is working full time on the AI.

so you have to use work arounds at the moment. giving CW more convoy, or maybe a synth, or have the axis waste BP



and I agree with the priority. do we really want steve to stop working on AI, and game breaking bugs. ?????

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: Mayhemizer_slith

Since there is ”set dice roll” option I have been hoping ”set BPs” option too… would be nice to fix things just adding few BPs.

I agree that this could be a workaround and avoid much frustration.

ORIGINAL: Centuur

I agree that production planning is the most difficult part of the game to get right. I also "cheated" in the past if I would not get a build point when I was sure I should get it (using beta testers debug tools, one can create build points).

But somehow, I got it to work. It takes a lot of time and effort. I can get optimal production at any time in the game now. You don't need to cheat, you need to grasp the logic of the forms. And that is the challenge you are facing.

I've stated sometime ago that, provided one enters a gamesave here at the start of preliminary production phase of a non-modded game, I can give instructions on how to get to maximum production.

Thing is: it's the human mind which messes thing up for us, not the computer...

So there is no reason to make any patch.

Ok. Here's a challenge for you or anyone else that I hope could make the following work as it should.

Situation:
(1) USA is giving 2 BPs to the USSR.
(2) USA is giving 2 BPs to the CW.
(3) USA is giving 2 BPs to Free France, home country Senegal.
(4) The 2 BPs are getting through to both the USSR and Free France but not to the CW.

Issue:
(1) USA to USSR trade route for the 2 BPs taken by MWiF is:
East Coast->North Atlantic->Denmark Straight->Norwegian Sea->Arctic Ocean->Archangel->Kharkov.
(2) I have enough CPs at sea such that if I could get these 2 BPs to travel from the East Coast to the Canadian Coast and then on then I could also get the 2 BPs from the USA to the CW.
(3) But, since the set convoy route feature hasn't been working for a long time now (3 or 4 years or even longer), I don't know how to affected this.
(4) I really hope it can and I just don't know how. Can it? That is, can the 2 BPs to the USSR be forced to route through the Canadian coast?

Thanks ...

[rkr1958]

Attached is the game file for anyone wishing to look at or take on this challenge.

However, personally instead of wasting hours on end trying to get this to work, which I don't know if I could ever get it to work, I'll use the "unofficial" set BPs feature which I've discovered through the magic of editing.

By the way, it's exactly stuff like this that's driven off most of the very large and enthusiastic fan base we had here 10 to 15 years ago. This makes me very sad because MWiF is a very good game but could have been a great game enjoyed by a large number of folks except for issues such as this. [:(]

Rant over and sorry if I offended anyone. [&o]

[craigbear]

What is the "unofficial" set BPs feature?... the only way I know is to add BPs to already existing saved ones. As well, beta-testers can also access some magic for editing... is there another way?

I like your example... I won't test it as I am running into similar issues.

[paulderynck]

There is no other way, people were "wouldn't it be nice-ing".

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: craigbear

What is the "unofficial" set BPs feature?... the only way I know is to add BPs to already existing saved ones. As well, beta-testers can also access some magic for editing... is there another way?

I like your example... I won't test it as I am running into similar issues.

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.a ... 32&mpage=2

Specifically, posts 36 - 44.

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

Attached is the game file for anyone wishing to look at or take on this challenge.

However, personally instead of wasting hours on end trying to get this to work, which I don't know if I could ever get it to work, I'll use the "unofficial" set BPs feature which I've discovered through the magic of editing.

By the way, it's exactly stuff like this that's driven off most of the very large and enthusiastic fan base we had here 10 to 15 years ago. This makes me very sad because MWiF is a very good game but could have been a great game enjoyed by a large number of folks except for issues such as this. [:(]

Rant over and sorry if I offended anyone. [&o]

No offense taken. However: your gamesave is useless. To get things right, I need a gamesave at the start of the preliminary production phase.
I've never been able to get things right during a naval movement phase...

[gw15]

Agree, never try to optimize production during any phase except preliminary production.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: Centuur
To get things right, I need a gamesave at the start of the preliminary production phase.
I've never been able to get things right during a naval movement phase...

ORIGINAL: gw15

Agree, never try to optimize production during any phase except preliminary production.

Thanks guys. I'll provide you one at that time. It's only impulse 2 of the JA42 turn so it'll be a while.

The only issue that I have with waiting to preliminary production to "optimize" production is that it's too late to add convoys if I need them. I understand I can subtract convoys being that this phase occurs before RTB. Though, I have been biten before by MWiF when I've returned to base "unused" CPs only to see different and less efficient routes then taken by MWiF.

Maybe I play this wrong but when I take a full naval as the allies (e.g., CW or USA) I like to set my convoy lines that maximizes my production (and limited oversea supply). I also at this time tend to return to base excess CPs in sea areas at risk of attack. I don't want to risk more CPs than I have to. In summary, for me the appropriate time to set your convoy lines and production is during a naval when you have the ability to add or subtract CPs. Though, often times after I've got things working like I want my opponent will come along and thoroughly mess everything up. How evil is that!

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

ORIGINAL: Centuur
To get things right, I need a gamesave at the start of the preliminary production phase.
I've never been able to get things right during a naval movement phase...

ORIGINAL: gw15

Agree, never try to optimize production during any phase except preliminary production.

Thanks guys. I'll provide you one at that time. It's only impulse 2 of the JA42 turn so it'll be a while.

The only issue that I have with waiting to preliminary production to "optimize" production is that it's too late to add convoys if I need them. I understand I can subtract convoys being that this phase occurs before RTB. Though, I have been biten before by MWiF when I've returned to base "unused" CPs only to see different and less efficient routes then taken by MWiF.

Maybe I play this wrong but when I take a full naval as the allies (e.g., CW or USA) I like to set my convoy lines that maximizes my production (and limited oversea supply). I also at this time tend to return to base excess CPs in sea areas at risk of attack. I don't want to risk more CPs than I have to. In summary, for me the appropriate time to set your convoy lines and production is during a naval when you have the ability to add or subtract CPs. Though, often times after I've got things working like I want my opponent will come along and thoroughly mess everything up. How evil is that!

I do it like I play the game. I already know how many CPs I want in each sea area so I put them there as long as I can. If it is MWiF, then they go on Sentry and stay that way and this is double-checked at the end of the return-to-base phase. If the enemy blows some away or aborts them, then I make a new plan and if impulse and action choice permit, I sail out CPs to patch things up.

So then when it comes to Preliminary Production, that's when I try to get MWiF to obey. I used to do this in Final Production, but as others have stated, things would not work correctly when done then.

Doing all the planning during a naval move is fine, but don't waste time trying to do production in the game at that time, besides you can't plan for what the bad guys and fate might do to your CP lines anyway.

I'm not saying it is the case here, but I have seen complaints saying the convoy lines are not working right but it turns out there is a CP bottleneck somewhere, especially when French and CW CP lines are shared. To aid in convoy planning (not just in MWiF, but also in the board game). I printed out copies of the global map on which to note the number of convoys needed in sea areas and note where CPs get on and get off of the pipelines.

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

ORIGINAL: Centuur
To get things right, I need a gamesave at the start of the preliminary production phase.
I've never been able to get things right during a naval movement phase...

ORIGINAL: gw15

Agree, never try to optimize production during any phase except preliminary production.

Thanks guys. I'll provide you one at that time. It's only impulse 2 of the JA42 turn so it'll be a while.

The only issue that I have with waiting to preliminary production to "optimize" production is that it's too late to add convoys if I need them. I understand I can subtract convoys being that this phase occurs before RTB. Though, I have been biten before by MWiF when I've returned to base "unused" CPs only to see different and less efficient routes then taken by MWiF.

Maybe I play this wrong but when I take a full naval as the allies (e.g., CW or USA) I like to set my convoy lines that maximizes my production (and limited oversea supply). I also at this time tend to return to base excess CPs in sea areas at risk of attack. I don't want to risk more CPs than I have to. In summary, for me the appropriate time to set your convoy lines and production is during a naval when you have the ability to add or subtract CPs. Though, often times after I've got things working like I want my opponent will come along and thoroughly mess everything up. How evil is that!

I do it like I play the game. I already know how many CPs I want in each sea area so I put them there as long as I can. If it is MWiF, then they go on Sentry and stay that way and this is double-checked at the end of the return-to-base phase. If the enemy blows some away or aborts them, then I make a new plan and if impulse and action choice permit, I sail out CPs to patch things up.

So then when it comes to Preliminary Production, that's when I try to get MWiF to obey. I used to do this in Final Production, but as others have stated, things would not work correctly when done then.

Doing all the planning during a naval move is fine, but don't waste time trying to do production in the game at that time, besides you can't plan for what the bad guys and fate might do to your CP lines anyway.

I'm not saying it is the case here, but I have seen complaints saying the convoy lines are not working right but it turns out there is a CP bottleneck somewhere, especially when French and CW CP lines are shared. To aid in convoy planning (not just in MWiF, but also in the board game). I printed out copies of the global map on which to note the number of convoys needed in sea areas and note where CPs get on and get off of the pipelines.

That's the same way I do it. I use the global map too, since you can press a button showing the active allied convoys there, making it more easier to check your calculations.

[craigbear]

Thanks rk958. Don't know how I missed that.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: craigbear

Thanks rk958. Don't know how I missed that.

Craig, I hope you don't mind me using your thread to follow up on convoy routing and production troubles? Please let me know if you do. [:)]

Until then I'll continue to use this thread. [&o]

[rkr1958]

Does the following make any sense to anyone?

The CW is giving an Indian RP to the USSR. The USSR controls Persia and all land/rail in between to the Russia proper. Why in the heck does MWiF route this RP through 11 sea areas when it could have routed through 2 (i.e., Arabian Sea to Persian Gulf)?!

[rkr1958]

game file attached for any interested.

[craigbear]

I am guessing the persian oil on the coast is getting priority... put those two on idle (use for reorg), and that may solve the issue.

This has happened to me... I have not downloaded the file and could be very wrong.

[Centuur]

No, it doesn't make sense. But that's only important in those cases when there is no maximum production for all major powers on a side. And if I check your gamesave, it looks like that all allied major powers do have maximum production...

A computerprogram never makes sense.... [:D]

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: craigbear

I am guessing the persian oil on the coast is getting priority... put those two on idle (use for reorg), and that may solve the issue.

This has happened to me... I have not downloaded the file and could be very wrong.

Thanks Craig. There's 2 unused allied CPs in the Persian Gulf, so that wasn't it. FYI. I was able to get the Indian RP to route trough the Persian Gulf by the Soviets changing the factory from Perm to Stalingrad.

ORIGINAL: Centuur

No, it doesn't make sense. But that's only important in those cases when there is no maximum production for all major powers on a side. And if I check your gamesave, it looks like that all allied major powers do have maximum production...

A computerprogram never makes sense.... [:D]

Agree. In my 40+ years of programming experience I've found that computer programs do exactly as programed whether or not the programmer intended for the code to work that way. Not working as intended has caused me untold hours of debugging! [8D]