Matrix Games Forums

And I couldn't fix it and I saw those forum, thank you sir but your dismissal is unwelcomed

double post

ORIGINAL: pochepiller

And I couldn't fix it and I saw those forum, thank you sir but your dismissal is unwelcomed

There is a full screen mode, but it also requires you to enter the resolution you want to use

the second quote is about full screen and is from the developer, and i'm sure if anyone is still having an issue with resolution just open a post of there own, posting a report and someone will reply with the instructions on how to edit the game file to suit that given res,...

most standard sizes are already in the game, but others have to be manually entered it seems, but there's plenty who have already posted that they have it working fine with 4k sizes

How to get a DirectX Diagnostic file:

1. click on "START"
2. click "run"
3. type in "dxdiag" and click "OK"
4. check through the tabs and perform all tests
5. click "Save all Information..." and save the text file to a location of your choice

We prefer that DxDiag files be posted as message attachments rather than pasted into the body of the post.

once the report has been made, just attach it to your post with first adding the file to a zip, which is then permitted to attach to the forum

Some explanation seems in order. For TOAW, Single Player Mode has two levels. There is Level 1, an AI, it is a written code program that is in place for every scenario and is not accessible to scenario designers [and well it shouldn't be]. Level 2 is separate, it is the Programmed Opponent [PO} that must be programmed by the scenario designer for every scenario in order to function. Level 1 won't really do anything unless given direction by Level 2. The amount of programming for Level 2 by scenario designers varies. It can range from just enough to allow the game to function [which for most players would not be considered a challenge], to full blown 'my programmed opponent will crush you'.

CIV estimates that 95% of all games are played solo, so these are valid concerns. Not all might be interested, but the Level 2 that I talk about above is fully accessible by all players in the Editor, and therefore there is the option to set up your own PO in a scenario that doesn't have one, or to modify one that is in place. Maybe one day I will make a video for this [;)]

Graph excerpt from SHunwick's TOAW III Scenario Catalogue. We haven't heard from him today so I have no idea if this has been updated for IV.

the icon dont resize and stay very small, the font is all over the place event when I edited each of them manually (a chore). Most game (all) I buy have no problem with resolution but your tech is so much primitive that I call it TOAW 3.

Grimoire : Heralds of the Winged Exemplar and your game is the 2 I can't run on my 4k monitor. Bravo.

Now the 4k complain is a valid one, it would be nice to know if there are people using that resolution without problems, and if that's the case maybe we could find a solution for pochepiller.

Pochepiller, if you haven't already, please check the relevant thread in the Tech Support forum and let us know there if the solution offered helped you or not.


As for "no AI": ALL the scenarios can be played in single player without exception. The difference that can be made between the nearly 300 scenarios, is whether specific AI scripts to help and optimise AI planning have been added or not.

Some of the scenarios, and indeed, that usually means the massive ones, do not have such AI scripts and the designers felt that due to this the AI's performance in their scenarios does not live up to the standard set by the other 200+ ones. So they market these "PBEM only".

I'd like to point out that we have almost as many scenarios marked "PO (AI) only", including one of the most impressive and biggest ones, Directive 21, that lets you play the Axis forces through the entire East Front campaign from 1941 to 1945. The designers suggest you play this as the Axis, and your long term victory objective is not to lose Berlin by the end of it!
And also in the case of these scenarios, there is nothing stopping you from playing them PBEM. It is merely that the designers felt that the events scripted etc. give you the most historic result if you play as a specific side in single player.

And then there is the vast majority of the scenarios, where the AI has been properly helped by scripts for both sides AND the designers are not shy about recommending PBEM either.

Oh and while we are at the topic of monster scenarios, another thread here reminded me, that everyone should check out "Campaign for South Vietnam" in the "Custom Graphics" folder - It is a scenario covering the entire Vietnam War, IIRC with AI properly set up for both sides, and with ingenious design to use existing game mechanics to simulate unique concerns of that conflict.

It is one of those "game within the game" massive undertakings that we have several of, similar to Directive 21 that I just mentioned.

Holy cow, thank you, I had registered just to take a shot at clearing that up.

In short, there's AI, and a way for scenario designers to tailor the AI's behavior to their scenario. Not having a Programmed Opponent(PO) doesn't stop the AI from working, it just - understandably - probably won't perform as well as if it had the scenario's creator guiding its preferences and behavior by hand.

Ed: Now, if I could figure out how to kick this thing into full screen mode in "Opart 4.ini"...

I just played the Coral Sea Scenario. I played the Allied side, and assigned the Japanese as the Computer. The game ended after 20 turns as an Allied Victory. No way to tell why. Because the Japanese computer didn't even move a Ship. Kind of like playing the Computer in Chess, only the Computer never moves any of it's pieces. You can imagine how much fun it was.

I am a very experienced TOAW player, but I have not played much in the last few years. I am finding the UI a challenge, but it is coming back quickly. I think that a contributing factor in the AI opponent confusion is that the process of selecting and setting up a new scenario is not very well done. The options are powerful but not obvious or easy to find. It took me several tries to set up the pc opponent the first time because I kept expecting the game to ask me how to set up the sides. It never does. You have to go looking for the options. I am still not sure if I am setting it all up right. The UI has the same problem in other places. Once you learn it, it is fast and powerful. But for a newby it has got to be frustrating. This game was made as a labor of love by people who breathed it. I do not think they realize how frustrating some of the UI elements are to people who have never played. Once you get past that, the game is GREAT. Maybe they can address some of these things.

Well you ignored the reality of what I just posted. Most of the World War II in Asia scenarios, are useless to play as a Single Player. If there is no script for the Computer opponent to follow, the Computer will do nothing with it's forces. Literally nothing. 'Veteran Players' of older versions of TOAW, are either purposely glossing over that key fact, or have never played from the Folder I mentioned.

ORIGINAL: Auchinleck

I just played the Coral Sea Scenario. I played the Allied side, and assigned the Japanese as the Computer. The game ended after 20 turns as an Allied Victory. No way to tell why. Because the Japanese computer didn't even move a Ship. Kind of like playing the Computer in Chess, only the Computer never moves any of it's pieces. You can imagine how much fun it was.

This is something that was reported by a beta tester on the morning of the release, and confirmed as a bug later yesterday: unfortunately a bug was introduced recently, that can make the naval AI "fall asleep" so to speak. We have a fix for it already, and will roll it out ASAP.

I have to admit I have never played any of the Asia stuff. I am a WW2 Europe guy. And there are some scenarios that are two player designed. But, for the most part, the stuff I gravitate toward is fine. A better initial game set-up would go a long way toward alleviating problems and steer new players away from scenarios that they might not like.

I have had an epiphany! TOAW 1 & 2 were so great and easy... and 3 was even better. I had no problems. Why? I was a whole lot smarter 20+ years ago!!!
It's all so clear now.....

Damn. Why didn't I saw this topic before I bought the game!

ORIGINAL: dobrodukh

Damn. Why didn't I saw this topic before I bought the game!

What is the particular issue you are having?

I am probably in similar situation as many in this topic. I am interested in monster scenarios and in single player. For us without the game it is hard to identify which scenarios can be played this way.

To my understanding, from reading these posts, basic AI is all present but not challenging and PO should be taken as a requirement for satisfying single player experience. It would be extremely helpful if there was a list on which monster scenarios or some other interesting scenarios from different periods have PO. There is no need to list all scenarios, few from each period would be enough so that people can have a minimum expectations.

I will be buying this game because there is enough scenarios with PO that interest me. It was hard to find this information (good source is page Rugged defense that somebody already linked, although not 100% relevant/accurate) and I believe it is the biggest reason for these negative posts/topics.

ORIGINAL: Plochan

I am probably in similar situation as many in this topic. I am interested in monster scenarios and in single player. For us without the game it is hard to identify which scenarios can be played this way.

To my understanding, from reading these posts, basic AI is all present but not challenging and PO should be taken as a requirement for satisfying single player experience. It would be extremely helpful if there was a list on which monster scenarios or some other interesting scenarios from different periods have PO. There is no need to list all scenarios, few from each period would be enough so that people can have a minimum expectations.

I will be buying this game because there is enough scenarios with PO that interest me. It was hard to find this information (good source is page Rugged defense that somebody already linked, although not 100% relevant/accurate) and I believe it is the biggest reason for these negative posts/topics.

Well said Plochan.