Matrix Games Forums

 Is disorganized the same as what we called "flipped" in WIFFE? You can become flipped after ground strikes, combat results where you don't get an asterisk result (*) etc. You use an HQ during an impuse to unflip units or you use oil at the end of the turn to unflip units.  Is this the same as disorganization?  I guess the MWIF units don't flip and show a reverse counter side.

ORIGINAL: Borger Borgersen

 Is disorganized the same as what we called "flipped" in WIFFE? You can become flipped after ground strikes, combat results where you don't get an asterisk result (*) etc. You use an HQ during an impuse to unflip units or you use oil at the end of the turn to unflip units.  Is this the same as disorganization?  I guess the MWIF units don't flip and show a reverse counter side.

Yes. Disorganized = Flipped = Face Down.
This is consistent with the HQ re-organizing.

ORIGINAL: Borger Borgersen

Is disorganized the same as what we called "flipped" in WIFFE? You can become flipped after ground strikes, combat results where you don't get an asterisk result (*) etc. You use an HQ during an impuse to unflip units or you use oil at the end of the turn to unflip units. Is this the same as disorganization? I guess the MWIF units don't flip and show a reverse counter side.

Disorganized units will be shown using the status indicators.

Cheers, Neilster

In tutorail page 8 it says that the defending Italians have 4 combat factors instead of 9. Shouldn´t that be 4 combat factors instead of 8?
 
 
/Magnus

Greetings,

perhaps You could change the seven buttons on the right top of the tutorials like this?



Thanks for Your interest.

ORIGINAL: Darken
Greetings,

perhaps You could change the seven buttons on the right top of the tutorials like this?



Thanks for Your interest.

Good idea. [:)] The way you show the buttons is more intuitive. But I wonder if Steve has created a lot of diffent forms with the names, symbols and shapes the same way as for the buttons used in the tutorials. That means it's a lot of work to change them.

The most important thing is to have a consistent use of dialog boxes, buttons, names etc. I have no problems getting used to almost anything as long as I can expect all the forms to look similar.

The forms were created and discussed on the forum a long time ago (more than 1 year ago). The reason for that was to agree upon a standard way of creating all the forms Steve needed to create. Now that work is finished based upon what we agreed upon that time. But it's never too late to change things if there is a very good reason to do so. Only Steve can answer whether it's feasible or not to change the buttons to be similar to your suggestion.

ORIGINAL: Darken
Greetings,

perhaps You could change the seven buttons on the right top of the tutorials like this?



Thanks for Your interest.

I hadn't considered that. It wouldn't be difficult to change.

However, ...

I prefer words to symbols. That is probably inconsiderate of the non-English speakers.[:(]

Though I understand these symbols, I only just learned them in the last year, and I am still not real comfortable with them. Since I work with computers continuously (and have done so for decades), I wonder if less experienced computer users would know what they mean.

I arranged the buttons so it would be easiest to click on Next Page. I expect that button to be selected 6-8 times more often than all the others combined and by isolating it, I prevent unintended clicks on the others.

I think I'll leave this as is. But it is good for me to be exposed to other viewpoints and possiblities, so thank you for your suggestion.

A comment on the Supply Tutorial page with the CW set up to blow away the Italians in Sardinia:
 
Either on that page, or perhaps earlier in the tutorial, the abbrevation OOS should be introduced as standing for out of supply.

ORIGINAL: Darken
perhaps You could change the seven buttons on the right top of the tutorials like this?

I like these.
Lots of webpages have similar buttons already, they are clear for me in their meaning.
A tooltips can also write a text that will remove any doubt if there are.

With the risk of being nagging...

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Second and last in series.

Doesn´t the Italian 5-3 and 3-1 unit togheter become 8? Or is there a rule I don´t know of?

/Magnus

ORIGINAL: bredsjomagnus

With the risk of being nagging...


Doesn´t the Italian 5-3 and 3-1 unit togheter become 8? Or is there a rule I don´t know of?

/Magnus

It looked like a 6-1 to me. Patrice?

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: bredsjomagnus

With the risk of being nagging...


Doesn´t the Italian 5-3 and 3-1 unit togheter become 8? Or is there a rule I don´t know of?

/Magnus

It looked like a 6-1 to me. Patrice?

This is the all mighty Italian XVth GARR Corps, which is a 5-1 from 1940 from countersheet 4 [:D]

We have been making some changes so here are the first 10 pages (some new, some old, some revised).

Obviously the new items are the abstracts.

Nothing new here. it's included for completeness.

I defined OOS in the text.

The abstract does good work here.

Patrice took all the screen shots, including the abstract graphics. [&o][&o][&o][&o]
(Perhaps he'll rotate the text for us[;)]).

I believe this is unchanged from previously.

Here the abstract helps too.