Matrix Games Forums

SoKay;

You've heard about it, pondered the proposed changes.........probably worked out what differences it will make to your current game....

Anyone have a vague clue concerning the 'launch date' for the next patch?

I'm in the middle of a 'playtest', and would really like to see the 'final frontier' befor I get any farther, LOL!

Resetting 'monster' scenario's can be a 'chore', eh?

[:D][:D][:D][:D]

ORIGINAL: L`zard

SoKay;

You've heard about it, pondered the proposed changes.........probably worked out what differences it will make to your current game....

Anyone have a vague clue concerning the 'launch date' for the next patch?

I'm in the middle of a 'playtest', and would really like to see the 'final frontier' befor I get any farther, LOL!

Resetting 'monster' scenario's can be a 'chore', eh?

[:D][:D][:D][:D]

When it's done.

I've started working on 3.4 already, so there shouldn't be any more code changes unless someone finds something really major.

How about an 'Elmer plays both sides for xx turns' option[X(] for PBEM. Civ IV has it. I'm not sure it would help playtest, but it sure might be entertaining.

Ralph

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick
How about an 'Elmer plays both sides for xx turns' option[X(] for PBEM. Civ IV has it. I'm not sure it would help playtest, but it sure might be entertaining.
Ralph

Ermm...While I bow in your general direction, Ralph, [&o][&o] methinx there's a whole bunch of better things to ask for than this, eh?

Especially when it comes to the use of YOUR time, [:D] Something about a 'compiled wishlist' comes to mind.....?

ToaW-Fanatic that I am, I've never played Civ IV, and really don't care about it, lol!

Lots more interested in what your gonna do with ToaW, and when, eh? [:D]

Especially as the 'playtest' in question has 'live players' , as it should for pbem, ....Silvanski is the guy to talk to re: elmer playtests, LOL!

He'd know about 30 times what I do on the subject....[:'(]

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick
How about an 'Elmer plays both sides for xx turns' option[X(] for PBEM. Civ IV has it. I'm not sure it would help playtest, but it sure might be entertaining.

Ralph

Like: let Elmer run both sides during the opening 2 turns and then have the PBEM opponents pick up the game on turn 3 and try to make the best of the situation?

Sounds interesting if it could be implemented.

BTW I have to correct you L'zard... I only know 20 times as much of PO as you do[:D]

ORIGINAL: Silvanski
BTW I have to correct you L'zard... I only know 20 times as much of PO as you do[:D]

With all due respect, Silvain;

Possibly, as what I know can be written on the inside of a matchbook cover with a grease-pen, LOL!

I did notice that in the PO version of AF:1914 (entente PO) that a wider spread of objective paths might be a good thing...

Seems like all the Army of North Virginia units stack as 1)inf...and then 2) engineers and other assets...instead of mixed stacks, eh? I'll get back to you on this by email, LOL! [&o]

ORIGINAL: L`zardI did notice that in the PO version of AF:1914 (entente PO) that a wider spread of objective paths might be a good thing...

Seems like all the Army of North Virginia units stack as 1)inf...and then 2) engineers and other assets...instead of mixed stacks, eh? I'll get back to you on this by email, LOL! [&o]

Has to do with the OOB... Formations made up entirely of engineer units if I remember correctly

Ralph (or JAM), will you accept scenario submissions for next patch?

ORIGINAL: Boonierat

Ralph (or JAM), will you accept scenario submissions for next patch?

PM sent.

ORIGINAL: Silvanski

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick
How about an 'Elmer plays both sides for xx turns' option[X(] for PBEM. Civ IV has it. I'm not sure it would help playtest, but it sure might be entertaining.

Ralph

Like: let Elmer run both sides during the opening 2 turns and then have the PBEM opponents pick up the game on turn 3 and try to make the best of the situation?

Sounds interesting if it could be implemented.

BTW I have to correct you L'zard... I only know 20 times as much of PO as you do[:D]

I was thinking of something like 'Let George do it' with a box that allows George to run things for x turns, then reverts to either PBEM or Single player or hot-seat or whatever. Obviously, right now, it would be better at the start, and suicide near the end of a long scenario sice you haven't followed the objective tracks.

I don't know if it's possible or not. I'd have to blank the display or something while it's working which could make it impractical.

It might make some of the scenarios more variable. Let George do it for 5 turns then you need to take over and go from there.

Ralph

Is it possible to prohibit Elmer to touch anything that the player has touched in the same turn?
Thanks.

I've started working on 3.4 already, so there shouldn't be any more code changes unless someone finds something really major.
Ralph

So the 3.3.0.6. patch is in the hands of the office-wienies, eh?

Evidently todays 'vocabulary powerword' is "Glacial" [:'(]

ORIGINAL: Levelworm

Is it possible to prohibit Elmer to touch anything that the player has touched in the same turn?
Thanks.

You mean, making some moves and then let Elmer take over? As far as I know the only thing you can do is dig in units, thereby expending all their movement points for that turn. Elmer can't move them after you did that. If you set up attacks I don't know if he will lift those.. Ralph or James surely will know more...

ORIGINAL: Silvanski

ORIGINAL: Levelworm

Is it possible to prohibit Elmer to touch anything that the player has touched in the same turn?
Thanks.

You mean, making some moves and then let Elmer take over? As far as I know the only thing you can do is dig in units, thereby expending all their movement points for that turn. Elmer can't move them after you did that. If you set up attacks I don't know if he will lift those.. Ralph or James surely will know more...

Right now, Elmer clears everything and takes over form scratch. Eventually, I want to let Elmer take over some of the support formations, and let you set his objectives, etc.. but that's quite a ways off.

Maybe you could "program" Elmer with the minds of deceased tactical and strategic geniuses? Or is that too far-fetched?
 
TOAW 6 or 7, maybe?

ORIGINAL: desert
Maybe you could "program" Elmer with the minds of deceased tactical and strategic geniuses? Or is that too far-fetched? TOAW 6 or 7, maybe?

\

D;

Methinx that what your looking for is in the part that's up to the individual scenario designers, eh?

Poor Ol' Ralph can only offer the tools to do it with.........

Tho it would be nice if there was a 'compendium of How To's' concerning programing Elmer for his best functionality, hint hint! [:D]

Sure, thats exactly what I meant...Yeah, lets go with that. [:'(]

ORIGINAL: desert

Maybe you could "program" Elmer with the minds of deceased tactical and strategic geniuses? Or is that too far-fetched?

TOAW 6 or 7, maybe?

First' I'll have to hunt them down...[:D].

They're getting better articles on how to create a good strategic AI. For a long time, they've been stuck on the first person shooter AIs. As the CPU cycles increase, the're finally starting to move up to the more complex questions.

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick

ORIGINAL: L`zard

SoKay;

You've heard about it, pondered the proposed changes.........probably worked out what differences it will make to your current game....

Anyone have a vague clue concerning the 'launch date' for the next patch?

I'm in the middle of a 'playtest', and would really like to see the 'final frontier' befor I get any farther, LOL!

Resetting 'monster' scenario's can be a 'chore', eh?

[:D][:D][:D][:D]

When it's done.

I've started working on 3.4 already, so there shouldn't be any more code changes unless someone finds something really major.

How about an 'Elmer plays both sides for xx turns' option[X(] for PBEM. Civ IV has it. I'm not sure it would help playtest, but it sure might be entertaining.

Ralph

..only if we get an event to activate it...

..you, the player have been killed, there will be a delay while your replacement takes over, nice...

..or, only slightly related[:)] to a scenario not a million miles from my HD, Brooke-Popham is in command until T3, when you are posted to Malaya..

Does anybody know if the 300x300 map mapsize limit will be increased in the next patch?

ORIGINAL: Bill II

Does anybody know if the 300x300 map mapsize limit will be increased in the next patch?

It won't be.