SP's in Editor

This forum is for feedback on any Public Beta updates. Feedback and issues related to official releases should go in the Support forum. All Beta version feedback and issues should go here.

Moderators: ralphtricky, JAMiAM

Post Reply
User avatar
sPzAbt653
Posts: 10056
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 7:11 am
Location: east coast, usa

SP's in Editor

Post by sPzAbt653 »

Using .178 on the XP and '98 OS's.

In the editor, supply points in enemy owned hexes cannot be seen anymore. The scenario dump still lists them, but they are not visible on the map. When waving the cursor over a hex that has one, it still prompts you to place one, instead of removing it. Placing one doesn't seem to place one. Playing the scenario, the supply points do appear when the hex ownership is converted. [:(]
User avatar
sPzAbt653
Posts: 10056
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 7:11 am
Location: east coast, usa

RE: SP's in Editor

Post by sPzAbt653 »

For example, I snipped a piece of map from the editor that I know has friendly [red] supply points in enemy territory and they are not visible. The inset is a cut from the scenario dump showing the supply point locations. For the friendly hexes at 26,30 and 28,30 the supply points are visible, but for the ones in enemy territory they are not visible.

If I put the mouse on the supply point at 26,30 or 28,30, the dialogue at the bottom says 'right click to remove supply point', but right clicking brings up the box for assigning a value. Assigning a value of '0' removes it, and it can be replaced by assigning a positive value. But moving to 27,30 and right clicking to place a supply point and asigning a value seems to have no effect.

Image
Attachments
edit189.jpg
edit189.jpg (87.8 KiB) Viewed 156 times
User avatar
Curtis Lemay
Posts: 14721
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
Location: Houston, TX

RE: SP's in Editor

Post by Curtis Lemay »

Although you could use "Toggle Ownership" to reveal the SP, this has been fixed in 3.4.0.186.
My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site
User avatar
BigDuke66
Posts: 2035
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Terra

RE: SP's in Editor

Post by BigDuke66 »

.186? Another Alpha?
User avatar
ralphtricky
Posts: 6675
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 4:05 am
Location: Colorado Springs
Contact:

RE: SP's in Editor

Post by ralphtricky »

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

.186? Another Alpha?
An internal build number. I keep every change so that I can trace back and pint the finger at myself[:-]. It's useful for seeing why I did such a bone headed thing so I can try to make a different mistake next time.

The release build should be either 187 or 190. It depends on the timing, I made a 190 with a minor change, but unless we've got time to test it, we'll go with 187. Unless I discover some other boneheaded mistakes, of course.
Ralph Trickey
TOAW IV Programmer
Blog: http://operationalwarfare.com
---
My comments are my own, and do not represent the views of any other person or entity. Nothing that I say should be construed in any way as a promise of anything.
User avatar
ralphtricky
Posts: 6675
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 4:05 am
Location: Colorado Springs
Contact:

RE: SP's in Editor

Post by ralphtricky »

A change can be one or many updates, but is generally one feature, or bug fix (possibly for a feature that was added.) So I've made 190 distinct changes from 3.3 to 3.4. Crazy, isn't it?
Ralph Trickey
TOAW IV Programmer
Blog: http://operationalwarfare.com
---
My comments are my own, and do not represent the views of any other person or entity. Nothing that I say should be construed in any way as a promise of anything.
User avatar
Sker
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 3:54 pm
Location: Milano, Italy

RE: SP's in Editor

Post by Sker »

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick

An internal build number. I keep every change so that I can trace back and pint the finger at myself[:-]. It's useful for seeing why I did such a bone headed thing so I can try to make a different mistake next time.

The release build should be either 187 or 190. It depends on the timing, I made a 190 with a minor change, but unless we've got time to test it, we'll go with 187. Unless I discover some other boneheaded mistakes, of course.

So we can expect the official release to come out very soon?

Anyway I think it's quite normal having many changes in such a wide project like this 3.4 patch, the more you change from the original game the more bug you will have to fix.
If any minor change will be cut from the patch it can be included in the next one
Post Reply

Return to “Public Beta Feedback”