Debug Mode

[IKerensky]

Is the full debug mode avaliable with the release ?

Picking dice roll, putting/removing counter from the map, setting the date ?

[Cad908]

ORIGINAL: KERENSKY

Is the full debug mode avaliable with the release ?

Picking dice roll, putting/removing counter from the map, setting the date ?

Full Debug mode is limited to Beta testers. In solitaire the player has the option to input the dice rolls, just go to

Interface
Player Interface Settings
"check" the box for Set die rolls under Simulation Control

-Rob

[IKerensky]

Is it possible to add this feature in the next patch ?

One of the best use I have of MWIF is to play the arbiter in our FtF game, to do so It need to be able to set up counter.

[Cad908]

ORIGINAL: KERENSKY

Is it possible to add this feature in the next patch ?

One of the best use I have of MWIF is to play the arbiter in our FtF game, to do so It need to be able to set up counter.

Steve's call, but I would guess not. The debug feature the Beta testers use is a little quirky, Steve created it to allow us to do a few things and was never intended for release.

-Rob

[Numdydar]

From what Steve has said, it can easily break the game if used incorrectly. He also said that it would take a considerable amout of time to get it to the point that it could be used in the retail versions. So I would not expect anything like this for a long time, if ever.

[Centuur]

I wouldn't say never, but at this moment I agree with Rob. Maybe in the future, with a manual, since especially the one which is used to place or remove units need to be used wisely to prevent in game crashes.

[celebrindal]

Actually I'd think this would help a few folks continue their game.. things like removing units that should have been out of supply and dead, putting things into supply even if impluse by impulse, removing or adding units on DoW that are not working.. things of that nature.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: celebrindal

Actually I'd think this would help a few folks continue their game.. things like removing units that should have been out of supply and dead, putting things into supply even if impluse by impulse, removing or adding units on DoW that are not working.. things of that nature.

I would rather spend my time fixing bugs so such problems don't arise.

[IKerensky]

While you are working on fixing the code, why not give the players a way to fix their games ?

[joshuamnave]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: celebrindal

Actually I'd think this would help a few folks continue their game.. things like removing units that should have been out of supply and dead, putting things into supply even if impluse by impulse, removing or adding units on DoW that are not working.. things of that nature.

I would rather spend my time fixing bugs so such problems don't arise.

Me too. But I've had the game a month or more, and still can't play it the way it's intended to play. Overseas supply, supply in China are still issues that affect the outcome of the game. Partisans working, then not working, then working again, the new bug with removing air units, the one playing Australian units, these are issues that affect the outcome of the game. Then there are crash bugs, which just make the game more frustrating. I don't hold you responsible and I'm glad you're working so hard on squashing the bugs... but put me down as one of the people in favor of having some kind of work around that we can use to fix broken games while we wait.

I also think that long term, the debug tool is something I want, something a lot of players will want. The ability to set up positions, change positions, play "what if's", or even create scenarios will be a major selling point for this game. Some nights I don't want to sit down to a long drawn out game, or have time for a shorter Barbarossa, but if someone made a 1 turn Kursk scenario, or a Spain/Gibraltar scenario, for example, that might scratch the itch nicely on those days. A debug tool makes that possible.

[CrusssDaddy]

This is one of the things I never understood -- why remove debug? Playing CWiF, I have numerous options using debug to fix resources. If I'm lazy, I can simply add build points directly, or destroy a factory and replace it with one in a more convenient location, or add factories or synth oil, or skip production and just add units directly to the production spiral. It allows you to work around other bugs, like the weirdness that results among conquered French-aligned minors when France goes Vichy with no Free France. You can temporarily overstack to shuffle units on a crowded frontline. Additionally, debug allows you to create your own "What If?" scenarios. The uses are endlessly satisfying.

Steve's reasoning for eliminating debug was, "Because people might crash the game by putting Brazilian units in Berlin when Brazil was not yet activated," and this is of course an absurd contrivance meant to cover for some other agenda or deficiency.

[joshuamnave]

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

Steve's reasoning for eliminating debug was, "Because people might crash the game by putting Brazilian units in Berlin when Brazil was not yet activated," and this is of course an absurd contrivance meant to cover for some other agenda or deficiency.

Oh I doubt that. There are no sinister motives here. Most likely the debug utility that the playtesters use is a backend system that is both not user friendly and not entirely stable. Fixing it up for general release takes time away from working on other bugs. And in that scenario, let's get the bugs fixed. But long term, I still want the debug tool.

And if it's going to take several months to get the game into the kind of shape it really should have been in on release (ie... 98% of the players can play 98% of their games all the way through without a crash, and all of the rules work the way they're supposed to work), then I would rethink that prioritization and give us a debug tool sooner so that we can play the game we bought the way it was intended.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Zartacla

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: celebrindal

Actually I'd think this would help a few folks continue their game.. things like removing units that should have been out of supply and dead, putting things into supply even if impluse by impulse, removing or adding units on DoW that are not working.. things of that nature.

I would rather spend my time fixing bugs so such problems don't arise.

Me too. But I've had the game a month or more, and still can't play it the way it's intended to play. Overseas supply, supply in China are still issues that affect the outcome of the game. Partisans working, then not working, then working again, the new bug with removing air units, the one playing Australian units, these are issues that affect the outcome of the game. Then there are crash bugs, which just make the game more frustrating. I don't hold you responsible and I'm glad you're working so hard on squashing the bugs... but put me down as one of the people in favor of having some kind of work around that we can use to fix broken games while we wait.

I also think that long term, the debug tool is something I want, something a lot of players will want. The ability to set up positions, change positions, play "what if's", or even create scenarios will be a major selling point for this game. Some nights I don't want to sit down to a long drawn out game, or have time for a shorter Barbarossa, but if someone made a 1 turn Kursk scenario, or a Spain/Gibraltar scenario, for example, that might scratch the itch nicely on those days. A debug tool makes that possible.

A player using the 'debug' tool can create more bugs in one sitting than I can fix in a month of Sundays.

The bugs that 'feature' creates are not necessarily immediately obvious. They can occur several phases, impulses, or even turns later. And then the players would complain that the game "doesn't work". I've already spent enough time (months probably) trying to fix problems in saved games where the problems were caused by people using the 'debug' feature. A total waste of time by all concerned. I use it very rarely and I am extremely careful to limit its use to just what I need to recreate a unique situation for testing purposes. 98% of the time I work from saved games that I know are 'clean'.

I already spend a lot of time simply investigating reported problems, with the majority turning out to not be bugs. If you remove duplicates, the number that I investigate which I discard is well over 90%. Adding spurious bug reports caused by players using the 'debug' feature wouldn't make anyone's life easier.

Bear in mind that "one little change" in the game state can have disastrous consequences because of the extremely high level of interactions between the game elements. Repositioning an air unit because you forgot to rebase it can affect: the number of minor country units outside their home country, foreign troop commitments, collapsing Vichy France, neutrality pact restrictions, stacking limits (many different ones), friendly units in enemy controlled hexes, ...

Way back in 2006 I used the debug tool to place units from all the major powers in the middle of the USSR (or the USA) just to display the different depictions of unit types and country colors - and solicit opinions from forum members. The debug tool didn't object at all to having units from all the Axis major powers and minor countries scattered hither and yon. In fact, I could have placed naval units in the middle of Kansas or the Ural mountains. That might have caused some problem later during the return to base phase.[;)]

I have no plans for ever making the debug feature available to customers. A ton of work for marginal benefit and certain to cause enormous headaches later.

[CrusssDaddy]

You heard it here, fellas -- 10 years wasn't enough time to fix convoys, but more than enough to break a capably functioning debug feature. Commendable work.

[AxelNL]

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

You heard it here, fellas -- 10 years wasn't enough time to fix convoys, but more than enough to break a capably functioning debug feature. Commendable work.

How long have you been a critic from the sideline, without any constructive effort? Very commendable.

[joshuamnave]

ORIGINAL: AxelNL

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

You heard it here, fellas -- 10 years wasn't enough time to fix convoys, but more than enough to break a capably functioning debug feature. Commendable work.

How long have you been a critic from the sideline, without any constructive effort? Very commendable.

I'm not unsympathetic to your position - I know how hard and often unrewarding it can be to be a beta tester or a playtester. I even did it for a living for a while, when I was a lot younger. But that doesn't make him wrong, nor is a paying customer under any ethical, moral or financial obligation to help improve the product before complaining about it. His complaint is valid - the convoy system is bad, and appears to be near universally disliked, while a functional debug tool would be very useful in working around the many bugs *and* nice to have for scenario builders and armchair generals. Sure, there are nicer ways that he could have said it, but trust me I'm right there with him in terms of my frustration with the current state of the game.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Zartacla

ORIGINAL: AxelNL

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

You heard it here, fellas -- 10 years wasn't enough time to fix convoys, but more than enough to break a capably functioning debug feature. Commendable work.

How long have you been a critic from the sideline, without any constructive effort? Very commendable.

I'm not unsympathetic to your position - I know how hard and often unrewarding it can be to be a beta tester or a playtester. I even did it for a living for a while, when I was a lot younger. But that doesn't make him wrong, nor is a paying customer under any ethical, moral or financial obligation to help improve the product before complaining about it. His complaint is valid - the convoy system is bad, and appears to be near universally disliked, while a functional debug tool would be very useful in working around the many bugs *and* nice to have for scenario builders and armchair generals. Sure, there are nicer ways that he could have said it, but trust me I'm right there with him in terms of my frustration with the current state of the game.

warspite1

Zartacla I see you joined at the start of the year. I assume you do not know of the "history" here.

What you say is partly right. However, CrusssDaddy is not a paying customer. He has made it perfectly clear in previous posts that MWIF is not for him - its too expensive, the graphics are rubbish and overall the game offers nothing more than that provided by CWIF. However, even if he is not a paying customer I guess he still has the right to voice an opinion, although would question why someone would waste their life hanging around a forum for a game they are never going to play... Each to his own I guess.

But its more than that I'm afraid, AxelNL's response was no doubt driven by the guy's previous. Over the years he has been routinely, (very) rude, vindictive and plain trollish in his behaviour, venting his spleen at Steve (competence, mocking his illness), Matrix (conspiracy theories about not wanting the game released), Beta Testers (fanboys) and, more recently and for no apparent reason, Neilster I think it was (perhaps he thought he was a Beta Tester?).

Yes we are all frustrated with elements of the game, and when you pay good money for something that does not work right, then frustration can spill over. Sadly in this person's case its been more than that.

[AxelNL]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Zartacla

ORIGINAL: AxelNL




How long have you been a critic from the sideline, without any constructive effort? Very commendable.

I'm not unsympathetic to your position - I know how hard and often unrewarding it can be to be a beta tester or a playtester. I even did it for a living for a while, when I was a lot younger. But that doesn't make him wrong, nor is a paying customer under any ethical, moral or financial obligation to help improve the product before complaining about it. His complaint is valid - the convoy system is bad, and appears to be near universally disliked, while a functional debug tool would be very useful in working around the many bugs *and* nice to have for scenario builders and armchair generals. Sure, there are nicer ways that he could have said it, but trust me I'm right there with him in terms of my frustration with the current state of the game.

warspite1

Zartacla I see you joined at the start of the year. I assume you do not know of the "history" here.

What you say is partly right. However, CrusssDaddy is not a paying customer. He has made it perfectly clear in previous posts that MWIF is not for him - its too expensive, the graphics are rubbish and overall the game offers nothing more than that provided by CWIF. However, even if he is not a paying customer I guess he still has the right to voice an opinion, although would question why someone would waste their life hanging around a forum for a game they are never going to play... Each to his own I guess.

But its more than that I'm afraid, AxelNL's response was no doubt driven by the guy's previous. Over the years he has been routinely, (very) rude, vindictive and plain trollish in his behaviour, venting his spleen at Steve (competence, mocking his illness), Matrix (conspiracy theories about not wanting the game released), Beta Testers (fanboys) and, more recently and for no apparent reason, Neilster I think it was (perhaps he thought he was a Beta Tester?).

Yes we are all frustrated with elements of the game, and when you pay good money for something that does not work right, then frustration can spill over. Sadly in this person's case its been more than that.

Warspite1 - thanks for intervening, buddy. You described it perfectly.

For the rest of the readers: my apologies that I let my emotions get the upper hand. On the subject itself I reserve my own opinion (also a bit bounded by the NDA I accepted). My reaction was purely against Crussdaddy, whom I probably gave exact what he wanted. I suspect he get's a kick out of this.

For Crussdaddy:

[CrusssDaddy]

Nope, not a paying customer. That is correct.

I first criticized removing debug 3+ years ago, and received support from experienced CWiF players -- stubborn resistance to reintroducing the feature (and it is most certainly a feature) caused my resistance to the project to metastasize into refusal. If after all this time convoys are still bugged beyond all use, then I don't believe questioning whether Steve can ever repair them is unreasonable. Debug would certainly help you out with that, and then if Steve did manage to tame the bugs you would still have a tool for scenario building.

Again, Steve's excuse is ludicrous -- no debug because if you plop units from every nation in the middle of Nebraska in a neutral USA, some funny business may result? No s***. Just ignore bug reports from debug games, good lord...

[brian brian]

No Soup For You!