Priority list of needed features and bug fixes in order to get 1940 maps to work

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
11 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Priority list of needed features and bug fixes in order to get 1940 maps to work

Veqryn
Administrator
ok, please do not hijack this thread, i will delete your post if you attempt to

also, please do not make feature requests for stuff that is NOT absolutely a BIG PRIORITY

the devs have very limited time, and we want a list of things that need being done in the order they need doing if pacific 1940 is going to reach a minimum level of playability.
(this means that if you can use edit to do something, then I will not ask comradekev to code it yet.  the priority is on the things that edit can not do).

thx, now here is the list:


FIRST THE BUG FIXES TO THE CURRENT UNSTABLE:

1. Carriers that are Transports BUG
i found a new bug regarding carriers that are also transports: if you have a carrier carrying allied ground units and allied air units, it will not be allowed to move anywhere.  the error message is: "transports can not leave their units"
(this one is really important to fix for 3 different maps)


2. Previous Units Fight (actually they don't fight)
units that start the turn in the same sea zone do not seem to attack each other even if you answer yes to the 'do you want to attack these transports' question.  (i think someone else made a ticket about this)


3. "Not All Units Can" Blitz - message when trying to move a unit a single space
i got that weird "not all units can blitz" error, when only trying to move some units 1 space.
(i have seen this error on the following maps: red sun over china, napoleonic empires, eastern front, feudal japan, and a few others too.
basically, when you go to combat move, you find that you can not move any of your single movement units in a territory.  you are not allowed to move them even to a friendly territory, or to an enemy territory 1 movement away.  the error message is "not all units can blitz".  If you save the game and re-load it, the error goes away.  It seems to happen very randomly, never in the same territory twice, and usually only in the bigger maps.)



4. unitsSupported does NOT work:

<attatchment name="unitAttatchment" attatchTo="artillery" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attatchments.UnitAttachment" type="unitType">
  <option name="movement" value="1"/>
  <option name="transportCost" value="3"/>
  <option name="attack" value="2"/>
  <option name="defense" value="2"/>
  <option name="artillery" value="true"/>
  <option name="unitsSupported" value="2"/>
</attatchment>


gave me this error:
Could not parse:C:\Documents and Settings\Chris Duncan\My Documents\workspace\TripleA\maps\Unstable_Map_Mods\games\UnstableTestWW2v3-1941.xml
games.strategy.engine.data.GameParseException: No setter for attachment option. Setter:unitsSupported Class:games.strategy.triplea.attatchments.UnitAttachment
    at games.strategy.engine.data.GameParser.setValues(GameParser.java:1181)
    at games.strategy.engine.data.GameParser.parseAttachments(GameParser.java:1101)
    at games.strategy.engine.data.GameParser.parse(GameParser.java:125)
    at games.strategy.engine.framework.ui.NewGameChooserEntry.<init>(NewGameChooserEntry.java:27)
    at games.strategy.engine.framework.ui.NewGameChooserModel.createEntry(NewGameChooserModel.java:163)
    at games.strategy.engine.framework.ui.NewGameChooserModel.populateFromDirectory(NewGameChooserModel.java:180)
    at games.strategy.engine.framework.ui.NewGameChooserModel.populate(NewGameChooserModel.java:82)
    at games.strategy.engine.framework.ui.NewGameChooserModel.<init>(NewGameChooserModel.java:35)
    at games.strategy.engine.framework.startup.mc.GameSelectorModel.loadDefaultGame(GameSelectorModel.java:217)




5. paratroopers has the following issues:

a) I can only load infantry, even if I have set "armor" to be "isAirTransportable" and set the transport capacity of the bomber to 5 or more.

b) If I click to load guys, then i click again, it asks me which i'd like to load, then i select again, then I get the following error:

java.lang.NullPointerException
    at games.strategy.triplea.delegate.MoveValidator.isLoad(MoveValidator.java:415)
    at games.strategy.triplea.ui.MovePanel.updateUnitsThatCanMoveOnRoute(MovePanel.java:771)
    at games.strategy.triplea.ui.MovePanel.access$22(MovePanel.java:757)
    at games.strategy.triplea.ui.MovePanel$5.mouseMoved(MovePanel.java:1818)
    at games.strategy.triplea.ui.MapPanel.notifyMouseMoved(MapPanel.java:354)
    at games.strategy.triplea.ui.MapPanel.access$15(MapPanel.java:346)
    at games.strategy.triplea.ui.MapPanel$2.mouseMoved(MapPanel.java:520)





ok, now for the next section,
FEATURE REQUESTS TO GET PACIFIC 1940 AND GALAXY TO WORK

1. Scrambling Air Planes where there are air bases (and you can buy new air bases in game)
How I think this should be done:
First, the property needs to be part of a unit attachment.  I will then attach this property to the unit called "air_base" in the xml.  Call it "Allows Air Scrambling" or just "scrambling" or w/e.
Second, there needs to be another unit attachment called "can scramble", which i will be attaching to the air units that can scramble.
Third, there should be a global property (game property) called this: "Air Scrambling only occurs on Islands" which can be set to true or false [if true, it only occurs on islands, if false it occurs all the time to any sea zone touching any land territory that contains the unit with the scrambling attachment].
Fourth, there needs to be a new territory attachment called "Island".  All you do is attach the word island to any territory you want to in the xml.  This territory attachment will work with the global property to determine if scrambling should occur or not.
Fifth, it needs to be coded in such a way that during an enemy's turn, after they finish their combat movement, but before the combat resolving phase begins, the engine detects: "is there a unit with the scrambling attachment on a territory that is an island AND is there a friendly air unit with the scrambling ability on that territory AND is there an enemy Ship or Air unit in any sea zone touching this territory".  If that returns a true, then the engine will ask the player who controls that territory or its aircraft: "Do you wish to scramble any airplanes?"  and the player will then get to choose to scramble any number or none of the air planes on that territory.  
If the player chooses to scramble some or all of the air planes (could be multiple types of air, including a tac bomber and 2 fighters, etc.), then what the engine will do is this: the engine then moves the airplanes chosen INTO the sea zone chosen (in case there are multiple sea zones, there needs to be a way to chose to send 3 planes to one sea zone, 2 to another sea zone, and leave some planes behind still on that island).  Those planes physically move to the sea zone in question, and they are DEFENDING (not attacking) against the enemy nation who's turn it is.  
After this, the enemy nation who's turn it is does all his battles, rolling and stuff.  After ALL combat is done (not after the individual battles are done), THEN the defender is allowed to move his airplanes that scrambled 1 space to land.  This is similar to how we currently have aircraft allowed to move 1 space if their carrier sinks, except that it is done After all combats are over.  This is because the airplanes that scrambled are only allowed to participate in a single battle that turn, so they should not be allowed to move right away in order to participate in multiple battles, and should instead wait until all combats are done for the player to decide where the aircraft move to.  

Basically, we need the scrambling rules coded first, since a good number of other rules specific to 1940 can be done either by making the users obey the rules themselves or by using edit mode to do things like add pu's.  


2.  Declarations of war, dynamic within a game.
The engine needs to be able to support a hypothetical game where alliances can change during the course of the game.  For example, Nation A (japan) and Nation B (china) will start the game at war, while Nation A (japan) and Nations C&D (usa, uk, anzac) will not be at war and instead will be neutral to each other.  Neutral means they are not allied, they will not defend together if one is attacked.  If Nation A attacks a space that contains both Nation B and Nation C, only Nation A and Nation B will fight, while Nation C will sit it out on the side and not participating.  This also means that nations that are neutral to each other can enter territories and sea zones that are controlled by other nations they are neutral with.  
How I think this should be done:
We need a new turn delegate called "Declarations of War and Alliances".  
During this turn-phase the current player will be presented with a menu showing the current alliances in the game that he has.  For example, it could have 3 boxes called: "Allied with", "Neutral with", and "War with", and in each box it will show any nations that he is allied to, neutral with, or at war with.  The current player then will be allowed to move any nation in those boxes to a different box.  This means he could go straight from an alliance to war, or from war to alliance, or from neutral to either war or alliance, etc.  This will allow complete flexibility while being fairly easy to code when compared with something that operates by more rules.  
It is only during this delegate that a player can change their alliances and relations, and it can not be done at any other time.  This allows me to have the delegate at the beginning of each turn for all players except the Chinese and USA, or whatever I want really.  





With scrambling and alliances coded for, most other things can be done with the edit function or by cool xml tricks i have learned.  


There, kev and anyone else, that should keep you plenty busy.  If you like, I can send you a donation via paypal or something, since i know some of this will be hard work.  I can also start a donation drive in the lobby to get this stuff going.  
thx,
veqryn



if you want to read the actual rules, they are here:
FAQ: http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/pdf/A&A_Pacific_1940_513_FAQ.pdf
RULES: http://www.wizards.com/%5CAvalonHill%5Crules%5CAVL1940_RuleBook.pdf

yay
Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Priority list of needed features and bug fixes in order to get 1940 maps to work

Pulicat
I would prefer there to be an additional option of "military access":

Countries may march their armies through territories controlled by neutrals only if they grant military access through their countries.

That is, there are 2 kinds of neutral relationship-- "Neutral with Military Access" and "Neutral without Military Access" in addtion to the "At War" and "Allied" options.

A Neutral country may revoke military access at any time. Whenever a relationship changes from "Neutral with Military Access" to "Neutral without Military Access," any units belonging to the foreign country in question already within your territories shall be moved to that foreign country's mobilization pool.

For example, if in a scenario, Turkey had granted USSR military access and the Soviets had marched a few units through Turkey, but then for some reason Turkey decided to revoke the privilege, then any remaining Soviets found on Turkish soil shall be removed and placed in the Soviet mobilization pool, ready to be deployed at any Soviet factory on the next Soviet turn.

If the relationship status was changed from "Neutral with Military Access" directly to "At War" then any Soviet units found on Turkish soil will not be removed, but become enemy and will be engaged during the Turkish combat phase (preferably with a "previous units fight" mode turned on for any pre-existing Turkish units in the same area).

Puli
how now brown cow?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Priority list of needed features and bug fixes in order to get 1940 maps to work

Woodstock
In reply to this post by Veqryn
Veqryn, if I may:

I am not so sure whether the DOW-dynamics are that much of a MUST have.
You did a nice job in P40 for USA, with that one territory, generating the income (IIRC).

You can do the same with Germany's NO for not being at war, and for Russia's NO for being at war. Simply make a TT somewhere in the corner calling "NO for Germany", "NO for USA" etc, and edit around the owner of the TT by the applied rules.

The whole thing with not allowed to do and such, well...If my opponent mails me a turn where his Russian forces invaded my German TT in R1, I just tell him to redo it. That's something easy to overcome.

When I play P40, the most important things missing as far as I can see are scrambling, convoys, repairs, and the extra movement when departing from AB's and NB's.
(offcourse I am now neglecting your other maps..but frankly...I dont care, I just want to play that one world war II game set in 1940 that looks somewhat like that one boardgame ;-)  )

- The +1 movement: suggestions to fix (and I might just be talking out of my ass now): I played one map where someone managed to pull this off by not counting the first step when departing from a base. I believe it was a map called "1941". Otherwise, simply give all sea and air units +1 movement, and count on players discretion to use that extra movement point wisely and correct. (That would be a lot easier then first editing all +20 planes of Japan around before moving, as suggested now in P40)
- Convoys: Not really a cold hard necessity to be coded either. Could be edited easily after the income phase. Just make sure there's a big friggin convoy indicator in the SZ (aesthetics (sp?) dont matter at this point of time IMO). But if it really has to be coded, maybe a suggestion to look into (again..apologies for any ass talking as I still havent figured out java) to maybe easen it up: Whenever there is a unit in one of the convoy SZ's, simply have a pop up box appear that immediately  instructs the player to edit the economocs of a nation?  ("There is a unit in SZ12. How much money do you want to deduct from"....And then simply list all countries, and an edit box for their income)
- Repairs: Hmm...allthough being not much of a coder (yet), I wouldn't think this one would be that difficult. But again, you could count on player's discretion. Re-use the code of a damaged factory, and at the beginning of a turn, have a pop up appear that indicates "You have one damaged BB. Please check if there is a friendly NB and if so, select Repair now. If not, then please select discard" and then move on to the next damaged property.
- Scrambling...euh...well...this is a tough one..Maybe re-use some naval bombardment code? Just like how you get the question to bombard, maybe try and tweaking it a bit so that you get a question if you want to scramble...I don't know...

I am sorry. I hope I dont sound like some wise ass. I just wish I could help out more, but I am no programmer, I have no photoshop skills, have no clue what a relief tile is, and see no other option to be helpful then just sprout some ideas on maybe how to fix a thing or two.

Feel free to edit or delete this post to keep your thread clean. Thanks for your efforts so far.


Edit...and only after posting I see this line:

[quote]Basically, we need the scrambling rules coded first, since a good number of other rules specific to 1940 can be done either by making the users obey the rules themselves or by using edit mode to do things like add pu's.   [/quote]

So it seems my post was just useless...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Priority list of needed features and bug fixes in order to get 1940 maps to work

Veqryn
Administrator
well, actually, here are some of the tricks for things:

air bases and naval bases providing extra movement: simply give all air and naval units 1 extra movement, then the user's can determine how far to move the units

repairing carriers and battleships at naval bases: turn on edit mode, delete damaged ship, add a new ship, done

convoys: turn on edit mode, subtract some income, done

kamikazes: these NEVER happen in a real game, so it is useless to code them.  if you really feel like it, roll a die in real life then use edit mode to delete a ship if you hit

mechanized infantry blitz/not-blitz: give all mech inf blitz, then let the user determine when they blitz and when they don't

scrambling: needs to be coded, no if's and's or but's

if-then-else National Objectives: the USA's "if you go to war" NO was solved by making a territory called "usa is at war" and having the objective tied to that territory.  ANZAC's one-time-only national objective can be added with the edit function.  

upgrading a factory: use edit mode to delete old factory, replace with new factory

number of units you can place using a factory: simply make all territories be able to place 10 or more units, then let the user place the correct number depending on what factory is there

tactical bombers get a boost of 1 attack when paired with fighters: needs to be coded, but can simply be gotten around for now by having all tactical bombers have 4 attack, and when you want to use a 3 attack version, just edit in a fighter in its place

victory conditions: again, no need to code this, you know when you've won

damaged carriers can't launch or receive aircraft: let the users determine when to move airplanes onto their carriers.  during a defense, just edit delete the airplane then add it back later if the carrier survives.

AA guns no longer defend against Strategic Bombing: this will have to be coded, but is a low priority compared with scrambling

All factories now come with an AA gun that ONLY defends against Strategic Bombing, but does not defend against a normal attack: this will have to be coded, but is a low priority compared with scrambling

Bombers going to Strategic Bombing Raid can be Escorted, and the defending territory can launch Interceptors to intercept the bombers: this will have to be coded, but is a very low priority compared with scrambling

Declarations of War and Alliances, Neutral Countries: I think this is a high priority, but lower than scrambling.  The reason is because you must be able to have japanese and american ships in the same sea zone, not attacking each other, but then later in the game they are at war.  

re, pulicat: yes, that would be ideal, to have 4 different boxes: Allied, Neutral with Military Access, Neutral with no access, and At War.  These of course could only be changed during the Delegate phase, not at any time the player wishes.  However, for the sake of simplicity and coding, USERS can determine whether to move a unit into a zone or not, therefore if the users obey the rules of the game there is no need for the difference between "neutral with military access" and "neutral with no access".  That can be added later.  
Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Priority list of needed features and bug fixes in order to get 1940 maps to work

Prussia
Has the transported-unit-cannot-be-edited bug been fixed?

Basically if you transport some units over transport from one land territory to another land territory and they need to be removed after your turn for whatever reason, (like, oh can I edit my units back) they cannot be deleted using edit.

Message is "cannot remove transported units without first removing the transport" and it still doesn't let you delete if you remove the transports.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Priority list of needed features and bug fixes in order to get 1940 maps to work

Veqryn
Administrator
yes.... the current svn has the transported units edit delete bug fixed.
Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Priority list of needed features and bug fixes in order to get 1940 maps to work

Maherdogg
We need to come up w/a consenus pitch to post on websites such as this:

http://forums.devshed.com/project-help-wanted-40/

My $.02
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Priority list of needed features and bug fixes in order to get 1940 maps to work

Veqryn
Administrator
In reply to this post by Veqryn
i guess we really only need scrambling.... (and the bug fixes)

please comradekev, we will cheer you on
Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Priority list of needed features and bug fixes in order to get 1940 maps to work

ComradeKev
Administrator
In reply to this post by Veqryn
Veqryn wrote
1. Carriers that are Transports BUG
Fixed-
If emailing me at ComradeKev at yahoo.com , please add TripleA to the subject line
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Priority list of needed features and bug fixes in order to get 1940 maps to work

Veqryn
Administrator
thx kev,
i checked and it is indeed fixed
however, you may have introduced a new bug, or there was a previous bug that was covered up by this older bug that we can now see

new bug:

with kamikaze turned on, bombers can not land after they have attacked (it happened during an amphibious assault, with a mixed fleet)

savegame attached to the sourceforge ticket


it could be that the bomber sat a turn on the carrier
or it could be that the bomber has a transport capacity
or it could be something else?
this one really puzzles me
the message it gives is "not all units have enough movement"
Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Priority list of needed features and bug fixes in order to get 1940 maps to work

Veqryn
Administrator
In reply to this post by Veqryn