World in Flames Updated to V1.3.3.0

[Daniele]

Hi guys,
A new version of World In Flames is now available. The patch brings new bug fixes and increases the stability of the game, included some multiplayer issues.
In order to download the patch, please click here.

V1.3.3.0

A hypertexted version of the World in Flames Players Manuals has been created by the Missouri Rebel. It is included as part of this release as two PDF files. One of those files explains how to use the hypertexted version.
A new menu has been added.

Air Operations
• During the Ground Support subphase Attacker Fly to Target, enabled the phasing side to send fighters to land combat hexes within their full range even if there are no bombers designated to fly to the hex. This effectively lets the phasing side fly CAP missions, without creating a new subphase expressly for that purpose. The WIF FE rules are somewhat unclear about whether this is permitted, so this change was made based on a consensus of the beta testers. Note that this affects all modes of play.

• Enabled moving air units at sea to a lower box, or returning them to land during the Naval Air phase.

• Fixed several places where damaged major ports were not properly being treated as minor ports. In particular, the question of including subs as targets in a port attack on a damaged major port is no longer asked (i.e., the port is treated the same as a minor port and the subs are always included).

• Fixed a problem with some carrier air units engaged in a naval air combat having their role set to Fighter even though they could have flown as Bombers.

• Fixed a problem with an air unit aborting from an air-to-air or anti-aircraft combat sometimes remaining Selectable even after it had returned to base. Instead it’s now no longer selectable, but can have its move Undone.

• Fixed a problem in Head-to-head games for port attacks that was causing a fatal error during the anti-aircraft subphase.

Land Operations
• Fixed a bug where attacks into jungle by countries other than Japan were gaining a column shift on the Land CRT 1D10 instead of losing a column shift.

• Fixed a bug with automatic victory calculations on the Land CRT 1D10 where left shifts were not being applied and right shifts were applied as if they were left.

• Fixed a problem with determining the number of attacker losses from a sea or air invasion, which is supported by other attacking land units and fails and the number of attacker losses is greater than the number of invading units. For instance, if one land unit is invading and 2 other land units are attacking from an adjacent hex and the attack fails with the attacker having to take 2 losses, then the attacker loses the invading unit plus one of the other attacking land units.

• Supply units are no longer affected by land combat results. If they are alone in the defending hex after the defender takes losses, then the phasing side can advance into the hex and capture them.

Naval Operations
• If a naval move to a sea area is cancelled using the Choose Section form, then the moving units are returned to their starting port. Previously this was only true when units had been loaded from coastal hexes upon entering the sea area. Now it also happens when no units are loaded from coastal hexes.

• Fixed the problem with the end-of-phase button being disabled for the Return to Base phases when a major power had units at sea on sentry which could return to base, but had no units that absolutely had to return to base. In these cases the end-of-phase button is now enabled.

Production Planning
• For Barbarossa, enabled executing the Preliminary Production Phase.

• Fixed a minor calculation of the number of build points that can be sent to a hex so that hexes containing an undamaged major port can receive one additional BP.

Game Save/Restore
• Fixed a problem with restoring saved games during the US Entry phase. Previously, they could sometimes go into an infinite loop.

• Enabled restoring games that were saved during the Include Notional phase.

Peace
• Fixed a couple of problems when enforcing peace in Finland and Rumania where the end-of-phase button was enabled when it should have been disabled, and disabled when it should have been enabled.

• Fixed a problem with collapsing Vichy France where the determination of whether a country controlled by Vichy France became controlled by France or the major power that formed Vichy France was sometimes incorrect. For example, the French possessions in the South Pacific oftentimes became controlled by Germany instead of by France.

Player Interface
• Restored the missing line of code so the Units In Hex form can be locked/unlocked using the Space Bar.

• Enabled the Roll-up button on the Naval Review Details form. This also permits the player to make the form shorter in height, if so desired.

For NetPlay
• Added a message so both players see the die roll for the end of turn.

• Using oil to organize units now does so on both computers.

• Placing fort reinforcements on the map and repositioning them now works correctly on both computers.

• Fixed a couple of problems with the form for deciding whether to Include a Notional Unit in a combat. This was causing all sorts of problems later with phases being skipped (e.g. Shore Bombardment), which major power controlled the invasion hex, and ultimately Land Combat Resolution.

• Modified the transition from phase to phase for all 60 phases to avoid a potential problem with one player’s computer terminating a phase after the other player’s computer already initiated the next phase. This problem was causing the phasing side’s computer to have the End-of-Phase button disabled when it should have been enabled (e.g., at the start of the Rail Movement phase).

• Added code to make sure the end-of-phase button is enabled for the deciding major powers at the start of some phases: Rail Movement, Ground Strike - CAP, Land Combat Declaration ,Air Rebase, and numerous others.

• Fixed a problem with hex control being set incorrectly for the non-phasing side when during Land Movement (or Retreats or Advance After Combat) the deciding major power on the phasing side Undoes a move. Previously, undoing any move which had caused a hex to be converted to being controlled by a different major power was not returning control of the hex to the previous owner. This only happened on the non-phasing side’s computer, so who controlled what hexes could end up being different on the two computers.

• Updated the location of factories when undoing their moves using rail movement.

• Fixed a problem in the Return to Base phase where if a major power M on side A only had units on Sentry status at sea, the Return to Base phase would be skipped for M. However, side B would be waiting for the side A player to click on the end-of-phase button for the M, which couldn’t be done.

• Added accompanying text for the new GRL (Game Record Log) for when a land move is cancelled. This only appears when examining debug information for NetPlay games.

For AI Opponent
• Changed some of the data for the AI Opponent as to which hexes in the USSR belong to which Land Regions. Now the Murmansk to Leningrad rail line is completely in the land regions Murmansk and Leningrad. The Voronezh land region has gained one hex from the Moscow land region and 4 hexes from the Stalingrad land region. These changes correct data entry errors made using out-of-date definitions of which hexes belong to which land regions.

[Missouri_Rebel]

If anyone is looking for the new PDF, Using The Hyperlinked Manual, it is located in /World In Flames/Manuals. Pretty standard stuff. BTW, a good way to view is Fit One Full Page per widow.

I put an enormous amount of time into this thing so I hope you all enjoy it. Thanks Steve for letting me take on this task.


mo reb

[CrusssDaddy]

"For AI Opponent"

Listing as an accomplishment a trifling adjustment to a non-existent feature? What a bizarre conceit.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

"For AI Opponent"

Listing as an accomplishment a trifling adjustment to a non-existent feature? What a bizarre conceit.

warspite1

Or... for something that everyone knows is NOT priority, and indeed some way down the order of things to do, at least some crumb of comfort, for those to whom an AI is important, to confirm that work is on-going, no matter how limited at present.

[CrusssDaddy]

Are you comforted by crumbs still? Is a meal ever forthcoming?

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

Are you comforted by crumbs still? Is a meal ever forthcoming?

Well, look at it as being "haute cuisine". You get a very small piece of food with each course. Just hope that the main course is enough to make sure you don't leave the place hungry...

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

Are you comforted by crumbs still? Is a meal ever forthcoming?

warspite1

Yes the meal is here. I'm playing MWIF and having a blast.... well actually I am having my bottom handed to me, but it's still great to be playing! [:)]

[tom730_slith]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

Are you comforted by crumbs still? Is a meal ever forthcoming?

warspite1

Yes the meal is here. I'm playing MWIF and having a blast.... well actually I am having my bottom handed to me, but it's still great to be playing! [:)]

Me too!
An incredible amount of fun with this game. What amazes me is the commitment to improve the game by folks that can't possibly see financial compensation for all the additional work. The passion and enthusiasm of the dozens of folks who helped bring this game to my computer screen to begin with is pretty inspiring. Their continuing to work to improve the functionality of it and add to everyone's game experience is pretty cool.
A lot more cool than just taking cheap shots at people who actually care enough to work without fanfare and likely little or no compensation. But that is the internet for you!

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: tom730

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

Are you comforted by crumbs still? Is a meal ever forthcoming?

warspite1

Yes the meal is here. I'm playing MWIF and having a blast.... well actually I am having my bottom handed to me, but it's still great to be playing! [:)]

Me too!
An incredible amount of fun with this game. What amazes me is the commitment to improve the game by folks that can't possibly see financial compensation for all the additional work. The passion and enthusiasm of the dozens of folks who helped bring this game to my computer screen to begin with is pretty inspiring. Their continuing to work to improve the functionality of it and add to everyone's game experience is pretty cool.
A lot more cool than just taking cheap shots at people who actually care enough to work without fanfare and likely little or no compensation. But that is the internet for you!

Thank you for the kind words. I hope you'll help us a little bit too...

[Numdydar]

ORIGINAL: tom730

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

Are you comforted by crumbs still? Is a meal ever forthcoming?

warspite1

Yes the meal is here. I'm playing MWIF and having a blast.... well actually I am having my bottom handed to me, but it's still great to be playing! [:)]

Me too!
An incredible amount of fun with this game. What amazes me is the commitment to improve the game by folks that can't possibly see financial compensation for all the additional work. The passion and enthusiasm of the dozens of folks who helped bring this game to my computer screen to begin with is pretty inspiring. Their continuing to work to improve the functionality of it and add to everyone's game experience is pretty cool.
A lot more cool than just taking cheap shots at people who actually care enough to work without fanfare and likely little or no compensation. But that is the internet for you!

+1000 [:)]

[CrusssDaddy]

ORIGINAL: tom730
What amazes me is the commitment to improve the game

Let's be accurate here. The ongoing commitment is not to improve a completed product, it's to remedy a substantial shortfall between what was promised and what was delivered that persists now for nearly a year and a half.

Should medals for diligence in cleaning sheets be awarded if one sh!ts one's own bed?

[bo]

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

ORIGINAL: tom730
What amazes me is the commitment to improve the game

Let's be accurate here. The ongoing commitment is not to improve a completed product, it's to remedy a substantial shortfall between what was promised and what was delivered that persists now for nearly a year and a half.

Should medals for diligence in cleaning sheets be awarded if one sh!ts one's own bed?

Sorry to say this but I have to agree with you Cruss[:(]

Bo

[AlbertN]

The game has its bugs, and is indeed incomplete. But most games at their retail were incomplete, with bugs and so forth.
Strategy games especially unless they were of the simplemost type.

Considering many strategy games are released and then abandoned (especially as the products are for a small niche of the market nowadays) it's good that we get a flow of patches; and hopefully we'll have all the optional rules and such coded.

In my wishful thinking I'll hope for some RAW8 extras or Annual Optionals over time - ultimately my game says "WiF product one" somewhere, which suggests that in the longer plans of Matrix Games there is the desire to fix also other "WiF" games (Patton, Amerika?). A -very- long term plan though, that requires a fully functional WiF anyhow firsthand (as it would anyhow represent the bulk of the coding).

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: bo

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

ORIGINAL: tom730
What amazes me is the commitment to improve the game

Let's be accurate here. The ongoing commitment is not to improve a completed product, it's to remedy a substantial shortfall between what was promised and what was delivered that persists now for nearly a year and a half.

Should medals for diligence in cleaning sheets be awarded if one sh!ts one's own bed?

Sorry to say this but I have to agree with you Cruss[:(]

Bo

[:(]


I do not mind the sentiment but I must say that I dislike the language. [:(]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: bo

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy




Let's be accurate here. The ongoing commitment is not to improve a completed product, it's to remedy a substantial shortfall between what was promised and what was delivered that persists now for nearly a year and a half.

Should medals for diligence in cleaning sheets be awarded if one sh!ts one's own bed?

Sorry to say this but I have to agree with you Cruss[:(]

Bo

[:(]


I do not mind the sentiment but I must say that I dislike the language. [:(]

warspite1

Yep - can't argue at all with the first sentence. But sadly the content of the second sentence sums up this guy in a nutshell.

[bo]

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: bo

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy




Let's be accurate here. The ongoing commitment is not to improve a completed product, it's to remedy a substantial shortfall between what was promised and what was delivered that persists now for nearly a year and a half.

Should medals for diligence in cleaning sheets be awarded if one sh!ts one's own bed?

Sorry to say this but I have to agree with you Cruss[:(]

Bo

[:(]


I do not mind the sentiment but I must say that I dislike the language. [:(]

True Orm about the language, it could be a lot better but no one here can deny the truth of this situation as espoused by Crussdaddy.

Besides I am the one that should be upset with cruss, calling me the phony general in my Poland AAR. But I am not as he might have had a point[:(]

Bo

[bo]

ORIGINAL: Cohen

The game has its bugs, and is indeed incomplete. But most games at their retail were incomplete, with bugs and so forth.
Strategy games especially unless they were of the simplemost type.

Considering many strategy games are released and then abandoned (especially as the products are for a small niche of the market nowadays) it's good that we get a flow of patches; and hopefully we'll have all the optional rules and such coded.

In my wishful thinking I'll hope for some RAW8 extras or Annual Optionals over time - ultimately my game says "WiF product one" somewhere, which suggests that in the longer plans of Matrix Games there is the desire to fix also other "WiF" games (Patton, Amerika?). A -very- long term plan though, that requires a fully functional WiF anyhow firsthand (as it would anyhow represent the bulk of the coding).

I agree with you 110% Cohen about everything you stated above, I am not defending crussdaddy views but his right to say them. Now I know better than to say this because all the left wing liberals here will pooh pooh me[:D]

If you look at the forums, at every game there are problems, many of these so called problems are the wishes of the people who bought a game from Matrix to add things that they would like to see added to the game for the betterment of the game in their eyes. I guess you might call them tweaks.

But in general these games are playable even if the AI is not a winner.[:(] Steve has put a great effort into this game and will continue to do so if his health allows him [his health, I find that kind of scary] I am a beta tester for the game, albeit no wheres as good as many of my friends here beta testing for some 5 or 6 years.

There are players here god bless them who are enjoying playing MWIF even if it is only in solitaire mode. But in reality that is not what they paid for, they wanted and deserved a game with a full functioning net play and an AI good bad or indifferent, also a pbem function that I do not believe you will ever see.

I am not happy about the situation here as I have stated before several times, the reason for that is not because the crussdaddy's and etal are upset about the game it is because IMO this the finest simulation of WW2 game ever attempted to be put onto a computer. With all it's nuances and rules and back and forth decisions that have to be made almost every time you make a move, the game is truly exceptional.

But because of all these nuances the game just might be unprogrammable to a point, meaning installing every rule of the board game, while this statement is above my pay grade, meaning I am not sure about that comment. I have a problem with players here and testers, and that is what part of "this game should not have released on Nov.7th 2013 do we not understand" It would not even be released now March 8th 2015 in it's present condition.

Players, both board gamers and war game computer lovers of WW2 want this game out so bad they are willing to endure anything and I do not blame them, as the game has been brilliantly done up to now by Steve, but in reality not playable in any mode but solitaire.

Bo

[Numdydar]

I just assume that all games released these days are in beta (or even late Alpha [:(]) regardless what the advertising says. So the state of the initial release was no big deal to me. Plus I have definitely gotten my monies worth from the game [:)]

So even if all development came to a screeching halt today, I'd still be ahead of some other games I've bought. So that does not worry me either. Of course I feel the same way about War in Europe that does not have an AI either. Needless to say any additional development past this point will just make this an even better experience, with or without an AI.

I certainly support everyone to express their views and comments freely, however, no one can change the past. So continuing to harp about 'Christmas past' is not going to help move things to a better place. I know that crussdaddy has given helpful feedback in the past so I can only hope that he (and others that feel the same way) will either continue to help improve the game (like Bo) or stop brining up the past if possible.

Yes the release could have been delayed/done/better/labeled a Beta version/etc. The question is now what do we do about it? Give up? Start over? Or just keep working as best we can on what we have? I know which one I would chose [:)]

[bo]

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

I just assume that all games released these days are in beta (or even late Alpha [:(]) regardless what the advertising says. So the state of the initial release was no big deal to me. Plus I have definitely gotten my monies worth from the game [:)]

So even if all development came to a screeching halt today, I'd still be ahead of some other games I've bought. So that does not worry me either. Of course I feel the same way about War in Europe that does not have an AI either. Needless to say any additional development past this point will just make this an even better experience, with or without an AI.

I certainly support everyone to express their views and comments freely, however, no one can change the past. So continuing to harp about 'Christmas past' is not going to help move things to a better place. I know that crussdaddy has given helpful feedback in the past so I can only hope that he (and others that feel the same way) will either continue to help improve the game (like Bo) or stop brining up the past if possible.

Yes the release could have been delayed/done/better/labeled a Beta version/etc. The question is now what do we do about it? Give up? Start over? Or just keep working as best we can on what we have? I know which one I would chose [:)]

Well said Numy, no argument, but I am not you, I am in a funk over this and it does not go away. I admit it eats at me, just the nature of the beast Numy. I am so disappointed in things I have not looked at the game in months other then downloading fixes from Steve and I truly love the many aspects of the game. Have I given up, not entirely but I am losing hope cannot help it, not being mean just the way I feel, wish I could feel like you.

The only reason I stay on the posts is because of the respect I have for yours and many others opinions and maybe, just maybe I could test an AI someday. As far as net play goes they can keep it.

Bo

[pzgndr]

ORIGINAL: bo
But because of all these nuances the game just might be unprogrammable to a point, meaning installing every rule of the board game

I wouldn't say unprogrammable, but it's certainly exceptionally challenging. Particularly with ensuring compatibility with all combinations and permutations of the various optional rules and all of the interactive actions. Anyone who has ever done any programming can appreciate what Steve is trying to accomplish. It's the folks who have no bloody clue who believe everything must be trivial and easy. Well, no.

It sort of reminds me of the Galaxy Quest scene with the chompers and Qwen's comments: "What is this thing? I mean, it serves no useful purpose for there to be a bunch of chompy, crushy things in the middle of a hallway!" "Well, forget it! I am not doing it! This episode was badly written." "Whoever wrote this episode should die." Probably how Steve thinks about Harry Rowland at times? [:D]