New editor values (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding



Message


MateDow -> New editor values (1/14/2013 7:04:48 PM)

I was going through the files generated by WITPload while getting ready to start working on my own personal mod and noticed these "new" values...

Sec_Attr
Sec_Eff
Sec_Pen
Sec_Acc

I know that they have something to do with the new values for AA guns that was implemented with BigBabes, but beyond that don't have a bunch of information.

What do these control?

What are reasonable values if I want the devices to work well with BigBabes devices in the file already (ie how were the generated if possible)?

Please let me know if there is any other information that you need, and thank you in advance for your help.




Oberst_Klink -> RE: New editor values (1/14/2013 7:09:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MateDow

I was going through the files generated by WITPload while getting ready to start working on my own personal mod and noticed these "new" values...

Sec_Attr
Sec_Eff
Sec_Pen
Sec_Acc

I know that they have something to do with the new values for AA guns that was implemented with BigBabes, but beyond that don't have a bunch of information.

What do these control?

What are reasonable values if I want the devices to work well with BigBabes devices in the file already (ie how were the generated if possible)?

Please let me know if there is any other information that you need, and thank you in advance for your help.

Attrition, Effectiveness, Penetration, Accuracy... that's my guess. What's the rest of it look like?

Klink, Oberst




Symon -> RE: New editor values (1/14/2013 7:26:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MateDow

I was going through the files generated by WITPload while getting ready to start working on my own personal mod and noticed these "new" values...

Sec_Attr
Sec_Eff
Sec_Pen
Sec_Acc

I know that they have something to do with the new values for AA guns that was implemented with BigBabes, but beyond that don't have a bunch of information.

What do these control?

What are reasonable values if I want the devices to work well with BigBabes devices in the file already (ie how were the generated if possible)?

Please let me know if there is any other information that you need, and thank you in advance for your help.

Yes. This was something that michaelm did in support of the Babes AA tweaks. It's a bit complex, but once understood, perhaps helpful.

There's some attributes that need to be set and and some understanding of Nav v AA for DP Guns and AA Guns. Would take pages of text if I tried to explain it here, and the usual suspects would howl in outrage, so if you are really interested, send me a pm, and I'll send you the stats. Of course, you are free to post anything sent to you.

JWE




Gary Childress -> RE: New editor values (1/15/2013 2:50:09 AM)

Nice! It would be really cool if Michealm could rig it so that a player could assign more nationalities to the Axis side...say N3 and N17... I'd pay for that! (hint, hint...) [:D]




Symon -> RE: New editor values (1/15/2013 7:30:29 PM)

Ok, Mate. Responded to your pm. I think everything in it is ok for you to post if you want. Nothing violates the NDA. I would be very judicious about showing the spreadsheet, though. As you can imagine, there's a lot of room for misinterpretation without an understanding of the last 2 years of development work. But, as I said in my initial post, your call, Mate.

Given your examination of the csv files, I expect you may have found some other land mines. In the Class file, there's a MaxDiveDepth in column AD that tweaks the ASW code. That one is highly interactive with a particular device file and is NOT used for any release version of Babes or Stock. It only exists in short, small map, tactical, Babes scenarios with special device files and restrictive rules for sub ops.

That's about it. Further questions accepted by pm, and will be answered. Ciao, JWE




MateDow -> RE: New editor values (1/15/2013 8:37:32 PM)

Thank you for all of the information.

Without knowing what will and won't violate an NDA, I'll refrain from posting information just to ensure that I don't get you or anyone else in trouble.




Alfred -> RE: New editor values (1/16/2013 5:54:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Symon

Ok, Mate. Responded to your pm. I think everything in it is ok for you to post if you want. Nothing violates the NDA. I would be very judicious about showing the spreadsheet, though. As you can imagine, there's a lot of room for misinterpretation without an understanding of the last 2 years of development work. But, as I said in my initial post, your call, Mate.

Given your examination of the csv files, I expect you may have found some other land mines. In the Class file, there's a MaxDiveDepth in column AD that tweaks the ASW code. That one is highly interactive with a particular device file and is NOT used for any release version of Babes or Stock. It only exists in short, small map, tactical, Babes scenarios with special device files and restrictive rules for sub ops.

That's about it. Further questions accepted by pm, and will be answered. Ciao, JWE


Hmm ... (putting on best deerstalker hat and cape whilst picking up a violin) ...

Would the somewhat mysterious spreadsheet referred to above be the same as that provided in post #17 of this thread?

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2874609&mpage=1&key=ballistics

(places his violin down and returns to read The Times)

Don't forget I'm still waiting to open that betting book.

Alfred




Symon -> RE: New editor values (1/16/2013 10:14:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
Hmm ... (putting on best deerstalker hat and cape whilst picking up a violin) ...

Would the somewhat mysterious spreadsheet referred to above be the same as that provided in post #17 of this thread?

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2874609&mpage=1&key=ballistics

(places his violin down and returns to read The Times)

Don't forget I'm still waiting to open that betting book.

Alfred

Nope, not that one. And Nope, the dog didn't bark. Spreadsheet isn't mysterious and it doesn't violate any NDAs, it's just old and uses some language in some of the explanation fields that might cause misunderstanding vapors[:D]. It's on how we did the calcs for the Sec_ values.

I have an open-door policy for Babes, but I prefer the door to swing for the serious modding community. Openly posting some things just annoys and iritates the usual suspects and leads to a plethora of "well, 'my' website says ...." I'm sure you know exactly what I mean.

I'll be glad to send you a copy, along with the explanations I sent to Mate. There's no magic, and nothing up my sleeve. Just want to keep some distance from the latrine.

J




michaelm -> RE: New editor values (1/21/2013 2:45:36 AM)

"wiptload" has been updated to allow the setting of the LCU Ops Mode (currently all are in Combat).
The new version is 9.0 and can be found in the latest beta (1123) in the beta directory.
Additionally, a new CSV is created from the 'cam' file which allows you to set how much HI/MP/OIL is used to train a Japanese pilot (if production on).




PaxMondo -> RE: New editor values (1/21/2013 3:24:24 AM)

Michael,

Thanks for the great support!




LargeSlowTarget -> RE: New editor values (1/21/2013 12:16:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm
"wiptload" has been updated to allow the setting of the LCU Ops Mode (currently all are in Combat).
The new version is 9.0 and can be found in the latest beta (1123) in the beta directory.


Thank you! [&o]

One question - what values are to be entered in the LCUopMode column for the different op modes?

Checked the readme and what's new, but found nothing.


Edit: Just made a test with the most likely values: 0 is combat, 1 is move, 2 is strategic move, 3 is reserve (no pursuit). Not tested yet but I guess 4 is either reserve (pursuit) or rest.




michaelm -> RE: New editor values (1/21/2013 12:37:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm
"wiptload" has been updated to allow the setting of the LCU Ops Mode (currently all are in Combat).
The new version is 9.0 and can be found in the latest beta (1123) in the beta directory.


Thank you! [&o]

One question - what values are to be entered in the LCUopMode column for the different op modes?

Checked the readme and what's new, but found nothing.


Edit: Just made a test with the most likely values: 0 is combat, 1 is move, 2 is strategic move, 3 is reserve (no pursuit). Not tested yet but I guess 4 is either reserve (pursuit) or rest.


Check the WITPtabs.csv file.




Cpt Sherwood -> RE: New editor values (1/21/2013 12:38:52 PM)

4 is rest and 5 is disorganized. The values are in the Tabs CSV.




LargeSlowTarget -> RE: New editor values (1/21/2013 12:48:16 PM)

D'oh! Never had a look at that file... [:o] Thx!




LargeSlowTarget -> RE: New editor values (1/23/2013 7:05:56 AM)

Am happily modding along on my "quickstart" scenario with the new LCU Ops Mode option. But I noticed something strange: When loading my mod after a fresh start of WitP, the scenario loading process is unusually fast and all the LCUs I have modded to move or strategic move ops mode are set to move EAST without exception - although the dest coordinates and dest hexes point to other directions. I double-checked the values I have entered in the editor and then reloaded the scenario - this time the loading process took more time and everything was fine. It is repeatable - after each fresh start of WitP, the first scenario load is quick and has the move directions pointed East, closing and reloading the scenario takes more time but the mod is WAD. No big issue, just mildly irritating.




LargeSlowTarget -> RE: New editor values (1/23/2013 10:12:29 AM)

Mmh, something unexpected with my LCU ops mod - units not taking the intended movement path.

For example, I have modded Aussie units to strat move to Sydney, copy&pasting the same values for destination coordinates etc.

The march objective data in the LCU screen correctly shows "90,167 Sydney" for all units.

For most units this works fine and they start strat movement to Sydney.

But for some units the movement indicator on the map and the march direction data in the LCU screen show that they intend to stray from the movement path (i.e. railways).

During turn resolution they actually do not move at all or get stuck after moving one hex.

Example:
5th RAAF Base Force at Esperance is moving to Sydney ok
25th MG Bn at Albany will move NE instead of strat moving along the railway to NW
12th RAAF Base Force at Kalgoorlie will strat move SW instead of SE

I have checked pwhexdat and pressed "y" on the map - matches the rail lines shown on the map.

When manually ordering the units to Sydney, the movement indicators and march direction are fine.

Similar issue with some Cav Bde I have ordered to Alice Springs - some move, others do not take the railway and get stuck.

User FAIL? Program glitch? [&:]

[image]local://upfiles/1313/3BE04CE481FA4A0AB790CD485AF79EFF.jpg[/image]




michaelm -> RE: New editor values (1/23/2013 1:07:53 PM)

Maybe there is more to just setting the op mode.
When I was playing with it, I didn't actually set any destinations, just the mode.
I'll dust off my test bed and try with a destination.




LargeSlowTarget -> RE: New editor values (1/24/2013 11:18:04 AM)

Follow up:
Does not matter whether movement mode is set to "strat" or "move" - affected units keep taking wrong directions.
However, if I change the destination for 25th MG Bn and 12th RAAF Base Force to Perth, they hop on the trains and go to Perth just fine.
Pains me to tell you, but it seems that Perth has more lure than Sydney...




inqistor -> RE: New editor values (1/26/2013 7:08:33 AM)

It was always something wrong with initial movement. Ever since WITP.

Just fire up any GC Scenario, and check 417 Battambang with Guards Division, and friends (actually the only units I know, that have movement orders set). They always march into jungle, not by roads, and they do not fix it after turn run.




LargeSlowTarget -> RE: New editor values (1/30/2013 11:28:53 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm
26/01/13: 1123c - New scenario LCU move direction not always correct


Confirm problem now fixed in my mod. Thanks Michael! [&o] [&o][&o]




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.0234375