Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!!

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815 >> Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/25/2008 9:55:12 PM   
Greg Wilcox

 

Posts: 361
Joined: 4/14/2006
Status: offline
Hi everyone,

We've the Beta version of the 1.03.13 Comprehensive Update available via our Members Club. While we do final testing we figured we'd offer you a change to get it early as well. This is still a beta, but it's stable and solid as far as we can tell. See the change list list below for details.

You can download this as a Registered Download as long as you have registered your Empire in Arms serial number in our Members Club (click on the MEMBERS link in the top nav bar).

Change List:
Standard Fixes
Fixed: Loan leader still bugged
Fixed: Granted access to an ally is not removed when alliance is broken
Fixed: Capturing a city doesn't cause the fleets in port to evacuate
Fixed: Alliance code not working consistently when alliances were successful
Fixed: Lille Sea Crossing enabled, but is selected as disabled.
Fixed: May not be able to cede provinces in PBEM games.
Fixed: Some freestates are not getting income.
Fixed: Sieges are being relieved EVEN when relieving force does not win the field combat!
Fixed: Game hangs during AI reinforcement phase
Fixed: bug when attacking a fleet in a blockade box
Fixed: Regression bug -- can't declare war on some minors, despite being in range
Fixed: France phase reinforcement looking for battle file
Fixed: Siege possible after foraging with unused movement.
Fixed: Game crashes when AI attacks in field combat.
Fixed: Problem with blockading neutral ports containing enemy fleets
Fixed: Second attacker of a controlled / at war minor stealing the conquest.
Fixed: Bristol not allowing the movement of ships into / out of port
Fixed: Unplaced land factors during reinf are _not_ lost.
Fixed: After foraging with zero movement remaining, cannot besiege city
Fixed: Can't move corps or forage
Fixed: AI British manpower calculations incorrect
Fixed: Armenian provincial capital is set to Alexandretta making it switch control when it should not
Fixed: Some battle wait states are blocking the game from moving forward in the diplomacy phase
Fixed: Some blockade resolutions were causing human players to become AI thus kicking them out of the game.
Fixed: Loaning units function will not allow leaders to be loaned
Fixed: besieged port supply still not working right
Fixed: Civil disorder can lockup game when MP in civil disorder must surrender to multiple MPs
Fixed: Successful withdraws from an area with a defending depot
Fixed: When doing unit to unit transfer in PBEM, the results of the destination unit are not carried over in the turn file.
Fixed: When first loading a game and selecting Ally rural units the unit display will fill with French corps
Fixed: Erroneous messages "None controlled by" are happening in text log during PBEM games
Fixed: Need to change pp gain/loss
Fixed: depot at Lisbon is not in a valid supply chain
Fixed: Unable to detach garrison from corps inside city with enemy corps outside
Fixed: Game allowing depots with factors to transfer factors to itself
Fixed: Game hangs during AI placement of units
Fixed: Game hang after surrender with blockaded fleet
Fixed: Landing from a fleet in the blockade box

AI Fixes and Enhancements
Fixed: Prussia MIL production is very wrong
Fixed: AI relies on foraging far too much
Fixed: AI spending money on militia
Fixed: AI Austria reluctant to ally with Prussia
Fixed: AI doesn't purchase cavalry at all
Fixed: AI sometimes not landing troops after selecting an amphibious invasion
Fixed: AI doesn't declare war at all
Fixed: Presence of one unit in hostile minor can prevent other units from moving in, thinking the first unit is another neutral MP.
Fixed: AI spending too much on cav, needs better build strategy
Fixed: AI is trying to manipulate minors that they are DOWing
Fixed: Need to change AI diplomacy to be more aggressive and more intelligent in DOWs.

Enhancements
Host editor to adjust PPs etc for PBEM game
Able to see map from combat screen
Added new alliances and broken alliances as headline news events
Added starving messages for garrisons


_____________________________

Greg Wilcox
Production Assistant
Post #: 1
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/25/2008 10:14:52 PM   
ndrose

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline
Where is this? I seem to be having trouble finding my way around since the site redesign. I can get into the members area, and go to registered downloads and see a page that includes 1.02g and 1.02k, but no 1.03. Am I in the wrong place?

(in reply to Greg Wilcox)
Post #: 2
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/25/2008 10:30:28 PM   
Greg Wilcox

 

Posts: 361
Joined: 4/14/2006
Status: offline
Once you log in you should see in the box on the right side My Games if you click on that it will take you to your game list where you can click on private downloads for the game and you should see it there.

-Greg

_____________________________

Greg Wilcox
Production Assistant

(in reply to ndrose)
Post #: 3
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/25/2008 10:49:03 PM   
ndrose

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline
Got it, thanks!

(in reply to Greg Wilcox)
Post #: 4
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/26/2008 12:48:05 AM   
Marshall Ellis


Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline
Hey PBEM guys:

FYI: Make sure that you all use the same version or some of you will not get the benefits of the fixes. There are some data changes that will NOT break a PBEM game but certainly help out.



_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games



(in reply to ndrose)
Post #: 5
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/26/2008 5:34:31 AM   
ndrose

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline
First impression: HUGE improvement in the AI. No more running out of control and out of supply, no single corps flinging themselves against vastly superior forces. Sensible alliances are formed, armies are kept together (and small forces pounced on opportunistically). It seems to have purpose and organization.

A few mistakes I have noticed so far (orders of magnitude less serious than those it was making before):

Prussia is now a little *too* aggressive in going after minors. A couple of times I've seen it declare against 4 or 5 minors at once. All were technically reachable, but some were pretty far off, with other minors it was declaring on in the way. In these case, it would take some of the minors, and allow juicy free states like Bavaria (which it probably shouldn't be going after at all) to fall into France's lap.

Britain handles its navy better, but it doesn't think about interdicting any crossings except the Channel. In particular, I invaded British-held Sweden by land. It could have, and should have, trapped me on the Danish islands, but it didn't.

Britain also hasn't figured out how to use its army, which is different from everybody else's. In the past, I've always used the Lille crossing when playing France to help Britain. (This shouldn't help Britain, but otherwise the AI would build its army in Gibraltar or someplace.) In 1.02, Britain would build its army in London, but if I left a corps in Lille, it wouldn't try to cross. If I moved away from Lille, it would cross, but only one corps at a time.

In 1.03, it's thinking better, and trying to get into the fray, but the result isn't better. Now it's sending whatever it has across to Lille as soon as it has it. Since it can't build much at a time, it gets destroyed by the single French corps every three months.

Instead, it should do one of the following things (ideally, somewhat unpredictably as to which):

1) lend or send the army to join whoever's fighting France wherever they're fighting.

2) make coastal raids to sink fleets, occupy capitals, seize minors, and generally annoy the French.

or, if it must make a cross-Channel frontal assault,

3) build up a sizeable force and wait until Paris is lightly guarded.

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)
Post #: 6
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/26/2008 7:03:04 AM   
alaric318

 

Posts: 366
Joined: 10/7/2003
Status: offline
greetings, maybe about the lille crosing, but can be said about all warfare, a way to code it is that the AI determine odds or predictable odds before going to battle, so, you can have the AI only attack on 2-1 or 3-1 etc, may be a solution, but if napoleon form his grand armee army stack you will face that AI never will attack this stack, cannot teach the AI to make an attrition war, as in the leipzig campaign is the change of warfare make from the allies that at last defeat the french and napoleon,

best regards,

murat30.

_____________________________

There is no plan of battle that survives the contact with the enemy.

(in reply to ndrose)
Post #: 7
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/26/2008 3:56:10 PM   
ndrose

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline
From what I've seen, the AI is generally going after favorable odds battles with some discrimination. The British situation is different because it hasn't figured out its special situation. It's protected by the fleet in the Channel, so the French corps a couple spaces from London isn't a threat, and it can afford to sit and wait until it has a bigger force available.

In the past, you could leave a string of depots totally unguarded and it wouldn't pounce on them to break your supply. No more, from what I've seen. Also, you can't send one corps out ahead to build the supply line and expect it to be left alone or at most attacked by one enemy corps. Now you have to think much more realistically, which is great.

But another instance where the AI is behaving intelligently, but missing a subtlety (in general, its mistakes are now human-like mistakes, which gives you an idea how much better it is):

Napoleon's army is in Venice, at war with Austria. I send Davout with two corps to besiege Trieste, and a large Austrian army under Mack jumps on them. Good thinking by the AI--except for the part about Napoleon being able to reinforce from next door!

Next turn, same thing--the whole army is now in Trieste, except a Naples corps left behind guarding the depot. Mack jumps on it--and Napoleon reinforces from Trieste. Ouch. But still--you can see this kind of thing is light years ahead of where the AI was in 1.02; it's going after little guys with big stacks, even if it hasn't yet grasped all the possibilities.

(in reply to alaric318)
Post #: 8
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/27/2008 6:06:16 AM   
delatbabel


Posts: 1251
Joined: 7/30/2006
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
Just a general warning from the test team on this release: Although a few (sometimes massively) critical bugs have been fixed, most of the testing that Jan, I and others have focussed on has been in AI mode. We have actually done very limited testing in PBEM mode.

Having said that, very little of the PBEM mode code has been touched, so there *shouldn't* be anything new that has broken, just saying that we haven't extensively tested in PBEM mode so be careful and keep your save games aside in case it screws something up. Remember that this is a BETA.

_____________________________

--
Del

(in reply to ndrose)
Post #: 9
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/27/2008 7:09:36 AM   
JanSorensen

 

Posts: 3684
Joined: 5/2/2005
From: Aalborg, Denmark
Status: offline
The AI has improved some - but still needs alot of work if its to become reasonable or even good. In particular Turkey and Russia seem fairly inactive. Its much better than before though :)

(in reply to delatbabel)
Post #: 10
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/28/2008 4:08:21 PM   
Marshall Ellis


Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline
I must second Del's and Jan's comments on the AI. We got this out without some AI improvements that I originally targeted for 1.03 but I did this since we did have a few crash fixes and I want you to get those ASAP. This also should fix up those pesky awaiting battle messages (Which does stop a game). We will resume our AI improvements over the next few versions.




_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games



(in reply to JanSorensen)
Post #: 11
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/28/2008 5:51:29 PM   
RayKinStL

 

Posts: 130
Joined: 7/4/2008
Status: offline
Marshall,

Some stuff I'd like to see...

Combat resolution when I enter an area but forget to "move into the city".  Isn't there a way the game can recognize if I have forces in an area where another country has a garrison, and let me decide if I want to assault.  This becomes such a tedious task when you are France moving huge stacks around and have to enter the area, then click back on the stack and enter the city.

In line with cleaning up the interface, is there a way, or can you make a way, such that holding the control button would allow you to select multiple corps (or fleets), and move them together (much in the same way you select multiple files in Windows)?  Also, can you make it so that the little screen that shows all the corps in an area automatically lines them up in order?  Plus, it often doesn't take advantage of the fact that the window can display corps "two high" and forces you to scroll left when the lower portion is empty.

These are jsut little things, but I think they would go a long way to cleaning up the interface.  The control-key multi-select feature would be HUGE and make the game so much easier to play, IMO.

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)
Post #: 12
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/28/2008 7:26:58 PM   
Marshall Ellis


Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RayKinStL

Marshall,

Some stuff I'd like to see...

Combat resolution when I enter an area but forget to "move into the city".  Isn't there a way the game can recognize if I have forces in an area where another country has a garrison, and let me decide if I want to assault.  This becomes such a tedious task when you are France moving huge stacks around and have to enter the area, then click back on the stack and enter the city.

In line with cleaning up the interface, is there a way, or can you make a way, such that holding the control button would allow you to select multiple corps (or fleets), and move them together (much in the same way you select multiple files in Windows)?  Also, can you make it so that the little screen that shows all the corps in an area automatically lines them up in order?  Plus, it often doesn't take advantage of the fact that the window can display corps "two high" and forces you to scroll left when the lower portion is empty.

These are jsut little things, but I think they would go a long way to cleaning up the interface.  The control-key multi-select feature would be HUGE and make the game so much easier to play, IMO.


1. Yea, it could be done. That's not a bad idea. Why don't you log that as a feature request?

2. This is certainly possible but stack movement is explicitly not allowed in land movement (I suspect because of foraging chance effects). This dicsussion has been had before to an end of "no" we should not do this.



_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games



(in reply to RayKinStL)
Post #: 13
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/29/2008 10:30:14 AM   
delatbabel


Posts: 1251
Joined: 7/30/2006
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis
2. This is certainly possible but stack movement is explicitly not allowed in land movement (I suspect because of foraging chance effects). This dicsussion has been had before to an end of "no" we should not do this.


I concur. Stack movement is not and should not be allowed in the land movement phase. Doing so breaks a range of game issues including:

* Foraging.
* Capture and conversion/destruction of enemy depots (only the first corps moving gets the advantage).
* Appearance of insurrection corps.


_____________________________

--
Del

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)
Post #: 14
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/29/2008 3:44:02 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline
No, stack land movement should not be allowed, BUT it would be nice if stack "outside city" to "inside city" would be allowed. That is, if you click on an area and hit "move into city" then all the corps in that area will move into the city. The current method would also still stand (clicking on individual corps and doing the same thing).

This is just a time saver. There are a TON of little things like this in the game that make the game more annoying to play than it should be.

(in reply to delatbabel)
Post #: 15
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/29/2008 4:33:53 PM   
RayKinStL

 

Posts: 130
Joined: 7/4/2008
Status: offline
I still am not understanding the aversion to stack mvoement.  No one is saying you HAVE to use it.  But when I am marching a stack of 11 corps from Paris to Berlin, only to turn to Vienna after Prussia's surrender, the constant flipping and moving each stack becomes tedious and annoying.  No one say you HAVE to sue stakc movement.  In the naval phase you are not forced to use stack movement.  You could still move individual corps to deal with things such as foraging and depot destruction/conversion.  The point is to give the player options, so that when I am France or Prussia, or whoever, and I have a large stack to mvoe 3-4 spaces, I can do so quickly and painlessly if there is no other menutia involved in said movement. 

Move stack inside/outside city would also solve the problem I bring up, I jsut want some solution to forgetting to siege one city (if I move into multiple areas) and the game skipping the Land Combat phase.

(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 16
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/29/2008 5:15:08 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RayKinStL

I still am not understanding the aversion to stack mvoement.  No one is saying you HAVE to use it.  But when I am marching a stack of 11 corps from Paris to Berlin, only to turn to Vienna after Prussia's surrender, the constant flipping and moving each stack becomes tedious and annoying.  No one say you HAVE to sue stakc movement.  In the naval phase you are not forced to use stack movement.  You could still move individual corps to deal with things such as foraging and depot destruction/conversion.  The point is to give the player options, so that when I am France or Prussia, or whoever, and I have a large stack to mvoe 3-4 spaces, I can do so quickly and painlessly if there is no other menutia involved in said movement. 

Move stack inside/outside city would also solve the problem I bring up, I jsut want some solution to forgetting to siege one city (if I move into multiple areas) and the game skipping the Land Combat phase.


Stack movement can not be used because of the way foraging works. There are forage penalties for a corps moving into and foraging in an area where other corps are already sitting and or moved to that turn.

There is no foraging for naval units hence allowing stack movement.

(in reply to RayKinStL)
Post #: 17
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/29/2008 6:22:47 PM   
RayKinStL

 

Posts: 130
Joined: 7/4/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan


quote:

ORIGINAL: RayKinStL

I still am not understanding the aversion to stack mvoement.  No one is saying you HAVE to use it.  But when I am marching a stack of 11 corps from Paris to Berlin, only to turn to Vienna after Prussia's surrender, the constant flipping and moving each stack becomes tedious and annoying.  No one say you HAVE to sue stakc movement.  In the naval phase you are not forced to use stack movement.  You could still move individual corps to deal with things such as foraging and depot destruction/conversion.  The point is to give the player options, so that when I am France or Prussia, or whoever, and I have a large stack to mvoe 3-4 spaces, I can do so quickly and painlessly if there is no other menutia involved in said movement. 

Move stack inside/outside city would also solve the problem I bring up, I jsut want some solution to forgetting to siege one city (if I move into multiple areas) and the game skipping the Land Combat phase.


Stack movement can not be used because of the way foraging works. There are forage penalties for a corps moving into and foraging in an area where other corps are already sitting and or moved to that turn.

There is no foraging for naval units hence allowing stack movement.


I understand that, but I still do not understand the problem. The game could certainly calculate all this if the player chose to move multiple corps through a land area. In other words, say I have the I II and III french corps. If I move all 3 together to Lille, or if I move I then II then III, what is the overall difference? The game will still calculate which corps moved through which areas. Movement points are still used up in the same way. How could moving one corps, as opposed to 3 or 8 or whatever number change the way the game calculates things, assuming the game is programmed to calculate a multicorp movement as individual stacks? In other words, the stack movement would be nothing more than window dressing. On the back end, the game could still move the corps individually, to maintain all existing rules, but on the interface, the player would see the ease of selecting multiple corps and moving them where ever they desired. Just because you are seeing multiple corps moved together, for the sake of time and convenience, doesn't mean the game has to CALCULATE the movement as a stack move.

(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 18
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/29/2008 7:30:41 PM   
Edfactor


Posts: 106
Joined: 6/13/2008
From: Dallas
Status: offline
Actually a stack movement option would be very nice.
You would move and forage with a couple corps first if you like - then pick up the rest of the stack and move them all - and it doesn't even matter if your paying for supply as then there would be no forage rolls anyway.

< Message edited by Edfactor -- 7/29/2008 7:32:41 PM >

(in reply to RayKinStL)
Post #: 19
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/29/2008 7:35:04 PM   
Jimmer

 

Posts: 1968
Joined: 12/5/2007
Status: offline
You can forage the first corps at an advantage (unless the enemy already has 2 or more corps present).

I don't think that's the real problem, though. The real problem is most likely that the presence of a corps is noted in the database for the land area (or city). So, there's no construct that has "Nappy's Grande Armee" (the 6 corps with Nappy), for instance. It would have to be coded.

However, it should be possible. But, despite that, there's another problem: One almost never moves an entire stack of corps. So, the feature would only very rarely get used.

Now, IF there were a pop-up for stack movement (for land OR naval) that let you pick and choose the corps you want to move, that would solve this problem. But, coding that might not be trivial.

_____________________________

At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?

(in reply to RayKinStL)
Post #: 20
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/29/2008 7:55:34 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RayKinStL


quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan


quote:

ORIGINAL: RayKinStL

I still am not understanding the aversion to stack mvoement.  No one is saying you HAVE to use it.  But when I am marching a stack of 11 corps from Paris to Berlin, only to turn to Vienna after Prussia's surrender, the constant flipping and moving each stack becomes tedious and annoying.  No one say you HAVE to sue stakc movement.  In the naval phase you are not forced to use stack movement.  You could still move individual corps to deal with things such as foraging and depot destruction/conversion.  The point is to give the player options, so that when I am France or Prussia, or whoever, and I have a large stack to mvoe 3-4 spaces, I can do so quickly and painlessly if there is no other menutia involved in said movement. 

Move stack inside/outside city would also solve the problem I bring up, I jsut want some solution to forgetting to siege one city (if I move into multiple areas) and the game skipping the Land Combat phase.


Stack movement can not be used because of the way foraging works. There are forage penalties for a corps moving into and foraging in an area where other corps are already sitting and or moved to that turn.

There is no foraging for naval units hence allowing stack movement.


I understand that, but I still do not understand the problem. The game could certainly calculate all this if the player chose to move multiple corps through a land area. In other words, say I have the I II and III french corps. If I move all 3 together to Lille, or if I move I then II then III, what is the overall difference? The game will still calculate which corps moved through which areas. Movement points are still used up in the same way. How could moving one corps, as opposed to 3 or 8 or whatever number change the way the game calculates things, assuming the game is programmed to calculate a multicorp movement as individual stacks? In other words, the stack movement would be nothing more than window dressing. On the back end, the game could still move the corps individually, to maintain all existing rules, but on the interface, the player would see the ease of selecting multiple corps and moving them where ever they desired. Just because you are seeing multiple corps moved together, for the sake of time and convenience, doesn't mean the game has to CALCULATE the movement as a stack move.



I don't think you understand.

It's not about MOVEMENT, it's about FORAGING. Movement points could easily be gotten around BUT FORAGING (this means supplying the moving corps) would not be.

I suppose that if you knew you weren't going to forage any of those forces OR maybe if you choose to move as a stack you wouldn't have the option to forage any of those units, then that would be possible; HOWEVER (and a BIG HOWEVER) that brings in a whole new ball of wax, such that the computer would have to automatically calculate where you could move that the supply would be paid for. This isn't a problem if a corps has to forage since each spot on the entire map has a forage point value. ALSO, now the computer has to take into account which depot you want to use (should it pick automatically or should you somehow be allowed to set a priority, etc, etc...) AND the computer has to now make sure that you do not remove that depot.

All of this can ALSO be gotten around simply by letting the computer choose which two corps "virtually" moved to the spot first, since the first has no penalty, the second -1 penalty and the others -2 penalty (I believe I remember correctly). The PROBLEM here is that how many of us want to trust the computer to do this? NOT ME!! I don't want the computer picking my calvary to move last.. OR DO I? What about guard corps?

Bottom line is that it's too situational and player dependent to implement this, it's simply is not cost effective from a development standpoint in my opinion.

THEN, there are those things Jimmer has mentioned, but I still believe the above reasons to be the primary reasons.

So you see, it has NOTHING to do with movement has you mention in your post and EVERYTHING to do with paying for supply.

(in reply to RayKinStL)
Post #: 21
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/29/2008 7:56:01 PM   
RayKinStL

 

Posts: 130
Joined: 7/4/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

You can forage the first corps at an advantage (unless the enemy already has 2 or more corps present).

I don't think that's the real problem, though. The real problem is most likely that the presence of a corps is noted in the database for the land area (or city). So, there's no construct that has "Nappy's Grande Armee" (the 6 corps with Nappy), for instance. It would have to be coded.

However, it should be possible. But, despite that, there's another problem: One almost never moves an entire stack of corps. So, the feature would only very rarely get used.

Now, IF there were a pop-up for stack movement (for land OR naval) that let you pick and choose the corps you want to move, that would solve this problem. But, coding that might not be trivial.


A pop-up should not be necessary. And when I say stack movement, I don't necessarily mean every corps in a stack. The feature I would like to see most could apply to Naval and Land. Image this is how it works....

When looking at the screen, you select the land area with the corps in it. In the window that shows the corps occupying that area, you could then click on the corps you would like to move together. So let's say I am in Paris. Let's say the 1st through the 10th are full, as well as all4 cavalry, and the Guard. After declaring war on Austria, I want to send a force there. I click on Paris. I see all the forces. I click on the I and it highlights green. I do the same for the II, which also highlights green. I do this for the III, IV, IC, IIC, and Guard. Now I see 7 of my corps are highlighted with a green border. When I click on "Metz", the program moves the corps IN THE ORDER I clicked on them. Now on the screen, I simply see the entire stack move. However, in the background, the I completes it's movement. Then the II. Then the III. The IV. The IC. The IIC. And finally the Guard.

Nothing has changed about how the game calculates anything. The corps still technically moved one at a time, but I just saved a minute from having to click on each of the individual corps I want to move. Is a minute a lot of time? No. But when I am doing this every turn, and flying through turns as quickly as possible, it adds up. All you would need to program is a multi-select feature, which already exists somewhat, because when you buy re-inforcement corps, you can select multiple corps that were purchased (or leaders, fleets, etc..), rather than having to select those one at a time. Since they obviously know how to program a multi select already, you simply make a rule, which is stated in your handbook, that multi-selecting corps for combined movement will move the corps one by one in the order they were highlighted. Now of course this applies mostly to land forces and land movement, because mvoing like this in Naval could be detrimental, given the rules for interception. I agree that a true STACK movement, by the literal meaning of the phrase only makes sense for Naval, but when I say stack movement for land, I simply am discussing a way to streamline the interface for land movement and reduce clicking back and forth over and over, and thus wasted time. If it was understood that doing a multi-corp stack movement calculated moves based on individual corps moving the clicked spaces in the order of how the corps were highlighted, this should not be a hard programming issue which would greatly improve the interface and make the game much more enjoyable, in my opinion.




< Message edited by RayKinStL -- 7/29/2008 8:00:04 PM >

(in reply to Jimmer)
Post #: 22
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/29/2008 7:58:32 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edfactor

Actually a stack movement option would be very nice.
You would move and forage with a couple corps first if you like - then pick up the rest of the stack and move them all - and it doesn't even matter if your paying for supply as then there would be no forage rolls anyway.


Yes, this might work but now how much time are we really saving vs. precious development time?

How big are your stacks going to be? 12 corps all moving together? This rarely happens, IMO. 6 corps is more the norm for the larger stacks, so then you are saving 3*(number of clicks to move) clicks. Not really all that advantageous.

(in reply to Edfactor)
Post #: 23
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/29/2008 7:58:57 PM   
RayKinStL

 

Posts: 130
Joined: 7/4/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan


quote:

ORIGINAL: RayKinStL


quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan


quote:

ORIGINAL: RayKinStL

I still am not understanding the aversion to stack mvoement.  No one is saying you HAVE to use it.  But when I am marching a stack of 11 corps from Paris to Berlin, only to turn to Vienna after Prussia's surrender, the constant flipping and moving each stack becomes tedious and annoying.  No one say you HAVE to sue stakc movement.  In the naval phase you are not forced to use stack movement.  You could still move individual corps to deal with things such as foraging and depot destruction/conversion.  The point is to give the player options, so that when I am France or Prussia, or whoever, and I have a large stack to mvoe 3-4 spaces, I can do so quickly and painlessly if there is no other menutia involved in said movement. 

Move stack inside/outside city would also solve the problem I bring up, I jsut want some solution to forgetting to siege one city (if I move into multiple areas) and the game skipping the Land Combat phase.


Stack movement can not be used because of the way foraging works. There are forage penalties for a corps moving into and foraging in an area where other corps are already sitting and or moved to that turn.

There is no foraging for naval units hence allowing stack movement.


I understand that, but I still do not understand the problem. The game could certainly calculate all this if the player chose to move multiple corps through a land area. In other words, say I have the I II and III french corps. If I move all 3 together to Lille, or if I move I then II then III, what is the overall difference? The game will still calculate which corps moved through which areas. Movement points are still used up in the same way. How could moving one corps, as opposed to 3 or 8 or whatever number change the way the game calculates things, assuming the game is programmed to calculate a multicorp movement as individual stacks? In other words, the stack movement would be nothing more than window dressing. On the back end, the game could still move the corps individually, to maintain all existing rules, but on the interface, the player would see the ease of selecting multiple corps and moving them where ever they desired. Just because you are seeing multiple corps moved together, for the sake of time and convenience, doesn't mean the game has to CALCULATE the movement as a stack move.



I don't think you understand.

It's not about MOVEMENT, it's about FORAGING. Movement points could easily be gotten around BUT FORAGING (this means supplying the moving corps) would not be.

I suppose that if you knew you weren't going to forage any of those forces OR maybe if you choose to move as a stack you wouldn't have the option to forage any of those units, then that would be possible; HOWEVER (and a BIG HOWEVER) that brings in a whole new ball of wax, such that the computer would have to automatically calculate where you could move that the supply would be paid for. This isn't a problem if a corps has to forage since each spot on the entire map has a forage point value. ALSO, now the computer has to take into account which depot you want to use (should it pick automatically or should you somehow be allowed to set a priority, etc, etc...) AND the computer has to now make sure that you do not remove that depot.

All of this can ALSO be gotten around simply by letting the computer choose which two corps "virtually" moved to the spot first, since the first has no penalty, the second -1 penalty and the others -2 penalty (I believe I remember correctly). The PROBLEM here is that how many of us want to trust the computer to do this? NOT ME!! I don't want the computer picking my calvary to move last.. OR DO I? What about guard corps?

Bottom line is that it's too situational and player dependent to implement this, it's simply is not cost effective from a development standpoint in my opinion.

THEN, there are those things Jimmer has mentioned, but I still believe the above reasons to be the primary reasons.

So you see, it has NOTHING to do with movement has you mention in your post and EVERYTHING to do with paying for supply.



Read my reply to Jimmer (which I apparently opsted while you were replying to us, so you may have missed it). Simply coding the multi-select movement so that it calculates the moves individually, based on the order the corps were selected in, resolves all your issues, while still maintaining the clean interface of streamling large stack movements. Do you disagree with this?


< Message edited by RayKinStL -- 7/29/2008 8:02:07 PM >

(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 24
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/29/2008 8:02:22 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RayKinStL


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

You can forage the first corps at an advantage (unless the enemy already has 2 or more corps present).

I don't think that's the real problem, though. The real problem is most likely that the presence of a corps is noted in the database for the land area (or city). So, there's no construct that has "Nappy's Grande Armee" (the 6 corps with Nappy), for instance. It would have to be coded.

However, it should be possible. But, despite that, there's another problem: One almost never moves an entire stack of corps. So, the feature would only very rarely get used.

Now, IF there were a pop-up for stack movement (for land OR naval) that let you pick and choose the corps you want to move, that would solve this problem. But, coding that might not be trivial.


A pop-up should not be necessary. And when I say stack movement, I don't necessarily mean every corps in a stack. The feature I would like to see most could apply to Naval and Land. Image this is how it works....

When looking at the screen, you select the land area with the corps in it. In the window that shows the corps occupying that area, you could then click on the corps you would like to move together. So let's say I am in Paris. Let's say the 1st through the 10th are full, as well as all4 cavalry, and the Guard. After declaring war on Austria, I want to send a force there. I click on Paris. I see all the forces. I click on the I and it highlights green. I do the same for the II, which also highlights green. I do this for the III, IV, IC, IIC, and Guard. Now I see 7 of my corps are highlighted with a green border. When I click on "Metz", the program moves the corps IN THE ORDER I clicked on them. Now on the screen, I simply see the entire stack move. However, in the background, the I completes it's movement. Then the II. Then the III. The IV. The IC. The IIC. And finally the Guard.

Nothing has changed about how the game calculates anything. The corps stillt echnically moved one at a time, but I just saved a minute from having to click on each of the individual corps I want to move. Is a minute a lot of time? No. But when I am doing this every turn, and flying through turns as quickly as possible, it adds up. All you would need to program is a multi-select feature, which already exists somewhat, because when you buy re-inforcement corps, you can select multiple corps that were purchased (or leaders, fleets, etc..), rather than having to select those one at a time. Since they obviously know how to program a multi select already, you simply make a rule, which is stated in your handbook, that multi-selecting corps for combined movement will move the corps one by one in the order they were highlighted. Now of course this applies mostly to land forces and land movement, because mvoing like this in Naval could be detrimental, given the rules for interception. I agree that a true STACK movement, by the literal meaning of the phrase only makes sense for Naval, but when I say stack movement for land, I simply am discussing a way to streamline the interface for land movement and reduce clicking back and forth over and over, and thus wasted time. If it was understood that doing a multi-corp stack movement calculated moves based on individual corps moving the clicked spaces in the order of how the corps were highlighted, this should not be a hard programming issue which would greatly improve the interface and make the game much more enjoyable, in my opinion.





You still have to click on every corps "in the box" once, so you are only saving time on the back end of the move. It's hardly a minute, it's more like 5-10 seconds. It's really not worth the development time.

If this game was perfect and Marshall still wanted to tweak some stuff, then I would probably agree with you, but there is still so much wrong with this game that 5-10 second speedup ONLY when you are moving large stacks from one place to another place just doesn't seem worth it to me.

(in reply to RayKinStL)
Post #: 25
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/29/2008 8:04:46 PM   
Marshall Ellis


Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline
You mean it's not perfect, Neverman? LOL!

I must agree with Neverman that this would save little for you and cost me a lot of dev cycles. There are much bigger fish to fry before we get to this.

_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games



(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 26
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/29/2008 8:06:22 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RayKinStL


Read my reply to Jimmer (which I apparently opsted while you were replying to us, so you may have missed it). Simply coding the multi-select movement so that it calculates the moves individually, based on the order the corps were selected in, resolves all your issues, while still maintaining the clean interface of streamling large stack movements. Do you disagree with this?



I agree that the concept would resolve most of the issues, I disagree that it is a simple task.

Currently there is an "undo move" button. Now Marshall has to keep track of each corps and it's order. He also has to be able to change the order in case you decided that the 2nd corps you moved with the stack wasn't suppose to move with the stack, or the 1st corps or the 1st and 3rd corps.

Ultimately, this is Marshall's decision AND it largely depends on how this thing is designed. So far, it has appeared that is doesn't have a very object-oriented/abstract design, so I'm not sure how easy this is going to be.

Marshall: LOL. It's not that I mean to come across harsh, I just do. ;) Besides, you, I and most everyone here realizes this, but it's coming along and honestly I haven't checked out 1.03 yet. I will be more excited to see some seriuos PBEM streamlining.

< Message edited by NeverMan -- 7/29/2008 8:08:05 PM >

(in reply to RayKinStL)
Post #: 27
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/29/2008 8:12:36 PM   
RayKinStL

 

Posts: 130
Joined: 7/4/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan


quote:

ORIGINAL: RayKinStL


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

You can forage the first corps at an advantage (unless the enemy already has 2 or more corps present).

I don't think that's the real problem, though. The real problem is most likely that the presence of a corps is noted in the database for the land area (or city). So, there's no construct that has "Nappy's Grande Armee" (the 6 corps with Nappy), for instance. It would have to be coded.

However, it should be possible. But, despite that, there's another problem: One almost never moves an entire stack of corps. So, the feature would only very rarely get used.

Now, IF there were a pop-up for stack movement (for land OR naval) that let you pick and choose the corps you want to move, that would solve this problem. But, coding that might not be trivial.


A pop-up should not be necessary. And when I say stack movement, I don't necessarily mean every corps in a stack. The feature I would like to see most could apply to Naval and Land. Image this is how it works....

When looking at the screen, you select the land area with the corps in it. In the window that shows the corps occupying that area, you could then click on the corps you would like to move together. So let's say I am in Paris. Let's say the 1st through the 10th are full, as well as all4 cavalry, and the Guard. After declaring war on Austria, I want to send a force there. I click on Paris. I see all the forces. I click on the I and it highlights green. I do the same for the II, which also highlights green. I do this for the III, IV, IC, IIC, and Guard. Now I see 7 of my corps are highlighted with a green border. When I click on "Metz", the program moves the corps IN THE ORDER I clicked on them. Now on the screen, I simply see the entire stack move. However, in the background, the I completes it's movement. Then the II. Then the III. The IV. The IC. The IIC. And finally the Guard.

Nothing has changed about how the game calculates anything. The corps stillt echnically moved one at a time, but I just saved a minute from having to click on each of the individual corps I want to move. Is a minute a lot of time? No. But when I am doing this every turn, and flying through turns as quickly as possible, it adds up. All you would need to program is a multi-select feature, which already exists somewhat, because when you buy re-inforcement corps, you can select multiple corps that were purchased (or leaders, fleets, etc..), rather than having to select those one at a time. Since they obviously know how to program a multi select already, you simply make a rule, which is stated in your handbook, that multi-selecting corps for combined movement will move the corps one by one in the order they were highlighted. Now of course this applies mostly to land forces and land movement, because mvoing like this in Naval could be detrimental, given the rules for interception. I agree that a true STACK movement, by the literal meaning of the phrase only makes sense for Naval, but when I say stack movement for land, I simply am discussing a way to streamline the interface for land movement and reduce clicking back and forth over and over, and thus wasted time. If it was understood that doing a multi-corp stack movement calculated moves based on individual corps moving the clicked spaces in the order of how the corps were highlighted, this should not be a hard programming issue which would greatly improve the interface and make the game much more enjoyable, in my opinion.





You still have to click on every corps "in the box" once, so you are only saving time on the back end of the move. It's hardly a minute, it's more like 5-10 seconds. It's really not worth the development time.

If this game was perfect and Marshall still wanted to tweak some stuff, then I would probably agree with you, but there is still so much wrong with this game that 5-10 second speedup ONLY when you are moving large stacks from one place to another place just doesn't seem worth it to me.


I disagree, and I will go back to my example. In your scenario, I click on Paris, clcik on the first corps, click on Metz. The I go back (or right click), click on Paris, click on the II, click on Metz. Rinse and repeat. I am constantly going back and forth.

In my scenario, I click on Paris, I click on all the corps, which are right next to each other so it's like bam bam bam, and then I click on Metz...movement done.

If you don't like the idea, then that is fine. You are entitled to your opinion. To me, after playing 5-6 full campaign games against the computer, I have found this to be the most annoying feature of the game...to the point that it is almost not fun to play it! If it were up to me, this would be a high priority item. That is my opinion and I am entitled to it. I don't mind friendly discussion, but I get a bit peeved when someone is so egotistical as to think their opinion is superior to mine. To me this is a major issue. Further, it would not be a major programming issue as it is mostly cosmetic. Everything still gets calculated the same way, provided rules are in place (such as the order corps are clicked moving in said order). It simply streamlines the way the game is played. Land movement is by far the most tedious part of the game, as well it should be, and streamlining it with the suggestions I have made should not be hard to implement. If you don't like the idea, then I welcome your opinion, but please do not tell me it is not doable. Anything can be accomplished with some ingenuity. And beign that most of the pieces are already in place and that such a feature would be mostly cosmetic, not really affecting HOW the game plays, any fierce opposition to the idea seems silly to me.

(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 28
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/29/2008 8:21:14 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline
Ray,

Yes, you stated your opinion. I disagreed and stated mine. Not sure where the ego was in that. Sorry if disagreeing with you makes me an egomaniac. Would it be less aggressive if I put "IMO" behind every sentence?

I understand your position, I also find it annoying, I just don't think that's it's a high priority. It's MY OPINION. It's really up to the developers (Marshall) what to do, not me.

Maybe it doesn't bother me as much since I don't play against the AI anymore and just play PBEM games.

(in reply to RayKinStL)
Post #: 29
RE: Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! - 7/29/2008 8:26:43 PM   
RayKinStL

 

Posts: 130
Joined: 7/4/2008
Status: offline
Marshall,

Here is the last I will say on this issue.  And this is in no way meant to be snotty, or snide, or anything else.  The simple fact is, I played this game in high school with a group of friends and loved it (as did they).  This (the computer version) should be a welcomed addition to the series.  Rule variations and lack of IP support aside, I would currently not recommend this game to any of my friends, certainly not at the 60$-70$ price point it currently goes at.  My main reason for not recommending it would be that, while I enjoy the game itself, I do not enjoy the interface.  This is not a jab at you.  I understand the enormity of the task you undertook in attempting to convert a very complex board game to a PC platform.  However, when play the game, I find myself so bored and annoyed with clicking on the SAME areas back and forth, simply to move a stack of 6-8 corps together, that I question if it is really worth it.  Unfortunately, at this point, I have paid the money, so I play it mostly to get my money's worth out of the game.  The fact is, the interface is so unintuitive, it literally pulls you away from the enjoyment of the game.  Rather than being excited to take a full stack of French corps up against the monster stack of the Austrians, I find that by the time I have clicked back and forth and moved everything in place, I am happy just to be done with moving everything.  I know there is a ton on your plate and that tweaks and fixes are always popping up.  I am simply tellnig you that form the perspective of someone NEW to your game, someone who paid the full price to play it, this is the biggest issue I have with it.  You can take that opinion for what you will.

And to Neverman, keeping track of what a person has clicked on and in what order is not a hard thing to store.  Once again, I will certainly value your opinion that you believe there are more pressing matters.  I don't argue this point as it is your opinion.  Yes it is one I disagree with, but that is OK.  In my opinion, spending another second on PBEM is a total waste of time and IP play would be a much more productive use of it (even if such a feature took 3-4 months to fully code and implement). But that is why we call them opinions.  But to say that my idea would be hard to implement seems ludicrous to me, since it is all cosmetic and easy to keep track of, since it is all user input.  So unless this game is coded in some backwards fashion that user input can't be stored, and then discarded when it is no longer needed, implements a multi-corp movement feature should really not be that tough.

Anyway, that is my 2 cents on the subject.  I have said what I needed to say.  I stated my case, with examples, and at the very least I hope what I propose makes sense.  I don't expect anyone to agree with me that it is necessary.  But coming from someon who has gone home and loaded this game up almost everyday since he has had it, I can tell you what has bothered me most.  And that would be the land movement interface.

< Message edited by RayKinStL -- 7/29/2008 8:28:34 PM >

(in reply to RayKinStL)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815 >> Empire in Arms 1.03.13 Public Beta Avalible!! Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.176