Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF Game File.

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> Mods and Scenarios >> RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF Game File. Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 5 [6]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 5/13/2021 10:42:29 AM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 2314
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
I have been following this forum and contributing to the debates on features and strategies, as well as waiting for the release of it from at least 2009 (unfortunately I cannot be sure exactly since when). So maybe my clock is not so wrong, considering that i said 15 years aprox..

My greatest dissapointment with a game in my life came when a few months from it's first projected date, suddenly we were informed that it would take many more months /some more years to be released.

I have downloaded the game at several points in the developement, just to find it unplayable and leave it after several highly frustrating attempts to play because of omnipresent bugs (then). Somehow we were unofficial beta testers I guess.


(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 151
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 5/13/2021 11:40:26 AM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 2314
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
deleted

< Message edited by Joseignacio -- 5/13/2021 11:51:03 AM >

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 152
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 5/13/2021 12:40:24 PM   
Centuur


Posts: 8723
Joined: 6/3/2011
From: Hoorn (NED).
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

Does that contradict any of the previous statements?

I have bought the game in the first batch that came to the market, with transport and taxes it costed me about 200€. and it didn't work well even in solitaire (which for 99% for people is not worth playing but anyway...).

After what? 15 years, the game seems to work in solitaire but not in Netplay, most people who play in a group use diverse systems to share screen et al, to be able to play. Even with this, the AS (Artificial Stupidity) keeps sending my resources through lame routes even though I correct it once and again; some resources are not credited, like recently the NEI resources to Japan, and I need like 5 or 10 convoys more to be able to get the resouces than I should need, to compensate the errors of the program. Extra convoys which are more prey for enemy subs , giving sometimes an extra bonus because of becoming more than 10, and always a higher number of ships, which means higher values of losses in the table.

Sometimes we get the game hanged like it did recently with something that was supposed to be solved but fails sometimes, the ships AA fire; that not counting on MIL that dont come up like the Nanking (which was later adressed), partisans that cannot be killed and can stack with enemies, or desync problems due to Matrix's online platform, which kicks us from time to time, or the game simply hanging because one of the computers believe one side has one CAP to do and the other doesn't think so, so the game doesn't progress.

When I reported this last one and asked whether someone was checking netplay errors after there had been no comments at least in the netplay Tech support forum for two weeks I got a message from a (I think) betatester, and the answer I got is "sorry to say that there are game stopping bugs in netplay. cant tell you when they will be fixed." which looks suspiciously similar to "sh*t happens, shut up and man", although maybe I am guessing too much here, but honestly that's how I felt then.

This system is retro-feeding, the worst it works in netplay the more people who plays it in the solitaire and sends screen through TeamViewer and similar. Apart from not being theoretically necessary if the game worked right, this brings security risks for the computers connected. And the less people plays netplay the less reports come and less attention is paid by the Tech Support. So the less netplay improves.

After 15 years more or less, I thought something more could come from this, not an AI, not all the scenarios, not the optionals, not a 5 or 7 players game, but at least a good netplay system for 2.

Now I believe all the effort seems to be concentrated in AI for the game (not only conv), but I have no faith in it after seeing that I order the computer for the 10th time how to carry the resources (routes drawn by me in a paper just to make sure) with more than enough convoys and the computer rejects it for the 10th time...after doing all this following the book and video tutorial sequencies. I cannot hope too much of the general AI in year 2050 when it comes out.

I am a fan of the board game, have recommended MWIF to my mates and in the forums, where everybody told me how naive I was for believing in this project, and I am finally coming to see that they were right.

Some people, old fans of the board game and newcomers have both fallen in love with it cause it is better than nothing and allows them to play their favourite game with a distant opponent... somehow.

For me, who was here from the beginning it is a list of dissapointments and only now some happiness that goes away soon, after seeing how after more than a decade of difficult birth, the baby is left crying with wet diapers, in order to make a new child.

I am not complaining on Steve, I know he tries to be fair and does his best, but maybe this project was too much for just one person in the first place.

And some things I believe are just a matter of pride and could be easily solved, like accepting that the Artificial Dumbness cannot manage convoys and letting the user decide which convoy carries what where. But alas... here we are.




Is it artificial dumbness or player dumbness? I said before, and I say again: apart from 1 minor bug regarding the lending of build points by an active and hostile Vichy and a cosmetic one found by mr. Warspite, there are no bugs in production planning that I'm aware of.
But there is of course, the inability of players to understand the right way to get things done in the game. It's not simple, it's pretty difficult to get it right.

If you can't get it right, do it like Mr. Warspite. Post a gamesave in here and let other players give you tips and tricks on production planning.
The problem is partially the program which is written out of a certain way of thinking which isn't easy to understand. But that doesn't mean the program is wrong. It is the way players approach it. It takes a different way of thinking and that's not easy to grasp. And believe me, it cost me an awful lot of time to accept that different thinking.

To be honest: I'm a bit troubled by the fact that you keep posting this issue again and again without giving others who got the program to work for them the opportunity to help you.

Finally: I agree with what you say about netplay bugs. Problem is: other players cannot check on those bugs. Only Steve can do so because we can't load other peoples netplay games.

< Message edited by Centuur -- 5/13/2021 12:42:06 PM >


_____________________________

Peter

(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 153
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 5/13/2021 1:31:12 PM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 2314
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Centuur

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

Does that contradict any of the previous statements?

I have bought the game in the first batch that came to the market, with transport and taxes it costed me about 200€. and it didn't work well even in solitaire (which for 99% for people is not worth playing but anyway...).

After what? 15 years, the game seems to work in solitaire but not in Netplay, most people who play in a group use diverse systems to share screen et al, to be able to play. Even with this, the AS (Artificial Stupidity) keeps sending my resources through lame routes even though I correct it once and again; some resources are not credited, like recently the NEI resources to Japan, and I need like 5 or 10 convoys more to be able to get the resouces than I should need, to compensate the errors of the program. Extra convoys which are more prey for enemy subs , giving sometimes an extra bonus because of becoming more than 10, and always a higher number of ships, which means higher values of losses in the table.

Sometimes we get the game hanged like it did recently with something that was supposed to be solved but fails sometimes, the ships AA fire; that not counting on MIL that dont come up like the Nanking (which was later adressed), partisans that cannot be killed and can stack with enemies, or desync problems due to Matrix's online platform, which kicks us from time to time, or the game simply hanging because one of the computers believe one side has one CAP to do and the other doesn't think so, so the game doesn't progress.

When I reported this last one and asked whether someone was checking netplay errors after there had been no comments at least in the netplay Tech support forum for two weeks I got a message from a (I think) betatester, and the answer I got is "sorry to say that there are game stopping bugs in netplay. cant tell you when they will be fixed." which looks suspiciously similar to "sh*t happens, shut up and man", although maybe I am guessing too much here, but honestly that's how I felt then.

This system is retro-feeding, the worst it works in netplay the more people who plays it in the solitaire and sends screen through TeamViewer and similar. Apart from not being theoretically necessary if the game worked right, this brings security risks for the computers connected. And the less people plays netplay the less reports come and less attention is paid by the Tech Support. So the less netplay improves.

After 15 years more or less, I thought something more could come from this, not an AI, not all the scenarios, not the optionals, not a 5 or 7 players game, but at least a good netplay system for 2.

Now I believe all the effort seems to be concentrated in AI for the game (not only conv), but I have no faith in it after seeing that I order the computer for the 10th time how to carry the resources (routes drawn by me in a paper just to make sure) with more than enough convoys and the computer rejects it for the 10th time...after doing all this following the book and video tutorial sequencies. I cannot hope too much of the general AI in year 2050 when it comes out.

I am a fan of the board game, have recommended MWIF to my mates and in the forums, where everybody told me how naive I was for believing in this project, and I am finally coming to see that they were right.

Some people, old fans of the board game and newcomers have both fallen in love with it cause it is better than nothing and allows them to play their favourite game with a distant opponent... somehow.

For me, who was here from the beginning it is a list of dissapointments and only now some happiness that goes away soon, after seeing how after more than a decade of difficult birth, the baby is left crying with wet diapers, in order to make a new child.

I am not complaining on Steve, I know he tries to be fair and does his best, but maybe this project was too much for just one person in the first place.

And some things I believe are just a matter of pride and could be easily solved, like accepting that the Artificial Dumbness cannot manage convoys and letting the user decide which convoy carries what where. But alas... here we are.




Is it artificial dumbness or player dumbness? I said before, and I say again: apart from 1 minor bug regarding the lending of build points by an active and hostile Vichy and a cosmetic one found by mr. Warspite, there are no bugs in production planning that I'm aware of.
But there is of course, the inability of players to understand the right way to get things done in the game. It's not simple, it's pretty difficult to get it right.

If you can't get it right, do it like Mr. Warspite. Post a gamesave in here and let other players give you tips and tricks on production planning.
The problem is partially the program which is written out of a certain way of thinking which isn't easy to understand. But that doesn't mean the program is wrong. It is the way players approach it. It takes a different way of thinking and that's not easy to grasp. And believe me, it cost me an awful lot of time to accept that different thinking.

To be honest: I'm a bit troubled by the fact that you keep posting this issue again and again without giving others who got the program to work for them the opportunity to help you.

Finally: I agree with what you say about netplay bugs. Problem is: other players cannot check on those bugs. Only Steve can do so because we can't load other peoples netplay games.


Thank for your nice words, I hadn't allowed to the possibility that I am stupid, maybe because I have had successful career with a degree in Economics, Business Admninistration and Master in Finance among other achievements, working for decades for a multinational firm in an according level, I am also reasonably proficient in English and speak some of other languages, I have been dealing with computers since they reached the public, starting with a Dragon, a model that loaded from a cassette, so I am not more computer iliterate than the average Joe.

That means I never imagined that, after reading the chapter relative, and seeing the videos several times, practicing in sessions of more than 40 minutes each how to organize the CW convoys, I have not been able to do it. Neither me, nor my two mates in both games I am playing. But, hey, maybe we all are retards.

This thread was precisely started to be able to deal with several problems with this game, mainly this one. In the previous page you can see people who is still insatisfied by how this "works", and those are yesterday's posts. No problem, we must be all retards.

And that said (just in case, I was being ironic when saying we all must be retards), even if the program works according to the wishes of the programmer, I think that a Game, not a NASA Vessel Control System, should be easy and intuitive. And obviously it is Not.

I have considered Warspite's chain of posts as a way to whiten the convoy and Production system that I had enough evidence to know it's black, that's why I didnt take part in it, to try for the umpteenth time to fit a square piece in a round hole. I have lost more than 20 hours seeing videos and trying to follow them and I was weary, that's the reason I didn't follow that thread. And I am not accusing Warspite of anything, just in case.

For me the fact that it is a pain in the ass to direct the Artificial Dumbness to the desired parameters is already a defect in a game, but I still have the doubt that it can be done at all.

Same as you are getting tired of hear my ranting, I am getting tired of excuses for what I believe inexcusable, so I will open a thread and see, since you recommend so:

1 If it is possible to carry the resources that I want where I want with the number and position of convoys that I pretend, and that would be enough in the board game.

2 How complicated is this to achieve for a player (or if it needs to be done by editing the files)

and it won't be a difficult display. No need to worry about Asia.

< Message edited by Joseignacio -- 5/13/2021 1:41:05 PM >

(in reply to Centuur)
Post #: 154
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 5/13/2021 4:37:10 PM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8159
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

I have been following this forum and contributing to the debates on features and strategies, as well as waiting for the release of it from at least 2009 (unfortunately I cannot be sure exactly since when). So maybe my clock is not so wrong, considering that i said 15 years aprox..

My greatest dissapointment with a game in my life came when a few months from it's first projected date, suddenly we were informed that it would take many more months /some more years to be released.

I have downloaded the game at several points in the developement, just to find it unplayable and leave it after several highly frustrating attempts to play because of omnipresent bugs (then). Somehow we were unofficial beta testers I guess.



That's all well and good. Your dedication is commendable. I became a playtester in 2007. But what I am saying is that you are providing a false narrative in terms of how long the game should have had to fix issues. No game should be dissed for time spent in development. Indeed for most games no one knows the time period from inception to release. So it should not be claimed that issues have extended over 15 years when it released 7 and one half years ago.

Nor should the developer that undertook to bring a niche game to market in 2003 (I think it was) be insulted by using preciously unfunny redefinitions of the terminology. This game was not the output of a production studio with a budget of millions.

It surprises me the developer continues to plug away at improving the game after this much time. Clearly he has quite a thick skin when it comes to some of the comments on this forum.

It is just a game after all...


< Message edited by paulderynck -- 5/13/2021 4:47:39 PM >


_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 155
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 5/13/2021 10:06:38 PM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 2314
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

I have been following this forum and contributing to the debates on features and strategies, as well as waiting for the release of it from at least 2009 (unfortunately I cannot be sure exactly since when). So maybe my clock is not so wrong, considering that i said 15 years aprox..

My greatest dissapointment with a game in my life came when a few months from it's first projected date, suddenly we were informed that it would take many more months /some more years to be released.

I have downloaded the game at several points in the developement, just to find it unplayable and leave it after several highly frustrating attempts to play because of omnipresent bugs (then). Somehow we were unofficial beta testers I guess.



That's all well and good. Your dedication is commendable. I became a playtester in 2007. But what I am saying is that you are providing a false narrative in terms of how long the game should have had to fix issues. No game should be dissed for time spent in development. Indeed for most games no one knows the time period from inception to release. So it should not be claimed that issues have extended over 15 years when it released 7 and one half years ago.

Nor should the developer that undertook to bring a niche game to market in 2003 (I think it was) be insulted by using preciously unfunny redefinitions of the terminology. This game was not the output of a production studio with a budget of millions.

It surprises me the developer continues to plug away at improving the game after this much time. Clearly he has quite a thick skin when it comes to some of the comments on this forum.

It is just a game after all...



Have I insulted the developer? Why, I had not realized it... Saying he does his best and tries to be fair is an insult? Wow.

So, an Artificial Intelligence which does not show intelligence should not be called Arificial Dumbness...

And yes, the developer has a level of compromise some others obviously cannot match.

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 156
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 5/14/2021 2:56:01 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8159
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
Your posts are artificially sincere.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 157
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 5/14/2021 4:38:43 AM   
craigbear

 

Posts: 109
Joined: 1/21/2020
From: Calgary, Alberta
Status: offline
Is this the right thread for this? I keep seeing new posts in a thread I am interested in, and they are not exactly relevant.

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 158
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 5/14/2021 6:58:58 AM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 2314
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Your posts are artificially sincere.


I dont have any interest in your biased opinions on my posts.

For me, this is over, i have already explained myself and I don't have time nor feel like any public kid's quarrels.

< Message edited by Joseignacio -- 5/14/2021 7:02:34 AM >

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 159
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 5/14/2021 2:16:34 PM   
Orm


Posts: 22275
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Could this thread be dedicated to its original purpose? Please.

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 160
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 6/1/2021 7:01:00 AM   
mldtchdog

 

Posts: 59
Joined: 7/23/2006
Status: offline
Not sure if this has been covered by anyone fully but what I have figured out for some of the variables for the units.

For example,

XII Inf,79,0,1936
0
0,1831,,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,-1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0
(Historical description)
10135,10112,0,2487,17407,65535,16384,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0
-1,UndoData


This is the German XII Infantry Corps first available in 1936. This particular unit is in the buildable Force Pool. I know this by the combination of the YES placement (-1) and the value of the 7th field (16384).

so what do the fields mean? what I have figured out so far.

0,1831,,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,-1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0
A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J,K,L,M,N,O,P,Q,R,S,T ;value of 7th field

A=unknown
B=unit ID #
C=Name Extension (ex. IL-2++Strum-+ovick)
D=unknown
E=on Map ;0
F=can be Setup on map ;4096
G=Reserve Pool ;6144
H=Build Spiral ;10240
I=Construction Pool ;12288
J=Repair Pool ;14336
K=unknown
L=Available Force Pool ;16384
M=Future Force Pool ;18432
N=unknown
O=unknown
P=unknown
Q=Conquered ;26624
R=unknown
S=Not Included ;30720
T=Turn arrival (0=Jan/Feb,1=Mar/Apr, ect.)

So from the example I could move the XII Inf to the sprial to arrive any turn I want simply by editing so...

XII Inf,79,0,1936
0
0,1831,,0,0,0,0,0,-1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,4
(Historical description)
10135,10112,0,2487,17407,65535,10240,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0
-1,UndoData


Now the XII Inf will arrive as a reinforcement next Oct/Nov

EDITITED for Disclaimer:
Vaules figured out at New Game stage

< Message edited by mldtchdog -- 6/1/2021 8:00:10 AM >

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 161
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 6/1/2021 7:42:05 AM   
mldtchdog

 

Posts: 59
Joined: 7/23/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

Two more questions for markb50k or anyone else who wishes to answer. 1 easy and 1 hard, I assume. I'll ask the easy one first.

(1) Where can I find which countries are axis and which are allied. I guess, specifically I'm asking how can I determine which side (if any) the minors are aligned?


Its in the Section that call National Relations

201,201
201,201
-1,0,-1,0
-1,CSet
0
0
0,0,-1,-1
3,3,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,3,1,1,2,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,0,0,1,0,1,1,0,2,1,2,1,1,1,3,0,1,3,1,1,0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,3,1,2,0,1,1,1,1,1,2,1,1,1,0,0,0,0,1,2,1,1,1,0,1,0,0,0,1,0,0,0,1,0,2,2,2,0,0,0,1,0,1,1,1,0,1,1,1,1,1,2,1,1,1,1,2,1,0,0,1,0,2,2,2,0,1,2,2,3,2,2,1,1,0,0,0,1,0,1,0,2,0,0,0,2,0,0,0,0,0,2,1,1,2,1,1,1,1,1,2,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,3,0,1,1,1,1,0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,0

0=War, 1=Neutral, 2=Aligned 3=Force Pool

So for the Commonwealth,
Australia is Force Pool, New Zeeland is Force Pool, Papua, New Guinea is Neutral, Solomon Islands are Neutral, ect. Count 80 digits and you will find a 0 for Germany (remember that Australia is zero).

To change the relation you also have to change the target nation.

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 162
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 6/14/2021 12:05:31 AM   
CL55AMG

 

Posts: 36
Joined: 11/21/2019
Status: offline
Adding US-Italian trade agreement




Save the game at the start of the US setup phase of the Global War scenario.
Edit the save game.
There is a trade agreement count and a list of trade agreements.
Count at line 9777
The trade agreement list starts at line 9959. Insert the two additional lines at the end of the list before line 9974.
I made the agreement temporary since the game engine cannot enforce the agreement.

17,0
-1,CSet
0,FactoryList
0,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1
0
0,FactoryList
0,-1,-1,-1,-1,-1
0
-1,-1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,0,0,0,0,0,79,51,-1,0,0
0,0,1,0,0,0,100,79,-1,0,0
0,1,1,0,0,0,120,80,-1,0,0
1,0,0,0,0,0,49,11,-1,0,0
0,2,2,0,0,0,78,201,-1,0,0
0,2,2,0,0,0,78,49,-1,0,0
0,1,1,0,0,0,68,201,-1,0,0
0,2,2,0,0,0,101,79,-1,0,0
0,1,1,0,0,0,101,89,-1,0,0
0,0,3,0,0,0,87,79,-1,0,0
0,0,1,0,0,0,103,79,-1,0,0
0,2,4,0,0,0,11,49,-1,0,0
0,2,7,0,0,0,51,79,-1,0,0
0,3,3,0,0,0,34,201,-1,0,0
0,3,3,0,0,0,34,11,-1,0,0
0,1,3,0,0,0,11,89,-1,0,1
1,0,0,0,0,0,89,11,-1,0,1

4,1939,3,1945,0,0,0,12,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,-1,12,0,-1,0


Italy-USA
The USA and Italy start the game with an agreement in place to lend lease 1
Italian build point to the USA for 3 US resources (TiF option 30: 1 of them
must be oil) to Italy, each turn.
This trade agreement ends immediately when either:
(a) the USA or Italy become active (see 9.1), or
(b) US entry option 34 (see 13.3.2) has been chosen.
From that moment on, both the USA and Italy may use their resources or build
point themselves.
While this agreement is in effect, and to avoid any penalty, the USA must have
enough convoy points in the sea areas from the USA to a sea area adjacent to
the Western Mediterranean sea area to transport the resources and build point.
Similarly, Italy may have enough convoy points in the Western Mediterranean
and the Italian coast sea areas to transport the resources and build point. If
during production (see 13.6), Italy has met her obligation and the US has not
met its then:
• the USA loses the 3 resources, and does not get its promised build point
that turn, which Italy may use herself; and
• Italy must randomly remove 1 entry marker from the Ge/It entry pool
(returning it to the common entry pool). See 13.3.3 if there aren’t any US
entry markers to remove.
If Italy does not meet her obligation then both sides may use their promised
resources or build point themselves this turn.


Attachment (1)

< Message edited by CL55AMG -- 6/14/2021 12:10:05 AM >

(in reply to mldtchdog)
Post #: 163
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 9/17/2021 2:34:33 PM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 2314
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
After patching the latest update, some processes that had happened one or more turns ago, ocurred again. There was a new conquer of NEI by Japan and a new anexation of ICeland, and so on.

Problem is that my mate had bought (after the first conquer) a NEI Terr and he is very pissed offf, and although it makes me shiver to have to do this "programming-like" thingy, I want to give a try.

Can somebody tell me how to identify the NEI Terr, so I can bring it back to game?

(in reply to CL55AMG)
Post #: 164
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 9/17/2021 4:21:20 PM   
rkr1958


Posts: 22564
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

After patching the latest update, some processes that had happened one or more turns ago, ocurred again. There was a new conquer of NEI by Japan and a new anexation of ICeland, and so on.

Problem is that my mate had bought (after the first conquer) a NEI Terr and he is very pissed offf, and although it makes me shiver to have to do this "programming-like" thingy, I want to give a try.

Can somebody tell me how to identify the NEI Terr, so I can bring it back to game?
Is your game mode solitary?

If so, if you attach a copy of your game file I think we (me or somebody) else can show you how to do this.

If not, we still may still be able to show you but possibly not as certain wrt/your particular situation.


_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 165
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 9/18/2021 12:50:46 AM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 2314
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
No, it's a netgame.

I have gone through your posts and maybe I could do it, it's just I dont know how to find the code for that (or other unit). Although I am not very sure to be true.

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 166
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 9/18/2021 2:17:46 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8159
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
Should be able to use beta tools to put that unit in the next turn's reinforcements. But need a saved game file.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 167
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 9/24/2021 10:51:16 AM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 2314
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
Here it comes, thanks in advance.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 168
RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF G... - 9/24/2021 11:40:08 PM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8159
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
I see your game file indicates debug at the top. Do you have a Debug menu at the top when you launch the game? The first item under it is Move/Place Units.

Anyway I used that feature and found the NEI Territorial in Force Pools and moved it to Batavia. The problem is that it still has Dutch colors, not Japanese. So I don't think that change will work. More likely, it will really confuse the program. I can post it if you like, but it's probably not worth the effort.

There should be a Japanese colored NEI Territorial in the Japanese force pool, but there isn't. when did the conquest happen?

BTW, even if you don't have a working debug menu, you can use CTRL-Q to examine all the pools in the game.

If that Territorial shows up in the Japanese force pool with Japanese colors later in the game, then using Move/Place Units should work to put it on the map at zero production cost.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 169
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 4 5 [6]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> Mods and Scenarios >> RE: A Layman's Guide to Successfully Editing the MWiF Game File. Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 5 [6]
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

0.625