The Operational Art of War III receives a final update… and a sequel!

[VegasOZ]

ORIGINAL: Meyer1

VegasOZ: I think I figured out, deleted the graphic folders in the scenario I was having problems (race for Tunis), and that solved the problem. Obviously, some bmp files were conflicting with the new graphics.
Reinstalling it should solve your problem, but just to be sure try to delete the old graphic folder before.

I did a complete uninstall, deleted the orginal Matrix folder and then reinstalled. Tested and the Small and Tiny Zoom levels were working fine.

I installed the latest patch fresh over the fresh core install. The problem seems to be cleared up now. My Campaign for North Africa, Rommel version, now has all Zoom levels working fine.

Thanks for your help on this.

Ok, problem fixed.

A fresh reinstall and fresh patch always seems to be the best option I guess.

[Ranger33]

Are people really complaining that they have to fork over some cash once a decade to keep this series going? [8|]

I'm excited! I'm still a newbie after owning the game for a couple years now, but I think it's an incredible game. So much content and variety in one title is unheard of these days.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Ranger33
Are people really complaining that they have to fork over some cash once a decade to keep this series going?

It's kind of funny, that you, a self-acknowledged newbie, makes this point. Sure the game is very good, but I've paid full price three times for some pretty incremental improvements. I'll be happy to pay full price again if they bring the UI out of the stone-age, but not if this turns out to be a glorified patch. I'll definitely wait for a few months after release before deciding.

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: Ranger33

Are people really complaining that they have to fork over some cash once a decade to keep this series going? [8|]

I'm excited! I'm still a newbie after owning the game for a couple years now, but I think it's an incredible game. So much content and variety in one title is unheard of these days.

Here is what I have:

Operational Art of War I
Operational Art of War II
Operational Art of War Flashpoint Kosovo
Operational Art of War Elite Edition
Operational Art of War Century of Warfare
Operational Art of War III

I may have missed one but I think that's all I have. And yes, each one was a small improvement over the other. No groundbreaking differences between them. Well, not counting the bugs anyway. I too would like to see some big improvement or something extremely righteous done but regardless I'm fairly obligated to spend whatever price they ask to continue work on an important project. I'm hoping they don't ask something like $50 for what may end up being a glorified patch. (awaiting typical fanbois replies)

BTW, the original 3.5 patch could have 'kept it going'.

[fogger]

Jack
If you go to Bob's website and then follow the link to Ralph's "Operational Warfare developer's Blog" and read some of Ralph's posts you will see Ralph talking about the "new IU code (31 May 15)" and "Modern C++ code (8 Mar 15)". I am no computer expert but I read that to mean that TOAW 4 is being rewritten in a more up to date code.

I could be totally wrong here and if I am would someone kindly correct me.

cheers
John

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: fogger

Jack
If you go to Bob's website and then follow the link to Ralph's "Operational Warfare developer's Blog" and read some of Ralph's posts you will see Ralph talking about the "new IU code (31 May 15)" and "Modern C++ code (8 Mar 15)". I am no computer expert but I read that to mean that TOAW 4 is being rewritten in a more up to date code.

I could be totally wrong here and if I am would someone kindly correct me.

cheers
John

This tm.asp?m=3462323

And this tm.asp?m=3462345

Also, if you click on Ralph's name it brings up his profile that has a link to his blog. This whole thing has been so off and on with so many dates it makes my head spin. [:D]

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: Meyer1

VegasOZ: you mean this?

I have this in some scenarios, such as "Race for Tunisia". This is not new patch-related, I also had it in the 3.4.202 version.

This looks like what I get when I save my .png tile edits improperly.

[SMK-at-work]

ORIGINAL: fogger

What is US$40 in New Zealand dollars? That is assuming that Matrix will be selling the game for US$40.

About NZ$60 at the moment - doesn't matter - it will be worth it - if I play IV for half as long as I've played III anything less than $100 will amount to less than 50 cents/week! [:)]

[rgflores]

Just two things I would like to see improved with the next TOAW version.
The first, playing huge and big scenarios against the PC, takes too much time to wait the enemy to complete all it´s moviments and resolve all the battles. However, I don´t know if it is technically possible to fix. But if it is possible, would be a huge improvement.
The second, I think, is not so difficult do fix. Would be great if we could read the rules with big fonts and not with those dark background that make very difficult to read the letters. Anyway, I´m anxious to buy the new version.

[VegasOZ]

I am very excited to get a copy of TOAW IV and will pay for the game willingly. One of the best gaming values ever produced in my view.

[Templer_12]

ORIGINAL: Cmdr_Vessery

So, I gotta ask, does this version 3.4.1.9 fix the AA issue that was addressed with using the 3XBb mod?...

-Vess

Still no answer to this.
I would be interested also.

[larryfulkerson]

The answer is yes it fixes that problem and the RBC attempt against fortified positions where the defenders are
in a three-dot stance. It used to be that the defenders would just stay in the hex and take losses ( ignore
losses stance is supposed to do that ) but now the defenders have a possibility of retreating instead.
And various little nit picking cosmedic things.

[Templer_12]

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

The answer is yes it fixes that problem and the RBC attempt against fortified positions where the defenders are
in a three-dot stance. It used to be that the defenders would just stay in the hex and take losses ( ignore
losses stance is supposed to do that ) but now the defenders have a possibility of retreating instead.
And various little nit picking cosmedic things.

So we don't need 3XBb.exe anymore?

[larryfulkerson]

So we don't need 3XBb.exe anymore?

You could keep it in your museum folder of old software. You may run into the occasional scenario
that was edited with that version and needs that version to play but I doubt it.

[Freyr Oakenshield]

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

So we don't need 3XBb.exe anymore?

You could keep it in your museum folder of old software. You may run into the occasional scenario
that was edited with that version and needs that version to play but I doubt it.

I think it's also still necessary to use it if you have started playing a scenario with it and haven't finished yet. To the best of my knowledge, scenarios started with 3XBb.exe can't be opened with Opart 3.exe.

[Lobster]

Last year the actual time frame was for an October 2014 release of 3.5 [:D]

Christmas would be nice but I'm not holding my breath. These things have a way of 'slipping'.

[fogger]

Christmas 2015 is how less than 5 months away.

[kukudas]

You mean it'll support win10?

[Freyr Oakenshield]

ORIGINAL: kukudas

You mean it'll support win10?

What makes you think it might not support win10?

[PRUSSIAN TOM]

Well I am grateful to all who worked long and hard to get us this far. I'm glad for the patch, and glad it's free. [&o][&o][&o]

Not to preach (as I ascend my soapbox), but I find it hard to conceive that a company, founded to make money, could pass up the chance to redo a classic, and make a few bucks too! I have, for example Civilization 1-5 (a poor comparison, but similar time scale on releases). It seems like a great time for a TAOW IV! I don't mind paying $40.00 or so for it. It's hard to see professionals (I mean the bean-counters) give it up for free [:-]. Making money is THE world's oldest profession (ok, maybe #2). Very glad for the update, saving for the new version. [:)]