Feature requests for 2019

[Mobhack]

Changing a field means a new save game format, so every save game, scenario etc would need remastering. It also has code issues since various screens will new rewriting to allow th extra characters. And then the new long string likely wont fit into some user displays, requiring user interface rearrangement, which is one of the most tedious things to get right.

Changing namestring[30] to namestring[40] is a 2 second job in C, but that leads on to a heck of a load of consequences in an existing code base and data set. Trivial if it was done right at the games inception, but not when its existing ossified code and data.

[DRG]

The way I understand it is this:

The code reserved a space up to the limit ( lets say it's 25 for now ) and after that is more code probably unrelated to that previous code and that code expects to find the info it needs at that spot.....if we allow more text then NOT ONLY do we have to make sure every place that text string is used still fits in the old space available with the increased number of characters but MORE IMPORTANTLY...... now that code that comes afterward that expects to find code starting at a specific point......now finds the tail end of the expanded text string .......and then things go downhill from there.

We could try it as an experiment to see what goes wrong but sometimes what goes wrong doesn't show up right away. I have MANY times wished the unit name could be 16 characters instead of 15 so I have heard the reason why many times in the past 20 years

[zovs66]

Thanks fellows! I figured there were some kind of coding madness involved. If it free and easy yeah, if not I get it, many thanks.

[DRG]

As I said this is at the " on the list to discuss". Yes tanks can be immobilized and occasionally lose their main weapon to damage. The idea that will be discussed involves damage / degradation to FC and RF systems IF a way can be found to simulate that damage so that it is something that happens occasionally, not regularly and it would be by necessity, an abstraction and something that could occur along with immobilisation and main weapon damage OR as individual events unrelated to immobilisation or main weapon loss.

Those articles were presented to illustrate that tanks ARE vulnerable to artillery as already simulated in the game NOT as a template to further changes but the idea is to make some of these other subsystems vulnerable that are not now and probably should be.

[Imp]

Originally Posted by DRG

As I said this is at the " on the list to discuss". Yes tanks can be immobilized and occasionally lose their main weapon to damage. The idea that will be discussed involves damage / degradation to FC and RF systems IF a way can be found to simulate that damage so that it is something that happens occasionally, not regularly and it would be by necessity, an abstraction and something that could occur along with immobilisation and main weapon damage OR as individual events unrelated to immobilisation or main weapon loss.

Those articles were presented to illustrate that tanks ARE vulnerable to artillery as already simulated in the game NOT as a template to further changes but the idea is to make some of these other subsystems vulnerable that are not now and probably should be.

If possible this would be a great addition with modern equipment.

[zovs66]

I know it was posted somewhere but I can't find it now. We were discussing the Allied/Axis type of Victory Hex markers as a possible thing.

I just wanted to throw that here so it was not lost.

I have an upcoming scenario set in North Africa where it looks like:

Axis [Germany/Italy] (Advance) vs. Allies [ANZAC/Great Britain] (Delay)

If we did have split icon's that would be really cool for this scenario. (just cosmetics)

[scorpio_rocks]

Originally Posted by zovs66

I know it was posted somewhere but I can't find it now. We were discussing the Allied/Axis type of Victory Hex markers as a possible thing.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=52027

[DRG]

If anyone has experience with the robustness/ fragility of some of these systems let us know what you know so we can fine-tune it ( IF we decide it's feasible ). I'd be especially interested in knowing if with these high-end systems that something like FC or RF degrades .....or just quits

[zovs66]

So been editing scenarios a lot and here is a useful (at least for me) feature I'd like to suggest.

In the Set OBJ screen
When you click move cursor to next victory objective (or using the 'n' (hot key) same functionality with previous victory objective), could we get it so that the red hex outline automatically indicates/surrounds the just selected next or previous objective hex?

Note that the Move Cursor to Victory Objective Location does have a hotkey ('o') but it's not displayed on the bitmap icon like the n, p, v, a and s are. Just discovered mr. 'o', after 100 scenario edits...lol

[DRG]

Yes but when you mouse over it , it does tell you...



Yes, doing the N+O as one press probably would save some time and make more sense. I'll put that on the code list

However, now that you've learned the N - O "trick" is it really necessary? I learned to N+O and just do it as a natter of course when I move around V hexes

That said also consider that you have done more of that in the last few months than most do in a lifetime