Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
General Staff Support Forum / Re: Changelog - picture heavy
« Last post by Andy ONeill on Today at 03:54:05 AM »
Army editor

Various minor changes to improve look and readability.
Vertically centering edit textboxes so the numbers sort of line up with the label.
It's impossible to guarantee exactly lining up, partly due to the two different controls of textbox and textblock involved but also due to fonts.
Cursive fonts and our Victorian ones measure differently to what the viewer might expect and their centre isn't always where you might expect it to be.
Added tooltips explaining some of the fields.


Bug fixes
Avoid error closing unit accuracy window
Without any preferences chosen, no fonts were loaded and therefore the fonts used default windows ones.
( I hadn't noticed this because personally I prefer readable over fancy ).
2
General Staff Support Forum / Re: Changelog - picture heavy
« Last post by Andy ONeill on Yesterday at 01:42:44 AM »
Scenario Editor

Test - fix cycle turned up less problems than I was expecting. Maybe I just missed some :^)

Minor fixes on unit icon.

Increase height (length) of column when in Simulation

Only show formations combobox on unit context menu when it has more than one option.
EG HQ can only have formation of "Small" and supply wagons are always column.
3
General Staff Support Forum / Re: Changelog - picture heavy
« Last post by Andy ONeill on July 16, 2018, 01:52:55 PM »
Scenario Editor

Added Square formation representation.

In Simulation mode, there's an empty square


In Kriegsspiel mode the strength is shown by the number of bands.
The pieces below are KS 2 and 3


Although these have a smaller frontage than a line formation this is still over scale.
Squares were actually relatively small formations since there are 4 sides and they'd usually be 4 deep with command and a reserve in the centre ready to plug any gaps.
They also tended to be closer order than line since the whole idea was to discourage horses from seeing a gap to get through and to ensure there were many more infantrymen than cavalrymen in any contact in order to drive them off.

Involved in this work for various arcane technical reasons was a refactor of how several attributes are handed down the layers of a piece.
This refactor is also a move towards making this more generic which will be necessary for the game.
There are probably still a few things broken in the process though.
4
General Staff Support Forum / Re: Changelog - picture heavy
« Last post by Andy ONeill on July 16, 2018, 04:26:10 AM »
Bug Fixing

Fixed points of "triangles" for light infantry and cavalry projecting slightly beyond their rectangle.
Army editor fix problem due to null accuracies when adding a HQ
Set default accuracies for new unit.
Fixed extra underline indicating two shortcut keys on load blue.

Scenario Editor

Completing changes to allow pieces to face each other in close combat without the icons on one being on top of the other's.

Added facing "triangle" to piece.
This is rather like the triangle you get indicating facing for an individual figure in combat games.
It appears only when the unit "lights up" due to mouseover of it or a piece in the same command.

This triangle will probably become different shapes in the game to indicate status.
Details of that as yet to be firmed up decided.

Moved the units down within the piece so the front face is across the center.
This involves changing a number of things rather than just one due to kriegsspiel showing multiple icons for strength. And column.

Icons can now extend past the circular edge of a piece which is particularly necessary for kriegsspiel units strength 2+ in column.


I still need to decide a good way to represent square.

Just to repeat something I think I mentioned earlier.
The icon is just a representation of the piece on the board.
Calculations deciding range, who can see and shooting will be completely abstracted from the visual representation.
5
General Staff Support Forum / Re: The road ahead
« Last post by Andy ONeill on July 14, 2018, 01:45:30 PM »
If you're an early backer then I think beta testing is part of the deal.
I'll mention it to Ezra though.
It will be him arranging beta testers and taking bug reports / suggestions.

6
General Staff Support Forum / Re: The road ahead
« Last post by bbmike on July 14, 2018, 06:29:00 AM »
Sounds great! Do you still need beta testers? If so, I volunteer.
7
General Staff Support Forum / Re: Changelog - picture heavy
« Last post by Andy ONeill on July 14, 2018, 04:11:29 AM »
Scenario Editor

Looking at the distance things shoot and where units would be, it became obvious that one piece would be on top of another when they are at musket ranges let alone in close combat.
Previously, the icons in a piece kind of fill the entire circle that is a piece.
This is problematic because the frontage of a line battalion should be a straight line.
To address this, we decided to move the symbols down inside the piece so their front is across the central line.
That then means some will stick out the back of the circle.
That depth is a bit of a problem so reducing that would be good.
Of course regular nato symbols don't have any arrows indicating facing.
Removing those thus reduces the depth of the symbols and reduces our depth problem.
What about indicating facing?
Facing is often reasonably obvious - but I have a plan to indicate facing separately as well but that's for later.
The first step was to take those arrows off and clean the mess up when it all then fell apart.



I was then surprised to notice you can't set the formation on a unit you drag onto the map.
Ooops.
Add combo to set formation to piece contextmenu

Added "Small" unit formation for HQ so it has a valid formation.

When testing that I found Formation wasn't being persisted when saving a scenario.
Probably not so surprising since you couldn't set it I suppose.
Fixed that.

Still need to sort out column square and make sure all symbols end up in the right place.

Once done units will look OK in common battlefield positions.
There will still be a bit of an oddity if one unit moves into close combat with another from it's rear - because one will be on top of another.
The defender is probably done for in that situation anyhow.

Actual frontage for shooting and close combat stuff will be calculated rather than depending on the pieces you see on the board representing units, so any weirdness should just be cosmetic.
8
General Staff Support Forum / Re: Changelog - picture heavy
« Last post by Andy ONeill on July 14, 2018, 02:48:53 AM »
Thanks.
The idea of a changelog in software development generally is so you can track changes between versions.
Obviously, people don't have a working product to track any changes on yet.
At the moment the idea is partly to re-assure people we're doing something.
But mainly... to explain decisions, show how stuff works, provide a basis for documentation and to entertain.
If you've been following along it should be easier to get started when you install the finished thing.

It's guesswork when I'll finish the game module.
Not actually started it yet.
Maybe December.
Future plans and wild guesses have a different thread.
http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=22324.0
9
General Staff Support Forum / Re: The road ahead
« Last post by Andy ONeill on July 14, 2018, 02:36:20 AM »
Changes are definitely necessary to existing code.
These are significant but not huge.

We're still discussing the best way to do various things in the game and details in the design are still fairly fluid.
Flowing towards a slicker better design, naturally.
:^)

The game itself will be the most substantial module, but we (obviously) already have some code it will re-use.
My best guess is still December.
I'll probably be wrong one way or another though.

This is for the game and design modules.
We're still talking about the best way to test.
This will be delivered ASAP to you guys who have already paid.
Any pbem will be entirely manual at that stage.

I will then move on to steam integration and a web site.
The web site will be necessary if we're to make the pbem experience any smoother.
But all that is blue skies.
10
General Staff Support Forum / Re: Changelog - picture heavy
« Last post by Sitnam on July 13, 2018, 09:32:04 AM »
The updates are great, Andy.  How close is this project to completion?
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10