Modern Combat: 1.0.1 Released!

[bismitch]

I submitted a working version that is entitled Modern Combat-1.10.

[A Guy]

I submitted a working version that is entitled Modern Combat-1.10.

Submitted it where?

EDIT: I see, on the add-on server. I could start maintaining it again, I think I have a bit more free time now. What changes would you guys like to see?

EDIT: The DELAY issue is being caused by a macro that no longer exists apparently. I'm fixing it.

EDIT: Fixed it. Pass me the PBL file and I'll upload it.

EDIT: PM me if you want to play a game with me.

[bismitch]

If we can somehow get enough people to play I would be up for it. My version contains some extra maps and conquest on one of them.
>pbl files on a public forum
Here you go.

[A Guy]

Thank you. I'll upload the fixed version. Let's play a 1v1 game as soon as I have it, I've never actually gotten to play a full game.

EDIT: Incorrect passphrase, I need you to PM me that.

EDIT: Oh, the version you sent me is YOUR version. That explains a lot.

[A Guy]

The very latest version of Modern Combat is updated. I need your feedback to keep this alive.

[alluton]

I'll give it a test later today. I have always liked this mod alot.

[Annalise]

Oh wow it's back? I must download and try and get people to play! :3

Um which one of the three is the correct one that is the most up to date? Update, 1.10, or the one I believe is original? :O

[Sagez]

First of all, I admire Modern Combat a lot. Last summer I have even gathered 6 players and we played a few games with it. Below you can see what I don't like in your splendid multiplayer era. Sorry for possible grammar mistakes.

1. Modern Combat needs ''Fog of War'' option badly. Lack of it ruins the game ; it is very hard to surprise your enemy when he can see the majority of your recruitment and the majority of your army moves (except submarines and stealth planes which are cool and rewarding ).

2. You should try to obtain as much realism as possible. Yes, realism in wesnoth. I was angry about atomic missiles in your era because a sharpshooter (yes! The mere man with a rifle with a scope!) can actually destroy a flying atomic missile. In one turn. Oh, it's unimportant that he can do it that fast... the problem is that he can just shoot and destroy it immediately! What a fable, a pure nonsense that hurts all the more because nuclear technologies and nuclear weapons are too expensive and definitely unffective in Modern Combat if a single man can destroy it. And what will happen next? After your great bomb has exploded?... Absolutely nothing! There will be no kaboom, no crater, no radioactive pollution. Abandon hope all ye who buy it! You can't feel yourself as the ultimate bad guy who is bombarding defenceless cities ( ) with his diabolical nuclear inferno arsenal ; after spending hundreds of gold for a sole missile and after it's spectacular fail you feel just like an ordinary and deceived fool .
That is to say... well, you should make nuclear missiles cheaper and more deadly.

3. It would be great if you could speed up gameplay a little. The concept is great but playing it takes too long (game is slowing because of those essential menus). Unluckily.

You have done a great job so far. Good luck, don't let it die! You should't care if MC will not be very succesfull - it is still infintely better than 70% eras (usually set in immature and boring fantasy world, lol! ) Take care.

[A Guy]

First of all, I admire Modern Combat a lot. Last summer I have even gathered 6 players and we played a few games with it. Below you can see what I don't like in your splendid multiplayer era. Sorry for possible grammar mistakes.

1. Modern Combat needs ''Fog of War'' option badly. Lack of it ruins the game ; it is very hard to surprise your enemy when he can see the majority of your recruitment and the majority of your army moves (except submarines and stealth planes which are cool and rewarding ).

We decided early that there wouldn't be Fog of War - though we did give the Anarchists the ability to utilize it as their major leader power.

2. You should try to obtain as much realism as possible. Yes, realism in wesnoth. I was angry about atomic missiles in your era because a sharpshooter (yes! The mere man with a rifle with a scope!) can actually destroy a flying atomic missile. In one turn. Oh, it's unimportant that he can do it that fast... the problem is that he can just shoot and destroy it immediately! What a fable, a pure nonsense that hurts all the more because nuclear technologies and nuclear weapons are too expensive and definitely unffective in Modern Combat if a single man can destroy it. And what will happen next? After your great bomb has exploded?... Absolutely nothing! There will be no kaboom, no crater, no radioactive pollution. Abandon hope all ye who buy it! You can't feel yourself as the ultimate bad guy who is bombarding defenceless cities ( ) with his diabolical nuclear inferno arsenal ; after spending hundreds of gold for a sole missile and after it's spectacular fail you feel just like an ordinary and deceived fool .
That is to say... well, you should make nuclear missiles cheaper and more deadly.

Yeah, I really think nukes need a buff. Snipers shooting them down? Really, they can do that? I'll fix that.

3. It would be great if you could speed up gameplay a little. The concept is great but playing it takes too long (game is slowing because of those essential menus). Unluckily.

You have done a great job so far. Good luck, don't let it die! You should't care if MC will not be very succesfull - it is still infintely better than 70% eras (usually set in immature and boring fantasy world, lol! ) Take care.

I'm thinking of ways to do that in fact. I'm considering giving units 1 extra MP the turn they're recruited.

[Hex]

I received the error shown in screen shot when we started a modern combat game. Bafflingly, I recently received this error loading a save of a great quest game, completely unrelated to modern combat. It wasn't the save, previous and latter loads of that save did not produce that error.

We had a game where host PC was having trouble, so I tried to rehost with me as the host, but it wouldn't work, we had a black screen and other stuff where I don't recall the details any more. Do you have something in modern combat designed to prevent reloads from saves? Similarly, the Isis cross map would not work for us (can't recall details)

This game needs alot of explanation a good help file and other things. What is strong or weak against what and what does this do? What kind of unit is this, only have a name, have to recruit it just to see it. Seems one can only keep on playing and experimenting to try and figure it all out, then remember it all. Definitely makes for a steep learning curve.

Planes maybe should not be able to fly indefinitely? Maybe make them like civ where they need to end a turn in a city after X turns, depending on the plane. Perhaps with a indicator to tell you how many turns are left, that could also be on intercontinental missiles.

[A Guy]

I received the error shown in screen shot when we started a modern combat game. Bafflingly, I recently received this error loading a save of a great quest game, completely unrelated to modern combat. It wasn't the save, previous and latter loads of that save did not produce that error.

We had a game where host PC was having trouble, so I tried to rehost with me as the host, but it wouldn't work, we had a black screen and other stuff where I don't recall the details any more. Do you have something in modern combat designed to prevent reloads from saves? Similarly, the Isis cross map would not work for us (can't recall details)

I don't have anything to prevent save-loading, not intentionally anyway. I'll look into it.

This game needs alot of explanation a good help file and other things. What is strong or weak against what and what does this do? What kind of unit is this, only have a name, have to recruit it just to see it. Seems one can only keep on playing and experimenting to try and figure it all out, then remember it all. Definitely makes for a steep learning curve.

It's on my to-do list.

Planes maybe should not be able to fly indefinitely? Maybe make them like civ where they need to end a turn in a city after X turns, depending on the plane. Perhaps with a indicator to tell you how many turns are left, that could also be on intercontinental missiles.

Planes right now are in a good spot, highly mobile and hard for most ground units to retaliate against but quite easy to take down when you have the right units. I don't want to make them weaker.

[Hex]

Planes right now are in a good spot, highly mobile and hard for most ground units to retaliate against but quite easy to take down when you have the right units. I don't want to make them weaker

.

Perhaps the ending turn in airport or city with airport bit, but buffed somewhere else to compensate?

I received the error shown in screen shot when we started a modern combat game. Bafflingly, I recently received this error loading a save of a great quest game, completely unrelated to modern combat. It wasn't the save, previous and latter loads of that save did not produce that error.

I don't have anything to prevent save-loading, not intentionally anyway. I'll look into it.

Just recently I received this error starting a regular default game with someone (not from save) the most baffling about all this is its intermittent nature. Seems like I will have to uninstall modern combat just to stop these annoying errors.

[fabi]

Please note, that I just commited support for a vision= attribute in [unit] and [unit_type]
which can be used to make the vision sight independent from the movement of a unit.

It can for example be used to define a radar unit with low or even no movement but a huge sight range.

Together with it there is support for [vision_costs] in [movement_type], allowing different view than movement costs.
It can be used for example to define a unit which can see over deep water even if it is not possible to move the unit there.

Maybe the features are of value for modern combat?

On a side note, the current code base of modern combat involves the usage of the [teleport] tag which is no longer working
the way it had before 1.10.

Regards,
Fabi

[Mabuse]

Please note, that I just commited support for a vision= attribute in [unit] and [unit_type]
which can be used to make the vision sight independent from the movement of a unit.

It can for example be used to define a radar unit with low or even no movement but a huge sight range.

Together with it there is support for [vision_costs] in [movement_type], allowing different view than movement costs.
It can be used for example to define a unit which can see over deep water even if it is not possible to move the unit there.

Regards,
Fabi

well, that sounds HUGE. which version of wesnoth supports this new feature ?

(tbh, i would suggest that ALL UNITS should be able to look over deep water, chasms (which would also solve the cliff problem, lava and that stuff -- so all units should be able to look over unwalkable tiles)

[fabi]

well, that sounds HUGE. which version of wesnoth supports this new feature ?

(tbh, i would suggest that ALL UNITS should be able to look over deep water, chasms (which would also solve the cliff problem, lava and that stuff -- so all units should be able to look over unwalkable tiles)

Sadly, only the unreleased 1.11+svn version.
In order to test the feature you need to download the sourcecode from svn and compile it yourself.
Thus most users/designers will need to wait a few weeks until the first of the new dev version is available.

But you can already plan new units or think about how to adjust the already existing ones since there is not much to guess about the feature.
If you specify vision=4 and have vision_costs 1 for the terrain your unit can see 5 hex fields wide. (one hex field around a unit is always revealed).

I also would like to see all Wesnoth units being able to see over deep water.
But I do not think that there is a big chance that this will make it into the mainline campaigns or the default multiplayer era.