HWLG patch 03p

[JCM101]

I've been checking at least monthly. but according to the depot -
May 04, 2015  - HistWar Les Grognards : patch 03p in progress
Just over a year has passed since that message. 
Any news?   

[zu Pferd]

It's on the burner. No definite date as the team is concentrating on HW2.
I don't have any more information then you just giving a courteous reply.

Best Regards

zuPferd

[JCM101]

Thanks for the replies.

Disappointing to wait for more than 12 months whether one is prepared to do so or not.

It is also very disappointing to see other Devs taking JMMs conceptual approach & pushing out rival products faster than I can get a patch.

[zu Pferd]

I get your frustration JCM 101
JMM team is very small in number and when the game engine was being tested (Ldgn) there were lots of patches on a regular basis a little less with HWN and HW2: Refining things for the most part.
A whole new and detailed graphic approach its in the making, is what is being developed right now JMM already set out a list.

From my own observation there are areas that are still not being talked about or no announcement has been made:

Simulated Unit behavior ie light infantry (all nations) none will at the moment develop
into skirmish order manually for delay, pinning, general malaise toward an opposing unit and that includes light cavalry: hussars and the like who provided some skirmishing duties.
The game AI will throw a skirmish line in front of  its parent Foot unit (observed)but in a Light Infantry unit it won't send the whole unit in skirmish formation (observed)
 Groupings say of 150 men 4 in a 600 men strength unit. (The reason they can't individually is that only a finite amount of units can be created on the battlefield : 100 units)
Graphically representing this behavior with would in my view enhance the simulation.

Physicality: a wall (building )cannot be walked through.
A steep rocky incline can't be climbed at the same rate as flat ground.
(lots of this type of ground in Portugal and Spain as well as the rest of Europe)

Path finding : Complete AI control and manual override.

Topography as in reverse slope.
Hard going areas (and Woods) which affect movement of large body of troops who are forced to maintain cohesion by drilling discipline are excluded from crossing unless there is a path/road and then only in march column. Cavalry may hide in but not move around.

No charges across marshes or wooded areas by any on 'four legs', skirmish units only (150 on 2 legs)

A actual tool to build elevation in the Map editor by increments.
(Would be great to have a TIFF imaging detection to render elevation from the real world
 but may not be practical; however a discussion of possibility was announced)

Missile trajectory and true physics as in : no missile may penetrate a hill and hit a unit
on the opposite side, (opposite to a unit behind another unit will suffer casualties from the same missile) a missile might penetrate a fortification eventually.
Destructible buildings
 Missiles shot in a/through a forested area. 
Gunners firing by hearing movement but not seeing the target (fog, black powder smoke).
Forest Fire sparked by shell explosion.

Watery impediments
Marsh, Lake, River, Brook this is all that can be simulated ?
Canals, small river branches with lots of vegetation : ideal defensive positions.

Steady as she goes Lads.

[JMM]

I can understand your frustration...
That said, I continue to work on the game.. a lot.. maybe not enough but I can't.

During the last months, I modified around 100 files in the internal engine in order to delete the last bugs about the collisions of entities.
This problem was critical and it is not possible to get a good game with these issues. That said, it's a huge work to rewrite the functions in charge of the collision... and also to get a function who finds a good place for avoiding the collision. I believe the new procedure is right.

Yes.. one year... sorry for that : just I stopped during 3 months because I was a bit tired... and one month for defining/modifying the editor of figurines for the new 3D models.

I hope the final result will be fine in order to forget your present frustration...

JMM


PS : to zu Pferd : The priority is to delete the bugs for pathfinding before implementing the new 3D models. I have also to improve the Great Tactic AI.
I hope I can quickly implement the new GUI.
The new Division/Brigade AI will implemented after the new 3D Models.
After that, my activity will be on the improvement of the internal engine, not before releasing the New 3D Models.

[Théodoricus]

Thank you, JMM, for these news.

Théo

[Gunner24]

Hello JMM, thanks for this update, could you confirm this applies to LG, or does it refer to N, or both ?.

I never knew you were building new 3D models for LG.

[JMM]

Hello JMM, thanks for this update, could you confirm this applies to LG, or does it refer to N, or both ?.

The modified internal engine will be released for both...
If that is possible, all improvements in the internal engine will released for HW:LG and HW:N

I never knew you were building new 3D models for LG.

Maybe I was not precise but the new 3D models are only for HW:N

JMM

[Gunner24]

Thanks, I understand now.

[Holdit]

It is also very disappointing to see other Devs taking JMMs conceptual approach & pushing out rival products faster than I can get a patch.

Who?

[sandman]

Who?

... and what?

If you are talking about SoW Waterloo, I want to mention, that this developer started about 2004 to release games based on this engine. He finally modified it to also offer a napoleonic theme besides american civil war subjects. So I wouldnt agree, that anyone seized the conceptional approach of HW series. It also differs enough from HW.

[JCM101]

Thanks for the update JMM, I am trying to be patient.   
I realize it is a lot of code to restructure/rewrite/debug.
I have no desire that you kill yourself for a game. 

Whilst I may have exaggerated rival products speedy development time, it remains true, I believe, that HWLG had a unique approach on its release.
Now there are several titles in various historical periods that leverage the idea of player/commander 'only' vs the formally endemic micro-management approach, where every soldier can/must be individually controlled. [I am not referring to the codebases, just the specifics of the idea/approach.]

This I find disappointing because whilst it is probably good for wargamers, it does not appear so good for the pioneer, JMM.
Where are the comments about JMM & Histwar in the 'mainstream' when talking of revolutions in gaming technology?
It seems to me he is not given enough recognition.
To me, this seems like the fact that there would be no 'Windows' without the then rival Apples vision.  There are differences but ...

[zu Pferd]

to JMM reply # 5

I am glad to hear that the game is on the mend and receiving further attention.
I agree in principle to mend the bugs this is very important.
I welcome the new 3d graphic models.

I wait for further developments ,and in principle will return to an MP community.

As for development time, three developers in the Napoleonic period stand out each
with its own development curve all appear to be incomplete in specific areas.
I have participated briefly in all three, everywhere and here some individuals are to be
commended for their managerial skills and for infecting the rest with a fever, all every
where are keen for the period because it generated a lot of skill set and innovation.

The specifics you all know to well. I enjoyed NTW III because it came close to a
Napoleonic miniature feeling where all pieces are stationary until you start moving
them. The plan is in the head of the senior player, I command a division and obey orders
which may not develop as intended because -in the learning curve- mistakes are the teacher.
I found the same learning curve  in LG and HWN as well what NTWIII lacks is an AI , as a
real opponent so its strictly player vs player (human players) It lacks a general set of rules
for conduct as to what is allowed and not allowed so Clubs have developed them...but nothing
in the code.
SOW and Histwar are the only two developers who have gone into the 'twilight zone' and I call
it so to describe the real challenge these developers are facing .JMM and Histwar is a hinge on which
this door works, He's been at it the longest with its specific vision.
I have had hours of enjoyment setting to Histwar vs the AI specific scenarios (small) that came from
boardgame developers...I ran into specifics and detail headlong; no matter these have been pointed
out even awkwardly I might add and I apologize, there are ways to enjoy the game and after all the
community is important to any and all developers to ...assist, to point out discrepancies to absorb
critique in return.

Best Regards
zu

[Gunner24]

Hello JMM

During the last months, I modified around 100 files in the internal engine in order to delete the last bugs about the collisions of entities.
This problem was critical and it is not possible to get a good game with these issues. That said, it's a huge work to rewrite the functions in charge of the collision... and also to get a function who finds a good place for avoiding the collision. I believe the new procedure is right.

May I ask, is the above something that was found to be very, very old bugs, from the early days of LG, or is it to correct something more recent that "went wrong" during the updates.  It sounds like very good news that you have now fixed what sounds like a serious problem.  I assume this refers to BOTH the LG and N internal engine.

I now plan to buy a new DT PC later this year, and all being well I should be back in HW action by the end of the year, hopefully, ready for the finished game.  Looking forward to that.

[JCM101]

Another year (almost) has passed.

News of 03p?