SPOT and Fire Mission Logs...

[JamesBailey]

Three questions/requests dealing with these two important logs in AATF:

*1* Is it possible to get the SPOT and Fire Mission logs as independent "floating" windows in AATF like they are in ATF? I like the flexibility to keep both open in ATF as I do other stuff, which proves impossible in AATF given the "locked" window that covers the menu area.

*2* Also, it is hard to read both in the "locked" window - you have to scroll to the right to get the entire report. A smaller font and/or "floating" size adjusted window like ATF would solve that problem.

*3* Finally, one thing I have always wanted on those SPOT reports was a grid reference (even a 6 digit GR would be nice if an 8 pointer is impossible).

Thanks much for considering these issues.

[Hub]

I also wouldn't mind having a smaller font in the window, if possible...

One thing that was in ATF that I didn't see in the AATF demo was UTM and elevation being displayed in the status bar as you moused over. This was handy for me, as I played exclusively using contours, and having the elevation shown helped me keep from confusing some low spots and high spots. Would it be possible to get that back in?

[CPangracs]

What resolution are you guys playing at? the font issues do get better at higher resolution.

I agree about the MGRS and elevation with the mouse over, and I think Pat's trying to get it implemented in the "tool tip" box when you mouse over the terrain. Don't quote me, though...;)

[Hub]

1024 x 768

[CPangracs]

1024 x 768

If your vid card supports it, try 1280 x 1024!! Everything looks nicer, and I believe most of the text fits better...

[TDR]

Nice suggestion..
If your vid card supports it, try 1280 x 1024!! Everything looks nicer, and I believe most of the text fits better...

Yes the text does fit better.
But I do like being able to read the screen with out the aid of the bottom of 2 glass Coke Bottles...

The floating window would be nicer. I am not too sure about making the font toooooo small. Its like resolution too small and its easy to lose interest. I would hate, even at this late stage of life, to go buy a pair of glasss just to play the game.

[JamesBailey]

Do you have to have one of those huge monitors to run 1280x1024? I have a 19" flat panel but the video card is good (256mb ram, all the fancy options available). Also how do you change AATF's resolution? Sorry for all the dumb questions.

[JamesBailey]

Yes the text does fit better.
But I do like being able to read the screen with out the aid of the bottom of 2 glass Coke Bottles...


LOL! :laugh:

TDR - what is the story w/ your avatar? Is that black mouse/rat a military unit's symbol or something? Just curious...

For full disclosure, my avatar is the (in)famous Bart Simpson, of the American cartoon series "The Simpsons" (http://www.thesimpsons.com/index.html). I'm a big fan of the show and its really the only TV show I frequently watch.

[kbluck]

One thing that was in ATF that I didn't see in the AATF demo was UTM and elevation being displayed in the status bar as you moused over.

I miss the right-click context menu for simple orders.

Also, I haven't been able to figure out how to delete path nodes.

--- Kevin

[eds]

KB are you talking about when your actually plotting a path or when you've just selected a unit?

[CPangracs]

I miss the right-click context menu for simple orders.

Also, I haven't been able to figure out how to delete path nodes.

--- Kevin

While in the pathmaking menu, click on the X and it will delete nodes in reverse order of you laying them down.

If you want to delete one particular node, select the "finger" icon, then select the node you want to delete, then click on the "X" button.

You can also change a "go" node to a "stop" node in the same manner, except instead of selecting the "X" button, select the button with the blue and red arrows pointing right - this will switch the node between go and stop.

Hope this helps.

Curt

[kbluck]

...click on the X...select the button with the blue and red arrows pointing right...Hope this helps.

It does, thanks.

But I'm *really* going to miss being able to drag nodes and right-click them to switch stop/go without having to repeatedly visit the right half of the screen to set the correct mode. Correct me if I've got this wrong, but to change an intermediate node from go to stop I have to:

1. Click on unit.
2. Click path mode button
3. Click selection mode button
4. Select node
5. Click stop/go toggle button

That's a lot of mousing, two round trips across most of the screen and five clicks. I can't think of any order that will not require at least one cross-screen round trip with the mouse. Certainly its nice to have the full menu of options laid out on the right side for any given unit, but not having shortcuts for common operations like path plotting and basic SOP-setting is going to get old in a hurry once players get even a short distance down the learning curve. I think some context menus and keyboard shortcuts to enter commonly-used click modes are sorely needed here for the more advanced player. If they exist, I can't find them.

I've never thought the real problem with ATF's interface was the Order-then-Unit paradigm, but rather that it was often difficult to perform common command operations efficiently. AATF now has Unit-then-Order, but I now find it even more difficult to actually control my game pieces efficiently. I don't think order of selection was ever the real problem; once gotten used to, it actually worked pretty well. The real problem was a persnickety interface that often required elaborate hand dances to accomplish fairly common tasks. *That* issue has actually gotten worse, in my opinion.

For all its warts, I for one think the ATF interface was more efficient and useable in most respects than what I'm seeing in the AATF beta demo. Sorry to be a wet blanket.

--- Kevin

[Pat Proctor]

I'm sorry you don't like the game.

I will just tell you that, I TOO, liked the ATF interface. But we were in the minority, my friend. I actually got angry mail about the learning curve in the ATF Engine.

I hope you will give the game some time to grow on you. I will just tell you that, ergonomically, the game is actually much easier overall. There are outliers, like waypoint flipping, that are slightly harder, but, overall, on average, the number of clicks, key presses, and cross-screen journeys has gone DOWN by 25% to conduct any operation.

For instance, to plan a single node in ATF, you had to:

1. Pick the 'Edit Menu'
2. Pick the 'Show Path' function
3. Double-click on the unit.
4. Drag from the last node in the unit's path and, while holding the mouse button down, drag to the next node.

Now:

1. Click on the unit
2. Click on the Move action (or use hotkey)
3. Click on the location of the next waypoint

To delete the last planned node before, you had to

1. Go to the edit menu
2. Select Delete
3. Click on the node you want to delete

Now:

Either

1. Click on the Delete button

or

1. Hit the DELETE key.

The stop function.

Before,

1. Select the order menu
2. Select stop
3. Click on the unit you want to stop

Now

1. Click on the unit
2. Click on the stop button or hit the S key

A fire mission before

1. Select the action menu
2. Select the fire order function
3. Set the fire order
4. Click OK
5. Select the action menu
6. Select the fire mission function
7. Select the unit you want to shoot
8. Select the grid where you want him to shoot

Now:

1. Click on the unit
2. Click on the fire mission button or hit F
3. Change the fire order in the panel
4. Click where you want the fire mission shot.

Again, the vast majority of things are easier to do in AATF (even with the context-sensitive menu in ATF, you had to right click on the unit and select the function, which, in every example, only saves you one click). The average is 25% less pain in the ass for everything you do in AATF.

A lot of this stuff will be easier when you have the manual with the hot keys. For instance, the move function is activated with the 'G' key, which prevents you from having to go to the panel to activate it. Most of the most-used functions have hot keys, and if you have any recommendations for what keys you would like to see, please let me know.

I think alot of your discomfort is that you got used to the ATF interface. Again, I would just ask you to give the game a few more minutes of your time and see if it grows on you.

Hell, if worse comes to worse, you can always INSTALL TSATC OVER AATF and play the game in the old interface. You will, of course, loose the damage model, the new AI, the cleaner graphics, and the other engine upgrades, but you will have the old interface back.

Again, sorry you don't like the game.

[kbluck]

I'm sorry you don't like the game.

There's a lot to like about the *game*. I just don't think the much-touted new interface is an improvement.

For instance, to plan a single node in ATF, you had to:

1. Pick the 'Edit Menu'
2. Pick the 'Show Path' function
3. Double-click on the unit.
4. Drag from the last node in the unit's path and, while holding the mouse button down, drag to the next node.


*OR* you could:

1. Right-click unit.
2. Select 'Edit Path' from context menu.
3. Drag out path nodes one after another.

Your mouse and eyes never had to leave the vicinity of the unit. Most other orders and SOP were also available via the context menu. AATF in its present form requires you to mouse all over the screen, necessarily taking your eyes off the unit at hand, thus forcing you to reorient yourself once you are able to return your attention.

The hotkey you mention will at least prevent so much mouse travel. But if you're not a touch-typist, you *still* have to take your eyes off the unit. It's click, locate and press key, click some more. That attention-shifting accumulates mental fatigue. If you start an action with the mouse, you should be able to complete in in its entirety with the mouse. And conversely for keyboard actions; they should be able to be started and completed entirely on the keyboard without reaching for the mouse. A small exception is often made for mouse/key chording with easy-to-feel either-hand special keys like Shift and Ctrl.

--- Kevin

[TDR]

No not as simple as that.

LOL! :laugh:

TDR - what is the story w/ your avatar? Is that black mouse/rat a military unit's symbol or something? Just curious...

For full disclosure, my avatar is the (in)famous Bart Simpson, of the American cartoon series "The Simpsons" (http://www.thesimpsons.com/index.html). I'm a big fan of the show and its really the only TV show I frequently watch.

I live in the desert; well it is formally referred to as ‘semi desert’, though I forget when it last rained. Wife recons I am a bit of a rat as I skip on her domestic chores she thinks I should do. She keeps muttering words like computer, games, programs and some unintelligent phrases like gardening. Well work thinks I have a strange streak in me with respect to how I circumvent the system.
So, the background is desert brown-red, but it does not come out well in the colour resolution, rat, obvious, yellow eyes with red centre, playing on the computer and a reflection of strange streak: work issues.

So it’s a symbolic reflection of life. How is that for a complex avatar?

[JamesBailey]

If your vid card supports it, try 1280 x 1024!! Everything looks nicer, and I believe most of the text fits better...

I got my AATF into 1280x1024 and upped the bits to 32. Question- does 1280x1024 slow the game loading and play down compared to the lower resolution at 16 bit? You are right the game is looks nicer at that higher resolution but seems to play slower. Also, the SPOT report log still had to be scrolled to the right to read the reports.
thanks.

[JamesBailey]

So it’s a symbolic reflection of life. How is that for a complex avatar?

Makes sense! Cheers mate, from the far side of the world!

[Pat Proctor]

1. Right-click unit.
2. Select 'Edit Path' from context menu.
3. Drag out path nodes one after another.

Your mouse and eyes never had to leave the vicinity of the unit. Most other orders and SOP were also available via the context menu. AATF in its present form requires you to mouse all over the screen, necessarily taking your eyes off the unit at hand, thus forcing you to reorient yourself once you are able to return your attention.

Fair enough. The other two things we were trying to do with the interface were:

a) Make it easy for new players to ProSIM games to pick it up and start playing. Besides just selling more games for us (which, frankly, I am not against) it also expands the user base which means more multiplayer opponents and more user created scenarios (e.g., a bigger community).
b) Bring the game online, interface-wise, with every other wargame and RTS on the market. We have always felt that our engine and content was the best on the market. But we were continually hammered for having an interface that was hard to learn.

The path-planning example you cite is a good one. In nearly every other wargame RTS, left-clicking on a unit selects it and displays its info. In ATF, left-clicking on a unit did nothing. In nearly every other wargame and RTS, right-clicking cancels the current selection. In ATF, right-clicking brings up a context menu sometimes and cancels functions sometimes. In any other wargame or RTS, clicking on a point, once you have selected a unit, moves the unit there. In ATF, it does nothing. You have to drag the path out of the previous node.

We surveyed over thirty other RTSs and Wargames to try to find a common denominator in interfaces. Where ever our game did the same thing as every game (moving units, for example), we tried to conform to the standard input mechanic. Where AATF did something that other games don't, like hyper-detailed fire missions, missions, and formations, we tried to preserve the input feel of these other games. The advanced features of the AATF Engine, that no other game has, don't matter if players can't find and use them.

I ABSOLUTELY, am not trying to stifle your input, which I have valued greatly through the years. And you are obviously a member of a "constituency" that I am very interested in hearing from: veteran ATF/BCT players. And your intial reaction to the interface is not unique. Probably 50% of hardcore ATF players have the same intial reaction. But I can also, gladly, say that, in playtesting, probably 95%, after playing the game for a few days, come back and say they like the changes, once they get used to them.

That includes Curt Pangracs, and you know how hard he is to please ;)

So, again, I hope you will stick with it for a day or two. Statistically, the new game interface will probably grow on you.

[kbluck]

So, if a major concern was the newcomer's experience, then let's leave off the experience of grognard control freaks like me and consider the newbie experience . I think AATF has mostly missed the mark on its attempt to simplify the interface for that audience as well. The crux of ATF's interface problem was never very much about the arrangement of toolbuttons on the screen or which order they ought to be clicked. Those were just obvious superficial issues that were easy to complain about. Of course it is desirable to have user inputs do something intuitive, and it is a worthwhile effort to attempt to align AATF with "state of the art" if you will. But the fundamental underlying problem always was, and unfortunately still is, that the game requires way too much busywork to accomplish what ought to be fairly straightforward tasks. By way of illustration, allow me to discuss the Fire Mission controls. Now, when it comes to simulation, artillery is one of the game's strong points. But at the same time, it is a perfect example of how the game's interface, by its most fundamental assumptions, makes issuing routine orders way more complicated than it really needs to be most of the time.

AATF has some incremental improvements in Fire Mission. For example, I'm very glad to see the ability to cancel missions from the FM Log. But such improvements are merely incremental; they don't address the fundamental complexity of the inputs the game requires to call for fire. Consider: in order to call for fire, you first need to identify and select the exact tubes which will be doing the firing. You need to select the type of ammunition, the sheaf pattern, and the number of volleys. You then need to select the exact impact point. Now, how can a new user be expected to know the proper role of HE vs. BBDPICM, or the application of linear vs. converged sheaves, or how many rounds/tubes/volleys is likely to be required to achieve a desired effect? They can't. I doubt most players in the Army right now could make those choices without a considerable amount of study. But the game offers little or no assistance in making these choices. For that matter, you can't call for fire unless you're aware of an asset's existence. I'm betting mortars are badly underutilized for exactly this reason, players simply forget or never knew they're there. If by chance the fire needs to be adjusted, you basically need to do all this again. And again. I bet I repeat this procedure 20 or more times for any given game. If there's an obvious high-value target for optimization, this is it.

Now, it is entirely reasonable to make it *possible* to select these things explicitly. Control freaks like me wouldn't have it any other way. But it is a serious design error to make it so that the user *must* select all possible options in order to achieve basic function. The Fire Mission selector is a classic example of the Lazy Dialog interface. Instead of having the computer figure out those things it can reasonably figure out, or even those it could do a better job than the user of figuring out, the programmer just "punts" and delegates all the decision-making to the end user by popping a dialog with lots of input controls. Easier for the programmer, and if the user's too dumb to know how to fill out the dialog, oh well. Very common; I regularly have to veto such dialogs from my own developers.

Here's my idea of how it should work if accessibility for the newcomer is a real priority. Calling for fire can be accomplished with two input steps: Enter fire mission mode, and select the target. That's it. Nothing else is required; further refinement is strictly optional. Target can either be an explicit unit, or it can be a dragged ellipse zone. The computer figures out the details of which unit fires what ammo how many times and exactly where the rounds are supposed to land, based on what happens to be contained by the designated targets. If the user wishes, they can continue selecting additional targets and the computer will plan to engage them in the order they selected. I don't think even the rankest of newbies would have much difficulty understanding how this works. Once they've got a little more experience, they can help refine the computer's choices. They can say, no, *this* target has priority. They can say that they are most concerned about tanks in that target. They can say they want this target suppressed and that target destroyed. Smoke missions, although they're still artillery, really ought to have their own mode. To designate a smoke mission, you enter that mode, and then draw a line. That's it. Again, the computer decides how that smoke is to be fired. For the intermediate user, they can decide when they want the smoke, and how long they want it maintained, or if they wish it to "creep". A similar special mode for illumination, and PGM, and chemicals, and mines. Advanced users, if they desire, can control every detail of the mission, just like beginners are forced to do now.

You've already made a start on this sort of thing with your heirarchy missions. Frankly, I don't know why those aren't the very first things you feature in the tutorial. That's exactly what I'm talking about; make things easy for the beginner not by fiddling with screen layout, but by letting them specify the desired high-level objective while the computer handles all the BS coordination factors for them. All this talk about whether AATF needs fewer clicks than ATF to diddle path nodes is largely irrelevant if you make it so they don't have to do so much clicki-bunti busywork in the first place, and so they don't have to keep so many niggling details straight in their heads. *That* would be a new, improved interface to brag about. Rearranging inputs without addressing the underlying complexities, not so much in my opinion.

--- Kevin

[CPangracs]

Sorry the game isn't to your liking, Kevin.

[CPangracs]

I got my AATF into 1280x1024 and upped the bits to 32. Question- does 1280x1024 slow the game loading and play down compared to the lower resolution at 16 bit? You are right the game is looks nicer at that higher resolution but seems to play slower. Also, the SPOT report log still had to be scrolled to the right to read the reports.
thanks.

If you don't have a good vid card and CPU, yes, it can slow down a bit. However, if you have a decent CPU and card, it's VERY nice. Just realize that, if you play the game at faster-than-real-time, it WILL slow down quite a bit and become "jerky" only as far as the unit movement on the screen.

As for the spot reports, there is quite a bit of info being displayed in a limited horizontal space. I'm hoping Pat can add a "text wrap" function for the window, but dammit, Jim, I'm an artist, not a programmer! ;)

[Pat Proctor]

Again KB,

I'm sorry you don't like the game.

[Hub]

I dunno. I guess by definition I'm a wargaming "grog," but my brother certainly isn't. I like the new UI, and my brother took to it right away - enough so that I believe he has already pre-ordered, as have I. Just one of those preference things I suppose.

[JamesBailey]

I could not agree more on the need to build a robust community of ATF/AATF gamers. As a newbie to ATF, I can speak to what attracted me to game: (1) very robust and accurate air-land warfighting model and (2) a professional, insightful community of players.

Prior to ATF, my major wargaming experience was CM. One of the problems with CM is that as it got larger, the level of professionalism in the community went down. Instead of discussing WW2 tactics and operations, it became a flame-war or cutie post contest. Not what I am looking for.

ATF/AATF, by its nature, will probably never have this problem, but I think it is important to decide what kind of a community it wants to build. I think, and this is just my humble uninformed opinion, we want newbies that are either (1) fairly knowledgeable grods or modern warfighters, or (2) passionately interested in learning just how a modern company/battalion/brigade fights :flag:.

The major driver is the game itself, of course. I believe AATF has accomplished many of the objectives it needs to attract more serious gamers. Major improvements, in my mind, are (1) new, better maps (the photo maps are absolutely first class - something all serious gamers of modern fights should be very excited about using), (2) better infantry models, centered on current events, (3) moderately easier interfaces with 'clicks' that are more familiar to most gamers. I have not tried the scenario designer yet nor the on-line function, other areas in need of improvement.

I never thought ATF's interface was too difficult, nor the level of knowledge required to successfully fight. In a few nights, I picked up the interface such that I could successfully wage prepared defenses (I still don't have a prepared offense against prepared enemy down, but there are very few Rommels out there :D ). Granted, I do have the knowledge of nearly 15 years of company, battalion and brigade staff experience behind me, so my time up the knowledge curve wasn't long. But the great thing about a community is the ability to learn from each other. I'm more than willing to discuss HE vs. BBDPICM and would look forward to learning from folks on this board. So while I don't have a clue how difficult it would be to program into AATF the "artillery commander" model Kevin Bluck describes, if there was an active forum for a newbie to post questions, I'm not sure we would need it. The passionate newbie could simply post the question, and in a few hours - after he has played the problem area over a few times more - he will have several high quality replies to his question. We can all learn and benefit. :toast:

For those of us who aren't building the AATF game, we can:
(1) talk to friends and fellow gamers,
(2) help folks that post questions on this forum,
(3) do some AARs (I want to do one for LZ EASTWOOD, but can't get screenshots without crashing the game - d'oh, as Homer would say :nuts:),
(4) think about new scenarios (I'm working on a 2006 Lebanon series, and at minimum, will make publically available a beautiful 1:50k operational map of Lebanon to the Litani River).

Thanks for reading my rumblings. :salute:

[CPangracs]

Jim, Hub, et al,

Thanks for your continued support and measured and well-meaning responses and requests.

It is the ATF fan such as yourself that makes doing the work we do so satisfying...it's definitely NOT the money! ;)

[Gary]

I agree fully with Curts comments there, thanks guys for supporting ATF in all its guises and AATF as it nears completion.

[Pat Proctor]

Thanks, guys. Again, I just hope everyone will have patience with the dents and scratches in the BETA. It will all get policed up before release.

[eds]

Whether you like the old interface or the new one better, the gameplay i feel is the most important thing and that has not been harmed in anyway. The new interface is a bit like finding new ways to do the same things. I kept reaching for the right click menu only to find it wasn't there, but once i'd got passed the changes and more used to the newer interface, there are some new features that i do find helpful. It's the guts of the game engine that makes this game great. Realy looking forward to seeing those Lebanese maps James.

[TDR]

Well we all tend to complain about this game or that as there is usually something we don’t like in it or its user interface.
A small list of games I don’t like various aspects in SPWAW, SPWW2/MBT TacOps, CMAK, CMBB, ATF system and AATF.
But that does not stop me playing them, I lie :lier: , stopped playing the CM stuff I just hated seeing tanks 1 foot of the ground all the time.

Ok I am not a high powered war gamming “grog” in all this.

Yes I did like the ATF interface with strong complaints about the size of the various floating widows/dialogs, (too small for teh text in them). The AATF one is different but I am sure I will get use to it once I play a bit more. So far I am just testing the water on this.

But I do have a few things that are getting to me with the AATF Demo.
1. What the H### is that person trying to say in the start up screen?

2. (More serious) Some units have a path already set. Not sure if this was an accident or not. Its easy to remove but something that is not intended should be cleaned off before release.
BUT on this issue I am getting driven mad. In the Windows mode the A / 1-320 FA unit has a path set and it is easy to remove. BUT I just do not seem to be able to get a fire mission going from it.
Now same formation/unit in non windows mode I can not get the path removed. What ever I do it stays and grows, path that is. Actually if you do a cut of the path the whole formation starts dashing of into the scrub. This is all before I start the clock. But I can get a fire mission organised.
So in summary what is going on with this one, it’s the Airfield Assault?

3. In ATF etc you could get to see the mission orders. This is not in the Demo. Is it coming back or will I have to remember it all before I start the game?
When you get to my age you start forgetting things like lawn mowing, pruning someone’s roses etc, and on a serious important note the mission orders for the game.

4. I just like the nice aerial photo over lay but I doubt this is a possibility for every map coming out. So this comes back to the shaded ones and contour maps. The shaded ones keep driving me nuts as I see it hill as valleys and valleys as hills, old age. I DO LIKE contours and especially the old display of grid references and heights.

5. The ZOOM !! I seem to spend lots of time in the top end of zoom for this scenario. Zoomed to the hilt, too much coffee here. So for me it would appear the zoom out to see the big picture is a bit wasted. Would not mind a bit more zoom in though.
I will ignore the slowness of the zoom as I assume its all part of the demo only.
The zoom is like the mouse pointer slow.

So my public comments: Yes like all games I have parts I dislike and aspects I like.
BUT I am still here so there has to be something significantly great to keep me with this game.
What that is, I doubt I can easily explain.
But Pat and team keep going!

[CPangracs]

But I do have a few things that are getting to me with the AATF Demo.
1. What the H### is that person trying to say in the start up screen?

That is our own then-CPT Pat Proctor giving his last fire command as an artillery Battery Commander. Personally, I think he is saying "I killed John Lennon", but that's another story...


2. (More serious) Some units have a path already set. Not sure if this was an accident or not. Its easy to remove but something that is not intended should be cleaned off before release.
BUT on this issue I am getting driven mad. In the Windows mode the A / 1-320 FA unit has a path set and it is easy to remove. BUT I just do not seem to be able to get a fire mission going from it.
Now same formation/unit in non windows mode I can not get the path removed. What ever I do it stays and grows, path that is. Actually if you do a cut of the path the whole formation starts dashing of into the scrub. This is all before I start the clock. But I can get a fire mission organised.
So in summary what is going on with this one, it’s the Airfield Assault?

There are paths already set for some units to either A] give the player a general idea of where he/she is supposed to go, or B] orient the unit, such as an arty unit, in the proper direction so it doesn't take so long to have the first splash of rounds (bypass the time it takes to lay-on guns).

As for the "path-creep" issue you see, that is already addressed and will be fixed in the final demo release (this is a beta), and in the final game release. I will personally check on the unit you mention and ensure there are no anamolies in its behaviors/pathing.


3. In ATF etc you could get to see the mission orders. This is not in the Demo. Is it coming back or will I have to remember it all before I start the game? When you get to my age you start forgetting things like lawn mowing, pruning someone’s roses etc, and on a serious important note the mission orders for the game.

Pat will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe there IS a mission symbol displayed for the unit given the mission - I can't verify right now - I think it's in the same area where there would normally be the current unit formation. Pat?


4. I just like the nice aerial photo over lay but I doubt this is a possibility for every map coming out. So this comes back to the shaded ones and contour maps. The shaded ones keep driving me nuts as I see it hill as valleys and valleys as hills, old age. I DO LIKE contours and especially the old display of grid references and heights.

None of the maps that ship with AATF will be simple shaded relief maps, and there are no plans right now to change any of the older ATF maps. I can tell you that any other game I may ever do with the AATF engine will NOT have basic shaded relief maps...ever. It is up to the person making the aftermarket maps to decide how they want to draw things. I also believe Pat is working on getting the grid and altitude into the tool tips balloon, but not sure if it's going to make it into the final release.


5. The ZOOM !! I seem to spend lots of time in the top end of zoom for this scenario. Zoomed to the hilt, too much coffee here. So for me it would appear the zoom out to see the big picture is a bit wasted. Would not mind a bit more zoom in though.
I will ignore the slowness of the zoom as I assume its all part of the demo only.
The zoom is like the mouse pointer slow.

Pat had to make a trade-off here - because of the detail of the maps, he decided to completely load the map at each zoom level, which causes the small lag time between zoom levels - but once zoomed, there should be no lag at all.

Hope some of this helps.

Pat will clean-up after any messes I made here when he gets time between his school, his family, and writing a brand new 100-some-odd page manual, and coding AATF.

Curt

[Pat Proctor]

Now same formation/unit in non windows mode I can not get the path removed. What ever I do it stays and grows, path that is. Actually if you do a cut of the path the whole formation starts dashing of into the scrub. This is all before I start the clock. But I can get a fire mission organised.
So in summary what is going on with this one, it’s the Airfield Assault?

Its a bug:mad: I'll check it out

4. I just like the nice aerial photo over lay but I doubt this is a possibility for every map coming out. So this comes back to the shaded ones and contour maps. The shaded ones keep driving me nuts as I see it hill as valleys and valleys as hills, old age. I DO LIKE contours and especially the

I think you will be happy with the maps in AATF :)

[TDR]

I think you will be happy with the maps in AATF :)


I am always happy, :lier: till someone mumbles those domestic "WORDS"!

besides if I don't grumble here no one at home is going listen to me..

Curt I will have another look for that mission button. I presume it covers the full mission statement?

Any way back to work I have a jungle fight on hand. NO not the garden either!

[TDR]

Now same formation/unit in non windows mode I can not get the path removed. What ever I do it stays and grows, path that is. Actually if you do a cut of the path the whole formation starts dashing of into the scrub. This is all before I start the clock. But I can get a fire mission organised.
So in summary what is going on with this one, it’s the Airfield Assault?

Its a bug:mad: I'll check it out



I think you will be happy with the maps in AATF :)

If you dont seem to be able to create this odd thing let me know and I will try some screen shots and send them to you.

[CPangracs]

TDR,

I checked the scenario, and A / 1-320 FA is in a position area formation and stopped, oriented in the proper direction, with artillery coverage of the objective. There's no reason at all to move it. Not sure what you are doing or what you are seeing. - Screens would b okay, but video of what you're doing would be even better! ;)

Maybe we should consider locking that unit except for fire missions...

[TDR]

TDR,

I checked the scenario, and A / 1-320 FA is in a position area formation and stopped, oriented in the proper direction, with artillery coverage of the objective. There's no reason at all to move it. Not sure what you are doing or what you are seeing. - Screens would b okay, but video of what you're doing would be even better! ;)

Maybe we should consider locking that unit except for fire missions...

First I was not trying to move it. Just getting rid of the preset path that it has.

When I was loading some of the Inf I noticed some had paths set. So I checked out the rest of the units. Some have short pathes set for some strange reason. This one A / 1-320 FA also had a path set. Since its should be stationary and I don't want its CO to do some strange thing. You really have to watch Arty people. I tried to turn it off/delete it. As I said it was easy to remove in Windows mode, impossible in full screen mode.
But in Windows mode after removing it I could not set a fire mission. In full screen mode and not toutching the path I can set a fire mission..
That does not make sense.

Also don't push for the video as that is going to push my poor old puter over the edge.

[JamesBailey]

Also don't push for the video as that is going to push my poor old puter over the edge.

LOL! :laugh:

One thing to check: make sure you are shooting an arty shell currently in stock. In LZ EASTWOOD, that means no DPICM or HERAP. A/1-320 FA only has HE, smoke and (I believe) flares -- if you are trying to shot anything else, the firemission order will appear not to work in AATF.

[CPangracs]

First I was not trying to move it. Just getting rid of the preset path that it has.

When I was loading some of the Inf I noticed some had paths set. So I checked out the rest of the units. Some have short pathes set for some strange reason. This one A / 1-320 FA also had a path set. Since its should be stationary and I don't want its CO to do some strange thing. You really have to watch Arty people. I tried to turn it off/delete it. As I said it was easy to remove in Windows mode, impossible in full screen mode.
But in Windows mode after removing it I could not set a fire mission. In full screen mode and not toutching the path I can set a fire mission..
That does not make sense.

Also don't push for the video as that is going to push my poor old puter over the edge.

I understand, but that path is NOT going to be activated unless YOU activate it - any time you give the Position Area formation without at least one path node, the firing systems all point inward. I think this is what Pat is going to check.

Try giving it another path, but ensuring it has "Stop" button depressed and "Position Area" formation. Actually, all you SHOULD be able to do is stop your artillery on a path, no matter WHAT formation is given, and fire missions should become available.

Do us one favor, like James said, check and make sure you have an ammunition type selected that is actually on the system - this is something I tend to forget until I can't plan a fire mission. Another thing is to check and see if you are out of ammo - when you are giving alot of full battery missions, they don't last long...

There is no need to delete a path set for an arty unit unless YOU want to move it after the clock has started.

[Gary]

You really have to watch Arty people.

Oh dangerous ground, Pat and I both have Artillery backgrounds. :-)

[CPangracs]

Oh dangerous ground, Pat and I both have Artillery backgrounds. :-)

I served a tour in an arty unit as well - that's not how we make friends, TDR!:D

[TDR]

I will re look at it tomorrow.
And here is me diligently reading “The Guns of the Regiment”, as well. That is the RAA, not RA.

[WMurray]

With regard to new users, I think the Flash tutorials are nicely done and will ease the learning curve greatly for them as they show how the interfaces work. I went thru them and could see the mapping from the old to the new interface fairly easily after that. You might want to include a single-page Quick Start guide instructing new users to go straight to the Flash Tutorials, otherwise some might just think it's a bunch more HTML help text.

[Pat Proctor]

Some really great guy managed to snake a copy of Camtasia for me :)

If you want to do any video screen capture, video cutting, or flash/video combos, it is THE BEST software package out there.