User avatar
bigus
General
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:43 pm

Scenario Depot

Thu Dec 11, 2008 2:52 am

Scenarios (1.15) (English only descriptions) Updated Oct_20_10
[ATTACH]12853[/ATTACH]

Scenarios (1.15) (English and Foreign descriptions) Updated Jan_28_11
[ATTACH]14514[/ATTACH]

Scenario Data Base files Oct_20_10 (1.15).
[ATTACH]12854[/ATTACH]


Scenario creation tutorial for AACW (part 1: basic tutorial)
[ATTACH]12860[/ATTACH]

Primasprit's Tutorial. (Scenario creation tutorial for AACW)
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=9756



See the changelog in the second post below for a list of changes to scenarios.
Attachments
Scenario (Strings) 1.15 Jan_28_11.zip
(978.6 KiB) Downloaded 341 times
Scenario Creation Tutorial.zip
(3.43 MiB) Downloaded 419 times
Xls files 1.15 Oct_20_10.zip
(1.64 MiB) Downloaded 339 times
Scenarios 1.15 Oct_20_10.zip
(438.13 KiB) Downloaded 687 times

User avatar
bigus
General
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:43 pm

Thu Dec 11, 2008 3:16 am

Changelog: Updated Jan_28_11
[ATTACH]14515[/ATTACH]

New Models and Units file:
This file is an optional download. (see changelog for description)
[ATTACH]14517[/ATTACH]

New game setting files:
This file is an optional download. (see changelog for description)
[ATTACH]12855[/ATTACH]

Civil war tunes: Replace your Sounds file to add some custom period music
http://www.mediafire.com/?2bkgwkzztd5
Attachments
Models&Units_Jan_30_11.zip
(1.63 MiB) Downloaded 672 times
Changelog.zip
(1.92 KiB) Downloaded 312 times
Game settings_Oct_27_10.zip
(1.29 KiB) Downloaded 297 times

User avatar
bigus
General
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:43 pm

Beta

Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:15 am

Red River Campaign.

[ATTACH]17183[/ATTACH]
Attachments
Red River.zip
(47.51 KiB) Downloaded 217 times

User avatar
berto
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1386
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 7:13 pm
Location: Oak Park, IL, USA

Thu Dec 11, 2008 7:57 am

bigus wrote:I'll post additional scenarios and updates here from now on.


Maybe Rafiki can sticky this?

This will be the only way to update my scenarios. No new or updated scenarios by me will be included into the "official" patches.

:(

I'll also try to keep this thread up to date to keep it from sinking into oblivion.


I'll help to make sure that doesn't happen.

Vicksburg: ... Changed the NM for the cities (Vicksburg is now worth 35 and Port Hudson is worth 15).


Excellent!

Atlanta: River Blocking. Removed Balloons (No Balloons after early 63).
Moved French back with his Corps. Checked OOB.


Is supply perhaps too harsh in this scenario?

WIP.............New scenario. To be named in a while (grab your sea legs).


Can't wait!

I'm also trying to get together a web page and tutorial on scenario creation.
Web page is almost done but tut is yet to be started.


I'm really looking forward to this.

Thanks for all the updates! :coeurs:
What this town needs is a good Renaissance band!
Early MusiChicago - Early Music in Chicago and Beyond - http://earlymusichicago.org
PIKT - Global-View, Site-at-a-Time System and Network Administration - http://pikt.org
AGElint - an AGE debugging toolkit - http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2978333
Your Mileage May Vary -- Always!

User avatar
Rafiki
Posts: 5811
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Oslo, Norway

Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:40 am

berto wrote:Maybe Rafiki can sticky this?

[color="Blue"]Sure :) [/color]

But to what extent does/will this overlap with http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=9125 ?
[CENTER]Latest patches: AACW :: NCP :: WIA :: ROP :: RUS :: PON :: AJE
Visit AGEWiki - your increasingly comprehensive source for information about AGE games
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
[/CENTER]

User avatar
bigus
General
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:43 pm

Fri Dec 12, 2008 1:02 am

Thanks Rafiki.
I was hopeing that this thread can be used exclusively for user made scenarios only. Not just my scenarios but all user made scenarios.
A place where people can post ,upload for testing and talk about scenario creation.
I do have a tutorial started. This will now be posted here.
Anyone interested in posting their creations can post or PM me and I will move their files to the first post of the thread.

Again many thanks for this Rafiki :thumbsup:

User avatar
bigus
General
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:43 pm

Fri Dec 12, 2008 1:09 am

berto wrote:
Is supply perhaps too harsh in this scenario?




For the Atlanta scenario I had this planned. For the Union I don't think it's much of a problem but for the South yes. I think it should be harsh.
If your talking about the North supply then I might have to have a look at how I set the supplies for them.

BTW I can send you the OOB for the Red River Campaign if you like.
The tutorial might be ready (in rough form) by sunday.

User avatar
Rafiki
Posts: 5811
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Oslo, Norway

Fri Dec 12, 2008 8:45 am

bigus wrote:Again many thanks for this Rafiki :thumbsup:

Sorry, but after thinking a bit more about this, I think we need to take a closer look at how we organize/showcase all mods for the AGE games. Since I jumped the gun a bit, I'll unsticky this again, but as long as you keep posting, it'll stay close to the top of the forum in any case :)
[CENTER]Latest patches: AACW :: NCP :: WIA :: ROP :: RUS :: PON :: AJE

Visit AGEWiki - your increasingly comprehensive source for information about AGE games

[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

[/CENTER]

User avatar
berto
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1386
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 7:13 pm
Location: Oak Park, IL, USA

Fri Dec 12, 2008 11:56 am

bigus wrote:For the Atlanta scenario I had this planned. For the Union I don't think it's much of a problem but for the South yes. I think it should be harsh.
If your talking about the North supply then I might have to have a look at how I set the supplies for them.

Supply seems to be the crux of this scenario. In a recent game, Northern forces had to give up the assault due to supply problems. Supply problems are good. I'm just wondering if the tight Northern supply constraints need to be relaxed a bit.

BTW I can send you the OOB for the Red River Campaign if you like.

That would be great! I can't afford to purchase Battles & Leaders of the Civil War or any other similar reference right now. Public library, here I come!


The tutorial might be ready (in rough form) by sunday.

More great! :thumbsup:
What this town needs is a good Renaissance band!

Early MusiChicago - Early Music in Chicago and Beyond - http://earlymusichicago.org

PIKT - Global-View, Site-at-a-Time System and Network Administration - http://pikt.org

AGElint - an AGE debugging toolkit - http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2978333

Your Mileage May Vary -- Always!

User avatar
lodilefty
Posts: 7552
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 3:27 pm
Location: Finger Lakes, NY GMT -5 US Eastern

Fri Dec 12, 2008 11:57 am

I think each modded scenario, model set, etc. should have a unique separate thread so a simple search on thread titles will locate the mod and any updates. Update data in first post of thread, with any 'bump' messages to notify people.

Long threads with multiple data sets get messy and hard to find things....
Always ask yourself: "Am I part of the Solution?" If you aren't, then you are part of the Problem!
[CENTER][/CENTER]
[CENTER]Visit AGEWiki - your increasingly comprehensive source for information about AGE games[/CENTER]

[CENTER]Rules for new members[/CENTER]
[CENTER]Forum Rules[/CENTER]

[CENTER]Help desk: support@slitherine.co.uk[/CENTER]

User avatar
berto
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1386
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 7:13 pm
Location: Oak Park, IL, USA

Fri Dec 12, 2008 11:59 am

Rafiki wrote:But to what extent does/will this overlap with http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=9125 ?


The other site is for all forms of modding. (And no offense to Brett, but his site is off the beaten path and easily overlooked.) I think Bigus' idea is a special place here to focus just on scenario creation.
What this town needs is a good Renaissance band!

Early MusiChicago - Early Music in Chicago and Beyond - http://earlymusichicago.org

PIKT - Global-View, Site-at-a-Time System and Network Administration - http://pikt.org

AGElint - an AGE debugging toolkit - http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2978333

Your Mileage May Vary -- Always!

User avatar
Rafiki
Posts: 5811
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Oslo, Norway

Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:22 pm

lodilefty wrote:I think each modded scenario, model set, etc. should have a unique separate thread so a simple search on thread titles will locate the mod and any updates. Update data in first post of thread, with any 'bump' messages to notify people.

This sounds a lot like what I am starting to think too :)
berto wrote:The other site is for all forms of modding. (And no offense to Brett, but his site is off the beaten path and easily overlooked.) I think Bigus' idea is a special place here to focus just on scenario creation.

Indeed; it would be good to find a way to get everything to mesh together in a good way :)
[CENTER]Latest patches: AACW :: NCP :: WIA :: ROP :: RUS :: PON :: AJE

Visit AGEWiki - your increasingly comprehensive source for information about AGE games

[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

[/CENTER]

User avatar
bigus
General
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:43 pm

Fri Dec 12, 2008 8:12 pm

lodilefty wrote:I think each modded scenario, model set, etc. should have a unique separate thread so a simple search on thread titles will locate the mod and any updates. Update data in first post of thread, with any 'bump' messages to notify people.

Long threads with multiple data sets get messy and hard to find things....


I don't understand your reasoning here. If each scenario is a seperate file posted to the first post of the thread then who cares what model files it has if it even has one. You can either download it or not. Not all scenarios posted so far are modded. They are Updates. The Vicksburg scenario is the only modded scenario and is clearly stated as such.

If you want to use the scenario then you can easily find it in the first post. This is a lot easier than looking through pages of posts or doing a search to find one particular scenario.

It does not make sense to me but it is what it is. Thank god it's only a game.
Life goes on....

User avatar
lodilefty
Posts: 7552
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 3:27 pm
Location: Finger Lakes, NY GMT -5 US Eastern

Fri Dec 12, 2008 9:28 pm

bigus wrote:I don't understand your reasoning here. If each scenario is a seperate file posted to the first post of the thread then who cares what model files it has if it even has one. You can either download it or not. Not all scenarios posted so far are modded. They are Updates. The Vicksburg scenario is the only modded scenario and is clearly stated as such.

If you want to use the scenario then you can easily find it in the first post. This is a lot easier than looking through pages of posts or doing a search to find one particular scenario.

It does not make sense to me but it is what it is. Thank god it's only a game.
Life goes on....


Semantics.

  • Start a thread with title of the scenario
  • Put the scenario files for it in first post.
  • Put changes to it in subsequent posts.
  • Don't put multiple scenarios in same thread.


..and if it's a variation from 'official', it's mod.
...and an update to a mod is a mod.

..and for me, I need clear understanding what's changed: additions, deletions, etc. so I can decide if I want to use the mod....
Always ask yourself: "Am I part of the Solution?" If you aren't, then you are part of the Problem!
[CENTER][/CENTER]

[CENTER]Visit AGEWiki - your increasingly comprehensive source for information about AGE games[/CENTER]



[CENTER]Rules for new members[/CENTER]

[CENTER]Forum Rules[/CENTER]



[CENTER]Help desk: support@slitherine.co.uk[/CENTER]

User avatar
bigus
General
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:43 pm

Fri Dec 12, 2008 11:31 pm

lodilefty wrote:Semantics.

  • Start a thread with title of the scenario
  • Put the scenario files for it in first post.
  • Put changes to it in subsequent posts.
  • Don't put multiple scenarios in same thread.

..and if it's a variation from 'official', it's mod.
...and an update to a mod is a mod.

..and for me, I need clear understanding what's changed: additions, deletions, etc. so I can decide if I want to use the mod....


So theoretically you feel having 20 seperate threads for 20 seperate scenarios...is the way to go?

Good one. (sarcasm....)

These are updates for my existing (now) vanilla scenarios. How can these be considered as Modded scenarios?


Since this thread is no longer stickied, I'll decide what I want to tell people about deletions and additions. I'll also post as many different scenarios as I see fit. If you feel this isn't good enough for you personally then don't download.

User avatar
lodilefty
Posts: 7552
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 3:27 pm
Location: Finger Lakes, NY GMT -5 US Eastern

Sat Dec 13, 2008 12:07 am

bigus wrote:So theoretically you feel having 20 seperate threads for 20 seperate scenarios...is the way to go?

Good one.

These are updates for my existing (now) vanilla scenarios. How can these be considered as Modded scenarios?


Since this thread is no longer stickied, I'll decide what I want to tell people about deletions and additions. I'll also post as many different scenarios as I see fit. If you feel this isn't good enough for you personally then don't download.


Probably won't then. Too hard to go looking, and I don't d/l unknown content.

Have fun. :D
Always ask yourself: "Am I part of the Solution?" If you aren't, then you are part of the Problem!
[CENTER][/CENTER]

[CENTER]Visit AGEWiki - your increasingly comprehensive source for information about AGE games[/CENTER]



[CENTER]Rules for new members[/CENTER]

[CENTER]Forum Rules[/CENTER]



[CENTER]Help desk: support@slitherine.co.uk[/CENTER]

User avatar
Gray_Lensman
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
Location: Who is John Galt?

Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:38 am

deleted

User avatar
bigus
General
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:43 pm

Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:02 am

Gray_Lensman wrote:Interesting. As an AACW beta, you recently wanted your work to be "officialized" but when asked for this same information regarding the changes and deletions made, which has always been the AGEod policy, you kind of gave me this same answer/attitude.

Like I continually stated in our PMs, I'll accept your work to be "officialized" and updated quite willingly as long as you give me supporting documentation to enable me to find all the changes you made. Without the information, it can't be accepted for the updates. I will not spend hours on each of your individual files searching them line by line just to find your changes, and especially deletions when all you have to do is document them as you make them, reducing the necessary copy/paste work to just a few minutes.

JastaV is courteous enough to provide supporting information regarding changes he makes to NCP files. (sometimes to the point of overload, :D ), but at least he gives the requested information. Might I politely inquire why, as a member of the AACW beta team, you won't provide this simple supporting information for your scenarios that AGEod has given you the honor of including in their official game scenarios?


Like I said to you. I don't feel I have to justify changes to my scenarios to you or anyone else. I never had to before and I won't start now.

In this case I did post the changes in the second post in case you missed it.

If you feel you need to co-ordinate every aspect of the game then maybe we should rename it "Gray Lensmen's American Civil War".

I personally don't care if my scenarios are "officialized" or not. I make them for my own personal enjoyment and I like to share. Not once did I force or recommend these scenarios be made Official.

I also stated to you via PM that I did'nt hold any grudges for your insistance that I document every change I make, I did'nt feel I had the time. Hence this Thread.

You don't want to sticky this thread....fine.

It was a request that was denied. I can live with that....

User avatar
Barker
Major
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 7:05 pm
Location: Walterboro, South Carolina

Sat Dec 13, 2008 12:05 pm

Here is an example that I consider a Scenario not a mod to the Vanilla: What if the bond drives in the south were excellent, what if the volunteer rate went through the roof, what if the supply at the start were phenomenal. Afew more generals at the start. Well that is what I did. I gave the CSA more money, more men, more supplies and more generals. But after the initial shock of superiority the south peters off after the mid point 62. Generals got killed etc. I did this in the 2 campaign April Scenario.

I would considered this a scenario and not a mod that effected the Vanilla game. You are right there should be one stop shopping for scenarios, updates, etc. You basically have to find what you need from various threads and then it may not work. Kudos for the escenario thread, you have my vote

User avatar
lodilefty
Posts: 7552
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 3:27 pm
Location: Finger Lakes, NY GMT -5 US Eastern

Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:26 pm

bigus wrote:<snip>
You don't want to sticky this thread....fine.

It was a request that was denied. I can live with that....


Why should it be stickied? No other mods are...
Always ask yourself: "Am I part of the Solution?" If you aren't, then you are part of the Problem!
[CENTER][/CENTER]

[CENTER]Visit AGEWiki - your increasingly comprehensive source for information about AGE games[/CENTER]



[CENTER]Rules for new members[/CENTER]

[CENTER]Forum Rules[/CENTER]



[CENTER]Help desk: support@slitherine.co.uk[/CENTER]

User avatar
berto
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1386
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 7:13 pm
Location: Oak Park, IL, USA

Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:07 pm

bigus wrote:I'm also trying to get together a web page and tutorial on scenario creation.
Web page is almost done but tut is yet to be started.


I hope that the controversies about sticky this and multi-thread that haven't derailed this web page initiative. However it's organized or presented, collaborative effort on scenario creation should be encouraged to continue.

Not to start another controversy, but rather than launch a (new?) web page, would it be better to add a tutorial and other stuff about scenario creation to the existing AACW Wiki?

But if you mean this to be graphics-intensive, and if the Wiki or this Forum won't accommodate your plans, if a "Web page" is called for, so be it. Will this be hosted at the Brett Schulte's "TOCWOC - A Civil War Blog" website? Or a new website?
What this town needs is a good Renaissance band!

Early MusiChicago - Early Music in Chicago and Beyond - http://earlymusichicago.org

PIKT - Global-View, Site-at-a-Time System and Network Administration - http://pikt.org

AGElint - an AGE debugging toolkit - http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2978333

Your Mileage May Vary -- Always!

User avatar
Gray_Lensman
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
Location: Who is John Galt?

Sat Dec 13, 2008 11:21 pm

deleted

User avatar
bigus
General
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:43 pm

Sun Dec 14, 2008 3:01 am

Gray_Lensman wrote:Then why did you give permission to AGEod to include your scenarios in the "official" game patches?

What is really going on here, is that you, for some reason, have decided that you want to maintain your scenarios as MODs, and bypass the update process, which I have absolutely no argument against, though I'm not sure how AGEod will perceive it, since you previously gave permission for them to "officialize" your scenarios. Personally, I'm recommending that they be relinquished back to you to do as you see fit, since you don't want to support the normal update process. A process which incidentally has always been the same as long as you provided the information to find the changed lines either by highlighting, or supplying separate documentation to allow the changed information to be easily found so as to be imported into the "official" versions of your scenarios. Anyone having to import work from one file into another file can understand why some sort of way to identify the changes would be necessary.


I never gave them "Permission" to use anything. I simply submitted the Xls files and they were included into the patchs.

This was how it used to be........ Then a couple of patchs later and you wanted me to highlight all my changes. This was O.K with me , so I highlighted the changes. Then this last round you Insisted that I document all changes including deleted lines! or my changes would not be submitted. I felt this was to much for me and told you so. I also told you I was going to post the updates in the Forums instead since I did'nt have the time to give you what you needed. You seemed to be alright with this. What happened?


Gray_Lensman wrote:Back to you bigus:

Your paranoia over these scenarios has even gone so far as to cause you to send me PMs accusing me of making changes to your scenarios without your permission. At those times, I actually thought I had made an accidental change and spent well over a day trying to ascertain when I might have done the change(s). I installed every update from the time of your scenarios' first inclusion. In these cases, each time I found out that the particular setting was exactly as you had submitted it from the very start. For everyone else's information reading this, this happened more than once. After the second time, I resolved not to bother checking again... (Boy who cried "Wolf" syndrome). Above you state "Not once did I force or recommend these scenarios be made Official" and yet somehow they are... Is this another memory lapse?


I don't recall accusing you of making changes to any scenario!
What I do recall, was asking you if you changed a city since I had a VP location in that spot. (62 East scenario) I realized the mistake was mine and apologized. I believe you had the memory lapse here.


Gray_Lensman wrote:For your information and everyone else's, barring my separate RR work and efforts to remove bugs and other deficiencies, you have enjoyed the most influence in regard to game input. You completely designed 4 scenarios from the ground up, and reworked the 1862 East and West single theatre Scenarios, all of which are now included in the game, because at some time or other you gave AGEod permission to "officialize" them, and then you willingly submitted them to AGEod to have them included in the game patches.

Like I said above, I personally have absolutely no problem with your scenarios being relinquished back to you to do with as you see fit, but I will no longer tolerate the insinuation that you want your scenarios back because I was somehow blocking your work. In reality, you were just too darn stubborn to supply the necessary information to make it easy for me to actually import your work. This is not good beta behavior, since the idea of a beta is to actually supply not withhold information for the overall enhancement of the game.



I never asked for my scenarios back? why would I want them back? I have my own working copys of all my scenarios. You can do whatever you like with your copies.


Gray_Lensman wrote:Finally, your comment above "Gray_Lensman's American Civil War" would normally be taken as a compliment towards me, but it is easy to tell that it was not made in that regard... The ironic thing is that for all the work I have indeed done for the AACW game, my name is not to be found anywhere in any of the data files, nor do I care, yet every scenario you touch and submit to me has been altered by you to show your name in blazing green and white standout colors, even those which you did not originally author. The ones that you didn't author actually do get edited back to the original author but your own designed scenarios retain your flashy credit in the .xls files


Whatever. I don't recall highlighting them. I don't recall takeing credit out for the original author of the 62 East and West scenario. I believe I had it at (PhilThibault and me). Why wouldnt I fill in the cell that says "Scenario author".

User avatar
bigus
General
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:43 pm

Sun Dec 14, 2008 3:07 am

berto wrote:I hope that the controversies about sticky this and multi-thread that haven't derailed this web page initiative. However it's organized or presented, collaborative effort on scenario creation should be encouraged to continue.

Not to start another controversy, but rather than launch a (new?) web page, would it be better to add a tutorial and other stuff about scenario creation to the existing AACW Wiki?

But if you mean this to be graphics-intensive, and if the Wiki or this Forum won't accommodate your plans, if a "Web page" is called for, so be it. Will this be hosted at the Brett Schulte's "TOCWOC - A Civil War Blog" website? Or a new website?


I'll probably post the tutorial here first. I don't think the file will be that big .I'm a little short on time so its the tutorial first and the web page (looking like a site now).

User avatar
bigus
General
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:43 pm

Sun Dec 14, 2008 3:13 am

Barker wrote:Here is an example that I consider a Scenario not a mod to the Vanilla: What if the bond drives in the south were excellent, what if the volunteer rate went through the roof, what if the supply at the start were phenomenal. Afew more generals at the start. Well that is what I did. I gave the CSA more money, more men, more supplies and more generals. But after the initial shock of superiority the south peters off after the mid point 62. Generals got killed etc. I did this in the 2 campaign April Scenario.


If you have a file that you want to share, post it or send it to me via PM.
I will move it to the first post of the Thread.

User avatar
Gray_Lensman
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
Location: Who is John Galt?

Sun Dec 14, 2008 6:44 am

deleted

User avatar
Barker
Major
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 7:05 pm
Location: Walterboro, South Carolina

Sun Dec 14, 2008 8:16 am

I know what Gray is speaking of I am a developer in the CAD environment. We have to supply the following:
1. Summary of enhancements or detraction from redundancies.
2. Impact of end users
3. Supply a Was and and Is Report
4. Supply an impacted files list.
5. Checklist of command structure
6. Approval Form

I really understad the necessity of documentation but sometimes that documentation can result in an extreme micromanagement of sorts. Gray you do a good job and thanks for your work but remember this is a game that is played for fun. I make enhancements using the raw files noth the XLS stuff. It is easier for me to modify without the conversion thing. I rarely play by email so the stuff I do impacts my version. If I screw up I reinstall. No harm no foul. Also one must be careful in back engineering this stuff so it won't trample on the terms of agreement and infringement. I like this game because to tell you the truth it is enjoyable. Afew items I would like to bring up, there should be a process for official inclusion of any addition to the game that is incorporated into the updates. For the general modder and user there is always workarounds for these mods. I had an experience with a competitor of sorts of yours. I was doing an extensive mod in a game. They encrypted a certain file that you could not modify basic element structure without submitting them for approval. That is not good. I decided at the time well so be it, so I quit my mod and enhancement. The community lost out because I accepted the fact that my mods were not going to be dictated to how it should go together. If one does mods on their own game why should it matter to anyone? Any improvement to a game is better then no improvement.

Marc

User avatar
Gray_Lensman
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
Location: Who is John Galt?

Sun Dec 14, 2008 8:25 am

deleted

User avatar
Barker
Major
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 7:05 pm
Location: Walterboro, South Carolina

Sun Dec 14, 2008 8:29 am

Gray, actually to the scenario designer and modder the process can be avoided by posting directly to the thread...it is up to the person downloading the file if he chooses to install it or not. If there is some biggage so be it, it does get fixed. For official inclusion I agree with you but for strictly user mods is it necessary?

User avatar
bigus
General
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:43 pm

Sun Dec 14, 2008 8:38 am

Gray_Lensman wrote:First off, just because you make changes to a scenario, doesn't make you the scenario author. It's the reason I never place my own name in any of the database files, and believe me, I have made more corrections and changes to these files than you could ever dream of. Fortunately, (or unfortunately depending on your viewpoint), I have kept records of all database changes done over the last year.

To perhaps help you to recall since you obviously only want to remember things for your own convenience, I have attached below 5 examples of Shiloh, a scenario originally authored by Philippe Thibaut way back when the game was first released. The first example is a screen shot of the last time it was properly credited to Philippe before you started changing these names (v1.10b dated 20080531). The next three examples got by me and were included in the "official" AACW_DB files. Finally the last example was caught by me and corrected back to Philippe Thibaut's name for the current database files (v1.12a dated 20081203). I don't know what your intentions were but this is a form of plagiarism and is another reason I started insisting on full documentation of any changes you were making to the scenario files, so that I would not miss any more of these and inadvertently forward them to the official AACW_DB files for public release.

I'm sorry to expose your dirty laundry like this, but your public answers only put forth your particular viewpoint and conveniently leave out the things you don't wish to acknowledge, making me look like the obstacle here.

Finally, I am a voluntary coordinator for a reason. That reason is to help reduce the workload of the AGEod programmer/developers so that they can put their time into their more important work of actual game code implementation. If, for example, I work 200+ hours on AACW for them, I have saved the actual programmers the same 200+ hours. I also think it's perfectly reasonable to expect someone that has actually accepted beta status to cooperate by furnishing supporting documentation of his own individual changes.
.


Now your accusing me of plagiarism.

I do consider myself to be one of the scenario authors because I made many changes to this scenario including practically everything to do with the scenario including region blocking, VP's, supply, etc. It seems to me that this scenario was just thrown out there similar to Gettysburg. It's not like I replaced Phils name with my own. I think this bothers you more than it does me.

Edit for post above>> I also did'nt accuse you of standing in the way of scenario changes. I stated that I simply don't have the time to document every change that you need. That is why I started this Thread! that is to say That now I can just post a scenario. I don't have to worry about documenting everything. For one I'm not good at it and secondly I feel I could be doing other things instead.

Let me make this perfectly clear to you Gray.... This is a game. I do this stuff for fun.

Return to “AACW Mods”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest