* *

Translations for our friends around the world.

Click on banner for Schwerpunkt website

 Save

Author Topic: AGW v1.2 Scenario(s) (probable discrepancies)  (Read 1323 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Gray_Lensman

  • New member
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • New member
AGW v1.2 Scenario(s) (probable discrepancies)
« on: December 10, 2016, 07:15:28 AM »
While waiting for more progress on WWII-E I decided to install and take another look at AGW itself (patched up to its latest release v1.2)

I have a collection of .Zip files for corrected AGW scenarios that are labelled v1.01 (presumably scenario fixes released just after v1.0 of AGW was released back in approx. 2005).

These scenario zip files and the accompanying scenario text files are for AGW scens 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 43.

Since I have a rather helpful Public release File Compare utility, I used it to make comparisons between the various versions of these particular scenario text files, first off comparing these v1.01 fixes to the original v1.0 scenario text files to assess what was originally intended to be fixed.

Following that, I then ran File Compare(s) between the v1.01 scenario text file fixes and the v1.1 and the final v1.2 scenario text file fixes. The results were rather surprising. It appears that quite a few (not all, but most) of the v1.01 fixes were subsequently left out of AGW v1.1 and v1.2 scenario text files and the resulting scenario builds. My assumption at that point was that maybe Ron had reevaluated those files and the v1.01 fixes were superceded by a rethinking of the scenario designs but closer examination of the specific details of these v1.01 changes reveals that most of those changes should have remained in the later versions of AGW, most importantly v1.2 the final version.

Below are examples of v1.01 changes for scenario(s) that did not make it to the AGW update v1.2 scenario(s).

Quote
AGW Scenario 1 (Blitzkrieg 1939-1941), OOB corrections and additions

Unit149   (Germany FK5 AirHQ) set to enter turn 12, was incorrectly set to turn 1.
Unit900   (Holland Wnk HighCmd) set to start with 140 supply points, was 132 points. This brings it inline with the other HighCmds starting values.
Unit2511 (Italy 9A Army HQ linked to Unit2503 (Italy Alb HighCmd HQ), was linked to Unit2500 (Italy Mus HighCmd HQ).
Unit2512 (Italy 11A Army HQ linked to Unit2503 (Italy Alb HighCmd HQ), was linked to Unit 2500 (Italy Mus HighCmd HQ).
Unit2502 (Italy Sar Army HQ) changed to HighCmd HQ. Note that this allows supply to get to the Italian troops on Sardinia via Naval Supply Ops.
Unit2506 (Italy Cor Army HQ) changed to HighCmd HQ. Note that this will allow supplying Italian troops on Corsica via Naval Supply Ops if the Italians decide to invade and seize Corsica from France. Also note that there are 2 HighCmd  HQs on Sardinia. Since (Italy Sar HighCmd HQ is the first in the Unit array, it will be the one to receive supplies via Naval ops.
Unit2660 (Germany AGA HighCmd HQ) created to allow for an Operation “Sea Lion” if so desired by the Axis player. This unit appears in Kassel (109,77) on May 5, 1940.

Quote
The following changes have been made to Scenario #7 Crete

1. Italy - 26th mountain XX arrives after scenario end. - deployed on turn 1
2. Italy - 80th airborne XX arrives after scenario end. - deployed on turn 1

Quote
The following changes have been made to Scenario #9 Western Desert Force

1. Italy - high command needed for africa - 'Lib' high command added in Benghazi
2. Italy - 10th army HQ should be in Tobruk, otherwise lost on turn 1 - moved to Tobruk, changed from HC to Army

Quote
The following changes have been made to Scenario #12 Brevity and Battleaxe

1. Germany - DAK high command subordinated to Mus

Quote
The following changes have been made to Scenario #14 Cyrenaica Again

1. Italy - 'Bal' army HQ should be a HignCmd attached to 'Mus' corrected
2. Germany - 12th army HQ is directly attached to 'Mus'. attach to Bal army - corrected

Quote
The following changes have been made to Scenario #15 The Cauldron and Tobruk

1. Germany - 12th army HQ is directly attached to 'Mus'. attach to Bal army - corrected
2. Italy - Bal army should be a HC - corrected

Quote
AGW Scenario 43 (AGW Campaign 1939-1945), OOB corrections and additions

* Unit1210 UK HighCmd information swapped with Unit1099 (which was blank) to make it the “first” UK HighCmd unit for supply allocation purposes.  All other previous UK units linked to Unit1210 were corrected to link to Unit1099.
* Unit417 changed type to “Fighter” was incorrectly set to “Bomber”.
* Unit429 changed “Fighter” to “JG”.
* Unit430 changed “Bomber” to “SG”.
* Unit2169 Ger 5A HQ incorrectly located in Holland at start (92,70), relocated to start in (92,90) same as Scen01 location.
* 815_city (Durazzo, Albania) set to Axis control at start, was incorrectly set to Allied control.
* 822_city (Scutari, Albania) set to Axis control at start, was incorrectly set to Allied control.
* 836_city (Tirana, Albania) set to Axis control at start, was incorrectly set to Allied control.
* Unit541 (Poland “Skw” Infantry Corps HQ) linked to Unit535 (Poland “Pru” Army HQ), was incorrectly linked to Unit538 (Poland “Dre” Cavalry Corps HQ).
* Unit3400 (England “FoH” marked as NavalHQ, was incorrectly marked as Fleet.
* Unit788 (France 18 Corps HQ) linked to Unit780 (France 2A Army HQ), was incorrectly linked to itself.
* Unit2503 (Italy Alb Army HQ) changed to HighCmd HQ. Note that this allows supply to get to the Italian troops in Albania via Naval Supply Ops.
* Unit2511 (Italy 9A Army HQ linked to Unit2503 (Italy Alb HighCmd HQ), was linked to Unit2500 (Italy Mus HighCmd HQ).
* Unit2512 (Italy 11A Army HQ) linked to Unit2503 (Italy Alb HighCmd HQ), was linked to Unit 2500 (Italy Mus HighCmd HQ).

Now for the good news...

Ron, I know you are busy with your priority project WWII-E so I'm in the process of making the above scenario changes (for myself for now) along with some additional (non v1.01) errors I also found with v1.2 scenario .txt files. Contact me if you are interested in having this work forwarded to you to save you the time of going back to work on AGW right now.

Regards

Gray_Lensman

Offline blond_knight

  • New member
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • New member
Re: AGW v1.2 Scenario(s) (probable discrepancies)
« Reply #1 on: December 14, 2016, 06:26:26 PM »
Nice job Gray, I'd say definitely post those scenarios text files here once you're done.
Is the utility you're using free?

Offline Gray_Lensman

  • New member
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • New member
Re: AGW v1.2 Scenario(s) (probable discrepancies)
« Reply #2 on: December 15, 2016, 11:18:35 PM »
Nice job Gray, I'd say definitely post those scenarios text files here once you're done.

Hi blond_Knight

Since those scenario files are the official scenarios, I won't be posting those scenario files without direct confirmation from Ron that the discrepancies were accidental and that they should be fixed. (explanation: I don't want to be responsible for different AGW gamers having different versions of the official scenarios if they play PBEM)

Quote
Is the utility you're using free?

re: FCOMPARE

Yes, It is rather rudimentary and just requires manual installation by creating your own folder (a.k.a) directory and copying the files into that same folder.
Also, you will need to create your own shortcut of the executable FCOMPARE.EXE

The author even included a text file explaining how to register it for free usage once installed.

It is a little clumsy to use since it was probably initially designed for use under MS Windows 95 LOL. Nevertheless it's functional with some practice.

It compares any file in any format but is most handy for the "Notepad/ascii type" formatted .txt files whether named .txt or some other equivalent.

One caveat... the files to be compared have to have the exact same names in separate folders which requires a little judicious file manipulations some times, but using this you can compare most anything by just doing a little filename manipulation to make the filenames match for the comparison.

It even has an editing function which I've never used preferring to pop up a separate Notepad box and making the corrections in an entirely separate third copy of the same text file thereby preventing any possible contamination/corruption of the two compared copies. After which I again compare the newly edited file to the original to ensure the fix. It does the comparison on a line by line basis so sometimes it is hard to see the difference(s) within the highlighted line if the difference is just an upper/lower case difference. (I noticed this in some of Ron's files when he used an "H" interchangeably with an "h" in some of his HighCmd unit definitions.

Regards

Since it is "Freeware" I attached it below
« Last Edit: December 16, 2016, 12:22:19 AM by Gray_Lensman »

Offline blond_knight

  • New member
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • New member
Re: AGW v1.2 Scenario(s) (probable discrepancies)
« Reply #3 on: December 16, 2016, 02:12:11 PM »
OK thanks for posting the tool.

Sorry I should have stated my thought was you would post these as "your modded scenarios" so as not to confuse them with the default ones.

Offline Gray_Lensman

  • New member
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • New member
Re: AGW v1.2 Scenario(s) (probable discrepancies)
« Reply #4 on: December 16, 2016, 03:49:59 PM »
OK thanks for posting the tool.

Sorry I should have stated my thought was you would post these as "your modded scenarios" so as not to confuse them with the default ones.

I actually understood you to mean exactly that but in my mind these are NOT mods but probable discrepancies in "official" scenarios that at one time were actually "officially" fixed. They need to be addressed by Ron most likely as an AGW update. He's still selling AGW and all customers deserve to have the "official" scenarios fixed. I've done most of the work for him so I'm waiting for a reply.

I'm also working on an updated AGW User's Guide (incorporating/embedding the updates/fixes in bold red) in .doc and .pdf formats.  (including the Reference Card w/fixes also)

The manual is almost done, (in the proof reading stage to be followed by The Table of Contents paging with internal hyperlinks I hope), but the reference card  is going to be a bit of a challenge (graphically) in order to incorporate the update/changes.

AND... while I'm putting together the guide I'm really learning the game's minute details that I've missed just jumping into the game with a quick preliminary read thru.

I won't be posting the guide/reference card either, unless I get the okay from Ron because of copyright/piracy concerns. Who knows, maybe he will like them enough to package them with a future AGW update? The manual already looks pretty much identical to the printed manual including the front cover art and fonts.  :)
« Last Edit: December 18, 2016, 06:28:17 AM by Gray_Lensman »

Offline Gray_Lensman

  • New member
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • New member
Re: AGW v1.2 Scenario(s) (probable discrepancies)
« Reply #5 on: December 18, 2016, 06:50:53 PM »
Seems I left out a few discrepancy/changes to Scenario 43 in the OP above... (For some reason I can't modify the OP directly maybe because it's the first post?)

Quote
Unit2502 (Italy Sar Army HQ) changed to HighCmd HQ. Note that this allows supply to get to the Italian troops on Sardinia via Naval Supply Ops.
Unit2506 (Italy Cor Army HQ) changed to HighCmd HQ. Note that this will allow supplying Italian troops on Corsica via Naval Supply Ops if the Italians decide to invade and seize Corsica from France. Also note that there are 2 HighCmd  HQs on Sardinia. Since (Italy Sar HighCmd HQ is the first in the Unit array, it will be the one to receive supplies via Naval ops.
Unit2509 (Italy 10A Army HQ) changed to HighCmd HQ. Note that this allows supply to get to the North African Italian troops via Naval Supply Ops.
Unit3001 (Germany AGA HighCmd HQ) created to allow for an Operation “Sea Lion” if so desired by the Axis player. This unit appears in Kassel (109,77) on May 5, 1940.
Unit1253 (England F12 AirHQ) marked as HQ (i.e. “n n n n n” changed to “y n n n y”)  actually was supposed to be changed in v1.2 update

Offline Gray_Lensman

  • New member
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • New member
Re: AGW v1.2 Scenario(s) (probable discrepancies)
« Reply #6 on: December 19, 2016, 01:10:33 AM »
It's beginning to make sense...

Instead of a reevaluation as originally assumed...

I'm pretty much convinced that what happened with these missing v1.01 fixes is that when Ron applied his v1.1 update fixes, he accidentally applied the new v1.1 fixes to the older original v1.0 files instead of the interim v1.01 scenario fix files and then shipped out the v1.1 AGW update executable fix file that included those misapplied fixes. These then carried forward to the v1.2 AGW update executable which also left out the v1.01 fixes above
« Last Edit: December 19, 2016, 01:24:45 AM by Gray_Lensman »