ABattlemap P40 BETA module

@P@nther:

Thank you.

But I was thinking of the compatibility of Soney’s P40-modules with Atillas P40-modules.
Maybe in a forum game one player uses Stoney’s modules, the other uses Atillas’s modules - in this case there may be compatibility issues.

But what I found out up to now is that Stoney’s modules seem to be more elaborated then Atillas’s. On Atilla’s map for example there are some markers for NO missing.
And the “6” for Burma road are not removed from the Info view when the Chinese marker is removed.

All this works flawlessly in Stoney’s modules.
So thank you again, Stoney :-)

My “original” module is just an updated version of Atilla’s module.  The intent was to fix problems and add whatever features I could without breaking compatibility.  That’s why when I added the toolbar, I labeled it BETA, since it breaks compatibility. with the original(s).  Idk why the Burma road income works different, I don’t remember ever noticing that problem, let alone fixing it  :wink:, except that I changed it to “oil”.

My best guess for what he updated is the convoy system to support the Pacific 1940 convoy system.  If I’m right, that will certainly be handy, but I need to check.  Thanks for the heads up!

@Stoney229:

@P@nther:

Thank you.

But I was thinking of the compatibility of Soney’s P40-modules with Atillas P40-modules.
Maybe in a forum game one player uses Stoney’s modules, the other uses Atillas’s modules - in this case there may be compatibility issues.

But what I found out up to now is that Stoney’s modules seem to be more elaborated then Atillas’s. On Atilla’s map for example there are some markers for NO missing.
And the “6” for Burma road are not removed from the Info view when the Chinese marker is removed.

All this works flawlessly in Stoney’s modules.
So thank you again, Stoney :-)

My “original” module is just an updated version of Atilla’s module.  The intent was to fix problems and add whatever features I could without breaking compatibility.  That’s why when I added the toolbar, I labeled it BETA, since it breaks compatibility. with the original(s).  Idk why the Burma road income works different, I don’t remember ever noticing that problem, let alone fixing it  :wink:, except that I changed it to “oil”.

My best guess for what he updated is the convoy system to support the Pacific 1940 convoy system.  If I’m right, that will certainly be handy, but I need to check.  Thanks for the heads up!

Ok, i haven’t installed it yet, but after taking a look at some of the text files in Atilla’s P40 module (which is actually brand new, even tho it doesn’t say so), this is what seems to me:
the only change he seems to have made in the new module, which required an updated program to support it, is a feature that automatically calculates NO’s when you’ve captured the right territories.  Not all NO’s can be represented this way - namely, the 1-time ANZAC one and the US at war one.  That is why the others are no longer found on the map, except Burma Rd.  Until looking into it further, my best guess is that the Burma road marker was left on the map on accident, and means nothing.  That is why when P@nther removed his chinese flag from the rectangle, it was not reflected in the infoview - because he still actually owned all of the Burma Rd.  Does that make sense?

I started a new job and won’t be able to work much on these modules, but I will do the best I can, and hopefully will have some time on my days off to figure some things out and make some updates, but i don’t know yet.

Question:  Do people want this new feature?  I’m not sure I don’t like it better the old way, because I can just hover over the marker to see what I need in order to obtain that objective.  Without those markers on the map, I have to already know what all the NOs are b/c the markers are no longer on the map.  Also, even if I do figure out how to make a module which utilizes the new feature, I would think it will be more difficult/complicated to make than one that just does NOs the old way, so not using the new feature also saves module-makers some time (I am thinking) and save users from having upgrade their program.

On the other hand, I may likely try to figure out how to utilize the new feature anyway, so let me know if it’s indeed something people want.  What do you think?

@ksmckay:

The price for CV is incorrect in the beta module.  It is listed as 18 rather than 16.  Courtesy Maxo.

Everything else is looking good.

@Battlingmaxo:

Also not sure if the airfield , naval base prices are listed as the bottom of the map and info view are slightly truncated on my desktop. Does this have something to do w/1600 x 1200 resolution?  It only affects the infoview on my AA50 modules.

I’m guessing you mean the program is showing 16 not 18.  Thank you for pointing it out - I’ll change it.  While I’m changing toolpiece values, I have a suggestion and request people’s input once again.

Currently, the “Hit BB” amd “Hit CV” pieces are worth 18 and 20, respectively.  I think it would be easier if they were, instead, “BB hit” and “CV hit” pieces, worth 0 IPC each, so that you just add and take away the hits, instead of having to swap them for the pieces that are already on the board.  Does that make sense?  What would other people prefer?

Also: ICs are currently listed in Infoview as with the land assets, but ABs and NBs aren’t.  I prefer that neither are listed, so that the Infoview just shows unit assets.  Again, what would other people prefer?

Also, Atilla included a BigPieces file in his new module, which means I was able to just borrow designs from him to make a better Bigpieces file.  Questioneer: sorry to ruin your fun if you were making one, but if you want to make a better one than this one and post it, maybe I can include it in the next update.

@ksmckay:

No, for the prices the CV should be 16 not 18.  The cost of a carrier is 16 not 18.  This is in reference to the bottom right chart.

Looks like it is correctly valued in terms of calculating unit values on the map.  If I place a carrier in a sea zone then it increases the navy value by 16 as it should.

Yeah the hits are a little annoying.  You either swap them as it is now, or you do what you said and just take away and add hits.  Problem with that is now when moving you have to move more stuff since you have to move the hits and the AC.  I think its probably easier just to keep it as it is but maybe others feel differently.

Actually, I’m pretty sure CVs are 18 in P40.  remember, they take 2 hits now, not to mention they can now carry 2 different kinds of aircraft.  The InfoView was showing them as 16, so I changed that, and will upload the new updated module when I hear from some more people regarding preferences of Infoview values for hit ships, ICs, and bases.

I also changed the Mongolians to actual pieces, in case a player attacks Buyant-Uhaa and retreats after killing only 1.  If people have a problem with this, let me know.

@ksmckay:

Yeah, they are definitely 16 (they used to be 18)  I attached a scan of the rulebook just so there is no doubt.

I also would prefer to leave naval bases, airbases, and ICs off the infoview and leave it strictly for actual forces.

Wow so sorry I thought for sure I had read 18 but my memory failed me.

Looks like the consensus is to leave hit  ships on the infoview, take ICs off, and leave bases off.  So that’s what I’ll do, and I let you know as soon as I can get a new module uploaded.  Thanks for your input!

alright the new module is up you can link to it from the first post.  The only matter of incompatibility with the previous version is that save files using the new module will show up on the previous module with blank white pieces in place of the mongolians.  I hope you enjoy!  As always, feedback/suggestions/criticisms appreciated!