Author Topic: New Development Snapshot 0.47.1 for Megamek, MegaMekLab, and MekHQ  (Read 4773 times)

Hammer

  • Numerorum Malleo
  • Global Moderator
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4101
    • MegaMek Website
Hi Everyone,

So it's been a few months since the last dev release, and this one is going to be huge! Lots of new cool stuff. So I remind everyone this is development release and all this new goodness means LOTS of chances of bugs. So make sure you keep backups of your games.

**FOR MAC USERS**
There isn't a Mac release and you'll have to use the Unix release. We are having issues with the Gradle packaging scripts and various security settings in MacOS.  We are working on the issue and have no ETA for a fix.

Megamek.
Lots of bug fixes that will carry over into MegaMekLab. Princess has learned to turn the lights on when fighting at night. We've got new maps from Derv and Simon Landmine. But the biggie is Support Vees. A huge amount of work has gone into Megamek to support the building of Support Vehicles. This is the first step in getting some new unit types playable. Soon you'll be able to have the Great Train Robbery with a Steiner Recon lance.

MegaMekLab.
Some bug fixes, and big one is Support Vehicle Construction includes ground, S/M naval, and fixed wing; airship, satellite, and large naval). At last we have a splash screen for MegaMekLab(from the amazing SpOoky777). This completes the linked sets of splash screens. One note on Support Vee's we still need to work on the Record Sheet printing.

MekHQ.
Ok, we've talked about it a lot and it's here. The Planetary system refactor. See a specific overview on our website for what's changed. We've got bug fixes, some UI improvements, the new Scenario Objectives tool is coming along(more on that soon), a markdown editor, for the AtB players(new and old) have a look at the new AtB Starter Guide by CampaignAnon in the docs folder. Oh, and yes we've add Support Vee support into MekHQ.

Also a reminder to drop into the Slack channel to meet other players and harass the devs that drop in and out. 

As a reminder when moving between versions:
1)   Make backups of your campaigns and customs.
2)   Always treat each release as a stand alone release and only copy your data forward from older versions.

There is a good chance you’ll have issues in MekHQ with unit name changes.  If you get errors loading your campaign as result of unit name errors please see this post.
Name Issues with units
The change log below lists all the changes in this release from the previous stable.

CHANGE LOGS AND DOWNLOAD LINKS
Megamek.
Download Here
Code: [Select]
+ Issue #1315: add support for map annotations and description to .board files.
+ PR #1451: Enable bot use of searchlights when necessary
+ Account for all bay types in large craft cost calculations.
+ Bug: Vehicle reduced to half movement not considered heavy damage
+ PR #1473: Allow the bot to gracefully handle deployment of grounded dropships on maps with no valid places to put them
+ PR #1474: TRO display in MegaMek lobby displays data for gun emplacements
+ Issue #1459: Using XXL(Clan) fusion engine on combat vehicle by mixed IS tech is not loaded properly
+ Issue #1481: Selecting the Adelante Train throws IndexOutOfBounds Exception
+ PR #1484: JS/SS max armor calculation (affects validation and MML).
+ PR #1478: Grounded Dropships and Individual Weapons (implements errata).
+ PR #1488: Nuclear warheads for large craft properly differentiate themselves from their standard versions when swapping ammo
+ Issue #1490: Fixed Ramshackle quirk description
+ Issue #1489: Fix jet booster and supercharger weight calculations
+ Issue #1500: Avoid NRE in BotClient::getStartingCoordsArray
+ Issue #1508: #1261 was never merged properly.
+ Data: Fixing the Hercules in the mechset again.
+ Bug: Some weapons missing their Aerospace attack values.
+ Bug/Data: Fixing various validation errors.
+ Issue #708: Errata indicates swarming battle armor should not be immune to fire.
+ Issue #1517: Fix for multiple NPEs caused by phantom transported units
+ Data: New Sprites/New Boards from Derv.
+ Issue #1480: Mech Mortar Smoke round is unavailable
+ Updating the Simon Landmine Map Pack.
+ PR #1519: Validation for support vehicles, corrections to many of the support vehicle unit files.
+ PR #1521: Multiple fixes and errata related to handling of large craft missile weapons;
 grounded dropships can now fire missiles as artillery;
 grounded dropships cannot directly fire capital weapons at ground targets;
+ PR #1527/Issue #1303: Mostly implemented current TW rules for movement of spheroid dropships in atmosphere
+ PR #1530: Treat fixed wing support vehicles as support vehicles instead of conventional fighters for cost calculation.
+ Issue #1516: Rotary RAC does not generate extra heat when rapid firing
+ Issue #1523: Fixes to 3145 FWL RATs
+ Issue #1514: Some Protomechs Missing Map Art
+ Issue #1454: RS:SW New Mechs are listed as Level 2 instead of Level 1

MegaMekLab.
Download Here
Code: [Select]
+ Issue #174: Replace Java-based open dialog with OS native dialog
+ Issue #337: Cost Calculation / Rules: Repair Facility on Space Stations
+ PR #346: Allow command console with superheavy/small cockpit
+ Issue #341: Sort the database won't work well in decimal point level
+ Issue #344: Attempt to changing Protomech's armor to Electric Discharge makes the unit keep invalid when using Standard armor
+ PR #351: Allow superheavy industrial mechs
+ Issue #352: Large engine crits not allocated correctly
+ PR #339: Support vehicle construction (includes ground, S/M naval, and fixed wing; airship, satellite, and large naval
still require MegaMek support).
+ PR #358: Splash Screen

MekHQ:
**WE'VE DISCOVERED A COUPLE OF SIGNIFICANT BUGS IN THIS RELEASE FOR MEKHQ AND HAVE REMOVED THE DOWNLOAD.**
Code: [Select]
+ PR #1259: Fix map size display for AtB scenarios in the briefing tab (cosmetic issue only)
+ Data - Updating the AtB Starter Guide to v3, thanks CampaignAnon
+ Issue #1257: Don't double up salaries when charging for peacetime costs
+ PR #1268: Fix money formatting in prisoner ransom messages
+ Issue #1274: Fix About window closing immediately
+ Issue #1275: Fix zero sized dialogs (Edit Biography, etc)
+ Issue #1273: Updated edge cost for AtB to match current rules
+ PR #1288: Allow the large craft ammo swap dialog to switch AR10, missile and artillery munitions properly
+ PR #1282: Fix erroneously high unit values
+ PR #1294: Improve ammo swaps and refits of Large Craft ammo bins
+ PR #1298: Restructuring of person view panel, double scroll issue, and other scrolling issues
+ PR #1300: Markdown for descriptions
+ PR #1280: planetary system refactor
+ PR #1305: Mac OSX key bindings on non-standard look and feel
+ PR #1304: Markdown Editor
+ PR #1303: Various GUI fixes
+ Issue #1290: Fixes for issues with campaign subset export.
+ PR #1309: Planetary System Map
+ PR #1314: a few map fixes
+ PR #1286,1307: Scenario Objectives - explicit objective management system for legacy AtB scenarios;
Ability to define objectives for scenario templates.
+ PR #1317: fix NPE that halts new day processing while applying training XP
+ PR #1318: player units given to other players now properly return to the campaign during scenario resolution.
+ Issue #1308: Fix NPE when the campaign folder is not present
+ PR #1315: Rescalable images for unit view panel when fluff image exists
+ PR #1320: Customize support vehicles in the MekLab.
+ PR #1321: For scenarios generated from templates, the ability to explicitly assign forces/units to different player force templates.
+ PR #1324: corrected icon map
Enjoy everyone
« Last Edit: 11 November 2019, 11:11:05 by Hammer »
MegaMek Projects Wiki
Bug Trackers
MegaMek Tracker
MekHQ Tracker
MegaMekLab Tracker
New Units and RAT's aren't added until after the 2 month release moratorium is passed.
Join the official MegaMek Discord

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 19825
  • Kid in the puddle eating mud of CGL contributors
    • Master Unit List
Re: New Development Snapshot 0.47.1 for Megamek, MegaMekLab, and MekHQ
« Reply #1 on: 06 November 2019, 11:30:05 »

MegaMekLab.
Some bug fixes, and big one is Support Vehicle Construction includes ground

NICE

Excellent work as usual

You bought the box set and are ready to expand your bt experience. Now what? | Modern Sourcebook Index | FASA Sourcebook Index | Print on Demand Index
Equipment Reference Cards | DIY Pilot Cards | PaperTech Mech and Vehicle Counters

Quote
Interviewer: Since you’ve stopped making art, how do you spend your time?
Paul Chan Breathers: Oh, I’m a breather. I’m a respirateur. Isn’t that enough?

trtw

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 44
Re: New Development Snapshot 0.47.1 for Megamek, MegaMekLab, and MekHQ
« Reply #2 on: 06 November 2019, 13:11:03 »
thanks again to the team. The scenario objectives tool has caught my interest..... always great things coming down the pipe.

servo01

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 51
Re: New Development Snapshot 0.47.1 for Megamek, MegaMekLab, and MekHQ
« Reply #3 on: 06 November 2019, 14:24:23 »
Awesome! Looking forward to all the new features.

A big thanks to the best devs in known space!

NickAragua

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 368
Re: New Development Snapshot 0.47.1 for Megamek, MegaMekLab, and MekHQ
« Reply #4 on: 06 November 2019, 21:09:27 »
A note on scenario objectives:

This update adds scenario objectives. What does this mean?

For standard AtB scenarios, the objectives are now explicitly tracked, to the best of the program's ability, during scenario resolution. This includes enemy unit destruction, allied unit preservation and any special objectives (you will probably need to manually set the state of the latter).

For scenario templates, you now have the option to embed objectives within the scenario templates. So, want to tell the player to "destroy 35% of primary hostiles, hostile reinforcements to gain one VP and lose one VP if failed", "preserve 85% of allied force one to gain one VP and one AtB bonus roll per surviving unit"? This will let you do that.

It's an experimental feature, so expect bugs and inconsistencies. Feedback is appreciated. Other than on how ugly the UI is, unless you've got some suggestions on how to improve it.

The objective UI looks like this:


Short Description should be a text description of the objective. It can be as long as you want, but longer ones may start to look weird in the scenario UI.

Details is a list of hints/tips that you want to display after the itemized force/unit list for the objective.

Objective Type is pretty straightforward:
Destroy - a unit will count towards this if it's destroyed per Total Warfare rules. Meaning, CT destruction, pilot death/ejection, engine/gyro kill. If the unit's force does not have battlefield control and it's immobilized, it also counts as destroyed. Basically, if you can salvage it after a battle, it counts towards this.

Force Withdrawal - a unit will count towards this if it's destroyed, crippled or has left the map.

Capture - a unit will count towards this if it's immobilized and its opponent has battlefield control, or if it's eliminated (destroyed) but the crew is not killed. Review these carefully, as it's hard to keep track of programmatically.

Prevent from reaching - this will expand to allow the selection of an edge. Force Destination edge will automatically set the destination edge to that of the first associated force template. A unit will count towards this if it's immobilized, destroyed, crippled or leaves the map via the wrong edge. If the unit's opponent forfeits battlefield control, it will be considered as having reached the edge.

Preserve - prevent units in the associated force from being destroyed, or immobilized also if the opposition has battlefield control.

Reach - allows edge selection as "prevent from reaching". A unit meets this criterion if it leaves the map from the designated edge or the unit's owner seizes control of the battlefield.

Custom - whatever you want. Obviously, it will have to be set manually during scenario resolution.

Percentage or Fixed Amount is pretty straightforward - either a percentage of all the selected forces must meet the objective, or a fixed number of units from the selected forces.

Force Names: This is a dropdown containing the force templates defined for the scenario. Adding one will associate the particular template with this objective. You can add any defined force template. For example, "Destroy 50% of Primary Opfor, Hostile Reinforcements".

"at most"/"at least": this is a time limit. At most is an upper bound (e.g. do this objective within X rounds), while "at least" is a lower bound (e.g. do this for at least X rounds). None turns the time limit off, Fixed is a fixed number of rounds, PrimaryUnitCountScaled will scale the time limit by the number of player and allied units that "contribute to unit count" and are assigned/generated prior to the user pressing the "finalize" button when instantiating a scenario from this template.

The next section is the scenario effects. Amount is either a fixed amount or a multiplier. Fixed is self-explanatory, linear is scaled to the number of relevant units that "contribute to unit count" and inverted is the number of relevant units that "contribute to unit count" but haven't met the objective. This number is used to determine how much of the effect type to apply.

Effect Type is a work in progress and not all are implemented.

ScenarioVictory/Defeat grants "vp" towards scenario victory or defeat respectively.
ContractScoreUpdate updates the contract score.
SupportPointUpdate, MoraleUpdate, BVBudgetUpdate are not implemented
ContractVictory means the player can declare victory in the current contract. Use sparingly.
ContractDefeat means the player automatically loses the current contract. Again, use sparingly.
AtBBonus grants the player the specified number of "AtB Bonus" rolls.

Effect Condition tells the program whether to apply the effect when the objective succeeds or when it fails. You can have more than one.

Simon Landmine

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1223
  • Enthusiastic mapmaker
Re: New Development Snapshot 0.47.1 for Megamek, MegaMekLab, and MekHQ
« Reply #5 on: 07 November 2019, 07:48:22 »
Oooh! Thanks everyone!

And large naval units progressing towards usability? Nice - I did have an idea about designing a 'small seaport' board on my ideas list ... nice to be able to have something to park there. And I'll also be making some offshore boards for my recent coast boards, to give people somewhere to locate the vessels that might be launching a landing force.

Also, looking forward to usable 'rail' terrain, because yes, I've got some ideas for shunting yards, too. Sorry all! (Does anyone know whether Saxarba is preparing rail terrain for their amazing tilesets?)
"That's Lieutenant Faceplant to you, Corporal!"

Things that I have learnt through clicking too fast on 'Move Done' on MegaMek: Double-check the CF of the building before jumping onto it, check artillery arrival times before standing in the neighbouring hex, and don't run across your own minefield.

"Hmm, I wonder if I can turn this into a MM map."

mikecj

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3254
  • Veteran of Galahad 3028
Re: New Development Snapshot 0.47.1 for Megamek, MegaMekLab, and MekHQ
« Reply #6 on: 08 November 2019, 10:57:38 »
Thank you guys! :thumbsup:
There are no fish in my pond.
"First, one brief announcement. I just want to mention, for those who have asked, that absolutely nothing what so ever happened today in sector 83x9x12. I repeat, nothing happened. Please remain calm." Susan Ivanova
"Solve a man's problems with violence, help him for a day. Teach a man to solve his problems with violence, help him for a lifetime." - Belkar Bitterleaf
Romo Lampkin could have gotten Stefan Amaris off with a warning.

Hammer

  • Numerorum Malleo
  • Global Moderator
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4101
    • MegaMek Website
Re: New Development Snapshot 0.47.1 for Megamek, MegaMekLab, and MekHQ
« Reply #7 on: 11 November 2019, 11:16:56 »
Just a heads up we've found a couple of significant bugs in the MekHQ part of this releases. We are planning a new release in couple of days with fixes.
MegaMek Projects Wiki
Bug Trackers
MegaMek Tracker
MekHQ Tracker
MegaMekLab Tracker
New Units and RAT's aren't added until after the 2 month release moratorium is passed.
Join the official MegaMek Discord

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37046
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: New Development Snapshot 0.47.1 for Megamek, MegaMekLab, and MekHQ
« Reply #8 on: 11 November 2019, 19:50:15 »
And THAT, sir, is why you ROCK!  :thumbsup:

Iceweb

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 769
  • Lyran Engineer
Re: New Development Snapshot 0.47.1 for Megamek, MegaMekLab, and MekHQ
« Reply #9 on: 15 November 2019, 11:51:04 »
Looking at the new missions in HQ, and I noticed that it no longer lists who controls the battlefield at the end of the mission. 

Is that now controlled by the AI or has it been accidentally omitted?

NickAragua

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 368
Re: New Development Snapshot 0.47.1 for Megamek, MegaMekLab, and MekHQ
« Reply #10 on: 15 November 2019, 16:04:36 »
Battlefield control for the existing AtB missions is determined as outlined in AtB rules.

Battlefield control for template scenarios is entirely up to the person who created the scenario.

Iceweb

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 769
  • Lyran Engineer
Re: New Development Snapshot 0.47.1 for Megamek, MegaMekLab, and MekHQ
« Reply #11 on: 15 November 2019, 17:03:28 »
In previous versions the briefing tab said who controlled the battlefield, it does not say in this version. 

Also looking at a probe mission

Code: [Select]
Destroy, cripple or force the withdrawal of at least 25% of the following enemy force(s):
Chaos March


Ensure that at least 25% individual units from the following force(s) and unit(s) survive:

Normally a probe is a race to 75%.  But the way this is worded I can have 74% of my forces destroyed when I destroy 25% of the enemy and declare a victory. 

Should I put a bug report in on this?

NickAragua

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 368
Re: New Development Snapshot 0.47.1 for Megamek, MegaMekLab, and MekHQ
« Reply #12 on: 15 November 2019, 17:50:26 »
You're correct. A probe is supposed to be "first to destroy 25% of the other team's force wins".

In this case, I think it'll be helpful to consolidate the various issues into one github issue, since it's basically a bunch of text corrections to be made.