• Please note: In an effort to ensure that all of our users feel welcome on our forums, we’ve updated our forum rules. You can review the updated rules here: http://forums.wolflair.com/showthread.php?t=5528.

    If a fellow Community member is not following the forum rules, please report the post by clicking the Report button (the red yield sign on the left) located on every post. This will notify the moderators directly. If you have any questions about these new rules, please contact support@wolflair.com.

    - The Lone Wolf Development Team

Far-flung ideas

  • Thread starter Thread starter larsgottlieb at forum.dk
  • Start date Start date
L

larsgottlieb at forum.dk

Guest
Hi List, hi Rob.
I know this might be a bit into the future, but ...

Would it be possible to change the way the Army Builder saves a
roster, so that if the datafiles were changed, it could still be
imported?

I manage the system in my local club, and I'm having tons of trouble
explaning to the other members why they can't import their old
rosters ...

Personally I see two solutions:

1: Some kind of versioning in the ABCreator, that would build-in the
old files into any new version of the datafiles, so that the
ArmyBuílder would read the version of the datafiles from the save,
then load up the correct version of the datafiles, or change the
roster to comply with the newest files.

2: A component in the ArmyBuilder itself, combined with changes in
the Creator, so the user could parse through old files & update the
contents. This could be done right after datafile update.

Lars Gottlieb


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
PLAY GAMES. WIN PRIZES. GUARANTEED.
Get $5.00 in FREE credits when you register at
http://click.egroups.com/1/10501/0/_/36190/_/976029697/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
At 15:21 05/12/00 +0000, you wrote:
>Hi List, hi Rob.
>I know this might be a bit into the future, but ...
>
>Would it be possible to change the way the Army Builder saves a
>roster, so that if the datafiles were changed, it could still be
>imported?

I asked before - apparently not :(

>I manage the system in my local club, and I'm having tons of trouble
>explaning to the other members why they can't import their old
>rosters ...
>
>Personally I see two solutions:
>
>1: Some kind of versioning in the ABCreator, that would build-in the
>old files into any new version of the datafiles, so that the
>ArmyBuílder would read the version of the datafiles from the save,
>then load up the correct version of the datafiles, or change the
>roster to comply with the newest files.

That's probably not an option, as it would quickly inflate the size of new
datafiles to several megabytes :)

>2: A component in the ArmyBuilder itself, combined with changes in
>the Creator, so the user could parse through old files & update the
>contents. This could be done right after datafile update.

Sounds more feasible... one thing I was thinking of was that, if AB
couldn't load a file normally, it tried a "reliable" load method - i.e. it
was a lot more liberal in what it accepted, and just chucked away any
options that it didn't know about (or something similar). Does that sound
more feasible?


--
'Not Colin' McAlister - License to Skrill
Email: demandred@skrill.org | Visit http://www.skrill.org/ today!
-----------------------------+------------------------------------
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain" - Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/0/_/36190/_/976043761/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
Actually, reconciling this issue is nigh impossible without changing the
saved roster files so that they become more than a 1MB in size. :-( Here is
the explanation from the web-site....

The contents of the saved roster file are tightly coupled to the set of
data files that are in use when the roster is created. It does not matter
whether you go forward or backward in versions. If the data files are
different when you load a saved roster from when that roster was saved, it
is quite probable that the roster will not be able to be loaded. The only
solution is to revert back to the original set of data files that were in
use when the roster file was originally saved.

As an attempt at explaining this, consider the following. Data file set #1
uses an id of "xxx" for a particular unit. In data file set #2, a different
id of "yyy" is used for the same unit. Any roster saved with data set #1
will be unable to resolve the reference to id "xxx" when loaded with set
#2. Similarly, a roster saved with set #2 will have an unrecognized id
("yyy") when loaded by set #1.

This is a gross simplification of things, but it illustrates the problem
going on within the roster files vis-a-vis the data files. Suffice to say,
whether a roster remains readable is completely dependent on how the data
files are changed from one version to the next. It also depends on whether
your roster actually makes use of any of the things that are changed
between versions. If your roster is all Elves and the new release of the
files only changes stuff for Dwarves, then your roster will work fine
across the versions, but some else's (that uses Elves) will not work any
longer.

To continue....

Presently, the saved rosters reference the contents of the data files so
that the data file contents don't need to be repeated in the saved file. If
the saved files need to include all of those references, then the roster
files will grow to be nearly the size of all the data files. The argument
could be made to only save what is referenced. However, then the file could
be reloaded but NOT EDITED. That doesn't provide much value. :-(

You suggested that AB could automatically convert old rosters to new
rosters. Unfortunately, that would require that AB somehow knew what
changes from one set of data files to the next AND that AB knew WHY each
change was made. AB would have to know how to change X to Y, which means a
mapping must be either determined by AB automatically (impossible) or the
author must specify it (lots more work for the authors and major amounts of
work to support this ability within AB).

Your suggestion about AB building old files into the new files has some
merit. The only gotcha is that the files will progressively get huge in
size. This will have a few major impacts. First, download times will
steadily increase as the files bloat - even for people that don't need or
want any of the old stuff. Second, loading of data files AND roster files
will slow down significantly. Third, EVERY time a new roster is created
and/or old roster is loaded, all of the data files will need to be
RELOADED, since AB will need to reset itself properly. I don't think this
is a performance hit that the majority of users will accept.

At present, only the data file writers can control this issue. They have to
take extreme steps to ensure that the files don't change between releases.
That's often in direct conflict with the demands of users for more and more
capabilities within the files. In order to add new material to the files,
the authors need to modify existing material to integrate the new stuff.
Those changes break the old saved rosters. The only REAL solution I can
think of here is for the data files to achieve stability and stop evolving.
That works great for many games, but certainly not for the GW games, since
the GW business model relies on constantly changing and evolving the game
system on a monthly (weekly?) basis.

I'm open to ideas on this if anyone has them. It may be that I'm completely
missing a simple solution to all this. If so, please let me know!!! :-)

Thanks, Rob


At 03:21 PM 12/5/00 +0000, you wrote:
>Hi List, hi Rob.
>I know this might be a bit into the future, but ...
>
>Would it be possible to change the way the Army Builder saves a
>roster, so that if the datafiles were changed, it could still be
>imported?
>
>I manage the system in my local club, and I'm having tons of trouble
>explaning to the other members why they can't import their old
>rosters ...
>
>Personally I see two solutions:
>
>1: Some kind of versioning in the ABCreator, that would build-in the
>old files into any new version of the datafiles, so that the
>ArmyBuílder would read the version of the datafiles from the save,
>then load up the correct version of the datafiles, or change the
>roster to comply with the newest files.
>
>2: A component in the ArmyBuilder itself, combined with changes in
>the Creator, so the user could parse through old files & update the
>contents. This could be done right after datafile update.
>
>Lars Gottlieb


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
PLAY GAMES. WIN PRIZES. GUARANTEED.
Get $5.00 in FREE credits when you register at
http://click.egroups.com/1/10501/0/_/36190/_/976051659/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
At 07:12 PM 12/5/00 +0000, you wrote:
>Sounds more feasible... one thing I was thinking of was that, if AB
>couldn't load a file normally, it tried a "reliable" load method - i.e. it
>was a lot more liberal in what it accepted, and just chucked away any
>options that it didn't know about (or something similar). Does that sound
>more feasible?

Hmmm. And just throwing things out arbitrarily is considered "reliable"???
What if one of those things thrown out is an option that uses "more" to
chain to a whole bunch of other options? What if those options are attached
directly to the unit in the newer files? How is AB supposed to handle this
cleanly and provide the user with something USEFUL to manipulate?

This is one of the simpler and LESS complicated issues that arises with
your proposed solutoin. :-)

Reliability, predictability, and usability are three critical components of
good software IMHO. I have striven for these within AB. Anytime that you
expect software to automatically "do the right thing" with something as
complex as AB data files, you open up a Pandora's Box of problems that
undermine those tenets. I'm not going there unless I can figure out a way
to tightly control those problems, and that's (a) not likely possible and
(b) extremely costly to implement and test if it IS possible.

Thanks, Rob

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/0/_/36190/_/976055258/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
At 14:15 05/12/00 -0800, you wrote:


>Hmmm. And just throwing things out arbitrarily is considered "reliable"???
>What if one of those things thrown out is an option that uses "more" to
>chain to a whole bunch of other options? What if those options are attached
>directly to the unit in the newer files? How is AB supposed to handle this
>cleanly and provide the user with something USEFUL to manipulate?

Look at it this way. Either you can:

a) Have to re-enter your entire roster by hand, including loads of small
things you may well forget, or

b) Have about 80% of it converted, so you have to do the rest.

I'd really prefer b. As long as you stress that this isn't a "heavy duty"
mechanism, in fact that it's a very lightweight one, a lot of people would
be made happier.


--
'Not Colin' McAlister - License to Skrill
Email: demandred@skrill.org | Visit http://www.skrill.org/ today!
-----------------------------+------------------------------------
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain" - Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/0/_/36190/_/976056808/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
At 13:25 05/12/00 -0800, you wrote:
>As an attempt at explaining this, consider the following. Data file set #1
>uses an id of "xxx" for a particular unit. In data file set #2, a different
>id of "yyy" is used for the same unit. Any roster saved with data set #1
>will be unable to resolve the reference to id "xxx" when loaded with set
>#2. Similarly, a roster saved with set #2 will have an unrecognized id
>("yyy") when loaded by set #1.


This is cool and froody for units. If I changed the unit ID of something,
there's no way I'd expect it to work out which unit to add instead. But
take the following example: The saved file references option "skrill1", but
the unit can't get option "skrill"! Instead of falling over and refusing to
load the file, just ignore "skrill" completely. Then produce a message
saying "By the way, you might want to check unit X, as odd things happened
when I was loading it". Is this feasible, and would it help at all?


--
'Not Colin' McAlister - License to Skrill
Email: demandred@skrill.org | Visit http://www.skrill.org/ today!
-----------------------------+------------------------------------
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain" - Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/0/_/36190/_/976056814/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
Well,
Given that the tech solutions are problematic (for very good reasons)
why noy use low-tech solutions.
Save a roster as a text file or keep a (shudder) paper copy (which you
probably used at the game you played with that roster). With a print of
what was in your army roster before you can very quickly recreate it using
the latest datafiles.

Agreed, if you want to see what all the options were for armies etc with
the old roster you'd have to reload the old files. But for processing one
roster in the new files the effort is trivial.

And saves Rob's times for fancier stuff (or even for him to have a life!
;-> )

Cheers

Bern

Reality is a chronic condition,
& one generally ignored by cats.

bern@pcug.org.au
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob Bowes" <rob@wolflair.com>
To: ab@support.wolflair.com


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/0/_/36190/_/976078935/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
Here is what it all boils down to......

It would definitely be possible to figure out a way for AB to salvage a
portion of an old saved roster when the data files are updated. My guess is
that it would take me about 4-6 weeks of effort to get something that would
salvage about 70% (on average) of a roster. The more salvaging required,
the more time required, and the recovery vs. effort curve starts to get
really steep after about 70%. In other words, it could easily be 8 weeks
total (2-4 weeks extra) to achieve a 75-80% salvage rate (i.e. a 5-10%
improvement). All of this effort would be invested to do a marginal (at
best) job and still leave lots of work to the user to perform. Is that
really a big benefit over printing out your old roster and re-entering it
in 5 minutes?

On the other hand, I could spend that same amount of time on new features
and/or new products. New features include things like being able to have AB
automatically retrieve and import new data files for you. You simply say
"go" and AB finds them, downloads them, and imports them. No muss, no fuss.
Or how about adding support for campaign systems where you can readily
track the additional resources acquired/lost and have AB reflect their
influences within the army roster automatically? Or the ability to add
graphics of your figs into your rosters and/or shown within AB. There is a
LONG list of features that people still keep asking for and that I'd like
to add. There are also lots of people asking for new tools, such as a lead
database. I've already got this mapped out pretty well, including an
integration into AB so you know whether you actually own all the lead that
you included in your roster. But I haven't had the time to write it yet.

The bottom line is determining which of the above is more valuable to the
end-user. My personal feelings are that half-assed solutions are usually
best avoided. They typically don't really help all that much in the long
run. That's why I've opted for adding features thus far.

But the real answer lies with all of you users. If there is anyone out
there that honestly feels that reading old rosters partially is better than
adding some major new features and/or products, please let me know. It's
quite possible that I've got a distorted perspective of what people most
want in the product - it wouldn't be the first time! Please don't turn this
into a high-bandwidth discussion with lots of "Me too!" posts, but I would
very much like to hear comments on the relative merits of these two
alternatives and which you would find more valuable.

Thanks, Rob

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/0/_/36190/_/976086081/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
At 10:46 PM 12/5/00 +0000, you wrote:
>This is cool and froody for units. If I changed the unit ID of something,
>there's no way I'd expect it to work out which unit to add instead. But
>take the following example: The saved file references option "skrill1", but
>the unit can't get option "skrill"! Instead of falling over and refusing to
>load the file, just ignore "skrill" completely. Then produce a message
>saying "By the way, you might want to check unit X, as odd things happened
>when I was loading it". Is this feasible, and would it help at all?

That's a lot easier said than done, except in the simplest case - which you
have happily chosen to use for your example. What if the missing option
assigns the unit type "Foo"? And what if there are other options that use
"utyp:Foo" and are now invalid. And what if there are items on the unit
that are only valid if type "Foo" is assigned (which is no longer the
case)? These are just a few of the SIMPLE cases that quickly emerge. They
get a LOT nastier - especially with the highly complex 40K files. So it is
NOT a simple matter to just ignore the option. There are WAY too many
inter-dependencies within data files that AB would have to gracefully
handle for this to be anything short of a major undertaking to solve.

Thanks, Rob

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
PLAY GAMES. WIN PRIZES. GUARANTEED.
Get $5 in FREE credits when you register at www.PrizeGames.com.
Play now at
http://click.egroups.com/1/10500/0/_/36190/_/976094542/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
What I do is to save my individual units. This way if it won't
allow me to load my roster when I update my data files, I re-create
my roster with the saved units and replace the ones that won't load.

I'm not a very tech-minded person, but maybe there would be some
way to have AB just remove or mark the affected unit instead of
invalidating the entire saved roster? Just a thought ;)

--- In armybuilder@egroups.com, "Bern" <bern@p...> wrote:
> Well,
> Given that the tech solutions are problematic (for very good
reasons)
> why noy use low-tech solutions.
> Save a roster as a text file or keep a (shudder) paper copy
(which you
> probably used at the game you played with that roster). With a
print of
> what was in your army roster before you can very quickly recreate
it using
> the latest datafiles.
>
> Agreed, if you want to see what all the options were for armies
etc with
> the old roster you'd have to reload the old files. But for
processing one
> roster in the new files the effort is trivial.
>
> And saves Rob's times for fancier stuff (or even for him to
have a life!
> ;-> )
>
> Cheers
>
> Bern
>
> Reality is a chronic condition,
> & one generally ignored by cats.
>
> bern@p...
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rob Bowes" <rob@w...>
> To: <armybuilder@egroups.com>


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
PLAY GAMES. WIN PRIZES. GUARANTEED.
Get $5 in FREE credits when you register at www.PrizeGames.com.
Play now at
http://click.egroups.com/1/10500/0/_/36190/_/976118100/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
 
Back
Top