@thedog
Oracle Java works fine. Your issue is that your system java install was java8. You can avoid this issue by setting the path to the java executable bundled with Triplea v2.5/2.6 on Windows, as suggested in my previous post or by modifying the classpath environment variable.

The hotkey to hide the menubar is ctrl released ALT: Press CTRL (hold), then press Alt. Releasing Alt fires the hotkey.

@cernel said in Fontsize and dpi scaling:

If it is feasible, the program should always enforce a pixel-per-pixel rendering as default (assuming vectorial graphic will never be supported).

Vector graphics require fundamentally different software tools from png and svg isn't natively supported in java swing.
Vectorizing the existing maps and artwork would be a lot of work. Then the map handling engine is based on pixel coordinates.

Vector graphics would make more sense for interface icons (ex: icons on buttons, menuitems), which TripleA makes very limited use of currently. Icon Fonts would likely be the right solution as they allow scaling and theming.

With the above said, we can certainly discuss what would be more or less equal to rope in.

@thedog said in TripleA 3.0 - Design Proposal & Discussion:

From what little I know, the coders time could be better spent coding , than unpicking the old code, working around it and patching it up, putting patching on top of patching.

That is kind of part and parcel to the task, it is somewhat intrinsic and describes what has been happening now for 15 years.

A new XML structure format might be better in a later version say 3.5.

Having new core data structures could be very important for re-arranging the code. Patching it together sounds much simpler than it will be. Removing all constraints of the existing design could prove to be very important lest the fire breaks will continue to have legacy design that has been holding us down.

New code for the file saving format

Almost all of the core data structures are tightly coupled to save game. A 'unit' and the concept of a 'unit type' cannot have any alterations because those code objects are encoded onto hard disk. We cannot change them in nearly any way without breaking save game. An overhaul of how the code is structured and data is required to enable a new save game format. Those same objects are mapped pretty directly to the XML, revisiting this from the ground up implies it all may change drastically.

There is a lot of uncertainty here, though having a green light to make radical changes is a key component to 3.0. I'd rather release a 2.7 sooner. Though, we have been trying to rearrange and fix core code design for half a decade now, it does not seem to be effective enough to really be successful.

@lafayette @TheDog agreed, upon a return review of the entire thread it is clear to me at least, that there has been some unintended obfuscation and misunderstanding on both sides.

i think we are all looking for the same ultimate goal here so if we have to burn the existing vote and start over in a more agreeable fashion i have no objection. again i thought we were under the gun so that might have been a bit rushed. 🙂

@cernel
Thanks, edited the above post, removed ECW and expanded ACW.

Renaissance.................1451-1790
American Civil War...1861-1900

@cernel A single file for game notes could be difficult because then you have to encode the HTML in some way. You no longer could open the notes file in an web browser to get a preview of how it would render.

With 2.6, if you want to organize games into folders with generic names, AFAIK you can do that now. You could not previously to 2.6

@LaFayette
Before I was guessing what happened, but here is a little bit more detail;

where letters = Territories and numbers = units in those territories.
D2 = Territory "D" with 2 units in it.

A1, B1, C1, D2, E2, F1, G1

Say I move the 1st unit in E2, it should return to E2, but it actually goes to D2.
If I move the 2nd unit in E2, it should return to F1, but it actually goes to G1.

@squid_daddy Please take the liberty to update the docs to get them more up to date, fill in any missing details, and generally make them more useful for someone getting started

@hepps I would love for the ratings to be sorted out and refined. There is an open need for Map Admins to go through and do curation of maps, volunteers needed: https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/2707/map-curation-rating-maps-categories/1

@lafayette well i think having some kind of directional arrows behind the lock or maybe a map grid under the lock 3d style would have the same effect. 🙂

@cernel said in Allow user to specifically choose amphibious offloaded units in battle chooser:

I want to add that, as far as I know, the only current case (beside multiple hitpoints) in which you are prompted to select different same-named units is when the two or more same-named transports (surely sea and maybe air too) have different units assigned. In this case, the transports will display the units on board beside the transport's image (or nothing if none). So this should be done in a way similar to that and also taking into account that in the future more additional images might be added for other cases in which it is not irrelevant chosing any one amongst two or more same-named units.

There are other cases as well. When putting a unit on a transport, if transports have different amount of movement left, it will separate them. When putting a unit on an air transport, if the units have different transport cost, it will separate them.

FWIW, the places that would need a fix are largely in code that will be deleted pretty imminently. That is why the fixes are in queue.

@LaFayette The alternative skin for 270BC is an example of changing also the units. There may be others.

Here you can find a map-skin for RSoC that is actually about making the map bigger:
https://github.com/Cernelius/red_sun_over_china-big_skin

The current map-skin feature allows changing everything in the skin, and that is good. What is not very good is that it obliges you changing everything, so forcing duplication if you don't actually want to change everything. It is true that most map-skins are only about changing the map details, but I think this is beside the point (Of course, some things are more used or useful than others.).

@LaFayette said in TripleA Rules Sets:

What would be ideal is to have a table describing different behaviors by rule set.

We are actually on our way there. We have example maps that follow each rule set, all we need to do is to start teasing apart the behaviors that are different and then answer for each map, "does this follow that behavior, yes or no?"

If we find that some rule sets are only very slightly different, simpler is better. The 'v3' moniker will be difficult to drop, if we can keep it simple and say "old edition", "revised edition" and "new edition", it could be easier to adopt. At this point though, without knowing what the rule sets actually are, it seems to be a first priority to know which rules are in each rule set before we do much of anything else.

@Cernel As we unzip a file, we will be doing a lot of checks (are all the required folders there? is there a centers.txt, etc.?) and as part of that process, we could enforce a casing convention.

I have a tool that fixes capitalization. When I got image assets from @GenerationKILL sometimes the casing was a bit off, so I would just run this tool and it would conform every unit to a convention like this: Unit-Name.png regardless of the OS and regardless of the original naming.

We could implement a similar normalization process at the map parsing level (though it might be hard to get map makers on the same page about which casing convention should be used).

https://github.com/jdimeo/triplea-map-tools/blob/master/src/main/java/jdimeo/triplea/util/FixFileNames.java

So, would you be ok with removing some locks if it can be shown that the data is actually read only?

I'm currently looking at ResourceList which is what GameData#getResourceList returns. The class has only one setter and it is only called during the game parse process and a test method. The data that ResourceList stores is a map of Strings and Resources. And Resource is a value object.

ResourceList doesn't appear to need any sort of read lock since I don't see any way for it to change. If I see locks around GameData#getResourceList, can I just remove them? Would you like me to tag Resource and ResourceList somehow (such as @Value) to indicate that they are read-only objects?