LnLT Digital Feature Requests

Oi_you_nutter

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
7
Points
3
Location
Usa
After a gap I tried the app again. After a frustrating start (details below) I muddled through and managed to finish some scenarios. Once I got over fighting with the interface (I never use tutorials or read manuals btw) I had a fun time. I have played larger scenarios and replayed a few several times. Some of the options have been tweaked to suit my preferences.

Feedback.
No bugs or instabilities found.
I worked out how to use the app pretty well by trial & error. So I found it was intuitive.

During play, I felt that I was always fighting with the overlay information windows. These are the Continue/Pass window or the terrain effects windows etc. I had to keep on moving them around to get at the map. The ability to scale the windows is useful but I feel there needs to be more control over the size/layout of the overlay windows.

These suggestions are all in the same vein of interface usability:
a) Ability to collapse or hide a window. windows
Edit. The victory conditions CAN be hidden by use of the V key
b) The ability to resize a window, by dragging the edge, to make it smaller/larger. Yes, information could be clipped. The "Units in hex window" is usually too wide imho.
c) Map scrolling via mouse position. The scrolling is linear and too fast. Adding the ability to turn that feature off, or change the scrolling speed, would alleviate the jerky over-scrolling via mouse position. If I place the window with the Continue/Pass button near the edge of the app window then the mouse causes the map to scroll when I just want to click the button.
d) Ability to pan the map by click-dragging the mouse.

Keep up the good work. Now if you could only do something about my poor die rolls.

Tim
 
Last edited:

Oi_you_nutter

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
7
Points
3
Location
Usa
Ref Scenario "I'll take the Low Road" in Defiance DLC.
How does the "Ace Gunner" effect get activated for the 25mm ATG?
I see no way to activate the effect or any (obvious) sign of it getting used when firing. The effect is based on the roll of 1d6; I would expect to see some logged info detailing its activation.
 

Oi_you_nutter

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
7
Points
3
Location
Usa
Ref Scenario "I'll take the Low Road" in Defiance DLC.

A fire has broken out (bloomin' tanks) in the hex 25k7 with the ATG. The morale roll for the ATG failed. Normally, a unit would move to an adjacent hex to get away from the fire. the ATG has 0 MP and I appear to be stuck and unable to continue as I cannot move the ATG or end this fire resolution step.

Link to larger image on Imgur. File was too big to post here.

2021-03-01 LNLT HID atg fire move Capture.PNG
 
Last edited:

Jones

Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2020
Messages
49
Points
8
Location
Australia
Glad to hear you've given the game another go Tim.
Like you, it took me a while to get used to the interface, and I also found myself fighting with it at times until it trained me ;)

I can't really offer any answers except for the terrain effects window which does get in the way. But if you press the T key it will hide the window, pressing T again will toggle it back on. (Same for Line of Sight checks, use the L key) Not sure about the best way to handle the re-sizing of Info/Status windows and their text - it's a problem for many hex/board/counter games converted to digital. For the occasional time when you just want to bask in the glory of the board and counters, hit F10 and all of the interface is toggled off (or back on again).

Scrolling map: yes, via mouse position it can end up being a bit hit or miss. I tend to just use the W S A D keys. Perhaps a middle-mouse button click and hold to move the map might happen.

Fire in 25K7 - I had a fire break out in a scenario I played yesterday, and I was wondering what to do about it - run away?? - luckily it went out on the next turn. But from the rules, I think it can spread (see 10.5.6.2 in the core rules) ... or alternatively there is a game option to turn off 5.1 flammable hex fire checks. Not sure about your situation of being unable to continue/stuck. Might be worth hitting F3 (or Shift-B) and doing a bug report in future. The programmer is very responsive to bug reports.

Completely agree about the good work on the game so far. It keeps growing on me. And I'll swap your poor die rolls for mine!
 
Last edited:

Oi_you_nutter

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
7
Points
3
Location
Usa
The overlays info is needed for me. So far I have only found the Victory window is one that I can regularily hide. I used the arrow keys to pan the map.

Having the ability to turn off map scrolling by mouse would work. I run windowed mode and have lots of scrolling when I don't want it to scroll.

Fires starting and spreading have been resolved fine in all the other scenarios. In all other cases the units have had a non-zero MP and thus could move out or up/down stairs to escape the fire. I had to abandon the game where the fire was trying to make me move that ATG with zero movement. The game flow was locked into trying to resolve movement that could not occur. The game was effectively over so it was ok.
 

Rodger Samuel

Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2014
Messages
20
Points
3
Age
67
Location
western PA
I have bought the base game and all the expansions released thus far, and I imagine I will continue to do so. Nevertheless, up til now I played very little, because I looked forward to playing with others, and I didn't want to have the advantage of knowing the scenarios and the OOBs ahead of time.

Happily, the scenario generator eliminates that problem. Every game is different, with different map set-ups and troops, so I have finally been playing, end enjoying, the game. However, I do have some suggestions.

1. The units on the map could be a little bigger and, thus, easier to see. I recall the earlier pc implementation done in conjunction with Matrix, and the counters were larger. Yes, you can, and I do, zoom in to see them better, but it still would be nice if they were a little larger.

2. Other tactical WWII games do the random scenarios somewhat differently. In the case of a Meeting Engagement, for instance, both sides start off-map, or on the opposite sides of the map, with the victory locations more-or-less in the middle. However, in LNLT, one side starts in possession of the objectives and the other must advance and take them. Given that point values for each side are approximately equal, this seems unbalanced. When playing against the computer, it may not be so bad, but if playing against a human, I'd expect the side that starts off holding the objectives to win the vast majority of the games.

3. Connected to the above, in multi-map games, most of the map is not used. For instance, in a three-map Meeting Engagement, one side enters on one side of the map, the second side starts on the middle map, already holding the objectives, and the third map never comes into play. In fact, in one game, also a Meeting Engagement, one side entered via the first map, but the objectives -- and the other side -- were also on the first map, so the other two maps were not involved in the game. It'd be nice if these two points could be addressed.

4. Finally, it would be nice if the OOBs could be more varied. Only a handful of the vehicles used in WWII are available for purchase at scenario start. Maybe, in addition to choosing a module, one could also choose the year, with different vehicles available depending on the year.
I recognize that the limited choice may have something to do with the fact that more modules are coming, thus, we may see more vehicle types when new modules appear. I hope that this is the case. Nevertheless, it would be nice, for instance, if sometimes, instead of the ubiquitous M-10 tank destroyer, players might be able to purchase an M-18 or M-36. As with other units in the game, they could have variable availability and restrictions in numbers, so that ridiculously ahistorical forces would not be the norm.

Despite the above, I am definitely enjoying the game and look forward to the release of more modules. Thanks for your efforts!
 

Wiggum

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Messages
367
Points
28
Location
Europe
I have bought the base game and all the expansions released thus far, and I imagine I will continue to do so. Nevertheless, up til now I played very little, because I looked forward to playing with others, and I didn't want to have the advantage of knowing the scenarios and the OOBs ahead of time.

Happily, the scenario generator eliminates that problem. Every game is different, with different map set-ups and troops, so I have finally been playing, end enjoying, the game. However, I do have some suggestions.

1. The units on the map could be a little bigger and, thus, easier to see. I recall the earlier pc implementation done in conjunction with Matrix, and the counters were larger. Yes, you can, and I do, zoom in to see them better, but it still would be nice if they were a little larger.

2. Other tactical WWII games do the random scenarios somewhat differently. In the case of a Meeting Engagement, for instance, both sides start off-map, or on the opposite sides of the map, with the victory locations more-or-less in the middle. However, in LNLT, one side starts in possession of the objectives and the other must advance and take them. Given that point values for each side are approximately equal, this seems unbalanced. When playing against the computer, it may not be so bad, but if playing against a human, I'd expect the side that starts off holding the objectives to win the vast majority of the games.

3. Connected to the above, in multi-map games, most of the map is not used. For instance, in a three-map Meeting Engagement, one side enters on one side of the map, the second side starts on the middle map, already holding the objectives, and the third map never comes into play. In fact, in one game, also a Meeting Engagement, one side entered via the first map, but the objectives -- and the other side -- were also on the first map, so the other two maps were not involved in the game. It'd be nice if these two points could be addressed.

4. Finally, it would be nice if the OOBs could be more varied. Only a handful of the vehicles used in WWII are available for purchase at scenario start. Maybe, in addition to choosing a module, one could also choose the year, with different vehicles available depending on the year.
I recognize that the limited choice may have something to do with the fact that more modules are coming, thus, we may see more vehicle types when new modules appear. I hope that this is the case. Nevertheless, it would be nice, for instance, if sometimes, instead of the ubiquitous M-10 tank destroyer, players might be able to purchase an M-18 or M-36. As with other units in the game, they could have variable availability and restrictions in numbers, so that ridiculously ahistorical forces would not be the norm.

Despite the above, I am definitely enjoying the game and look forward to the release of more modules. Thanks for your efforts!

1. I think its important to offer the original (boardgame) proportions map / xmap to counters. Everything else (if included) should be optional.

2. Agree, that sounds like a classic attack not like a meeting engagement, may be a bug

4. Most of the moduls currently released are conversions of the original boardgame modules (which i think is awesome), so thats why not all units are in their. When more and more modules get added we will see more and more units being available for the battle generator and editor.
 

Rodger Samuel

Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2014
Messages
20
Points
3
Age
67
Location
western PA
I get your point about the relative sizes of counters and hexes. It's just that my eyes aren't what they used to be, and it'd be nice if I didn't have to zoom in quite so much to read the counters. The info markers [Shaken, etc.] are also difficult to make out.

Yes, it does seem to me that the Meeting Engagements are more like Attacks. Played another 3-mapper today: My US forces started on the edge of the first map, almost all the objective [which were already occupied by the Germans] were also on the first map, leaving the bulk of the other two maps out of play.

As I stated, I thought that the fact that all the modules have not yet been released might have something to do with the lack of variety in units to be purchased. I hope you're correct, and that more types will appear as the other modules are released.

Thanks for your response!
 

Rodger Samuel

Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2014
Messages
20
Points
3
Age
67
Location
western PA
Thanks for the tip! I didn't notice that. I does, indeed, help.

Might as well add my voice to the request for Hot Seat mode.
 

Rodger Samuel

Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2014
Messages
20
Points
3
Age
67
Location
western PA
Hi! I just want to reiterate my request for a better set up for random meeting engagements. I just started a small one, using the Heroes of Normandy module. It uses two maps, laid out lengthwise. The US troops enter as reinforcements from the left edge of the mapboards. The largest, most valuable objective was four hexes from the left edge, the second objective five hexes from the left edge. Only one objective was on the second map, and it was quite near the left edge of that map.

Meanwhile, the German units set up as close as three hexes from the US entry hexes -- if you don't count the German sniper who set up right next to the entry hexes. Also, the Germans controlled all the objectives.

This just doesn't work for a Meeting Engagement! However many maps are used, the objectives need to be near the center of the map area and not controlled by either side. In addition, instead of relatively equal purchase points for each side no matter the situation, there must be a differential based on who has the greater burden. Meeting Engagements should be relatively equal, but battles in which one side sets up in good positions and in control of the the objectives need to give more purchase points to the side which is attacking.
 

Stéphane Tanguay

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Aug 2, 2013
Messages
1,152
Points
63
Age
53
Rodger, to me, it looks like a bug because a meeting engagement, as defined in the Battle Generator, should not generate anything like you are describing. It is almost as if the computer is using the parameters of something else. Please do not hesitate to report it with F3 every time. This will help the dev in finding a solution.
 

About LnLP

Welcome to the official Lock 'n Load Publishing Community page. Here you will find the latest information on our released and upcoming games.



We enjoy designing, developing, and publishing some of the best strategy games in the world. Lock 'n Load Publishing has published over eighty products, including our fan favorites Nations at War Series, World at War 85 Series, and Lock 'n Load Tactical series. We have expanded the publishing line now to include novels to go along with our game series in Paperback, EPUB, and Audiobook lines.

As Lock 'n Load Publishing moves forward, it intends to continue to broaden its product lines. We thank God for blessing us and allow us to follow our passions and thank you for support in our endeavors.


Like us on Facebook

Donate Cadence International

Cadence serves all branches of the U.S. military in American and overseas locations. Comprised of nearly 4 million people, the U.S. military community has proven to be one of the largest, most responsive sub-cultures today. Cadence ministers not only to military personnel but to their spouses and dependents as well.

Thank you for your interest in supporting our us. Please specify an amount below to begin the secure, tax-deductable donation process.

Donate to Cadence International
Top