Divided Ground Question

[Scud]

In the scenarios section, under Campaign Series, there are links to DG - Vietnam and The Matrix Games version of Divided Ground. Does anyone know what the difference is? Is DG - Vietnam the old Talonsoft version? If Raz (our webmaster) gets rid of that link will it affect anyone? I don't see those scenarios included in the Matrix version, so I'm worried that it might affect players who still play the older version.

I've never played Divided Ground, not even sure where to get it, thus my ignorance.

Dave

[Warhorse]

I just looked, and there are scenarios listed under both!? DG-VN is played yet bt a few of us, I actually did some updates to it recently to try and drum up support! DG, must be the Talonsoft version, as to my knowledge there is no Matrix version? However, some of us do play that as well, there is also a no cd exe available for that and DGCN! I would leave them alone please!!

[Scud]

Thanks, Mike. I let them know. They just want to get rid of the confusion with all the "do not use for reporting" links. Consolidate things a bit.

Dave

[Warhorse]

No problem, Dave, good thing you asked!! Not a lot of following, but every little bit counts!

[Big Ivan]

Just a comment in passing...

I find the DGVN Divided Ground Vietnam works OK in jungle terrain but the no-cd exe doesn't take you back to the start screen when you exit an application like the terrain, org or scenario editors. It just quits and all I see is my desktop. However, it does load a scenario for play and one can save it. Also the desert terrain is all mucked up. The shaded hexes that a unit has no line of sight to are blue and not shaded. Makes play difficult and night combat impossible.

As for Divided Ground straight, the no-cd just doesn't work. When I want to play a scenario it asks me to insert disk in drive D in both my Vista and Win 7 machines. There is an interface problem somewhere which makes these games difficult to use on the newer operating systems.

ItB

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Hi Dave,

First, there is no Matrix version of Divided Ground (I assume Tiller and Talonsoft "Or whomever" bought it have the rights to it until it becomes freeware). It is my understanding that Matrix did not want DG. Jason may know more about that?
The "Matrix Version" prefix was put there by a former officer of the club, when he was tinkering with data base, after the Matrix release of MJTCS.

Divided Ground and DG/VN are both stand alone games. You may want to keep them in the scenario dBASE. DG has thirty-nine scenarios with multiple game reports. DG/VN has 130 scenarios with hundreds of game reports.
There are CS members who are still reporting DG/VN games.

What happens if/when those titles are removed? Do players lose their ladder points?
They are still under the CS umbrella. As much so as when Modern Wars is released. MW will be under the CS umbrella too?

Years ago, when Umbro was the coder for the site, we were told that you could not combine or remove any of the scenario "trees" or it would mess things up. If this is not the case I would keep Matrix EFII, WF, RS and keep the "not Matrix" DG and DG/VN.
Get rid of the rest (by hopefully merging the scenario reports so that players will not lose their ladder points).

Hope that makes sense.



HSL

[Scud]

Thanks Ed, and yes, I understand. Maybe Raz can just rename the Matrix version to "Divided Ground" and DG - Vietnam to "Divided Ground - Viet Nam". Would that make more sense?

As for Umbro's comments, that could very well still be the case. I know this clean-up thing has some issues, but Raz is aware of them. Plus, I don't think that's the issue. The idea is to clean up the links. Why have the "do not use for reporting" links at all? Doesn't make sense. So we're just talking about removing links going forward, not deleting old entries from the database. I will verify that, though.

Lastly, Modern Wars, when last discussed, will be under the CS umbrella.

Dave

[Herr Straße Laufer]

The idea is to clean up the links. Why have the "do not use for reporting" links at all? Doesn't make sense. So we're just talking about removing links going forward, not deleting old entries from the database. I will verify that, though.

I've always wanted those linky things gone.
I remember there were issues in consolidating. But, I don't remember what they were. At the time Umbro showed me what things would look like, and it was not pretty. I'm sure Raz is up for the challenge!

We are on the same page.



HSL