World in Flames is the computer version of Australian Design Group classic board game. World In Flames is a highly detailed game covering the both Europe and Pacific Theaters of Operations during World War II. If you want grand strategy this game is for you.
I am concerned with that too. AI is going to be tough to get done and will take alot of time. Nervous that no game testing of the AI is happening. Arg. I'm afraid we are at least a year away.
Concerning your comment on AI game testing....
Are you on the beta team and know what is happening? If so wouldn't discussion of what is or is not being tested be considered a violation of your NDA. Or are you just making assumptions about an issue you are not sure of?
Lighten up abj9562.
Steve controls the forum posts and knows who is subject to the NDA and who isn't.
You should note HansHafen has 51 posts and is expressing his valid concerns.
The 51 posts makes me doubt he is a member of the Beta test team.
abj9562 for a member of the forums with over 632 posts you should consider being less confrontational and more helpful to new people that post.
Please note I wrote "consider" it is totaly up to you how and when you respond in the froums.
University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)
I am not on beta team, I am only an observer. I know AI is supposed to be in the release, I think that Steve, last month was working on the supply code, supply is also quite important, a lot of things depend on it.
Michel Desjardins,
"Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious" - Oscar Wilde
"History is a set of lies agreed upon" - Napoleon Bonaparte after the battle of Waterloo, june 18th, 1815
I am concerned with that too. AI is going to be tough to get done and will take alot of time. Nervous that no game testing of the AI is happening. Arg. I'm afraid we are at least a year away.
Concerning your comment on AI game testing....
Are you on the beta team and know what is happening? If so wouldn't discussion of what is or is not being tested be considered a violation of your NDA. Or are you just making assumptions about an issue you are not sure of?
Lighten up abj9562.
Steve controls the forum posts and knows who is subject to the NDA and who isn't.
You should note HansHafen has 51 posts and is expressing his valid concerns.
The 51 posts makes me doubt he is a member of the Beta test team.
abj9562 for a member of the forums with over 632 posts you should consider being less confrontational and more helpful to new people that post.
Please note I wrote "consider" it is totaly up to you how and when you respond in the froums.
Thank you for pointing out my uh lack of tact. I am an old retired USAF NCO and can be too blunt at times. I know you are not trying to be confrontational and neither was I. I should have been more tactful in my response. I wa only trying to point out his post should have been a question and not a statement of assumed fact.
I am not on beta team, I am only an observer. I know AI is supposed to be in the release, I think that Steve, last month was working on the supply code, supply is also quite important, a lot of things depend on it.
Yes the AI has always been an integral part of MWiF. There are examples of the game in play from AAR's to screenshots showing the interaction of movement, combat, the maps, the interface, and much more. Instituting Supply is jut expanding the necessary interactions and rules checking the AI will need to make its decisions with.
We can not comment on specifics but I suggest this. Think of all the necessary parts that have to be in place before an AI can function. With that you can see how far tha game has come and what is left to accomplish. Add to that all the threads, discussions, and announcements on the AI. When all of this is put together I think it makes a pretty awesome picture.
In the next month's progress report, due soon, I hope the designer can give us an estimated ready date. That would, if met, greatly enhance my morale!!
In the next month's progress report, due soon, I hope the designer can give us an estimated ready date. That would, if met, greatly enhance my morale!!
I am concerned with that too. AI is going to be tough to get done and will take alot of time. Nervous that no game testing of the AI is happening. Arg. I'm afraid we are at least a year away.
Concerning your comment on AI game testing....
Are you on the beta team and know what is happening? If so wouldn't discussion of what is or is not being tested be considered a violation of your NDA. Or are you just making assumptions about an issue you are not sure of?
Lighten up abj9562.
Steve controls the forum posts and knows who is subject to the NDA and who isn't.
You should note HansHafen has 51 posts and is expressing his valid concerns.
The 51 posts makes me doubt he is a member of the Beta test team.
abj9562 for a member of the forums with over 632 posts you should consider being less confrontational and more helpful to new people that post.
Please note I wrote "consider" it is totaly up to you how and when you respond in the froums.
I have to agree with you about everybody lighten up, I have done it and man it was tough to do for a negative person like I am, but what is gnawing at my innards is this word NDA, come on people we are talking about a stinking game [please dont get annoyed I am referring to any game] this is not OPERATION OVERLORD[:-], give me a break. I am sure some lawyer is going to give us a lesson in NDA, not that my opinion is important but I have given Steve the benefit of a doubt[;)] and do hope he is on the right track to get this game to market. I am begining to think the OSS is at work here.
Concerning your comment on AI game testing....
Are you on the beta team and know what is happening? If so wouldn't discussion of what is or is not being tested be considered a violation of your NDA. Or are you just making assumptions about an issue you are not sure of?
Lighten up abj9562.
Steve controls the forum posts and knows who is subject to the NDA and who isn't.
You should note HansHafen has 51 posts and is expressing his valid concerns.
The 51 posts makes me doubt he is a member of the Beta test team.
abj9562 for a member of the forums with over 632 posts you should consider being less confrontational and more helpful to new people that post.
Please note I wrote "consider" it is totaly up to you how and when you respond in the froums.
I have to agree with you about everybody lighten up, I have done it and man it was tough to do for a negative person like I am, but what is gnawing at my innards is this word NDA, come on people we are talking about a stinking game [please dont get annoyed I am referring to any game] this is not OPERATION OVERLORD[:-], give me a break. I am sure some lawyer is going to give us a lesson in NDA, not that my opinion is important but I have given Steve the benefit of a doubt[;)] and do hope he is on the right track to get this game to market. I am begining to think the OSS is at work here.
BO
NDA's of this nature are actually legally binding agreements. Beta testers in this category have actually signed physical documents that Matrix has on file. They are not allowed to reveal privy information without official permission for disclosure, end of story.
I knew I would get a lawyer Major Dude[&o] ABJ explained it to me, I think I understand but what is Matrix going to do, shoot them with a firing squad.[:D] I have read many posts but all the sudden this NDA has been used lately, did not hear much about it before this and I did not bring this NDA subject up, just commenting on it, touchy touchy [not you Major just everybody]
July 1, 2010 Status Report for Matrix Games’ MWIF Forum
Accomplishments of June 2010
Project Management
I monitored all the threads in the MWIF World in Flames forum daily.
Hardware and Software
Theme Engine is still disabled. I rarely use the Delphi 2010 IDE/debugger any more, but I’ve become quite efficient using work-arounds. My work-arounds are inline diagnostic messages that let me track call sequences and variable values. I comment out the messages once I have fixed the problem (unless I forget).
Beta Testing
I released versions 4.02.00 (24 bug fixes), 4.02.01 (20 fixed), 4.02.02 (20 fixes), 4.02.03 (14 fixes), 4.02.04 (3 fixes), and 4.02.05 (19 fixes) to the beta testers last month. I had left diagnostic messages active in version 4.02.03 which drove the beta testers crazy (every time they moved a unit the program reported its destination hex); hence the quick upload of a new version the next morning. The beta testers send me saved games for many of the bugs they discover so it is easy for me to reproduce them and for me to validate that I have corrected them after making changes.
The mods this month were to correct bugs in a variety of places in the sequence of play. Over the past 2 weeks I have been gathering some momentum, usually correcting all new bugs the beta testers have posted during the night by noon my time (Hawaii). Then I spend the afternoon and evening working on the backlog or writing new code.
Saved Games
I have these fully functional again. There had been sporadic glitches which seem to have been cleared up.
Map and Units
Added some small map changes from Patrice. I also renamed the Verz Cruz (sp) militia to Veracruz so it matches the city name on the map, enabling the program to know where to place it when it arrives. Rob sent me an update of the naval unit writeups.
Scenarios and Optional Rules
Added new code which finalizes the optional rule for changing when the game is over. The players can do this whenever they like, setting the last game turn anywhere from the current turn to Nov/Dec 1952.
With the help of the beta testers, I have finished the specifications for how the Unlimited Divisions optional rule works. Based on that discussion, Paul has volunteered to write up the rule for inclusion in Rules as Coded and the Players Manual. I’ll post more on that once I modify the form for reforming the divisions back into corps/armies.
MWIF Game Engine and CWIF Conversion
I completely rewrote the code for determining valid naval moves. The CWIF code had used recursion that was dependent on assembler routines. Since I had removed all assembler routines, I needed to create a new solution to the problem of determining which ports and sea areas were valid destinations for a naval unit. A Repeat ... Until structure served that purpose. This rewrite took me a week but it enabled me to correct some logic deficiencies and to fix some bugs reported last year in November and December. I had been in the midst of fixing those when I decided to upgrade to Windows 7, Delphi 2010, et al.
The new search routines look for a path that can not be intercepted by enemy units. This is very handy when returning to port, since you will rarely want to encounter enemy units at that time. CWIF always searched for the shortest path, even if it took the units through sea areas controlled by the enemy. Now don’t get me wrong, you can still take a shorter path through enemy controlled sea areas. For instance, that can happen if you want to reach a higher sea box section in a destination sea area. To do so, you specify the path for the naval units one sea area/port at a time using Ctrl Left Click. The new code is working well now. From a programming perspective, it is both simpler to understand and fully documented.
I added another piece of code to my rewrite of the supply routines: enabling HQs in a coastal hex to trace supply overseas without having to first find a land path to a port. I’ve gotten the code for tracing from tertiary to secondary supply sources mostly written but I haven’t activated it for testing yet (I like to reread code several times after I have written it to reassure myself that the logic is sound). Once I can get far enough ahead of the beta testers, who quickly report bugs when I upload a new version, I’ll finish the rest of my new supply routines and trash the old ones from CWIF (which are still in place and still execute all supply determination).
Player Interface
Created a new form for changing when the game ends. It is accessible when a new game is being started and also during play. In both cases it is accessed using a button on the Optional Rules Help form for Extended Game Play.
For the Unlimited Divisions optional rule I began work on modifications to the Pools form so it shows which divisions were created when a corps/army was broken down. As part of that, the location of each division is shown.
Internet - NetPlay
Removed the last of the CWIF code for Internet Play. That had been based on using Windows utility routines, while MWIF’s is based on a Delphi library for Internet communications. Because the old routines were interfering when playing Head-to-head, I went to the effort of cleaning up this loose end.
PBEM
Nothing new.
Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Nothing new.
Player’s Manual
A few small changes to reflect changes in rules interpretations. Nothing important, but I want both Rules as Coded and the Players Manual to be as precise as possible.
Tutorials, Training Videos, and Context Sensitive Help
Nothing new.
Historical Video, Music, and Sound Effects
Nothing new.
Marketing
Andy Johnson has the MWIF fan site looking good. My involvement in the fan site remains close to nil.
Communications
Harry Rowland answered a question posed by Patrice (on behalf of MWIF) about the use of fractional odds on the 1D10 Assault table. The question arose because there are gaps in the odds columns: 5:1, 7:1, and 10:1. So, what happens if the odds are 8.5:1? Harry’s answer was that there was a 50% chance of rounding up to 9:1, which is then reduced back to 7:1. This becomes important if there are other factors causing odds shifts - weather and snow units for example.
Have been logging on and ou to keep an eye on your progress and can see there is light at the end of the tunnel and really looking forward to it's release.
Yeah it's just a game, but one that's been in development since 1999 (ADG was working it before Matrix took over). My interest in seeing this went from enthusiasm to Meh in that time. I would ask Matrix, "Is the customer base even still here to support this thing when it gets released?" and, "What about expectation management?" Five years in Matrix development-expectations are going to be extremely high-and with no AI; going to be tough sell to break even on this one. There's also the problem of the software lagging hardware; meaning that processors, RAM, and Video have all expanded exponentially in the last few years-there's a danger here of releasing something that was cool: ten years ago. I wish Matrix all the best, but I'm not going to be in line for this one.
If it will be released (maybe the year after David Gerrolds fifth book of the Chtorr-Series that should come out in "octobre", since 1993 [;)] ), I will buy it anyway. Promise. And in the meantime the working staff has to stand vs. my growing depression.
