It's a disgrace

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.

Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets

Post Reply
macgregor
Posts: 999
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 6:44 pm

RE: My POV

Post by macgregor »

If you guys want a seperate email for every PiF Abort v. Kill decision then I don't see why you can't have it. Just don't make it compulsory.

How do I argue when this wasn't what I was advocating in the first place.
If you see the only difference between WiF and WAW as the provision of asynchronous PBEM then I think we're on different planets. Greetings from Earth... Sydney sector

I see nothing as I have yet to play WaW. I take it you're not a big fan.
I want a game where I'm expected to sit motionless in front of the screen for 30 minutes just planning my turn.

Did you mean to say "I don't want". Look, I do understand the value of asynchronous play. I'm a huge TOAW fan. I question if WiF is the way toward achieving a global asynchronous game.
If I had the time I'd be playing WitP but reality intrudes... as will a baby in about 2 months

WiTP looks like a pretty cool game. Could there be a global version of this?
I mean...what is a game? It's not so much about the topic, because if it's successful, the same game can be re-released to cover a different conflict or theatre. It's the way a particular game is played that is the game. You want to change the way WiF is played -why? You're better off taking another game engine and getting it to cover the global capaign. Oh yeah, good luck with your baby.
User avatar
Grotius
Posts: 5842
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 5:34 pm
Location: The Imperial Palace.

RE: My POV

Post by Grotius »

WiTP looks like a pretty cool game. Could there be a global version of this?
WITP is a wonderful grognard-oriented game. It's got its flaws, but it's a serious operational-level treatment of the whole war, in single-day turns. That's a 1600-turn PBEM, which for most players will take years. (One PBEM is now in 1945; the game was released 10 months ago.) If you like detailed games like WiF or ASL, you might like WITP. Anyway, all of this leads me to a question:

Would a full PBEM treatment of WIF -- including e-mailing every little decision by non-phasing players -- involve more than 1600 e-mails? I have only tooled around a little with WIF, so I honestly don't know. All I'm saying is that there is a commercially-significant number of gamers who will play a PBEM game that requires thousands of e-mails to complete one game. I'm one. If you told me "you have to e-mail each decision you make as a non-phasing player," my reaction would be: cool.
Image
macgregor
Posts: 999
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 6:44 pm

RE: My POV

Post by macgregor »

The difference between WiF and all the other games are the opportunities to affect the battle as the non-phasing player. Take away these and it's no longer WiF. Obviously not for everyone, still for some - it's the best game ever made. It's a shame Matrix couldn't have decided to buy the stagnantware TOAW series from take two. They could've much more easily made that global -and it fits with all their pre-requisites.
Would a full PBEM treatment of WIF -- including e-mailing every little decision by non-phasing players -- involve more than 1600 e-mails?

If that's the way Matrix decided to do it -yes. I pray they don't.
User avatar
Greyshaft
Posts: 1979
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2003 1:59 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

...say 18,000 emails

Post by Greyshaft »

If you guys want a seperate email for every PiF Abort v. Kill decision...
>> maybe you don't want this, but there seems a lot of differest sweet spots out there for what will make the perfect MWiF game. I don't see why most of them can't be done in the same game just through changing config options.

My understanding of WaW comes from Matrix Forum & web site. I'm not a big fan but I expect others will be.

To clarify my original point:
* I DO want a game where I'm expected to sit motionless in front of the screen for 30 minutes just PLANNING my turn as opposed to playing a dumbed-down version of WiF.
* I DON'T want a game where I'm expected to sit motionless in front of the screen for 30 minutes just WAITING for you to finish your turn.
So I want the complexity of the boardgame along with asychronous play.
Would a full PBEM treatment of WIF -- including e-mailing every little decision by non-phasing players -- involve more than 1600 e-mails?

Well each WiF IMPULSE has over 100 consecutive interactions between the players (not allowing for PiF Kill v. Abort discussions).
Multiply that by an average of (say) 5 impulses per turn.
Multiply that by 36 turns.
...say 18,000 emails

Of course that doesn't include the emails of introduction involved when both players eventually die and their children try to keep the game going.
/Greyshaft
User avatar
Grotius
Posts: 5842
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 5:34 pm
Location: The Imperial Palace.

RE: ...say 18,000 emails

Post by Grotius »

Heh, 18,000 would be a lot of e-mails. But if most of them are pretty quick decisions, maybe people could turn around a bunch of e-mails a day? Some WITP players somehow manage to do 4 or 5 PBEM turns a day, and each e-mail in that game is massive. If you could somehow do 10 e-mails a day in CWIF, why, that's just 1800 days of gaming. [8D] About the same as WITP.

I can tell you're not buying it. I just thought I'd ask. [;)]
Image
macgregor
Posts: 999
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 6:44 pm

RE: ...say 18,000 emails

Post by macgregor »

I don't see why most of them can't be done in the same game just through changing config options.

I agree.
Well each WiF IMPULSE has over 100 consecutive interactions between the players (not allowing for PiF Kill v. Abort discussions).

How ya figure? If you were to say 100 interactions are possible in a single impulse I'd say maybe -but that would indeed be a climactic impulse. I'd say the average would be more like 10 to 20 interactions. Let's clarify the definition of interaction: anything from yes or no to the single interaction of assembling an air defense -or the single interaction of post air or naval combat where non-phasing player decides to stay and if so,with what (and in what order). Even the return to base phase could be handled as a single interaction.

At any rate I should be able to recieve, read, and select off the little spam-like IM window as fast as my opponent could announce his intentions across the board, while picking up the tiny cardboard pieces with his tweezers.
User avatar
Greyshaft
Posts: 1979
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2003 1:59 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

RE: ...say 18,000 emails

Post by Greyshaft »

I did the math in a long forgotten post... I'll try and dig out the original doc
/Greyshaft
User avatar
coregames
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:45 pm
Contact:

RE: My POV

Post by coregames »

ORIGINAL: Greyshaft

If you see the only difference between WiF and WAW as the provision of asynchronous PBEM then I think we're on different planets. Greetings from Earth... Sydney sector

LOL... Yeah, GGWaW is fun, but the comparison is akin to that between checkers and go. That's what makes asynch play such a tough challenge for MWiF. Grigsby had the advantage of knowing he wanted PBEM as the primary multiplayer mode.

If they do have a toggle for the non-phasing decisions, that could be where they implement some scripting features. During PBEM games, the phasing side could tack on a contingency script file with their turn when submitting it. The decisions would be resolved as the situations arose during their opponents' turn. I am convinced that will be at least part of the solution.
"The creative combination lays bare the presumption of a lie." -- Lasker

Keith Henderson
User avatar
coregames
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:45 pm
Contact:

RE: ...say 18,000 emails

Post by coregames »

ORIGINAL: Grotius

Heh, 18,000 would be a lot of e-mails. But if most of them are pretty quick decisions, maybe people could turn around a bunch of e-mails a day?

This is where some scripting will make the game much more managable. Perhaps you don't have to submit all of your contingencies for the next impulse at once, but even if you can decide, say, 10 or 12 things in advance, the number of emails exchanged would be dramatically reduced. As has been mentioned elsewhere, perhaps strategic bombing, carpet bombing and ground strikes could be combined into one air phase without substantially altering the play of the game. Many such ideas will probably be needed to make WiF suitable for PBEM in a reasonable amount of time.
"The creative combination lays bare the presumption of a lie." -- Lasker

Keith Henderson
User avatar
Hortlund
Posts: 2162
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2000 8:00 am

RE: ...say 18,000 emails

Post by Hortlund »

Basically there are two options here.

1) keep the current sequence of play
- will make pbem impossible, and tcp/ip as only possible multiplayer variant

2) rework the sequence of play
- will make pbem possible, will remove *alot* of what wif is.


I dont know which route Matrix will take. Honestly I think cwif is vaporware.
The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..
macgregor
Posts: 999
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 6:44 pm

RE: My POV

Post by macgregor »

LOL... Yeah, GGWaW is fun, but the comparison is akin to that between checkers and go.

Hey...it's new. It's global. It's Matrix. I just thought...
1) keep the current sequence of play
- will make pbem impossible, and tcp/ip as only possible multiplayer variant

I guess my IM idea is out. What do I know-I'm just a guitar player!
Honestly I think cwif is vaporware.

Now you're talking fighting words. If this is the case then Matrix ought to at least let the WiF fans know how much they want for it -and stop yanking us around. This asynch pbem game everyone is talking about may be vaporware -as they're still years away. But what I want -to expedite the non-phasing decisions through TCP/IP (or IM) should not be that difficult. I mean...presumably CM had some kind of interface in mind!

Matrix bought this demo for one of three reasons:

1) To keep it from potentially hurting their sales of similar products. (which so far have recieved less than a heartening endorsment on this thread at least)This is at least a 'booby prize' to their inaction.

2) To rescue WiF fans from years of waiting. So far this does not appear to be the case.

3) In a moment of boyish enthusiasm, made a huge mistake which they now regret. I'll remind them -Take Two still has the TOAW series! That's PBEM! And a good game at that. If so,let the WiF fans buy it from you. Hell, if Green Bay can buy the Packers...

There was some talk earlier about this 'Origins' convention. Did it produce anything concrete in regards to this project?
User avatar
Hortlund
Posts: 2162
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2000 8:00 am

RE: My POV

Post by Hortlund »

ORIGINAL: macgregor
I guess my IM idea is out. What do I know-I'm just a guitar player!

I apologize, I had no intention to critizise your idea. I guess my point is that the current seqence of play requires too much action by the non-phasing player. Too much to be able to solve via IM (instant messages? like msn?). If you require the players to be avaliable online to answer questions via IM, you might as well have the players log on to the same game and have it taken care of inside the game. So it would seem that we somewhat agree, we both want the "real" sequence of play, but I am of the opinion that it cannot be done via pbem.
Now you're talking fighting words. If this is the case then Matrix ought to at least let the WiF fans know how much they want for it -and stop yanking us around. This asynch pbem game everyone is talking about may be vaporware -as they're still years away. But what I want -to expedite the non-phasing decisions through TCP/IP (or IM) should not be that difficult. I mean...presumably CM had some kind of interface in mind!

Well, Im sorry, but I dont know how else to put it really. Ive kept a close eye on cwif, because at first I thought it would be a great contender to a game I was involved in (HoI2), both were announced roughly at the same time. HoI2 has been out for 6 months now, while cwif has yet to hit pre-alpha. I mean look at these boards, look at what the developers are saying, I would bet good money that they havent even finished the GDDs yet (general design documents) and that puts the first alpha AT BEST in Q1-Q2 2006 if they nail the GDDs at Origins or whatever. And that is a very optimistic timeline, considering the limited resources of Matrix.
Matrix bought this demo for one of three reasons:

1) To keep it from potentially hurting their sales of similar products. (which so far have recieved less than a heartening endorsment on this thread at least)This is at least a 'booby prize' to their inaction.

2) To rescue WiF fans from years of waiting. So far this does not appear to be the case.

3) In a moment of boyish enthusiasm, made a huge mistake which they now regret. I'll remind them -Take Two still has the TOAW series! That's PBEM! And a good game at that. If so,let the WiF fans buy it from you. Hell, if Green Bay can buy the Packers...

There was some talk earlier about this 'Origins' convention. Did it produce anything concrete in regards to this project?

I think Matrix bought the game with good intentions. I have never doubted the honesty or sincerity of Matrix. I do believe they are stretched too thin at the moment though. Look at the first page of the forums. That is alot of games to cover for a very small game company. I would bet that the resources are focused elsewhere for now, and cwif remains on the to-do list...somewhere slighly below Combat Leader (which we have been waiting for since...2000 or something like that).

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..
macgregor
Posts: 999
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 6:44 pm

RE: My POV

Post by macgregor »

I apologize, I had no intention to critizise your idea. I guess my point is that the current seqence of play requires too much action by the non-phasing player. Too much to be able to solve via IM (instant messages? like msn?). If you require the players to be avaliable online to answer questions via IM, you might as well have the players log on to the same game and have it taken care of inside the game. So it would seem that we somewhat agree, we both want the "real" sequence of play, but I am of the opinion that it cannot be done via pbem.

Coregames said something similar to this. I suppose you're right. There needs to be a line of communication. So TCP/IP is the way to go.
I would bet good money that they havent even finished the GDDs yet (general design documents) and that puts the first alpha AT BEST in Q1-Q2 2006 if they nail the GDDs at Origins or whatever. And that is a very optimistic timeline, considering the limited resources of Matrix.

I guess my problem with Matrix started when, instead of releasing a savefile we could mail to each other to kick off playtesting the demo, they tried to rub it out. Insisting we don't share it or offer it. Then they tell us they're starting from scratch and things could take years. Well, if that's the case they haven't given us a game at all -but indeed have taken one away! I have nothing against them developing an AI -but not at the cost of them delaying the release of a non AI version. To me this is insane.
The computer saves time with beancounting and computation not to mention clarity of placement. You cannot cheat and should not have to be looking up rules quite as often -and you don't have to be near an opponent. Space is yet another issue. A father could watch his kids and still play -and not a cat, toddler, or jealous girlfriend can mess up your board. This isn't enough for you guys?

I'm quoting myself here -as not to repeat.
I think Matrix bought the game with good intentions. I have never doubted the honesty or sincerity of Matrix.

I have no reason to disagree. If a player on my baseball team(the Phillies -which might tell you something) missed a fly ball and didn't realize it was right behind him I'd yell and scream at him too. It doesn't mean I don't want him to win. If they leave the door open to unfavorable speculation -I'm going to let them know what it is. The bottom line is that I'm willing to do something to get this done -whatever it takes. And vaporware is not an option!
User avatar
Hortlund
Posts: 2162
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2000 8:00 am

RE: My POV

Post by Hortlund »

Well, I think what we need is for David Heath or someone else to give us the bottom line.

Either the GDDs are in place or they are not.

If the GDDs are set, then Matrix can tell us lots of stuff. At least they can tell us whether it will be pbem with changed sequence of play, or tcp/ip with the correct sequence of play.

if the GDDs are not in place, then they should give us an honest timeline.

I think that if Im right about the current state of cwif, then we are looking at a possible...POSSIBLE 2007 release at the earliest. That or vaporware.

Now there are interesting alternatives to make cwif playable as a sort of cross between pbem and tcp/ip, and I'd love to discuss those things, but not until I know that someone will listen, and listen more than what we see in this forum right now.
The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..
macgregor
Posts: 999
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 6:44 pm

RE: My POV

Post by macgregor »

What? No sense of humor? I had posted a little non-serious satire.It's hard to make fun of things in a post. You're never sure if people are laughing or organizing a lynching. So I removed it.
Cheesehead
Posts: 362
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 5:48 pm
Location: Appleton, Wisconsin

RE: My POV

Post by Cheesehead »

Hell, if Green Bay can buy the Packers...

Hey, now we're talking! Combining my two favorite interests: WiF and the Green Bay Packers [:D]

Last Fall, because of a scheduling mix up I had to choose between the two. Play WiF or stay home and watch the Packers beat up on the Vikings....I chose WiF
You can't fight in here...this is the war room!
User avatar
coregames
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:45 pm
Contact:

RE: ...say 18,000 emails

Post by coregames »

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

Basically there are two options here.

1) keep the current sequence of play
- will make pbem impossible, and tcp/ip as only possible multiplayer variant

2) rework the sequence of play
- will make pbem possible, will remove *alot* of what wif is.


I dont know which route Matrix will take. Honestly I think cwif is vaporware.

So, a dual mode approach is out of the question... no toggling between full sequence and streamlined PBEM sequence? Hearing a Matrix five-star say the project is vaporware is less than encouraging. I hope someone from the staff says something in here to contradict that opinion soon.
"The creative combination lays bare the presumption of a lie." -- Lasker

Keith Henderson
User avatar
Greyshaft
Posts: 1979
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2003 1:59 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

RE: ...say 18,000 emails

Post by Greyshaft »

I'm posting a *possible* CWiF sequence of play in another thread.
/Greyshaft
User avatar
Hortlund
Posts: 2162
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2000 8:00 am

RE: ...say 18,000 emails

Post by Hortlund »

ORIGINAL: coregames
So, a dual mode approach is out of the question... no toggling between full sequence and streamlined PBEM sequence? Hearing a Matrix five-star say the project is vaporware is less than encouraging. I hope someone from the staff says something in here to contradict that opinion soon.

Dont look too much at my stars now, all they say is that Ive got more than 1000 posts in this forum. And I think we all know that there doesnt exactly have to be a correlation between a posters number of posts and his knowledge about things [:D] I am associated with matrixgames in no way, shape or form.
The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..
User avatar
SamuraiProgrmmr
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:15 am
Location: NW Tennessee

RE: ...say 18,000 emails

Post by SamuraiProgrmmr »

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

there doesnt exactly have to be a correlation between a posters number of posts and his knowledge about things


True, but your posts usually show a high level of intelligence and thoughtfulness.

Good to see you posting again!
Bridge is the best wargame going .. Where else can you find a tournament every weekend?
Post Reply

Return to “World in Flames”