It sounds like there some fogginess about "option" means with respect to Matrix-WiF and ADG-WiF (Raw 7). I recognized the greyed-out options as from WiF and I was surprised to see just how many there are greyed-out. So, when people here spoke up I thought maybe I was putting my foot in my mouth and these "options" were some new Matrix-WiF option construct.
So, I took the few minutes to match-up those from MWiF and RAW 7. The list below can also serve to anyone interested in knowing about it without having to buy the game and be surprised, or sifting through the small print, so-to-speak, of these forums.
Of the 24 currently unimplemented Matrix-WiF options, they are listed below as described in ADG-WiF (RAW 7), and from which add-on module in the WiF world they come from, if any.
1. Frogmen (Option 24 (Asia Aflame))
2. Partisan HQs (Option 72 (Politics in Flames))
3. Guards Banner Armies (Option 70 (Leaders in Flames))
4. City Based Volunteers (Option 67 (Africa Aflame, Leaders in Flames, Politics in Flames)
5. V-Weapons (Option 23 (Planes in Flames))
6. Atomic Bombs (Option 23 (Planes in Flames))
7. Naval Supply Units (Option 69 (Ships in Flames))
8. Convoys in Flames (Option 76 (Convoys in Flames))
9. Rough Seas (Option 75 (Ships in Flames, Cruisers in Flames))
10. Oil Tankers (Option 76 (Convoys in Flames))
11. Surprised ZOC (Option 20 (World in Flames))
12. Kamikazes (Option 60 (World in Flames))
13. Bounce Combat (Option 22 (World in Flames))
14. En-route Aircraft Interception (Option 51 (World in Flames))
15. Limited Aircraft Interception (Option 57 (World in Flames))
16. Flying Bombs (Option 59 (Planes in Flames))
17. Naval Offensive Chit (Option 61 (World in Flames))
18. Isolated Reorganization Limits (Option 47 (World in Flames))
19. Hitler's War (Option 49 (World in Flames))
20. Recruitment Limits (Option 16 (World in Flames))
21. Japanese Command Conflict (Option 64 (World in Flames))
22. USSR-Japan Compulsory Peace (Option 50 (World in Flames))
23. The Ukraine (Option 62 (World in Flames))
24. Intelligence (Option 63 (World in Flames))
Obviously, it's my personal opinion, but cripes, that's a whole hell'ov'a lot of RAW 7. I still, even now, don't care that all this will trickle in over time. The crux of the matter for me is what I keep reading from the developers and managers, again and again, nope, Matrix-WiF is its own thing and we'll include what we want to and deem feasible. Fair enough. I wish I'd known that $200 back. Moreover, with so much on the development plate at this point, expanding the product to include ADG sister products like, Days of Decision, well, that's totally flown out of my mind.
I would add an important point. Some of the list above has been deemed too complex to implement, so they'll just skip it. Indeed, exactly because these options so fundamentally alter the game of WiF indicates that they are not simply minor chrome add-ons.
I yanked out my 2008 annual that contains the rules for Factories in Flames (FiF). (FiF is not listed as part of MWiF. I'm just using it as an example for the following point.) It's a few pages of rules. But, if you go through it in detail you can see where the rules impact the game just about everywhere. That's a major big deal. From Steve's point-of-view, FiF is not simply a stick in the spokes of his wheels, it's a barrelful of sticks. If his code is not architecturally so structured, it means a lot of development pain. From my consumer's point-of-view, FiF is a major option, not to be implemented, and makes MWiF divergent from ADG's WiF. Once I saw the list of the other 24 unimplemented options, well that was just way too much for me.
To respond to you, Bo, no I don't think you were talking about me. I recognized that you were referencing the quasi-violent post up-thread. I appreciate your sentiment as well as the professional nature of the Matrix moderators here. I understand where I am. There are a bunch of geeky or immature types and that's part of the wargaming world and subculture/demographic.
I also understand that Steve is offended and feels unappreciated by, from his point-of-view, another geeky immature type (what does he know of my problems). Steve, I totally understand the corners of your four walls. But, it's not my place to be concerned about that, not unless you're going to sell your product at a discount in exchange.
Yes, of course, one can write one line of requirements (in this case, in part, ADG-WiF RAW 7), and it implies an entire new subsystem. Using that as an argument, to my mind as an experienced developer, is a non-starter. WiF is what it is as defined by Harry Rowland, and you guys took it upon yourself to make his game. Even though it implies a whole new mountain of work, I cannot criticize my domain experts that reality implies too much work for me. I can tell them the software development implications and they can decide whether they want to pay/buy.
That you are afraid to touch your code and feel it is too brittle is again not my concern as a consumer:
I'm sure you are aware of FURPS+
And the several dozen other -ilities that go under all that.
I refuse, as the consumer, to be made a scapegoat of unreasonableness and being unrealistic, because the developers missed the boat on several critical attributes in that all-important list above, and it's continually biting you in the ass even now. In particular, maintainability, and process issues vis-à-vis iterations. I didn't do anything wrong except pony up $200 faster than I should have.
With respect to various comments in this thread of how I, as a consumer, was too stupid to have re-read years' worth of posts in order to unravel what is/isn't/will/won't be implemented, you speak more of yourselves than of me I think.
Mr. Rutins wrtites above, "Regarding the original post, we went over the product page before release to make sure it only reflected the rules and content included at release." Sounds like the practice of due diligence as advised by an attorney. I'm not claiming any legal right and I'm sure you guys are covered.
Also, some cleanup comments: Nope this is not a sock puppet. I never had occasion to use the Matrix Forums. I gave up on a computerized WiF years and years ago. I heard over on BGG that MWiF was finally coming out. I checked out the several advertising posts, especially the 7 Wows post. I thought MWiF looked amazing functionally (and I still do). I think Steve did a bang-up job in his functional design/port from cardboard. Also, the maps are awesome.
I performed some due diligence here in these forums. I pretty much stopped when I found the list of which ADG modules are included, noting that only Factories in Flames (FiF) was omitted from Matrix-WiF. I was OK with that. I took that at face value, which was my main mistake, I guess, if I understand people's criticisms of my position. I had some questions about the maps so I just recently registered on these forums so I could post my questions.
I know of Matrix for many years and I just put my faith in the brand, such that if anything was missing from the day-1 release, I was confident it would arrive later. It's only when I started reading, understanding, and grasping that MWiF will be its own beast, already well divergent from ADG's WiF, that the red flags started to go up. I have no interest in learning some other game, albeit clearly originally sourced from ADG's WiF.
That understanding took a couple of days of reading the manuals that came with the download and these forums. So, I quickly asked Matrix for a refund before the physical product ships. Slitherine responded with a, and I paraphrase, no, too bad for me.
Well, if I'm stuck with this--in my opinion--not WiF, I thought I'd post about my position, which is my original post, in order to (a) make people aware of this situation, and (b) if people agree with me, that we collectively urge that MWiF be at least ADG WiF compliant; i.e. make our wishes known.
Then the apologists and fanboys fell out of the woodwork with their usual venom and immaturity.
And, Steve was very offended that I should have the temerity to suggest that programming all of RAW 7 is actually not the undoable monster he was trying to convince me of. Obviously (to me; in my opinion), the development project has severe structural and process issues, none of which are Steve's fault. When one is afraid to touch one's code in order to add functionality, that's a giant red flag.
I also get the business requirements (constraints) inherent in this business case. This is WiF, not Halo 3. The business case warrants only so many manual resources. And, I could go on about risk mitigation in the first iterations such that makes regression testing as cheap and painless as possible. But, I'll only mention that one sentence because I recognize that it is not my place to come in as an after-the-fact, 20/20 hindsight, laser pointer, stranger, to possible erroneous decisions. Software development only ever came into the discussion because Steve brought it up, and only as an ad hominem argument against me.
As an individual I hope all the stakeholders make oodles of money, and they'd deserve it. I don't begrudge anyone their due. As an owner of MWiF, I'm hoping I've pulled enough levers such that the marketing and economics guides the product managers to ensure that MWiF is a computerized version of ADG WiF and not its own offshoot--as it most definitely is right now--and in a reasonable (not 3-5 years) timeframe. I know you have NetPlay to fix, and extend it to 6 players, and PBEM is a biggie, hence the title of my original post, "don't forget the etc."