From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko
LOL what naivete....
Thanks, Oleg. You're such a swell guy.
I would agree with you - hell why not... why not have both options? Lets have both options, sing Kumbaya and throw rose petals in the air...
But unfortunatelly there is a fine line between rhetoric on the board and actual game development. Thus, to have it your way, or both ways, you first have to find an individual capable of understanding and improving TOAW code.
Mm. If Norm, as you indicate, is such a super-genius, then he will have properly commented the source code. So it'll be possible to see how it works.
Then you need to spend many many months to actually introduce "formation by formation" turn ending (I still can't imagine how would this work in actual game... you'd get message "Turn ended for SS LAH"? while other formations will still have their phases?).
Yeah. One could use the 'garrison' status for that formation, since Norm already wrote that bit of code. That seems fine to me.
Anyway, since you've stated that you will be happy with just a patch, I don't see why you object to the programmers spending months on this. If, as you say, no other programmer could ever understand Norm's holy writ, what is the point in even having this forum? Why are you bothering to argue with me? Fundamentally, nothing bad can come from what I'm advocating. A great deal of good can.
BTW Norm is not "god", he is simply the designer of this game. This game is product of his method of thinking, brilliance, genius, and faults, misconceptions, warts and all. That's all there is to it. With him at drivers seat, you may have somewhat imperfect, but consistent product.
Norm thinks that it's just fine for other people to add to his code. So it's a bit much for you to come out and demand that it be left untouched. If you love TOAW as it is so goddamned much, then don't buy the 'Matrix Edition'. There's no-one forcing you to do so.
With "wargaming democracy" in drivers seat you will have simply - nothing. Nothing but endless flame wars. That was my point.
The interesting thing is that, absent you trying to make this extremely dubious point, there wouldn't really be any disagreement at all. We'd have a virtually unanimous agreement that formation-by-formation early turn ending would be a great idea for a future version of TOAW.
btw, If you think this constitutes a 'flame war', you haven't lived.
< Message edited by golden delicious -- 10/24/2005 1:11:53 AM >