I believe this game will never happen

[Rocko911]

After seeing that this game has been in development for over 4+ years I have written it off

[SLAAKMAN]

(Silly LRRP-Newblette. Its already been happening for many moons)-
http://www.vassalengine.org/
http://www.vassalengine.org/wiki/Module:World_in_Flames
[:'(]

[bo]

ORIGINAL: LRRP

After seeing that this game has been in development for over 4+ years I have written it off

It has been a long time LRRP there is no getting around that , but as a beta tester for MWIF there is light at the end of the tunnel and the game will be well worth the wait.\

Bo

[Edfactor]

ORIGINAL: LRRP

After seeing that this game has been in development for over 4+ years I have written it off

4 years? we are coming up on the 10 year anniversary in a few months.

If you are going to complain accuracy is a must.


"Matrix Games and Australian Design Group Seal Deal for World In Flames!

Matrix Games to Develop and Publish World Famous Wargame

Woodbridge, NJ, October 21st, 2003 - Matrix Games and Australian Design Group (ADG: www.a-d-g.com.au ) are pleased to announce that the international award-winning wargame World In Flames will be faithfully adapted for computer play. Unlike many other World War II wargames, World In Flames covers every unit in every theater of operations, making it possible to play out all of World War II in a single unified game system."

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: LRRP

After seeing that this game has been in development for over 4+ years I have written it off

Thanks for dropping by and sharing that with us. Happy to see you have this kind of time on your hands...

[tigercub]

come in open your mouth and go!

Don`t let the door hit you on the way out!

[vonRocko]

ORIGINAL: SLAAKMAN

(Silly LRRP-Newblette. Its already been happening for many moons)-
http://www.vassalengine.org/
http://www.vassalengine.org/wiki/Module:World_in_Flames
[:'(]

Slaak is right. The game is already out for multiplayers. If this won't have an AI, what is the point?

[Terminus]

The only point would be for people who don't want to buy the boardgame and 87 bajillion expansions to play the VASSAL module.

I personally don't think having no AI is a good idea. Take a year or two to build it before release. You've already gone for a decade, what's a few more years?

[paulderynck]

The point is that all the mistakes you or your opponent can make in Vassal or the boardgame, like missing the weather being different on the other side of the weather line, or with respect to whether units are in or out of supply, or bringing on reinforcements in the wrong place, or messing up US Entry, or miscounting plane ranges, or miscalculating odds or shifts for an attack, or etc. etc. etc. won't happen.

But you would have all of us who are perfectly willing to play other human beings (or not terrified of losing a game to them) wait a few more years. That's very big of you.

[Terminus]

You've waited for a decade already.

After launch, will you be willing to forego bug fixes while the AI is being written? Last I checked, this is a one-man project, and writing a competent AI is not something you do in a week or two. I think this is a poor decision.

[Titan]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: LRRP

After seeing that this game has been in development for over 4+ years I have written it off

Thanks for dropping by and sharing that with us. Happy to see you have this kind of time on your hands...

Looks more like Trolling to me, probably no real interest anyway

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

You've waited for a decade already.

After launch, will you be willing to forego bug fixes while the AI is being written? Last I checked, this is a one-man project, and writing a competent AI is not something you do in a week or two. I think this is a poor decision.

Nope. I'm willing to have the AI further delayed.

Furthermore, the game is almost ready now. There are many of us who want to start using it. Let's say half the fans of the game are willing. With the AI, the software needs to be written, then debugged - but unlike the game there is yet one more step. How much further testing and software modification (and debugging) will be needed to make the AI at least a passable opponent for a beginner**? And how much more time will that add to the process? So unlike the game, which has two components to satisfy prior to release, the AI will have three. So half the fan base here have to wait that much longer for an AI they feel they can live without?

Waiting for the AI before publication would be the poor decision.

**And the game will come with something like 20 tutorials that should enable a beginner to understand and play it anyway.

You want an AI now? Play the game solitaire. The AI will be superior to the one you are going to get. And you'll have it when the game is published. And it will always adjust and keep pace with your own improving abilities.

[Terminus]

And for how long has it been "almost ready now"?

[Kham]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

And for how long has it been "almost ready now"?

several years.

it has also been several years since there has been an attempt to answer the question When?

And thats despite more than 3000 posts in the top sticky.

So I kinda agree that there is a good chance we will never see this commercially. And yes dropping by every year or so to see nóthing has changed might not be really paying attention but then again I doubt there is much of a point to being on this forum more often.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Kham

ORIGINAL: Terminus

And for how long has it been "almost ready now"?

several years.

warspite1

It was a rhetorical question.......

Not fair to say nothing has changed - although admittedly you can be forgiven for thinking that is the case. Rest assured, there is plenty of work going on under the surface - keep the faith. In Steve we trust [:)]

[rmdesantis]

ORIGINAL: Kham

ORIGINAL: Terminus

And for how long has it been "almost ready now"?

several years.

it has also been several years since there has been an attempt to answer the question When?

And thats despite more than 3000 posts in the top sticky.

So I kinda agree that there is a good chance we will never see this commercially. And yes dropping by every year or so to see nóthing has changed might not be really paying attention but then again I doubt there is much of a point to being on this forum more often.

As counterpoint, if you've checked out the forum you'll have seen that Matrix has called for the 'final' round of beta testers. There would be no point in doing this if there wasn't a reasonable likelihood of a commercial launch of the product being planned.

Mike

[marklv]

ORIGINAL: Edfactor

ORIGINAL: LRRP

After seeing that this game has been in development for over 4+ years I have written it off

4 years? we are coming up on the 10 year anniversary in a few months.

If you are going to complain accuracy is a must.


"Matrix Games and Australian Design Group Seal Deal for World In Flames!

Matrix Games to Develop and Publish World Famous Wargame

Woodbridge, NJ, October 21st, 2003 - Matrix Games and Australian Design Group (ADG: www.a-d-g.com.au ) are pleased to announce that the international award-winning wargame World In Flames will be faithfully adapted for computer play. Unlike many other World War II wargames, World In Flames covers every unit in every theater of operations, making it possible to play out all of World War II in a single unified game system."

I remember that the original idea to make a computer game from World in Flames came about in mid 1990s. Chris Marinacci started it in 1995 and 'finished' it in 2002 - of course there was no AI etc. So some of us (me included) have been waiting 18 years!! I was 28 in 1995 and now I'm 46. Hopefully I'll be able to play the game before I retire.

[Jimm]

As a long time (on and off since about 2007) member of the beta team, I echo what Bo, Paul and other of my colleagues have said above: the game is very close. It has been relatively playable in beta versions for some time now and Steve is battling through the last few main issues.

Now, given the limited development resources we have, (ie Steve) it seems sensible to me that getting a robust, working game up and running is an absolute prerequisite before getting very far down the line of coding up an AI- (which still strikes me as an immensely challenging proposition in its own right).


One thing we have been chewing on of late in the development group is how game balance is affected by the Asian/Pacific being at European scale; particularly the Sino-Japanese campaign. In testing we only have a very small sample of test games to go by and up to now it hasn't been a big focus. Having a large data set of netplay games will be a great indicator of whether this balance is right- or perhaps needs compensating in future patches- and this affects how you program an AI to play Japan and China successfully.

[bo]

I agree with Jimm 100% and I usually dont agree with anybody about anything [;)]

Steve has heard my negative side for many years, but 2 years ago I grew up a little and to Steve's credit he took me on as a beta tester. Wow what an eye opener for me about the complexity of this game, I never played the board game and not really sure this is my kind of game, hopefully it will be, I like more action oriented games like Cod2 and WOT, probably because at my age I tend to doze at slow moving games [:@]

I will say this that I find playing MWIF in the beta form in the solo mode not bad at all, even though I would prefer an AI in the initial release [it will not happen] I can live with learning the game through Steve's fine tutorials in any mode. I may be wrong but PBEM will not fly right with me, even though you could have 5 or 6 games going at once, I might have enough trouble trying to concentrate on one game.

My biggest thrill for me at 7 pm est. will be to call Orm on the phone waking him up [>:] [probably about one pm in Sweden] and chastise him for not making any moves in the last 24 hours. [pbem]

And in net play some of you you people here will need to change a diaper in the middle of the game which will not sit well with me when I am about to crush them with Erwin Rommels Panzers.

The AI is a must, I do not care if it is a poor AI, a not so good AI, a decent AI, a very good AI, or a Big blue AI, I just do not care, each one above will have it's values for differnt learning technics, nobody in their right mind would want to play against Big Blue for they would lose every time and I do not like to lose.

Just an opinion good or bad.

Bo

[Kham]

warspite1

It was a rhetorical question.......

Not fair to say nothing has changed - although admittedly you can be forgiven for thinking that is the case. Rest assured, there is plenty of work going on under the surface - keep the faith. In Steve we trust [:)]

It must be very well hidden

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

May 2, 2010 Status Report for Matrix Games’ MWIF Forum


Beta Testing
I released versions 4.01.01, 4.01.02, 4.01.03, 4.01.04 and 4.01.05 to the beta testers this month. They got a new version about every 4 days at the beginning of the month but that paced slacked off once I started working on the rewrite of the supply routines.

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

May 1, 2013 Status Report for Matrix Games’ MWIF Forum

In April I released 3 new versions to the beta testers: 10.03.00 (12 fixes), 10.03.01 (8 fixes), and 10.03.03 (8 fixes). The last of those was on April 14th. I have 20 fixes done for version 10.03.04, which is waiting for me to finish supply. Both the number of new versions and fixes (48) are dramatically below my averages. What can I say, debugging supply takes a lot of my time and effort.