Where is Nomonhan scenario?

[JMS2]

Send it my way and I´ll try to convert it.
 
jms101es(at)yahoo.es

[rhinobones]

After you do the conversions, please post them on the SZO scenario page. Thank you.

Regards, RhinoBones

[Arckon]

Actually JMS2 that would be great if you could do what RhinoBones suggested.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

So? 90% is 10% less than 100%.

"pick your favorite Best Unit Ever, any war, any army, any century and it's not 100% proficient, perhaps not even 90% in TOAW terms"

I don't think 1939-era Japanese armour qualifies as the "best unit ever, any war, any army, any century".

Naturally, these scenarios would need reworking for TOAW III, since the way motor transport works in TOAW has been changed, among other things. That, I think, is why Volume I scenarios weren't considered for release with TOAW III.

[Catch21]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko
You're credited for that - so you might as well live with it.

Speaking for myself as usual- are we? I guess time will tell. And we will. And all for nothing.

[JMS2]

Mail has decided to fold up just now, people, please send it to:
 
JMSLR(at)mailpersonal.com
 
Thanks

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: General Staff

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko
You're credited for that - so you might as well live with it.

Speaking for myself as usual- are we? I guess time will tell.

Are you credited? Well you are. See In game Help or manual section 21.0 for the list of people who are credited. Actually I see "General Staff" there - you appear to be so shy you didn't give your real name even for the list of game credits [8D]

[jungelsj_slith]

It seems like a lot of customers here and on other forums are pretty bummed out about the scenario selection in TAOW III. I think the promised product was that we'd be getting the pick of the litter, and it doesn't seem to be that way in reality. We can sit here and nitpick about details but I think it's fairly obvious to everyone that the scenario creation process could see some improvement - even the matrix folks themselves are admiting that time was more important than scenario quality in this case.

Hopefully the team at matrix continues to try to track down the designers of some of the better scenarios for inclusion in future patches. I also hope that they continue to fix the scenarios that are included already. It really bummed me out to see that a large number of scenarios are still "PBEM only" - which seems acceptable for a free scenario created by a user, but definately not acceptable for a retail product set at a premium price.

It also seems that there are a lot of people in this thread, as well as others, that are very interested in the selection of scenarios for TAOWIII. Hopefully the team at matrix uses this resource to make a better product rather than simply disagreeing with their customers or telling them to 'do it yourself.'

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: molotov_billy
It really bummed me out to see that a large number of scenarios are still "PO only"

Presumably you mean Human vs. Human only.

With scenario selection, either you already own COW and therefore already have access to all the scenarios in the public domain whether they were selected or not, or you don't own COW, in which case no-one I have so far encountered would argue that TOAW III is a short-change.

[jungelsj_slith]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
With scenario selection, either you already own COW and therefore already have access to all the scenarios in the public domain whether they were selected or not, or you don't own COW, in which case no-one I have so far encountered would argue that TOAW III is a short-change.

I can certainly see why a customer would be frustrated with poorer quality scenarios, scenarios that they can't play (PBEM only), and scenarios that were not re-balanced for the updated engine (Not necessarily my own opinions, but opinions that I've heard from others.) I've encountered many folks who feel short changed by the scenario selection. I personally feel shortchanged because, like you said, scenarios in TAOWIII are scenarios that were already available for a previous game that I've already paid for.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: molotov_billy

I can certainly see why a customer would be frustrated with poorer quality scenarios, scenarios that they can't play (PBEM only), and scenarios that were not re-balanced for the updated engine (Not necessarily my own opinions, but opinions that I've heard from others.) I've encountered many folks who feel short changed by the scenario selection.

Short of comissioning new scenarios, there is little Matrix could have done. Anyone and everyone is free to browse the scenario archives at Rugged Defence and elsewhere, so I don't see why it should matter what's on the disk. Except that I get a free copy because of it [;)]

[Chuck2]

TOAW 3 has some new tools that will be useful for designing better PO scenarios. First, there is the improved AI. Elmer is a lot smarter. Second, there is the movie option. This allows you to have speed matches of PO vs. PO with a picture taken after each turn for review later. This is 95% faster than watching it live. Third, there is the SitRep log, which has detailed combat reports.

[jungelsj_slith]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

ORIGINAL: molotov_billy

I can certainly see why a customer would be frustrated with poorer quality scenarios, scenarios that they can't play (PBEM only), and scenarios that were not re-balanced for the updated engine (Not necessarily my own opinions, but opinions that I've heard from others.) I've encountered many folks who feel short changed by the scenario selection.

Short of comissioning new scenarios, there is little Matrix could have done. Anyone and everyone is free to browse the scenario archives at Rugged Defence and elsewhere, so I don't see why it should matter what's on the disk. Except that I get a free copy because of it [;)]

I guess my point is that with the purchase of a new game, I (as well as others) would prefer to play something with new content. I don't believe it's unreasonable to ask for such a thing.

I do believe that there are many low-cost things that the developers could have done to improve the scenarios and scenario selection.

I wish my copy had been free If I knew that I could have gotten a free copy of the game if I designed and tested a new scenario, I definately would have done so.

[henri511]

ORIGINAL: Chuck2

TOAW 3 has some new tools that will be useful for designing better PO scenarios. First, there is the improved AI. Elmer is a lot smarter. Second, there is the movie option. This allows you to have speed matches of PO vs. PO with a picture taken after each turn for review later. This is 95% faster than watching it live. Third, there is the SitRep log, which has detailed combat reports.

This can be a useful and fun feature. I think it was on by default, and I discovered last night that my game had 7.5 Gb of pictures added to the disk[X(]. If you are short on disk space or don't want the pictures, make sure that it is turned off in the advanced options. Or if you want only the smaller pictures ( two pictures are generated each turn), you can delete the big images after each session. The log can be turned off separately, but that takes a lot less space.

Henri

[rhinobones]

ORIGINAL: molotov_billy
I guess my point is that with the purchase of a new game, I (as well as others) would prefer to play something with new content. I don't believe it's unreasonable to ask for such a thing.

If I knew that I could have gotten a free copy of the game if I designed and tested a new scenario, I definately would have done so.

Think that Matrix was very up front with what they proposed to sell the public. They made it quite clear that it would be COW with certain bug fixes and a few added features. Most of the features were posted on the forum prior to release. As for scenario selection, Matrix explained exactly where the new scenarios were coming from and even published a list prior to release. No one buying the game can say that they were surprised. As stated earlier, if your favorites were not included, it is a perfectly good option to continue playing them with TOAW-COW.

As for the complimentary copy of TOAW3, the individual scenarios did not initially know that that Matrix intended the freebee. All of the authors (except maybe for those on the selection team) gave their consent without prior knowledge. It was a nice surprise!

If you count up the number of authors and multiply by $40, it's obvious that Matrix gave away a good number of guarantied sales. That's something they didn't have to do.

Regards, RhinoBones

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

If you count up the number of authors and multiply by $40, it's obvious that Matrix gave away a good number of guarantied sales. That's something they didn't have to do.

Indeed. Now that you put it *that* way, including so many half assed poor scenarios in the final distribution seems like even worse idea than I originally thought [:D] [:D] [:D] (joking, joking!)

[jungelsj_slith]

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

Think that Matrix was very up front with what they proposed to sell the public. They made it quite clear that it would be COW with certain bug fixes and a few added features. Most of the features were posted on the forum prior to release. As for scenario selection, Matrix explained exactly where the new scenarios were coming from and even published a list prior to release. No one buying the game can say that they were surprised. As stated earlier, if your favorites were not included, it is a perfectly good option to continue playing them with TOAW-COW.

As for the complimentary copy of TOAW3, the individual scenarios did not initially know that that Matrix intended the freebee. All of the authors (except maybe for those on the selection team) gave their consent without prior knowledge. It was a nice surprise!

If you count up the number of authors and multiply by $40, it's obvious that Matrix gave away a good number of guarantied sales. That's something they didn't have to do.

Regards, RhinoBones

It's pretty frustrating to try to have a reasonable discussion and to come up with solutions to problems when not all opinions and posts are read thoroughly. A couple of the things you're talking about here don't have much to do with what I was bringing up. Maybe I'm just not being clear enough, I don't know. I don't want to have to rewrite it.

I think if you'd ask any game developer if a free copy of the game was compensation enough for the number of hours required to create good, historical gameplay, they'd say you're crazy. That said, I would still have done it, because I love wargames and I want to see them furthered along. I would still create a scenario if it meant a free copy of a matrix game.

I, as well as others, are upset with the scenario selection of TAOW III. You can tell me that my opinion is wrong, and that everyone is perfectly happy, but that's just pointless. I'm not really interested in those arguments; they don't go anywhere. I'm trying to come up with a solution to a problem that many customers are upset with. That's all. Burning bridges isn't going to accomplish anything, especially when the wargaming community is so small as-is.

Thanks

[ralphtricky]

ORIGINAL: molotov_billy

I think if you'd ask any game developer if a free copy of the game was compensation enough for the number of hours required to create good, historical gameplay, they'd say you're crazy. That said, I would still have done it, because I love wargames and I want to see them furthered along. I would still create a scenario if it meant a free copy of a matrix game.

I don't quite understand this comment. The games were offered to the people after the scenario scelection was completed. It was in no way offered as payment. I'd agree that the number of hours run up by the people that created by the scenarios in no way offset the number of hours they spent on creating the scenarios. That does double for the scenario selection team and the beta testers.

I, as well as others, are upset with the scenario selection of TAOW III. You can tell me that my opinion is wrong, and that everyone is perfectly happy, but that's just pointless. I'm not really interested in those arguments; they don't go anywhere. I'm trying to come up with a solution to a problem that many customers are upset with. That's all. Burning bridges isn't going to accomplish anything, especially when the wargaming community is so small as-is.

Please, if you're upset by it, that's something that's very easy to undo. Start a thread (or blog, or some other medium) and list the scenarios along with a description of them, whether they're good for PBEM, whether they're good for PO, how complex they are and what short-comings they have. Heck, collaborate with Oleg on getting his site up to date.

That's something that's sorely missing from the community. Figuring out which scenarios you want to play is a daunting task.

Ralph

It's better to light a candle than curse the darkness.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: molotov_billy
I wish my copy had been free If I knew that I could have gotten a free copy of the game if I designed and tested a new scenario, I definately would have done so.

At $40 for the game, even for a small scenario like Leros it works out at no more than $1 an hour. There are easier ways to pay for computer games.

[jungelsj_slith]

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick
I don't quite understand this comment. The games were offered to the people after the scenario scelection was completed. It was in no way offered as payment. I'd agree that the number of hours run up by the people that created by the scenarios in no way offset the number of hours they spent on creating the scenarios. That does double for the scenario selection team and the beta testers.

So we're both confused. I think we're in agreement.

Please, if you're upset by it, that's something that's very easy to undo. Start a thread (or blog, or some other medium) and list the scenarios along with a description of them, whether they're good for PBEM, whether they're good for PO, how complex they are and what short-comings they have. Heck, collaborate with Oleg on getting his site up to date.

The problem is that it's not actually easy to do. I'm also not sure that those resources would in turn be used by matrix. I make video games for a living (not wargames), and I've offered assistance on a number of matrix games, completely free of charge. I've never actually seen a reply about any of it, so I can't say I'm confident that it would be used.

That's something that's sorely missing from the community.

In my opinion, it's something that was sorely missing from the developer of TAOW III. I don't think most developers rely on their customers to make their games.

My offer is still available to do a scenario for TAOW III, if my copy of the game were free.

And actually, my offer to do some examples of icon work for COTA/HTTR are still available. My offer to do create art content for LnL: band of brothers is still available. My offer to do UI artwork for Combined Arms is still available. Probably a couple more that I'm forgetting My offer to playtest each of those titles is still available. Shrug