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.
It's hard to imagine a demo comprehensive enough to show-case MWiF sufficiently to influence a potential buyer without the demo itself being a long-drawn-out affair.
Demos are nice, but there has to be a cost/benefit analysis to them, and I'd think that the benefit side for a game like MWiF would be found a little wanting, not only because of the games complexity, but also because of it's relatively limited (and thus relatively informed) audience.
Thank you Hawkeye I agree but what I was trying to get across also was Matrix never puts out a demo of any game to my knowledge, Battlefront does on every game and you can tell real quick whether this game will fill the bill so you dont throw your money away. Your comment on the limited number who might by this game and understand this game is right on never thought of that thank you.
Willy
How did you like the BFC demo for CMSF? Or did you wait for more than 10 patches before you bought it? A demo can be made to show whatever the owning company wants it to since they are often very limited in scope. If you think the game is questionable then wait for the reviews by GAMERS to be done on them.
Good Hunting.
MR
I am not talking about patches, or if it is buggy or not, I am concerned if the game fits into my realm of game playing eg. Battlefronts "Theater of War", write ups by them makes the game seem like the end of all games but when I downloaded the demo and played it for one night about 3 hours I decided this game was not to my liking, did I give it a fair chance, probably not, I just didnt like the way it played for me, to someone else it might be a great game, I am not knocking the game, but the demo showed me this game is not for me. I will buy this game [WIF] for four reasons I like the Nato units images, the scope of the game, all the comments from the board gamers what a great board game it is, and I trust that Steve will correct anything thats wrong and that it will be faithfully adapted to the computer.
I need a demo simply to see if I can stand the awful screen resolution limits of some games without upchucking (I hate games with ugly stretch marks). And/or to get even the faintest feel for pitiful interfaces some games have. How am I to determine either of those things about this game without a demo? I could purchase it and play for 60 seconds and realize I cannot stand to play it any longer. Then I'm out close to $100. How is that anything other than a total ripoff?
Matrix has had bad results with demo's because they've generally only had them for games that were failing to begin with (Hornet Leader etc.). Also a demo really needs a tutorial included that teaches you at least a few parts of the game. If you've ever taught boardgames then you well know that even a complex game can be broken down quite easily into essentials and.. we can wait till later on all that other stuff..
When you start making the game is when you should figure out the plan for the demo.. Then its in your code or your code is structured in a way to later support it from day one and a no-brainer. Of course it would be a nightmare to add now to something like this. Even then there are "interactive recording" type demos that can be made wherein its basically a bunch of linked screenshots and motion video that lets you follow a training script and click/move like your in the game but you really aren't. But its not a skill just anyone would have to make from scratch and/or to purchase 3rd party products to do it would perhaps make it further cost prohibitive. I'd love to get just a demo that booted the game and let you click and move around without really even playing. That still shows me the screen graphics/resolution and some feel for the interface. Maybe let us play around with the game editor as well. There are things that can be done inexpensively enough should Matrix choose.
Maybe I'm pickier than most, or spoiled by other companies, but I'm in that camp of continually lost sales due to lack of demos. I'd probably have bought half or more of Matrix's titles otherwise. Here is a thought for Matrix... YOU MAKE TOO MANY GOOD GAMES? Did you ever think of that? I want them all but can't buy them all. It takes too much time to figure out which ones I really want so i end up buying NONE. If I played all the demos in a days time or less I'd be able to pick a few out easily instead of still procrastinating on the majority of them years later..
I don't have days or weeks to sit on these forums like others do sifting through countless posts and AAR's to try to determine what I could with 60 minutes or less and a demo.
If I cave in on this particular game and purchase it without a demo it will only be because I have a weak spot for nostalgia, which this game conjurs up. That and the fact that if I get a physical copy I believe this game will be new and hot enough that I suppose I could always sell it or trade it away for something else and get decent value back.
I hope this post is viewed constructively. I'm sure MWIF will be a fine product..
Or you could just watch the movies they make showing people playing the game, while reading the posts written by people who bought the game, all of which should give you a decent idea about what the interface looks like, without the game being delayed from being released.
“My logisticians are a humorless lot … they know if my campaign fails, they are the first ones I will slay.” – Alexander the Great
I need a demo simply to see if I can stand the awful screen resolution limits of some games without upchucking (I hate games with ugly stretch marks). And/or to get even the faintest feel for pitiful interfaces some games have. How am I to determine either of those things about this game without a demo? I could purchase it and play for 60 seconds and realize I cannot stand to play it any longer. Then I'm out close to $100. How is that anything other than a total ripoff?
Matrix has had bad results with demo's because they've generally only had them for games that were failing to begin with (Hornet Leader etc.). Also a demo really needs a tutorial included that teaches you at least a few parts of the game. If you've ever taught boardgames then you well know that even a complex game can be broken down quite easily into essentials and.. we can wait till later on all that other stuff..
When you start making the game is when you should figure out the plan for the demo.. Then its in your code or your code is structured in a way to later support it from day one and a no-brainer. Of course it would be a nightmare to add now to something like this. Even then there are "interactive recording" type demos that can be made wherein its basically a bunch of linked screenshots and motion video that lets you follow a training script and click/move like your in the game but you really aren't. But its not a skill just anyone would have to make from scratch and/or to purchase 3rd party products to do it would perhaps make it further cost prohibitive. I'd love to get just a demo that booted the game and let you click and move around without really even playing. That still shows me the screen graphics/resolution and some feel for the interface. Maybe let us play around with the game editor as well. There are things that can be done inexpensively enough should Matrix choose.
Maybe I'm pickier than most, or spoiled by other companies, but I'm in that camp of continually lost sales due to lack of demos. I'd probably have bought half or more of Matrix's titles otherwise. Here is a thought for Matrix... YOU MAKE TOO MANY GOOD GAMES? Did you ever think of that? I want them all but can't buy them all. It takes too much time to figure out which ones I really want so i end up buying NONE. If I played all the demos in a days time or less I'd be able to pick a few out easily instead of still procrastinating on the majority of them years later..
I don't have days or weeks to sit on these forums like others do sifting through countless posts and AAR's to try to determine what I could with 60 minutes or less and a demo.
If I cave in on this particular game and purchase it without a demo it will only be because I have a weak spot for nostalgia, which this game conjurs up. That and the fact that if I get a physical copy I believe this game will be new and hot enough that I suppose I could always sell it or trade it away for something else and get decent value back.
I hope this post is viewed constructively. I'm sure MWIF will be a fine product..
What you fail to get is that demo's show you what the game company wants you to see. There is a very famous demo/release for a recent game. Pretty high sales and then followed 11+ patches. The game was bad. The demo was good though. More than a year later the game is starting to look like the demo......[X(]
You're saying that you want Matrix to do a demo, BUT all the demo's they've done have been for poor games. I'm not following your logic here. Why do a demo if all they do them for is poor games?
Again, if you want to wait to spend your money, and I can understand that don't buy on a demo in the first place. Buy on GAMER reviews. Not EDITOR reviews. They often have a vested interest in the games.
Let the gamers who buy it tell you if it's any good or not. Watch those forums. See what the gamers have to say about it. That should take all of about a week. If the gamers like it then buy it. If they don't like it move on.
I've bought games that had demos and some of them were worse than if I'd seen or heard nothing and simply bought the title.
If you're not buying because you're not getting a demo of course that's your option. I think everybody has a system they use to buy what games they buy. I'm just telling you that a good demo doesn't always mean a good game. A demo is very thin slice of the pie to determine whats inside.
We all have the choices of what to buy. But if you are looking at games already for sale. Go to the forum of the game you are considering and start a thread of your own. ASK THEM WHAT THEY THINK....most gamers here will tell you. Some of them absolutely will tell you.
I'm in the wait and see/ask questions group. I won't be for MWiF. I'll buy it the moment I can. I've seen enough already. Steve is the demo for this game. Look at all he's done and the pains he takes to SHOW you the entire game every step of the way.
That's a first for me and that works. I've come late and I had a bunch of reading to do to get caught up. It's been worth it because WiF is IMO one of the great wargames of all time and Steve seem determined to make that happen in MWiF as well.
I'll even break a rule I NEVER BREAK where MWiF is concerned. I'll buy the second version if they do one. The first version is to be true to the board game. While that's not my first choice it's a very good one. The second version will likely have improvements to the GAME. Not just let us all do the playtesting and then make the game work like it should have to begin with in version 1. That is a huge pet peeve of mine with game developers. Push the game out and then when you actually fix it make a version 2 and charge for that one too. I don't pay twice for what I should have gotten in the first place. But that's just me.
It's kind of like you don't buy games without demos. We all have our criteria for spending money.......[&o]
Good Hunting.
MR
The most expensive thing in the world is free time.
Founder of HSG scenario design group for Combat Mission.
Panzer Command Ostfront Development Team.
Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm Development Team.
I think Mad Russian has some good advice in there. My very first post in this forum was "Is this the game I hope it is?", and the responses largely justified my hopes.
To be sure, I've learnt one thing about this game that goes into my negative column, that being the specific nature of units, which leads almost to a requirement that the game have a specified end-date. I've literally not bought games solely because I knew them to have an enforced end-date (HoI 1 for example).
For MWiF, I suspect I'll make an exception, but forums, far more so than demos, have always been the best source for deciding on games where the decision isn't an automatic yes or no.
I say all that despite the fact that I like (and use) demos to. I suspect it's just not practical at this point however to make one for MWiF, so forums, you-tube vids and the like will have to be what you make a decision upon, short of using the absence of a demo alone to make a negative decision.
I think Mad Russian has some good advice in there. My very first post in this forum was "Is this the game I hope it is?", and the responses largely justified my hopes.
To be sure, I've learnt one thing about this game that goes into my negative column, that being the specific nature of units, which leads almost to a requirement that the game have a specified end-date. I've literally not bought games solely because I knew them to have an enforced end-date (HoI 1 for example).
For MWiF, I suspect I'll make an exception, but forums, far more so than demos, have always been the best source for deciding on games where the decision isn't an automatic yes or no.
I say all that despite the fact that I like (and use) demos to. I suspect it's just not practical at this point however to make one for MWiF, so forums, you-tube vids and the like will have to be what you make a decision upon, short of using the absence of a demo alone to make a negative decision.
I have to agree with MR too, but to Veldor maybe one of his prime considerations seems to be resolution and graphics which is important to me also, maybr MR didn't read my post above about "Theater of War", [not being negative MR] I like a demo because it shows me the stlye of game play which is my first consideration, It does not mean that the game will play exactly like the demo, I don't care about any of that, I don't care about bugs and such they all have that, and good companies like Matrix will take care of that or lose all their gamers. Maybe some players dont like everything [units] showing maybe their used to playing with fog of war, with counters of tanks and guns and planes and ships instead of nato counters, maybe nato counters annoys them and they would not buy the game because of that. But a good demo might relieve all that anxiety about those type of counters or no FOW. You[Matrix] cant just rely on your WIF boardgamers to buy this game and keep you in business you need new people people who dont read these forums and really dont know much about WIF like me understanding WIF. The explanations by knowledgable WIF players about FOW not being important in this game was a big help to me in considering this game. I think the bottom line here at least for me is if one company can do it why cant Matrix? I am sorry I can't shake it from my mind I believe it is as major mistake! But guess what if their successful [Matrix] in not doing it then I stand corrected.
If the publishers and devs have the cajones to let customers come in and vent or rave about the game in an open forum then what the heck is there to be worried about ?
When the forums are over moderated to exclude any negative comments or opinions from customers, then I'd say maybe a demo makes sense. Even then as has been pointed out, demos can be faked and paid reviewers can be manipulated.
History began July 4th, 1776. Anything before that was a mistake.
demos can be faked and paid reviewers can be manipulated.
You know I've probably bought over a thousand games. And as mildly upset as I've been in the rare occasion where I purchased after playing a demo and then found out I hated the game its still nothing like buying a $50 plus game blind and finding out I hated it moment one after looking at the awful screen stretching or some other aspect of the interface I just couldn't get over. A video conveys only the look of the interface, it generally doesn't give enough feel for actually using it (And in whats soon to be 2010 I'm just too tired of what ends up usually being an all keyboard shortcut method of playing).
Call that superflous or whatever you like. But since those are things that matter to me I need an easy way to assess that in a game, without much effort.
I will not drag on the demo debate, its been had too many times over the years here.
I will add though that I've also not played World in Flames ever before, and there is also the chance that I just don't like the game itself period.. Regardless of the superhero level of programming being done. And again, so much as everyone would like to argue otherwise, I've never had to learn more than 10 or 20% of a game to realize whether or not there was a huge potential for me to like it or not. So this thought that Matrix Games are just so deep that you can't get a realistic feel for them in a demo is BS. Even more so since others have already done similar demos on equally complex games.
And, honestly, I do not take any more time with a game I've purchased in that regard than one I have not. So if a game is too hard to learn due to awful tutorials, awful instructions, awful interface or whatever... I'm not going to muddle through it just because I shelled out money. I'm just going to be pissed and move on.
That's happend too many times for me to do it blindly again.
We can debate this for another decade, but like I said, when I look at the reason I haven't bought more Matrix Games... This is it. I can't be alone in that. If all I played were computer wargames maybe I'd have no other choices. But since I play lots of other genres of PC Games, have all 3 consoles, and played all genres of boardgames including board wargames... Its not like I don't have anything else to spend my gaming money on.
I fully understand why Matrix has the policy they do. But I also know it doesn't work for many many out there.
If the publishers and devs have the cajones to let customers come in and vent or rave about the game in an open forum then what the heck is there to be worried about ?
When the forums are over moderated to exclude any negative comments or opinions from customers, then I'd say maybe a demo makes sense. Even then as has been pointed out, demos can be faked and paid reviewers can be manipulated.
Well said Veldor I agree with everything you say I don't understand why other players dont understand your feelings. This is not a knock against Matrix games its common sense. I have several Matix games.
Jeffrey H. please dont take this wrong I have promised myself not to get into any
arguments again and I will post no more on this subject but did you actually read my post about nato counters etc? I do not think so, what do fake demos and reviewers have to do with that post. If you do not understand what I am talking about say so and I will explain in sharper detail. I have no problem doing that.
This is why I get so discouraged posting about how I feel about something. Veldor it must be me not explaining myself right I guess I was talking about someone who might not like nato counters and would prefer units shown as tanks planes ships etc. and a demo might convince them that the game plays pretty well with nato counters, I am just using Nato counters as an example not to sell or unsell a game on this one particular minor issue. I said before if Matrix can get away with this [no demos] then more power to them.
Sorry willycube, I didn't really pay any attention to your post, so don't take any of my comments personally.
ORIGINAL: willycube
ORIGINAL: Jeffrey H.
If the publishers and devs have the cajones to let customers come in and vent or rave about the game in an open forum then what the heck is there to be worried about ?
When the forums are over moderated to exclude any negative comments or opinions from customers, then I'd say maybe a demo makes sense. Even then as has been pointed out, demos can be faked and paid reviewers can be manipulated.
Well said Veldor I agree with everything you say I don't understand why other players dont understand your feelings. This is not a knock against Matrix games its common sense. I have several Matix games.
Jeffrey H. please dont take this wrong I have promised myself not to get into any
arguments again and I will post no more on this subject but did you actually read my post about nato counters etc? I do not think so, what do fake demos and reviewers have to do with that post. If you do not understand what I am talking about say so and I will explain in sharper detail. I have no problem doing that.
This is why I get so discouraged posting about how I feel about something. Veldor it must be me not explaining myself right I guess I was talking about someone who might not like nato counters and would prefer units shown as tanks planes ships etc. and a demo might convince them that the game plays pretty well with nato counters, I am just using Nato counters as an example not to sell or unsell a game on this one particular minor issue. I said before if Matrix can get away with this [no demos] then more power to them.
Willy
History began July 4th, 1776. Anything before that was a mistake.
Im sorry too Jeffery H. you didn't quote me and I forgot about that, you were just making a general observation and not butting heads with me, when I went to bed I thought geez was he quoting me or what, thanks for not coming down on me over that deeply appreciate, but read the post I wrote about nato counters etc. I think I am right on that Matrix should have demos at least for some of their games maybe not this one.
Someone had mentioned (perhaps it was in this thread) that doing a demo of the Spanish Civil war would be a good marketing tool. I was less than encouraging to that suggestion.
Today I got an email asking for the set up instructions for Missed the Bus. I know that we found a few glitches in the ADG Setup instructions for that scenario so I just cut out all the scenario specific code for Missed the Bus from the program. Here is what MWIF uses. We had to make several corrections to the spreadsheet (approved by Harry).
// ****************************************************************************
// Fifth scenario
// ****************************************************************************
scMissedTheBus:
begin
case MCIndex of
mcUnitedStates: // Missed the Bus
begin
AddGroupSimple(lUSAEastCoast, ['CS Ranger', 'CS Wasp', 'CS Texas',
'CS Arkansas', 'CS New York', 'CS Pensacola', 'CS Quincy',
'CS Indianapolis', 'CS Louisville', 'CS San Francisco',
'CS Tuscaloosa', 'CS Vincennes', 'CS Wichita', 'CL Cincinnati',
'CL Trenton', 'CL Concord', 'CL Memphis', 'CL Milwaukee',
'CL Philadelphia', 'CL Savannah']);
===
Chit draws. The tension are taken from the entry pool. So Germany has 6 chits in entry after the tension is removed.
scMissedTheBus:
begin
DrawEntryG(7);
DrawTensionG(1);
DrawEntryJ(3);
DrawTensionJ(1);
end;
===
Weather roll of zero means it has to be rolled at teh start of the scenario.
// ****************************************************************************
// scMissedTheBus.
// ****************************************************************************
(Name: rsMissedTheBus; MaxPlayers: 6; Maps: 4;
StartingLegalMajorCountries: [mcGermany..mcUSSR]; TotalCountries: 9;
Initiative: sdAxis; InitiativeBonus: iAxis1; StartingSide: sdNone;
Intelligence: (2, 1, 1, 0, 0, 2, 0, 0, 0); WeatherMod: 0; WeatherRoll: 0;
StartYear: 1940; StartTurn: tJulAug; EndYear: 1945; EndTurn: tJulAug;
RegSetupOrder: (mcUnitedStates, mcUSSR, mcChina, mcItaly, mcFrance,
mcJapan, mcGermany, mcCommonwealth, mcVichyFrance);
===
Can align - this is for the CW.
function CheckIcelandCW: Boolean;
begin
Result := (CurrScenario in [scMissedTheBus, scLebensraum]) and
((C = Iceland) or
(C = Greenland));
end;
==
US Entry options chosen.
scMissedTheBus:
begin
USEntry.OptionsChosen := [useChineseBuildAC, useInternFrenchCV,
useResourcesChina, useResourcesWAllies];
===
Major Power groups. You will have to read the code/logic for this one.
scMissedTheBus..scDarkness, scGlobalWar:
begin
case PlayerCount of
2:
begin
if CurrScenario in [scGlobalWar, scDarkness] then
MajorPowerGroups.AddGroup([mcGermany, mcItaly, mcJapan])
else
MajorPowerGroups.AddGroup([mcGermany, mcItaly, mcJapan,
mcVichyFrance]);
3:
begin
if CurrScenario in [scGlobalWar, scDarkness] then
MajorPowerGroups.AddGroup([mcGermany, mcItaly, mcJapan])
else
MajorPowerGroups.AddGroup([mcGermany, mcItaly, mcJapan,
mcVichyFrance]);
4:
begin
if CurrScenario in [scGlobalWar, scDarkness] then
MajorPowerGroups.AddGroup([mcGermany])
else MajorPowerGroups.AddGroup([mcGermany, mcVichyFrance]);
5:
begin
if CurrScenario in [scGlobalWar, scDarkness] then
MajorPowerGroups.AddGroup([mcGermany])
else MajorPowerGroups.AddGroup([mcGermany, mcVichyFrance]);
6:
begin
if CurrScenario in [scGlobalWar, scDarkness] then
MajorPowerGroups.AddGroup([mcGermany])
else MajorPowerGroups.AddGroup([mcGermany, mcVichyFrance]);
MajorPowerGroups.AddGroup([mcItaly]);
MajorPowerGroups.AddGroup([mcJapan]);
MajorPowerGroups.AddGroup([mcCommonwealth]); // MasterMWIF.
MajorPowerGroups.AddGroup([mcChina, mcUnitedStates]);
MajorPowerGroups.AddGroup([mcFrance, mcUSSR]);
end;
end;
===
// No Maginot Line forts after May/Jun 1940
===
scMissedTheBus:
begin
Add(USSR, Germany, 5, 2); // USSR and Germany trade agreement
Add(Germany, USSR, 0, 0, 2); // Finland & Rumania
Add(Hungary, Germany, 1); // Hungary and Germany trade agreement
Add(Iraq, Germany, 1, 1); // Iraqi oil (through Syria)
Add(UnitedStates, Japan, 4, 2); // USA and Japan trade agreement
Add(Japan, UnitedStates, 0, 0, 1);
Add(Netherlands, Japan, 2, 2); // Netherlands trade agreement
Add(Netherlands, Commonwealth, 2, 2);
Add(Persia, Commonwealth, 1, 1); // Persia and CW trade agreement
Add(Rumania, Germany, 2, 2); // Rumania and Germany trade agreement
Add(Rumania, Italy, 1, 1); // Rumania and Italy trade agreement
Add(Spain, Germany, 1); // Spain and Germany trade agreement
Add(Sweden, Germany, 3); // Sweden and Germany trade agreement
Add(Turkey, Germany, 1); // Turkey and Germany trade agreement
Add(Venezuela, Commonwealth, 3, 3); // Venezuela trade agreement
Add(Venezuela, UnitedStates, 3, 3);
end;
===
Political Relationships.
scMissedTheBus:
begin
// ****************************************************************************
// Balkans.
// ****************************************************************************
ChangeParentCountry(rsHungary, [rsTransylvania]);
ChangeParentCountry(rsBulgaria, [rsSouthDobruja]);
// ****************************************************************************
// Italy.
// ****************************************************************************
AddAligned(Italy, [rsEritrea, rsItalianSomaliland, rsLibya]);
AddConquered(Italy, [rsEthiopia]);
AddWar(Italy, [rsCommonwealth]);
// ****************************************************************************
// Commonwealth.
// ****************************************************************************
AddAligned(Commonwealth, [rsBurma, rsMalaya, rsBelgianCongo, rsNorway,
rsNetherlands, rsNetherlandsEastIndies]);
AddForcePool(Commonwealth, [rsBurma]);
// ****************************************************************************
// Vichy France.
// ****************************************************************************
Countries.CreateVichyFrance(Germany);
ChangeParentCountry(rsVichyFrance, [rsVichyFrance]);
AddAligned(VichyFrance, [rsAlgeria, rsDahomey, rsFrenchGuinea,
rsFrenchGuyana, rsFrenchSudan, rsIvoryCoast, rsMadagascar, rsMauritania,
rsMorocco, rsNigerColony, rsSenegal, rsTogo, rsTunisia, rsUpperVolta,
rsSyria, rsFrenchIndoChina]);
ChangeForVichy; // Handles most of the changes except those below.
GDChangeControl(rsVichyFrance, [rsCorsica]);
// ****************************************************************************
// Germany.
// ****************************************************************************
AddConquered(Germany, [rsBelgium, rsDenmark, rsNetherlands, // rsFrance,
rsNorway, rsPoland]);
GDChangeControl(rsCommonwealth, [rsFaeroes]);
GDChangeControl(rsVichyFrance, [rsFrenchPolynesia, rsMarquesasIslands,
rsGuadeloupe, rsMartinique, rsStPierreMiquelon, rsPondicherry,
rsReunion, rsComorosIslands, rsFrenchSouthernAntarctic,
rsScatteredIslandsIndianOcean]);
AddWar(Germany, [rsCommonwealth]);
// ****************************************************************************
// Free France.
// ****************************************************************************
AddAligned(France, [rsCameroons, rsChad, rsMiddleCongo,
rsFrenchSomaliland, rsGabon, rsUbangiShari]);
Countries.RenameFrance;
ChangeFranceHomeCountry; // To Gabon.
GDChangeControl(rsFreeFrance, [rsNewCaledonia]);
AddWar(Germany, [rsFreeFrance]);
AddWar(Italy, [rsFreeFrance]);
// ****************************************************************************
// Belgium.
// ****************************************************************************
ChangeBelgiumHomeCountry; // To UK.
// ****************************************************************************
// Netherlands.
// ****************************************************************************
ChangeNetherlandsHomeCountry; // To NEI.
// ****************************************************************************
// USSR.
// ****************************************************************************
ChangeParentCountry(rsUSSR, [rsFinnishBorderlands, rsBessarabia]);
GDChangeControl(rsUSSR, [rsEasternPoland]);
AddConquered(USSR, [rsEstonia, rsLatvia, rsLithuania]);
// ****************************************************************************
// USA.
// ****************************************************************************
AddAligned(UnitedStates, [rsPhilippines]);
// ****************************************************************************
// Japan.
// ****************************************************************************
AddAligned(Japan, [rsKorea, rsManchuria]);
AddForcePool(Japan, [rsKorea, rsManchuria]);
AddWar(Japan, [rsChina]);
end;
===
procedure PickVichyUnits;
begin
case CurrScenario of
scMissedTheBus: // 'IN 2', 'NT 1', 'SU 2', 'MT 1', 'IN 1'
begin
TransferLandUnit(utInfantry, France, VichyFrance);
TransferLandUnit(utInfantry, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip('TRS', France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip('Sub', France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip('Sub', France, VichyFrance);
TransferLandUnit(utMountain, France, VichyFrance);
TransferLandUnit(utInfantry, France, VichyFrance);
end;
===
scMissedTheBus:
begin
TransferShip(rsBearn, France, UnitedStates);
TransferShip('TRS', Norway, Commonwealth);
TransferShip(rsNielsJuel, Denmark, Germany);
TransferShip(rsPederSkram, Denmark, Germany);
TransferShip(rsHaraldHaarfagre, Norway, Germany);
TransferShip(rsTordenskjold, Norway, Germany);
TransferShip('Sub', France, Italy);
TransferShip(rsJeanBart, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsFoch, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsPrimaguet, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsStrasbourg, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsAlgerie, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsColbert, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsDupleix, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsJeanneDArc, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsMarseillaise, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsEmileBertin, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsGLeygues, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsGloire, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsJeandeVienne, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsGalissonniere, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsMontcalm, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsLamottePicquet, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsClemenceau, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsGascogne, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsProvence, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsDunkerque, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsRichelieu, France, VichyFrance);
TransferShip(rsPingHai, NationalistChina, Japan);
PrepareMoveForcePool(Netherlands.FindNamedUnit(rsSumatra));
PrepareMoveForcePool(Netherlands.FindNamedUnit(rsJava));
PrepareMoveForcePool(Netherlands.FindNamedUnit(rsDeRuyter));
PrepareMoveForcePool(Netherlands.FindNamedUnit(rsHeemskerck));
PrepareMoveForcePool(Netherlands.FindNamedUnit(rsTromp));
// ****************************************************************************
// Select enough units from the force pools for setting up Vichy France.
// ****************************************************************************
PickVichyUnits;
RecoverFrenchUnits;
end;
===
Here is another one where you will have to read the code.
procedure RecoverFrenchUnits;
// ****************************************************************************
// This routine takes half of the French units from the Conquered Pool and
// places them in the Force Pool from which the French draw their setup units
// and future builds.
// ****************************************************************************
var
UTypeCounter: TUnitType;
Total: Integer;
Counter: Integer;
LibUnit: TUnit;
procedure RecoverUnitToForcePool(const U: TUnit);
begin
// ****************************************************************************
// This routine prepares the record log entry for moving a unit from the
// Conquered pool back into the ForcePool
// ****************************************************************************
Inc(EntryNumber);
CountryNumber := U.Country;
UnitNumber := U.ID;
OldLocate.UnitPlace := U.UnitPlace;
OldLocate.Column := U.Column;
OldLocate.Row := U.Row;
OldLocate.ProdTurn := U.ProductionTurn;
NewLocate.UnitPlace := upForcePool;
NewLocate.Column := 0;
NewLocate.Row := 0;
NewLocate.ProdTurn := TTurn(0);
SetGRL(RLID_LiFP);
UseGRL(RLID_LiFP);
end;
procedure GetCount;
procedure Check(var U: TUnit);
// ****************************************************************************
// Unit is moved to the FutureForcePool if it is still in the game but it is
// before its time.
// ****************************************************************************
begin
if U.BeenRemoved then Exit;
if U.Year > Game.Date.Year then PrepareMoveFutureForcePool(U)
else if U.UnitType in LandUnitSet then
begin // Take all the division sized units
if TLandUnit(U).Small and
(not (U.UnitType in ArtillerySet + EngineerSet)) then
RecoverUnitToForcePool(U);
end;
end;
begin
// ****************************************************************************
// GetCount.
// ****************************************************************************
France.CUnits.ForEach(@Check);
if UTypeCounter = utMilitia then
Inc(Total, France.CUnits.UnitCount(UFilterReserveMilitia))
else
Inc(Total, France.CUnits.UnitCount(UFilterConqueredUnitType));
end;
begin
// ****************************************************************************
// RecoverFrenchUnits.
// ****************************************************************************
Inc(TransNumber);
for UTypeCounter := Low(TUnitType) to High(TUnitType) do
begin
Total := 0;
UFUnitType := UTypeCounter;
GetCount;
if Total > 0 then
begin
// ****************************************************************************
// Recover half (rounded up) of the conquered units. Militia will be found in
// the Reserve pool and all other unit types will be in the Conquered Pool. All
// the randomly selected units are placed in the Force Pool.
// ****************************************************************************
for Counter := 1 to Succ(Total) div 2 do
begin
if UTypeCounter = utMilitia then
PrepareMoveForcePool(France.PickUnitConquered(UFilterReserveMilitia))
else
begin
LibUnit := France.PickUnitConquered(UFilterConqueredUnitType);
RecoverUnitToForcePool(LibUnit);
end;
end;
end;
end;
end;
===
scMissedTheBus:
begin
NeutralityPacts.Add(Germany, USSR, tSepOct, 1939); // German/USSR pact.
Pact := NeutralityPacts.FindPact(Germany, USSR);
NeutralityPacts.AddChits(Pact, Germany, 10, 0); // 10 off and 0 def.
NeutralityPacts.AddChits(Pact, USSR, 1, 4); // 1 off and 4 def.
end;
===
And then you're ready to start!
I think this makes my point about not wanting to create additional scenarios.
Someone had mentioned (perhaps it was in this thread) that doing a demo of the Spanish Civil war would be a good marketing tool. I was less than encouraging to that suggestion.
More than just listing the various units for a Spanish Civil War scenario, what would be a pain would be to add code for the unavoidable special rules that it would have.
