MWiF Fan Site

[Anendrue]

Current status on my request to design and host a fan site for MWiF.

So far Matrix has failed to respond to multiple requests to allow a MWiF Fan Site, Wiki, etc... I am not sure of their motivation behind ignoring requests. It could obviously be a legal or contractual issue or they might even be taking the idea I submitted to them for their own use. I simply do not know as they will not respond. What I want to offer the community is a website with the following:

1) A community based web site to find opponents graded by skill and expierance.
2) A ladder based competitive arena for players.
3) A monthly challenge scenario to see who can effect the best win.
4) Interactive RAC and Players manual. This would be indexed, hyperlinked, glossary, and cross referenced. Each hyperlink would have a note identifying other rules that may apply with hyperlinks to each of those. This requires Matrix games approval and authorization.
5) A Wiki to help teach the game to people. This may require Matrix games approval and authorization.
6) A small forum for discussion and improvement of the web site.
7) Minimal advertising to sustain the site. Advertisement Boundaries: Right column or bottom of the page only. No popup ads at all. Matrix Games and computer technology advertisements only. All ads would be from google ads so they are clean, tastefull and appropriate. Matrix ads would be designed consistent with their own web site. Links to Matrix Games own store. I even offered to only host Matrix Games ads if they so desired.

The bottom line... if you want a web site sound off and let Matrix know.

[gridley]

Good luck with your site.

Fan sites are common and are usually a great place for regular gamers to get together. Gamers who get familiar with one another and can be counted on to show up on game night and play the entire game. Both of which are the most important items in long multiplayer games like WiF.

Even if you can't get approval for some of the bells and whistles you are proposing, your site will still be a great place for many of us to meet.[8D]

Please, keep us up to date.

[undercovergeek]

sounds great - do you need permission - theres loads of WitP fan sites with downloadable data, mods and patches and i was never under the impression that permission was asked for or given

[Neilster]

Sounds like a good idea. I'm for it. There should be a Facebook fan thingy too.

Cheers, Neilster

[bo]

ORIGINAL: undercovergeek

sounds great - do you need permission - theres loads of WitP fan sites with downloadable data, mods and patches and i was never under the impression that permission was asked for or given

Sounds great ABJ and I agree with geek why do you have to ask just do one and we will support you I am sure.

Willy

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: abj9562
5) A Wiki to help teach the game to people. This may require Matrix games approval and authorization.

I always was interested in doing a Wiki based on WiF FE.

[Cheesehead]

Sounds like a great idea. That would be a regular stop on my internet highway.

[Anendrue]

Thanks for the support and positive comments. My principle reason for doing a fan site is to make the rules readily available and usable during a game which would require the OK for use of copyrighted material. However I know that a successful site will need more and would need the additional pieces I mentioned above. Most of the additional pieces exist already on either these forums, IIRC, yahoo discussion groups and many more places like Patrices and others. Therefore I want to add to the community first with the rules and wiki and thses do need the go ahead from the interested parties. Especially before I pay for managed hosting that will not have speed or bandwidth issues.
 
The community component is community builder which will give a facebbok type of component to the site. This I already have the rights to use on the site. But before I go any further I need to know I will not get a cease and decist letter from Matrix or ADG. Based on my communications with Steve he seems to be Ok with the site but he does not have the authority to give a go ahead. For that I need Erik Rutins or David Heath to say OK and so far both are silent. So for now it is a wait and see issue.

[Jaimainsoyyo]

Great idea¡¡¡¡¡[8D]

[SamuraiProgrmmr]

It would be a great place for finding opponents.
 
And having a ladder!!! 

[Jagdtiger14]

Great idea!  I hope you do it!  Maybe you could also include into a player's skill and ladder position(as well as having a player "reputation grade") based on completion of games through J/A'45.  Games not completed through J/A'45 count less, etc...
C

[Anendrue]

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

Great idea!  I hope you do it!  Maybe you could also include into a player's skill and ladder position(as well as having a player "reputation grade") based on completion of games through J/A'45.  Games not completed through J/A'45 count less, etc...
C

If I understand you are driving at is a metric to accuratly measure weather an opponent will play to the end of a scenario giving more weight to the longer scenarios and full games. This could be very useful in game matching. However; I believe it will need a minimum number of games to be an accurate representation of a player. Some form of a simple peer review may be of help here?

[brian brian]

I thought this was the MWiF Fan Site...


and just so you know, Harry made some noises about setting up some more WiF related content on the ADG site a few months ago. Don't know if anything has came of that yet?


but an opponent ranking system would be very, very cool. there was one a long, long time ago

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: brian brian

I thought this was the MWiF Fan Site...


and just so you know, Harry made some noises about setting up some more WiF related content on the ADG site a few months ago. Don't know if anything has came of that yet?


but an opponent ranking system would be very, very cool. there was one a long, long time ago

... in a land far away and down under?

[Jagdtiger14]

Yes, that is the metric I am driving at. One of the gripes or fears I've been reading about here on MWiF is that players will/might? abandon games if/when they get into a losing situation. Players interested in being on a ladder or on a rating system or players looking for games should have some kind of demerit/bonus/reputation based on their past behavior. Completion of games should get some kind of bonus for all players involved...win or lose. Players that quit a game(not players involved in a game where someone else quits) should lose points and have that fact noted in some form of attendence/reputation grading system?...not sure what to call it. When I wrote "through J/A'45" I meant to completion assuming playing the full game. If a scenario is played, then to completion of that scenario.
C

ORIGINAL: abj9562

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

Great idea!  I hope you do it!  Maybe you could also include into a player's skill and ladder position(as well as having a player "reputation grade") based on completion of games through J/A'45.  Games not completed through J/A'45 count less, etc...
C

If I understand you are driving at is a metric to accuratly measure weather an opponent will play to the end of a scenario giving more weight to the longer scenarios and full games. This could be very useful in game matching. However; I believe it will need a minimum number of games to be an accurate representation of a player. Some form of a simple peer review may be of help here?

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

Yes, that is the metric I am driving at. One of the gripes or fears I've been reading about here on MWiF is that players will/might? abandon games if/when they get into a losing situation. Players interested in being on a ladder or on a rating system or players looking for games should have some kind of demerit/bonus/reputation based on their past behavior. Completion of games should get some kind of bonus for all players involved...win or lose. Players that quit a game(not players involved in a game where someone else quits) should lose points and have that fact noted in some form of attendence/reputation grading system?...not sure what to call it. When I wrote "through J/A'45" I meant to completion assuming playing the full game. If a scenario is played, then to completion of that scenario.
C

ORIGINAL: abj9562

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

Great idea!  I hope you do it!  Maybe you could also include into a player's skill and ladder position(as well as having a player "reputation grade") based on completion of games through J/A'45.  Games not completed through J/A'45 count less, etc...
C

If I understand you are driving at is a metric to accuratly measure weather an opponent will play to the end of a scenario giving more weight to the longer scenarios and full games. This could be very useful in game matching. However; I believe it will need a minimum number of games to be an accurate representation of a player. Some form of a simple peer review may be of help here?

Rather than simply a fixed end date, something that includes the decision to end the game based on mutual agreement by all players might be better.

There are also different scenarios - which have different numbers of turns - to consider.

Whether the game was NetPlay or PBEM might be important too.

And lastly, what about player A who keeps missing playing sessions (NetPlay) or takes overly long to return emails (PBEM) and thereby causes player B to abandon the game. Is it A or B who gets the 'blame'?

[BallyJ]

Great idea!

[Snydly]

I vote Froonp Site as the MWiF fan site [:)]

[Neilster]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: brian brian

I thought this was the MWiF Fan Site...


and just so you know, Harry made some noises about setting up some more WiF related content on the ADG site a few months ago. Don't know if anything has came of that yet?


but an opponent ranking system would be very, very cool. there was one a long, long time ago

... in a land far away and down under?

That sounds like Tasmania. The "long, long time ago" bit could be explained by the accusation that we're five years behind. Actually Hobart is quite funky and cosmopolitan but one doesn't have to go far to see a few six-fingered, banjo-plucking, cousin-fancyin' hill folk [:D] Hanging out as I do in gentrified Sandy Bay I get a bit of a shock when I do.

Anyhoo, I'm moving to Perth in a week. That's like Delaware to L.A. for our American friends. I've got some sweet transport lined up for the cross-country trip [:D]

Cheers, Neilster

[Anendrue]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

Yes, that is the metric I am driving at. One of the gripes or fears I've been reading about here on MWiF is that players will/might? abandon games if/when they get into a losing situation. Players interested in being on a ladder or on a rating system or players looking for games should have some kind of demerit/bonus/reputation based on their past behavior. Completion of games should get some kind of bonus for all players involved...win or lose. Players that quit a game(not players involved in a game where someone else quits) should lose points and have that fact noted in some form of attendence/reputation grading system?...not sure what to call it. When I wrote "through J/A'45" I meant to completion assuming playing the full game. If a scenario is played, then to completion of that scenario.
C

ORIGINAL: abj9562




If I understand you are driving at is a metric to accuratly measure weather an opponent will play to the end of a scenario giving more weight to the longer scenarios and full games. This could be very useful in game matching. However; I believe it will need a minimum number of games to be an accurate representation of a player. Some form of a simple peer review may be of help here?

Rather than simply a fixed end date, something that includes the decision to end the game based on mutual agreement by all players might be better.

There are also different scenarios - which have different numbers of turns - to consider.

Whether the game was NetPlay or PBEM might be important too.

And lastly, what about player A who keeps missing playing sessions (NetPlay) or takes overly long to return emails (PBEM) and thereby causes player B to abandon the game. Is it A or B who gets the 'blame'?

Quite a bit to consider in order to keep a reporting system fair to all sides. Family medical emergencies, jobs that send you away, military deployments and more could unfairly target some people as persona non grata when it is neither accurate or fair. Perhaps the ladder is a better route. The individual who quits will drop in ranking while the other rises. I think over time a quitter will lower themselves enough to warn good players that a challenge does not exist.
Both require games to be played and data accumulated to give a better picture of the environment. I think the ladder is less obtrusive and has its own reward for excelling. If someone can overcome the points Steve indicated, I am all ears.