FITE opinions

[dicke bertha]

I take it Curtis Lemay is the Keeper and Maintainer of the public no-promises-made and include-arbitrarily-as-Curtis-sees-fit Wish List service to the development of TOAW, so this is a formal or informal request to him that the functionality of sub-scenario-creation out of existing games be included in the wish list and mentioned to the powers that be for the future development of the game. What seems to be a good idea doesn't ripple the water the least. My thanks to Mensch, parmenio and golden for the extra input and info.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: dicke bertha

I take it Curtis Lemay is the Keeper and Maintainer of the public no-promises-made and include-arbitrarily-as-Curtis-sees-fit Wish List service to the development of TOAW, so this is a formal or informal request to him that the functionality of sub-scenario-creation out of existing games be included in the wish list and mentioned to the powers that be for the future development of the game. What seems to be a good idea doesn't ripple the water the least. My thanks to Mensch, parmenio and golden for the extra input and info.

Lol. And I thought it was just me. 'public no-promises-made and include-arbitrarily-as-Curtis-sees-fit Wish List service.' I suspected it would be -- and I haven't even looked. Lessee? PNPMAIAACSFWLS? Still a bit cumbersome...

As a depressing thought, let me suggest that Curtis himself must effectively be one of the powers that be -- or as good as.

[larryfulkerson]

What ever happened to JamIam ?

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

What ever happened to JamIam ?

Curtis ate him, I believe.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: dicke bertha

I take it Curtis Lemay is the Keeper and Maintainer of the public no-promises-made and include-arbitrarily-as-Curtis-sees-fit Wish List service to the development of TOAW, so this is a formal or informal request to him that the functionality of sub-scenario-creation out of existing games be included in the wish list and mentioned to the powers that be for the future development of the game. What seems to be a good idea doesn't ripple the water the least. My thanks to Mensch, parmenio and golden for the extra input and info.

This is already in the Wishlist. See item 12.23.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

Lol. And I thought it was just me. 'public no-promises-made and include-arbitrarily-as-Curtis-sees-fit Wish List service.' I suspected it would be -- and I haven't even looked. Lessee? PNPMAIAACSFWLS? Still a bit cumbersome...

All suggestions, regardless of my opinion of them, are placed in the Wishlist. Even the ones from Colin Wright. The only requirement is that they pertain to the code itself (i.e. scenario suggestions, etc., are not included).

As a depressing thought, let me suggest that Curtis himself must effectively be one of the powers that be -- or as good as.

Ralph is the only power-that-be.

[ColinWright]

JamIam's fate is left conspicuously undiscussed.

[larryfulkerson]

Rumor I heard was that he got burned out.  Happens sometimes to almost everybody.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

Rumor I heard was that he got burned out.  Happens sometimes to almost everybody.

That's not nearly as interesting as my theory.




He looks like he might eat somebody -- and it would definitively explain JamIam's silence.

[sPzAbt653]

Well, somebody ate him ... or something ...

[Menschenfresser]

What's really ironic here is that many of the old timers I can remember from waaaay back in the day all vanished to some degree (myself included) right about the time T3 was released.

For years we all dreamed about reworking this game, and when it finally happened, we didn't want to play it anymore.

[Raver508]

Yeah I noticed that too Mensch. In fact I thought it was dying for a while there.

[dicke bertha]

This is already in the Wishlist. See item 12.23.

Great, thanks for that. Now, I looked at the list item, and it is rather meagre and not ambitious enough (12.23 Restore the ability to load .SAL files in the editor. 12.23.1 If from a .PBL game, require both passwords to do so).

I think it would be better if the scenario auto-generation wish were to be added to it, or at least measures taken to effect issues mentioned by golden delicious in posts 57 and 60 in this thread.

[dicke bertha]

ORIGINAL: Menschenfresser

What's really ironic here is that many of the old timers I can remember from waaaay back in the day all vanished to some degree (myself included) right about the time T3 was released.

For years we all dreamed about reworking this game, and when it finally happened, we didn't want to play it anymore.

The reason why I still play TOAW is that there is still no other game which overall can do better that TOAW. My reoccurring burnouts with TOAW is due to its engine shortcomings. I think many old TOAW players (and some scenario developers too)left because they got fed up with shortcomings in the engine. I think TOAW needs to reinstate faith in these ranks by stating what will be - not what can or might be - addressed in the near future.

While certainly many changes were built into T3, I am not sure they adressed the - in my view - most important issues with the game, e.g. supply. A lot of effort seems to have gone into graphics, interface etc. A lot of goodies has come spontaneously from outside of the development team (by JMass, parmenio and others, edit: damezzi). From what I understand, supply is being addressed in the upcoming patch (some of the supply issues anyway - eh when is it due?), but I don't know what the patch otherwise will do. Ralph's blog a few months ago mentioned 95 items being incorporated, I have no clue as to what they are. While I understand that the development team and Ralph need to steer things according to their own ideas, it seems to be done under secrecy, and I have no idea really which way TOAW is heading, when patches are due and in what order. The wish list is huge and doesn't indicate what items are actaully being considered. I think the game would benefit from more transparency from the development team. But maybe I've missed some obvious declarations about this.

[Panama]

ORIGINAL: dicke bertha

While certainly many changes were built into T3, I am not sure they adressed the - in my view - most important issues with the game, e.g. supply.

From what I understand, supply is being addressed in the upcoming patch

After reading Ralph's blogs it is my understanding that the ability for a unit to receive supply is being modified. However, I don't see anything about what happens when a unit's supply is reduced to the point where it has used up what it has. They can still move almost as if there were an eternal motion engine in all vehicles.

In the real world tanks and other vehicles actually DID run out of gas. Guns actually DID run out of ammo. [X(]

In TOAW bullets and shells and fuel are manufactured on the spot by the units. This is one of the most glaring problems with the game. I really don't understand why it's not addressed.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong about any of this. (except the science fiction parts. [:D])

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: dicke bertha

I think it would be better if the scenario auto-generation wish were to be added to it, or at least measures taken to effect issues mentioned by golden delicious in posts 57 and 60 in this thread.

I don't see anything else in those posts. Be specific about what you want.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: Panama

After reading Ralph's blogs it is my understanding that the ability for a unit to receive supply is being modified. However, I don't see anything about what happens when a unit's supply is reduced to the point where it has used up what it has. They can still move almost as if there were an eternal motion engine in all vehicles.

In the real world tanks and other vehicles actually DID run out of gas. Guns actually DID run out of ammo. [X(]

In TOAW bullets and shells and fuel are manufactured on the spot by the units. This is one of the most glaring problems with the game. I really don't understand why it's not addressed.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong about any of this. (except the science fiction parts. [:D])

Fixing supply is going to take many, many updates. It's a non-trivial issue. 3.4 takes a first step only.

Having said that, most of the above is a misconception about what the unit supply numbers mean. A unit at 1% supply is not "out of supply". Guns do run out of ammo and vehicles do run out of gas in TOAW. It happens when the unit is "Unsupplied" and the gun or vehicle is eliminated by that condition.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: dicke bertha


...While certainly many changes were built into T3, I am not sure they adressed the - in my view - most important issues with the game, e.g. supply...

Try discussing the supply issue with Curtis. This will shed a lot of light on some of the reasons why progress in this area is so difficult.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: Panama

After reading Ralph's blogs it is my understanding that the ability for a unit to receive supply is being modified. However, I don't see anything about what happens when a unit's supply is reduced to the point where it has used up what it has. They can still move almost as if there were an eternal motion engine in all vehicles.

In the real world tanks and other vehicles actually DID run out of gas. Guns actually DID run out of ammo. [X(]

In TOAW bullets and shells and fuel are manufactured on the spot by the units. This is one of the most glaring problems with the game. I really don't understand why it's not addressed.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong about any of this. (except the science fiction parts. [:D])

Fixing supply is going to take many, many updates. It's a non-trivial issue. 3.4 takes a first step only.

Having said that, most of the above is a misconception about what the unit supply numbers mean. A unit at 1% supply is not "out of supply". Guns do run out of ammo and vehicles do run out of gas in TOAW. It happens when the unit is "Unsupplied" and the gun or vehicle is eliminated by that condition.

It's nice to see one's point so promptly illustrated. We can't make progress on the supply issue, because among other things, Curtis won't admit:

1. That supply for tanks, other vehicles, and artillery has a different dynamic than supply for infantry.

2. That supply for defensive purposes is a different matter than supply for offensive purposes.

3. That supply is volume-based. That is to say, the Germans could supply two divisions in North Africa well, or five badly. They couldn't supply five divisions as well as they could supply two.

4. That in fact there is anything wrong with the current system at all.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: dicke bertha

Great, thanks for that. Now, I looked at the list item, and it is rather meagre and not ambitious enough (12.23 Restore the ability to load .SAL files in the editor. 12.23.1 If from a .PBL game, require both passwords to do so).

I think it would be better if the scenario auto-generation wish were to be added to it, or at least measures taken to effect issues mentioned by golden delicious in posts 57 and 60 in this thread.

The text you quote from the wishlist is exactly the functionality that I need- Bob's right on this one.