Discontinued?

[Rodia]

Here's an idea: We could troll other Matrix forums to get noticed and express our indignation, but in a subtle way if you know what I mean.

For example: Battle Academy gets an update? Someone of us goes to their board and post this: "Oh man, an update! How I wish I was playing this Matrix game instead TOAW!"

If we do this strictly by turns, there's nothing much Matrix can do.

Besides, I always wanted to troll in the Distant Worlds boards, those pussies.

[wodin]

I think they need to step in and do something now..I's obvious Ralph is going to be away long term and it's not fair on the players nor on Ralph really for everything to go on hold until he is well again. It seems a few here are more than capable of taking the patch up and to get cracking with it. Ralph can always come back when and if he feels like it.

We all know once a game stops selling then it's not economically viable for them to carry on working on it. However here we have a situation that people are willing to work on it for free and it's also not taking up time from other game development.

I really can't see why Erik hasn't passed the reigns on from Ralph to someone else by now. I mean this current situation could go on for years..and by that time there maybe no one around who can be bothered to take it up or with enough knowledge to take it up.

[r6kunz]

I am a little confused here.

How much of the code, etc, does Ralph have, and is presumably inaccessible?
How much of the code does Eric have that is not under licence, and would be available for development?

signed
Kunz, hptm

[Shazman]

ORIGINAL: HPT KUNZ

I am a little confused here.

How much of the code, etc, does Ralph have, and is presumably inaccessible?
How much of the code does Eric have that is not under licence, and would be available for development?

signed
Kunz, hptm

When anything about 3.5 is brought up Curtis Lemay (Bob Cross) utters the two magic words. Ralph Trickey, and the conversation ends. Seems Ralph owns the code to 3.5 it would appear. I'm guessing that is because he used the code from 3.4 for 3.5. But Matrix 'owns' or 'has' the code for 3.4 or earlier.

[USXpat]

There are at least a few of us designing something for the next version - not exactly talking about small scenarios either. It's a labor of love for us, involving literally hundreds of hours. Updating the game engine is one thing - having scenarios that apply the new features is another. Whether the scenarios are any good, that requires testing - and testers - hundreds of hours more by both testers and scenario designers. More than that, too - but that's a decent start.

The state of game development today is very different than it was five years ago. Crowdfunding is an option for any given project. Crowdsourcing, too - makes it easier for game companies to get games to the market. Neither is in any way "particularly creative", just two options immediately at hand. Here Matrix has volunteers willing to do programming, scenario design, testing and more.

For Matrix, it's a choice between a combined arms development paradigm or sticking to trench warfare.

[jmlima]

ORIGINAL: USXpat

....
For Matrix, it's a choice between a combined arms development paradigm or sticking to trench warfare.

Not sure if the pun on Combined Arms is intended, but when you stick in the same sentence 'Matrix', 'Combined Arms' and 'development', inside me there's a voice tha instantly goes 'NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...'.

Also, not sure why, but suddenly a tumble-weed came to my mind. [:D]

[r6kunz]

ORIGINAL: Shazman

ORIGINAL: HPT KUNZ

I am a little confused here.

How much of the code, etc, does Ralph have, and is presumably inaccessible?
How much of the code does Eric have that is not under licence, and would be available for development?

signed
Kunz, hptm

When anything about 3.5 is brought up Curtis Lemay (Bob Cross) utters the two magic words. Ralph Trickey, and the conversation ends. Seems Ralph owns the code to 3.5 it would appear. I'm guessing that is because he used the code from 3.4 for 3.5. But Matrix 'owns' or 'has' the code for 3.4 or earlier.

To continue my question, can Curtis Lemay confirm this is the case with Ralph and the 3.5 code?
And does Matrix have the full ownership of 3.4 TOAW code, and would be under no restictions to giving it to the TOAW community?

[sPzAbt653]

Just thought I'd throw this opinion back up in case no one responds, from Post #8 in this thread:

... Matrix doesn't own the source code for TOAW, they own the right to develop and publish the game. The core rights reside with Take-Two Interactive.

[r6kunz]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink

WT*?! Well, if they discontinue it, then they should release the source code, no?

My understanding is that Matrix doesn't own the source code for TOAW, they own the right to develop and publish the game. The core rights reside with Take-Two Interactive.

Anyway, I think everyone will be a lot happier if they stop anxiously expecting another patch and work with what we have.

Here is Post #8 in its entirety. I agree completely with the second line...

signed
Kunz, HPTM

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: HPT KUNZ

ORIGINAL: Shazman

ORIGINAL: HPT KUNZ

I am a little confused here.

How much of the code, etc, does Ralph have, and is presumably inaccessible?
How much of the code does Eric have that is not under licence, and would be available for development?

signed
Kunz, hptm

When anything about 3.5 is brought up Curtis Lemay (Bob Cross) utters the two magic words. Ralph Trickey, and the conversation ends. Seems Ralph owns the code to 3.5 it would appear. I'm guessing that is because he used the code from 3.4 for 3.5. But Matrix 'owns' or 'has' the code for 3.4 or earlier.

To continue my question, can Curtis Lemay confirm this is the case with Ralph and the 3.5 code?
And does Matrix have the full ownership of 3.4 TOAW code, and would be under no restictions to giving it to the TOAW community?

The short answer is that I just don't know. I only know that the development team doesn't have any ACOW or TOAW III source code.

But I gave my opinion (only!) on it here:

tm.asp?m=3326549

Disregarding the sad case of Combined Arms, does anyone know of a case where Matrix changed programmers on any project? Even if they have the source code, there may be contractual barriers to doing so.

[r6kunz]

Thanks for your input, Bob.
Could you please review my post re: FLAK in Two Weeks in Normandy, and let us know your take on the real effect of the "AA-Bug?"

Also, has anyone tested a house-rule that 'a unit cannot be both entrenched and ignore-losses?' As far as I can tell Elmer has not caught onto this yet, so that would help.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: HPT KUNZ

Thanks for your input, Bob.
Could you please review my post re: FLAK in Two Weeks in Normandy, and let us know your take on the real effect of the "AA-Bug?"

Of course it's not a "show stopper" - after all, we went for a decade where high-altitude bombers were immune to all AAA.

Also, has anyone tested a house-rule that 'a unit cannot be both entrenched and ignore-losses?' As far as I can tell Elmer has not caught onto this yet, so that would help.

See SealClubber's post #5 in the thread I just linked above.

[shunwick]

Guys,

With reference to Combined Arms: World War II - the game formerly known as Battlefields!, the game formerly known as Battlefront - the developer, Ludovic Coval, posted on 21 October 2009 that "Game and Editor are completed awaiting for test since June. Sorry I cant say more as I dont know more."

As far as I can tell, it is not a development problem. The most likely explanation for its continued delay is that the game, unfortunately, turned out to be a Turkey. Why Matrix continues to host that forum I do not know.

TOAW is not a Turkey.

Again, as far as I can tell, all the TOAW forums are dying. This is nothing to do with the lack of 3.5; activity on the TOAW forums have been in steady decline since before release of the 3.2 patch. One of the big differences between the period 2001 - 2006 and now is that forum activity was still vibrant in the lost years.

I fully agree with Ben and Bob. Let's get on with what we have and wait for development to restart.

Best wishes,
Steve

[Oberst_Klink]

ORIGINAL: shunwick

Guys,

With reference to Combined Arms: World War II - the game formerly known as Battlefields!, the game formerly known as Battlefront - the developer, Ludovic Coval, posted on 21 October 2009 that "Game and Editor are completed awaiting for test since June. Sorry I cant say more as I dont know more."

As far as I can tell, it is not a development problem. The most likely explanation for its continued delay is that the game, unfortunately, turned out to be a Turkey. Why Matrix continues to host that forum I do not know.

TOAW is not a Turkey.

Again, as far as I can tell, all the TOAW forums are dying. This is nothing to do with the lack of 3.5; activity on the TOAW forums have been in steady decline since before release of the 3.2 patch. One of the big differences between the period 2001 - 2006 and now is that forum activity was still vibrant in the lost years.

I fully agree with Ben and Bob. Let's get on with what we have and wait for development to restart.

Best wishes,
Steve

Aye, even I restarted my efforts on Kharkov '43 (thanks to Uncle Larry) and modifying a special .eqp for Hptm. Rob 'Doc' Kunz.

And remember... be happy in your work.

Klink, Oberst

[larryfulkerson]

Again, as far as I can tell, all the TOAW forums are dying. This is nothing to do with the lack of 3.5; activity on the TOAW forums have been in steady decline since before release of the 3.2 patch. One of the big differences between the period 2001 - 2006 and now is that forum activity was still vibrant in the lost years.

This has been my experience as well. When I migrated to WITE some 3 or 4 years ago I seem to remember people like Siberian Heat
and Jamiam etc. and you never see them post here anymore, just for an example. I seem to remember a lot more traffic than we see
now.

[Oberst_Klink]

ORIGINAL: HPT KUNZ

Thanks for your input, Bob.
Could you please review my post re: FLAK in Two Weeks in Normandy, and let us know your take on the real effect of the "AA-Bug?"

Also, has anyone tested a house-rule that 'a unit cannot be both entrenched and ignore-losses?' As far as I can tell Elmer has not caught onto this yet, so that would help.

Doc,

I've done some extensive testing lately and analysed the logs with the ubderdude=Y settings, both in the modified Ardennes '44 and my Kharkov '43 scenario; ground support and interdiction...

AIRCombat:Interdict unit: Soviet Union 10 Tank Corps, 178 Tank Bde.
Combat :Removing available equipment from combat inventory.
AIRCombat:Begin Axis frictional air support (ground attack).
AIRCombat:Air Support: Axis LwKdo Don, III./KG 3.
AIRCombat:Begin frictional anti aircraft fire.
AIRCombat:Attempt Penetration: Axis LwKdo Don, III./KG 3.
AIRCombat: Committed to furball: Axis LwKdo Don, III./KG 3.

Combat : Smite: Axis LwKdo Don, III./KG 3, (other), attrition%= 11.
Combat : Soviet Union weapons firing on Axis Ju-88 (late).
Combat : Potentially effective hit on Axis Ju-88 (late) by Soviet Union weapon.
Combat : Ju-88 (late) destroyed.
Combat : Soviet Union weapons firing on Axis Ju-88 (late).
Combat : Potentially effective hit on Axis Ju-88 (late) by Soviet Union weapon.
Combat : Ju-88 (late) damaged, sent to replacement pool.
Combat : Weighted direct combat losses: 21%
Combat : Check morale: Axis LwKdo Don, III./KG 3, ouch=189,ouch threshold=50.
Combat : Morale check failed (demoralized).
Combat : End smite...

Klink, Oberst

[kmitahj]

From what I can see these looks like loses from air-to-air combat, at least assuming there is nothing missing between "Committed to furball" AIRCombat message and following Combat lines. Below is example where the loses where definitely due to flak fire:

News :Axis Luftflotte 2, StG 2 bombards the target.
AIRCombat: Soviet 10A, 71ozad contributes anti-aircraft fire (12).
AIRCombat:Attempt Penetration: Axis Luftflotte 2, StG 2.
News :Axis Luftflotte 1, II. /JG 53 (-) supports the attack.
AIRCombat:Committed to furball (escort): Axis Luftflotte 1, I. /JG 54.
Combat : Axis Luftflotte 1, I. /JG 54 escapes attrition (insufficient attack).
AIRCombat:Committed to furball (escort): Axis Luftflotte 1, II. /JG 53 (-).
Combat : Axis Luftflotte 1, II. /JG 53 (-) escapes attrition (insufficient attack).
AIRCombat:Committed to furball (escort): Axis Luftflotte 2, I/II JG 51.
Combat : Axis Luftflotte 2, I/II JG 51 escapes attrition (insufficient attack).
AIRCombat:Committed to furball (escort): Axis Luftflotte 2, III/IV JG 51.
Combat : Axis Luftflotte 2, III/IV JG 51 escapes attrition (insufficient attack).
AIRCombat: Committed to furball: Axis Luftflotte 2, StG 2.
Combat : Axis Luftflotte 2, StG 2 escapes attrition (insufficient attack).
AIRCombat:Committed to furball (escort): Axis Luftflotte 2, ZG 26.
Combat : Axis Luftflotte 2, ZG 26 escapes attrition (insufficient attack).
AIRCombat:Committed to furball (escort): Axis Luftflotte 2, Erg/II ZG 26.
Combat : Axis Luftflotte 2, Erg/II ZG 26 escapes attrition (insufficient attack).
AIRCombat:Committed to furball (escort): Axis Luftflotte 2, II. /JG 52.
Combat : Axis Luftflotte 2, II. /JG 52 escapes attrition (insufficient attack).
AIRCombat:End penetration attempt.
AIRCombat:StG 2 targeted by Soviet anti-aircraft fire (36/197).

Combat : Smite: Axis Luftflotte 2, StG 2, (anti-air low), attrition%= 4.
Combat : Soviet weapons firing on Axis Ju-87 (late).
Combat : Ju-87 (late) damaged, sent to replacement pool.
Combat : Weighted direct combat losses: 4%
Combat : Check morale: Axis Luftflotte 2, StG 2, ouch=36,ouch threshold=50.
Combat : Morale check failed (loss tolerance exceeded).
Combat : End smite...

[Shazman]

ORIGINAL: kmitahj

From what I can see these looks like loses from air-to-air combat, at least assuming there is nothing missing between "Committed to furball" AIRCombat message and following Combat lines. Below is example where the loses where definitely due to flak fire:

News :Axis Luftflotte 2, StG 2 bombards the target.
AIRCombat: Soviet 10A, 71ozad contributes anti-aircraft fire (12).
AIRCombat:Attempt Penetration: Axis Luftflotte 2, StG 2.
News :Axis Luftflotte 1, II. /JG 53 (-) supports the attack.
AIRCombat:Committed to furball (escort): Axis Luftflotte 1, I. /JG 54.
Combat : Axis Luftflotte 1, I. /JG 54 escapes attrition (insufficient attack).
AIRCombat:Committed to furball (escort): Axis Luftflotte 1, II. /JG 53 (-).
Combat : Axis Luftflotte 1, II. /JG 53 (-) escapes attrition (insufficient attack).
AIRCombat:Committed to furball (escort): Axis Luftflotte 2, I/II JG 51.
Combat : Axis Luftflotte 2, I/II JG 51 escapes attrition (insufficient attack).
AIRCombat:Committed to furball (escort): Axis Luftflotte 2, III/IV JG 51.
Combat : Axis Luftflotte 2, III/IV JG 51 escapes attrition (insufficient attack).
AIRCombat: Committed to furball: Axis Luftflotte 2, StG 2.
Combat : Axis Luftflotte 2, StG 2 escapes attrition (insufficient attack).
AIRCombat:Committed to furball (escort): Axis Luftflotte 2, ZG 26.
Combat : Axis Luftflotte 2, ZG 26 escapes attrition (insufficient attack).
AIRCombat:Committed to furball (escort): Axis Luftflotte 2, Erg/II ZG 26.
Combat : Axis Luftflotte 2, Erg/II ZG 26 escapes attrition (insufficient attack).
AIRCombat:Committed to furball (escort): Axis Luftflotte 2, II. /JG 52.
Combat : Axis Luftflotte 2, II. /JG 52 escapes attrition (insufficient attack).
AIRCombat:End penetration attempt.
AIRCombat:StG 2 targeted by Soviet anti-aircraft fire (36/197).

Combat : Smite: Axis Luftflotte 2, StG 2, (anti-air low), attrition%= 4.
Combat : Soviet weapons firing on Axis Ju-87 (late).
Combat : Ju-87 (late) damaged, sent to replacement pool.
Combat : Weighted direct combat losses: 4%
Combat : Check morale: Axis Luftflotte 2, StG 2, ouch=36,ouch threshold=50.
Combat : Morale check failed (loss tolerance exceeded).
Combat : End smite...

Of course there were losses to AAA fire. 71ozad is a AAA unit with a AAA icon. No problem with units with a AAA icon. WAD.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

This has been my experience as well. When I migrated to WITE some 3 or 4 years ago I seem to remember people like Siberian Heat
and Jamiam etc. and you never see them post here anymore, just for an example. I seem to remember a lot more traffic than we see
now.

They don't post anywhere anymore:

Siberian Heat's last Matrix post was 10/27/2006 & last login was 1/16/2007.
Jamiam's last Matrix post was 5/1/2012 & last login was 9/22/2012.

Even Ralph's doing better than that.

[sPzAbt653]

I was kind of expecting some sort of details to emerge out of that Historicon event. Is it over, and does anybody know if there was any info to come out of it ?