Tuning Out, Now

[Symon]

All this AI stuff is outside our scope. Since Andy is propagating more and more AI things. Our thoughts on data and such have become irrelevant. Our data tweaks no longer conform to the AI vision, and are marginalized as a result.

We can no longer offer our data adjustments to the general user community. Our adjustments do not conform to the latest AI scripts. The AI scripts are what the user community wants. So be it. We will not conform to the AI requirements, The AI requirements are the sine qua non for scenarios.

Given this disconnect, we will no longer offer, or support, scenarios to the general community, except for specific, small map, operational scenarios that have nothing to do with the AI.

[mind_messing]

What exactly was the extent and purpose of these "data tweaks"?

I'm aware of AA and ASW changes (which, if I'm not forgetting, have already been released as a update for the stock scenarios), but is there any improvements other than those?

I need not remind you that AI is irrelevant for PBEM play, as well as the fact that DBB varients are quite popular as PBEM scenarios.

Why close up shop when your "data tweaks" are so attractive to the PBEM community compared to AI play? Why knock the house down just because the bathroom has no hot water?

Why not simply mark them as "For PBEM play only" and save all the drama?

[John 3rd]

John:

I have the feeling that my head has been in the sand. What is going on? I don't give a tinker's damn about the AI. Always have considered my Mod work to be PBEM only as well.

[Andy Mac]

Kinda confused myself but hey ho I am sure it will get clarified when John is next online

Have been away for best part of 6 months come back and seem to be causing mayhem somehow

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

John:

I have the feeling that my head has been in the sand. What is going on? I don't give a tinker's damn about the AI. Always have considered my Mod work to be PBEM only as well.

I hope those involved don't lose sight of the fact there are some of us who don't give a tinker's damn about PBEM.

No offense intended John 3rd, just want to be sure the opposite perspective is respected.

[wdolson]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

John:

I have the feeling that my head has been in the sand. What is going on? I don't give a tinker's damn about the AI. Always have considered my Mod work to be PBEM only as well.

It's quite possible that the official scenario AI scripts will work reasonably well. I'd give it a go, all it takes is renaming the files and see what happens. I've tried it with other mods and they usually work OK.

Bill

[Kitakami]

I have played RA against the AI until June/July '42 with decent results. Maybe the AI is not tweaked, but with 2-day turns I've found it enjoyable.

[John 3rd]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

John:

I have the feeling that my head has been in the sand. What is going on? I don't give a tinker's damn about the AI. Always have considered my Mod work to be PBEM only as well.

I hope those involved don't lose sight of the fact there are some of us who don't give a tinker's damn about PBEM.

No offense intended John 3rd, just want to be sure the opposite perspective is respected.

None taken whatsoever. Sorry with how MY comment came across.

I haven't played against the AI since I bought the game and since I moved into Modding, I always think from that perspective. Appreciate Kitakami's comment as well.

[btd64]

I played the AI a lot. Seems fine. That said, Now that I am playing a PBEM I don't think I will go back except to maybe test things. For example, I just downloaded and installed chem's Topo map and started a DBB's game just to make sure it worked. I was Pleasantly surprised. The map looks and feels really great. Keep up the great work Symon. If you need anything from me, just ask.[:)] GP
The last statement above goes for anyone on this forum.

[Symon]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
I have the feeling that my head has been in the sand. What is going on? I don't give a tinker's damn about the AI. Always have considered my Mod work to be PBEM only as well.

Absolutely nothing is "going on". Andy is dialing up even more nasty AI scripts. That's cool. However, we are not into the AI thing, The deeper Andy goes into the AI, the more the Babes scenarios are marginalized.

So Babes ain't gonna play in that sandbox no more. We will be doing short map scenarios for grornards. And that's it.

Ciao. John

[JuanG]

ORIGINAL: Symon

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
I have the feeling that my head has been in the sand. What is going on? I don't give a tinker's damn about the AI. Always have considered my Mod work to be PBEM only as well.

Absolutely nothing is "going on". Andy is dialing up even more nasty AI scripts. That's cool. However, we are not into the AI thing, The deeper Andy goes into the AI, the more the Babes scenarios are marginalized.

So Babes ain't gonna play in that sandbox no more. We will be doing short map scenarios for grornards. And that's it.

Ciao. John

The current course sounds a little like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I think that you are undervaluing the importance of the Babes scenarios and others based on them to the PBEM community. In my opinion it is one of the cornerstones for PBEM and the loss of support for it would be a great loss.

I don't think Babes has to 'be into the AI thing' to remain important and relevant to AE and the community, indeed I think you guys might be better off just doing what you do best and if someone does want to undertake trying to adapt Babes to the AI or vice versa, let that be their headache.

Just my two cents.

Regards,
Juan

[John 3rd]

Thanks for responding John. Truly--as always--appreciate it.

To say that I agree with the comments by Juan is an UNDERSTATEMENT. DB Scenarios, RA, and others are built--in my opinion--for the PBEM audience. That they can be played with the current AI is only icing on the cake.

Much more to say but will send an email.
John

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: JuanG

ORIGINAL: Symon

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
I have the feeling that my head has been in the sand. What is going on? I don't give a tinker's damn about the AI. Always have considered my Mod work to be PBEM only as well.

Absolutely nothing is "going on". Andy is dialing up even more nasty AI scripts. That's cool. However, we are not into the AI thing, The deeper Andy goes into the AI, the more the Babes scenarios are marginalized.

So Babes ain't gonna play in that sandbox no more. We will be doing short map scenarios for grornards. And that's it.

Ciao. John

The current course sounds a little like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I think that you are undervaluing the importance of the Babes scenarios and others based on them to the PBEM community. In my opinion it is one of the cornerstones for PBEM and the loss of support for it would be a great loss.

I don't think Babes has to 'be into the AI thing' to remain important and relevant to AE and the community, indeed I think you guys might be better off just doing what you do best and if someone does want to undertake trying to adapt Babes to the AI or vice versa, let that be their headache.

Just my two cents.

Regards,
Juan

Well put. +1

[Kitakami]

+3 (or more... I am sure others agree)

DBB was the first mod I played and LOVED. When RA changed a lot of the vanilla stuff to DBB standards, I switched to RA. Now the Mods that be are planning to base their new mod on the DBB C standard... and I will try that what-if? too.

My personal enjoyment of AE would not have reached the level it has without all the effort you have put into DBB. I usually play only one game, due to time constraints, although I have used the vanilla AI to try new RA versions (did it with 5.x and 6.4 I think... if my memory serves-and it may not, due to illness, I did the same with DBB-B or -C at some point or another, playing the Allies.

All this to say that I concur with JuanG's statement about DBB being a cornerstone of this game/hobby. It would be sad if you stopped what you have been doing so excellently so far. It has been a major factor in making this game what it is.

My humble 2 centavos.

[John 3rd]

Well said.

[DOCUP]

JWE.  I play mostly PBEM.  My next game will be a mod it will be atleast a Babes mod maybe an RA mod.  I hope that you and your team will stay and make improvements to the GC, so that the rest of us can continue to enjoy this great game.  Several others above has said it better than me, but I wanted to add my 2 cents.
 
Thanks to you and your team.

[JocMeister]

What the others said. If it hadn´t been for the lure of playing a full DBB game I would never have started another PBEM. [&o]

[LoBaron]

John, I second JuanG´s comments.

It would be a great loss for the PBEM community if you decide to stop, just because your ideas and designs go beyond what the AI can handle.

The DBL scenarios cover everything a player could wish for a good AI game, and I am pretty sure Andy´s new AI scripts work perfectly fine with them.

But please, please, if you got some radical changes on the horizon and some good ideas waiting in the pipeline, forget about the AI and simply move forward. A LOT of people here would aprechiate - and benefit from - your work.


Thanks!

[ny59giants]

I agree with the words of wisdom spoken by others. [&o] I love DBB and am working with John 3rd to incorporate them more fully into RA and then in his new Treaty Mod. Your efforts would be missed if you didn't continue making these changes to improve this game. I'm looking forward to seeing your work on some of the Allied OOB being used with the new Treaty Mod.

[John 3rd]

Concur with Michael. We, in the Treaty as well as hybrid RA--Treaty Mod, EXPECT those bad-a**ed Allied OOB changes and plan to implement them into the new Mods!