PBEM / Online / Single Player?

[MButtazoni]

ok let's try another unofficial survey:

Assume the following 3 options would be released seperately and maybe 1 year apart. Which order would you want them released:

A. PBEM - The Sequence of Play will be modified to support less interactions per turn, but the feel of the game will be retained.

B. ONLINE - The Sequence of Play will remain MOSTLY (80-90%?) unchanged. this option will support multiple clients connected together to play a game.

C. SINGLE PLAYER - with an AI that will provide enough playability to learn the game.


This is in no way an official survey and it may, or may not, have any impact on how development will proceed. But it would be good to know what ppl are looking for.

[Mziln]

C, B, and then A.

[meyerg]

If the AI is determined a must for CWIF

---then--- get out single player with AI first (the most detailed sequence of play can now be used), then the LAN version, and finally PBEM with the compromised sequence of play

Newbees can learn while playtesters and Rob improve the AI.

if the AI is not a must

---then--- get out a no AI version with the simplified sequence of play for PBEM. Fast turnaround on play tests will make the game evolve much faster. Then do a no AI LAN full sequence of play. And lastly, give Rob the job of designing the best AI he can for the two versions above. He may even be able to use save game files from good players to TEACH the AI (a la SE4 or Galactic Civ). As a neural network guy, I know with enough training, a computer can learn to do the most complicated things. It is obvious in Hearts of Iron, their American AI cannot even manage a competent invasion of Europe.

I believe a no AI version is the quickest way to release, but it may upset those who love to play single player. I believe the fan base of this game is here because they played it multiplayer, so a no AI version would not upset them. Maybe you include a free copy of computer Axis and Allies with the game!?!?!? Actually, I have been playing computer Third Reich (downloadable from Underdogs for free) to tide me over; I think the AI is much better, but still easy to beat.

Greg

[MButtazoni]

ORIGINAL: meyerg

If the AI is determined a must for CWIF

---then--- get out single player with AI first (the most detailed sequence of play can now be used), then the LAN version, and finally PBEM with the compromised sequence of play

Newbees can learn while playtesters and Rob improve the AI.

if the AI is not a must

---then--- get out a no AI version with the simplified sequence of play for PBEM. Fast turnaround on play tests will make the game evolve much faster. Then do a no AI LAN full sequence of play. And lastly, give Rob the job of designing the best AI he can for the two versions above. He may even be able to use save game files from good players to TEACH the AI (a la SE4 or Galactic Civ). As a neural network guy, I know with enough training, a computer can learn to do the most complicated things. It is obvious in Hearts of Iron, their American AI cannot even manage a competent invasion of Europe.

I believe a no AI version is the quickest way to release, but it may upset those who love to play single player. I believe the fan base of this game is here because they played it multiplayer, so a no AI version would not upset them. Maybe you include a free copy of computer Axis and Allies with the game!?!?!? Actually, I have been playing computer Third Reich (downloadable from Underdogs for free) to tide me over; I think the AI is much better, but still easy to beat.

Greg

afraid of commitment? [:D] i didn't see a clear vote in there...

[meyerg]

If my last response was too complicated: A,B,C is my personal preference.
greg

[Greyshaft]

A, C then B

I don't see people willing to hang around online while someone else finishes their turn

[meyerg]

I agree. I change my vote to A,C,B. I don't think the world will anxiously wait online to see if I implement that DA against the front bomber or front fighter!!! Or watch the British sail is convoys each turn (especially if he is meticulous and does it convoy point by convoy point)[;)]

[Neilster]

ORIGINAL: meyerg

...He may even be able to use save game files from good players to TEACH the AI (a la SE4 or Galactic Civ). As a neural network guy, I know with enough training, a computer can learn to do the most complicated things....

Greg

I've been thinking along these lines as well. Do you think an AI could also learn during development by playing expert Wiffers? Would the learning time be prohibitive? It certainly seems like an elegant solution.

Cheers
Neilster

[terje439]

C-A-B.

Why?! Because I am likely to play soloplayer more than anything else, and the reason I choose A over B is the fact that due to timedifferences I would be likely to have to play at nights if I was to go online and play

[Grotius]

C-A-B for me, too. I don't know the game system at all, and I'd like to learn it against an AI, even if the AI isn't Einstein.

[wfzimmerman]

A, C, B.

I won't have time to play multi-player.

PBEM is more important than AI because the interactivity is what makes it fun.

[Ralt]

C-A-B for me. I have played the original game a lot but would be playing solo a lot, at least at first.

[gbed]

C B A
I think that people would be surprised at the number of fans of this game who don't play anymore for one reason, the SPACE it requires. Granted, there are many that don't have the time for gathering and playing and playing head-to-head, but it is to me, the best way to play this game. I believe that that was the intention of the game designers when they announced a computer version years ago. Put the maps, production, charts, and forcepools on the computer, and make some room!