Could a future patch/mod add...

[Tankerace]

Hmm....what we want was ignored eh? How much did we pay for this game again.....

[samuraigg]

you can't get a burger topped with jalapenos, cheddar cheese, sauteed mushrooms in wine sauce, avocado slices, capers, foie gras, caviar....

Except we aren't asking for something horribly impossible for the devs to give us, so this comparison is not valid. It seems to me (with my nonexistant programming knowledge) that it should be a fairly easy feature to add. Give an option to turn off the trigger.

Its stupid, the user should be given the option of when to quit, not told "ok you're far enough ahead, time to stop playing."

[Rendova]

I also vote for having the option of auto-victory turn offs. If I want to play till the cows come home, why shouldn't I. I won't force you to watch.

[siRkid]

I'll add it to the list and we'll see what happens.

[Mr.Frag]

Wheres all this negative stuff come from lately? People not getting enough sleep from playing too much? [>:]

You are completely free to edit the VP locations for both the Japan homelands and the West Coast to silly multiplier levels to disable the auto-victory completely with no programming changes at all. Lets use programmers for stuff that actually requires their time. [;)]

This negative "I've been ignored" stuff really bugs me ... if you don't like things, start your own game company and write your own game then you can have it just the way *you* want it. Thats the way the real world works. I have never seen a group that spent more time adding player requested improvements and features. If you want to give 2by3 a bad time, you are biting the very hand that feeds you. Who do you plan on whining to when they are gone? [8|]

There is not a game that exists where one side can't quit when they have had enough, good luck finding someone to continue to play a game beyond a 4:1 ratio.

[Tankerace]

For the purposes of PBEM, I completely agree with an autovictory. But when playing against the AI, and you want to try to invade Japan, an autovictory in 1943 can ruin what you are trying to do. Hence, I am in favor of adding a toggle, so that those of us with AI games can turn off the autovictory.

[Mr.Frag]

Hence, I am in favor of adding a toggle, so that those of us with AI games can turn off the autovictory.

Toggle requires artwork, programming, etc.

Editor requires nothing. Edit you solution, takes 2 minutes.

[Tankerace]

True. But, when I have already invested several dozen hours, an editor doesn't do me that much good does it? [8|]

[Bodhi]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
This negative "I've been ignored" stuff really bugs me ... if you don't like things, start your own game company and write your own game then you can have it just the way *you* want it. Thats the way the real world works. I have never seen a group that spent more time adding player requested improvements and features. If you want to give 2by3 a bad time, you are biting the very hand that feeds you. Who do you plan on whining to when they are gone? [8|]

If you really want a game to be exactly "the way *you* want it", you design and write it yourself. No need to form a game compnay to do so. If you want to sell it and earn a living from designing/writing games, then you form a game company. And as any good company should do, you listen to your customers. "Thats the way the real world works."

A company that listens and spends "time adding player requested improvements and features" is actually helping itself by making the game appeal more to the target audience. Not only that, they are also getting valuable feedback on how to make future games even more attractive to their paying customers. (BTW, it's actually the paying customers who are "feeding" 2By3/Matrix, not the other way round.[;)] ) If they continue to supply games that people are willing to buy, then they won't "disappear", unless individually they decide that they're tired of making games and want a change of direction.

The attitude that, this is the game we made, take it or leave it and stop whining, is symptomatic of a game made as a non-commercial hobby, or one from a company that isn't going to be around for too much longer. Personally, I don't believe 2By/Matrix fit either of these two descriptions.[;)]

[Sultanofsham]

ORIGINAL: Kid

I'll add it to the list and we'll see what happens.

Thanks [:D]

[guv]

i what to play to i kill every jap. what wrong with that

[Tankerace]

ORIGINAL: Bodhi

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
This negative "I've been ignored" stuff really bugs me ... if you don't like things, start your own game company and write your own game then you can have it just the way *you* want it. Thats the way the real world works. I have never seen a group that spent more time adding player requested improvements and features. If you want to give 2by3 a bad time, you are biting the very hand that feeds you. Who do you plan on whining to when they are gone? [8|]

If you really want a game to be exactly "the way *you* want it", you design and write it yourself. No need to form a game compnay to do so. If you want to sell it and earn a living from designing/writing games, then you form a game company. And as any good company should do, you listen to your customers. "Thats the way the real world works."

A company that listens and spends "time adding player requested improvements and features" is actually helping itself by making the game appeal more to the target audience. Not only that, they are also getting valuable feedback on how to make future games even more attractive to their paying customers. (BTW, it's actually the paying customers who are "feeding" 2By3/Matrix, not the other way round.[;)] ) If they continue to supply games that people are willing to buy, then they won't "disappear", unless individually they decide that they're tired of making games and want a change of direction.

The attitude that, this is the game we made, take it or leave it and stop whining, is symptomatic of a game made as a non-commercial hobby, or one from a company that isn't going to be around for too much longer. Personally, I don't believe 2By/Matrix fit either of these two descriptions.[;)]

I agree wholeheartedly. What separates MAtrix/2by3 from other companies is that they listen. It's for reasons like that that I went ahead and bought an $80 on the release date. And, provided that they continue their tradition of listening to customers, I'll do it again.

[Sultanofsham]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

If you want to give 2by3 a bad time, you are biting the very hand that feeds you.

Yes asking for an option in the game to go the long run is "biting the very hand that feeds you". [8|]

[Tankerace]

Not playing the game because they didn't listen, and never buying another game from them, now THAT is biting the hand that "feeds" me.

[samuraigg]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Hence, I am in favor of adding a toggle, so that those of us with AI games can turn off the autovictory.

Toggle requires artwork, programming, etc.

Editor requires nothing. Edit you solution, takes 2 minutes.

Its something that should really be done, especially for the people who may not visit this thread and know that they can use the editor to manipulate the game just to keep playing. What about people who started a game, played through until they were forced to quit, and find out they can't edit a savegame to keep playing. Sorry, start over, and go back 600 turns to edit the map just to ensure your next game won't end because you are winning/losing by too much?

Also.. what artwork? The options menu already has several toggles in it, just use the same graphics all the other toggles use.

There is not a game that exists where one side can't quit when they have had enough, good luck finding someone to continue to play a game beyond a 4:1 ratio.

Its called AI

Lets use programmers for stuff that actually requires their time.

I agree their time is valuable, and I appreciate any effort they put into this game. But I would hardly call adding a simple toggle to the game something not worth their time. Purely judging by the responses in this thread, its an option that's wanted by several members of the community, and hence, would help the game by having it added.

I'll add it to the list and we'll see what happens.

Thanks very much sir, we appreciate it. [&o]

[mogami]

Hi, Is this a real problem or are we once again debating something that only exists in someones mind. First you have to get through 400 turns and have a 3 to 1 lead. if not then you have another 365 turns before you need a 4-1 lead.
If you do force an auto victory your saying that having destroyed the entire enemy force you want to spend another 800+ turns sailing around admiring yourself?
I'm all in favor of it. How hard can it be? However what I would do is once you have the 3-1 lead and before 1 Jan 1943 you switch sides.

(But it strikes me as kind of funny in that for some reason I keep picturing

The Game "You've won"
The Player " No I have not. There is still a PC at Port Arthur"


The only victory condition in WITP is the autovictory via point ratio. The actual allies did not attain it before 1945. (The Japanese if they ever had it lost it in May -June 1942)
Japanese auto victory means they have been on a constant rampage for 13 months. The chance of Allied autovictory prior to 1944 is so remote it's not worth the worry.

[samuraigg]

Hi, Is this a real problem or are we once again debating something that only exists in someones mind. First you have to get through 400 turns and have a 3 to 1 lead. if not then you have another 365 turns before you need a 4-1 lead.

Those 700 some turns takes a LOT of time and effort to complete, a player could become attached to his game, and want it seen played out as long as he desires (within the constraints of the time period of course); all the more reason why a user could be very upset that they were forced to quit a game they spent so much time on.

If you do force an auto victory your saying that having destroyed the entire enemy force you want to spend another 800+ turns sailing around admiring yourself?

I don't think that would be the case, the enemy would still have fight left in them. If the player wants to keep playing, why should he be stopped?

The Game "You've won"
The Player " No I have not. There is still a PC at Port Arthur"

A gross exaggeration. As I said before, there could still be plenty of fight left in the enemy.

If this was a matter that would take weeks upon weeks of programming to complete, it would be another story... but we would have to hear from the developers on that. But I'm guessing it would be easier than that.

The only victory condition in WITP is the autovictory via point ratio. The actual allies did not attain it before 1945. (The Japanese if they ever had it lost it in May -June 1942)
Japanese auto victory means they have been on a constant rampage for 13 months. The chance of Allied autovictory prior to 1944 is so remote it's not worth the worry.

There weren't any point ratios in the real war... the Allied commanders didn't go pushing the Japanese back island by island, waiting for an inevitable text popup to come telling them they were leading by enough points, its over.

All the more reason to give us an option to disable this "feature".

[Ki11azer]

ya the game feels very pre-set and robotic with all of the restrictions that are currently there.

Imo there should be a toggle to disable auto-victory and allow total domination victory.
Also they should put in a scenario that allows you to modify build queues and build ships/planes/infantry etc that you want and withdraw their cost from heavy industry points or something.

Add these things and this game would be the best. I still like it but I want those 2 above things to -really- love the game

[mutterfudder]

Not all of us are armchair generals more like armchair privetes.

I want the option to continue even if the AI is kicking my butt.[;)]


Some of us enjoy playing for the fun of it not just to win.

[Joel Billings]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

Several of us argued long and hard for this during the game design phase, but were ignored.

It worries me that "IGNORED" keeps coming up in descriptions of this kind. Sounds
as if there is a "sacred cow" cult operating within 2by3

No, no sacred cows, just a desire to finish the game. Come on Mike. If we acted on every item that came up during development the game would still be in development. Yes, we didn't do everything that everyone proposed (I didn't even see all the suggestions since keeping up with the forum is a full time job that we can't afford to hire for). I actually agree with this one that we should have given players the option to continue. Hopefully it will get done in a future patch if it's not too painful to program.

I know this doesn't mean much to those who have things they'd like to have seen us do differently, but this was the most ambitious and difficult game that I've ever worked on (and I've worked on a lot of games). If it wasn't for a lot of hard work by a lot of people, it could have easily never made it out the door (weren't the Vegas odds 3 to 1 against us? [:)]). We had to ignore some things or we'd still be programming. If I could wave a magic wand and make some of the suggestions come true (like this one), I would, but it's usually not that easy.

By the way, I also agree that it's time that players start playing at harder AI difficulty levels (especially if they have played UV a lot). The best WitP game you'll ever have (and the most realistic) is if you sit down and play the game through without reading the rulebook, without reading all the player tips and strategy notes on the forum, and without restarting when you make a mistake. This is the only way to minimize the 20/20 hindsight and historical knowledge that all of us grognards have regarding the War in the Pacific. The AI doesn't have that background knowledge. Learn as you go, that's what the real commanders had to do. The AI is ok relative to other AI's (which means pretty dumb compared to a good player), but give it a break and at least play on hard (it has no combat cheats).

As has been stated elsewhere, Gary will continue to work on the AI periodically as long as we get save games that show specific issues. I don't honestly expect it to get a lot better than it is now, but hopefully we can improve a few of the more obvious problems.