1.3 update?

[Kitakami]

I have a few thoughts on the "too many patches" train of thought.

You see, there is no way a limited think tank (designers, developers, and playtesters) can cover all the minutiae that the MUCH larger player base will want covered. That means that patches, as Kid stated, not only have to take care of bugs, but they also have to please the consummers (us) with what we consider improvements. These improvements can take many forms, from following OOBs more closely to UI tweaks.

Now, here comes the thought: those improvements cannot be made before going gold, because there is no way the think tank will know what we want beforehand. They are good, very good, at what they do, but they do not have crystal balls or are privy to the techniques of the Vulcan mindmeld. <my apologies to those that miss some of my references>

In closing, I am very thankful for all the effort of Matrix and 2by3 for making a good product, but also for responding to the wants and needs of the player base and polishing their excellent game accordingly. To work on the bugs is what some of the competition would have done, and would have stopped there, but these guy take the cake. [&o][&o][&o]

[Platoonist]

Oog...I'm up to March '43 in my current campaign game. Maybe I'll just finish Japan off in 1.21 and try 1.3 from the other side. Sounds like quite an positive upgrade at this point

Was curious....any possible tweaking of the AI in this next patch...or is that further down the road?(if ever)

[Tophat]

For heavens sake,
How many patches were there in Uncommon Valor? Didn't everyone,who for the most part had been following development for over a year expect something similar? I certainly know I did.....yet i drove to Origins,not that far from cleveland,bought a copy and was darn glad to get it!
Lets not get silly here folks............

[tsimmonds]

I was under the impression that the 1.2 restart would be the only restart we would really need.

I know you backed off a bit, but c'mon man, nobody ever said that......

[siRkid]

ORIGINAL: Platoonist

Oog...I'm up to March '43 in my current campaign game. Maybe I'll just finish Japan off in 1.21 and try 1.3 from the other side. Sounds like quite an positive upgrade at this point

Was curious....any possible tweaking of the AI in this next patch...or is that further down the road?(if ever)

We have done a number of things to improve the AI.

[siRkid]

Now, here comes the thought: those improvements cannot be made before going gold, because there is no way the think tank will know what we want beforehand. They are good, very good, at what they do, but they do not have crystal balls or are privy to the techniques of the Vulcan mindmeld. <my apologies to those that miss some of my references

This is a good point. Take the players not being happy with the surface combat and the fire concentration on a few ships. It was originally coded that way to make it more realistic. For example if a ship caught fire at night it became more visible and drew more fire. This was in the code. Also, there are more real world examples of the transports getting away that there are of them getting sunk to the last ship. However, once the players complained we changed it to make the game more enjoyable.

[tsimmonds]

Oog...

I never heard anyone say that, who wasn't named Albert, Churchy, or Pogo. Which one are you?

[rkr]

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

Oog...

I never heard anyone say that, who wasn't named Albert, Churchy, or Pogo. Which one are you?

Sounds like librarian to me (from UU).

[Tankerace]

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

I was under the impression that the 1.2 restart would be the only restart we would really need.

I know you backed off a bit, but c'mon man, nobody ever said that......

True, but I figured with all the "we urge you to restart after the 1.2 patch" blah blah blah, I figured that they wouldn't make us restart again.

Not that I mind in all honesty, because I have put so much time into the War Plan Orange thing I now have a crapload of troopladen convoys going God-knows-where for God-knows-what reason. So, a restart fo rme won't be too bad. But this will be the final, final, (to take a quote from Empires: Dawn of the Modern World absobloodylutely last time I restart.... unless my PC crashes.

[Platoonist]

I'm Pogo....all the way. [:D]



Awesome to hear the AI is getting a little attention as well. Thanks Kid!

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

I must confess my dissapointment, had I realized that WitP was this "buggy" I would never have started the grand campaign (in truthfulness, I wouldn't have bought the game until at least the 1.3 patch was out. The reason being I am the kind of guy that tries to tackle the big enchilada before the side dishes). I was under the impression that the 1.2 restart would be the only restart we would really need.

Well that's your fault. Everyone from the beta team (including Joel from 2by3) was URGING (with CAPITAL letters) that players do not start with the "big enchillada" thing, rather that the take their time getting to know the game thru smaller scenarios.

I consider myself to be hardcore UV veteran, and I play WITP for some months now, and yet, after playing so many "smaller WITP scenarios" I still don't consider myself entirely worthy to take on serious PBEM-ing here. And that's not because the WITP "is buggy" - that's because it's complex by design (and I like it that way).

Restarts? Why do you all people feel the need to restart? Is it because Frag told you so? [:D] Remember it's the Big Bad 2by3-lovin' Mr. Frag who thinks aircraft upgrade system is fine as it is [:D] [8D] BTW Frag what's with my complaint re 32-bit color on fullsize screen map? [:'(]

If there's no internet, and NO link to this board, I'd be playing UV v1.00 (as released) never knowing there are any patches to that game (let alone WITP) game and still thinking that is the greatest wargame ever released [:D] And I would not restart every once in a while...

Calm down and let the betas and devs do their work in (relative) peace.

Oleg

[kaiser73]

For me the fun is playing, regardless if i win or lose (i like playing Japan and i do know i will prolly lose) nor to get to end of campaign (even if i never quit a game when started).

I mean, even if i have to restart my GC PBEM campaign (even if i hope i haven't to do that), it's not wasted time in this month. it's a month where i learned lot more about the game and had damn fun doing that.

None obliges anyone to restart a game. If you started a grand campaign in 1.2 and kept playing it for 1 or 2 months, it means you (not matrix, not mods, not other players but you) decided that 1.2 was fine to be played for 1 year. so why you should restart if you thought that?
I mean, you did know the problems of previous patch and what was going to be fixed in 1.2 (and what didn't). so if you started anyway a GC, it means you didn't think what was remaining out of 1.2 was "critical" to enjoy the game.

When i looked for opponents for PBEM GC, i did know a patch would have come out later. and i did know that some problems like ground control or some issues in surface combat were still present. I just thought they weren't enough for me to wait another month to star a game.
Now, since i saw the changes in the upcoming patch, i decided that i wait the patch before starting new GC. this doesn't mean i want to restart the one i have going (eventually i'll install 2 versions of the game) unless i and my opponent agree on that.

[Jorm]

[ Also, there are more real world examples of the transports getting away that there are of them getting sunk to the last ship. However, once the players complained we changed it to make the game more enjoyable.
[/quote]

<sigh>
it would have been better if you just pointed to some historical references to support the initial game design decision. Im so very very tired of people wanting changes based on "what THEY think" should happen rather than what ACTUALLY happnened
oh well

ta
Paul

[steveh11Matrix]

In general, I'd say that you can't have too many patches, but that you can certainly have too few... [:)]

Just think of it as Continual Improvement.

Steve.

[tsimmonds]

ORIGINAL: Platoonist

I'm Pogo....all the way. [:D]

The greatest comic strip ever.

[freeboy]

It looks as though the patch will change some very important aspects of sea combat, and correct some bugs, and for those who wish to start games after the patch we will see a whole new wave a jap torpedoes... IAAEEE!!! did I say how much I hate Bettys in the early war as the allies and love them as the Jap player?

Any thoughts on these changes and how they will be incorperated into our strategies?

[Caranorn]

ORIGINAL: Kid

Now, here comes the thought: those improvements cannot be made before going gold, because there is no way the think tank will know what we want beforehand. They are good, very good, at what they do, but they do not have crystal balls or are privy to the techniques of the Vulcan mindmeld. <my apologies to those that miss some of my references

This is a good point. Take the players not being happy with the surface combat and the fire concentration on a few ships. It was originally coded that way to make it more realistic. For example if a ship caught fire at night it became more visible and drew more fire. This was in the code. Also, there are more real world examples of the transports getting away that there are of them getting sunk to the last ship. However, once the players complained we changed it to make the game more enjoyable.

That's very sad to hear and makes me wonder whtehr I should spend money on Matrix games in the future. With this approach I recommend your next game be Axis and Allies, it will have many more people enjoying it. Just don't call it a wargame as it will have no connection to historic wars.

Marc aka Caran...

P.S.: Yes I'm a bit annoyed as you can see. I expect I will as usual continue to buy Matrix products, but much more cautiously.

P.P.S.: I also disagree with the concept that players are a cheap form of beta testers. I have no problem with testing a game, but I won't pay for a game I test. If I buy a game I expect it to be reasonably bug free and playable. Times like these I really start to miss good old Avalon Hill. SPI games always seemd like a lot of fun, but today it's the AH we continue to dig out and play because they were thorouwly tested. Fortunatelly we could always fix board games (or else SPI would have disapeared much earlier), we can't do that with computer games. So if a game like WitP is buggy it ends up being a waste of money and time.

P.P.P.S.: Yep, I have enjoyed quite a few hours playing WitP, but right now the time spent to duplicate bugs, look for ways to fix unhistoric game play, wait for patches etc. is starting to outweigh the original enjoyment.

P.P.P.P.S.: And the problem is not as much Matrix's policy then a general poor record in computer game publications the past years. Matrix is actually trying to do it better it seems, which makes this an even sader issue.

[Pier5]

This whole process has been rather frustrating for me and, obviously, many others. After venting my frustrations somewhat, I find that many of the major problems I became frustrated with are going to be fixed (or at least changed). Where, before this thread, was any of this addressed? What did I miss?

I complained about the whole amphibious operation, which is quite unrealistic. This was mostly caused by a defective bombardment model, which, I now learn, will be fixed. I complained about the devastation of AP's by so-called CD artillery. This should largely be corrected if a reasonable bombardment model is used. I also note that whomever wrote the manual specifically points out that AP's will be largely unaffected by CD artillery. He certainly knew how is should work. Too bad whoever coded this aspect of the game did not. In any event, a rational bombardment system will fix this problem. What I really wonder is how, with so many fine beta testers involved, this crap made it out on the street. It seems as though this aspect of the game was never effectively tested.

Now we get to the whole process of beta testing of this and, in fact, other Matrix games. I certainly have no fault with the selection of the beta testers and I'm sure they put in many, many hours of work in the Alpha (extensive) and Beta (very short) testing. In spite of this, a game was produced which was buggy as a termite mound and had quite a few modeling issues which were, quite simply, utterly ridiculous. There are also a number of other issues which are highly debatable and, therefore, needed to be debated before the final game was released. We have the issue of surface combat, particularly target selection, the effectiveness of Long Lance torpedoes, the ASW issue, torpedo attacks in shallow water, etc., etc., ad infinitum. What we don't know, of course, is how much and what kind of internal debate took place between the testers, producers and coders. It had to be extensive and, regardless of what is said, the need to get something out that produced income, has to, at some point, become paramount.

My point in this rambling BS is that, after all these years, what was produced was a product that is potentially the best war game ever, but not even close to a finished product. There are two schools of thought about the release of a game. Some think that the product should be 99.9% ready. Other are more pragmatic and realize that isn't likely to happen. I specifically propose that in the future, preliminary beta copies be SOLD to the Matrix gamers who desire to participate. There should be only one restriction, high speed internet connections. Task forces could be formed by a coordinator (Kid, I think that is the task you performed in the actual event), but the number of testers vastly greater, the view points more extensive, all aspects of the game thoroughly tested, while income is created for Matrix/2X3.

Pier5

[dr. smith]

ORIGINAL: Kid

For example if a ship caught fire at night it became more visible and drew more fire. This was in the code. Also, there are more real world examples of the transports getting away that there are of them getting sunk to the last ship. However, once the players complained we changed it to make the game more enjoyable.

I HATE those changes, whiners wanting changes without any Real World examples to back it up. I LOVE the AI changes (getting my Vildebeest target practice around Singapore now).

Would love to leave out the Surface combat updates, any way to do that???

[kaiser73]

Fact that actual games get out and then need patches while in the old days it wasn't needed is related to the complexity of the games.

WITP is rather complex. The sole fact that the game last 1 year RL to end the whole campaign tells you enough of the complexity and lengh.

Betatesters did a great job IMO. Minor bugs and tweaks can only be found out with massive playing by tons of users. and this can be only once game goes gold.