scenarios and expansions

[macgregor]

Abhorrent... perhaps I was conveying some of my own sentiment.
I'd probably buy a global version of WitP. And I'd definitely buy a working version of the CWiF demo. Melding the 2 would be tantamount to pissing on me and telling me it's raining out. The onus is on Matrix to explain to me how they didn't buy WiF to keep it from competing with this global asynch/AI game. And if I have to wait and eventually pay for this asynch/pbem/AI game to get my CWiF make no mistake. It's ransome -and until this point becomes moot, I shall sustain it.

[pasternakski]

"Auschwitzware"? I thought we called them "shower clogs."

[Greyshaft]

Gentlemen I fear this thread is hurtling towards a Matrix lockdown. I think we know where everyone stands on this issue so can we get back to discussing issues that might assist Matrix to get this game out the door rather than just flaming each other?

And it really doesn't matter who started it...

[macgregor]

If I do not speak my mind, openly and honestly, how can that possibly serve Matrix. I'll admit not everyone of my comments warrants an answer, but my view of this project that started ....eight years ago is entirely valid. It's not like I don't like the game. And in the end, my dollars are closer to matrix's pockets than supporters of this other game, as it will cost much more in time and money than what I want. It's my faith in this website's purpose that compells me to continue posting.

[pasternakski]

Oh, stop congratulating yourself on how valid your viewpoint is, already. When the game comes out, make an informed decision about whether you want to buy it for the price you would have to pay.

[macgregor]

Everybody has a viewpoint. Some are shared. I suppose I used 'valid' when I should've used 'correct'. Without the detail of WitP, it won't be that great of a pbem/AI game. This will not only delay and drive up the price of the game I love, CWiF, but will hamstring a potentially great, global, pbem/AI WW2 sim into a lesser game. I only wish there was someone else who realized this. And don't ask me to 'go with the flow' on this. I believe Matrix is making a mistake.

[Erik Rutins]

Macgregor,

As I've posted in other threads, we still have flexibility and we are listening to feedback. I believe your point has been clearly understood and we will take it into consideration. The final format, price or play options (or whether there will be modular releases for different customer markets with different play options) remains to be determined and is a subject of discussions that will likely not conclude until after Origins this year.

I realize some folks are upset with us because we didn't take Chris' beta, package it up and release it. All I can say about that is wait until after Origins. In July, we should have more information to present to you on what you can expect and when it will be delivered. We will also try to explain the decisions involved so that our goals, challenges and motives are understood as clearly as possible.

We're wargamers and we want to see WiF for the computer completed as well. However, this has been and remains a very challenging project, much more so than the majority of posters here seem to realize, from a development perspective.

Regards,

- Erik

[macgregor]

Thank you Erik. That means alot to hear it from you. I feel like I have now articulated this as best I can and can let it rest. I started to get upset the game wasn't released about a year after having the demo. Which was some years before Matrix took over. This is the first time I've had the opportunity to post my ideas on an ongoing project, and for that I'm grateful.

[Cheesehead]

I'd probably buy a global version of WitP

Whats that? Are there plans to make a global WWII game based on WitP?

[Greyshaft]

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead

I'd probably buy a global version of WitP

Whats that? Are there plans to make a global WWII game based on WitP?

I have never heard any Matrix person say anything like that. GG & co officially scuttled plans for a Mediterranean version of WitP a few months ago so I'd say the global version is just a fantasy tossed around by some other members of the Forum

[macgregor]

No. I was using it as an example of the finest pbem/AI strategic format Matrix was capable of and saying that in terms of a pbem/AI game , it would blow away CWiF. So why try to make CWiF compete with it's own product? The value of CWiF is in it's poker/bridge-like interaction between players as much as anything else. Would you want a global WitP?

GG & co officially scuttled plans for a Mediterranean version of WitP a few months ago...

Well there you have it. Though I'd say, relative to an AI/pbem version of CWiF, global WitP would be easier to produce -and better to play.

[coregames]

Interesting how this thread became the battleground once again for the same old debate. My hope was that posters would think in a constructive way about the idea of using an expansions model, and then give Matrix some options to consider. I am willing to hear any polite (and hopefully fresh) thoughts on the subject.

[Mziln]

Have you worked with the Editor program that was included [&:]

I changed the base color for the Chineese. Yellow didn't show up well on the global map.

I also started labeling the names for the sea zones.

I didn't try to create an entire sceanario (I belive this is doable to a greater or lesser degree) but there are a lot of things you can do with the Editor.

[coregames]

ORIGINAL: Mziln

I didn't try to create an entire sceanario (I belive this is doable to a greater or lesser degree) but there are a lot of things you can do with the Editor.

You make an interesting point Mziln. Should Matrix include an editor feature with the program? It would be fun to generate some scenarios to match individual personal tastes. I would enjoy the ability to change the alliance structures, to mix it up (Ge/Ru/France vs. the rest?). Matrix could even post some of the more interesting custom scenarios on the website.

[Mziln]

I don't think it needs a high priority. It is nice to have though.

[macgregor]

I'm for leaving the editor in. I'd like it if players could not only create their own scenarios, but their own units as well. DoD would be an interesting addition. If it's added, I'd like this to be editable as well. I'm not sure how easy that would be, but I tend to like games that have websites with player created scenarios. If I had my choice I would rather see some sort of colored plate dawings featuring soldiers in the uniforms of the different nations rather than grainy black & white photos like in WitP as I think this would be more informative. (I'm assuming they plan on showing more graphical detail than the demo.)

[pasternakski]

There is no editor "in." People have to realize that the code Matrix inherited when it made the gross mistake of ever embarking on this project counts almost nothing toward creating the product they want to sell after they get it developed.

This whole thing is at "square one."

I would like to see Matrix take the stance, on the surface an unpopular one, of saying, "Look, folks, we want to produce a game. We want to finish it within our lifetimes. We want it to be playable when we sell it, and we recognize that, for economic survival, a decent AI is a necessity. Maybe later, an editor and other fancies can be added, but, for now, let's just 'Get 'er Done.'"

This is one of the things that killed WitP. If it had been created as a game, it might have worked. But no. "We wanna have 400 carriers in the game." "What if the Japanese had built Mig-15s in 1933?" "I wanna make my AKs into CVBs."

Gimme a break. Let the designers create a game, then decide if you want to buy and play it. "I like checkers, but 32 squares aren't enough, and two-high kings are boring." Please.

[macgregor]

I agree. I just wanted to post about something different -but you are correct. I'm trying to stay in topic. It's nice to hear someone else say what I've been saying all along.

[Greyshaft]

ORIGINAL: macgregor

I agree. I just wanted to post about something different -but you are correct. I'm trying to stay in topic. It's nice to hear someone else say what I've been saying all along.

Hmmm... Macgregor I suggest you reread a few posts. I daresay that what Pasternakski has asked for is NOT what you have been saying all along. He has endorsed a Matrix stance which says that "a decent AI is a necessity" while I recollect that you see an AI as an unnecessary option.

[macgregor]

I've read your posts enough to realize is that their only common theme is that they're anti-macgregor.(as was this last one) Don't worry, I'll keep posting. I want to give you something to post about. Erik understands my point, so I'll let it rest. Either the logic for what I'm saying exists or it doesn't. It's out of either one of our hands now. I've let you flame my anger enough. Post what you like, but don't expect a reply.