Curiousity killed the cat!

[Mike Scholl]

I chose the max when this was asked..., but in truth it would depend on what "improvements" were made. I'd love to see the "my supply is all walking away in the wrong direction" problem controlled or done away with. Some change in the "air basing restrictions" to make them more reflective of aircraft size and servicing needs would be a must. If the "open ended" Japanese production is maintained, then some more realistic cost (in time) for re-tooling would be nice. More correct replacement numbers for aircraft on both sides is a must. A more realistic air-to-air combat system is a necessity.

If the changes are in the direction of making the contest more historical, I'll spend my money on it. If it's just a lot of "Fan-boys wanted this or that" stuff, then it won't be worth it.

[Freedom205]

Damn, I missed another good one. Work gets in the way of everything fun and interesting

[wworld7]

I change my vote. If logistics could be improved I would go for $200.00. I like this period of warfare and hated Paci War, so an improved WITP could find a way into my budget.

Flipper

[Thayne]

If I may . . .

As somebody who has some experience in marketing, I would suggest not paying much attention to the results of such a poll. People will habitually report a willingness to spend that far exceeds what they are willing to spend.

Also, the concept of "improvements" generates problems because, as we see over and over again in the forums, what one person considers an "improvement" another considers just another example of how WitP is more fantasy than fact. So, can you come up with "improvements" that people will generally like.

In order to satisfy the largest number of customers with the greatest number of diverse views and opinions, I would suggest a "game options" screen that allows users themselves to adjust the settings.

For example:

Zero bonus: +0 to +10 (reduces at the rate of 1 per month)
Japanese Pilot Replacement Pool (pilots per month)
IJN: +0 to +50
IJA: +0 to +100
Atoll Troop Capacity: 2000 to unlimited
Atoll Airplane Capacity: 100 to unlimited
China Defense Advantage: +0 to (some reasonable upper limit) -- or some similar method of restricting Japan's capability to conquer China).
Logistics:
- Restricted Port Rearming: On/Off
- 4-Engine Bomber Supply Drain: On/Off
- Base Rearmament Restrictions (note: this section lists all 10 port sizes and has a setting for the size of the gun that can be stationed there).

This option would allow people with different views, whomever can find a player who shares those views, to play under the rules and restrictions they like. This should increase the capability to market the game to a more diverse audience.

With these options, players can belittle each other over the various design changes, rather than blame Matrix Games for the decisions they make (though they would still likely find other things to complain about, such as, "Why does Option X exist but not Option Y?")

There would, of course, be "default values" for those who do not want to waste their time debating such issues and simply want to play the game out of the box.


Now, if I could put in a plug for my most favored improvement:

A more realistic map with less distortion.

Where a map that actually represents a sphere is out of the question, I would argue for an increased map scale (1 hex = 30 miles).

Plus, as the map gets further from the equator, the hex scale changes. A central band of hexes uses the 1 hex = 30 mile method. Further from the equator it becomes 1 hex = 29 miles, then 28 miles, and so on. Such a method would significantly reduce map-edge distortions without the complex math necessary to actually represent a sphere.

This would introduce one distortion: "Why is it that a unit can control a 30-mile hex at the equator but only a 15-mile hex at the top and bottom of the map?" Which would affect combat mostly in Manchuria and Russia (in the Aleutians and Kurile Islands, the fact that one is on an island will put a natural barrier on this) -- which would have its influence on only a limited part of the war.

Such a change would not actually change the complexity of the game, therefore would not increase the amount of time it took to play the game. However, it would (I think) make the game much more interesting -- enough that I would be willing to offer dollars.

[Thayne]

Oh . . . and one more thing.

An option that allows both (all) players to work on their moves at the same time. The allied player would put his orders into an allied player database; the Japanese player's moves would be stored in a Japanese player's database. The program would then resolve the turn by looking at the orders in both sets of tables.

The Japan player resolves the turn, sends the results to the allied player, BEFORE he starts working on his own orders.

[LargeSlowTarget]

I've voted 150 bucks, but I would have a close look at the 'new features' list and probably wait for some forum feedback before deciding how much it is really worth - with all dream features included I'd be willing to pay more. Would prefer an AI because I have to take into consideration that with two little kids PBEM won't be an option (unless I find an opponent who accepts slow and highly irregular turn output), but I understand that a decent AI is a pipe dream. So I would consider the game an investment into the future when the kids reach hotseat age.

[Big B]

ORIGINAL: Thayne

If I may . . .


In order to satisfy the largest number of customers with the greatest number of diverse views and opinions, I would suggest a "game options" screen that allows users themselves to adjust the settings.

For example:

Zero bonus: +0 to +10 (reduces at the rate of 1 per month)
Japanese Pilot Replacement Pool (pilots per month)
IJN: +0 to +50
IJA: +0 to +100
Atoll Troop Capacity: 2000 to unlimited
Atoll Airplane Capacity: 100 to unlimited
China Defense Advantage: +0 to (some reasonable upper limit) -- or some similar method of restricting Japan's capability to conquer China).
Logistics:
- Restricted Port Rearming: On/Off
- 4-Engine Bomber Supply Drain: On/Off
- Base Rearmament Restrictions (note: this section lists all 10 port sizes and has a setting for the size of the gun that can be stationed there).

This option would allow people with different views, whomever can find a player who shares those views, to play under the rules and restrictions they like. This should increase the capability to market the game to a more diverse audience.

Well thought out and brilliant,

Now If I can add my two cents, I have been like everyone else with my opinions of what should be changed...but I must say - with the scenario editor you can customize it to just about what ever you like. The game is brilliant, even if you don't agree with the standard default values.

I agree with the posters who say here "if anything needs a little more attention - it's LOGISTICS.
1) The 'port size vs. capabilities' issue is one worthy of explorering - and can't be somply addressed right now with the editor.
2) '500 battalion Death Stars' is another such issue that can't simply be addresseed with the editor.
AND my pet peeve
3) Land Based Supply Movement -PLEASE give us a way to direct where supply goes once it's on land. We can pick it up with ships and take it to a port - but once it's unloaded we loose all control over it, and rediculous things occur - such as - hexes with abandoned bases continually getting precious supply you can't spare..etc.[&:]

Otherwise, to me precious little needs to be done with the game that you can't do already.

And oh yah, I'd pay $150 for a serious improvement that was hot-seat/ PBEM only

[Hornblower]

Tossed in my 2 cents for $100

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: SpitfireIX

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

I'm really amazed by the fact the some people manage to get angry in a game forum

a) Some people obviously didn't learn any manners growing up.

b) Some people get off on making other people feel small.

c) Other people react to both of the above. (wrong action but tough not to justify).

c) causes more from the a) & b) types which in turn causes more folks to go the c) path ... once started, it is impossible to stop.

Frag, maybe you need to start threatening to suspend, or even ban, people in groups a) and b) and, if necessary, group c) (guilty). That's what happens to rude posters in other forums in which I participate, and I have to say the level of discourse and civility is generally a lot higher in those.

What requires censorship? Ideas or behavior? Are opposing ideas and difference of opinion regarded as unpalatable behavior which is then in turn open to censordhip? I missed the whole thing (darn) but I'd like to know why any anything short of foul language and porn pics need be censored.

[Bradley7735]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I missed the whole thing (darn) but I'd like to know why any anything short of foul language and porn pics need be censored.

I'd like to see more porn pics. LST needs to remove the lettering from his sig. [:D]

[LargeSlowTarget]

That's not porn in my sig [:-] - it's art [:D].

[treespider]

Having discovered the joys of PBEm, I want to change my vote....

[Mr.Frag]

What requires censorship? Ideas or behavior? Are opposing ideas and difference of opinion regarded as unpalatable behavior which is then in turn open to censordhip? I missed the whole thing (darn) but I'd like to know why any anything short of foul language and porn pics need be censored.

Quite simple Ron, read the forum rules:

1) I will control myself
2) I will not cause trouble to others

3) I am at least 14 years old
4) Admin has the right to modify/delete my messages
5) Matrix Games reserves the rights to modify this agreement at any time

1 & 2 are generally completely ignored by users [X(]

3 sometimes I wonder how many people lied about their age

You will notice there is no #6 I am entitled to free speach as governed under the constitution [:D]

[Ron Saueracker]

Looks like porn is A-OK!![:D] Pasternaski! Surfs Up![8D]

[Mr.Frag]

Looks like porn is A-OK!! Pasternaski! Surfs Up!

That falls in the "I will not cause trouble to others" last I checked.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Looks like porn is A-OK!! Pasternaski! Surfs Up!

That falls in the "I will not cause trouble to others" last I checked.

[:D]Oh! [;)]

[Mr.Frag]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Looks like porn is A-OK!! Pasternaski! Surfs Up!

That falls in the "I will not cause trouble to others" last I checked.

[:D]Oh! [;)]

Especially if it's a Redhead!

[Ron Saueracker]

I feel a Platoonist Pic coming on!!![:D]

[Mr.Frag]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

I feel a Platoonist Pic coming on!!![:D]

I hope so, I lost the Redhead he did for me! [:(]

[2Stepper]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

A question on expanded scope… what specifically do you have in mind?

Logistics is the number one thing on my list.

As you think through it, you come to the conclusion that by having logistics, it also entails expanding the concept of what a base actually is, how ships are handled, air mission frequency/repair, etc.

Any thoughts to adaptions/improvements of the weather model? I like where we're at, but there's always room for a tweek or two. As its my profession Frag with a specialization on tropical forecasting the thought of making a contribution is a welcome one. Just tossing the carrot out there. If not, I can respect that. Look forward to hearing more in the future either way. [8D]