Start of Game Screen

[Froonp]

JanSorensen, what you say about the critical mass & all seems right, but what can be done about that ?
If you ship a WiF computer game without the options, you'll loose all WiF players as customers.
If you ship a WiF computer game with all the options as standard, you'll have a game too complicated for the non WiF players to play.

I think that Steve approach of having 2 preconfigured sets of options solves this problem nicely.
And that's why I thought about having those 2 sets miroring what a Classic WiF FE box / Deluxe WiF FE box was containing and what play can be done with a Classic WiF Box / Deluxe WiF Box.
Lots of people play the Classic style when they are beginners or want a lighter experience, or have little time to play.
Lots of Expertens play Deluxe for the feel & interest of the optional rules & extra counters.

Steve justs easily allow for both, and I think this is good.

We just have to define what the "beginner package" and the "experten package" will be.

[lomyrin]

Oops, in trying to quote from a part of an earlier posting, seem that i just ended up sending it over again without any explanations.

It was stated that Mech in Flames was to be included in MWiF. I am under the impression that most players do not use the corps from that module since it was intended as a supplement to WiF 5. WiFFE has already included the Mechs and by using Mech in Flames corps the units are doubled up.

The Divs, Guns and the other non corps units are what is moslty in use.

Lars

[lomyrin]

I think Patrice is very much right on target with his beginners and experienced approach to MWiF.

Lars

[Froonp]

It was stated that Mech in Flames was to be included in MWiF. I am under the impression that most players do not use the corps from that module since it was intended as a supplement to WiF 5. WiFFE has already included the Mechs and by using Mech in Flames corps the units are doubled up.

The Divs, Guns and the other non corps units are what is moslty in use.

As far as I know, the corps from MiF are not included in MWiF, only the DIVs, Guns, and other non corps are.

[JanSorensen]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

JanSorensen, what you say about the critical mass & all seems right, but what can be done about that ?
If you ship a WiF computer game without the options, you'll loose all WiF players as customers.
If you ship a WiF computer game with all the options as standard, you'll have a game too complicated for the non WiF players to play.

I think that Steve approach of having 2 preconfigured sets of options solves this problem nicely.
And that's why I thought about having those 2 sets miroring what a Classic WiF FE box / Deluxe WiF FE box was containing and what play can be done with a Classic WiF Box / Deluxe WiF Box.
Lots of people play the Classic style when they are beginners or want a lighter experience, or have little time to play.
Lots of Expertens play Deluxe for the feel & interest of the optional rules & extra counters.

Steve justs easily allow for both, and I think this is good.

We just have to define what the "beginner package" and the "experten package" will be.

I do not offer a better solution than the one already being undertaken by Steve nor do I believe I criticised it.

I still think its an issue that is worth airing rather than ignoring though as someone else might get to thinking by realizing it could be an issue and hence come up with an even better idea.

I do not recall ever seeing a game that will play as differently as WiF based on optional rules - in particular in relation to the time it takes to play a full game meaning that you are unlikely to play 100s of games of WiF so you are more inclined to stick to one set of rules.

[YohanTM2]

The DOS version of SPIs War in Europe actually kept track of the benefits of each optional rule for both sides. Obviously the weighting of each option would have to be determined in advance.

As each option was clicked the status of the weighting anywhere from Major Allied through Major German advantage was tracked. Thus you could end in a balanced or unbalanced state, whatever you desire.

It also allowed for players who were playing PBEM to select a set of options that were balanced thus making a competitve game against folks who did not "gather around the table to play" without a lot of crying foul over the options being balanced too much in favour of the other player(s).

Anyway, seemed to work fairly well, unlike the game itself

[wodin]

Mouse over tips are a superb idea. Im a newbie aswell to the game.

A very good manual is needed to!

Also I agree about the colour scheme. Maybe Army green and khakis would be a better scheme.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: lomyrin

Oops, in trying to quote from a part of an earlier posting, seem that i just ended up sending it over again without any explanations.

It was stated that Mech in Flames was to be included in MWiF. I am under the impression that most players do not use the corps from that module since it was intended as a supplement to WiF 5. WiFFE has already included the Mechs and by using Mech in Flames corps the units are doubled up.

The Divs, Guns and the other non corps units are what is moslty in use.

Lars

Patrice reviewed all the units in MWIF for me back in August: Land, Naval, and Air. I have implemented most of his corrections and will do the rest "some day soon". Adding the new counters for Cruisers in Flames and Convoys in Flames is the bulk of the work that needs to be done. The other corrections are minor.

Just to double check for your concern I went through the German units and yes the Corps units are ommitted from MWIF. Some of the divisional units too where they were superceded by Asia in Flames counters. I did not check all the units on the Mech in Flames countersheet, just the Germans.

What I did find that was interesting is that a few other corps sized units have been added to the German army. Guderian as an armor corps HQ, a 12-5 armor, a 11-6 mechanized, and a 10-5 motorized. I did not check the infantry corps. I do not know why these units were added to CWIF. Perhaps Patrice knows.

[lomyrin]

That raises another question, are the late war units from Leaders in Flames included?

Regarding Divisions, unlimited breakdowns adds units to the force pool. Someone already touched on this subject and the suggestion that the unit broken down would end up in a separate sidelined pool so it could not be built again except by recombining was made.

Another means of dealing with Division breakdowns would be to take be Div's from the available forcepool only and thus avoid the problem of any separate pools. Often it woud mean that no breakdown is available.


Lars

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: lomyrin

That raises another question, are the late war units from Leaders in Flames included?

Regarding Divisions, unlimited breakdowns adds units to the force pool. Someone already touched on this subject and the suggestion that the unit broken down would end up in a separate sidelined pool so it could not be built again except by recombining was made.

Another means of dealing with Division breakdowns would be to take be Div's from the available forcepool only and thus avoid the problem of any separate pools. Often it woud mean that no breakdown is available.


Lars

Ah, that's where those extra units came from - Leaders in Flames. It was a 11-5 mechanized, not an 11 - 6.

Yes, the combat units (not the leaders and vetos and all that stuff) will be included in MWIF product 1. If you want to omit them, the CSV file can be changed easily enough.

Your comment about unlimited divsional breakdown (UDB) reminds me that I will have to add two more optional rules eventually: UDB, and more cities in China. Sigh. Just when I thought I had all this mess about optional rules nailed down, it squirms away again.

[Froonp]

Adding the new counters for Cruisers in Flames and Convoys in Flames is the bulk of the work that needs to be done. The other corrections are minor.

I can provide you with the CSV file for them if you want.

What I did find that was interesting is that a few other corps sized units have been added to the German army. Guderian as an armor corps HQ, a 12-5 armor, a 11-6 mechanized, and a 10-5 motorized. I did not check the infantry corps. I do not know why these units were added to CWIF. Perhaps Patrice knows.

Some corps were added in CS25 (LiF) and some were added in CS30 (PoliF).

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Adding the new counters for Cruisers in Flames and Convoys in Flames is the bulk of the work that needs to be done. The other corrections are minor.

I can provide you with the CSV file for them if you want.

Yes, please.

[c92nichj]

What I would like your help on is deciding which options should be set for novices and which for experienced players.

Ok here comes my suggestions, I know that options can be discussed at lenth but those are my suggestions.


For novices:
15. Off-city reinforcement
23. V-weapons and Atomic bombs
30. Factory construction and destruction
34. Motorized movement rates
39. Blitz Bonus
40. Chinese attack weakness
41. Fractional odds
42. Allied combat friction
44. Extended aircraft rebasing
46. Partisans
47. Isolated reorganization limits
50. USSR-Japan compulsory peace
61. Offensive Chits

For experienced players
2. Divisions
3. Artillery
5. Fortifications
6. Supply units
7. Engineers
8. Flying boats
9. Ships In Flames units
10. Territorials
11. Limited overseas supply
12. Limited supply across straits
13. HQ supply and support
14. Synthetic oil plants
15. Off-city reinforcement
19. In the presence of the enemy
20. Surprised ZOCs
23. V-weapons and Atomic bombs
24. Frogmen
25. SCS transport
26. Amphibious rules
27. Optional CV searching
28. Pilots
30. Factory construction and destruction
31. Saving build points and resources
32. Carpet bombing
33. Tank busters
34. Motorized movement rates
35. Bomber (& no paradrop) ATRs
36. Large ATRs
39. Blitz Bonus
40. Chinese attack weakness
41. Fractional odds
42. Allied combat friction
43. 2D10 Land CRT
44. Extended aircraft rebasing
46. Partisans
47. Isolated reorganization limits
48. Oil
50. USSR-Japan compulsory peace
51. En-route aircraft interception
52. Night missions
53. Twin-engined fighters
54. Fighter-bombers
55. Outclassed fighters
56. Carrier planes
57. Limited aircraft interception
58. Internment
59. Flying bombs
60. Kamikazes
61. Offensive Chits
65. Ski troops
66. The Queens
67. City Based Volunteers
68. Siberians
69. Naval supply units
70. Guards Banner Armies
71. Chinese Warlords
72. Partisan HQs
scrap units

Items that will not be part of any default:
16. Recruitment limits
17. HQ movement
18. Bottomed ships
22. Bounce combat
29. Food in Flames
37. Railway movement bonus
38. Defensive shore bombardment
45. Variable reorganization costs
49. Hitler’s War
62. The Ukraine
63. Intelligence
64. Japanese command conflict
75. Cruisers in Flames
76. Convoys in Flames
fog of war
facility repair
Limited view of production

[wfzimmerman]

ORIGINAL: JanSorensen


I do not offer a better solution than the one already being undertaken by Steve nor do I believe I criticised it.

I still think its an issue that is worth airing rather than ignoring though as someone else might get to thinking by realizing it could be an issue and hence come up with an even better idea.

I do not recall ever seeing a game that will play as differently as WiF based on optional rules - in particular in relation to the time it takes to play a full game meaning that you are unlikely to play 100s of games of WiF so you are more inclined to stick to one set of rules.

I agree this is an important concern. As a newb, it is a negative for me to have to worry about having to endure a prolonged options debate to start a game, even more so since the outcome may wind up "screwing" me. What I hope will happen is that standards will emerge around Steve's proposed defaults.

Steve, I would suggest that you make options files saveable, and provide a hyperlink to a repository of them (the WIF list Downloads area perhaps). That way, people can create helpful packages -- "Patrice's Options Choices" and share them with others. That way, when people are looking for a game, they can just post "looking for game -- Experienced default preferred, Patrice's Options acceptable" -- eliminating, I hope, much of the options negotiation.

[ieamlot]

As a non-WIF player, but an all round wargamer, are you saying that the optional rules will be pre ticked when you choose one of the standard options packages: Begginer, Intermediate or Advanced?

This would be my preference, with the link off to a description of what the options will effect.

For my two pence worth i have a thought on pbem, etc games. I assume that there are victory conditions involved with the game (as i think I saw mention above), could the optional rules be used to adjust the victory level up and down based on the options chosen for a game.

That way you could use the Begginer to Advanced standards (with seperate sub forums for each, possibly). Players could then bid/bargain on optional rules that would help their chosen side at the cost of increased victory condition points.

All you would then need to do is decided on what optional rules will be included in each of the 3 standard set of rules.
This could even be broken down further by having:
Begginer Allied Adv. or Begginer Axis Adv.
Intermediate Allied Adv. or Intermediate Axis Adv.
Advanced Allied Adv. or Advanced Axis Adv.

As with any game when you play different people than you may be used too, at a game with a vast range of optional rules, you always have to come to an accomodation to play.

What you chaps need to do (in my opion) is not try and get the game set up how you like it at this design stage, but decided amongst yourselves what rules should be placed in what slot by accomodating each others opinions.

p.s. Is that JanSorenson that plays WaW so well?

[JanSorensen]

ORIGINAL: ieamlot
p.s. Is that JanSorenson that plays WaW so well?

I dont know about well but I do also play WaW thats correct. Infact, I have also done some coding on WaW recently - mostly fixing bugs.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: wfzimmerman

ORIGINAL: JanSorensen


I do not offer a better solution than the one already being undertaken by Steve nor do I believe I criticised it.

I still think its an issue that is worth airing rather than ignoring though as someone else might get to thinking by realizing it could be an issue and hence come up with an even better idea.

I do not recall ever seeing a game that will play as differently as WiF based on optional rules - in particular in relation to the time it takes to play a full game meaning that you are unlikely to play 100s of games of WiF so you are more inclined to stick to one set of rules.

I agree this is an important concern. As a newb, it is a negative for me to have to worry about having to endure a prolonged options debate to start a game, even more so since the outcome may wind up "screwing" me. What I hope will happen is that standards will emerge around Steve's proposed defaults.

Steve, I would suggest that you make options files saveable, and provide a hyperlink to a repository of them (the WIF list Downloads area perhaps). That way, people can create helpful packages -- "Patrice's Options Choices" and share them with others. That way, when people are looking for a game, they can just post "looking for game -- Experienced default preferred, Patrice's Options acceptable" -- eliminating, I hope, much of the options negotiation.

Nice.

The ability to save/load a set of options is already on the Start Game screen. You can save them under the label "Personal Default" or any other file name you like.

As to providing a repository of setups, I believe that is better handled outside of MWIF proper. The saved optional rules file is a very simple file listing the optional rules one per line with either On or Off following the name of each option. These are tiny files and anyone could set up a 'repository'. That is a ways down the road yet.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: ieamlot

As a non-WIF player, but an all round wargamer, are you saying that the optional rules will be pre ticked when you choose one of the standard options packages: Begginer, Intermediate or Advanced?

This would be my preference, with the link off to a description of what the options will effect.

For my two pence worth i have a thought on pbem, etc games. I assume that there are victory conditions involved with the game (as i think I saw mention above), could the optional rules be used to adjust the victory level up and down based on the options chosen for a game.

That way you could use the Begginer to Advanced standards (with seperate sub forums for each, possibly). Players could then bid/bargain on optional rules that would help their chosen side at the cost of increased victory condition points.

All you would then need to do is decided on what optional rules will be included in each of the 3 standard set of rules.
This could even be broken down further by having:
Begginer Allied Adv. or Begginer Axis Adv.
Intermediate Allied Adv. or Intermediate Axis Adv.
Advanced Allied Adv. or Advanced Axis Adv.

As with any game when you play different people than you may be used too, at a game with a vast range of optional rules, you always have to come to an accomodation to play.

What you chaps need to do (in my opion) is not try and get the game set up how you like it at this design stage, but decided amongst yourselves what rules should be placed in what slot by accomodating each others opinions.

p.s. Is that JanSorenson that plays WaW so well?

I am reluctant to be the arbiter of the value of optional rules. Or even the central clearing house for same. As a mathematician I also expect that there will be synergistic effects for certain combinations, where the net gain is either more than the sum of the parts or less.

These are subtleties best left outside of the code, to be handled as part of the general negotiation to start playing a game. To some degree, ADG has set up a pretty neat system that accommodates all the variability due to optional rules. Set up which rules you are going to play by, and then bid for who gets to play which country. If you think the Axis gains a lot because of the optional rule set decided upon, then you will bid higher in order to play the Axis.

In any event, I am placing this this topic outside of my concerns until after the game is released for sale.

----

Oh, and yes. Preticked is how a default set is 'loaded'.

[amwild]

Steve,

Since I am a relative newbie to WiF, I can't really comment on all these options.

However, a friend asked me the following rules-based question, which I am now passing on as well as I undetstand it:

In cardboard WiF, production is limited to those unit types for which there are counters available in the box and not yet deployed to the map - i.e. only a limited number of any unit type can be produced.

Since a computer does not have any such physical limits on the number of each unit type counter that can be produced, is it possible to set an option so that:

1. The numbers of each unit type that may be produced is limited to those available as counters in cardboard WiF
or
2. Unlimited numbers of each unit type may be produced.

I would expect that there may be named units - such as HQs - that it might not be desirable to produce in numbers in excess of those available in cardboard WiF.

So, will MWiF have limited, unlimited or selectable limits on production of units?

[YohanTM2]

I am pretty sure the answer is 1. The unit pool will also change based on what mods you are playing like "Asia in Flames" and even "Leaders in Flames" had some extra units but it will be limited to the cardboard force pool. The Leaders in Flames rules will not be part of MWiF. At least not release 1.