Attention Matrix Staff: Aircraft Upgrades

[Drongo]

ORIGINAL: joliverlay
I don't disagree with your companies right......

Hey Frag, you liked testing the game so much that you bought the company??? [:)]

[Captain Cruft]

ORIGINAL: Drongo
Hey Frag, you liked testing the game so much that you bought the company??? [:)]

I would hope you guys are at least getting a free copy of the game for your trouble ...

[joliverlay]

I don't have any idea how this (flexible upgrade path) would make the game become a RTS. I can't belive anyone would even suggest that. One of the precursors of this game BTR, and indeed its distint precursor Pac War, both by the same author (G.G.) allowed this sort of upgrade, and neither was ever considered a RTS. This has nothing whatsoever to do with that. How cold production decisions in December 41 which might give you extra planes in 1944 (1000s of game hours away) make this a RTS. They have the OPPOSITE effect. If you have to make production decisions 500 turns before you benefit from them and manage all the production in between this is OPPOSITE of a RTS.....it is a turn based strategy game build around what could have happened at the time had the persons in charge made different decisions. This is NOT a RTS.

[Drongo]

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft
I would hope you guys are at least getting a free copy of the game for your trouble ...

The free copy of the game is irrelevent. All we needed as a reward was to read the glowing user posts after the game was released. [;)]

[ZOOMIE1980]

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

Possibly the most useful thing that could happen here is that Mr Frag (or other "staff representative") formally present this thread to "The Devs" in the form of a "petition". Having been thus addressed "The Devs" can then formally say No (or Yes) and that would be end of story.

One minor point I might add to the discussion. Earlier on Frag expressed the idea, and I paraphrase, "you don't want to turn the game into an RTS". Well, I would argue that it is precisely the RTS-like "building stuff" features of the game that make it attractive to many people. If a thing was practically possible in reality then it should be possible in the game. If that same thing was politically impossible or just extremely difficult then that should be reflected in the PP cost of the action.

WitP is indeed turn-based strategy meets real-time strategy. A morphing of the two. And that has a lot to do with its appeal.

[Mr.Frag]

I don't disagree with your companies right to make whatever game you design (and take the consequences if it does not please your customers).

Not my design, not my company and no, i do not represent Matrix or 2by3 in any way, shape or form.

I fought for the features that i could get into the game. I didn't win every fight. 2BY3 was not interested in changing this one. End of story.

Sometimes you guys get a little confused as to what power we have over things. 2BY3 simply reads what we say and sees something they like and uses it. We have no say whatsoever in the design. If we did, you'd see Frag's pilot school sitting in Tokyo.

[Polar Iceman]

Ive been following this thread and for a while now and now for my 2 bits.It does not make sense to me to give a player everything they need too wage war and then say they have to fight with 1 arm tide behind their back.The game already gives you paths to take that are not historic....visavi sub doctrine.So I see no reason not to have air an option for historic aircraft upgrades as well! After all is this not what the game promised to deliver on its game page....."There are 15 campaigns included...War in the Pacific now gives you the chance to fight the entire war YOUR WAY ON EVERY LEVEL." and "Complete player control of aircraft upgrades." These are the primary reasons I bought the game. If indeed their is not the remotest chance to change the historical outcome because of game limitations,I feel there is not much reason to even attempt it. You all have a good day eh[:D]

[Tankerace]

Here is my take on it. People are saying the premis of this being a historical game is that each squadron upgrades to what it did historically. It cannot budge. If that is what passes for a historical game, then it is nothing but a user oriented documentary. If we, the player, are playing as the SUPREME COMMANDER of ALL ALLIED FORCES in the Pacific, then we should be able to choose it as we please. It is plain stupid if you want to upgrade 2 groups of F2As to F4F-4s, if you have 72 F4F-4s, but only 10 F4F-3s, you have to wait longer. That is not historical, that is just being Anal. From turn one, the game ceases being historical. The whole point of the game is not to give us a history lesson, but to give us the equipment that was available on Decemeber 7, 1941, and let us see if we can fight the war any better. They way you guys are saying it needs to be, if by June 6, 1942, four Japanese carriers aren't burning hulks, then the game must be bugged. That is stupid.

You create a game to make money. If we are giving you 80 bucks, and ask that we, the player, get a little more room to maneuver in the game, where is the harm? 75% or so of the players are editing the scenarios to do just that, so why can't you do it for us, and make them official scenarios?

Also, people tell me that the game was not released early. Well, in its current state, I would now believe that, except that the Japanese ship production, an ADVERTISED feature, does not work. If it didn't work, don't release the game. But the game was released with stuff like that not working, and Matrix has all but clammed up leaving the testers, who volunteered for free, to fend for themselves in trying to explain it all to us and defend Matrix, I can't help but feel a little betrayed. The testers have done a marvelous job in supporting the game, but its not their job to support the game, or tell us why something doesn't work as advertised. With issues like these its up to Matrix to explain just why something like these aircraft upgrades can't be done, or why advertised features suddenly don't work.

I might have been taking it the wrong way, but one thing that really erked my was on Gary Grigsby's dev Journal, where he said something to the effect "And now that WiTP has been released its full speed ahead on WaW". Nowhere did he mention any of the major problems with the game (Fatal error 772, the sound bug), and it came across to me like it was being said that the game was done, and now all oiur resources are going to be diverted towards other projects other than those needed to make the game playable on all systems (i.e. those who had the sound bug.)

I applaud the testers for their job, but now its Matrix/2by3's turn to step up and tell us why features that MOST of the players want can't be added.

If I seem a little critical of this, I do not mean to. I get really POed when a $30 game doesn't work wholly as advertised, and I remember I got really pissed when Silent Hunter II came out (40 bucks), and the promised multiplayer feature would "be added at a later date". So, when I have to live off Ramen noodles for weeks to afford this $80 game, I cannot help but be upset when it doesn't work as advertised, and when my CD order gets lost twice.

[Oleg Mastruko]

Frag, assuming everything that had to be said in this thread, has already been said, I'll be rude and semi-hijack the thread...

I'm interested in your VERY depressive outview of the Japs chances to win the scen #15 game (mind you, I'm saying win the *game* not win the *war*).

Frankly, your depressing observations did more to cool me off for playing WITP than this whole "aircraft upgrade" discussion. (Design decisions regarding production/industry/upgrades do seem a bit strange but I can live with that.)

I guess no one played the whole campaign to the end during playtesting, but I understand you have run some PC vs. PC games (lasting for some days as I read on this forum).

What was the outcome of those games?

And finally - DO you really stand by your words that Japs have snowballs chance in hell to win the *game*? After the initial patching period ends, I plan on starting several serious PBEMs. I play to have good time, but I also play to WIN (and am not ashamed to admit it). If you tell me straight away I will have no chances of winning as Japanese (with or without aircraft upgrades or whatever) then what's the purpose of playing the friggen game?

Oleg

[Tankerace]

Like I said, its like they want to give us an $80 history lesson, not an $80 game.

[mdiehl]

The problem wasn't that the real Japanese production people had "brains the size of walnuts." The problem was that they had to choose between inferior models that they could produce in what seemed to be "adequate" numbers vs. "good on paper" models that in reality were not up to the quality of 1st line Allied a/c and in insufficient numbers.

The grousing about Japanese production here sounds to me like people are complaining because the Japanese are modeled after the Japanese rather than, for example, the Borg.

Like I said, its like they want to give us an $80 history lesson, not an $80 game.

If you want a game in which you can defeat the opposition by keeping pace in the production and quality of aircraft you should not play a game as the Japanese in WW2.

[Spooky]

Unfortunately, I have to agree with Tankerace ... and all the other posters.

I have been a Matrix fanboy since the UV release 2 years ago ... but right now, I have the very unpleasant feeling that the players' feedback is not taken in account - even if a lot of us believe that a "feature" is a big flaw of the game.

Now, I really hope I am wrong and that this lack of communication can be explained by the fact that most of the Matrix staff is at the World Boardgaming Championships.

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

The grousing about Japanese production here sounds to me like people are complaining because the Japanese are modeled after the Japanese rather than, for example, the Borg.

Like I said, its like they want to give us an $80 history lesson, not an $80 game.

If you want a game in which you can defeat the opposition by keeping pace in the production and quality of aircraft you should not play a game as the Japanese in WW2.

No problem with your points (this time [:D]) but then why the whole production/upgrade management "thingie"? Right from the start I said I wanted to be Yamamoto, not Speer, and it seemed to me whole production management sub-game is rather tedious. Now it seems you HAVE to be Speer (which I'd like to avoid altogether), but not really see results of your "Speer-ing", if I understand the problem correctly?

That does sound a bit bizarre, you must admit...

O.

[Oleg Mastruko]

Redundant post sent by mistake, deleted.

[myros]

re: Oleg Mastruko
There have already been some cases posted of people winning with the Japanese side by having enough points in 43 to meet the "win" criteria and end the game. (4 x points in 43 IIRC). These were against the AI mind you. So it is very possible to win the game as Japan.

I think it has more to do with PBEM ... when 2 players of equal skill and cunning play scen 15 then it would be a LOT harder for Japan to win in that manner. It is still very possible given the same scenario to achieve a better ending than history. And if you happen to be playing someone not as skilled you could quite easily pummel the allies. Its nowhere near as fixed in stone as you seem to be worried about.

Myros

[Captain Cruft]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
Not my design, not my company and no, i do not represent Matrix or 2by3 in any way, shape or form.

I understand that, and always have. You are acting as an informal communications channel though i.e. you can talk to 2by3, whereas none of us customers can. Hence my previous suggestion which would, one way or the other, put an end to the whole issue.

[Reiryc]

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

The problem wasn't that the real Japanese production people had "brains the size of walnuts." The problem was that they had to choose between inferior models that they could produce in what seemed to be "adequate" numbers vs. "good on paper" models that in reality were not up to the quality of 1st line Allied a/c and in insufficient numbers.

The grousing about Japanese production here sounds to me like people are complaining because the Japanese are modeled after the Japanese rather than, for example, the Borg.

Like I said, its like they want to give us an $80 history lesson, not an $80 game.

If you want a game in which you can defeat the opposition by keeping pace in the production and quality of aircraft you should not play a game as the Japanese in WW2.

Silly argument...

If the production system allows one to build x number of aircraft that is better than a current model then that current model should be capable of being replaced.

If the problem is that the production system doesn't do a good job of reflecting the difficulties the japanese faced, then the production system should be tweaked. However, it stands to reason that if a model is available that performs better, that the player should be able to utilize that aircraft model more fully.

Why allow a tweaking of the production/R&D system if you can't really benefit from it?

[ZOOMIE1980]

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

The problem wasn't that the real Japanese production people had "brains the size of walnuts." The problem was that they had to choose between inferior models that they could produce in what seemed to be "adequate" numbers vs. "good on paper" models that in reality were not up to the quality of 1st line Allied a/c and in insufficient numbers.

The grousing about Japanese production here sounds to me like people are complaining because the Japanese are modeled after the Japanese rather than, for example, the Borg.

Like I said, its like they want to give us an $80 history lesson, not an $80 game.

If you want a game in which you can defeat the opposition by keeping pace in the production and quality of aircraft you should not play a game as the Japanese in WW2.

If we had NO control over Japanese production I could agree. But Matrix or 2X3 gave 100% control over Japanese production. Now we CAN produce GOOD models, in some cases even BETTER than American counterparts, and get them in substantial numbers by simply being smarter than the Japanese were in history, and better/luckier in combat. But then we are forced back into decisions that adhere to history even though we are no longer historical at all. If I have the ability to produce a pool of 500 Shindens by Dev 1944 I should be able to use them regardless of what "history" says. Historically, I should never have Shindens at all. But the game allows me to. What's the point if I'm not allowed to use them?

[Tankerace]

Boom! You just hit the nail on the head Zoomie.

[mdiehl]

If the production system allows one to build x number of aircraft that is better than a current model then that current model should be capable of being replaced.

If the problem is that the production system doesn't do a good job of reflecting the difficulties the japanese faced, then the production system should be tweaked. However, it stands to reason that if a model is available that performs better, that the player should be able to utilize that aircraft model more fully.

Why allow a tweaking of the production/R&D system if you can't really benefit from it?

You can benefit from it, you're just not going to win the war from it. I have more sympathy with Oleg's response. If the game requires that you channel Speer rather than opt for an automated management system that attempts something historical then there's a need for more automation.

But as to your point, my view is that any effort to model in detail the kinds of inefficiencies and lack of resources (in particular large numbers of top ranked engineers, machinists and industrial moguls who can really rationalize production AND also make top of the line equipment) is doomed to fail unless you sort of invert the whole point of the game. That is, make a game called "WW2 Industrial Baron" in which the ONLY thing the players do is manage the economies and let the war play out in some hypersimplified Risk type combat resolution system. Because doing this job really well requires an inordinated level of complexity.

So, IMO, Matrix has been somewhat generous to the Japanese player in letting him have as much control as he does. Given a choice between walking into an incredible quagmire of modeling Japanese production in detail (only, I am pretty sure, to have the usual AF legions persistently clamoring to be allowed to tweak the system such that Shinden production compares favorably with P-40 production as regards numbers), and simply removing the feature entirely from the Japanese player's control, I'd say the best option is the latter.