Matrix Games Forums

Posted: **Mon Sep 29, 2008 6:50 pm**

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

I have not added that yet. Is that a good one to add?

Yes, with proper logging of course.

PP
VP
money
manpower
troops (in place as garrisons would be close enough -- see below)
corps counters (assuming this is possible)
fleet counters (assuming this is possible)
depots

Basically, everything that can change through the course of a game would be good to be able to add back in. As now, only the host should be able to do it. Also, it needs to be fully logged, so all players know it happened. Honorable hosts would not use it to cheat, so the players should already know. But, some may not be so honorable.

Posted: **Wed Oct 01, 2008 12:49 am**

good points

Posted: **Wed Oct 01, 2008 6:06 pm**

It’s not about the money, at least for me it isn’t… although I do understand the people that complain about this, if you pay a quality price you should get a quality product…

Is the game playable yet?, well, technically it is, although technically you can also play football with a bunch of monkeys if you have a real good imagination and at least one of the chimps has a good and accurate arm… many bugs are still unfixed, the AI is a joke, at least for experienced players (and mind you, although I have been playing EiA for quite some time now, I’ve never won a single campaign game, came close with GB once in a 1805 scenario…), and the pace of PBEM games are about the same as cyberboard games, which aren’t as limited in many ways…

What I really feel sorry about is that this game is neither EiA nor EiH… and it is still actually advertised in the overview as “Empires in Arms is the official licensed computer version of Australian Design Group's classic board game”… which it is really a disgrace to EiA and Australian Design Group altogether. I suppose that it is of no use by now pointing all this out, and that one of the best games in the history of strategy games will never really see the light, and that I should stop following this forum and what some of you will certainly call whimpering… but I can’t help it when I come back to this forum and when I see what has been done to the “computer version of the classic board game”…

Posted: **Wed Oct 01, 2008 8:12 pm**

The latest v1.04 update should be available very soon.

We've posted before that we hear and understand those who want as much of the EIH stuff removed as possible. Where we can do that, we will, but as a separate "pure EIA" scenario. Our priority remains bugs, AI and PBEM improvements before we get too heavily into scenario editing. But, we've heard these concerns and agreed that they should be addressed.

Regards,

- Erik

Posted: **Wed Oct 01, 2008 11:05 pm**

But, we've heard these concerns...

yea, years ago from now....

Posted: **Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:23 am**

Erik, you need to read a bit more before you comment. We're not talking about a scenario editor at all. We're talking about a "host editor": The ability for the host to adjust a current game's items (PPs, VPs, money, manpower, etc).
 
There are two reasons to have an editor or the ability to edit:
 
1)  To correct for a bug or a possible mistake (that all agree with), and/or
2)  To "edit" "scenarios".
 
#1 already exists. The comments in this thread refer specifically to those things, plus what other pieces would be good to add. Nothing more. Only a few squeaky wheels are arguing for less EiH. The vast majority just want the game fully playable in SOME form. It's close, but not there yet.
 
Bugs, AI, PBEM. #1 is a way to work around some bugs. That's all.

Posted: **Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 am**

ORIGINAL: Tanan Fujiwara

It’s not about the money, at least for me it isn’t… although I do understand the people that complain about this, if you pay a quality price you should get a quality product…

Is the game playable yet?, well, technically it is, although technically you can also play football with a bunch of monkeys if you have a real good imagination and at least one of the chimps has a good and accurate arm… many bugs are still unfixed, the AI is a joke, at least for experienced players (and mind you, although I have been playing EiA for quite some time now, I’ve never won a single campaign game, came close with GB once in a 1805 scenario…), and the pace of PBEM games are about the same as cyberboard games, which aren’t as limited in many ways…

What I really feel sorry about is that this game is neither EiA nor EiH… and it is still actually advertised in the overview as “Empires in Arms is the official licensed computer version of Australian Design Group's classic board game”… which it is really a disgrace to EiA and Australian Design Group altogether. I suppose that it is of no use by now pointing all this out, and that one of the best games in the history of strategy games will never really see the light, and that I should stop following this forum and what some of you will certainly call whimpering… but I can’t help it when I come back to this forum and when I see what has been done to the “computer version of the classic board game”…

I couldn't agree with you more.

As far as Matrix marketing the game as "classic EiA", well, that's all it is: marketing. It's almost like Matrix decided to make whatever game they wanted to make regardless of the community and then decided to list it as "classic EiA" because they knew that's why people would buy it. I know that's make no sense (and it doesnt' to me either) but it seems to be the route they decided to take.

Erik, why do you keep saying "WE"?????????????????????????

It seems to me that Marshall is the only one doing any real work on this. Matrix really goofed this one up all around, there's little doubt about that.

Posted: **Thu Oct 02, 2008 1:16 am**

Having never played, or even seen EiH before, I must say there are things in the game that were quite a shock. I think Martix will find that given the option 80%+ of us would have preferred EiA classic.. ....  where did the idea to base it off EiH come from anyway???

Posted: **Thu Oct 02, 2008 1:42 am**

ORIGINAL: borner

Having never played, or even seen EiH before, I must say there are things in the game that were quite a shock. I think Martix will find that given the option 80%+ of us would have preferred EiA classic.. .... where did the idea to base it off EiH come from anyway???

A select handful of people who Matrix decided to listen to years ago and then that was that, Matrix shut their ears to the masses: not a very smart business move.

Posted: **Thu Oct 02, 2008 9:40 am**

Not to pick too much, but what is "classic" EIA? In every single game I played ... paused for thinking, except for one play by MAIL game...shudder, there were some type of house rules or whatever. So, I get that many want to get back to the "euphoric days" of EIA. I would support that. But many of us ALSO want more advanced rules, house rules or more EIH stuff. If you were able to choose your options, that would work great.

Just my $.02...which is NOW just over one British pence!!!

Jason

ORIGINAL: borner

Having never played, or even seen EiH before, I must say there are things in the game that were quite a shock. I think Martix will find that given the option 80%+ of us would have preferred EiA classic.. .... where did the idea to base it off EiH come from anyway???

Posted: **Thu Oct 02, 2008 11:24 am**

ORIGINAL: borner

Having never played, or even seen EiH before, I must say there are things in the game that were quite a shock. I think Martix will find that given the option 80%+ of us would have preferred EiA classic.. .... where did the idea to base it off EiH come from anyway???

The EiH came from Matrix and I. We went with what we thought would be the best implementation. Add elements of EiH that we as experienced players thought would be good moves. We did not want the game to be just "EiA". The map and counters in the screen shots for the past 10 years should have shown that BUT we might have been wrong in these additions and certain assumptions we made. I'm not sure I could say it any other wa because the cries after release are for more EiA. This is doable. I would really like to get some PBEM stuff fixed and an editor then we can add an "EiA Classic" scenario.

Posted: **Thu Oct 02, 2008 1:12 pm**

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
As far as Matrix marketing the game as "classic EiA", well, that's all it is: marketing. It's almost like Matrix decided to make whatever game they wanted to make regardless of the community and then decided to list it as "classic EiA" because they knew that's why people would buy it. I know that's make no sense (and it doesnt' to me either) but it seems to be the route they decided to take.

This is simply false. We made the deviations from EIA clear in a number of discussions here over the years that this game was in development. Our goal from the beginning was to make a game that most of the EIA community would enjoy. If we've fallen short, it's entirely our fault but we are certainly listening and trying to address problems and suggestions post-release.

Erik, why do you keep saying "WE"?????????????????????????
It seems to me that Marshall is the only one doing any real work on this. Matrix really goofed this one up all around, there's little doubt about that.

Marshall has always been the developer on this project. That doesn't mean this hasn't been a team effort. Any mistakes or problems are on all our shoulders.

Regards,

- Erik

Posted: **Thu Oct 02, 2008 2:17 pm**

[font="times new roman"]So what you are just saying basically is that we can’t trust matrix at all… that a potential customer should look at this web page:[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]http://www.matrixgames.com/products/285/details/Empires.in.Arms[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]and then say, “hey, that sounds neat!!!, I like the game and want to buy it, but I really should read the forums and inform myself further, and join or ask the community more to really see if what it says is true…”, excuse me, but I think that’s BS… If that’s your marketing plan, “let’s say something which is technically true but that doesn’t really stand up upon closer inspection and carry on...”[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]Because if that’s what you’re suggesting I don’t think that Matrix has a bright future ahead. People will just fall once for it and then be very careful about what Matrix has to offer them. [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]So, this just means that what you advertise is not really true and the only way to find out about it is to enter the forums??? We can’t just see what you advertise and trust that you aren’t given us some a technically true overview??? [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]I’m not saying this because of me… I had a fairly good idea of what I was buying (mind you, not the bugs or releasing a beta product), but that doesn’t change the fact that your advertisement of this product is not true in many ways… [/font]

Posted: **Thu Oct 02, 2008 4:04 pm**

ORIGINAL: Tanan Fujiwara

[font="times new roman"]So what you are just saying basically is that we can’t trust matrix at all… that a potential customer should look at this web page:[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]http://www.matrixgames.com/products/285/details/Empires.in.Arms[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]and then say, “hey, that sounds neat!!!, I like the game and want to buy it, but I really should read the forums and inform myself further, and join or ask the community more to really see if what it says is true…”, excuse me, but I think that’s BS… If that’s your marketing plan, “let’s say something which is technically true but that doesn’t really stand up upon closer inspection and carry on...”[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]Because if that’s what you’re suggesting I don’t think that Matrix has a bright future ahead. People will just fall once for it and then be very careful about what Matrix has to offer them. [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]So, this just means that what you advertise is not really true and the only way to find out about it is to enter the forums??? We can’t just see what you advertise and trust that you aren’t given us some a technically true overview??? [/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]I’m not saying this because of me… I had a fairly good idea of what I was buying (mind you, not the bugs or releasing a beta product), but that doesn’t change the fact that your advertisement of this product is not true in many ways… [/font]

Absolutely Tanan, that is what Erik is saying: If you don't read the Matrix forums then there is no idea what kind of game you will be buying DESPITE the game description. That's a little weak, IMO and Matrix needs to update the game description.

For some reason all the Matrix employees want to take this personal when they shouldn't. You are running a BUSINESS (even if it feels like family to you guys, it's not to most of your customers) so you shouldn't take these criticisms personal you should take them as advice/feedback.

Marshall keeps mentioning my poor bedside manner, and maybe that's true, but I don't think that's relevant. What IS relevant is that I like war games (particularly EiA) and am now very hesitant about buying any of the titles from Matrix, even ones that should be awesome (like MWiF).

Posted: **Thu Oct 02, 2008 5:37 pm**

ORIGINAL: Tanan Fujiwara
So what you are just saying basically is that we can’t trust matrix at all… that a potential customer should look at this web page and then say, “hey, that sounds neat!!!, I like the game and want to buy it, but I really should read the forums and inform myself further, and join or ask the community more to really see if what it says is true…”, excuse me, but I think that’s BS… If that’s your marketing plan, “let’s say something which is technically true but that doesn’t really stand up upon closer inspection and carry on...”

I think I would classify your assessment of my statement as a significant exaggeration. What I'm saying is that when you see a note like this in the features list on that page you just linked to:

"Includes some enhanced rules and play options added over the years by Empires in Arms players"

Then perhaps if you are concerned at what that means, you should ask in the forum.

In general, I think it's a good idea to check the forums for games before purchasing them. I know I do. And I hardly consider something that we've posted publicly on the forum (and as I recall, the deviations from EIA rules were posted as a Pinned FAQ thread for at least two years before release) to be an attempt to conceal it from players.

It's self-evident that a brief store description and a bullet point features list can't possibly tell you every last detail about the game. Therefore, if a particular feature or the lack thereof is of ultimate importance, I definitely advise you to make a quick post in the forum to make sure it is what you think it is before buying. We are in favor of having informed customers, which is why we have these forums so that we can discuss and share information beyond what fits in a single page description.

Regards,

- Erik

Posted: **Thu Oct 02, 2008 5:39 pm**

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
For some reason all the Matrix employees want to take this personal when they shouldn't. You are running a BUSINESS (even if it feels like family to you guys, it's not to most of your customers) so you shouldn't take these criticisms personal you should take them as advice/feedback.

I'm not taking this personally at all, but I feel obligated to point out when I feel that a false or misleading conclusion has been reached.

Marshall keeps mentioning my poor bedside manner, and maybe that's true, but I don't think that's relevant. What IS relevant is that I like war games (particularly EiA) and am now very hesitant about buying any of the titles from Matrix, even ones that should be awesome (like MWiF).

I'm sorry to hear that. From our perspective, we were entirely open about this release. We also screwed up in terms of the bugs and AI problems that presented themselves at release not being caught before. However, I do not feel that we were misleading in marketing the game.

Regards,

- Erik

Posted: **Thu Oct 02, 2008 7:56 pm**

Erik,

As far as enhanced rules, wouldn't it be fair to say that those advanced rules dominate game play in many facets of the game. One thing I would like to point out is simply this. When i first joined the forums in 2003 this is the only game I followed and the only reason I looked at Matrix. In the beginning and for many years the game was going to be EIA and not a variant. Then didn't Matrix begin consulting the person who first put EIH on the map. I cannot remember his name right now. After that it seems once that person came on board the game changed to more or less EiH even though many many in the community did not want it.

The biggest problem I have is you only have a few playtesters for this game and have always kept that group small. I see now that you use us the "Consumer" to do most of that now and still have a tiny group Officially testing for you. I realize you sold the soul of the game to EiH and to PBEM at the expense of the AI. I also realize that we may only see an official update about once a quarter with only one programmer. I implore you though to bring on more official play testers to speed some of this up. Maybe even bring on a part time programmer to help. I know you won't for fiscal reasons, but it would better serve this game and this community if you would.

Posted: **Thu Oct 02, 2008 10:02 pm**

ORIGINAL: timewalker03
I implore you though to bring on more official play testers to speed some of this up.

I'm not sure if you realize this, timewalker03, but you and I are the playtesters.

The guys who bought the game.

A 5 page thread called "Is This Game Playable Yet?" should be a major warning to anyone considering purchasing this game.

GSB

Posted: **Thu Oct 02, 2008 10:11 pm**

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

I'm not taking this personally at all, but I feel obligated to point out when I feel that a false or misleading conclusion has been reached.
Regards,

- Erik

Erik, unfortunately the only thing misleading is the title of this game: EMPIRES IN ARMS, which it is NOT. How is that not misleading?

So if I tell you I will sell you a lexus and you agree then send you a yugo you're going to be cool with that? WOW, I have some real estate in the swam....er... beach front property in Florida to sell you.

Posted: **Thu Oct 02, 2008 10:51 pm**

ORIGINAL: Grapeshot Bob

A 5 page thread called "Is This Game Playable Yet?" should be a major warning to anyone considering purchasing this game.

GSB

It is, believe me it is. [:)]

Matrix Games Forums

Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?

RE: Is This Game Playable Yet?