Do you play against the AI?

[Gargantou]

I am so confused right now, and I think you and me scared everyone else away from the thread.

[AW1Steve]

[:)]  Wait till tonight , you will have all the traffic you can handle. Give it five hours. [:)]

[Nomad]

ORIGINAL: Gargantou

What in Jesu Joy Of Man's Desiring's name does "GAMEY" mean!?

GAMEY? That is that chicken breast you forgot in the fridge for 4 weeks. [:D]

[Gargantou]

Mmmm.. Breeeasts...[:D]

[Mobeer]

At the simplest, "GAMEY" means a tactic that takes advantage of a flaw in the game engine. So for example, invading and capturing a major city with 20 soldiers disembarked from a submarine is "GAMEY".

But where this gets confusing is where a tactic might or might not be taking advantage. For example, loading American carriers with Seafire fighter planes might be considered gamey by some players, who would object about the use of a British built plane on an American built warship. Other players would say that this was within the rules, and something that might have been done historically.

[Gargantou]

So basically, 'gamey' is something that people consider 'contradicts' logic and history too much.

[Nikademus]

"Gamey" generally refers to an "exploit" in the game routines that allows players to either do something not very plausible in RL or able to preform an act that gives an advantage that can't be reliably countered. (i.e. no "Con" to balance the "Pro")

[Gargantou]

Ok, I get it now, thanks for the explanation guys!

[wdolson]

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

Yes the game still sells some every month. I'd guess that 70-80% of the eventual lifetime sales have been achieved to date. There's nothing else like it so it should continue to generate sales for awhile. Yes there are some "volunteers" that continue to work on the game, and we're happy that they are doing so. I think Gary would have lost his mind if he had continued to work on WitP (I know I would have).

I thought the people actually maintaining the code were Matrix employees. So the ongoing development effort is a quasi-open source model? (Volunteer programmers, but with the code remaining proprietary.)

Bill

[wdolson]

ORIGINAL: wdolson

... I have checked some games for patches, oddly I never thought about it for some others. I never patched UV when I played it. I'm not going to bother now since I haven't played since buying WitP.

ORIGINAL: Joe D.
As a UV player, I can say that under v. 2.5, the game is still worth playing. However, the UV forum doesn't have nearly the activity as this forum, and there have been times that we UV players have felt like second class citizens, as if we were all expected to upgrade to WitP.

And please don't read anything personal into this post; it's just an observation on my part as a UV player.

For the record I've also played PacWar, which can be considered a "primitive" version of WitP.

When I played UV, I liked it, but kept thinking how nice it would be if I was able to play the whole Pacific instead of being limited to just the Solomons and half of New Guinea. I think the preference has to do with the scale of game you like to play.

Bill

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

Which begs the question: can you be considered to have died if you never lived in the first place?

Isn't that basically what Julius Caesar replied to a soldier under his command who asked his commander's permission to commit suicide?

[Reiryc]

Most of my game time is against the AI, but I prefer pbem.  Problem is of course time.  If I had more time, I'd be a mostly pbem player like when the game first game out.

But with a change in life's circumstances came a change in the amount of time I had to play in a dedicated manner.  PBEM is without any doubt the best way to play the game, but it isn't always a viable option for everyone.  I'd guess most people play the AI as opposed to pbem due to time constraints of one form or another.

[histgamer]

bout 50 50 now, got one PBEM going might start another and roughly same time pace for my AI game... Well today i had 5 turns done in my PBEM so PBEM was a bit faster. Dang that was a good PBEM day nearly got a week done.[&o][&o][&o][&o]

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Reiryc

Most of my game time is against the AI, but I prefer pbem.  Problem is of course time.  If I had more time, I'd be a mostly pbem player ...

I know the poll was simply "do you play against the AI?"; but what does it say about the game's AI when most veteran players would prefer PBEM.

OK, it's not a perfect world, so players have to make compromises; perhaps the next poll should be, under ideal circumstances -- i.e., no time constraints, etc. -- what do you prefer to play against: people or the machine?

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

ORIGINAL: Reiryc

Most of my game time is against the AI, but I prefer pbem.  Problem is of course time.  If I had more time, I'd be a mostly pbem player ...

I know the poll was simply "do you play against the AI?"; but what does it say about the game's AI when most veteran players would prefer PBEM.

OK, it's not a perfect world, so players have to make compromises; perhaps the next poll should be, under ideal circumstances -- i.e., no time constraints, etc. -- what do you prefer to play against: people or the machine?

i don't think that is the purpose of this poll... Matrix wants to find out (i think) how much effort to devote to the AI in this game. Obviously, if no one is playing AI, then they can drop the AI and no one would be unhappy.

However, if lots of folks ARE playing the AI - not as many people are going to buy WITP without an AI.

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

ORIGINAL: Reiryc

Most of my game time is against the AI, but I prefer pbem.  Problem is of course time.  If I had more time, I'd be a mostly pbem player ...

I know the poll was simply "do you play against the AI?"; but what does it say about the game's AI when most veteran players would prefer PBEM.

OK, it's not a perfect world, so players have to make compromises; perhaps the next poll should be, under ideal circumstances -- i.e., no time constraints, etc. -- what do you prefer to play against: people or the machine?

i don't think that is the purpose of this poll... Matrix wants to find out (i think) how much effort to devote to the AI in this game. Obviously, if no one is playing AI, then they can drop the AI and no one would be unhappy.

However, if lots of folks ARE playing the AI - not as many people are going to buy WITP without an AI.

[:)] I could not agree more. I certainly would not have bought it. [:)]

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso
i don't think that is the purpose of this poll... Matrix wants to find out (i think) how much effort to devote to the AI in this game. Obviously, if no one is playing AI, then they can drop the AI and no one would be unhappy.

However, if lots of folks ARE playing the AI - not as many people are going to buy WITP without an AI.

Does this game even have an "AI"? It plays more like a period of "scripted endevours" followed by "aimless wandering". It may be "automated" wandering..., but there certainly isn't much "intellegence" in evidence after the opening Japanese "push".

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso
i don't think that is the purpose of this poll... Matrix wants to find out (i think) how much effort to devote to the AI in this game. Obviously, if no one is playing AI, then they can drop the AI and no one would be unhappy.

However, if lots of folks ARE playing the AI - not as many people are going to buy WITP without an AI.

Does this game even have an "AI"? It plays more like a period of "scripted endevours" followed by "aimless wandering". It may be "automated" wandering..., but there certainly isn't much "intellegence" in evidence after the opening Japanese "push".

[:)] While it's far from perfect , and not all we'd like it to be (or hope the new version will be) , it is better than nothing , and a fair "training aid" . [8|]

[bradfordkay]

Personally I think that this thread has a lot to do with the Admiral's Edition announcement. I'll bet Matrix thought that they were going to be able to release the AE this Christmas, but found the AI to be problematic and so thought to check to see how viable a release would be with a nearly non-existent AI. My guess is, based on this poll, they're spending a lot more time on developing the AI.

[pad152]

AI as Japan

The AI does a good job for the inital invasions, but after the first 4 or 5 months is just goes dumb!
- Sends supplies to useless places.
- Too scripted, always invades the same places at the same time (some varable would be nice).
- Doesn't use minelaying beyond the initial invasion, it should mine forward bases for defense
- Keeps it's subs in the same place each in every game.
- Doesn't escort troops or supply shipments to forward bases under enemy air control.


AI as Allied

- It throws away it's forces peice meal
- Keeps sending tankers to useless forward bases.
- Sends TF's right base Japanese airbases only to get sunk.
- Never tries to retake wake, midway
- Keeps all of it's subs in the same places
- Doesn't mine enemy ports
- Dosen't use mines to protect forward bases
- Dosen't use PT boats for forward base defense
- Way to easy to cut off land units, like (Rangkoon, one enemy unit north will do it)