Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

As for me, I will play AI, like (i believe) 95% - 99 of the possible buyers.

It may well be that 95% of the regular Matrix Games customers who, in turn, purchase WiF will play AI only. That actually makes a lot of sense, because that style of game is the publisher's bread and butter. Let me add, however, that Matrix is a low-volume publisher of what they, themselves, refer to as "niche" computer games.

Conversely, ADG has sold a boatload of boardgames that appeal to a completely different audience with completely different gameplay preferences, the sheer numbers of whom dwarf those associated with the customer base of Matrix games. And its not my intention to slag Matrix games with that comment. As I stated somewhere else in this thread, AI-only gamers would be lost without them.

Assuming that the game gets published and isn't so buggy and/or unfaithful to the boardgame as to turn a "traditional" WiF player completely off, then I'll probably purchase it. I'll spend some time studying the game, learning the GUI, planning moves and the like. Then, I'll look for a game with other wargamers. I seriously doubt that I'll ever open an AI game. I have no interest, whatsoever, in World Flames: AI Edition.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

BTW: Here are the Matrix Games that I own; note the relative absence of hex/turn based games:

Battles in Italy
Battle of Britain 2
Carriers at War
CC3-CoI
CC4-WaR
CC5-TLD
CCMT
Conquest of the Aegean
Crown of Glory
Empires in Arms
Harpoon 3
Highway to the Reich
LGAA
Panzer Command Kharkov
Panzer Command OWS
Tin Soldiers Julius Caesar
Uncommon Valor
War between the States
War in the Pacific

I have no interest, whatsoever, in World Flames: AI Edition.

 
The survey is done, and it shows you are in the minority on this forum. More to the point. The decision has been made, and this discussion doesnt change a thing.

Well praem, he is allowed to express his opinion. 

Playing against yourself is a challenge of your own strategy and tactics which exposes weaknesses rather quickly. I always miss things and feel like a novice after I play each side in any solitaire game. However I learn new things and that is always good. Still, I am not sure I improve as much as I do against other people since you can reinforce faulty tactics and ideas too. So for me the AI is a good way to get familiar with a game. Solitaire is a good way to test concepts and ideas out. While pbem, netplay and hotseat allow for tough competitions and the greatest learning expierance.

Keep it polite guys. This thread was only started to get these posts out of the "When" thread.
 
 
 
GSB

AI?, PBEM?, Solitaire?, Netplay?, Hotseat?

Netplay/PBEM/Hotseat= 95%
AI/Solitaire=5% and mostly as reference, training, updates etc.
[:D]

ORIGINAL: abj9562
... So for me the AI is a good way to get familiar with a game. Solitaire is a good way to test concepts and ideas out. While pbem, netplay and hotseat allow for tough competitions and the greatest learning expierance.

Very good summary of my thoughts, thanks [;)]

To test concepts and ideas out, using the option to select the values of the die rolled (instead of having them random) in solitaire mode should be especially useful. It's on Steve's list (see here)

Alain aka Caquineur

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

ORIGINAL: JonBrave

Steve,

In your 1st June Update Report, you said

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

... This was motivated by a conversation with David Heath about how important the AI Opponent will be.
... I now agree with Dave: the AIO is crucial for sales.

That was 6 weeks before supposed release date. That's what "concerns" me. I would have thought that was figured long ago, I have been returning to the thread for years. Polls can be conducted well in advance if wanted.

I do realise my tone is critical. But I do not mean to offend.

What "Dave" said is totally true. You can see the effect of a dumb AI in the results of the launch of Empire Total War, in terms of prestige (future sales) and in terms of inmediate sales cut through the feedback of online forums. Even though they tried to patch it decently afterwards.

As for me, I will play AI, like (i believe) 95% - 99 of the possible buyers. Honestly I don't think people will ever (with some extremely rare exceptions) Solitaire.

Hotseat is a possibiity but considering how extended is internet and computers, it's most probably obsolete in benefit of Netplay.

PBEM is another very minoritary option, although I believe it is not totaly substitued by Netplay. It may still be useful.

So, for me would be AI+ ocasionally Netplay. For the general market, i would include a niche for those who still need PBEM. I would say the other options are totally outdated. For example: How many people you know who play chess against themselves?

i think steves survey was 60/40 so its not as big a majority as you may think - and a survey elsewhere puts PBEM above AI - beware the non-AIers are growing [:'(]

ORIGINAL: undercovergeek

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

ORIGINAL: JonBrave

Steve,

In your 1st June Update Report, you said



That was 6 weeks before supposed release date. That's what "concerns" me. I would have thought that was figured long ago, I have been returning to the thread for years. Polls can be conducted well in advance if wanted.

I do realise my tone is critical. But I do not mean to offend.

What "Dave" said is totally true. You can see the effect of a dumb AI in the results of the launch of Empire Total War, in terms of prestige (future sales) and in terms of inmediate sales cut through the feedback of online forums. Even though they tried to patch it decently afterwards.

As for me, I will play AI, like (i believe) 95% - 99 of the possible buyers. Honestly I don't think people will ever (with some extremely rare exceptions) Solitaire.

Hotseat is a possibiity but considering how extended is internet and computers, it's most probably obsolete in benefit of Netplay.

PBEM is another very minoritary option, although I believe it is not totaly substitued by Netplay. It may still be useful.

So, for me would be AI+ ocasionally Netplay. For the general market, i would include a niche for those who still need PBEM. I would say the other options are totally outdated. For example: How many people you know who play chess against themselves?

i think steves survey was 60/40 so its not as big a majority as you may think - and a survey elsewhere puts PBEM above AI - beware the non-AIers are growing [:'(]

Of course, my perception can be wrong. However, what I was meaning is that i don't think the results of the survey are quite valid, since (IMO) that's not what people really does when they buy the games.

Old wargamers (somehow I include myself) like those who can form the fan group of this game ( I include myself no doubt) and the base of this forum can have very different behaviour than the final buyers' majority. Anyway, I think many people may have not understood completely what solitaire game meant (although it was explained for those who took care to read it) like it almost happened to me, when I nearly confused it with AI .

I wonder how representative is the votes of a small number of hardened grognards in the final requirements that the game should have. It's not a matter of "treasoning" a product like WIF by depriving it from some of it's characteristics, but of adapting the gameplay to the modern systems. I mean, it would be like making square roots by hand, although you have a computer.

Of course, this is a forum, full of opinions and that is just mine. [;)]

Praem,

Actually it is you who are in the minority on this forum, as I recall about a week ago, Steve mentioned NetPlay had a higher percentage than AI, and that does not count a survey done over at the Yahoo WiF discussion group where NetPlay came in ahead of AI as well. Regardless, there will be an AI...and I hope it will be nothing more than a minimal tutorial strength AI.

ORIGINAL: praem

I have no interest, whatsoever, in World Flames: AI Edition.

The survey is done, and it shows you are in the minority on this forum. More to the point. The decision has been made, and this discussion doesnt change a thing.

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14
Regardless, there will be an AI...and I hope it will be nothing more than a minimal tutorial strength AI.

I hope the AI is far better than tutorial strength.

An AI will be extremely useful when there are insufficient players for the full Global War and no-one wants to play (say) Russia.

An even better use for the AI is when three players take one side and they let the AI take the opposition. In that case there is no possible game-generated animosity between the players but instead there is a real opportunity to enjoy fighting a game for the Common Good... (until 1945 when another player gets too close to the last victory hex - that's when the gloves come off).

Yes, I need a descent AI. But as I understand it, one side is either all human played (even if only one person) or all AIO. True?

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

ORIGINAL: undercovergeek

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio



What "Dave" said is totally true. You can see the effect of a dumb AI in the results of the launch of Empire Total War, in terms of prestige (future sales) and in terms of inmediate sales cut through the feedback of online forums. Even though they tried to patch it decently afterwards.

As for me, I will play AI, like (i believe) 95% - 99 of the possible buyers. Honestly I don't think people will ever (with some extremely rare exceptions) Solitaire.

Hotseat is a possibiity but considering how extended is internet and computers, it's most probably obsolete in benefit of Netplay.

PBEM is another very minoritary option, although I believe it is not totaly substitued by Netplay. It may still be useful.

So, for me would be AI+ ocasionally Netplay. For the general market, i would include a niche for those who still need PBEM. I would say the other options are totally outdated. For example: How many people you know who play chess against themselves?

i think steves survey was 60/40 so its not as big a majority as you may think - and a survey elsewhere puts PBEM above AI - beware the non-AIers are growing [:'(]

Of course, my perception can be wrong. However, what I was meaning is that i don't think the results of the survey are quite valid, since (IMO) that's not what people really does when they buy the games.

Old wargamers (somehow I include myself) like those who can form the fan group of this game ( I include myself no doubt) and the base of this forum can have very different behaviour than the final buyers' majority. Anyway, I think many people may have not understood completely what solitaire game meant (although it was explained for those who took care to read it) like it almost happened to me, when I nearly confused it with AI .

I wonder how representative is the votes of a small number of hardened grognards in the final requirements that the game should have. It's not a matter of "treasoning" a product like WIF by depriving it from some of it's characteristics, but of adapting the gameplay to the modern systems. I mean, it would be like making square roots by hand, although you have a computer.

Of course, this is a forum, full of opinions and that is just mine. [;)]

apologies - i meant to quote praem who seems to think EVERYONE will be playing AI, whereas - and this isnt a rant for a no AI edition - i believe eventually the vast majority will hit netplay and PBEM - its what this game was made for and its the closest you can get to playing the board game, over a beer, with a friend, except its over the ether, with a beer, with a friend - a virtual reconstruction of the game.

as i did with witp after the tutorial - i will not touch the single player button, these games were made for play against humans

No apologies needed. [:)]

Of course I prefer to play personally against a human player on the physical board, in the virtual board, and against an AI in this order, like most or all wargamers, but it's extremely difficult to find the coincidence in timetables the more players involved.

Right now we have been playing a WIF game (4 players) and we could only make our agendas meet once a month, although we played like 8-9 hours those few days. It means that, although the game was aborted by the surrender of the allies (the russian player was pretty new and didn't help enough), it took us about 1 or 2 years to make to 1942 or 1943 (don't remember exactly), because we couldn't play either in july/august and some other periods where people had holidays, ...

Also, we had to meet in a village about 50 km ( +/- 30 miles) from Madrid, with frequent traffic jams, which were a nuisance.

The PBEM or netplay would solve the problem of travelling in order to play, but netplay wouldn't solve the agenda problem (work & familiar responsabilities).

The PBEM could be valid as for the agenda problem only if the discipline of all was constant enough to keep a rythm in the send of turns. My only experience with this was (if I recall well) with the game Space Empires IV, and although the 4 of us were serious players, there was always a certain longer delay of one of them, which was uncomfortable. Also, after some time, the interest decayed and the game was abandoned. I think it's difficult to keep a long term interest with the PBEM, but maybe it's only my experience.

That's why it's invaluable to be able to play with the AI. That 90/95% of the times that my human opponents are not avaliable when I want to play I can play against the AI, which does not collide with the preference that, of course, I will give to play against humans.

i believe eventually the vast majority will hit netplay and PBEM - its what this game was made for and its the closest you can get to playing the board game, over a beer, with a friend, except its over the ether, with a beer, with a friend - a virtual reconstruction of the game.

This is what VASSAL and CyberBoard PBEM software was made for, specifically for players who only want to play games against other humans over the internet.

Computer games are different. Players buy and play computer games - rather than VASSAL and/or CyberBoard - specifically because computer games provide something the PBEM software does not. Specifically, a computer opponent, in addition to the PBEM and netplay capability. Matrix understands this, and markets computer games with AI computer opponents. Matrix appears to be doing quite well by recognizing this fact of life, despite those who believe otherwise.

i will not touch the single player button, these games were made for play against humans

Good for you! I and others probably will not touch the PBEM or netplay button. So what? Nobody should worry themselves about how other people want to play their games for fun as they see fit. Like Yogi Berra says, if people don't want to play [AI] [PBEM] [Netplay] [Solitaire], nobody's gonna stop 'em.

didnt you get all shouty for no reason!!!!!????

vassal is no good to me - i dont own the board game, i want to own the pc game and play against a human opponent - what software is out there to replicate this for me?

a good duplication of a board game with PBEM ability thats what.

ORIGINAL: Subetai

Yes, I need a descent AI. But as I understand it, one side is either all human played (even if only one person) or all AIO. True?

I believe this is a correct statement. An entire side CW - Axis - Comintern is all AI or All human. There is no individual countries controlled by the AI.. at least not until all but one country is conquored, but that is only a technical detail.

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

i believe eventually the vast majority will hit netplay and PBEM - its what this game was made for and its the closest you can get to playing the board game, over a beer, with a friend, except its over the ether, with a beer, with a friend - a virtual reconstruction of the game.

This is what VASSAL and CyberBoard PBEM software was made for, specifically for players who only want to play games against other humans over the internet.

Computer games are different. Players buy and play computer games - rather than VASSAL and/or CyberBoard - specifically because computer games provide something the PBEM software does not. Specifically, a computer opponent, in addition to the PBEM and netplay capability. Matrix understands this, and markets computer games with AI computer opponents. Matrix appears to be doing quite well by recognizing this fact of life, despite those who believe otherwise.

i will not touch the single player button, these games were made for play against humans

Good for you! I and others probably will not touch the PBEM or netplay button. So what? Nobody should worry themselves about how other people want to play their games for fun as they see fit. Like Yogi Berra says, if people don't want to play [AI] [PBEM] [Netplay] [Solitaire], nobody's gonna stop 'em.

I'm with ya Brother - 100% ditto

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

This is what VASSAL and CyberBoard PBEM software was made for, specifically for players who only want to play games against other humans over the internet.

Computer games are different. Players buy and play computer games - rather than VASSAL and/or CyberBoard - specifically because computer games provide something the PBEM software does not. Specifically, a computer opponent, in addition to the PBEM and netplay capability. Matrix understands this, and markets computer games with AI computer opponents. Matrix appears to be doing quite well by recognizing this fact of life, despite those who believe otherwise.

In the first Survey, I did answer 0% to PBEM. Finally, and seeing that MWiF scheduled date was postponed. I began playing a PBEM game with Vassal. After 2 weeks, I like it a lot and I see a lot of advantages over a board game. You can do your moves even when your opponent is away, you don't mess the counters, it's actually easier to move them. I do not mean to stop playing on board, I will never do so. I also have a Global War campaign on board going on.

I think that PBEM with MWiF will simplify many things. As for me I do a lot of mistakes, sometimes doing more moves than allowed, forgetting some ressources (especially when playing CW), etc. MWiF, will provide a way to counter me from doing such mistakes an will make the production phase, reorg. with oil easier. At least it has the potential to do so.

If MWiF would be available now with only PBEM and NetPlay who is working right, and no AI. I would buy it right now, unless it's too costly. But, I understand that many members of the community wants an AI. [:)]

An issue I have with the AI is the time that can be spend on developping one, you could spend 2 months or could as well take 20 years developping one.

ORIGINAL: pzgndr
Computer games are different. Players buy and play computer games - rather than VASSAL and/or CyberBoard - specifically because computer games provide something the PBEM software does not. Specifically, a computer opponent, in addition to the PBEM and netplay capability. Matrix understands this, and markets computer games with AI computer opponents. Matrix appears to be doing quite well by recognizing this fact of life, despite those who believe otherwise.

While I am firmly on the side that wants an AIO and a decent one, I think there is alot more to the advantage of a computer game than just an AIO.

1. You can set up the game and leave it setup without hogging up your dining room table (or whatever) and the cat jumping up to take a look won't completly derail your Caucus' campaign!

2. You can take care of bookeeping automatically without any paper records

3. Niggling rule details/discrepancies/arguments are arbitrated by the computers implimentation.

4. (not germaine to MWIF but) Much more complex methods can be used for a variety of actions within the game can be used as the computer can crunch through the calculations for you. So things that mighthave been thought impossible on a board game can be done with ease on a computer game.

Somewhere in there is an AIO, for me its at the top or near the top, being able to set the game up virtually is actually the best feature to me of computer vis a vis board games.