OK Erik, but I have a question

[borner]

funny pz. I could actually care less what you thought of me personally. However, if we are going to have rules of conduct here, they need to be enforced evenly. You seem to have a clear habbit of talking about someone first, and the points they bring up second.   By the way, I am still curious to see how many games you are in?

[pzgndr]

By the way, I am still curious to see how many games you are in?

No pbem games, yet, if that's what you're after. Since you bring this up, allow me to comment on a "playability" issue. The AI. If I or others were to take the exact same selfish harrassing approach you and your buddy NeverMan take, we'd be screaming for AI improvements and enhancements FIRST and pbem fixes LATER. In contrast, you don't generally see such vocal complaining, and in fact you see more broad-based support for the whole game, including getting the pbem game issues resolved. However, the silent majority of solo gamers also want a decent challenging playable game versus AI as much or moreso than you want a currently playable (albeit slowly) pbem game to go "faster." So youse guys go ahead and enjoy your pbem and I'll keep waiting patiently for my AI ship to come in. Marshall is working on that so I don't feel a need to nag the hell out of him every day.

[NeverMan]

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

Pz's reply was clearly in the form of an attack... I also point to Pz's above thread and artwork. while amusing...

Hey borner, serious personal attacks are not usually followed by [:'(]=razz, eh? It's interesting how youse guys can dish it out but can't take it, even in jest. At least you acknowledge the amusing aspect of my posts. I wish I could say the same but I can't.

1. You are joking.. people who joke don't stalk other people thread to thread so don't act like a 12 year old with your hand in the cookie jar please.
2. No one is "dishing it out", we are, at most, criticism a computer game developed by a COMPANY that is in BUSINESS TO MAKE MONEY! I'm not sure how you can see any of this as personal, particularly to yourself.
3. Anyways...

[warspite1]

A POLITE REQUEST

Gents - Neverman, Pzgndr

Isn`t it time you two just cut the constant sniping at each other?

I admire the fact that you both feel strongly - passionately indeed - about the game, albeit from different ends of the spectrum. However, this is now getting ridiculous.

It seems obvious you will never agree on fundamental issues with the game, its design, playability etc etc but you both feel you have something worth offering to the forum in terms of moving the game along in its (difficult) development. Great, please continue to post.

However, why not simply let each other post comment(s) (as each are fully entitled to do) without the need for the other to immediately counter with some inflamatory comment, that then gives rise to another and so on and so on until the thread gets frozen.

How about it? Please? [:)]

[NeverMan]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

A POLITE REQUEST

Gents - Neverman, Pzgndr

Isn`t it time you two just cut the constant sniping at each other?

I admire the fact that you both feel strongly - passionately indeed - about the game, albeit from different ends of the spectrum. However, this is now getting ridiculous.

It seems obvious you will never agree on fundamental issues with the game, its design, playability etc etc but you both feel you have something worth offering to the forum in terms of moving the game along in its (difficult) development. Great, please continue to post.

However, why not simply let each other post comment(s) (as each are fully entitled to do) without the need for the other to immediately counter with some inflamatory comment, that then gives rise to another and so on and so on until the thread gets frozen.

How about it? Please? [:)]

I'd be more than happy to do this, just get pz to stop stalking me thread to thread, lol.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

ORIGINAL: warspite1

A POLITE REQUEST

Gents - Neverman, Pzgndr

Isn`t it time you two just cut the constant sniping at each other?

I admire the fact that you both feel strongly - passionately indeed - about the game, albeit from different ends of the spectrum. However, this is now getting ridiculous.

It seems obvious you will never agree on fundamental issues with the game, its design, playability etc etc but you both feel you have something worth offering to the forum in terms of moving the game along in its (difficult) development. Great, please continue to post.

However, why not simply let each other post comment(s) (as each are fully entitled to do) without the need for the other to immediately counter with some inflamatory comment, that then gives rise to another and so on and so on until the thread gets frozen.

How about it? Please? [:)]

I'd be more than happy to do this, just get pz to stop stalking me thread to thread, lol.

Warspite1

Okay Neverman - I`m holding you to that [;)]

Pzgndr - ball`s in your court, you know it makes sense [:)]

[NeverMan]

Warspite,

I was never the one following another poster around thread to thread picking fights. It's sad that all these threads come down to this, too bad pz manages to break these threads down to this level.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

Warspite,

I was never the one following another poster around thread to thread picking fights. It's sad that all these threads come down to this, too bad pz manages to break these threads down to this level.

Warspite1

But the whole point of my post was recognising that you are both right in your own minds about who did what and who started it etc etc and will simply never agree. As a result, I am just asking for you both to just leave it; both of you to assume the bigger man role, both of you to take the moral high ground and both leave each other alone!!!!

Please both continue to post your own valid views, but without the bitching - which at first - as an outsider looking in - was mildly entertaining, but has become irritating and detracts from what you are trying to achieve. [&:]

The response you just posted - before you had a chance to know what Pzgndr was going to say - is just an inflamatory remark. He started it - no he started it - no he start....[>:]

Oh well I tried......

[pzgndr]

It seems obvious you will never agree on fundamental issues with the game, its design, playability etc etc but you both feel you have something worth offering to the forum in terms of moving the game along in its (difficult) development.

This is not the issue at all. I actually agree with NeverMan and borner and others on most of their specific comments about the game. These are listed in the Mantis bug tracker, and if not then they should be. No argument there. When valid bugs, rules deviations, pbem issues, AI issues, etc. are identified, add them to the list, discuss specific resolution options, and then SIT BACK AND WAIT FOR MARSHALL TO WORK OFF THE LIST. The game will continue to move along in its difficult development at Marshall's pace, with Matrix and ADG guidance, and patience is required. Obviously a lot more patience then some folks have. Whining about it doesn't help at all.

The issue is the fundamentally negative and abusive manner NeverMan has towards Marshall, Matrix, the whole game, and anyone who gets in his way. Erik has correctly identified such behavior as bashing and trolling and has issued repeated warnings. I don't care for his bullying either and I'll speak up against it. The solution is simple: NeverMan needs to moderate his behavior.

[NeverMan]

ORIGINAL: pzgndr
The solution is simple: NeverMan needs to moderate his behavior.

LOL, classic!!

[borner]

Pz, YOU HAVE TO BE KIDDING ME!!??!!   You are the first to jump on any of us, and you do not even play this game? You talk about the improvements in the game, and you are not even playing the game?  No wonder the constant trouble and bugs do not bother you. HOW CAN THEY? Please, fell free to comment as much as you like on these threads. At least now I know how much creditibality to give to your arguments.

[pzgndr]

you do not even play this game?

Pardon me? I am not playing this game via pbem yet; that is not to say I am not playing the game. If you intend to start a flame-war with the majority of Matrix customers who buy PC wargames primarily for the convenience of the AI opponent, just say so. You are suggesting that any customer who does not play the way you do has no credibility, which would be an insult and personal attack to many EiANW players. Is that your intent?? Speak freely.

[borner]

I do owe Pz an apology here.  I intended to say not playing pbem, not playing at all. I was too amused to post clearly I guess. As for me trying to pick a fight with everyone, just calm down a little. If you think you need help holding your position, ask for it. Don;t try to make it look like i am picking a fight with others to find more fiends. My point was you seem to talk a great deal about bugs you have not run into, or have the opportunity to only playing the AI. Plus, you do not have the added fustration of investing the time into game turns and diplomacy, to have tings derailed by bugs. If a game with the AI hit a bump, you have much less emotionally invested in it, that a "real" game. Thus your point of view and reaction is quite different, and explains much. try a pbem game, I think it would change your viewpoint a bit.
 

[Dancing Bear]

Pzgndr
what makes you say the vast majority of players are solo players? There is very little marketing data available. The only poll down by Matrix on what improvements game owners would like showed an almost 50:50 split between AI and PBEM improvements (with a slight edge on PBEM improvements). This would suggest that the split is 50:50. I don't think it is possible to claim anything else, unless you have access to better data than the rest of us.
DB.

[pzgndr]

My point was you seem to talk a great deal about bugs you have not run into, or have the opportunity to only playing the AI. Plus, you do not have the added fustration of investing the time into game turns and diplomacy, to have tings derailed by bugs.

borner your point is noted but not relevant. I have not argued about the reported pbem issues and have supported getting them resolved. I understand the frustration. However, I will argue about how fast is "fast enough" and some of the unrealistic expectations that you and others propose. EiANW with its automated features and phase skipping and hopefully soon combined eco/dip phases will be considerably faster than benchmark pbem software. That's a good thing. Be happy. [:)]

what makes you say the vast majority of players are solo players?

I did not say just "solo," I said convenience of AI opponent(s). How many 7-player no-AI pbem playgroups are actively playing (or trying to?) EiANW? Other playgroups like Trax who posted a completed game AAR had 4 players, meaning 3 AI opponents were used, and this was criticized as not being a "real" game played. This is a whole different issue and getting off track here again. Point is that the majority of EiANW customers who bought this PC adaptation expect a decent AI opponent, for either solo or small group pbem play, and any derogatory comments about how anyone wants to play the game are unacceptable. borner speaks of frustration. Tell me about it. If the assertion here is that AI play is not worthy and AI improvements are not as important if not more important than pbem speed improvements, then you're trolling for trouble with Matrix PC wargame customers. Be careful? Just a thought... [;)]

[borner]

pz, you keep talking about "others". are you trying to rally people to your side, or do you not have any practical experience yourself?

[obsidiandrag]

Not to get bantered into the debate but I have to agree with Pz in the fact I bought the game for the solo play, I found the AI extreeeeemely lacking but did not complain, joined on as a tester and started suggesting improvements and working with Marshalle and Matrix to get it better.

Not that I dislike PBEM but remember the days of play by mail games.. talk about a turn around time... I look forward to the hopeful eventual IP game as speed is a factor I am concerned with but know the limitations of PBEM - therefor I do not complain but look for improvements ( like the recent changes to pursuit in another forum, or the auto reinforcement on not corps minors )

I do not have the player group I used to some 20 years ago playing EiA - I have a few close friends that might be interested and would need a decent AI to play against..  Right now I actually play multiplayer as hotseat.. at the same computer as its still faster than the PBEM or the FtF games.. the issue is that everyone teams up against the AI as it can barely take on Prussia as France letalone a coalition..

So in summary - I am all for the AI improvements and bug removal but do not rant and rave all over the forums about PBEM not needing as much attention, nor do I rant and rave much at all, I offer ideas where I see a chance, and insight on experience as I have.

I believe there are alot of players that wish the AI was better so they can continue a solo game while waiting for others to take thier PBEM turns...[:)]

OD

[borner]

yes, and there is nothing at all wrong with solo play. I just believe (hot air from PZ not withstanding)  that the bugs are far more fustrating when in a PBEM setting.

[Dancing Bear]

Actually, I was just asking if you had any data to say to back up your statement about the majority of players play against the AI. It appears that the truth is that whether the majority play with the AI or 7 player PBEM is unknown.

I do recall starting a post asking PBEM players to report if they had completed any games (and whether the AI was used for one country) which might have answered this question, but that thread was hijacked.

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

If the assertion here is that AI play is not worthy and AI improvements are not as important if not more important than pbem speed improvements, then you're trolling for trouble with Matrix PC wargame customers. Be careful? Just a thought... [;)]

[NeverMan]

ORIGINAL: obsidiandragon

Not to get bantered into the debate but I have to agree with Pz in the fact I bought the game for the solo play, I found the AI extreeeeemely lacking but did not complain, joined on as a tester and started suggesting improvements and working with Marshalle and Matrix to get it better.

Not that I dislike PBEM but remember the days of play by mail games.. talk about a turn around time... I look forward to the hopeful eventual IP game as speed is a factor I am concerned with but know the limitations of PBEM - therefor I do not complain but look for improvements ( like the recent changes to pursuit in another forum, or the auto reinforcement on not corps minors )

I do not have the player group I used to some 20 years ago playing EiA - I have a few close friends that might be interested and would need a decent AI to play against..  Right now I actually play multiplayer as hotseat.. at the same computer as its still faster than the PBEM or the FtF games.. the issue is that everyone teams up against the AI as it can barely take on Prussia as France letalone a coalition..

So in summary - I am all for the AI improvements and bug removal but do not rant and rave all over the forums about PBEM not needing as much attention, nor do I rant and rave much at all, I offer ideas where I see a chance, and insight on experience as I have.

I believe there are alot of players that wish the AI was better so they can continue a solo game while waiting for others to take thier PBEM turns...[:)]

OD

You say "complain" as if some of us haven't been around here for YEARS and have constantly given good advice that has been totally ignored only later to find out that even Matrix thinks it's what they should have done.

If you are saying "just complain" and then think of me then you are WAY OFF... just an "fyi". I've been here for years (I joined under this account in 2004 but had an account even before that).

I'm not saying your pointing at me but just in case you were... [:)]