WIF Release

[vonpaul]

Vassal definetly is NOT like play a good computer wargame (more like an emulator) IMO. The most painful thing about playing boardgames should be taken care of by the computer (rules, odds, legal movement etc.). Vassal does none of these (for WIF anyway). If the real-time multiplayer is good there should be a noticable improvement in the speed of play due to the computer handling these things.

Not that i agree that a pay 1/2 now later scheme is feasible, pre-order is the standard (but only when development is in beta).

[wworld7]

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

or maybe ... we could pay half now ...and half when the game is released ...then matrix games could see how many customers. there are for the game ...and use the money to speed up the development of the game ... 

If the economics of the project do not support addtional resources this idea does not change that. All it is is a poor attempt to speed developement (Paul) at the expense of ADG, Matrix and Steve (Peter). It does not create extra funding that it appears to, so I don't see this happening.

Put another way, it wants to steal from Peter to pay Paul. Everyone knows this doesn't work well.

[IKerensky]

ORIGINAL: Sarge

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur



or maybe ... we could pay half now ...and half when the game is released ...then matrix games could see how many customers. there are for the game ...and use the money to speed up the development of the game ... 

VSSAL is free why would anyone pay for essentially the same thing ?

Because, and that is a thing a lot of the people around there that never played CWif and aren't betatesting MWiF will discover that this is NOT THE SAME GAME.

VASSAL/SUN TZU/CYBERBOARD games are 100% perfect transposal of the WiF boardgame with the exact same rules, map and counters.

MWiF, as CWiF WONT BE. This will be a very similar game, but the map will be so different you cant call it the same game, US Entry will be different too, and division and a few other minor tweaks. But the main reason why I am not sure I want to buy or play MWiF rather than VASSAL is that I dont like the way they choose to have Pacific Theater at european scale.

For me the game just dont work that way. Pacific pace of Operation and Counter density, especially in WiF doesnt go well with the European scale and I am convinved this will alter the game far too much... War in China and Siberia will be greatly changed. Same for India. Pacific is dotted of so many tiny useless piece of land that you just have far too much place to put troups than you need them. Invasion are greatly helped now that there is more land to cover while you have the same number of troups to do so and the same number of build point to build them.

Barbarossa is an entirely new thing because there is no more Siberia to run for with the Russian. This give the 2D10 table too much strength and vastly help germans.

So dont expect to be playing World In Flames on you PC, you will be playing very related called Matrix World In Flames... but you will still have to use the cyberbox and vassal modules to play the true thing.

[macgregor]

ORIGINAL: KERENSKY
MWiF, as CWiF WONT BE. This will be a very similar game, but the map will be so different you cant call it the same game, US Entry will be different too, and division and a few other minor tweaks. But the main reason why I am not sure I want to buy or play MWiF rather than VASSAL is that I dont like the way they choose to have Pacific Theater at european scale.

Well I won't miss you. Enjoy vassal. Having the Pacific at the European scale is the best thing they could've done IMO. Having to make rules to circumstantially change movement and supply( as well as those crazy off-map-boxes) was a compromise ADG made in order to have a game that fit on a table the same size. To the extent the game realistically portrays combat, the unified mapscale can only help to provide a continuity the game lacked.

[NeverMan]

I thought Matrix would have learned the pitfalls of a nonfaithful port from their EiA "experiment". I guess not.

It's good to know upfront that this won't be a faithful port of WiF, so I won't have to waste my money.

[NeverMan]

ORIGINAL: Palle

First announcement was The Annual 1996.

And we cannot play half now. That is not how games work.

WiF is perhaps the most complex of all wargames (except perhaps ASL), it must be almost impossible to create for computers. especially the AI. Any player of RTW/EB or even SPWWI/MBT will know how frustrating dumb AIs are.

This is arguable. There is little diplomacy in WiF, and that's usually what makes AI's difficult to code. The AI for this should be much easier than it should be for say, EiA.

[NeverMan]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Even so, we could not make moves quickly in Europa simply because of the number of units: heights of the stacks and depth of the stacks along the frontline. We were both very practiced at using medical tweezers for examining stacks. Regardless, at a certain point it isn't possible to examine all enemy & friendly units in the frontline and retain that information long enough to make reasonable decisions. For instance, if you discovered something in the middle of your move that you hadn't noticed before, there was no way you could undo all your moves up to that point. As I said, the game looked lovely (and by game I mean the rule set too), but we couldn't get past the problems with the mechanics.

This is exactly what a computer should be really really good at.

[SamuraiProgrmmr]

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

I thought Matrix would have learned the pitfalls of a nonfaithful port from their EiA "experiment". I guess not.

It's good to know upfront that this won't be a faithful port of WiF, so I won't have to waste my money.

To the best of my knowledge and understanding, all 'changes' are with the request or approval of the designer. These can be viewed as 'corrections' to compromises that had to be made to keep the tabletop game playable and affordable.

From the information posted on this forum, Steve has taken GREAT pains to ensure that this is a FAITHFUL port of this game to a computer.

I am a purist at heart and want the game to be as faithful as possible to the original. I am excited at the prospects of what is being accomplished. IMO, the changes fix kludges that were necessary to keep the game playable and to restrain it to a reasonable number of tables.

Just think what the game would have needed to be played if all hexes were the same size.

European theater = 2 maps
Pacific theater = 4 maps
Africa = 4 maps
The Americas = ?8 maps? (maybe 6)
Scandinavia = 1 map

So that would have been from 17 to 19 maps to play the game.

[micheljq]

ORIGINAL: KERENSKY

Because, and that is a thing a lot of the people around there that never played CWif and aren't betatesting MWiF will discover that this is NOT THE SAME GAME.

You mean CWiF not same game as MWiF? Good thing.

VASSAL/SUN TZU/CYBERBOARD games are 100% perfect transposal of the WiF boardgame with the exact same rules, map and counters.

Yes Vassal is great, but you must make all the calculations yourself, like with the board. MWiF will do a lot for you and speed up thing, this is what computers are for.

MWiF, as CWiF WONT BE. This will be a very similar game, but the map will be so different you cant call it the same game, US Entry will be different too, and division and a few other minor tweaks. But the main reason why I am not sure I want to buy or play MWiF rather than VASSAL is that I dont like the way they choose to have Pacific Theater at european scale.

Aren't you a little pessimist? Personally I never liked the Pacific scale with WiF, I am happy they change it.

Barbarossa is an entirely new thing because there is no more Siberia to run for with the Russian. This give the 2D10 table too much strength and vastly help germans.

What are you speaking about? Siberia exists also in MWiF. I respect your opinion though. [:)]

[composer99]

Michel, what Kerensky is referring to is the artifact caused by the map-scale change from the Europe to Asia map. Often this saves USSR's bacon as they can form a line from the map edge to the Caspian which the Germans are unable to run around.

However, I should point out to everyone who is upset by the change to a single map scale is that this was implemented in the original CWiF at ADG's express intent. In short, it is the way Harry Rowland wanted it, and if it weren't for the physical limitations of space it's the way tabletop WiF:FE would be, too.

[Skanvak]

Composer is right on this one. The only thing we could ask is a correction of the mercator projection toward the pole to reduce the number of hexes is northern finland and Siberia (well Canada too but I am not sure it is very important).

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Skanvak

Composer is right on this one. The only thing we could ask is a correction of the mercator projection toward the pole to reduce the number of hexes is northern finland and Siberia (well Canada too but I am not sure it is very important).

This was done in Scandinavia.

[NeverMan]

ORIGINAL: SamuraiProgrammer



To the best of my knowledge and understanding, all 'changes' are with the request or approval of the designer.

1. So were the EiA changes. ADF (aka Harry Rowland and crew?) were perfectly fine with whatever butchering Matrix wanted to do with EiA, why do they care, they're getting paid!

2. I really don't care about the map issue that much, it's the principle that bothers me.

[NeverMan]

It doesn't matter if that's who WiF was "suppose" to be or not, what matters is how a lot of people played the games for YEARS and YEARS and now they are going to change it and whether you want to believe it or not, it will change the way the game is played to some degree.

[SamuraiProgrmmr]

I have no idea if Harry Rowland approved the changes to Empires In Arms but I do know that the design of that game was heavily influenced by by Empires In Harm (a set of 'house rules' that appear to have been quite unbalanced).

I never said that it would not change the game. Clearly it will. The question is how much and whether the changes will be good or not.

I understand your position about this being an issue of principle. However, the map issue is (I believe) the only major core change. There are some other things that were 'adjusted' to fit the new Pacific Map hex paradigm.

Don't forget; the extension of European Map scale to the rest of the world has been in place since Chris M. was working on this so many years ago.

I am not going to provoke you into a discussion after you have indicated it was an issue of prinicple and it doesn't matter. If you would like to have that discussion in detail, post here and say so or send me a PM.

In principle, I agree with you most of the time. For example, I hate it when Hollywood takes a perfectly good story and ruins it by twisting it around in some way. (Notable examples are what they did to Starship Troopers and The Puppet Masters.)

BUT occasionally, they get it right and their small changes work when bringing something to the big screen. (Notable mention was the ending to The Hunt For Red October and the changes in the recent Angels & Demons). These changes are not always necessary and sometimes are just to satisfy the ego of the producers / directors / script writers / etc.

I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE CHANGES IN THIS GAME ARE TO SATISFY ANYONE'S EGO.

Hopefully they will be welcome additions.


spelling edited

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

ORIGINAL: SamuraiProgrammer



To the best of my knowledge and understanding, all 'changes' are with the request or approval of the designer.

1. So were the EiA changes. ADF (aka Harry Rowland and crew?) were perfectly fine with whatever butchering Matrix wanted to do with EiA, why do they care, they're getting paid!

2. I really don't care about the map issue that much, it's the principle that bothers me.

ADG has been changing WIF continuously since it was first released (~1985). Do you disapprove of all their changes? Or just some of their changes?

I have trouble understanding what principle is being violated.[&:]

[pzgndr]

I have trouble understanding what principle is being violated.

Hey Steve, welcome to the wonderful world of Neverman. He's always right, and everyone else is always wrong. [8|]

Drive on!!

[michaelbaldur]

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

I have trouble understanding what principle is being violated.

Hey Steve, welcome to the wonderful world of Neverman. He's always right, and everyone else is always wrong. [8|]

Drive on!!

[:-] there should be room for everybody and every opinion...

but on another note:

I have spend alot of time playtesting MWIF ... and I have played the war in china many times ....

it is a little more mobile. but then again. you don´t have enough HQ to advance everywhere. and there are alot of mountains

so China is still a pain ...

the change of hex size on the American map means that USA can´t move all of their units from one hex any more ... which means that they need to use more naval moves to transport the units

there more pacific hexes. so there are more hexes to defend

but the allies still have to take the Capital/all ports to conquere the island groups.

to conquer the Territory of new Guinea the allied need to take back 3 ports.

with 6 japanese white print units. you can delay the allied for a long time ...

[micheljq]

I guess the Americans will have to choose carefully what they want to conquer/occupy in the Pacific, as they can't occupy all territories. A little as in WW2. They were choosing the bases that would get them closer to Japan and they did ignore the others to some extent.

[pzgndr]

there should be room for everybody and every opinion...

I agree 100%. However, there are those who insist their way is the only way and various game options and other Matrix/ADG-approved changes/improvements/enhancements are unacceptable. Neverman has made a sour reputation for himself on the EiA forum being one of those. Like I said, Steve should drive on and not worry about it. Looking forward to MWiF. Cheers! [:)]