Is anyone interested in an update for AE?

[NormS3]

Yes, I would be interested.

Any chance some of the vacant nation slots might become useful?

[Ian R]

I would be willing to pay reasonable $ for that.

[Moltrey]

I would say that your first paragraph would seem to indicate a Kickstarter Campaign by Matrix would fit the bill perfectly.

Matrix Games risk would be minimal; some startup costs in manpower and time to produce and then maintain the KS campaign.
Lay out the KS WITP goals clearly and concisely (probably based on some research and forum feedback, etc.).
Announce the KS campaign and ask for contributions here and in all the normal channels for wargamers.
Sit back and wait to see just how much interest there really is in a AE update.
If it doesn't meet the 30 day KS $ goal the project stops and Matrix is off the hook.

For me the short answer is Yes.
My personal thoughts are that map updates are not enough to warrant even discussing it. We need some dialogue from the forumites to ascertain what improvements are valued by the players, vetted for feasibility by Matrix and Co.
Good luck!

[Korvar]

I second Moltrey that a crowdfunding campaign is the perfect setup for updates to AE. Asking opinions on the matter is fine, but nothing beats knowing exactly how much cash the community is willing to put behind such an effort. That way any developer(s) will know up front that they'll be paid a fair wage for their services, with clear goals to prevent scope creep (or at least any scope creep will require commensurate additional funding).

Don't package it as a massive update for a large amount of money. As much as is feasible, atomize the scope of work so the simpler tweaks can be had for a smaller goal, escalating the labor of the tweaks with the larger stretch goals.

To get the ball rolling, we'll need to brainstorm ideas for changes. We'll no doubt come up with a long 'Christmas List', so once enough ideas have been collected, we'll need to prune them down. Developer input will probably be needed at some point to eliminate any which are unfeasible due to coding restrictions/considerations. We'll need to keep realistic expectations throughout and realize that our goal is to tie up any loose ends as well as grab any low hanging fruit - NOT to produce a full sequel to the game.

[BeirutDude]

So my take is, I really don't want to play campaign games of WITP:AE, and I'm really not interested in micromanaging aircrew training down to the 2nd class Petty officer level from 1937-1945! And IMHO there just aren't enough decent "smaller" scenarios to attract my interest (unless they're hiding somewhere I don't know about). Now a patch with a significant number of battle scenarios, alternative battle scenarios (full Kido Butai at Coral Sea, Full Kido Butai at Midway with no Coral Sea, etc.) and even some month/2 month mini campaigns (Mid-April to Mid-June 1942 for example) and I'd be in for decent bucks, Like $30-40.

My $0.02

[modrow]

The idea sounds great to me, count me in as well - even if it is "only" the addition of these new map functionalities.

[WingCmdr]

Hi,

I think you have overlooked the most important issue. Demand.
In several days no one has stepped up to take over my game. Of the last ten people to post on this forum looking to start a game I have take on four of them. I do not see any demand for a product that is very difficult to get anything done in less than several hours. We love the detail and accuracy of the simulation, but a much better and smoother product can be designed with more recent code.

The game AI is there and its good, you just need a better more streamlined way to handle all the detail.

[ReadyR]

I would be interested in the new map features described, and in any other update features that are feasible. Would pay to purchase. Would also contribute to a Kickstarter campaign.

[el cid again]

A "better" product will never be able to be more detailed and not take many hours per turn. It depends on
what a player is interested in? Failure to require hours of input means that the game would not permit
adequate player control - it would automate too much.

Nevertheless, I am certain many share your view and it IS germane to if people are willing to pay for an improvement.

So thank you.

ORIGINAL: WingCmdr

Hi,

I think you have overlooked the most important issue. Demand.
In several days no one has stepped up to take over my game. Of the last ten people to post on this forum looking to start a game I have take on four of them. I do not see any demand for a product that is very difficult to get anything done in less than several hours. We love the detail and accuracy of the simulation, but a much better and smoother product can be designed with more recent code.

The game AI is there and its good, you just need a better more streamlined way to handle all the detail.

[WingCmdr]

You miss my point completely. The thread is anyone interested, not what I want.

I purchased WITPE and I had no idea what was inside.

The question is will you pay $79.99 for WITPE 2020?

[WingCmdr]

Hey, There's those little vote features down below. Let's give it a whirl?

I think every voter should commit $100 with each vote.

[WingCmdr]

This proves my point. People know what they want, but they won't open their wallet to get it. And these are the people who want this the most.

Sad [>:]

[Akos Gergely]

Yes an update would be very much due and welcome, even at a full price product!

Some ideas up-front:
IMHO as BigB suggest, the area in need of some heavy rework is naval surface combat. As it is there is almost no control over it. At least engagement min/max distance, formation and preferred tactics should be set.

Also finally torpedo defense for major warships should be factored in, torpedo damage is waaay too random as is. Differentiation in cruising speeds would also be nice (though some mods already do that).

Allied player should have some control over the US warship reinf. queue, could be implemented easily and would do away with the stupid respawns.

Graphics are basically fine as it is, but some higher resolution animation should be added in as well as proper multi resolution/multi CPU support etc, so that one does not have to tinker with windows switches.

Also a few more smaller scale scenarios wouldn't hurt...


So I'd keep most of the code as is just add some things that people mostly wish for.

[rustysi]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

I have been asked to demonstrate that an update for AE "would generate more money than it costs."
As a preliminary indicator, I am asking for people to indicate interest.

I specifically proposed a very slight update to the game to facilitate a somewhat expanded
version of Andrew Brown's Extended Map System. Apart from adding a few hexes and a few
off map locations on the off map movement track, it would facilitate using seasonal maps
which feature construction (and rarely, deconstruction) throughout the war. The basic
system is working in RHS, but requires manually changing the pwhexe.dat file and some
map art files every season of the war. I want to automate that process.

The new map system shows things like the deconstruction of the East Malaya RR and the
Baikal Amur RR at the end of the first Winter season, as well as many construction projects.
It also shows considerable construction of roads and rail lines throughout the war. And
trails change seasonally where mud, ice or other natural events "erase" or create them.
The construction comes in two flavors - a strictly historical set - and an alternative
history set which includes numbers of actual projects not implemented (or not fully
implemented during WW2). In Australia, for example, narrow gage RR were surveyed, but
not built, in favor of primary roads. [As issued, AE provides neither.] The upgrade
would allow original AE, strictly historical enhanced AE, and alternative history AE
versions of the pwhexe.dat files, which are where this "construction" is coded. All of that
now exists and there is no cost for Matrix to use it.

As well, the ice on the ocean and on rivers and lakes considerably changes navigation on
an annual cycle. Numbers of major river systems have been considerably developed.

The upgrade might be software only to avoid the cost of disks, boxes and physical package
art. The AE editors would permit any mod to use any version including the original files.
One simply selects the right scenario to modify.

TBH. As you've explained it I would not be interested. The game seems as complete as its going to get with the current code. The only thing I would be interested in is a full re-write and we know that's not gonna happen. Besides even then the whole thing could get botched.

I'm one of those guys who considers, 'Watch what you ask for, you just might get it'.

[Dili]

It seems you want to change only to make possible to make geographic changes. Seems to me that is a very small upgrade. Of course we all have our interests, for me would be 20nm scale option instead of 40nm and LCU consuming fuel based in their AFVs.

[dontra85]

Yes but can it also incorporate seasonal weather; monsoons and typoons. Halsey managed to damage a lot of ships going into them not once but twice.

[Anachro]

If LCU are gonna consume fuel, then airplanes can't run on rice and beans either.

[Yaab]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

I have been asked to demonstrate that an update for AE "would generate more money than it costs."
As a preliminary indicator, I am asking for people to indicate interest.

I specifically proposed a very slight update to the game to facilitate a somewhat expanded
version of Andrew Brown's Extended Map System. Apart from adding a few hexes and a few
off map locations on the off map movement track, it would facilitate using seasonal maps
which feature construction (and rarely, deconstruction) throughout the war. The basic
system is working in RHS, but requires manually changing the pwhexe.dat file and some
map art files every season of the war. I want to automate that process.

The new map system shows things like the deconstruction of the East Malaya RR and the
Baikal Amur RR at the end of the first Winter season, as well as many construction projects.
It also shows considerable construction of roads and rail lines throughout the war. And
trails change seasonally where mud, ice or other natural events "erase" or create them.
The construction comes in two flavors - a strictly historical set - and an alternative
history set which includes numbers of actual projects not implemented (or not fully
implemented during WW2). In Australia, for example, narrow gage RR were surveyed, but
not built, in favor of primary roads. [As issued, AE provides neither.] The upgrade
would allow original AE, strictly historical enhanced AE, and alternative history AE
versions of the pwhexe.dat files, which are where this "construction" is coded. All of that
now exists and there is no cost for Matrix to use it.

As well, the ice on the ocean and on rivers and lakes considerably changes navigation on
an annual cycle. Numbers of major river systems have been considerably developed.

The upgrade might be software only to avoid the cost of disks, boxes and physical package
art. The AE editors would permit any mod to use any version including the original files.
One simply selects the right scenario to modify.

Yes and no.

YES to seasonal maps.

NO to construction maps as they are now. Consider what happens if the Japanese player captures Ledo and holds it for i.e. a year. Per your proposition, the construction of the Ledo Road would still take place, which makes no sense. The construction should either stop ( the code checks if the Allies own the Ledo hex) or revert ( Japs destroying the existing Ledo Road). If you implement hex ownership check, then construction maps will make sense, and I am in.

[Dili]

ORIGINAL: Anachro

If LCU are gonna consume fuel, then airplanes can't run on rice and beans either.

Agreed.

[Korvar]

Changing the maps or other major components in any substantive way is an example of what NOT to focus on - that's make-a-wish, Christmas List stuff that makes any updates improbable. You'd have to raise at least tens of thousands of "squiggly L's" (GBP [:D]) to have Slitherine/Matrix seriously consider doing that. The complications are already appearing, and we've barely discussed it.

I believe the focus should be on removing code roadblocks to further 3rd party development. We would be paying for someone to access the source code to which we don't have access, so don't have them work on anything which we can do ourselves. Have them focus on extending access to the internals of the game (not including the 'secret sauce' stuff) so that the community can run with it to create new scenarios, mods, 3rd party tools/utilities, etc. That's how to get the 'most bang for our buck'.

Determining what roadblocks to remove would take a 'Pow-Wow' between community authors/creators and any developer(s) assigned to the project. The community authors/creators could give an idea of what the biggest pain points are for creating a scenario, for instance, and the developer(s) could give an idea of what was technically feasible. Some 'low hanging fruit' could then be determined, and the scope of work set by the quantity of funds we are able to raise.