Happy anniversary- Lovely webpage: cynical views and conspiracy theories.

[Grotius]

I personally like Digital Download. With a reputable company like Matrix, it's no riskier than using your credit card at the local mall. Maybe less risky.

WiF is it going to be a more detailed game as compared to GGWaW. Something similar to the difference between UV and WitP?

My impression is that WiF is going to be far more complex than GGWaW. Certainly the difference between GGWaW and WIF will be far greater than that between UV and WiTP, which use the same engine on different scales.

[NeverMan]

ORIGINAL: coregames

ORIGINAL: David Heath
Empires in Arms is giving us much more of a workout then we expected.

EiA is a big undertaking, and WiF is approximately twice as complex as that,

EiA is way harder to development due to the blurred lines of diplomacy. I think that WiF has more detailed rules but in that, the rules are less blurry and are straight up. Yes there are a lot of them, but they are pretty concrete and the lines of diplomacy never blur.

[coregames]

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
EiA is way harder to development due to the blurred lines of diplomacy.

The open alliances are an element that would make EiA more difficult to code than WiF... still, having played both I would still say WiF is likely to be substantially more challenging (buggier) because of the combined arms aspect. All of the interactions in the game will be tough to handle in an appealing manner. The added complexity may also lead to difficulty in creating a reasonably strong AI.

Since EiA is far along on its development curve, and from what I've read, the WiF team has begun the conceptualization phase, some basis for comparison may already exist. I'm curious to know, based on their early assessment, what are Robert Crandall's and the other developers' takes on how the tasks of adapting EiA and WiF will compare?

[Cheesehead]

About a year ago I read that the Matrix team assigned to make CWiF had to finish some other game (I don't remember the title) and then they could start working on WiF. Then they said they had to finish FPG and then they would start on WiF. FPG was finished last fall and now we're told that the WiF team has to work on EiA? I feel my chain is being pulled...When EiA is complete, what is the next game that will have to be finished before you can begin WiF? I never expected that this game would be finished soon, but it would be nice to hear that someone is actually working on it. [&:]

[coregames]

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead
...and now we're told that the WiF team has to work on EiA?

I think you misunderstood me Cheesehead. I wasn't saying that Crandall and company had to wait for EiA to start on WiF (different teams). I was just asking if they had any basis for comparing the two projects' levels of difficulty. I do think that, once post-release support for FPG is concluded, we will start hearing from Matrix's team more in this forum.

If WiF is easier than EiA, it will probably be due to Marinacci's legacy code.

[Cheesehead]

My comment was in regards to David Heath's post of March 1:

"Its not lack of attention as much as we are working on how best to proceed with this title. Empires in Arms is giving us much more of a workout then we expected."

[macgregor]

I'm still as cynical about this as ever. The sad thing is that the Marinacci beta was like 99.9% complete. MAKE A DAMN MAILABLE SAVEFILE AND LIGHT THIS CANDLE ALREADY!! So far ,I've seen nothing out of these people. AND PLEASE-NO MORE EXCUSES DAVE! Once the problem of finishing every Tom,Dick,and Harry project on Matrix's agenda which will undoubtedly 'give us more than we expected' is complete, (if that's possible) there is then the issue brought up by so many visitors to this forum adamantly demanding things such as an AI, when they've never even played the damn game. ( which I find suspicious). I will say right now: If I have to pay 100$ and wait 10 years for an AI to be developed -that I wont even use, I'm just not doing it. For god's sake,put it up for sale or something. Haven't WiF players been tortured enough already?

Please bear with me- this is all relevant.

There's a reason why films suchas 'Band of Brothers', 'A bridge too far', and 'Tora,Tora,Tora' will still be required viewing for history students long after 'Pearl Harbor', 'Windtalkers', and even 'Saving Private Ryan' find themselves buried in some archive. Whatever the passion for the making of latter 3, it did not stop the producers' egos from supplanting actual historic recounts with their own propagandist storylines. The passion-driven historians at ADG have sold WiF to the money-driven people at Matrix. My guess is that they were desperate. I believe the reason this game will take as long as it will to release is in part due to a lack of humility at Matrix. As with 'Pearl Harbor' the movie, they will insist on meddling in order 'to increase the appeal' of WiF. Fortunately for them they are almost alone in this genre of wargaming. So as with Stalin or Mao's choice of fashion, most of us will be content wearing it regardless.

[Zap]

Lots of passion in your presentation macgregor, I have to admire your love for the game. But your passion seems to be warping reality a bit.
Don,t you think it would be wise to take a wait and see philosophy.

[macgregor]

I may have gone too far with what drives the two companies. Suffice to say I'm frustrated. The game they got from ADG was so close and yet to date we've seen nothing. If money is not the principle preoccupation then I don't know what is. A mailable savefile, retextured graphics, and a creative method of releasing the game that makes them money while cutting down on risk is all this game needs to make WiF players happy. That is what Matrix wants to do, right? I think they're trying to re-invent WiF and I don't think it needs it. Or if the idea is that persistent, save it for WiF gold or platinum or something like that. LET MY PEOPLE PLAY!!!!

[Fred98]

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead
Question about DD: If you buy a new computer or reformat your old one do you have to pay for the DD a second time?

I have a number of games by DD.

For each game I burn the file to CD and I burn the registration number to the same CD.

Then I get the manual and print the front page. And use it as a cover to the CD box.

I buy a cheap empty CD box and keep it on the shelf.

If patches are released I burn them too to the same CD.

If mods are made I burn them all to the one CD.

Then I am no longer reliant on anybody the day the internet dies.

[Zap]

That is what Matrix wants to do, right? I think they're trying to re-invent WiF and I don't think it needs it

macgregor I don,t know what they need to work on. And I know that me telling you to be patient probably does not hold any water. But look at what Matrix did with "War in the Pacific". It seems to be acclaimed by all those who play it as a great game(bugs and all). You said you don't need much to make you happy, right.
So, if Matrix did credit to WitP can you trust them with this game? I trust them because I have a few of the games they published, proof to me its worth the wait. I believe their record deserves our patience and support.
If, they push out some junk for games I will then join the chorus and ask why. And I will be less likely to buy from them in the future.
I believe Matrix is more motivated to produce/reproduce great games then many who visit these Forums give them credit for. I MEAN, THEIR REPUTATION IS ON THE LINE, AND THEY KNOW IT! BE ASSURED, REPUTATION IS EVERYTHING IN THEIR BUSINESS.
Just hold out a little longer - play a game you like, take a long walk in the park. Before you know it you will see in this forum the update you have been waiting for.

I won't charge you for this therapy session but next time bring your walet![:D]

[coregames]

ORIGINAL: macgregor
I think they're trying to re-invent WiF and I don't think it needs it.

I was very worried a few months back when this forum was the site of much speculation about what Matrix was going to do to make WiF PBEM compatible. At that point, it did sound very much like they were going to reinvent the game, keeping the basic ideas but dramatically simplifying air and naval interception:

ORIGINAL from early October '04: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

The problem is this:
...Sequence of play needs to be completely reworked.
Alternatively, online TCP/IP is only way to make MP work.

Basically, for this game to be playable at all the sequence of play needs to be completey reworked. It works very well in board-game WiF, it would be a complete disaster to try in computer WiF.

Shortly after that on the topic, however:

ORIGINAL Greyshaft from late October '04:

RobertC posted somewhere that he was tasked to do a faithful translation of WiF onto the computer. IMHO the only variations from the cardboard will be where the shoe just doesn't fit - eg resolving PBEM naval interceptions or air aborts/kills . In that case there may be a checkbox which allows the computer to take control of those decisions, but the Purists will always have the option to do it their way.

My feeling is that the intricate interactions that make WiF so involved and satisfying will still be available when played TCP/IP. I have a secret hope that the option of using the multiple scales of ADG's version will be an option, because that would allow us to use my laptop as a play aid during our games over the tabletop. This might be asking a bit much, but a guy can dream!

[Mziln]

ORIGINAL: coregames
My feeling is that the intricate interactions that make WiF so involved and satisfying will still be available when played TCP/IP. I have a secret hope that the option of using the multiple scales of ADG's version will be an option, because that would allow us to use my laptop as a play aid during our games over the tabletop. This might be asking a bit much, but a guy can dream!

Are you refering to optional: supply rules, hidden movement, etc.

You had over 70 optinal rules in CWiF.

[Hortlund]

Well, to be honest, I suspect matrix has not yet decided where to go on the sequence of play thing. And its pretty pointless to start coding anything unless you have a clear goal of what you are doing.

Any game starts with the design phase. Here you have one or more game designers drawing the outlines for the game. This process usually ends up with a GDD "general design document". In it, you can read what the game is supposed to be like, what the point of the game is, etc etc. This GDD gets bounced around and eventually the powers that be will give it the go-ahead or not. THEN you start coding.

It seems to me that matrix is not yet past the GDD-stage, which probably puts CWiF somewhere in Q4 2007 at best, vaporware at worst.

[macgregor]

I'm afraid you may be correct about the release which bothers me. I cannot say enough about the Marinacci demo. He brought WiF (as we've all known it) to the computer. While the graphics were more like the early versions of WiF (and thus more printer-friendly) it had every thing I need to be satisfied with a purchase (minus that ever elusive mailable savefile). The WiF forum could be the busiest on the matrix site if they would only allow us the opportunity to comment on a game we were actually playing. And believe me -we could be playing it right now. I know it -and Matrix knows it. ADG released the demo for free (which I found a tad generous -though it proved to me ADG's loyalty to it's frustrated fanbase -as they were already 3 years behind schedule - and that was like 4 years ago.)

I've removed this part of my post as I feel it may have lacked some responsibility. The feelings are strong though the articulation ...perhaps distorts. I don't think Matrix is either a bunch of idiots or evil. Perhaps they have no responsibility at all to the dedicated players of the boardgame. If that's the case , I should probably be angry with ADG for selling it in the first place, not Matrix for seeing it's inherent value for whatever project comes down the road. I see the possibility that matrix bought CWiF in order not to have to compete with it. Maybe I'm just a skeptic.

[coregames]

ORIGINAL: Mziln
[Are you refering to optional: supply rules, hidden movement, etc.

I was talking about a feature the Marinacci beta lacked; the option of playing at the same scale as the board game. In his version (and possibly in Matrix's) the entire map was presented at the European scale (approximately a hundred kilometers per hex). This affects the game play in Asia especially, and to a lesser extent in India, Africa and Australia, though it's hard to say if it imbalances the game somehow. If anything, static lines will be less common, due to the limited force pools having to occupy more hexes.

I understand that a unified scale will probably be a must (the only reason for multiple scales in the original development process was to make the size of the maps managable). The option I mentioned was the idea of allowing the game to be played with the multiple scales of the board game, so that it could be fully integrated with the board game and used as a play aid directly. If multiple scales are not offered as an option, some strategies innovated in the computer game may not be directly applicable to the board game.

[Mziln]

Oh the "unified scale" scale issue. But consider by using the "At Sea" boxes this realy only affects China and somewhat the Malay peninsula. [&:]

[macgregor]

Call me crazy(I've been asking for it), but I love the unified scale. It's probably the best single feature of the Marinacci game (to me). With the option of unlimited breakdown, whatever problems the unified scale present shouldn't be insurmountable. I understand how you feel-the old board is etched in my mind as well. But the new map was obviously made with the same genius for the game. Certainly the inter-map movement situation has improved. It just seems like the logical next step. Besides, this is way too constructive a comment for this thread. I thought there were more angry wiffers out there who needed to vent. Am I the only one who's reached the boiling point over this seemingly endless fiasco?

[coregames]

I love the unified scale too, for strictly computer play. I wouldn't want the game to require multiple scales; I just crave a computer aid with a hex-to-hex correspondence to the board game, to test out strategies before unleashing them on the other side. It would also be nice to have the current set-up stored in the computer in case the game needed to be taken down for a time, as well as to settle disputes after a large stack or a complex theatre is knocked over and mixed.