Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: pmath

Many players find it desirable to play multi-day turns. Would it be possible to combine combat into one round for a multi day turn and in general enhance multi day turn playability?

Well maybe I'm not sure what pmath means here. I mean we do have multi-day turns already and they work great already in stock, some of us (like me) pretty much only play 2-day turns!

2-day turns were good before I upgraded to a new computer, now 2-day turns are FANTASTIC.

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: 1EyedJacks

Hi jwilkerson,

I'd guess that ya'll are doing some game testing with AE? I was just wondering if some of the testers could post in the AAR section when they are testing out AE... Man, I can hardly wait for summer...[:)]

Once we get the OOBs finished we will try to start up some public AARs.

Yea! They were the best part of stalking the WITP forums in the last couple of months before the game's release. Sure had me licking my chops for the game...

Not sure where this goes so I'll ask it here:
 
Will there still be the Japanse 7 Dec 41 uberturn where they can go halfway accross the map?

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Not sure where this goes so I'll ask it here:

Will there still be the Japanse 7 Dec 41 uberturn where they can go halfway accross the map?

Selectable

Ahh, thanks.

Edit: So, what happens to KB if you don't select it? PH doesn't happen on 7 Dec? [:(]

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Ahh, thanks.

Edit: So, what happens to KB if you don't select it? PH doesn't happen on 7 Dec? [:(]

Yup!

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Ahh, thanks.

Edit: So, what happens to KB if you don't select it? PH doesn't happen on 7 Dec? [:(]

Yup!

Now that's interesting.

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Ahh, thanks.

Edit: So, what happens to KB if you don't select it? PH doesn't happen on 7 Dec? [:(]

Yup!

Now that's interesting.

What Don means here is that the scenario designer "selects" those TFs which will be eligible for the "magic move". So, sure, if the scenario designer decides that KB does not get the magic move, then no PH happens on 7 Dec. But rest assured the scenario designers for AE master campaign scenario will "select" KB as being eligible for the "magic move"!

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson


What Don means ...

Yup

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson


What Don means ...

Yup

A man of many words. [:D]

Much better.  I was beginning to get worried.

Joe,

Regarding FOW (you appointed yourself FOW commander, right? [;)]) - Much information appears in the combat animations that is not available in the various reports. Many of us play without animations to save (a great deal of) time. All information available in the animations should also be available in various reports.

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Joe,

Regarding FOW (you appointed yourself FOW commander, right? [;)]) - Much information appears in the combat animations that is not available in the various reports. Many of us play without animations to save (a great deal of) time. All information available in the animations should also be available in various reports.

This would fall under the "anti-Fog-of-War" Team!!
[:D][:D]

Don't recall seeing this one, yet. Will installation of AE be such that it's reasonably simple to switch back and forth between AE and the original WitP, at least no worse than the batch files that exist now for the variants? If I'm playing PBEM with someone who can't afford to upgrade his computer (WitP was a gift from me in the first place), I don't want to be limited to the original myself!

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Joe,

Regarding FOW (you appointed yourself FOW commander, right? [;)]) - Much information appears in the combat animations that is not available in the various reports. Many of us play without animations to save (a great deal of) time. All information available in the animations should also be available in various reports.

Providing this info in reports would be very nice.

ORIGINAL: CaptDave

Don't recall seeing this one, yet. Will installation of AE be such that it's reasonably simple to switch back and forth between AE and the original WitP, at least no worse than the batch files that exist now for the variants? If I'm playing PBEM with someone who can't afford to upgrade his computer (WitP was a gift from me in the first place), I don't want to be limited to the original myself!

This isn't really a big problem. Just make a "copy" of your original WITP, drop all the saves, change the name to WITP-AE, and install AE on this copy. Then you have two completely seperate "games", and no need to worry about the limitations of anyone you want to play against...

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: CaptDave

Don't recall seeing this one, yet. Will installation of AE be such that it's reasonably simple to switch back and forth between AE and the original WitP, at least no worse than the batch files that exist now for the variants? If I'm playing PBEM with someone who can't afford to upgrade his computer (WitP was a gift from me in the first place), I don't want to be limited to the original myself!

This isn't really a big problem. Just make a "copy" of your original WITP, drop all the saves, change the name to WITP-AE, and install AE on this copy. Then you have two completely seperate "games", and no need to worry about the limitations of anyone you want to play against...

How does this effect the Windows registry settings?

ORIGINAL: mlees
How does this effect the Windows registry settings?

I don't know...., I'm no computer whiz. But it works fine on my Windows XP machine (in fact I have 3 WITP installations). Can someone that knows more than I do kick in an opinion?

ORIGINAL: mlees

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: CaptDave

Don't recall seeing this one, yet. Will installation of AE be such that it's reasonably simple to switch back and forth between AE and the original WitP, at least no worse than the batch files that exist now for the variants? If I'm playing PBEM with someone who can't afford to upgrade his computer (WitP was a gift from me in the first place), I don't want to be limited to the original myself!

This isn't really a big problem. Just make a "copy" of your original WITP, drop all the saves, change the name to WITP-AE, and install AE on this copy. Then you have two completely seperate "games", and no need to worry about the limitations of anyone you want to play against...

How does this effect the Windows registry settings?

These kinds of questions are more Matrix area questions than AE-Design-Team questions. I think Erik has addressed this is another post laying around here somewhere. But I can't remember the level of detail he went into. Maybe he will repost about this here!

got a question...

the new, improved, FOW rules, will the magical "all-knowing-development-reports" dissapear from the turn reports?. I mean, if I sneak a construction team to an empty dot base, and I want to develop it in secret to give my opponent a really nasty suprise (something done in the pacific quite some times during WWII, as it was done in the alleutians, or even near tarawa), in WITP I run into two problems that make the tactic impossible to pull:

1- if I land my troops in an empty enemy base, they have to conquer it. Even if the nearest enemy is 2500 miles away, and there's not a single soul in said base, the enemy WILL know you have landed there and taken the base. So, he will know you are there and probably will assume you will develop the base...no surprise factor and probably your whole plan has been compromised (if it relied in taking the enmy by surprise).

2- if I land my troops in a dot base the enemy has let unconquered, he won't know if I have landed my troops. So no problem...until you actually dare to develop the base increasing its AF or port level. Again, no matter he's 3000 miles away and has no means of knowing what was happening there, the enemy will know you are there and that you are developing the base. Gone is the effect of surprise.


Unless the problems involved in points 1 and 2 are solved, in the game you can't develop bases secretly, something that in real life happened several times. Actually in the game you know in real time the AF and port level of each base in the map, no matter you've done any kind of recon over it or not...and that could be improved, too.

I would say it would be a nice touch to let each player to know just what he can know about the base developments the enemy is doing. And would add an extra importance to regular and continous recon. And information on where the enemy is landing should be restricted...you can't know the enemy is somewhere if you don't have any means to find out he's there... is any of this included in AE?

thanks in advance for the answers