Matrix Aircraft Upgrades

[ZOOMIE1980]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, OK I see I am once again failing in my poor attempts to explain the game.
Production is required. But it is not there so much for the Japanese to alter the war with as it is as the primary focus of Allied war efforts. The Japanese have to have enough control to keep it going dispite the enemy. (So they can switch production focus to counter allied damage) It's primary purpose is supply and fuel. (not creating wonder airgroups)
There are many ways for the allies to attack Japanese production. Rather then bomb specific aircraft factories they can attack engine production. They can shut it down by targeting tankers. They can bomb Heavy Industry. In the Meantime the Japanese player will be taking steps to keep it going. I don't think you need be a chess master. Just understand as Japan that production of supply and fuel is your main effort. Stopping it is the Allies main effort. All the airbattle, sea battles and land battles that make up the OPERATIONAL focus of the game are subject to this. Operations are the primary purpose of the game. Operations depend on what is possible not on what player might like.

Mogami. Can't argue with any of the above because you are absolutely right. But
unfortunately, none of what you say has any bearing on the point Dbeves raised---
which is that the INTERFACE used to control/influence Japanese production is a con-
voluted mess. We're all glad that you managed to master it. But what we can't
figure out was why you didn't tell Matrix it was an overly-complicated piece of junk
while you were testing it and suggest that they consider using a "Production Sub-routine
Spreadsheet" that would allow players to get a grip on the "production game" without
a bunch of "player-aides" and pencil and paper note-taking? Spreadsheets are some-
thing computers do exceptionally well..., and a lot of players want to know why 2by3
doesn't seem to have heard of the application?

Probably for the same reason they've never heard of object oriented design and dynamic containers........

Nevermind....

[Mr.Frag]

So patches that involve new executable binaries are NOT going to require restarts to take advantage of? So next Dec when we are all finally getting into 1944 with our PBEM games and we discover some big problem that requires a major patch to fix we aren't all going to have to start over? You can guarantee that?

Zoomie, quit being a space cadet. You claim to be a programmer a million times over then come out with this tripe?

a) OOB changes require a restart to pick up the new OOB.

b) Code changes that do not have anything to do with a) do not require a restart.

c) Corruption level fixes sometimes require a restart to cure the losses created by the corruption (example - air transported troops that vanished - fixing the code so they stop vanishing will not bring back the vanished troops)

d) New features - may require a restart to turn on the feature or the feature may be defaulted to on. (possible restart depending on the feature)

Having a silly pick list using data that already exists in a) while being b) code change does not require a restart as the data in a) does not change.

ALL changes fall into one of those 4 catagories.

c) is being worked on as an absolute priority as it causes the potential of needing to restart depending on how much you loose.

a) is being worked on like mad and could be worked on a lot more if people spent their time helping out instead of starting these threads about nothing.

b) & d) catogory stuff are absolutely of no priority because they do NOT need the game to be restarted.

[mogami]

Hi, Can someone please explain to me what exactly is their problem with Japanese production.

You feed in oil and resource.
produce heavy industry points
use these to produce other items.

It will never produce enough items to off set the Allied production advantage.
It requires minor tweeking from time to time to continue supporting existing units and providing for the introduction of the new units.
It is not an instant response system. (There was one post where the poster complained new land units did not arrive at 100 percent. Are land combat units created over night at 100 percent?) Players seem to want Japanese pilots to arrive trained in numbers to allow excessive loss so they can conduct operations without fear while ignoring that portion of planning that dictates you perserve your force. Players appear to want to be able to produce only those aircraft they think worthy rather then using what the Japanese thought good enough. By including production they think they are no longer an Operational commnader but the Japanese arms Minister. Production is included as a target for Allied Operational planning. Japanese Operational Level planning is to provide the means for the industry in the first phase and defend it there after. It's detail is to add depth to both sides Operational conduct of the war not to supplant this. I think players are misunderstanding this. The intent is not to be "a game within a game" I can see where production might be confusing or disappointing if you move your focus from operations to war production managment.
As Japan plan for what you industry will support. Counter enemy efforts directed against it. As the Allies you know the ultimate objective is to have B-29 in range of Home Islands.
The whole game on the surface is rather simple. I only see problems if you try to use it for something else. It is an OPERATIONAL level game based on WWII in the Pacific. Not an economic model of that contest. (That is why the Allied production is so limited. It was not a target of Japanese Operations.) Because the Japanese system was the primary target it was required to have more detail. I'm sorry I am unable to verbalize this concept. I think this is where the root of all the discontent and misunderstanding lies.

As for 2by3 and Matrix not addressing this I can only say we all have short memories. Nothing here is new and it has been covered many times. Well before the release of the game this was a major topic of discussion. Had industry/production been anything else I would have posted detailed coverage of my treatment of it in AAR. I believe in more then 1 AAR I covered Japanese Phase 1 Operations in detail as to their impact on my production (explained why I conducted some Operations and excluded other possible paths) I don't want to claim responsiblty for the present system but during testing I focused on it. As such it was my feedback that produced it. So any problems can prehaps be laid on me. My concern was not to change the production system but to test that it worked according to design. I feel it does. Prehaps it could be explained better. (I'd begin the treatment with "Don't expect miracles"

[Mr.Frag]

Sorry, but with a player controlled Production system, the EXPECTATION by a LARGE NUMBER of players was that it IS a BTR.

Sorry, but that is YOUR assumption. Show me a single post during the alpha and the beta that says or even requests this.

[ZOOMIE1980]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

So patches that involve new executable binaries are NOT going to require restarts to take advantage of? So next Dec when we are all finally getting into 1944 with our PBEM games and we discover some big problem that requires a major patch to fix we aren't all going to have to start over? You can guarantee that?

Zoomie, quit being a space cadet. You claim to be a programmer a million times over then come out with this tripe?

a) OOB changes require a restart to pick up the new OOB.

b) Code changes that do not have anything to do with a) do not require a restart.

c) Corruption level fixes sometimes require a restart to cure the losses created by the corruption (example - air transported troops that vanished - fixing the code so they stop vanishing will not bring back the vanished troops)

d) New features - may require a restart to turn on the feature or the feature may be defaulted to on. (possible restart depending on the feature)

Having a silly pick list using data that already exists in a) while being b) code change does not require a restart as the data in a) does not change.

ALL changes fall into one of those 4 catagories.

c) is being worked on as an absolute priority as it causes the potential of needing to restart depending on how much you loose.

a) is being worked on like mad and could be worked on a lot more if people spent their time helping out instead of starting these threads about nothing.

b) & d) catogory stuff are absolutely of no priority because they do NOT need the game to be restarted.

These thread are not about NOTHING! These threads indicate some SERIOUS game flaws in either bugs, design, or documentation/communication. And as such are the MOST RELEVANT SUPPORT threads on this entire site!

Bottom line, many of the patches are going to require RESTARTS if we want to take advantage of them and many of the types of fixes that require restarts are the most sought after fixes by players. Thanks for making my point! The downside of a game that requires 1667 turns and takes most normal people with real lives the better part of a YEAR to play means we have to understand that we have to live with some nasty bugs and ommissions for a long time if we ever want to finish a game....

Thanks for clearing that up!

[Erik Rutins]

Hi,

We're here, we're not ignoring but rather reading and discussing internally. With convention requirements compounded by some personal tragedies within the extended Matrix family, we are not responding as actively as usual, but this will resume once we are through this round of conventions (we leave for GenCon tomorrow, return next Monday/Tuesday). Apologies to those who are growing frustrated, but everything here is being monitored and there will be a response either way (positive or negative) once time allows and due consideration has been given from a design standpoint to the necessary work.

In the end, we are happy to take feedback and investigate any and all feature requests, but support and bug fixes must come first (and our travel/convention commitments which limit our time cannot be changed).

Regards,

- Erik

[Marc von Martial]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

......

Mike, can you please check your "Private Messages" please?

[Captain Cruft]

How to shut everybody up (this is what DBeves was originally asking for, I think):-

Official Matrix staff person comes on this thread (or the other one) and says:

"Sorry guys but production/aircraft upgrades aren't going to change"

I cannot for the life of me understand why this has not yet happened.

EDIT (subsequent to Erik's post): Oops, how unlucky was my timing here ... LOL

[Erik Rutins]

Captain,

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft
How to shut everybody up (this is what DBeves was originally asking for, I think):-
Official Matrix staff person comes on this thread (or the other one) and says:
"Sorry guys but production/aircraft upgrades aren't going to change"
I cannot for the life of me understand why this has not yet happened.

If that were certain, I would absolutely do that. However, we give all feedback consideration and the problem is simply that our current schedule is not allowing us to deal with this issue quickly enough for some. I think expectations have to adjust to give us at Matrix and 2 by 3 time behind the scenes to deal with some higher priority issues before addressing feature requests and design changes one way or the other. We're not going to dismiss this out of hand, but we can't give a firm answer yet.

Regards,

- Erik

[ZOOMIE1980]

In a nutshell, an OPEN-ENDED research and production system coupled with a closed, fixed, rigid deployment system. I can alter production to respond to Allied bombing to keep economy functional but I cannot do the say with my deployments.

If I have 500 Franks in a pool and 15 squadrons depleted Oscars with 10 left in the pool, OR 15 depleted Frank squadrons in late 1944 with 0 in the pool and all my plants bombed out, but I have 500 old Oscars lieing around .... well they just get to lie around....

And then there's issue of failed expectations. When they publically anounced with great furor, you will COMPLETE control over Japanese production, that led players to quite understandably EXPECT a BTR type research/production/deployment. And nowhere did anyone ever counter that notion that I can remember.

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, Can someone please explain to me what exactly is their problem with Japanese production.

You feed in oil and resource.
produce heavy industry points
use these to produce other items.

It will never produce enough items to off set the Allied production advantage.
It requires minor tweeking from time to time to continue supporting existing units and providing for the introduction of the new units.
It is not an instant response system. (There was one post where the poster complained new land units did not arrive at 100 percent. Are land combat units created over night at 100 percent?) Players seem to want Japanese pilots to arrive trained in numbers to allow excessive loss so they can conduct operations without fear while ignoring that portion of planning that dictates you perserve your force. Players appear to want to be able to produce only those aircraft they think worthy rather then using what the Japanese thought good enough. By including production they think they are no longer an Operational commnader but the Japanese arms Minister. Production is included as a target for Allied Operational planning. Japanese Operational Level planning is to provide the means for the industry in the first phase and defend it there after. It's detail is to add depth to both sides Operational conduct of the war not to supplant this. I think players are misunderstanding this. The intent is not to be "a game within a game" I can see where production might be confusing or disappointing if you move your focus from operations to war production managment.
As Japan plan for what you industry will support. Counter enemy efforts directed against it. As the Allies you know the ultimate objective is to have B-29 in range of Home Islands.
The whole game on the surface is rather simple. I only see problems if you try to use it for something else. It is an OPERATIONAL level game based on WWII in the Pacific. Not an economic model of that contest. (That is why the Allied production is so limited. It was not a target of Japanese Operations.) Because the Japanese system was the primary target it was required to have more detail. I'm sorry I am unable to verbalize this concept. I think this is where the root of all the discontent and misunderstanding lies.

As for 2by3 and Matrix not addressing this I can only say we all have short memories. Nothing here is new and it has been covered many times. Well before the release of the game this was a major topic of discussion. Had industry/production been anything else I would have posted detailed coverage of my treatment of it in AAR. I believe in more then 1 AAR I covered Japanese Phase 1 Operations in detail as to their impact on my production (explained why I conducted some Operations and excluded other possible paths) I don't want to claim responsiblty for the present system but during testing I focused on it. As such it was my feedback that produced it. So any problems can prehaps be laid on me. My concern was not to change the porduction system but to test that it worked according to design. I feel it does. Prehaps it could be explained better. (I'd begin the treatment with "Don't expect miracles"

[ZOOMIE1980]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Sorry, but with a player controlled Production system, the EXPECTATION by a LARGE NUMBER of players was that it IS a BTR.

Sorry, but that is YOUR assumption. Show me a single post during the alpha and the beta that says or even requests this.

You have a 22 page thread that states that VERY THING!

[Mr.Frag]

These threads indicate some SERIOUS game flaws in either bugs, design, or documentation/communication.

Once again, show me the bug. Show me the flaw. Show me the documentation that is wrong.

System works just fine ... you might not like it, but *that* is not a bug or flaw.

[Captain Cruft]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins
Captain,

It's just a nickname, no need to get formal [:)]

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft
How to shut everybody up (this is what DBeves was originally asking for, I think):-
Official Matrix staff person comes on this thread (or the other one) and says:
"Sorry guys but production/aircraft upgrades aren't going to change"
I cannot for the life of me understand why this has not yet happened.

If that were certain, I would absolutely do that. However, we give all feedback consideration and the problem is simply that our current schedule is not allowing us to deal with this issue quickly enough for some. I think expectations have to adjust to give us at Matrix and 2 by 3 time behind the scenes to deal with some higher priority issues before addressing feature requests and design changes one way or the other. We're not going to dismiss this out of hand, but we can't give a firm answer yet.

Regards,

- Erik

OK thanks. Guess you need to charge more for the games so you can hire more staff ... Or maybe just write an autobot that posts "issue noted" to every thread.

[Hard Sarge]

Hi Erik
thanks for the reply, sorry to hear if there has been anything bad happening to any of the staff, real life can be pretty nasty

HARD_Sarge

[Hartley]

The production system itself is nothing you didn't see in any 10-year-old Tycoon game.

[Black Cat]

Frag

Other then his style and prose Zoomie has a legimate concern that many of us who just play the AI share.

I _really_ don`t want to invest 1000+ hours of my life on the full campaign to find out that I need to re-start in 1944.

Matrix needs to be more forthcoming about the Patch plans and how it will effect Games In Progress.

It looks like " C " level fixes will require a restart., yet we don`t know if that Bug is unit specific, or any unit, like a complete TF or Division can "vanish" which will screw the Game in Progress.


I`m also concerned that " A " level OOB fixes ( requiring a restart ) are being worked on because it`s been discovered by the testers that the Game has issues due to lack or, or the inclusion of, these units down the road.

[ZOOMIE1980]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Captain,

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft
How to shut everybody up (this is what DBeves was originally asking for, I think):-
Official Matrix staff person comes on this thread (or the other one) and says:
"Sorry guys but production/aircraft upgrades aren't going to change"
I cannot for the life of me understand why this has not yet happened.

If that were certain, I would absolutely do that. However, we give all feedback consideration and the problem is simply that our current schedule is not allowing us to deal with this issue quickly enough for some. I think expectations have to adjust to give us at Matrix and 2 by 3 time behind the scenes to deal with some higher priority issues before addressing feature requests and design changes one way or the other. We're not going to dismiss this out of hand, but we can't give a firm answer yet.

Regards,

- Erik

First off, condolences to whatever tragedies have been endured.

But the notion that so many key people of one firm are off "convention-hopping" that we have a month long fire-storm of controversy brewing that cannot even warrant a single staff person to take the time to periodically post a "we're working on it post", if for nothing else, to calm it all down, is a bit hard to imagine. Forgive my surprise, but this whole operation comes across as being a bit.... "strange".....

[ZOOMIE1980]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

These threads indicate some SERIOUS game flaws in either bugs, design, or documentation/communication.

Once again, show me the bug. Show me the flaw. Show me the documentation that is wrong.

System works just fine ... you might not like it, but *that* is not a bug or flaw.

Read the forum. Try reading for actual COMPREHENSION this time.

[mogami]

Hi, If you have 500 Franks in Pool and 15 depleted Oscar groups you screwed the pooch production wise. You knew the Oscar groups needed Oscars but produced Franks instead.
And your saying that is the games fault? It required perhaps 30 minutes at some point to see where this was heading and what was required. Then you had to watch turn after turn of your Oscar groups decreasing size. A 30 second check of the pools and production would have fixed it. But no. It's 2by3's fault because they did not provide some sort of warning devise or pie chart. If you can't see your own airgroups condition how would a pie chart help?

[strawbuk]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, If you have 500 Franks in Pool and 15 depleted Oscar groups you screwed the pooch production wise. You knew the Oscar groups needed Oscars but produced Franks instead.
And your saying that is the games fault? It required perhaps 30 minutes at some point to see where this was heading and what was required. Then you had to watch turn after turn of your Oscar groups decreasing size. A 30 second check of the pools and production would have fixed it. But no. It's 2by3's fault because they did not provide some sort of warning devise or pie chart. If you can't see your own airgroups condition how would a pie chart help?

er... yeah probably under current system. But why are they 'Oscar groups' not IJA fighter groups I can put anything into (charged penalties as per many discussions). Is that not the other big thread of discussion about use of availbale aircraft once built , even if built under current system?