Buying again and I make a request

[O.O. Howard]

Dear V,

I have lost my Advanced Tactics game a few months ago. I cant stand it anymore I am going to buy it again. That means i deserve to have your ear for a moment

I am an old player of boardgames and computer games. Thats another reason why you should listen to me.

Here is the point that i have for you:

In your next version of this game, add the individual commanders back in. The feel of the game lost a little bit from people's tactics. Right now the head quarters staffing that you have is just a type of supply. Its only a bunch of numbers. I understand the staff is needed, but it does nothing for the imagination. Add commanders back in!

Since I am buying the game a second time, I would like you to respond. If you do, I will buy your next version.

Aww who am i kidding? I will buy your next version whether you answer or not.

[Joshuatree]

I second that. It would sure add some flavour to the gamefeel. This has been discussed before though, and I don't know if Vic is planning to do this.
If you don't mind me asking, how'd you manage to loose your AT game? Garagesale?

[Vic]

Ha ha!

Well you dont have to bribe me to get an answer on a question.

I hope to give some more info on the next projects soon. But i want to be just a little bit more sure how things are going.

Rest assured that commanders are on the drawing board. Though i am not sure they'll be available in random games too.

Kind regards,
Vic

[seille]

Officers are nice,
 
but how about more multiplayer features in the next release ?
 
Shared Tech, Shared Roads/supplylines for allies etc.
And how about setting complete units under the command of an ally,
Giving him cities ?
There is already some good stuff implemented, but i miss for example the shared tech a lot.

[Twotribes]

ORIGINAL: seille

Officers are nice,

but how about more multiplayer features in the next release ?

Shared Tech, Shared Roads/supplylines for allies etc.
And how about setting complete units under the command of an ally,
Giving him cities ?
There is already some good stuff implemented, but i miss for example the shared tech a lot.

Shared Tech means tech gains double as essentially the allies just agree ahead of time what they will research. That never happened in WW2 on any meaningful level.

[Vic]

ORIGINAL: seille

Officers are nice,

but how about more multiplayer features in the next release ?

Shared Tech, Shared Roads/supplylines for allies etc.
And how about setting complete units under the command of an ally,
Giving him cities ?
There is already some good stuff implemented, but i miss for example the shared tech a lot.

Hi Seille!

I will give a briefing about upcomming projects soon.

A lot of requests will make it in either the first or second next release. I am working simultaneously on 2 releases.

However with growing number of features we'll have to face the fact that they will not all, or not in all combinations of features a scenariodesigner may chose, will work with the AI.

The fun however that some features will provide for PBEM games is so big imho that the lack of AI support wont matter that much.

Hope to give some more info within a few weeks.

Kind regards,
Vic

[Joshuatree]

More info within some weeks, that sounds very nice to me.
Guess; that would be AT3 and this new project your working on.

[seille]

@Twotribes
 
I do not talk about ww2 for my shared tech suggestion.
Talked about multiplayer random games where one player controls two regimes (or more).
I play PBEM only and i see some potential there to make AT better.
 
And of course this would just be a option you can activate or deactivate or maybe
a transfer by action card.
 
@Vic
Waiting on the informations. If there is something to look at or test you know my email adress [;)]

[V22 Osprey]

Any chance you can add on-line/LAN multiplayer Vic?

I'm asking a pretty please on this one.I want to play my dad but he's not the PBEM type.We play John Tiller's Campaing Series via LAN and love it, he says he likes AT but wont do PBEM.Please add LAN multiplayer.[&o]

[seille]

You can use messengers like ICQ to send the turns.
This way you can make a real game session of let´s say 10 turns in a row.
You see immediately when the turn arrives and can play direct after receiving
-> similar speed to LAN this way.
Both players have to be in front of their PC. Did it already and it worked well for me.

[Jeffrey H.]

ORIGINAL: seille

You can use messengers like ICQ to send the turns.
This way you can make a real game session of let´s say 10 turns in a row.
You see immediately when the turn arrives and can play direct after receiving
-> similar speed to LAN this way.
Both players have to be in front of their PC. Did it already and it worked well for me.

If you both are on email, you can simply bounce emails back and forth in realtime. You have to agree when it's time to start and time to quit, that way nobody gets left waiting for a turn that isn't coming.

[seille]

Hehe Jeffrey, i can remember on 15 turns i did with Vic this way in a single day.

[Grymme]

Maybe you are playing the scenario GPW and cant enter the Russian territory owned by another German regime. Since there are several German and Russian regimes on each side (each one simulating an army group). That would explain it.

[Joshuatree]

Grymme, are you referring to this thread? http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2068606