What would you like to see done next?

[Vanman]

I am going to approach this from a self serving perspective in terms of what I would like to see completed next. Not sure
exactly how many will agree but the responses should be interesting. Before I begin, I just want to say this game is
absolutely outstanding. Peter Garnett and myself have played a few global campaigns together and any bugs encountered
have been worked around with ease.

Teamviewer is an outstanding resource and I could hardly care if Netplay even gets completed. The only drawback is the
lack of US Entry secrecy. I used to be 'AI or bust', but playing against an actual person is much more rewarding as it
is experienced together. One can talk about potential errors made and clarify rules together.

1) Current agenda is clearly Bugs and Netplay.

2) The Russo-Japanese situation neutrality pact/garrison ratio situation needs to be addressed. Without it Japan is essentially
a paper tiger just waiting to fall if Manchuria gets hit by the Russians (and it does not need much). We currently use a house rule to get around this issue
but it would be much better to have it programmed.

3) Convoys in Flames: Would love to play with Light Cruisers but feel the game would be too allied biased without convoys.

4) Cannot say I am particularly impatient with any of the other optional rules (though V-weapons would be kind of cool).

5) AI.

[Twisted1]

Days of Decision. The crack cocaine of WiF!

[brian brian]

ORIGINAL: Vanman

2) The Russo-Japanese situation neutrality pact/garrison ratio situation needs to be addressed. Without it Japan is essentially
a paper tiger just waiting to fall if Manchuria gets hit by the Russians (and it does not need much). We currently use a house rule to get around this issue
but it would be much better to have it programmed.

I don't see much issue with this in a 2-player game. It is needed for a multi-player game. Russia going into Manchuria is not a slam dunk Allied strategy by any means.


For a list of stuff to work on, mine would go like this:

Isolated Re-Org Optional

Guards Banner Armies

City-Based Volunteers

CV Planes in Flame become true Optional

Barbarossa AI

Netplay is a dead end in my opinion. Anyone smart enough to play World in Flames is smart enough to set up a chat channel or any other type of communication to handle interaction for the non-Phasing player, and emailing the game file gets easier with every Operating System release. It would be far more profitable to port the existing code to run on a server so any internet connected device could input decisions into the game, rather than just PCs. The base code (rules, maps, units) seems solid enough for this but the GUI code would have to be started over from scratch. Perhaps too large of a project but would be the best way to bring new players into WiF.

[Centuur]

The half map scenarios are something I would like to have too...

[LeeChard]

ORIGINAL: Centuur

The half map scenarios are something I would like to have too...

+1

[michaelbaldur]

CV Planes in Flame become true Optional

what do you mean ???

[Courtenay]

My two highest priorities are the ability to implement other neutrality pacts besides the Nazi-Soviet pact (i.e. Japanese-Soviet) and the ability to swap maximally stacked units.

At the moment, though, Steve is quite correctly focusing on bugs.

[Cataphract88]

AI, so that MWIF matches practically every other game out there!

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

CV Planes in Flame become true Optional

what do you mean ???

He means not getting all the CVPs from SiF plus doubling the number of them again by adding all the CVPs from CVPiF.

The ones from CVPiF should be a separate option.

[BradK82]

My priority list would be:
1) bug squashing.

2) optional rules.

3) half map scenarios.

4) netplay.

5) AI

However, I already appreciate the tremendous amount of work Steve has done.

[Aranthus]

The main job that needs to be done is bug removal. Included with that I hope there will be a re-working of the convoy/production system, which is still frustrating. After that, finishing the optional rules, including FiF. Then if it is possible, add Patton and America in Flames. But I don't think we will be seeing that for a very long time.

[Jagdtiger14]

1. Bugs
2. Options
3. Guard Banner/city vols
4. Factory in Flames
5. Day's of Decision
6. Fatal Alliances

[PeteGarnett]

Half Map scenarios for me as well as the continued good work removing bugs.

[Orm]

1) Bugs
2) Options, especially Frogmen, City Based Volunteers and Bounce Combat
3) AI opponent
4) Up to 6 player games

[tom730_slith]

Really glad that work continues to address bugs.
In addition I'd LOVE to see -

1. City Based Volunteers
2. Ukraine
3. V-Weapons and A-Bombs

Regarding A-Bombs, why is it that only the U.S. can develop them? In the boxed game I bought years ago Germany could build them. I can understand why Italy shouldn't be allowed to, but Germany might have gone down that road successfully if things were a little different. Was this changed in the boxed version of WIF as well, so only the US can make the A-Bomb?

[Hansstory]

1. AI

[Viktor_Kormel_slith]

IMO:

1)Bugs
2)more bugs
3)And More bugs

After, malfunctions (naval movements, using oil, convoys routing...) and then 1)japan ussr peace 2) half maps 3)isolated reorganization

[Dencat]

1) Optionals, especially City Based Volunteers, German Commerce Raiders(with extra optional few for others to build...), Ukraine
2) Diplomatic system(Maybe modeled on America in Flames) to get those minors as full allies.
3) Breakable minor units

[Joseignacio]

1- The game without bugs. Even solo or hotseat.
2- Multiplayer
...
...
...
3- (someday) AI

[Yaab]

A long-time lurker here..

Just one thing: the AI.