Matrix Games Forums

Just my two cents but here are three ideas for the future that may help attract more people to the game.

1. A patch to fix the bugs with the previous patch, in particular the problems with the Steam version of the game as it's currently broken on install.

2. A more comprehensive manual that includes examples of the rules in action so that people can more easily understand it.

3. A new and updated tutorial that's easy to understand and also more comprehensive.

Like I said above, these are just my ideas off the top of my head so feel free to disagree with me on this.

Kind Regards
PrivateLsd

There is a community manual that Steve and I worked on a few years ago before us parting ways with design differences. I believe both are still relevant and around here someplace.

PrivateLsd wrote: Mon Jun 26, 2023 11:17 am Just my two cents but here are three ideas for the future that may help attract more people to the game.

1. A patch to fix the bugs with the previous patch, in particular the problems with the Steam version of the game as it's currently broken on install.
Kind Regards
PrivateLsd

Uninstalled. Reinstalled to a different drive than the one it had been installed one. Downloaded and installed fine. Auto downloaded the patch and installed just fine. Game runs just as it always had. What problem are you having?

The first idea should be to find someone to take Ralph's place.

The second idea should be for everyone interested in TOAW Development to stop using Steam. That would allow for a programmer to not waste time on the Steam version and to be dedicated to the Matrix version. Probably Matrix would not support this idea, but if it was demonstrated that TOAW'ers did not use Steam, then maybe you never know what might follow.

sPzAbt653 wrote: Wed Jun 28, 2023 8:27 pm The first idea should be to find someone to take Ralph's place.

The second idea should be for everyone interested in TOAW Development to stop using Steam. That would allow for a programmer to not waste time on the Steam version and to be dedicated to the Matrix version. Probably Matrix would not support this idea, but if it was demonstrated that TOAW'ers did not use Steam, then maybe you never know what might follow.

I think that's a given. I doubt that Matrix is going to replace Ralph anytime soon. I think they are depending on Bob to do everything he's supposed to do and be the developer as well. That's probably why development progress is so slow and opaque. Very opaque. If anybody has had a different experience I appologize ahead of time but I've noticed a very short but concise answer to any question Bob has ever answered. I feel like he's holding his cards against his chest so we cannot breach his OPSEC. I for one would rather see the development of TOAW be a LOT more open and transparent. But that's obviously not Bob's policy.

I think they are depending on Bob

That would be an incorrect thought, my friend. TOAW Development has ended until we get a programmer/developer to replace Ralph. I will stress the 'we'. No one is actively developing this title. We have our little community and that is it. Anyone may contact Matrix if they are qualified and have an interest.

sPzAbt653 wrote: Thu Aug 03, 2023 1:57 am

I think they are depending on Bob

That would be an incorrect thought, my friend. TOAW Development has ended until we get a programmer/developer to replace Ralph. I will stress the 'we'. No one is actively developing this title. We have our little community and that is it. Anyone may contact Matrix if they are qualified and have an interest.

Erik's word on it:

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 0#p4907910

Groundhog Day. Sigh.... Just give me my hex-side rivers and we will call it even.

Curtis Lemay wrote: Thu Aug 03, 2023 3:26 am

sPzAbt653 wrote: Thu Aug 03, 2023 1:57 am

I think they are depending on Bob

That would be an incorrect thought, my friend. TOAW Development has ended until we get a programmer/developer to replace Ralph. I will stress the 'we'. No one is actively developing this title. We have our little community and that is it. Anyone may contact Matrix if they are qualified and have an interest.

Erik's word on it:

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 0#p4907910

The link quoted is almost two years old. In that time there have been no updates or update timeline as described by Erik. The only thing that smells like a possible update is something called "Commanders" which does not address the wish list. I agree that development has ended.

Regards

rhinobones wrote: Thu Aug 03, 2023 3:07 pm

Curtis Lemay wrote: Thu Aug 03, 2023 3:26 am

sPzAbt653 wrote: Thu Aug 03, 2023 1:57 am
That would be an incorrect thought, my friend. TOAW Development has ended until we get a programmer/developer to replace Ralph. I will stress the 'we'. No one is actively developing this title. We have our little community and that is it. Anyone may contact Matrix if they are qualified and have an interest.

Erik's word on it:

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 0#p4907910

The link quoted is almost two years old. In that time there have been no updates or update timeline as described by Erik. The only thing that smells like a possible update is something called "Commanders" which does not address the wish list. I agree that development has ended.

Regards

More recently:

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 3#p5107933

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 6#p5065896

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 1#p5032041

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 8#p5006138

Just a little before:

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 3#p4854023

And, from way back (talking about a different update):

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 3#p4546373

Let me add that I'm making occasional update file postings to the Development Board. The last such was 7/31/2023 - three days ago. Since Steve has access to that board, his post was very strange.

I keep hearing reference to the development board. How does one get on this development board?

It's possible that in the future, we may be able to ramp things up again with more resources and get more ambitious with TOAW, but for now that is a hope rather than a reality.

That's what Erik said. Further TOAW Development is a Hope, not a Reality.

@Simon - When there is a need for people on the Development Board, they will ask. Obviously, there is no current need.

sPzAbt653 wrote: Fri Aug 04, 2023 12:59 pm

It's possible that in the future, we may be able to ramp things up again with more resources and get more ambitious with TOAW, but for now that is a hope rather than a reality.

That's what Erik said. Further TOAW Development is a Hope, not a Reality.

Everyone reading has a link to that post so what's your point in misquoting it? What Erik said in the above is that "Ramping up" is a hope. About further development he said:

We're also thankful that Bob has continued working on TOAW after Ralph left, but regarding the possibility of any future updates it's up to him at this time what's realistic and what the timeline might be

.

And you know that I'm still developing it since you have access to the DB.

Simon Edmonds wrote: Fri Aug 04, 2023 1:11 am I keep hearing reference to the development board. How does one get on this development board?

Why would you want to be on the board?

And you know that I'm still developing it since you have access to the DB.

You've posted your relevant quotes, no need to attempt to use me to validate your contributions to TOAW.

As a 'developer', what have been your efforts to 'ramp up' TOAW development since Ralph 'left' and since Erik posted his thoughts two years ago?

Why would you want to be on the board?

The Operational Art of War occupies a special place in computer wargaming. There is nothing else quite like it. The problem seems to be that there is only you on the development, programming and fault rectification side of things. I don’t know if you are retired or if you work but I am retired and have nothing but time on my hands.
I have been around computers and programming for about 40 years. Mainly with the army but also with the public service. So I have the basic skills for what you need done. What I don’t know I can soon learn. My first wargame was a birthday present in the 1970’s. Lot of games since then… I bought TOAW III when it came out then TOAW IV so lot’s of TOAW exposure. Currently I am playing D41. Great scenario by the way. Over-all I am pretty happy with TOAW. I won’t be coming to the table wanting to totally change things. Just help work through the suggestion and problems list.
So why do I want to be on the board. Because I think I can be an asset to TOAW and continuing its special place in computer wargaming.

sPzAbt653 wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2023 1:55 am

And you know that I'm still developing it since you have access to the DB.

You've posted your relevant quotes, no need to attempt to use me to validate your contributions to TOAW.

As a 'developer', what have been your efforts to 'ramp up' TOAW development since Ralph 'left' and since Erik posted his thoughts two years ago?

Writing about 25,000 lines of code.

Simon Edmonds wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2023 1:59 am

Why would you want to be on the board?

The Operational Art of War occupies a special place in computer wargaming. There is nothing else quite like it. The problem seems to be that there is only you on the development, programming and fault rectification side of things. I don’t know if you are retired or if you work but I am retired and have nothing but time on my hands.
I have been around computers and programming for about 40 years. Mainly with the army but also with the public service. So I have the basic skills for what you need done. What I don’t know I can soon learn. My first wargame was a birthday present in the 1970’s. Lot of games since then… I bought TOAW III when it came out then TOAW IV so lot’s of TOAW exposure. Currently I am playing D41. Great scenario by the way. Over-all I am pretty happy with TOAW. I won’t be coming to the table wanting to totally change things. Just help work through the suggestion and problems list.
So why do I want to be on the board. Because I think I can be an asset to TOAW and continuing its special place in computer wargaming.

That was the right answer. I was expecting another "tourist" who just wanted to snoop.

Curtis Lemay wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2023 2:29 am

Simon Edmonds wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2023 1:59 am

Why would you want to be on the board?

The Operational Art of War occupies a special place in computer wargaming. There is nothing else quite like it. The problem seems to be that there is only you on the development, programming and fault rectification side of things. I don’t know if you are retired or if you work but I am retired and have nothing but time on my hands.
I have been around computers and programming for about 40 years. Mainly with the army but also with the public service. So I have the basic skills for what you need done. What I don’t know I can soon learn. My first wargame was a birthday present in the 1970’s. Lot of games since then… I bought TOAW III when it came out then TOAW IV so lot’s of TOAW exposure. Currently I am playing D41. Great scenario by the way. Over-all I am pretty happy with TOAW. I won’t be coming to the table wanting to totally change things. Just help work through the suggestion and problems list.
So why do I want to be on the board. Because I think I can be an asset to TOAW and continuing its special place in computer wargaming.

That was the right answer. I was expecting another "tourist" who just wanted to snoop.

Alright. If I'm going to do this, I might as well check to see if there are any others out there that have a hunger to help out with the playtesting. This will mean access to the Development Board and the current beta .exe. An NDA will be required.

Curtis Lemay wrote: Sat Aug 05, 2023 8:21 pm Alright. If I'm going to do this, I might as well check to see if there are any others out there that have a hunger to help out with the playtesting. This will mean access to the Development Board and the current beta .exe. An NDA will be required.

I would like to take the liberty to encourage all of you out there who are on the fence about whether or not to volunteer to be on the beta team. You are needed. Plus, it's not all that hard. Mostly just play your scenarios with an eye open to things that seem off, wrong, not quite right, etc. And take the time to document the "off" events and report any bugs you find or have a suspescion about. Or suggestions aimed to make the game easier, or "better" in some way. I've been doing this since TOAW III and I wouldn't want to do anything else. I've made a difference several times now. That the proficiency, health, MP's, etc. show on the unit display panel for the unit was a suggestion of mine about a decade ago now. It was SO much harder to play the game without those stats showing. I distinctly remember going through each unit just before moving it having to look under the hood to find out how the unit was doing currently, as a contingent factor to determine where I moved it to. I no longer have to do that.

Your opinion will be heard. Bob is nothing if not fair and level headed. And wicked intelligent. Also, it's impossible to stump him with a question about TOAW. I've tried. We've all tried. Bob is the correct choice of who to lead the beta team trust me. Just the fact that your opinion will be considered is reason enough to join the team if you want my humble opinion. I can't think of a good reason NOT to join the team. You get a fresh copy of the very latest model of the game engine hot off the griddle and there's been 100+ of them since TOAW III. It's a win-win. Also, don't be afraid of the NDA. It's pretty standard industry-wide.