Matrix Games Forums

I'm hoping that WITP II will be a reality some day. WITP I is the most enjoyable wargame I have ever played. I play like a fiend for three months, go on to something else (Rome: Total War, Vampire: The masquerade, etc.) but I always return. Taking what we've learned from the game, what could a possible sequel do differently?

I'd like to see a TF screen interface as in Harpoon, so I could place ASW and AAW assets, then the combat animation could show the enemy aircraft engaging the screening units, moving inward, towards the high value targets. It might be quite dramatic.

I'd also like to see a more detailed damage interface. Engineering hits, ammo hoists, electrical central. You could have a schematic view of each ship (probably pretty memory intensive).

Anyway, those are my thoughts. Any others?

From what they said (if I remember correctly) WitP II will be only for PBEM. Since I don't play that, I don't know. I am waiting for War in Russia though [&o]

Oh well, I would say perhaps: "I'd like to see naked geishas/starlettes"

No one of any real import at Matrix has ever said anything about WITP II. Frag posted a poll on his own (not an official Matrix poll) asking if people would be interested in a PBEM version, but I seriously doubt that the economics would support a PBEM only project. WITP was a very involved project, fairly expensive to make (for a wargame). I do not picture any effort at a WITP II in the forseeable future. Maybe in another ten of fifteen years the guys who make up 2by3 might forget their frustrations with WITP and decide to revisit the idea.

I hope that I'm wrong, but I don't think so...

Better graphics and animations - like some South Pacific girls waving when a recon flight passes over... [:D]

A better user interface.

more hotkeys, more friendly interface, I love WitP but current WitP is something like a micromanagement nightmare.

well if there is one....GG wont be doing it. I think he meant what he said when he said he would never attempt such a large scale project again. Course anyone can change their mind but given the trial that WitP represents, I doubt it.

Early involvement of testers and experts on the subject. If this had been done with WITP we would not be talking about a WITP2 right now and for a while after.

My requested features of WITP II:

- improved graphic.
- more user frendly interface (righ click to open tasks menu and so on...)
- improved land movement/combat model
- better logistic
- better management AI (AI for production, resources management etc)

I hope to see WITP II. I'd buy it immediately.
WITP has some bugs but it's a great wargame.

I would be happy if the source code for WITP I was placed under the GPL when its marketable lifespan is complete. The only way to address some of the WITP issues is to change the code, e.g. land combat, ASW combat.....

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Early involvement of testers and experts on the subject. If this had been done with WITP we would not be talking about a WITP2 right now and for a while after.

Funny, i recall differently.

I think the whole concept of covering the Pacific war at squad/plane level is suspect to start with. I think they did an amazing job at attempting the impossible.

But I would hope that any future redo would start from scratch. Someday some brilliant young developer will come up with a new way of treating the theater in a comprehensive way but without such an extreme level of detail.

Except that said "brilliant young developer" will be from a generation reared on RTS's and FPS's, and will know that there's no money to be made in the PC market gaming. Never going to happen...

Forgot to take my anti-cynic medicine tonight...

are you saying the detail level is too fine? Don know about that. After having played Carrier Force (8bit SSI), i just couldn't get into SSG's "Carriers at War" despite some design advantages that it had (and allegedly a killer AI) I hated the fact that the planes were represented in squadrons and you only got squadron level combat reports. I loved how CF detailed the combat down the individual plane.

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Except that said "brilliant young developer" will be from a generation reared on RTS's and FPS's, and will know that there's no money to be made in the PC market. Never going to happen...

Forgot to take my anti-cynic medicine tonight...

ARRRRG dont even think it. Real time sucks! give me turn based any day.

Sign of the times, buddy. Wake up and smell the RTS...

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Early involvement of testers and experts on the subject. If this had been done with WITP we would not be talking about a WITP2 right now and for a while after.

Funny, i recall differently.

You are forgetting how many times we asked for change and met the stone wall of statements like, "Sorry, there will be no change as it would require to much work." This obviously suggests that old code and any new stuff was already to far entrenched to be feasably altered. This is what I mean by being involved earlier than simply being monkeys asked to break something. Ground floor design is the issue, otherise we just get further rehashes of older approaches. New ideas and methods are a must.

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Sign of the times, buddy. Wake up and smell the RTS...

I did during Fighting Steel and i gagged and choked. Only RTS game i can stomach is Combat Mission and thats only because they came up with an innovative way to eliminate two of my by biggest complaints about RTS, that of not being able to see all the action because its all occuring at once and having to rush around giving orders without a staff to help me. The blending of turn based and RTS elements was a stroke of pure genius.

However in the end i still prefer the Steel Panthers series. NWS has greatly improved Fighting Steel (version 10.0 now) but it still has the RTS bugaboo....the biggest one being that naval actions can be a bit boring to watch when it's long range fighting.....fire, steam....wait.....fire steam...wait.....was that a hit? no.....fire steam...wait. Give me turn based !!!!!

Well, obviously. 10+ years of God only knows how tangled spaghetti code is not conductive to making new games. Clean slate, and that's unlikely, at best, considering how monstrous a task a second WitP would be.

I remember, however you are forgetting how many adjustments and changes they did incorporate. A balanced view is required. I would have loved it in particular if they could have implemented the surface model changes I wanted....but in the end i accepted their explanation. Whether we want to admit it or not....the making of a wargame, any wargaming is a business venture and economic and coding limitations must be accepted.

To balance that memory i recall that at long last MikeW was able to incorporate a supply destruction factor into the ship damage model and finally nailing down the exp drop bug. Player upgrades were for a long time a taboo subject but in the end they made it happen. lots of changes...lots more not changed but thats the nature of the beast.