New 08.00.00.00 Public Beta Update Available Now!

[Joseignacio]

Well, I have not played those games, although I know of EiA from my board game friends' comments, so forgive me if I am wrong, but I have always heard that WIF is the bigger Strategic Monster game in the world, the tactical one being Advanced Squad Leader.

And that counting only the maps and the counters, not to speak of the rules which are incredibly complicated and affect one another in ways that sometimes even veteran players get dumbfounded and need to ask in the Mail List for support.

Then comes the optionals, which can change absolutely the game, in fact they make different games. FiF changes strategic bombardment and so strategic warfare, punishes USSR because it needs to build only in factories, not in cities, and rail factories... and production. In the presence of the Enemy makes the naval warfare completely different, punishing first Germany and later USA. Bounce Combat changes absolutely the air combat for tactical bombing and strat bomb, because of the increase in possible losses in bombers even while escort is intact. Planes in Flames introduces a great number of planes that afect the war very seriously compared with no PiF, and so on.

As I say, I dont know your games, but according to what I hear from those who played them and according to what I know of MWIF, I do not think they are comparable.

[Joseignacio]

BTW, I own EiA but I am just to old and so too lazy to start learning complex rules of games unless I am specially motivated. And contrary to some players I dont like playing games running like a chicken without a head because of not knowing but a bare tutorial.

[jaeenox]

Anyone can post whatever he feels like, but I would like not to see so much wishful thinking here, asking for impossible things instead of being practical and asking for possible things.

Anyone who has played board WIF, or enough MWIF for the matter, knows perfectly well that it is impossible at this time to make an AI for a game with such complicated rules, so many different units that allow different strategies (like MAR or PARA for example) which permit invasions, paradrops by surprise, naval support, air combat..., not to speak of complicating the situation with optionals, which affect directly to strategy and tactics greatly, like "In The Presence Of The Enemy".

Besides, according to the comments of some of the best informed in the forum, there is few communication between Steven and the Beta Testers, and even at smaller maps like the introductory Barbarossa, which is very limited in scope and mainly about land combat and only two powers, the AI doesnt advance, and nowadays after one or two years is still far from complete. In spite of Steven experience in AI in his previous career, and his great interest in developing one for MWIF.

So, calling for advances on this matter, which does not go forward and it is clearly undoable, is also calling for diverting resources for other matters that should be possible, like more scenarios, resolving the growing bugs number, et al.

I don't think the poster that I answered was asking for a fully complete functional AI and neither am I. I would just like access to what is available. It's pretty obvious this Steve person has checked out, if he is not even communicating with the official beta testers. What could it hurt to release what is available to the public. Maybe someone else could do better.

[JamesHunt]

Anyone can post whatever he feels like, but I would like not to see so much wishful thinking here, asking for impossible things instead of being practical and asking for possible things.

I don't think the poster that I answered was asking for a fully complete functional AI and neither am I. I would just like access to what is available. It's pretty obvious this Steve person has checked out, if he is not even communicating with the official beta testers. What could it hurt to release what is available to the public. Maybe someone else could do better.

Yes and should be obvious by reading my post. Other poster jumped too fast out of the bush. No offense but at least attempt to do proper reading before immediately pressing reply. Otherwise it can litter discussions and causes confusion.

All I asked was "can open beta users be granted access to the WIP AI."

Thanks for your modding contributions btw.

[eouellet]

All I asked was "can open beta users be granted access to the WIP AI."

The short answer is no, not at this time.

The longer one is that it has been over 2 years since Matrix (well one programmer) is working exclusively on the AI, and it has nothing to show for. The official beta testers are under a NDA, but they said that they are not very busy with testing. Bottom-line there is not much to work with, and there are signs that it might never get finished anyway. You can approach Matrix and try to sign up as a formal beta tester, but I don't know if they still take people.

[Magpius]

Is there any indication or comms as to when the next update will be made available? as it's been over a year since 07.00.01 was released.
(I'm assuming it is still being worked on).

[MaximKI]

Is there any indication or comms as to when the next update will be made available? as it's been over a year since 07.00.01 was released.
(I'm assuming it is still being worked on).

Development is ongoing. Once we're ready to share news or new updates, we'll let you know.

[Joseignacio]

Anyone can post whatever he feels like, but I would like not to see so much wishful thinking here, asking for impossible things instead of being practical and asking for possible things.

I don't think the poster that I answered was asking for a fully complete functional AI and neither am I. I would just like access to what is available. It's pretty obvious this Steve person has checked out, if he is not even communicating with the official beta testers. What could it hurt to release what is available to the public. Maybe someone else could do better.

Yes and should be obvious by reading my post. Other poster jumped too fast out of the bush. No offense but at least attempt to do proper reading before immediately pressing reply. Otherwise it can litter discussions and causes confusion.

All I asked was "can open beta users be granted access to the WIP AI."

Thanks for your modding contributions btw.

My post was not specifically directed to you,

[JamesHunt]

All I asked was "can open beta users be granted access to the WIP AI."

The short answer is no, not at this time.

The longer one is that it has been over 2 years since Matrix (well one programmer) is working exclusively on the AI, and it has nothing to show for. The official beta testers are under a NDA, but they said that they are not very busy with testing. Bottom-line there is not much to work with, and there are signs that it might never get finished anyway. You can approach Matrix and try to sign up as a formal beta tester, but I don't know if they still take people.

Not interested, but thanks for the info.

[MaximKI]

A new public beta is live now! See OP for details.

Also, we have a development update to share with you from Steve. See HERE.

[Angeldust2]

What's New in v08.00.00.00
Peace
- Fixed a problem where if a player has multiple major powers which are eligible to surrender, the program permits the player to decide about them one at a time. Previously, the player was only able to decide about the first one in the list. This comes up when the Axis is doing very well and the Allied side has to decide whether or not to surrender China and/or the USSR.
Production Planning
- Fixed a problem where the City Based Volunteers for Germany were not available during the Production phase of the first turn of the Global War scenario. They can now be built at no cost to arrive at the start of the second turn: Vienna and Bratislavia militia.
- Enabled Vichy France to send build points to the major power that declared Vichy France (typically, Germany). This is only possible once Vichy France is Hostile to an Allied major power.
- Added a check so the major power receiving a build point is always changed from the value of None when the player uses the capability to change the receiving major power.

I did not test it yet, but if indeed the bugs mentioned above were finally solved, it restores some hope, the development of this game might still lead to some further value added. Especially the two missing German CBV units were annoying, as each Global War game needed immediately a game file edit to fix this bug, right after game start. So thank you very much for this bug fixing, Steve! Please keep bug fixing, especially for such simple, well documented bugs.

The way forward is
1. constant bug fixing
2. coding remaining optional rules, at least the not yet fully functional ones like GBA promotions or Frogmen
3. Implementing one-map scenarios

AI scripting for just the Soviet side in just Barbarossa scenario is a distraction and a waste of ressources. That obsession by Steve and/or Matrix can only be explained by some perceived contractual/legal obligations.

[juntoalmar]

The way forward is
1. constant bug fixing
2. coding remaining optional rules, at least the not yet fully functional ones like GBA promotions or Frogmen
3. Implementing one-map scenarios

I'd add as first priority fixing the convoy system, as sometimes is hard (or impossible) to work around it. I'd even say, perhaps the biggest improvement to the game would be to allow editing the gamefiles easily for the player (like with a graphical editor) without breaking the game, so that we could manually fix any bug we may find. I know it's easier said than done.

AI scripting for just the Soviet side in just Barbarossa scenario is a distraction and a waste of ressources. That obsession by Steve and/or Matrix can only be explained by some perceived contractual/legal obligations.

As far as I know, I think AI opponent is what Steve likes and his motivation to join this project. I'm quite sure his involvement hasn't been monetary beneficial for him (he has worked many more hours than the money he received) and I guess he had this agreement with Matrix from the beginning. So, let him have his reward coding the AI.

On the other hand, I wonder who owns the code, probably Matrix. If so, I wonder if they could find another programmer to continue this project when/if Steve stops working on it eventually. It should be another person who joins out of love for the game, as there would basically be no budget for it.

[pzgndr]

As far as I know, I think AI opponent is what Steve likes and his motivation to join this project. I'm quite sure his involvement hasn't been monetary beneficial for him (he has worked many more hours than the money he received) and I guess he had this agreement with Matrix from the beginning...
On the other hand, I wonder who owns the code, probably Matrix. If so, I wonder if they could find another programmer to continue this project when/if Steve stops working on it eventually.

IMHO an AI computer opponent is necessary for a computer wargame. If not, then may as well play your game via Vassal or Tabletop Simulator or something. TCP/IP or NetPlay over the internet is nice if you have opponents ready to play when you are ready to play, but there's a silent majority of wargamers out there who are happy to play against the computer at their convenience and on whatever difficulty settings they desire. Matrix Games understands this so quit bitching about it.

I speak with some experience based on code development for Empires in Arms over the past decade. Prior to me taking over the project, the game was released in 2008 with too many bugs and an incomplete AI, and even after another decade the game still had bugs and AI issues when I got it. It's taken years (years!) to work off the game bugs, make game enhancements, and improve the AI computer opponent. It's not trivial. But always, my priorities have been 1) game bugs, 2) game enhancements, and 3) AI improvements. Steve should have the same priorities. I continue to wait for the one-map scenarios (Fascist Tide ETO campaign primarily, for me) and then the AI whenever. It's been a long wait and I'll keep waiting.

As for code ownership and such, I don't believe it works that way. Matrix is more of a publishing house. There may be a couple of in-house projects they control but mostly its independent developers that they really do not have control over. When Marshall Ellis dropped Empires in Arms, it wasn't Matrix that found me. I reached out to Marshall Ellis to take it on as a hobby project to keep the game alive and fulfill its potential. No 'contract' with Matrix Games and no monetary benefit for me. I don't know what arrangement Steve has, but folks here should thank their lucky stars that he's doing whatever he can to keep WiF alive and fulfill its potential. And it may yet be several years (years!) for him to wrap up a final version that has everything that was promised. We shall see. I'll keep waiting.

[paulderynck]

The problem with Vassal (or Tabletop Simulator, or Cyberboard) for this game is that they all rely on the players to enforce the rules. Even with the best of intentions, even veteran players make mistakes. MWiF is great at enforcing the rules.

At the very best, the AI opponent for this game will play the Russians in the Barbarossa scenario. That is all that has been promised. As a training aid for someone new to the game it will be pretty good at teaching the land and air parts of the game, and a smattering of the naval. But its best bet against regular WiF players will be to get lots of bad weather.

[pzgndr]

At the very best, the AI opponent for this game will play the Russians in the Barbarossa scenario. That is all that has been promised.

Really? Then I guess all of the code work Steve did for AIO and LAIO over the years for much more than just "the Russians in the Barbarossa scenario" wasn't to fulfill promises made when the game was released. And all of the work peskpesk did for various AI strategies for much more than just "the Russians in the Barbarossa scenario" wasn't to support the promises made. Uh-huh. Did Matrix Games and/or Steve explicitly say that all of those previous AI promises for WiF were revoked and are now null and void, forever? Or just deferred for the time being, and put on hold until other higher priority items are worked off? Big difference. I'll wait for an official announcement. And I'll keep waiting for the Fascist Tide one-map scenario, and then eventually the AI computer opponent for more than just "the Russians in the Barbarossa scenario."

[paulderynck]

Did you read the AI Opponent Mode of Play section in the first post of the linked thread under "What's New in v07.00.01.00?"

https://forums.matrixgames.com/viewtopic.php?t=403417

[pzgndr]

Did you read the AI Opponent Mode of Play section in the first post of the linked thread under "What's New in v07.00.01.00?"

Oh, there it is...
AI Opponent Mode of Play
9. For the AI Opponent, fixed a newly created problem where the program wasn’t starting the Barbarossa scenario - halting at the setup phase for the USSR.
Not! Maybe we're missing something, but neither this or anything else announced has indicated that the goal of eventually having an AI computer opponent for more than just the Barbarosss scenario has officially been taken off the table. Again, let's wait to hear something OFFICIAL from Matrix Games or Steve. I'll keep waiting...

[paulderynck]

Actually I meant the very lengthy entry under "What's New in v07.00.00.00?"

But anyway, you are free to believe whatever you like. Patience is the practice of waiting with calm endurance, while hope is the expectation of a future good, and those are admirable qualities.

[Centuur]

Actually I meant the very lengthy entry under "What's New in v07.00.00.00?"

But anyway, you are free to believe whatever you like. Patience is the practice of waiting with calm endurance, while hope is the expectation of a future good, and those are admirable qualities.

True, so true. But: I'm an impatient man, especially if one takes the age of Steve into account...