Forum debate

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Forum debate

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> Forum debate

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Forum debate - 6/24/2007 11:41:23 AM

dale1066

Posts: 108
Joined: 6/23/2007
Status: offline

I'm a newbie on the forum but have being playing wif for a while, since ver 5 anyway and for the last few years CWif. (bit sad as no opponents locally any one from the uk midlands out there?)

I�ve been playing with the forum, looking at threads that are live/current and reading with interest Steves progress reports and theres a lot to go through.

Looking forward to playing the game esp. by email (Jimm you got your ears on?) or online ? or vs the AI and will go to Columbus to get it

And I�d like to help being a software developer an all �

Anyway enough waffle

My main point is I am having difficulty identifying what sort of input is now useful, what sort of things are finalised? what topics are dead ? Where is further detail from players required?

For example

Are more suggestions on strategic options for the various powers useful ?
Rules clarifications are there any outstanding? Are they finalised?
Are more tactical suggestions similar to the topical naval txpt thread required?
Is it now sensible to be asking for features that are essentially �gold-plating� the game interface? Feature creep is something I dread at work.

Any way I�ve started this in a new thread and await, with a certain amount of trepidation it must be said, the response of the veterans.

Post #: 1

RE: Forum debate - 6/24/2007 11:54:21 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dale1066
I'm a newbie on the forum but have being playing wif for a while, since ver 5 anyway and for the last few years CWif. (bit sad as no opponents locally any one from the uk midlands out there?)

I�ve been playing with the forum, looking at threads that are live/current and reading with interest Steves progress reports and theres a lot to go through.

Looking forward to playing the game esp. by email (Jimm you got your ears on?) or online ? or vs the AI and will go to Columbus to get it And I�d like to help being a software developer an all �

Anyway enough waffle

My main point is I am having difficulty identifying what sort of input is now useful, what sort of things are finalised? what topics are dead ? Where is further detail from players required?

For example

Are more suggestions on strategic options for the various powers useful ?
Rules clarifications are there any outstanding? Are they finalised?
Are more tactical suggestions similar to the topical naval txpt thread required?
Is it now sensible to be asking for features that are essentially �gold-plating� the game interface? Feature creep is something I dread at work.

Any way I�ve started this in a new thread and await, with a certain amount of trepidation it must be said, the response of the veterans.

I like questions and I love suggestions. Mercifully a lot of others help answer the questions. Rules clarifications are not finalized and there is always the possibility that a new wrinkle will appear. There is a thread on that topic and you can post your thoughts there.

You might read through the tutorial threads. I will be doing a lot more work on them and comments there are a reflection of your own tastes and previous experiences. I would like the tutorials to be robust = clearly commnicate to players of all levels and backgrounds.

The AI Opponents (1 thread per major power) could always use more advice. However, I expect to post summaries of all the previous comments within the next month or two. That will provide a better structure for comments, since right now they all tend to be rambling collections of ideas.

Asking for features never hurts. I have made decisions already on thousands of aspects of the game - and I loathe going back and reevaluating decisions once I have finalized them. On the other hand, there are are still more elements yet to be coded, and they are wide open for commentary. Indeed, I will openly solicit comments before making final decisions. On occasions too numerous to count, I have trashed my ideas for better ones, or integrated forum suggestions into my design decisions. Because of that the game is vastly improved from what I would have created in isolation.

Oh, and welcome.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to dale1066)

Post #: 2

RE: Forum debate - 6/24/2007 12:20:49 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dale1066
Are more suggestions on strategic options for the various powers useful ?

I believe that the more the better. Even if you repeat something already said, no problem, this will strengthen that point of view.

quote:

Rules clarifications are there any outstanding? Are they finalised?

The questions have been sent to Harry (the first tenth) and are awaiting answers. But if you have new questions, ask them anyway. If your question is old indeed, you'll have an answer at least.

quote:

Are more tactical suggestions similar to the topical naval txpt thread required?

Again I would say, the more the better.
I hope this will allow players to learn things, or Steve to better understand what is possible within the game.

quote:

Is it now sensible to be asking for features that are essentially �gold-plating� the game interface? Feature creep is something I dread at work.

I think that as Steve said, asking never hurts, and if what you ask is possible, cheap in creating time, and add to the game, it would be a shame not to ask.

(in reply to dale1066)

Post #: 3

RE: Forum debate - 6/24/2007 12:21:09 PM

jesperpehrson

Posts: 1052
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline

If nothing else you are welcome in contributing with the writing of writeups for the various units in the game. As is anyone. We could really use an extra hand :-)

- Jesper

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 4

RE: Forum debate - 6/24/2007 5:07:30 PM

dale1066

Posts: 108
Joined: 6/23/2007
Status: offline

No Probs
where and how do I need to put the requisite info? and for what units? is there a list maintained of what is done? and outstanding?
Also what about provinence of the data ? I work in an area which does something similar for current mil systems just trawling the net
is not really on ? I assume that sources would need to be quoted?

(in reply to jesperpehrson)

Post #: 5

RE: Forum debate - 6/24/2007 9:39:24 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dale1066

No Probs
where and how do I need to put the requisite info? and for what units? is there a list maintained of what is done? and outstanding?
Also what about provinence of the data ? I work in an area which does something similar for current mil systems just trawling the net
is not really on ? I assume that sources would need to be quoted?

Capitan is in charge of the land units (about 30% done). Greyshaft has done most of the air units (98%). And Terje439 is coordinating the naval unit writeups (about 60% done). Any and all of these people would like some help I suspect. If you send them a PM (personal message) they can tell you what remains on the todo list.

For numerous examples of what has been completed so far (content and style issues too), see the thread Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land.

Thanks for offering to help.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to dale1066)

Post #: 6