Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: AI vs Rules

 
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 >> RE: AI vs Rules Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/6/2010 11:04:51 AM   
oscar72se

 

Posts: 100
Joined: 8/28/2006
From: Gothenburg Sweden
Status: offline 		Here´s a crazy idea. Wouldn't it be simpler if Steve just created a set of options which are available when playing with AI enabled? That way it just might be possible to finish the AI within the next couple of years... When AI mk 1 is finished, it will be possible to expand the "AI game" to include some variation to the options available. Just an idea...

(in reply to fallgelb)
Post #: 31
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/6/2010 11:41:47 AM   
BallyJ

 

Posts: 142
Joined: 5/25/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: oscar72se

Here´s a crazy idea. Wouldn't it be simpler if Steve just created a set of options which are available when playing with AI enabled? That way it just might be possible to finish the AI within the next couple of years... When AI mk 1 is finished, it will be possible to expand the "AI game" to include some variation to the options available. Just an idea...

At first sight this sounds like an idea worth thinking about.
regards John

(in reply to oscar72se)
Post #: 32
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/6/2010 12:27:14 PM   
Skanvak

 

Posts: 577
Joined: 4/3/2005
Status: offline 		Yep, this was just the idea of brianbrian, that I put up again. I'd like that there is some meaningful thinking on this one.

_____________________________


Best regards

Skanvak

(in reply to BallyJ)
Post #: 33
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/6/2010 12:46:45 PM   
pzgndr

 

Posts: 3170
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		Since the game will have default options for novice, standard and enhanced levels of play, it may be worthwhile to prioritize AI performance accordingly. Ensure the release version AI is fully capable at the novice level and continue to improve the higher levels with patches. It may also be worth restricting the AI to the three default options? No telling what may happen with some of the option combinations some folks may want to experiment with...

(in reply to Skanvak)
Post #: 34
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/6/2010 2:03:06 PM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline 		I'm pretty sure the first few decisions along those lines have already been made actually, and contrary to what you may think, plenty of players of the game choose a stripped down version to play. Of two of the best players I know, one prefers to play without divisions and another prefers not using pilots. It is easier for humans to reach the end of the game that way. Another good friend of mine just had to mothball a game on orders of the ultimate Commander-in-Chief ... the game's host's wife. They have been playing a game of Super Deluxe with every bell and whistle, meeting once a month; their game was proceeding in about real-time that way in that in just over three years of gaming, they had just reached 1943. Playing World in Flames electronically will be good protection from the nemesis' of monster games, cats and significant others, but it still takes a loooooong time to make all the decisions for hundreds if not scores of hundreds of pieces, and plenty of electronic games don't make it all the way to 1945 either. It might not seem that way in the heady days of 1940 when the action is brisk, but start fighting a half-dozen Bounce Combats per impulse from the mid game onwards and things start to drag. So an AI with a bit less of the esoterica that _could_ be included won't be that much of a compromise. In My Opinion.

(in reply to pzgndr)
Post #: 35
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/6/2010 2:22:19 PM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline 		Oh and I'm positive Steve's AI will be able to protect a hex like Ploesti from any threat, though even human beings can have a tough time defending key hexes from the cunning double moves possible in WiF. There are very few hexes in the game with more than one resource in them, and they are all crucial places to defend, whether oil rules and the option to let some bomber units drop paratroopers is in use or not. In fact the routine to recognize such threats is already mostly done from the work already completed to set up the minor countries. Where I see the AI potentially creating the most difficulty is in teaching it smart but esoteric things to do while on the offensive, such as repairing captured factories with engineer units, or using a good screen of light cruisers to maintain a solid naval perimeter when using Cruisers in Flames and the Presence of the Enemy rule. Plenty of players pass on doing those two things in 3D games and I wouldn't miss them in the AI.

In a game this weekend, my Royal Marines were presented with a very decent chance to march on Berlin in the late fall of 1942, but I know how to play the game and I passed on this opportunity. Nothing crushes a newbie to the game more than triumphantly marching the Polish cavalry in to Berlin in October 1939 only to discover they get essentially no reward for that.

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 36
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/6/2010 4:14:12 PM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Phelan


quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Skanvak

The point is not that they are important or not, is that we are used to them now. It will be headhache to reach an agreement on which rule to drop and not. The group that did not get there favorite optional rule might just not buy the game. What I try to say is that for grognard to buy it, it will need to be as the paper game is, otherwise it will lose its appeal for those that have played the game before and more so to those who are still playing it regularly. I hope I can make you understand the feeling. btw most optional rule where here to simplifie the boardgame to make it more manageable for poor human mind, nearly all optional rules are consider a plus or to say otherwise are the true rules, and the option is to not use then if you dont have the time or place. I hope it helps you umderstmds our point of view.

I am very happy that people who don t know the game are interested in it, don t take me wrong.

Thank you Skanvak for your clarification on how you feel about rules, I feel your pain[where have we heard that before] You speak of the Grognard buying this game well IMHO this game wont make any money for Matrix or Steve if the general gaming public does not buy it, and do you think they will care about all these extra rules they only want a game that is playable, remember War in the Pacific great game if your retired and dont have a family to feed and take care of and have 12 hours a day to give to it [time element] It seems to me everytime I ask a legitimate question about this game it turns into a semi-war which is not what I meant it to be, Geez guys every rule cant be that important could it I am sure every board game player will buy this game, is there any idea [estimate] how many players have the board game?

Bo


I´m not sure the analogy to War in the Pacific is accurate. Games designed as computer games from scratch have a LOT of little details and values for each and every unit etc, simply because when you are not limited to a set number of counters with fixed values you can do that. MWiF, being based on a boardgame, is actually... shall we say "chunky" in comparison. The tactical and strategic options in WiF are at least as interesting, but the time you spend on the game are spent on making choices, not micromanaging a zillion units. (Most strategic computer games these days, <hrrmmm Paradox hrmmm>, swamp their games with a thousand details and chrome to cover up the fact that the AI sucks, hoping people will be happy just building detailed stuff.)

A lot of the optional rules are actually such a standard to most WiF groups. They add a lot in play value but don´t really require a lot of extra time to play. If one wanted to make AI programming a little easier with regards to effects of optionals, I think it would make more sense to make some of the optionals always included instead of discarding any.

Hi Phelan thank you for your thoughts appreciate it, I think I am being a little misunderstood about the rules thing, what I was comparing was MWIF vs WITP time element meaning both are a monster[size] of a game and I have seen posts where a lot of players have now put it in storage, on the hard drive of course. The reason seems to be in donating so much time to it at the cost of family needs and if your single your social life [married people dont have any] My whole point and now it seems not a good one was how do we [meaning Steve not us] get this game to the customer, Steve showed me a couple posts back what he has to go through just on a small segment of naval moves and if he has to do that with every rule coming down the pike I think our wait will be very long indeed, it is not a dig of anykind, to me its telling it like it is.

Bo

(in reply to Phelan)
Post #: 37
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/6/2010 4:18:07 PM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline 		sorry about this one how do you delete a post?

Bo

< Message edited by bo -- 7/6/2010 4:22:38 PM >

(in reply to oscar72se)
Post #: 38
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/6/2010 4:19:49 PM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bo


quote:

ORIGINAL: oscar72se

Here´s a crazy idea. Wouldn't it be simpler if Steve just created a set of options which are available when playing with AI enabled? That way it just might be possible to finish the AI within the next couple of years... When AI mk 1 is finished, it will be possible to expand the "AI game" to include some variation to the options available. Just an idea...


OUCH, next couple of years whew nice, yo Oscar I will be in nursing home, the cheapest one my wife or children can find without internet

Bo


(in reply to bo)
Post #: 39
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/6/2010 4:21:50 PM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

I'm pretty sure the first few decisions along those lines have already been made actually, and contrary to what you may think, plenty of players of the game choose a stripped down version to play. Of two of the best players I know, one prefers to play without divisions and another prefers not using pilots. It is easier for humans to reach the end of the game that way. Another good friend of mine just had to mothball a game on orders of the ultimate Commander-in-Chief ... the game's host's wife. They have been playing a game of Super Deluxe with every bell and whistle, meeting once a month; their game was proceeding in about real-time that way in that in just over three years of gaming, they had just reached 1943. Playing World in Flames electronically will be good protection from the nemesis' of monster games, cats and significant others, but it still takes a loooooong time to make all the decisions for hundreds if not scores of hundreds of pieces, and plenty of electronic games don't make it all the way to 1945 either. It might not seem that way in the heady days of 1940 when the action is brisk, but start fighting a half-dozen Bounce Combats per impulse from the mid game onwards and things start to drag. So an AI with a bit less of the esoterica that _could_ be included won't be that much of a compromise. In My Opinion.


AMEN Brian

Bo

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 40
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/6/2010 6:02:24 PM   
wworld7


Posts: 1727
Joined: 2/25/2003
From: The Nutmeg State
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

OUCH, next couple of years whew nice, yo Oscar I will be in nursing home, the cheapest one my wife or children can find without internet
Bo


Just hope the roof doesn't leak over your bed and that the food is bearable.



_____________________________

Flipper

(in reply to bo)
Post #: 41
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/6/2010 11:16:44 PM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: flipperwasirish


quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

OUCH, next couple of years whew nice, yo Oscar I will be in nursing home, the cheapest one my wife or children can find without internet
Bo


Just hope the roof doesn't leak over your bed and that the food is bearable.


Hmmmm my family mentioned something about how very little wapum I have left in my IRA [Irish republican Army]I wonder if tents leak on the Lakota Sioux reservation in Nebraska, and they will be replacing my beloved pasta with ugh Buffalo meat, its about all I can afford right now

Bo


< Message edited by bo -- 7/7/2010 12:53:27 AM >

(in reply to wworld7)
Post #: 42
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/6/2010 11:21:51 PM   
Bibs

 

Posts: 29
Joined: 7/11/2001
From: Cincinnati
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

sorry about this one how do you delete a post?

Bo


Yes, please tell me how to delete Bo's posts.


_____________________________

John Bibler

(in reply to bo)
Post #: 43
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/7/2010 12:17:32 AM   
wworld7


Posts: 1727
Joined: 2/25/2003
From: The Nutmeg State
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bo
and they will be replacing my beloved pasta with ugh Buffalo meat, its about all I can afford right now

Bo


You are mistaken if you think Buffalo meat is cheap. You better plan on having your family go to the local McDonald's for you each day they visit....

_____________________________

Flipper

(in reply to bo)
Post #: 44
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/7/2010 12:52:34 AM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bibs


quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

sorry about this one how do you delete a post?

Bo


Yes, please tell me how to delete Bo's posts.


Bibs I like that, cool, all of them Bibs or just the negative ones, oooooops their all negative to some people Wow Bibs 2.5 posts a year not bad Drop in again next year please.

Bo

(in reply to Bibs)
Post #: 45
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/7/2010 12:54:08 AM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: flipperwasirish

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo
and they will be replacing my beloved pasta with ugh Buffalo meat, its about all I can afford right now

Bo


You are mistaken if you think Buffalo meat is cheap. You better plan on having your family go to the local McDonald's for you each day they visit....

Visit?

Bo

(in reply to wworld7)
Post #: 46
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/7/2010 4:24:50 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bibs


quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

sorry about this one how do you delete a post?

Bo


Yes, please tell me how to delete Bo's posts.


heh heh. LOL

Edit: That's an average of 573 posts between the two of us.

< Message edited by paulderynck -- 7/7/2010 4:35:00 AM >

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Bibs)
Post #: 47
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/7/2010 4:53:20 AM   
wworld7


Posts: 1727
Joined: 2/25/2003
From: The Nutmeg State
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bo
Visit?

Bo


I can't picture your loving family just rolling you up to the home in a wheel-barrel and dumping you out and never visiting you?

If this is the case I would advise you to come up with an alternate plan like moving in with the cheerleaders at a local college (live or die you'll have FUN).

Good luck!!!


_____________________________

Flipper

(in reply to bo)
Post #: 48
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/7/2010 6:22:21 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

Hmmmm my family mentioned something about how very little wapum I have left in my IRA [Irish republican Army]
Bo

Warspite1

Bo - what does that mean?

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to bo)
Post #: 49
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/7/2010 3:45:01 PM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

Hmmmm my family mentioned something about how very little wapum I have left in my IRA [Irish republican Army]
Bo

Warspite1

Bo - what does that mean?

Ouch I hope I have not offened you in anyway Warspite with the IRA remark, I was just joking around with Flipperwasirish, I am retired and some of my funds come from my IRA account [Individual Retirement Account] [IRA] and because I am assuming flipper is Irish I just threw that in, probably a bad choice of words to an English gentlemen and for that I apologize to you, I consider England our firmest friend in this crazy world and condemn the antics and policies of the modern IRA.

Bo

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 50
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/7/2010 3:54:07 PM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bibs


quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

sorry about this one how do you delete a post?

Bo


Yes, please tell me how to delete Bo's posts.


heh heh. LOL

Edit: That's an average of 573 posts between the two of us.

Really nice Paul are you agreeing with his delete Bo's post or you just added his posts to yours and divided by two or both.

Bo

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 51
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/7/2010 4:07:53 PM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline 		Please can we get back to this rule thing, it sounds like at least to me that most posters here would rather wait an indefinite amount of time to get all the alternate rules in then to get this game to market in a more reasonable time without some of the rules, not being negative at all or trying to stir the pot just like to know the thinking on this, please remember that the only knowledge I have of this game is the CWIF I just purchased and it has some rules but probably not up to date ones. I realize that once all the rules are in that Steve will have programmed the game so you will not be able to make an error on this rule or that rule which will be a lot better than having to read a rule over and over in the board game. Not being negative about rules just the time to do each one.

Bo

(in reply to oscar72se)
Post #: 52
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/7/2010 9:01:38 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

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

ORIGINAL: bo

Please can we get back to this rule thing, it sounds like at least to me that most posters here would rather wait an indefinite amount of time to get all the alternate rules in then to get this game to market in a more reasonable time without some of the rules, not being negative at all or trying to stir the pot just like to know the thinking on this, please remember that the only knowledge I have of this game is the CWIF I just purchased and it has some rules but probably not up to date ones. I realize that once all the rules are in that Steve will have programmed the game so you will not be able to make an error on this rule or that rule which will be a lot better than having to read a rule over and over in the board game. Not being negative about rules just the time to do each one.

Bo

Here's my current status list for the optional rules. It should be pretty self explanatory. Those with xxx are not part of the initial release but will be added as 'patches' at no additional cost. New indicates those optional rules which are not part of CWIF.

Somewhere I have a list of which optional rules the AI Opponent will agree to play with - which is not all of these 81 options. 
// ****************************************************************************
// DONE: 54 rules                    7/7/2010.
// New: 24 rules = 74 hours = 23 hours (immediate) + 51 hours (later).
// Check: 1 rule = 1 hour.
// Mods: 2 rules = 6 hours.
// Total: 81 rules = 86 hours = 30 hours (immediate) + 51 hours (later).
// ****************************************************************************
	TOptions = record // 53 done, 24 new, 1 check, 3 mods, 86 hours
  	Divisions: Boolean;                    // 0   #2 s. 22.4.1           DONE
    Artillery: Boolean;                    // 1   #3 s. 22.4.2           DONE
    Fortifications: Boolean;               // 2   #5 s. 22.4.9           DONE
    SupplyUnits: Boolean;                  // 3   #6 s. 22.4.10          DONE
    CombatEngineers: Boolean;              // 4   #7 s. 22.4.1 (combat)  DONE
    FlyingBoats: Boolean;                  // 5   #8 s. 2.3.1            DONE
    Territorials: Boolean;                 // 6   #10 s. 22.4.5          DONE
    LimitedOverseasSupply: Boolean;        // 7   #11 s. 2.4.2           DONE
    LimitedSupplyAcrossStraits: Boolean;   // 8   #12 s. 2.4.2, 11.10    DONE
  	HQSupport: Boolean;                    // 9   #13 s. 11.16.2         DONE
    EmergencyHQSupply: Boolean;            // 10  #13 s. 2.4.3           DONE
    SyntheticOilPlants: Boolean;           // 11  #14 s. 22.4.11         DONE
    OffCityReinforcement: Boolean;         // 12  #15 s. 4.2             DONE
  	RecruitmentLimits: Boolean;            // 13  #16 s. 4.2             New-2   xxx
    HQMovement: Boolean;                   // 14  #17 s. 11.11.2         DONE
  	BottomedShips: Boolean;                // 15  #18 s. 11.2            DONE
  	InThePresenceOfTheEnemy: Boolean;      // 16  #19 s. 11.4.2          DONE
  	SurprisedZOCs: Boolean;                // 17  #20 s. 2.2             New-2   xxx
    BounceCombat: Boolean;                 // 18  #22 s. 14.3.3          New-6   xxx
  	VWeapons: Boolean;                     // 19  #23 s. 11.7.1          New-1   xxx
  	AtomicBombs: Boolean;                  // 20  #23 s. 11.7.1          New-1   xxx
  	Frogmen: Boolean;                      // 21  #24 s. 22.4.3          New-3   xxx
  	SCSTransport: Boolean;                 // 22  #25 s. 11.4.5          DONE
  	AmphibiousRules: Boolean;              // 23  #26 s. 22.4.12         DONE
  	OptionalCVSearching: Boolean;          // 24  #27 s. 11.5.5          DONE
  	Pilots: Boolean;                       // 25  #28 s. 11.2, 14.6      DONE
    FoodInFlames: Boolean;                 // 26  #29 s. 13.6.1          New-2
    FactoryConstruction: Boolean;          // 27  #30 s. 22.2, 13.6.8    Check-1
  	SavingResources: Boolean;              // 28  #31 s. 13.5.1          DONE
  	CarpetBombing: Boolean;                // 29  #32 s. 11.8            DONE
  	TankBusters: Boolean;                  // 30  #33 s. 11.9            DONE
  	MotorizedMovementRates: Boolean;       // 31  #34 s. 11.11.2         DONE
  	BomberATR: Boolean;                    // 32  #35 s. 11.12           DONE
    LargeATR: Boolean;                     // 33  #36 s. 11.12           DONE
    RailwayMovement: Boolean;              // 34  #37 s. 11.11.2         DONE
    DefensiveShoreBombardment: Boolean;    // 35  #38 s. 11.16.2         DONE
    BlitzBonus: Boolean;                   // 36  #39 s. 11.16.1         DONE
  	ChineseAttackWeakness: Boolean;        // 37  #40 s. 11.16.5         DONE
  	FractionalOdds: Boolean;               // 38  #41 s. 11.16.5         DONE
    AlliedCombatFriction: Boolean;         // 39  #42 s. 11.16.5         DONE
    TwoD10LandCRT: Boolean;                // 40  #43 s. 11.16.6         DONE
  	ExtendedAircraftRebasing: Boolean;     // 41  #44 s. 11.17           DONE
    VariableReorganizationCosts: Boolean;  // 42  #45 s. 13.6.3          DONE
    Partisans: Boolean;                    // 43  #46 s. 13.1            DONE
    IsolatedReorganizationLimits: Boolean; // 44  #47 s. 13.5            DONE
  	OilRules: Boolean;                     // 45  #48 s. 13.5.1          DONE
    HitlersWar: Boolean;                   // 46  #49 s. 13.3.2          New-2   xxx
  	USSRJapanCompulsoryPeace: Boolean;     // 47  #50 s. 13.7.3          New-2
  	EnrouteInterception: Boolean;          // 48  #51 s. 14.2.1          New-6   xxx
  	NightMissions: Boolean;                // 49  #52 s. 14.2.3, 22.4.2  DONE
  	TwinEnginedFighters: Boolean;          // 50  #53 s. 14.3.2          DONE
  	FighterBombers: Boolean;               // 51  #54 s. 14.3.2          DONE
  	BackupFighters: Boolean;               // 52  #55 s. 14.3.2          DONE
    CarrierPlanes: Boolean;                // 53  #56 s. 4.2, 14,4,1     DONE
  	RoughSeas: Boolean;                    // 54  #75 s 22.4.6           New-1
  	LimitedAircraftInterception: Boolean;  // 55  #57 s. 14.2.1          New-2   xxx
  	Internment: Boolean;                   // 56  #58 s. 19.1            New-2
  	FlyingBombs: Boolean;                  // 57  #59 s. 14.7            New-2
  	Kamikazes: Boolean;                    // 58  #60 s. 14.8            New-2
  	Offensive: Boolean;                    // 59  #61 s. 16              DONE
    Ukraine: Boolean;                      // 60  #62 s. 19.12           New-4   xxx
  	Intelligence: Boolean;                 // 61  #63 s. 22.1            New-15  xxx
  	JapaneseCommandConflict: Boolean;      // 62  #64 s. 22.3            New-1   xxx
  	SkiTroops: Boolean;                    // 63  #65 s. 22.4.1          DONE
  	Queens: Boolean;                       // 64  #66 s. 22.4.4          DONE
    CityBasedVolunteers: Boolean;          // 65  #67 s. 22.4.8          Mods-2
  	Siberians: Boolean;                    // 66  #68 s. 22.4.7          DONE
  	NavalSupplyUnits: Boolean;             // 67  #69 s. 22.4.13         DONE
    GuardsBannerArmies: Boolean;           // 68  #70 s. 22.4.14         New-2
    ChineseWarlords: Boolean;              // 69  #71 s. 22.4.15         New-1
    PartisanHQs: Boolean;                  // 70  #72 s. 22.4.16         New-2   xxx
    CruisersInFlames: Boolean;             // 71  #75 s. 22.4.6          DONE
    ConvoysInFlames: Boolean;              // 72  #76 s. 22.4.6          New-8
    OilTankers: Boolean;                   // 73  #76 s. 22.4.6          New-4   xxx
    ConstructionEngineers: Boolean;        // 74  #7 s. 22.4.1           DONE
    ScrapUnits: Boolean;                   // 75  MWIF addition          DONE
    AddChineseCities: Boolean;             // 76  MWIF addition          DONE
    UnlimitedBreakdown: Boolean;           // 77  MWIF addition          Mods-4
    ExtendedGame: Boolean;                 // 78  MWIF addition          DONE
    BreakingNaziSovietPact: Boolean;       // 79  MWIF addition          DONE
    NavalOffensiveChit: Boolean;           // 80  #61 s. 16              New-2
//    UnrestrictedSetup: Boolean;            // xx  MWIF 2 addition        Dropped.


_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to bo)
Post #: 53
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/7/2010 9:44:48 PM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline 		Thank you Steve for the information. Boolean?

Bo

(in reply to oscar72se)
Post #: 54
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/7/2010 10:35:28 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bo


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

Hmmmm my family mentioned something about how very little wapum I have left in my IRA [Irish republican Army]
Bo

Warspite1

Bo - what does that mean?

Ouch I hope I have not offened you in anyway Warspite with the IRA remark, I was just joking around with Flipperwasirish, I am retired and some of my funds come from my IRA account [Individual Retirement Account] [IRA] and because I am assuming flipper is Irish I just threw that in, probably a bad choice of words to an English gentlemen and for that I apologize to you, I consider England our firmest friend in this crazy world and condemn the antics and policies of the modern IRA.

Bo
Warspite1

Okay thanks, no problem - I just didn't understand the whole sentence i.e what wapum was and how that fitted in to a sentence about the IRA - and no big deal.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to bo)
Post #: 55
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/8/2010 4:40:01 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bo


quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bibs


quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

sorry about this one how do you delete a post?

Bo


Yes, please tell me how to delete Bo's posts.


heh heh. LOL

Edit: That's an average of 573 posts between the two of us.

Really nice Paul are you agreeing with his delete Bo's post or you just added his posts to yours and divided by two or both.

Bo

I have no idea what your talking about.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to bo)
Post #: 56
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/8/2010 4:48:22 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:


quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

Hmmmm my family mentioned something about how very little wapum I have left in my IRA [Irish republican Army]
Bo

Warspite1

Bo - what does that mean?

Warspite1

Okay thanks, no problem - I just didn't understand the whole sentence i.e what wapum was and how that fitted in to a sentence about the IRA - and no big deal.


Well "wapum" means nothing but is likely a mis-spelling of "wampum" which is North American Indian for "money".

Thus potentially insulting two different ethnicities in one sentence... Nice.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 57
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/8/2010 8:38:45 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

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

ORIGINAL: bo

Thank you Steve for the information. Boolean?

Bo

Boolean variables are True/False. Boolean logic is branching logic based on binary operations and branches: AND, OR, NOT, et al.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to bo)
Post #: 58
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/8/2010 3:51:52 PM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:


quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

Hmmmm my family mentioned something about how very little wapum I have left in my IRA [Irish republican Army]
Bo

Warspite1

Bo - what does that mean?

Warspite1

Okay thanks, no problem - I just didn't understand the whole sentence i.e what wapum was and how that fitted in to a sentence about the IRA - and no big deal.


Well "wapum" means nothing but is likely a mis-spelling of "wampum" which is North American Indian for "money".

Thus potentially insulting two different ethnicities in one sentence... Nice.

Now Now Paul, nice huh! I have no idea what your talking about, now does that sound familiar, I explained to Warspite what I meant and he accepted it and now you are trying to drum up trouble with that last really stupid accusation go back to eating your voting chits and dont say you dont know what I am talking about PLEASE! I know I am insulting someone but not Englishmen and Indians, and not potentially believe me.

Bo

< Message edited by bo -- 7/8/2010 5:48:09 PM >

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 59
RE: AI vs Rules - 7/8/2010 5:47:19 PM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: bo

Thank you Steve for the information. Boolean?

Bo

Boolean variables are True/False. Boolean logic is branching logic based on binary operations and branches: AND, OR, NOT, et al.

Cool, errr how many Booleans have to be done yet

Bo

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: AI vs Rules Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.984