Interesting but...

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Interesting but...

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 >> Interesting but...

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Interesting but... - 3/16/2017 11:32:29 AM

wolfe69

Posts: 10
Joined: 3/16/2017
Status: offline

Wasn't sure if this game is for me, sadly it doesn't have AI after what I review the official page. My questions is that what do I get if I buy this? Is it hard to find players??

The only things that worries me that if there is no AI, how do factions manage to play out this game? Note there can be minor factions and majors, not sure how many players is needed to set this up. The odd for one or more players leaving the game and surely ruin the game itself.

So this game is pretty pricey, not sure how much it would be in USD. At the official site, you see three hardcover books, etc. Does that comes in with it too?

Anyway I need to do some research on this and see if I am willing to buy it and play it, I may or may not like it, but I do like complex war games.

After doing some research, I decided not to get this.

< Message edited by wolfe69 -- 3/16/2017 12:00:03 PM >

Post #: 1

RE: Interesting but... - 3/16/2017 1:45:03 PM

davidachamberlain

Posts: 326
Joined: 1/21/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wolfe69

Wasn't sure if this game is for me, sadly it doesn't have AI after what I review the official page. My questions is that what do I get if I buy this? Is it hard to find players??

The only things that worries me that if there is no AI, how do factions manage to play out this game? Note there can be minor factions and majors, not sure how many players is needed to set this up. The odd for one or more players leaving the game and surely ruin the game itself.

So this game is pretty pricey, not sure how much it would be in USD. At the official site, you see three hardcover books, etc. Does that comes in with it too?

Anyway I need to do some research on this and see if I am willing to buy it and play it, I may or may not like it, but I do like complex war games.

After doing some research, I decided not to get this.

Sorry to see that you made your decision to not try the game.

I do understand the interest in the AI, but frankly, I don't think that this will ever be a good fully capable AI game.

You mentioned that like complex games. This is probably the most strategically complex games I have ever encountered. To play out the entire WWII with a world map of thousands of hexes and thousands of units of hundreds of types representing 7 major powers over 6 years (36 turns) is something that I can not imagine an AI being able to be able to represent competitively. Chess has only 32 pieces comprised of 6 types of pieces representing 2 sides on a playing board of 64 squares. I think that this will probably always be a game for just humans. An AI can help make the game easier and faster, but this is a full scale war game with lots of complex rules.

Your research should have told you that the games is US$99.99 and that the hard cover books are optional, but will impact shipping costs, since that extra couple pounds of weight has a cost to ship, but the books can be downloaded to save that and is okay to work with.

There are a good number of players in the Netplay community, but many are in different timezones. There are some in US and Canada and others in Europe and others in Asia. I am not sure how reliable that will be for regular play.

I play with a group of friends in other cities in North America who I played the cardboard and paper version of the game for many years before we went our separate ways across the continent - currently in 3 timezones. Our experience was over several years playing for a day per week for several months. Now, we are trying this with a combination of Netplay and TeamViewer with 4 (of the 6) playing. Each has their own copy of the game, but currently Netplay is limited to 2 player - that is where Teamviewer comes in. We manage to get in a few hours every week or two and that will take some time to get through. Others may be able to play more often.

I suggest that if you are keen (though not now), you check with those who are posting the After Action Reports. You might be able to set up something to allow you to get in a small game on one of the simpler scenarios. You might also consider checking if someone might be willing to try a game out with you using Teamviewer to get the experience of setup and playing a few turns.

Personally, I think it is a very good game. Between my Netplay sessions, I have been playing the game solitaire. I give that more credit now than I started with. It amazes me how challenging this can be as solitaire. You do know the strategy for both sides, but the fog of war (weather and combat results) throws a wrench into that strategy and keeps the game fresh. It also helps me to better prepare for the real game between sessions by wargaming the potential results so that in that game, I have a better idea on the strategy.

I will leave that decision to you, but you might want to consider checking things out.

Again, regarding the AI, it is expected to be developed at some point, but I can not imagine it as being satisfying since the game is so complex.

Dave

(in reply to wolfe69)

Post #: 2

RE: Interesting but... - 3/16/2017 1:57:45 PM

wolfe69

Posts: 10
Joined: 3/16/2017
Status: offline

I think I would wait and see how this project goes, esp when it is on sale. For the game and the books, that is almost two-hundred dollars and not looking forward to that at all.

I do enjoy playing War in the Pacific, best game I have played after all. Didn't care for War in the West/East, didn't have much actions to see what going on in the fields.

(in reply to davidachamberlain)

Post #: 3

RE: Interesting but... - 3/16/2017 4:06:51 PM

davidachamberlain

Posts: 326
Joined: 1/21/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wolfe69

I think I would wait and see how this project goes, esp when it is on sale. For the game and the books, that is almost two-hundred dollars and not looking forward to that at all.

I do enjoy playing War in the Pacific, best game I have played after all. Didn't care for War in the West/East, didn't have much actions to see what going on in the fields.

You missed the half price deal during December. I am not sure when that happens.

The game AND the books is only $100 (I bought on sale and paid $50 + shipping). You might be thinking about the huge maps. Those are not required. Shipping costs are the only addition for the books. You don't need them either as you can download them.

Otherwise, I am not sure where the extra hundred comes in.

Dave

(in reply to wolfe69)

Post #: 4

RE: Interesting but... - 3/16/2017 4:44:13 PM

Centuur

Posts: 8802
Joined: 6/3/2011
From: Hoorn (NED).
Status: offline

It depends on where he lives. Sometimes there are import taxes to be paid for the books too...

_____________________________

Peter

(in reply to davidachamberlain)

Post #: 5

RE: Interesting but... - 3/16/2017 5:27:01 PM

wolfe69

Posts: 10
Joined: 3/16/2017
Status: offline

Ah too bad I missed the half price deal back in December, after I saw that huge map and it mention comes in with those books. So didn't know you can get those if you order the game separately. Well guess I will have to wait til next December for the sale begin.

(in reply to Centuur)

Post #: 6

RE: Interesting but... - 3/17/2017 2:26:15 AM

brian brian

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline

I own a core amount of the hex and cardboard counter games I found to be the best in my collection from the 80s. A few Avalon Hill classics for nostalgia, a few for the quality of the simulation such as Berg's 'Great Battles of the American Civil War', a few simplistic simulations but intense games (Victory in the Pacific), and some various operational Strategy & Tactics issue games on interesting subjects ('Desert Fox' is a particularly good look at Egypt/Libya in WWII and who got shipments of tanks, when).

Most of my games from then I sold off long ago.

But the only hex and cardboard game I actually play, and I don't play electronic wargames, is World in Flames. It is a triumph of both detail and simplicity, simultaneously. Someone mentioned the total number of types of units in the game, which sounded like a daunting number. But if you have any interest in WWII at all the units are just right. If you don't understand ahead of time that an AMPH is used to land infantry on an enemy beach you won't ever be starting a game like this anyway.

What the game truly simulates is the decision making at the highest level. A national leader has various figures to deal with to direct a war - diplomats, Generals, Admirals, bureaucrats. No one can predict how a new weapon design will actually perform in combat. Weather forecasting in the 1940s was still in it's infancy. No Supreme Leader, not even Hitler and Stalin, was omnipotent. The game puts you in their shoes and forces you to accept constraints - you can't do everything at once. Players experienced with other games initially hate this sometimes. But ultimately this is what brings you back to the game, over and over. Can you conceive a plan for what will happen in the war, next year, and follow that through with what you want from your diplomats, Generals, Admirals, and bureaucrats while dodging the slings and arrows of Fortune (the dice)?

Conversely, I have seen a friend show off some of the features of War in the Pacific. I would like to play it some day but do I really need to know how many artillery tubes a Chinese infantry division deployed to Burma still has in operation or exactly how many P-40s and Hellcats are on 4 different islands up and down The Slot ... or do I just want to order the Chinese infantry to approach Mandalay from the north while I send up a maximum fighter cover over a landing force approaching New Britain from the sea lanes to the north rather than the less surprising safety of the Coral Sea?

Maximum historical detail is interesting at times; conversely in WiF the binary combat loss mechanisms of either on the map or off the map seems a poor representation of permanent attritional combat and simplifications of less-than-precise OOBs can be distracting at first. But to me what is ultimately the most satisfying is seeing if my Panzers can actually cross the Volga, not which historical unit does it first or what kind of tank they are currently issued.

So I could ramble on about World in Flames at random for a while, but it is the only game I play because it is a great game that feels like being in charge of WWII, even while not knowing the air speed velocity of a laden swallow, be it African or European.

< Message edited by brian brian -- 3/17/2017 2:27:56 AM >

(in reply to wolfe69)

Post #: 7

RE: Interesting but... - 3/17/2017 1:26:41 PM

Centuur

Posts: 8802
Joined: 6/3/2011
From: Hoorn (NED).
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

I own a core amount of the hex and cardboard counter games I found to be the best in my collection from the 80s. A few Avalon Hill classics for nostalgia, a few for the quality of the simulation such as Berg's 'Great Battles of the American Civil War', a few simplistic simulations but intense games (Victory in the Pacific), and some various operational Strategy & Tactics issue games on interesting subjects ('Desert Fox' is a particularly good look at Egypt/Libya in WWII and who got shipments of tanks, when).

Most of my games from then I sold off long ago.

But the only hex and cardboard game I actually play, and I don't play electronic wargames, is World in Flames. It is a triumph of both detail and simplicity, simultaneously. Someone mentioned the total number of types of units in the game, which sounded like a daunting number. But if you have any interest in WWII at all the units are just right. If you don't understand ahead of time that an AMPH is used to land infantry on an enemy beach you won't ever be starting a game like this anyway.

What the game truly simulates is the decision making at the highest level. A national leader has various figures to deal with to direct a war - diplomats, Generals, Admirals, bureaucrats. No one can predict how a new weapon design will actually perform in combat. Weather forecasting in the 1940s was still in it's infancy. No Supreme Leader, not even Hitler and Stalin, was omnipotent. The game puts you in their shoes and forces you to accept constraints - you can't do everything at once. Players experienced with other games initially hate this sometimes. But ultimately this is what brings you back to the game, over and over. Can you conceive a plan for what will happen in the war, next year, and follow that through with what you want from your diplomats, Generals, Admirals, and bureaucrats while dodging the slings and arrows of Fortune (the dice)?

Conversely, I have seen a friend show off some of the features of War in the Pacific. I would like to play it some day but do I really need to know how many artillery tubes a Chinese infantry division deployed to Burma still has in operation or exactly how many P-40s and Hellcats are on 4 different islands up and down The Slot ... or do I just want to order the Chinese infantry to approach Mandalay from the north while I send up a maximum fighter cover over a landing force approaching New Britain from the sea lanes to the north rather than the less surprising safety of the Coral Sea?

Maximum historical detail is interesting at times; conversely in WiF the binary combat loss mechanisms of either on the map or off the map seems a poor representation of permanent attritional combat and simplifications of less-than-precise OOBs can be distracting at first. But to me what is ultimately the most satisfying is seeing if my Panzers can actually cross the Volga, not which historical unit does it first or what kind of tank they are currently issued.

So I could ramble on about World in Flames at random for a while, but it is the only game I play because it is a great game that feels like being in charge of WWII, even while not knowing the air speed velocity of a laden swallow, be it African or European.

And now for something completely different....

_____________________________

Peter

(in reply to brian brian)

Post #: 8

RE: Interesting but... - 3/17/2017 2:21:31 PM

pzgndr

Posts: 3170
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: davidachamberlain
I do understand the interest in the AI, but frankly, I don't think that this will ever be a good fully capable AI game...
Again, regarding the AI, it is expected to be developed at some point, but I can not imagine it as being satisfying since the game is so complex.

This is probably true for experienced players of the boardgame, but not true for everyone. But as you point out, since the game is so complex it makes the learning curve for new players quite steep. That makes it easy to make mistakes and miss opportunities, relatively simple things that veterans would not do and that an AI could be programmed to do efficiently. Steve seems confident enough and motivated to program the AI to be fully capable at the strategic, operational and tactical levels. I don't expect it to be brilliant or nefarious at the grand strategic level, but it should be challenging enough. At least for new players and casual players who will struggle just trying to play the game and understand all of its complexity. I remain optimistic that this will someday be a good fully capable AI game for most players, assuming Steve is able to finish this project over the next few years. I'm still patiently waiting for the half-map scenarios to get done, so I can play the ETO Fascist Tide scenario solo while I wait for the AI, someday...

_____________________________

Bill
Empires in Arms Development Team

(in reply to davidachamberlain)

Post #: 9

RE: Interesting but... - 3/17/2017 3:00:38 PM

davidachamberlain

Posts: 326
Joined: 1/21/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

This is probably true for experienced players of the boardgame, but not true for everyone. But as you point out, since the game is so complex it makes the learning curve for new players quite steep. That makes it easy to make mistakes and miss opportunities, relatively simple things that veterans would not do and that an AI could be programmed to do efficiently. Steve seems confident enough and motivated to program the AI to be fully capable at the strategic, operational and tactical levels. I don't expect it to be brilliant or nefarious at the grand strategic level, but it should be challenging enough. At least for new players and casual players who will struggle just trying to play the game and understand all of its complexity. I remain optimistic that this will someday be a good fully capable AI game for most players, assuming Steve is able to finish this project over the next few years. I'm still patiently waiting for the half-map scenarios to get done, so I can play the ETO Fascist Tide scenario solo while I wait for the AI, someday...

Actually, I don't think the rules are all that complicated. Most are pretty straight forward. Even the size of the rule book is not all that bad. Compare this game with Advanced Squad Leader. By comparison, it is simple.

My point was simply that for a computer to be a competent opponent, it has to keep track of a lot of things. With the number of major powers, hexes (of varying types), and units (of varying types), the number of decisions involved is pretty extreme for an AI to deal with. When compared with other AI driven games with 2 players, a few hundred hexes, a few dozen unit types, this is several orders of magnitude more complex.

There are probably ways to limit what needs to be done for any given turn, since I expect that only a very small percentage of hex locations, units on the map, types of units in play, and their status of out of supply, attacking, defending, etc. would probably reduce the number decisions required, it is still very large. I think the final design for that AI is probably worthy of a PHD thesis dissertation. I expect that IBM would be interested in using some of the technology involved in the decision optimization processes with Deep Blue or other cutting edge AI systems.

Dave

(in reply to pzgndr)

Post #: 10

RE: Interesting but... - 3/17/2017 9:02:04 PM

AllenK

Posts: 7259
Joined: 2/17/2014
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wolfe69

Wasn't sure if this game is for me, sadly it doesn't have AI after what I review the official page. My questions is that what do I get if I buy this? Is it hard to find players??

The only things that worries me that if there is no AI, how do factions manage to play out this game? Note there can be minor factions and majors, not sure how many players is needed to set this up. The odd for one or more players leaving the game and surely ruin the game itself.

So this game is pretty pricey, not sure how much it would be in USD. At the official site, you see three hardcover books, etc. Does that comes in with it too?

Anyway I need to do some research on this and see if I am willing to buy it and play it, I may or may not like it, but I do like complex war games.

After doing some research, I decided not to get this.

I think you are missing out by waiting for an AI opponent. I'd recommend you get it, play in solitaire mode (against yourself) to learn the mechanics, then see about finding an opponent. I'm sure you'll find someone in a close enough time zone to play using the E-mail play method documented in our AAR's. It's slower than Netplay but does allow you more time to work offline to plan and test moves. It also looks like Netplay is getting reasonably close to enabling 1 v 1 play online.

If you can both arrange to be available to play at the same time, it is pretty quick posting the various questions to your opponent and receiving the replies. It also writes an AAR at the same time if you do it via the forum.

My total experience in playing MWiF (WiF) is reflected in the AAR's I've contributed to. It's about 8 games so I'm still very much a beginner. My first was an account of the first solitaire game I played right through. Previous to this I'd done about 4-5 Global War set-ups to try out the game concepts and one start that was aborted after it became obvious it was flawed. I was then offered a game by Mayhemizer and we battled through a few AAR's with much enjoyment. We then broadened this to a 4-player game, which is even better (although slower) because of the team play aspect that I think WiF was really designed for. I suggest you follow our AAR's to see how factions play out the game.

In essence, if you want to play a grand strategic WW2 game, buy it, learn the mechanics and then jump in against a human opponent. If you do, you'll wonder why you ever wanted an AI.

As a caveat, there have been various bugs that we have had to discuss and find a mutually satisfactory workaround with our group in order to progress the game. Hopefully these will reduce in future updates.

Good luck

< Message edited by AllenK -- 3/17/2017 10:24:04 PM >

(in reply to wolfe69)

Post #: 11

RE: Interesting but... - 3/17/2017 9:43:51 PM

ncc1701e

Posts: 7380
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

quote:

ORIGINAL: davidachamberlain
I do understand the interest in the AI, but frankly, I don't think that this will ever be a good fully capable AI game...
Again, regarding the AI, it is expected to be developed at some point, but I can not imagine it as being satisfying since the game is so complex.

This is probably true for experienced players of the boardgame, but not true for everyone. But as you point out, since the game is so complex it makes the learning curve for new players quite steep. That makes it easy to make mistakes and miss opportunities, relatively simple things that veterans would not do and that an AI could be programmed to do efficiently. Steve seems confident enough and motivated to program the AI to be fully capable at the strategic, operational and tactical levels. I don't expect it to be brilliant or nefarious at the grand strategic level, but it should be challenging enough. At least for new players and casual players who will struggle just trying to play the game and understand all of its complexity. I remain optimistic that this will someday be a good fully capable AI game for most players, assuming Steve is able to finish this project over the next few years. I'm still patiently waiting for the half-map scenarios to get done, so I can play the ETO Fascist Tide scenario solo while I wait for the AI, someday...

I agree with you. I expect the AI to challenge me as a beginner to this game. Also, I do not have time to play with others right now and definitely the AI must entertain me.

(in reply to pzgndr)

Post #: 12

RE: Interesting but... - 3/17/2017 11:39:58 PM

brian brian

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline

I think the AI will start out great in the scenarios and seriously challenge people. Once that becomes dialed-in the ascent of Mt. Everest of AI Global War will begin.

The two intro scenarios of Barbarossa and Guadalcanal are the way to get into this game. They use the core air, land, and sea combat rules mostly, without much need for the economic or political rules, which comprise a large amount of the rules. The whole thing can be absorbed in portions this way.

(in reply to ncc1701e)

Post #: 13

RE: Interesting but... - 3/21/2017 7:57:00 AM

Joseignacio

Posts: 2449
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: davidachamberlain

quote:

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

This is probably true for experienced players of the boardgame, but not true for everyone. But as you point out, since the game is so complex it makes the learning curve for new players quite steep. That makes it easy to make mistakes and miss opportunities, relatively simple things that veterans would not do and that an AI could be programmed to do efficiently. Steve seems confident enough and motivated to program the AI to be fully capable at the strategic, operational and tactical levels. I don't expect it to be brilliant or nefarious at the grand strategic level, but it should be challenging enough. At least for new players and casual players who will struggle just trying to play the game and understand all of its complexity. I remain optimistic that this will someday be a good fully capable AI game for most players, assuming Steve is able to finish this project over the next few years. I'm still patiently waiting for the half-map scenarios to get done, so I can play the ETO Fascist Tide scenario solo while I wait for the AI, someday...

Actually, I don't think the rules are all that complicated. Most are pretty straight forward. Even the size of the rule book is not all that bad. Compare this game with Advanced Squad Leader. By comparison, it is simple.

AFAIK that is not an example but probably the ONLY board game with more pages, not to speak of such small letter and condensed information within.

(in reply to davidachamberlain)

Post #: 14

RE: Interesting but... - 3/21/2017 4:38:26 PM

Courtenay

Posts: 4003
Joined: 11/12/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

quote:

ORIGINAL: davidachamberlain

quote:

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

This is probably true for experienced players of the boardgame, but not true for everyone. But as you point out, since the game is so complex it makes the learning curve for new players quite steep. That makes it easy to make mistakes and miss opportunities, relatively simple things that veterans would not do and that an AI could be programmed to do efficiently. Steve seems confident enough and motivated to program the AI to be fully capable at the strategic, operational and tactical levels. I don't expect it to be brilliant or nefarious at the grand strategic level, but it should be challenging enough. At least for new players and casual players who will struggle just trying to play the game and understand all of its complexity. I remain optimistic that this will someday be a good fully capable AI game for most players, assuming Steve is able to finish this project over the next few years. I'm still patiently waiting for the half-map scenarios to get done, so I can play the ETO Fascist Tide scenario solo while I wait for the AI, someday...

Actually, I don't think the rules are all that complicated. Most are pretty straight forward. Even the size of the rule book is not all that bad. Compare this game with Advanced Squad Leader. By comparison, it is simple.

AFAIK that is not an example but probably the ONLY board game with more pages, not to speak of such small letter and condensed information within.

Star Fleet Battles' rules are far longer than WiF's. Don't know how they compare with ASL's.

However, I agree. WiF is a very complicated game. Actually, it is a more complicated game than SFB, as you don't need 90% of the SFB rules most of the time.

_____________________________

I thought I knew how to play this game....

(in reply to Joseignacio)

Post #: 15

RE: Interesting but... - 3/23/2017 1:30:03 AM

tom730_slith

Posts: 169
Joined: 1/28/2014
Status: offline

If you can grab a 50% off sale it is truly a no-brainer! I bought one full price when it came out and have logged MANY challenging and enjoyable hours playing solitaire, so the entertainment value per hour is probably pennies. Compared to movies or most (but not all) video games a very good investment for me!
So good in fact when I saw the "Christmas sale" I bought one half price for a friend! Hoping to get him hooked and play some games by email!
Bottom line - the game is worth it! Nothing like it, the options are amazing and each game offers completely different paths and choices!
Love it!

(in reply to Courtenay)

Post #: 16