RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

Bobthehatchit -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/11/2006 3:25:47 PM)

This is great news!

[&o]

One thing i'd like changed it the size of RN carrier airgroups later in the war, it was possible to hard code the USN airgroups to change sizes and configuration during the war, it should be possible to do the same with the RN carrier, maybe tie it in with ship Upgrades?

I know its not a major thing but hell i'm British, its matter of national pride![:D]



denisonh -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/11/2006 10:43:16 PM)

Great news!

Thanks Joe and Don for taking this task on. Good luck and look forward to the fruits of your labor.



pasternakski -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/13/2006 6:35:03 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bobthehatchit

This is great news!

[&o]

One thing i'd like changed...

Yeah, I'm beating a dead horse. A real dead horse. It stinks. It's got maggots on it. Man, it's so dead, Jesus couldn't raise it. Even with a Japanese engineer vehicle he couldn't raise it.



Feinder -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/13/2006 4:03:14 PM)

FWIW, a DB editor isn't THAT hard. It's just a GUI to edit fields in the database. Considering all the other complexities of WitP, it's development time is but a crumb of the whole cake.

It is also a bit presumptuous to think that future patches of WitP or WitP II (whatever), will completely fix issues (and no future ones created). Folks will want to maintain games in progress, that have been upgraded thru various versions.

What folks would also want tho, is a "game already in progess" editor. Again, it's a matter of making a GUI, so you could edit the current settings of the game file.

Natureally, the AI doesn't care if you edit the DB. No security required.

My suggestion on how to accomodate PBEM security would be to have each player have their own password to the DB, and you could only edit (and see) your OWN units. You actually coun't see or touch your opponents units. In order to actually edit the DB for YOUR units, you'd have to put in your OPPONENT'S password. Password could be reset as often as necessary (option to change DB password when working on turn). You could edit/add/delete unit(s) with this function.

This means -

a. A player can't edit anything, without his opponent knowing that -something- got edited (because he needs the password from the opponent).
b. A player can only edit his own stuff (with permission).
c. A player would have a free-hand to make fixes - maybe a teleport or disappeared unit or a jump into mountains, whatever.
d. Would certainly require trust on behalf of both PBEM players. But the whole point is to try and salvage a critical problem. If somebody chooses to take the oppontunity to bork the game, then just dump the game.
e. A player could reset access to the DB during his next turn (for additional security).

-F-



Nomad -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/13/2006 4:32:26 PM)

Another possibility would be an editor that took both passwords and was intended to be used by a third party. That way things could be fixed without either player actually having access to the data.



Feinder -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/13/2006 4:50:29 PM)

3rd party - Yeah, the only problem is finding folks who will actually do this. There -ARE- folks who understand the editor (not that hard), and would be glad to fix other people's games. But my concern would be that those people who volunteered would get innundated with requests (altho hopefully not). A 3rd party option would be one thing, but I would shy away from REQUIRING it being a 3rd party edit. Nobody wants to wait around for a week or two, to have your game fixed. If players agree that it's important enough to be fixed, they should agree to a degree of trust.

-F-



Curty -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/14/2006 1:22:06 AM)

MAINTAINING A GAME IN PROGRESS IS A MUST....I'VE BEEN PLAYING THE FULL CAMPAIGN SINCE EARLY NOVEMBER '05 ITS NOW MARCH '06!!!! THATS A LOT OF HOURS........AS FOR THE DISAPPEARING UNITS BUG...[&o] TO THE NEW GUYS IF THEY FIX IT!!!!!!

REGARDS - CURTY



Bobthehatchit -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/14/2006 8:31:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pasternakski


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bobthehatchit

This is great news!

[&o]

One thing i'd like changed...

Yeah, I'm beating a dead horse. A real dead horse. It stinks. It's got maggots on it. Man, it's so dead, Jesus couldn't raise it. Even with a Japanese engineer vehicle he couldn't raise it.


Try a difibrulator....

Or maybe cloning....[sm=terms.gif]

Its all in the details.



steveh11Matrix -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/15/2006 7:12:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

FWIW, a DB editor isn't THAT hard. It's just a GUI to edit fields in the database. Considering all the other complexities of WitP, it's development time is but a crumb of the whole cake.

It is also a bit presumptuous to think that future patches of WitP or WitP II (whatever), will completely fix issues (and no future ones created). Folks will want to maintain games in progress, that have been upgraded thru various versions.

What folks would also want tho, is a "game already in progess" editor. Again, it's a matter of making a GUI, so you could edit the current settings of the game file.

Natureally, the AI doesn't care if you edit the DB. No security required.

My suggestion on how to accomodate PBEM security would be to have each player have their own password to the DB, and you could only edit (and see) your OWN units. You actually coun't see or touch your opponents units. In order to actually edit the DB for YOUR units, you'd have to put in your OPPONENT'S password. Password could be reset as often as necessary (option to change DB password when working on turn). You could edit/add/delete unit(s) with this function.

This means -

a. A player can't edit anything, without his opponent knowing that -something- got edited (because he needs the password from the opponent).
b. A player can only edit his own stuff (with permission).
c. A player would have a free-hand to make fixes - maybe a teleport or disappeared unit or a jump into mountains, whatever.
d. Would certainly require trust on behalf of both PBEM players. But the whole point is to try and salvage a critical problem. If somebody chooses to take the oppontunity to bork the game, then just dump the game.
e. A player could reset access to the DB during his next turn (for additional security).

-F-


All excellent suggestions. I still feel that any PBEM game between players I'd want to play against needs no such security at all, but for those who want such a crutch [;)], this maps a decent way forward.

Steve.



Damien Thorn -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/16/2006 10:44:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl


May I ask one thing. If/when you ever get around to playing with WITP II, will you consider making it a PBEM game first and formost. PLEASE! Almost all the "problems" in the current game seem to trace back to the need to make it playable against the computer. I know this is popular with many players, but it seems to have made far to many of the problems unsolvable..., as well as creating such unworkable or totally screwed up sub-systems like the uncontrollable "overland supply movement" system or the "automatic convoy (destruction) system". Please make a game that works..., then if you must, put an AI on some of the scenarios where the scope and the demands on the AI can be limited.



I had to respond to this as soon as I'd read it. I'll go back and continue reading the rest of the thread later.

Are you kidding? A mega-moster game that takes years to play PBEM and you want to drop the AI and make in ONLY PBEM (except for some scenarios you said). You really have got to be kidding. Among all of my friends I don't know anyone who made it more than 6 game-months playing PBEM.

How about suggesting they make the AI BETTER and not eliminate it. I don't think I've ever heard of a wargame released without an AI.

Damien Thorn



Damien Thorn -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/16/2006 10:57:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson



This being said, the idea would be to have the "AI" scriptable, so that it can be changed and enhanced by developers and modders alike.




I hope WitP 2 will come with an API and allow modders to make DLL's that they can link in to the game to add or change features. the "Starfleet Command" series did this and I had great fun doing programming with that. This is assuming you are going to write WiTP2 in C++.

Also, I'd like to have a scripting ability using Python to create events in the game and to customize the interface. Civilization 4 currently has this and the community has produced some wonderful mods that are really amazing.

Those two games should be examples of the level of customization we shoot for in WiTP2.

Damien Thorn.



sprior -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/16/2006 11:47:32 PM)

Welcome abourd guys.

In best Leslie Nielsen voice: I just want to tell you both good luck, we're all
counting on you.



Terminus -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/17/2006 12:12:05 AM)

Eight times in a row...[:D]



Admiral DadMan -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/18/2006 6:20:27 AM)

OMG, is it Patched yet?

Note to Joe an Don: Inflate your time estimates by a factor of 4, then get it done in half the time.

Is there a timeline yet?



akdreemer -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/20/2006 12:05:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

My, God. Patch 1.8 first.

I have issues with WitP too, but can we at least put first things first, and not act worse than my 7 year old?

Yes, give me the game that at least does not self-destruct at random intervals, and fix the databse because this if where most of the problems seem to exist.



dereck -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/20/2006 12:36:46 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior

Yes, give me the game that at least does not self-destruct at random intervals, and fix the databse because this if where most of the problems seem to exist.


Everybody up to now has been posting about wanting things which are basically just "bells and whistles" and are overlooking the fundamental fact that the "database" for WITP is seriously flawed. Without addressing the basic issue of the "database" all that WITP II will be is a continuation of adding bells and whistles on top of a flawed database - which is just what is going on with the current WITP. The same bugs which are plaguing WITP will continue to plague WITP and exist and plague WITP II.

Properly re-design (or, in my opinion, design in the first place) a proper database and so many bugs could be eliminated and much more could be possible.



Cap Mandrake -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/20/2006 5:33:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: fremen

WITP II ????
Who must be killed to get it???[:D][:D]
CHEERS!!


[:D] Hey..do you guys need any help? I know Atari Basic.[:'(]



2Stepper -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/22/2006 3:23:26 AM)

And the forecast is???? [:D] [sm=terms.gif]

Fair sailing lads... With the odd typhoon or two mixed in of course. LOL! Congrats to you both Joe and Don.

[sm=party-smiley-012.gif]



Damien Thorn -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/24/2006 12:40:17 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake



[:D] Hey..do you guys need any help? I know Atari Basic.[:'(]


Cool, another Atari user. Atari rules! Always has, always will.

I remember the first thing I ever typed on a computer. I typed my name in to the Atari and hit return. It said, "Syntax Error". I wasn't sure what it meant but I was pretty sure I had just been insulted. [:D]

Damien Thorn



Rysyonok -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/24/2006 2:35:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Damien Thorn
I remember the first thing I ever typed on a computer. I typed my name in to the Atari and hit return. It said, "Syntax Error". I wasn't sure what it meant but I was pretty sure I had just been insulted. [:D]
Damien Thorn


Oh this is hilarious =) An instant classic =)



Berkut -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/29/2006 6:22:13 PM)

So, is there something actually going on?

Is there going to be a patch anytime soon?



Mike Scholl -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/29/2006 7:31:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dereck


quote:

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior

Yes, give me the game that at least does not self-destruct at random intervals, and fix the databse because this if where most of the problems seem to exist.


Everybody up to now has been posting about wanting things which are basically just "bells and whistles" and are overlooking the fundamental fact that the "database" for WITP is seriously flawed. Without addressing the basic issue of the "database" all that WITP II will be is a continuation of adding bells and whistles on top of a flawed database - which is just what is going on with the current WITP. The same bugs which are plaguing WITP will continue to plague WITP and exist and plague WITP II.

Properly re-design (or, in my opinion, design in the first place) a proper database and so many bugs could be eliminated and much more could be possible.


I'm with Derrick here, I doubt the new team will be wading into the database mess..., but anything they can do to make it easier for someone else to "clean out the Augean Stables" as they now exist would deserve out gratitude.



The Gnome -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (3/30/2006 12:03:48 AM)

If anyone really wants to see a dead horse beaten, listen to me ask for AI improvements! [:D]



Cmdrcain -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (4/1/2006 8:11:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pasternakski
First, starting with the idea that the game must be open to modding or contain an editor is a bad, bad decision. Don't you people understand what that does to the mechanics and data of the game from the very outset? At this point, the integrity of the design goes out the window. You've got to do great damage to simple, straightforward code in order to leave these open strands at the far end of the game engine. If editor and modding features can be added, fine, but let's have a solidly designed game first.



Don't get what your so hot over, as long as the basic, unmodded game works, allowing modding/editing shouldn't matter, if editing it changes it in a way that then the AI doesn't work as well, thats not going affect the fact the basic unchanged game works..


Even if accept your arguement, there STILL should be an editor just so one could
if wish change data like swap out some BB's for more Yamato class on assumption the builting started earlier and more were built..

Editing CV stats on premis again that things improved faster...

Simply editing in a sense shouldn't matter if the AI still can use the edited units proper.





akdreemer -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (4/4/2006 8:58:42 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Damien Thorn


quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson



This being said, the idea would be to have the "AI" scriptable, so that it can be changed and enhanced by developers and modders alike.




I hope WitP 2 will come with an API and allow modders to make DLL's that they can link in to the game to add or change features. the "Starfleet Command" series did this and I had great fun doing programming with that. This is assuming you are going to write WiTP2 in C++.

Also, I'd like to have a scripting ability using Python to create events in the game and to customize the interface. Civilization 4 currently has this and the community has produced some wonderful mods that are really amazing.

Those two games should be examples of the level of customization we shoot for in WiTP2.

Damien Thorn.


Heck, just a programmable events engine similiar to the one in TOAW. Most players do not have, nor care to learn, exotic programming languages. The KISS principle should be apllied in large amounts. What is also needed is a a database that is independent of devices/units/etc. being in the correct spot. [:-][sm=00000055.gif]



pasternakski -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (4/4/2006 12:51:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cmdrcain
Don't get what your so hot over, as long as the basic, unmodded game works, allowing modding/editing shouldn't matter, if editing it changes it in a way that then the AI doesn't work as well, thats not going affect the fact the basic unchanged game works..


huh?


quote:

Even if accept your arguement, there STILL should be an editor just so one could
if wish change data like swap out some BB's for more Yamato class on assumption the builting started earlier and more were built..

Editing CV stats on premis again that things improved faster...


How about playing the game you bought instead of the one you made up in your head?

quote:

Simply editing in a sense shouldn't matter if the AI still can use the edited units proper.


Thanks for listening.







Rexor -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (4/11/2006 5:26:57 PM)

AI improvements would be wonderful. There seems to be a defeatist attitude toward the AI, as if the very notion of a competent AI is preposterous. Is it that remote? Has this and every other unusually deep wargame been relegated permanently to multiplayer?



grumbler -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (4/11/2006 5:57:22 PM)

I think, in a way, pasternakski's two arguments are the same argument.

The reason why a competant AI is so hard for this game is that the player role is not defined for the game, and so the AI role is not defined either. If, as pasternakski says, the designer starts with an idea of who the player is (and limits decision-making to the decisions appropriate the player's role) then it is much more likely that an effective AI (which only has to deal with those decisions and no others) could be created.

There are always limits to the AI, but the main limit is imposed by the complexity of the task that you are asking the AI to accomplish, because the more complex the task, the less options/variability/optimization the AI will have for handling them.

Having chrome in the game is not a bad thing, so long as it does not impact on the game play and the AI. Things like CO assignments, crew experience, support squad requirement calculations, and the like seem to me to be clogging up the game and degrading the ability of the AI to be programmed to do the stuff we would like it to do.

With only X manhours available for AI programming, what should be the focus of the AI? That should determine what the role of the AI (and thus the player) should be.



Grotius -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (4/12/2006 6:00:39 AM)

Great news! Good luck, guys!

Edit: one or two comments on AI. Is it me, or is computer-game AI improving? I have yet to beat "Galactic Civlizations II" at the "Normal" difficulty level, and while it's no War in the Pacific, it's far more involved than chess. Likewise, "Birth of America" has a half-decent AI; at least, it has kicked my sorry butt more than once. Is there some new AI learning emerging from university computer science departments these days?




Damien Thorn -> RE: New Development for War In The Pacific -- MUST READ (4/12/2006 5:17:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior

quote:

ORIGINAL: Damien Thorn


quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson



This being said, the idea would be to have the "AI" scriptable, so that it can be changed and enhanced by developers and modders alike.




I hope WitP 2 will come with an API and allow modders to make DLL's that they can link in to the game to add or change features. the "Starfleet Command" series did this and I had great fun doing programming with that. This is assuming you are going to write WiTP2 in C++.

Also, I'd like to have a scripting ability using Python to create events in the game and to customize the interface. Civilization 4 currently has this and the community has produced some wonderful mods that are really amazing.

Those two games should be examples of the level of customization we shoot for in WiTP2.

Damien Thorn.


Heck, just a programmable events engine similiar to the one in TOAW. Most players do not have, nor care to learn, exotic programming languages. The KISS principle should be apllied in large amounts. What is also needed is a a database that is independent of devices/units/etc. being in the correct spot. [:-][sm=00000055.gif]


Didn't play TOAW so I can't comment on it but if you see the amazing things people are doing over at the Civ 4 forums you'd probably demand that same kind of flexability in WitP 2. In fact, if we had that kind of flexability WitP 2 would probably become an entire platform for designing naval war games. You could mod in everything for 1890's coal-era ships to modern navies. It's a dream right now but I know it can be a reality with the dedicated people in this community.... if the developers give us the tools to make it possible. Python! Python! Python!

Damien Thorn



Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.703979