RE: Simple Survey (Full Version)

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



Message

bredsjomagnus -> RE: Simple Survey (5/8/2009 9:51:09 AM)

I said 10% netplay and PBEM before but I dont think that I will play netplay at all.

so my revised "vote" will be:

PBEM 10%
AI 90%



mutant1 -> RE: Simple Survey (5/8/2009 11:34:51 AM)

I would say

20% PBEM
80% AI



Walloc -> RE: Simple Survey (5/8/2009 11:49:45 AM)

AI 33%
PBEM 33%
Netplay 34%, if i find any to play with in this mode.

Kind regards,

Rasmus



IrishGuards -> RE: Simple Survey (5/8/2009 12:23:09 PM)

Solitaire - 5%

Head-to-head (Hotseat) - 5%

AI Opponent - 10%

NetPlay - 40%

PBEM - 40%

Thx
IrishDragoonGuards



oscar72se -> RE: Simple Survey (5/8/2009 12:51:38 PM)

Solitaire - 5%
AI Opponent - 75%
NetPlay - 20%
PBEM - 0%

Regards,
Oscar



JudgeDredd -> RE: Simple Survey (5/8/2009 1:29:04 PM)

Solitaire 10%
AI Opponent 60%
PBEM 30%



Lützow -> RE: Simple Survey (5/8/2009 1:40:07 PM)

AI = 70%

The remaining get divided between PBEM and NetPlay.



Bradley62 -> RE: Simple Survey (5/8/2009 2:31:52 PM)

AI- 100%



OzHawkeye2 -> RE: Simple Survey (5/8/2009 2:59:33 PM)

AI - 99%
PBEM - 1%



ItBurns -> RE: Simple Survey (5/8/2009 4:19:09 PM)

Solitaire - 0% (I can do that now with CWiF.)

Head-to-head (Hotseat) - 15%

AI Opponent - 65%

NetPlay - 5%

PBEM - 15%

To begin with I will be playing exclusively against the AI to learn all the new rules as I played the game with version 4 rules and no expansions. It will only be later that I will try other opponents.



Reverend Zombie -> RE: Simple Survey (5/8/2009 4:28:18 PM)

solitaire 0 %
AI opponent 1 %
Netplay 0 %
PBEM 99 %



macgregor -> RE: Simple Survey (5/8/2009 5:11:16 PM)

I suppose I may be a little overly optimistic about how smooth and fun netplay will work since it hasn't been demonstrated much so far. PBEM could win me over, though I will reserve judgment until I've played it. Provided my opponent has some reliability(I'm willing to wait a couple days for a turn -sometimes)I'd rather play against a human layer. I compare it to watching a movie. I usually like to share the experience, though I can understand the value of playing alone.



Cheesehead -> RE: Simple Survey (5/8/2009 7:27:25 PM)

AI: 50%
PBEM: 50%

If I can find plenty of opponents, the PBEM should increase to as much as 90% after a year or so.



Edfactor -> RE: Simple Survey (5/8/2009 8:23:35 PM)

Solitaire - 0%
Head-to-head - 10%
AI Opponent - 80%
NetPlay - 10%
PBEM - 0&



Petracelli69 -> RE: Simple Survey (5/8/2009 10:26:58 PM)

For me some Ai use but mainly email play.

regards

Phil



Otto von Blotto -> RE: Simple Survey (5/8/2009 10:39:03 PM)

Initally as I am not experianced with this game. I remeber it being on sale in the early 90's but went for third reich instead.

solitaire 20 %
AI opponent 80 %
Netplay 0 %
PBEM 0 %

But after I have played with it for a while and got a handle on what Im doing

solitaire 10 %
AI opponent 40 %
Netplay 0 %
PBEM 50 %



Froonp -> RE: Simple Survey (5/8/2009 11:15:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Otto von Blotto

Initally as I am not experianced with this game. I remeber it being on sale in the early 90's but went for third reich instead.

solitaire 20 %
AI opponent 80 %
Netplay 0 %
PBEM 0 %

But after I have played with it for a while and got a handle on what Im doing

solitaire 10 %
AI opponent 40 %
Netplay 0 %
PBEM 50 %

You can't vote twice.
I'll take the latest numbers then.



Froonp -> RE: Simple Survey (5/8/2009 11:15:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Petracelli69

For me some Ai use but mainly email play.

regards

Phil

Can you convert this into percentages ?



gyxurian -> RE: Simple Survey (5/9/2009 2:31:51 AM)

Solitaire - 10%
Head-to-Head - 0%
AI - 50%
Netplay - 20%
PBEM - 20%



paulderynck -> RE: Simple Survey (5/9/2009 4:48:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: macgregor

I suppose I may be a little overly optimistic about how smooth and fun netplay will work since it hasn't been demonstrated much so far. PBEM could win me over, though I will reserve judgment until I've played it. Provided my opponent has some reliability(I'm willing to wait a couple days for a turn -sometimes)I'd rather play against a human layer. I compare it to watching a movie. I usually like to share the experience, though I can understand the value of playing alone.

IMO the ideal way to play would be Netplay at the beginning of the turn up to when Ground Strikes are done then PBEM the move and Netplay again for combat resolution and transition to the next impulse.

I find from FTF games, there is not a lot to do while the opponents are making all their moves, but now with MWIF there'd be no chess clock, no pressure to finish etc. - which I find preferrable. Of course two player is the extreme example of this.

We've even had another game (like Russian Campaign) set-up off to the side, for the non-moving player to spend his time on. But heck, now with MWIF you can have two MWIF games going at once! ...space - the final frontier... will have been conquered.



BallyJ -> RE: Simple Survey (5/9/2009 5:15:00 AM)

Solitaire 10%
H to H 0%
AI 40%
Netplay 10%
PBEM 40%



macgregor -> RE: Simple Survey (5/9/2009 9:07:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck
I find from FTF games, there is not a lot to do while the opponents are making all their moves, but now with MWIF there'd be no chess clock, no pressure to finish etc. - which I find preferrable. Of course two player is the extreme example of this.


As someone who has played against Steve; an accomplished chess player, if the idea of a chess clock has not been adopted, it's not been because the option hasn't been explored. I say look for MWiF product 2 perhaps.



Froonp -> RE: Simple Survey (5/9/2009 10:29:50 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck
IMO the ideal way to play would be Netplay at the beginning of the turn up to when Ground Strikes are done then PBEM the move and Netplay again for combat resolution and transition to the next impulse.

I find from FTF games, there is not a lot to do while the opponents are making all their moves, but now with MWIF there'd be no chess clock, no pressure to finish etc. - which I find preferrable. Of course two player is the extreme example of this.

There is one thing in which MWiF will be so different compared to face to face or Vassal play :
1) MWiF will strictly follow the sequence of play,
2) MWiF will show you any available units for the current step,



AgentComet -> RE: Simple Survey (5/9/2009 12:51:53 PM)

Solitaire 20%
Hot Seat 5%
AI 60%
Netplay 15%
PBEM 0%



terje439 -> RE: Simple Survey (5/9/2009 12:59:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

I would like to have a better idea of which modes of play are going to be used.

There are 5 modes of play:

Solitaire - you play both sides and make all decisions.

Head-to-head (Hotseat) - two players use a single computer, with the players taking turns moving their units/making decisions using the same mouse and keyboard.

AI Opponent - the player takes one side and the Artificial Intellengent Opponent plays the other.

NetPlay - 2 to 6 players with each player having his own computer; there are game 'sessions' where all the players log into the game and communicate their decisions using the internet.

PBEM - Play by email for 2 players, with all decisions communicated via email (an option to temporarily switch to NetPlay if they so desire).

Which mode of play do you expect to use?[&:]

Could you please put your answers in percentages? It would be nice it the percentages added up to 100% too.[;)]

Short and simple answers would be best for this thread. If there are other discussions on this topic, I would prefer a new thread (or some other existing thread) be used.


AI opponent - 50%
NetPlay - 40%
Pbem - 10%

This of course is only correct numbers if NetPlay is used by others [:)]

Terje



cdbeck -> RE: Simple Survey (5/9/2009 1:19:40 PM)

Solitaire - 0%
Head-to-head (Hotseat) - 0%
AI Opponent - 90%
NetPlay - 10%
PBEM - 0%

What can I say, I'm anti-social. [:D]



ypsylon -> RE: Simple Survey (5/9/2009 5:24:13 PM)

AI - 100%

I thought I will be first with such answer, but I'm not, so that is good news for me. [:D]



alsopxx33 -> RE: Simple Survey (5/9/2009 6:42:22 PM)

100% AI.




HansHafen -> RE: Simple Survey (5/9/2009 7:18:36 PM)

Solitaire - 5%

Head-to-head (Hotseat) - 0%

AI Opponent -  65%

NetPlay - 5%

PBEM -25%



paulderynck -> RE: Simple Survey (5/10/2009 5:08:38 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck
IMO the ideal way to play would be Netplay at the beginning of the turn up to when Ground Strikes are done then PBEM the move and Netplay again for combat resolution and transition to the next impulse.

I find from FTF games, there is not a lot to do while the opponents are making all their moves, but now with MWIF there'd be no chess clock, no pressure to finish etc. - which I find preferrable. Of course two player is the extreme example of this.

There is one thing in which MWiF will be so different compared to face to face or Vassal play :
1) MWiF will strictly follow the sequence of play,
2) MWiF will show you any available units for the current step,


I am unsure of the point you are trying to make here, Patrice. These make Zero difference while your opponent is making his land moves.

I find playing WiF is much like playing chess in terms of all the things that must be considered and the short and long term strategies that are being undertaken - by both sides. But it is to my taste much more enjoyable because of the element of chance and the historical "color".

Some people like to play fast and loose, some people are even great at playing fast and expertly - more power to them. But I want to take all the time I need to decide on my move and what I want to do. It takes a great deal of thought - primarily because of WIF's biggest wargame industry success and novelty - the action limit system.

On the other hand I hate being bored out of my gourd while my opponent does exactly the same thing. So you may respond: "Well, you should be planning your next move - like in Chess" - to which I respond "yes, that is what I do, providing
1. the turn can't end, and
2. I am moving second (so I know the weather)". This is about 20% of all the "boring category" time.

I learned long ago any other planning while my opponent is moving is not only a colossal waste of time but almsot always so exceedingly frustrating as to make me loathe the time I invested in it.

So give me and my opponent all the time we need to make the best move we possibly can make so that the outcome is not determined by some stupid error, but rather by whoever employed the best overall strategy (the luck part always evens out).




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.828125