WIF Release (Full Version)

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



Message

rmg -> WIF Release (2/17/2010 10:35:05 PM)

Is this the biggest false hype since swampland in Florida? Really, why no specifics, targets or releases after...HOW MANY YEARS????.....Matrix should just take the false advertising off until there is something real to promote...........anyone know anything different?



winky51 -> RE: WIF Release (2/17/2010 10:58:47 PM)

1 programmer. That sums it up. He has help from Beta Testers who have assisted over the years. Quite a dedicated group.

1st post I say was July 2005 asking "when".

Go buy Strategic Command 2 and play that till WIF comes out.



Joseignacio -> RE: WIF Release (2/18/2010 8:41:08 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rmg

Is this the biggest false hype since swampland in Florida? Really, why no specifics, targets or releases after...HOW MANY YEARS????.....Matrix should just take the false advertising off until there is something real to promote...........anyone know anything different?


There have been the tipycal delays in a software product, plus a "bonus delay" because this product is intended to deliver with quality.

To state this is correct. To start to groan and moan like a child is infantile and is plain trolling. Please, let's try not to upset Steve, he is doing very well considering the circumstances.



Arctic Blast -> RE: WIF Release (2/18/2010 11:31:58 PM)

And where has there been 'false advertising'???



composer99 -> RE: WIF Release (2/19/2010 5:42:12 PM)

To be fair, the site worldinflames.com (which I note now automatically transfers to the Matrix product page) used to have a Coming Soon! announcement several years ago. If that was still up it would definitely be false advertising. [:)]



marklv -> RE: WIF Release (2/21/2010 2:04:44 AM)

This game has been in some form of development, on and off, since the mid 1990s has it not?  I remember some announcement about it back in 1995 - no kidding. [8|] I didn't even have internet access then, I read about it in a gaming magazine.



Mad Russian -> RE: WIF Release (2/21/2010 2:35:57 AM)

You want it complete when you get it or you want to buy what they have ready now?

I'm sure Matrix will go with whatever you want.

Personally, I've waited a LONG time for this game. When I buy it I want it to be a finished product. I'll wait until Shannon says he's finished.

MR



Mad Russian -> RE: WIF Release (2/21/2010 2:37:02 AM)

Or you could send me the money and I'll hold it for you until it's ready...just a service I provide for free.[:D]

MR



michaelbaldur -> RE: WIF Release (2/21/2010 4:32:45 AM)



or maybe ... we could pay half now ...and half when the game is released ...then matrix games could see how many customers. there are for the game ...and use the money to speed up the development of the game ... 



capex_MatrixForum -> RE: WIF Release (2/21/2010 11:26:00 AM)

Hi all!

just to say another guy (and customer of course) from Italy is waiting for years... no problem. A big huge to Steve and all the community.

cpx



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: WIF Release (2/21/2010 7:03:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: capex

Hi all!

just to say another guy (and customer of course) from Italy is waiting for years... no problem. A big huge to Steve and all the community.

cpx

Welcome to the forum.[:)]



Palle -> RE: WIF Release (2/25/2010 2:30:05 PM)

First announcement was The Annual 1996.

And we cannot play half now. That is not how games work.

WiF is perhaps the most complex of all wargames (except perhaps ASL), it must be almost impossible to create for computers. especially the AI. Any player of RTW/EB or even SPWWI/MBT will know how frustrating dumb AIs are.



SLAAKMAN -> RE: WIF Release (2/25/2010 5:11:51 PM)

"The suspense is terrible. I hope it'll last." [:D] 



coregames -> RE: WIF Release (2/26/2010 3:37:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Palle

First announcement was The Annual 1996.

And we cannot play half now. That is not how games work.

WiF is perhaps the most complex of all wargames (except perhaps ASL), it must be almost impossible to create for computers. especially the AI. Any player of RTW/EB or even SPWWI/MBT will know how frustrating dumb AIs are.

GDW produced the Europa series of games, which if you combine them, are more complex than anything else I've seen in the way of board games. WiF and ASL are way up there though.



Palle -> RE: WIF Release (2/26/2010 11:03:21 AM)

I was never able to get my hands on those, as I was informed they were not as complex ruleswise as WiFFE and ASL, but much larger?

I think the largest ones in terms of counters I have played are ASL's Kampfgruppe Peiper, ???'s The Longest day (that was hard to get here in Denmark before internet was invented ;-) ), Enemy at The Gates, and of course WiFFE. For roleplaying I play Rolemaster since 1988 though, so complexity is... not new to me ;-)



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: WIF Release (2/27/2010 3:17:49 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Palle

I was never able to get my hands on those, as I was informed they were not as complex ruleswise as WiFFE and ASL, but much larger?

I think the largest ones in terms of counters I have played are ASL's Kampfgruppe Peiper, ???'s The Longest day (that was hard to get here in Denmark before internet was invented ;-) ), Enemy at The Gates, and of course WiFFE. For roleplaying I play Rolemaster since 1988 though, so complexity is... not new to me ;-)

The Europa series just had a ton of counters - with many different unit types and special rules for each. It took a long time just to set up the starting position. What really impacted play though were the stacks of units along the front line and sorting through them all to figure out what you wanted to place where. The game looked lovely but while one side was figuring out their move, the other side could go on a two week vacation.



paulderynck -> RE: WIF Release (2/27/2010 4:09:24 AM)

Let's see... was that 1/5th ATEC on the third stack? or 1/3rd on the fifth?...



Palle -> RE: WIF Release (2/27/2010 1:44:03 PM)

Is that not by and large dependant on the players?
For example, I also play tabletop with figures using rules we (Oleg) developed himself, him and often Jan and I are very fast players, we just move. tracey is a very slow, deliberate player who can take 20 mins to move 10 figures, putting them just right and taking everything into account while the rest of us (oleg and I especially as we have 40+ years of re-enactment and I lots of military experience) just do what seems right and analyses afterwards or while doing it. Tracey too has lots of re-enactment experience 23 years I believe, she has same wargaming experience as Oleg and I while Jan has no re-enactment or militay experience and the same wargaming... it depends on character is my point.

The games can be seen here, here and here, I strongly recommend having a look.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: WIF Release (2/27/2010 6:39:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Palle

Is that not by and large dependant on the players?
For example, I also play tabletop with figures using rules we (Oleg) developed himself, him and often Jan and I are very fast players, we just move. tracey is a very slow, deliberate player who can take 20 mins to move 10 figures, putting them just right and taking everything into account while the rest of us (oleg and I especially as we have 40+ years of re-enactment and I lots of military experience) just do what seems right and analyses afterwards or while doing it. Tracey too has lots of re-enactment experience 23 years I believe, she has same wargaming experience as Oleg and I while Jan has no re-enactment or militay experience and the same wargaming... it depends on character is my point.

The games can be seen here, here and here, I strongly recommend having a look.

Of course the player can make a big difference, but I was referring to my experience where my opponent and I had been playing monster board war games for 10 years (8 hours/week). We were quite good at making decisions quickly - both of us played speed chess a lot too (Karl was much bettter than I and had to give me 2 minutes vs 5 minutes odds to make the game competitive).

Even so, we could not make moves quickly in Europa simply because of the number of units: heights of the stacks and depth of the stacks along the frontline. We were both very practiced at using medical tweezers for examining stacks. Regardless, at a certain point it isn't possible to examine all enemy & friendly units in the frontline and retain that information long enough to make reasonable decisions. For instance, if you discovered something in the middle of your move that you hadn't noticed before, there was no way you could undo all your moves up to that point. As I said, the game looked lovely (and by game I mean the rule set too), but we couldn't get past the problems with the mechanics.



Sarge -> RE: WIF Release (2/27/2010 7:38:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur



or maybe ... we could pay half now ...and half when the game is released ...then matrix games could see how many customers. there are for the game ...and use the money to speed up the development of the game ... 



VSSAL is free why would anyone pay for essentially the same thing ?



vonpaul -> RE: WIF Release (2/27/2010 9:35:33 PM)

Vassal definetly is NOT like play a good computer wargame (more like an emulator) IMO. The most painful thing about playing boardgames should be taken care of by the computer (rules, odds, legal movement etc.). Vassal does none of these (for WIF anyway). If the real-time multiplayer is good there should be a noticable improvement in the speed of play due to the computer handling these things.

Not that i agree that a pay 1/2 now later scheme is feasible, pre-order is the standard (but only when development is in beta).



wworld7 -> RE: WIF Release (2/28/2010 12:26:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

or maybe ... we could pay half now ...and half when the game is released ...then matrix games could see how many customers. there are for the game ...and use the money to speed up the development of the game ... 



If the economics of the project do not support addtional resources this idea does not change that. All it is is a poor attempt to speed developement (Paul) at the expense of ADG, Matrix and Steve (Peter). It does not create extra funding that it appears to, so I don't see this happening.

Put another way, it wants to steal from Peter to pay Paul. Everyone knows this doesn't work well.



IKerensky -> RE: WIF Release (3/1/2010 1:31:38 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sarge


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur



or maybe ... we could pay half now ...and half when the game is released ...then matrix games could see how many customers. there are for the game ...and use the money to speed up the development of the game ... 



VSSAL is free why would anyone pay for essentially the same thing ?



Because, and that is a thing a lot of the people around there that never played CWif and aren't betatesting MWiF will discover that this is NOT THE SAME GAME.

VASSAL/SUN TZU/CYBERBOARD games are 100% perfect transposal of the WiF boardgame with the exact same rules, map and counters.

MWiF, as CWiF WONT BE. This will be a very similar game, but the map will be so different you cant call it the same game, US Entry will be different too, and division and a few other minor tweaks. But the main reason why I am not sure I want to buy or play MWiF rather than VASSAL is that I dont like the way they choose to have Pacific Theater at european scale.

For me the game just dont work that way. Pacific pace of Operation and Counter density, especially in WiF doesnt go well with the European scale and I am convinved this will alter the game far too much... War in China and Siberia will be greatly changed. Same for India. Pacific is dotted of so many tiny useless piece of land that you just have far too much place to put troups than you need them. Invasion are greatly helped now that there is more land to cover while you have the same number of troups to do so and the same number of build point to build them.

Barbarossa is an entirely new thing because there is no more Siberia to run for with the Russian. This give the 2D10 table too much strength and vastly help germans.

So dont expect to be playing World In Flames on you PC, you will be playing very related called Matrix World In Flames... but you will still have to use the cyberbox and vassal modules to play the true thing.




macgregor -> RE: WIF Release (3/1/2010 2:50:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: KERENSKY
MWiF, as CWiF WONT BE. This will be a very similar game, but the map will be so different you cant call it the same game, US Entry will be different too, and division and a few other minor tweaks. But the main reason why I am not sure I want to buy or play MWiF rather than VASSAL is that I dont like the way they choose to have Pacific Theater at european scale.

Well I won't miss you. Enjoy vassal. Having the Pacific at the European scale is the best thing they could've done IMO. Having to make rules to circumstantially change movement and supply( as well as those crazy off-map-boxes) was a compromise ADG made in order to have a game that fit on a table the same size. To the extent the game realistically portrays combat, the unified mapscale can only help to provide a continuity the game lacked.



NeverMan -> RE: WIF Release (3/1/2010 3:05:53 PM)

I thought Matrix would have learned the pitfalls of a nonfaithful port from their EiA "experiment". I guess not.

It's good to know upfront that this won't be a faithful port of WiF, so I won't have to waste my money.



NeverMan -> RE: WIF Release (3/1/2010 3:10:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Palle

First announcement was The Annual 1996.

And we cannot play half now. That is not how games work.

WiF is perhaps the most complex of all wargames (except perhaps ASL), it must be almost impossible to create for computers. especially the AI. Any player of RTW/EB or even SPWWI/MBT will know how frustrating dumb AIs are.


This is arguable. There is little diplomacy in WiF, and that's usually what makes AI's difficult to code. The AI for this should be much easier than it should be for say, EiA.



NeverMan -> RE: WIF Release (3/1/2010 3:11:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Even so, we could not make moves quickly in Europa simply because of the number of units: heights of the stacks and depth of the stacks along the frontline. We were both very practiced at using medical tweezers for examining stacks. Regardless, at a certain point it isn't possible to examine all enemy & friendly units in the frontline and retain that information long enough to make reasonable decisions. For instance, if you discovered something in the middle of your move that you hadn't noticed before, there was no way you could undo all your moves up to that point. As I said, the game looked lovely (and by game I mean the rule set too), but we couldn't get past the problems with the mechanics.


This is exactly what a computer should be really really good at.



SamuraiProgrmmr -> RE: WIF Release (3/1/2010 3:18:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

I thought Matrix would have learned the pitfalls of a nonfaithful port from their EiA "experiment". I guess not.

It's good to know upfront that this won't be a faithful port of WiF, so I won't have to waste my money.



To the best of my knowledge and understanding, all 'changes' are with the request or approval of the designer. These can be viewed as 'corrections' to compromises that had to be made to keep the tabletop game playable and affordable.

From the information posted on this forum, Steve has taken GREAT pains to ensure that this is a FAITHFUL port of this game to a computer.

I am a purist at heart and want the game to be as faithful as possible to the original. I am excited at the prospects of what is being accomplished. IMO, the changes fix kludges that were necessary to keep the game playable and to restrain it to a reasonable number of tables.

Just think what the game would have needed to be played if all hexes were the same size.

European theater = 2 maps
Pacific theater = 4 maps
Africa = 4 maps
The Americas = ?8 maps? (maybe 6)
Scandinavia = 1 map

So that would have been from 17 to 19 maps to play the game.






micheljq -> RE: WIF Release (3/1/2010 3:37:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: KERENSKY

Because, and that is a thing a lot of the people around there that never played CWif and aren't betatesting MWiF will discover that this is NOT THE SAME GAME.



You mean CWiF not same game as MWiF? Good thing.

quote:



VASSAL/SUN TZU/CYBERBOARD games are 100% perfect transposal of the WiF boardgame with the exact same rules, map and counters.



Yes Vassal is great, but you must make all the calculations yourself, like with the board. MWiF will do a lot for you and speed up thing, this is what computers are for.

quote:



MWiF, as CWiF WONT BE. This will be a very similar game, but the map will be so different you cant call it the same game, US Entry will be different too, and division and a few other minor tweaks. But the main reason why I am not sure I want to buy or play MWiF rather than VASSAL is that I dont like the way they choose to have Pacific Theater at european scale.



Aren't you a little pessimist? Personally I never liked the Pacific scale with WiF, I am happy they change it.

quote:



Barbarossa is an entirely new thing because there is no more Siberia to run for with the Russian. This give the 2D10 table too much strength and vastly help germans.



What are you speaking about? Siberia exists also in MWiF. I respect your opinion though. [:)]



composer99 -> RE: WIF Release (3/1/2010 8:05:16 PM)

Michel, what Kerensky is referring to is the artifact caused by the map-scale change from the Europe to Asia map. Often this saves USSR's bacon as they can form a line from the map edge to the Caspian which the Germans are unable to run around.

However, I should point out to everyone who is upset by the change to a single map scale is that this was implemented in the original CWiF at ADG's express intent. In short, it is the way Harry Rowland wanted it, and if it weren't for the physical limitations of space it's the way tabletop WiF:FE would be, too.



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.8125