RE: WIF Release

RE: WIF Release (Full Version)

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

Message

Skanvak -> RE: WIF Release (3/1/2010 8:57:13 PM)
Composer is right on this one. The only thing we could ask is a correction of the mercator projection toward the pole to reduce the number of hexes is northern finland and Siberia (well Canada too but I am not sure it is very important).

Froonp -> RE: WIF Release (3/1/2010 9:31:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Skanvak Composer is right on this one. The only thing we could ask is a correction of the mercator projection toward the pole to reduce the number of hexes is northern finland and Siberia (well Canada too but I am not sure it is very important). This was done in Scandinavia.

NeverMan -> RE: WIF Release (3/2/2010 1:40:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SamuraiProgrammer To the best of my knowledge and understanding, all 'changes' are with the request or approval of the designer. 1. So were the EiA changes. ADF (aka Harry Rowland and crew?) were perfectly fine with whatever butchering Matrix wanted to do with EiA, why do they care, they're getting paid! 2. I really don't care about the map issue that much, it's the principle that bothers me.

NeverMan -> RE: WIF Release (3/2/2010 1:42:21 AM)
It doesn't matter if that's who WiF was "suppose" to be or not, what matters is how a lot of people played the games for YEARS and YEARS and now they are going to change it and whether you want to believe it or not, it will change the way the game is played to some degree.

SamuraiProgrmmr -> RE: WIF Release (3/2/2010 4:14:30 AM)
I have no idea if Harry Rowland approved the changes to Empires In Arms but I do know that the design of that game was heavily influenced by by Empires In Harm (a set of 'house rules' that appear to have been quite unbalanced). I never said that it would not change the game. Clearly it will. The question is how much and whether the changes will be good or not. I understand your position about this being an issue of principle. However, the map issue is (I believe) the only major core change. There are some other things that were 'adjusted' to fit the new Pacific Map hex paradigm. Don't forget; the extension of European Map scale to the rest of the world has been in place since Chris M. was working on this so many years ago. I am not going to provoke you into a discussion after you have indicated it was an issue of prinicple and it doesn't matter. If you would like to have that discussion in detail, post here and say so or send me a PM. In principle, I agree with you most of the time. For example, I hate it when Hollywood takes a perfectly good story and ruins it by twisting it around in some way. (Notable examples are what they did to Starship Troopers and The Puppet Masters.) BUT occasionally, they get it right and their small changes work when bringing something to the big screen. (Notable mention was the ending to The Hunt For Red October and the changes in the recent Angels & Demons). These changes are not always necessary and sometimes are just to satisfy the ego of the producers / directors / script writers / etc. I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE CHANGES IN THIS GAME ARE TO SATISFY ANYONE'S EGO. Hopefully they will be welcome additions. spelling edited

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: WIF Release (3/2/2010 8:15:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NeverMan quote: ORIGINAL: SamuraiProgrammer To the best of my knowledge and understanding, all 'changes' are with the request or approval of the designer. 1. So were the EiA changes. ADF (aka Harry Rowland and crew?) were perfectly fine with whatever butchering Matrix wanted to do with EiA, why do they care, they're getting paid! 2. I really don't care about the map issue that much, it's the principle that bothers me. ADG has been changing WIF continuously since it was first released (~1985). Do you disapprove of all their changes? Or just some of their changes? I have trouble understanding what principle is being violated.[&:]

pzgndr -> RE: WIF Release (3/2/2010 12:16:06 PM)
quote: I have trouble understanding what principle is being violated. Hey Steve, welcome to the wonderful world of Neverman. He's always right, and everyone else is always wrong. [8\|] Drive on!!

michaelbaldur -> RE: WIF Release (3/2/2010 3:27:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pzgndr quote: I have trouble understanding what principle is being violated. Hey Steve, welcome to the wonderful world of Neverman. He's always right, and everyone else is always wrong. [8\|] Drive on!! [:-] there should be room for everybody and every opinion... but on another note: I have spend alot of time playtesting MWIF ... and I have played the war in china many times .... it is a little more mobile. but then again. you don´t have enough HQ to advance everywhere. and there are alot of mountains so China is still a pain ... the change of hex size on the American map means that USA can´t move all of their units from one hex any more ... which means that they need to use more naval moves to transport the units there more pacific hexes. so there are more hexes to defend but the allies still have to take the Capital/all ports to conquere the island groups. to conquer the Territory of new Guinea the allied need to take back 3 ports. with 6 japanese white print units. you can delay the allied for a long time ... [image]local://upfiles/24604/0943877F3E8B4A1D9F832B992B942A15.jpg[/image]

micheljq -> RE: WIF Release (3/2/2010 4:05:31 PM)
I guess the Americans will have to choose carefully what they want to conquer/occupy in the Pacific, as they can't occupy all territories. A little as in WW2. They were choosing the bases that would get them closer to Japan and they did ignore the others to some extent.

pzgndr -> RE: WIF Release (3/2/2010 4:57:00 PM)
quote: there should be room for everybody and every opinion... I agree 100%. However, there are those who insist their way is the only way and various game options and other Matrix/ADG-approved changes/improvements/enhancements are unacceptable. Neverman has made a sour reputation for himself on the EiA forum being one of those. Like I said, Steve should drive on and not worry about it. Looking forward to MWiF. Cheers! [:)]

Blorsh -> RE: WIF Release (3/3/2010 8:03:15 AM)
I think that is the map scale is changed why not the units scale is changed? Army sizes units were designed for a spicific mapscale so it could be revised. But I also think that different size units are playing at same game map, with different scale but the same map, so if some armies units are changed to corps their combat stats have to be changed so or the 3 corps that dormed the 1st army, for example, will have 3 more power at the new scale. Is no so easy.

vonpaul -> RE: WIF Release (3/3/2010 8:31:14 AM)
There is always the fascist tide scenario :) Does anyone know if the new pacific maps have been play-tested?

Froonp -> RE: WIF Release (3/3/2010 9:40:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Blorsh I think that is the map scale is changed why not the units scale is changed? Army sizes units were designed for a spicific mapscale so it could be revised. But I also think that different size units are playing at same game map, with different scale but the same map, so if some armies units are changed to corps their combat stats have to be changed so or the 3 corps that dormed the 1st army, for example, will have 3 more power at the new scale. Is no so easy. I think that you're mislead with the scale. What is called an "army" for the Japanese, the Chinese and the Russians in WiF FE, are the same as what is called a "Corps" for the USA, CW. About the same number of mens, artillery and tanks. This is even true for the Russians in the real world, where their armies where equivallent to western corps and their corps were equivallent to western divisions. I mean, the term "army" was not used for scale purposes, so changing the scale of the land does not necessitate to change the scale of the units. They are already the same scale all around the WiF world.

michaelbaldur -> RE: WIF Release (3/3/2010 11:07:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vonpaul There is always the fascist tide scenario :) Does anyone know if the new pacific maps have been play-tested? not very much. there are some problems with the over sea supply ... so it is not easy to test. but I can almost guarantee that there will come a AAR of a pacific campaign. when the supply work ....

composer99 -> RE: WIF Release (3/3/2010 5:02:56 PM)
In theory, the CWiF Beta means people are playing, albeit using obsolete rules, on the new scale. Is the new scale being officially tested? Maybe not per michaelbaldur's post. Unofficially? Quite possibly.

lomyrin -> RE: WIF Release (3/3/2010 5:53:20 PM)
The CWiF program did use the same map scale and units as MWiF and has been played extensively. The differences are the CWiF operating with RAW6 and MWiF with the latest rules. Optional additional cities have been added in MWiF for China and the divisional breakdowns are a little different. The counter mix has also been updated to the present rules. There was a thread some time ago on the War in China. Lars

micheljq -> RE: WIF Release (3/3/2010 7:01:42 PM)
Here is the thead with the AAR on the war in China, very interesting. [:)] http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2149608&mpage=1&key=

NeverMan -> RE: WIF Release (3/3/2010 10:34:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pzgndr quote: there should be room for everybody and every opinion... I agree 100%. However, there are those who insist their way is the only way and various game options and other Matrix/ADG-approved changes/improvements/enhancements are unacceptable. Neverman has made a sour reputation for himself on the EiA forum being one of those. Like I said, Steve should drive on and not worry about it. Looking forward to MWiF. Cheers! [:)] Odd, you are one of the only ones who think I have a "sour" reputation. In fact, Marshall even sent me an IM thanking me for my "differing" opinions. [X(]

NeverMan -> RE: WIF Release (3/3/2010 10:36:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets quote: ORIGINAL: NeverMan quote: ORIGINAL: SamuraiProgrammer To the best of my knowledge and understanding, all 'changes' are with the request or approval of the designer. 1. So were the EiA changes. ADF (aka Harry Rowland and crew?) were perfectly fine with whatever butchering Matrix wanted to do with EiA, why do they care, they're getting paid! 2. I really don't care about the map issue that much, it's the principle that bothers me. ADG has been changing WIF continuously since it was first released (~1985). Do you disapprove of all their changes? Or just some of their changes? I have trouble understanding what principle is being violated.[&:] Just the changes involved with making this PC game. It will, undoubtedly, not be a faithful port, Matrix doesn't seem to be very good at doing that. That said, a lot of people probably don't want a faithful port and that's fine, my opinion is that I do and I won't get it.

Orm -> RE: WIF Release (3/3/2010 10:53:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Blorsh I think that is the map scale is changed why not the units scale is changed? Army sizes units were designed for a spicific mapscale so it could be revised. But I also think that different size units are playing at same game map, with different scale but the same map, so if some armies units are changed to corps their combat stats have to be changed so or the 3 corps that dormed the 1st army, for example, will have 3 more power at the new scale. Is no so easy. You can play MWIF with an unlimited divisions option and they work very well with the new pacific scale.

Froonp -> RE: WIF Release (3/4/2010 5:29:23 AM)
People should stop speaking of unlimited divisions in MWIF. Divisions are no more unlimited. They are less restricted by the counters available, but they are limited indeed to 2 divisions for each existing corps. quote: ORIGINAL: Orm quote: ORIGINAL: Blorsh I think that is the map scale is changed why not the units scale is changed? Army sizes units were designed for a spicific mapscale so it could be revised. But I also think that different size units are playing at same game map, with different scale but the same map, so if some armies units are changed to corps their combat stats have to be changed so or the 3 corps that dormed the 1st army, for example, will have 3 more power at the new scale. Is no so easy. You can play MWIF with an unlimited divisions option and they work very well with the new pacific scale.

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: WIF Release (3/4/2010 9:06:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Froonp People should stop speaking of unlimited divisions in MWIF. Divisions are no more unlimited. They are less restricted by the counters available, but they are limited indeed to 2 divisions for each existing corps. quote: ORIGINAL: Orm quote: ORIGINAL: Blorsh I think that is the map scale is changed why not the units scale is changed? Army sizes units were designed for a spicific mapscale so it could be revised. But I also think that different size units are playing at same game map, with different scale but the same map, so if some armies units are changed to corps their combat stats have to be changed so or the 3 corps that dormed the 1st army, for example, will have 3 more power at the new scale. Is no so easy. You can play MWIF with an unlimited divisions option and they work very well with the new pacific scale. True. I could use a new name for this optional rule.

Mad Russian -> RE: WIF Release (3/4/2010 2:04:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NeverMan It doesn't matter if that's who WiF was "suppose" to be or not, what matters is how a lot of people played the games for YEARS and YEARS and now they are going to change it and whether you want to believe it or not, it will change the way the game is played to some degree. Why do you think we've all waited all these years? I want the game to change. I want it to change from being a board game to being a computer game. For those that don't want that this is probably not going to be a good fit. I'm not normally one of the guys that wants to see games ported over directly. WiF is so good it's probably one of the few that will be a good thing to see happen. Our group hasn't kept up with all the little baby flames and we don't agree with all of them. It's my understanding we can play with whichever rules set we like as options. That's great. If not, we'll still play. This is World in Flames after all. Good Hunting. MR

Edfactor -> RE: WIF Release (3/4/2010 2:32:38 PM)
quote: In principle, I agree with you most of the time. For example, I hate it when Hollywood takes a perfectly good story and ruins it by twisting it around in some way. (Notable examples are what they did to Starship Troopers and The Puppet Masters.) This is so true. But what about the remakes they do, Planet of the apes, Rollerball, Day the Earth Stood Still. They manage to screw those up to.

michaelbaldur -> RE: WIF Release (3/4/2010 4:03:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets quote: ORIGINAL: Froonp People should stop speaking of unlimited divisions in MWIF. Divisions are no more unlimited. They are less restricted by the counters available, but they are limited indeed to 2 divisions for each existing corps. quote: ORIGINAL: Orm quote: ORIGINAL: Blorsh I think that is the map scale is changed why not the units scale is changed? Army sizes units were designed for a spicific mapscale so it could be revised. But I also think that different size units are playing at same game map, with different scale but the same map, so if some armies units are changed to corps their combat stats have to be changed so or the 3 corps that dormed the 1st army, for example, will have 3 more power at the new scale. Is no so easy. You can play MWIF with an unlimited divisions option and they work very well with the new pacific scale. True. I could use a new name for this optional rule. what about ... additional/more breakdowns....

rkr1958 -> RE: WIF Release (3/4/2010 6:22:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets quote: ORIGINAL: Froonp People should stop speaking of unlimited divisions in MWIF. Divisions are no more unlimited. They are less restricted by the counters available, but they are limited indeed to 2 divisions for each existing corps. quote: ORIGINAL: Orm quote: ORIGINAL: Blorsh I think that is the map scale is changed why not the units scale is changed? Army sizes units were designed for a spicific mapscale so it could be revised. But I also think that different size units are playing at same game map, with different scale but the same map, so if some armies units are changed to corps their combat stats have to be changed so or the 3 corps that dormed the 1st army, for example, will have 3 more power at the new scale. Is no so easy. You can play MWIF with an unlimited divisions option and they work very well with the new pacific scale. True. I could use a new name for this optional rule. what about ... additional/more breakdowns.... What about, the "Unlimited Divisions" option?

SamuraiProgrmmr -> RE: WIF Release (3/4/2010 6:47:20 PM)
How about Complete Divisional Breakdown Option or CDB Option or CDBO

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: WIF Release (3/4/2010 6:59:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SamuraiProgrammer How about Complete Divisional Breakdown Option or CDB Option or CDBO Hmm, Merging suggestions, I come up with: Unlimited Breakdown. This is different from Unlimited Divisions, which implies you can build as many divisions as you like. Unlimited Breakdown means you can break down all your Corps/Armies into divisions - which is what this optional rule does.

Froonp -> RE: WIF Release (3/4/2010 7:53:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets quote: ORIGINAL: SamuraiProgrammer How about Complete Divisional Breakdown Option or CDB Option or CDBO Hmm, Merging suggestions, I come up with: Unlimited Breakdown. This is different from Unlimited Divisions, which implies you can build as many divisions as you like. Unlimited Breakdown means you can break down all your Corps/Armies into divisions - which is what this optional rule does. This is not unlimited Breakdown, as you are limited to the corps you have. Also, you can break down all your Corps/Armies into divisions, but also you can't build back a corps you have broken down into divisions, so for me it is "Expanded Division Breakdown". It is the "Division Breakdown" option, that is expanded to something better.

Orm -> RE: WIF Release (3/4/2010 9:51:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Froonp People should stop speaking of unlimited divisions in MWIF. Divisions are no more unlimited. They are less restricted by the counters available, but they are limited indeed to 2 divisions for each existing corps. quote: ORIGINAL: Orm quote: ORIGINAL: Blorsh I think that is the map scale is changed why not the units scale is changed? Army sizes units were designed for a spicific mapscale so it could be revised. But I also think that different size units are playing at same game map, with different scale but the same map, so if some armies units are changed to corps their combat stats have to be changed so or the 3 corps that dormed the 1st army, for example, will have 3 more power at the new scale. Is no so easy. You can play MWIF with an unlimited divisions option and they work very well with the new pacific scale. I am sorry to have offended[:(] I could have explained what it this option means and so on and named the option by its current name "unlimited breakdown". For me unlimited division is just that the divisions are not limited by the original WIF division counters. They are still limited by how many corps you have to break down. But I just wanted to make a fast comment that there is an option available in MWIF that allows you to have more divisions in MWIF on the pacific map than you were allowed in WIF. I didn't feel it was important to explain just how it works in regards to this subject. I thought most would understand that there would be no endless hordes of free divisions to place on every hex in the pacific.

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

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.859375