(Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns



Message

Charles22 -> (3/3/2001 7:52:00 PM)

Wild Bill/David Heath: My mistake. I was generalizing and wasn't trying to stir up a ruckus; if it can't be done, it can't be done. I did, however, go through the trouble of saying it was "basically" rejected by Wild Bill, not so much because he was being allegedly cold or anything, but because the use of the word, 'basically', was meant to show to generalization of the chances of that request being executed. My failure lied in not being more specific in mentioning any details apart from the fact that Wild Bill was the messenger (though I didn't say 'messenger'), or indeed that it's something he got from others. It's one of the few times I cut to the quick, and now you can see why I don't do it very often. I figured what WB said was accessible and current enough, and that there was no reason to get specific. No, if I haven't made it clear enough by now, WB, was the messenger only, and not the rejector. It doesn't matter to me who rejected the idea, and I didn't think generalization would lead to this, though I certainly could've worded it better. The rejection, in whole or in part by anyone doesn't matter to me, I didn't even post a frowny face to the post. No attempt to complain, really, just another post on my part. I could've just as easily have been talking about turret traverse.



Charles22 -> (3/3/2001 8:30:00 PM)

Here's a portion the message Wild Bill gave me:
quote:

You'll see a lot of great things in 5.0, but you won't see wider maps. That is a change that would involve many, many hours of coding work. It is something that I too would like, but I have to understand and accept the fact that Matrix programmers have to get to work on other projects. After 19 months of work (can you believe that!) on SPWAW, we have to move on or move out. That is an alternative that we do not want to face. So perhaps one day...but not in 5.0, I fear.
I'm sorry, but that looks like opinion to me. Sure that opinion could, and as it turns out was correct, but there is no mention of "others" rejecting it. It's WB's opinion that they don't have time for that specific request to be done; it would involve too much coding work and there's no mention that anyone asked anyone else about it, though I know better now. I'm not upset, still. Just a misunderstanding that's all [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img]



Charles22 -> (3/3/2001 9:02:00 PM)

Wild Bill: Since you, like I, would like the wider campaign maps, consider the following if you would. Perhaps you've had this issue settled in your head long before this series just now, and perhaps you're wondering why I've pressed this issue more than once. For one thing it seems as though I'm the only one pressing it, so if I don't, it certainly will fall by the wayside (unless someone like yourself is all fired up about it, but then I don't know what goes on at Matrix - [trying to not generalize here, so excuse me if this gets irritating to read]). Now, given that you may had been satisfied that there's no way this will ever be done except in the very distant future, I have seen a thread which seemed to be hopeful, and is partially why I'm still pressing this point. Perhaps you haven't seen the thread to which I speak, but in it this subject came up, and Warhorse "or somebody" basically all of the sudden had a brainstorm on how it could seemingly be easily done. Maybe it's my fault, but I don't ever recall, whoever this was, coming back and mentioning that their idea could or could not work. I would guess that thread was no more than a month or two old. Maybe his idea couldn't work, but I don't recall anything further about it.



Figmo -> (3/3/2001 9:14:00 PM)

Geez Charles - Now I'm having to think!! [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/confused.gif[/img] I don't remember the specific post but the only way I can think of to get a really big map in a generated battle is by placing a pre-made one in there when you start. I know there's a way to do it - but for the life of me I can't remember! [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/eek.gif[/img] Hopefully somebody else can help with this - although a separate post might be best for the explanation as this thread is for suggestions - which yours is a good one - if it happens or not!! Figmo



Warhorse -> (3/3/2001 9:25:00 PM)

Charles22, ok now you peaked my interest!! What was the idea to get the maps in there?! Other than manually entering them in by changing the save to scenario, I don't know how to do it [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/wink.gif[/img] Would be really cool if a couple folk could provide a campaign alteration service. They would change opposing forces, maps, etc, then send back the save, but this would be time consuming(about half hour sometimes per),no pay either, which sucks but oh well!! Me and my brother do this for each other, and it rocks, but if you compound this by all the many players, it is indeed unthinkable, I believe, still nice to dream of. I wouldn't be able to do it, as I'm working on CL, but if I had the time, I would, really, I get a kick out of assembling forces, setting traps, and customizing large maps for my own and my brothers campaigns!! Just a thought. [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/wink.gif[/img] ------------------ Mike Amos Meine Ehre Heisst Treue



ruxius -> (3/3/2001 9:35:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by Figmo: ruxius - Your English is much better than my Italian - actually I don't know Italian at all - argh!! I wouldn't have known if you hadn't said anything!!
uhm...this means my english is very poor as what you say about your italian is true.. LET ME TELL YOU THAT I DO AGREE WITH YOU ! Eh eh eh eh !(that means :-)))) ) (A very terrible thing trying to having a sense of humor into another language...) By the way ...here we expect a little more from an typical italian surname as Faletti is !



Figmo -> (3/3/2001 9:48:00 PM)

[/QUOTE] By the way ...here we expect a little more from an typical italian surname as Faletti is ![/B][/QUOTE] OOPS!! Busted!! [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/eek.gif[/img] If it helps any - I know two phrases in Italian!! [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/redface.gif[/img] The really embarrassed Figmo P.S. OK - I'm going to get a "Learn Italian" CD today - give me some time - geez - the pressure is on!!



Mark Ezra -> (3/3/2001 10:14:00 PM)

My wish list for SP was fully met when SPWAW came out. Everything since then has been icing on the cake. This latest offering will obviously take SPWAW to a new demension. More like adding another level of cake! Outstanding work, thanks for all your efforts!



Paul Vebber -> (3/3/2001 10:36:00 PM)

One of the problems with a forum like this that lots of ideas get floated from lots of people, including us "insiders". At the end of the day those of us who help translate those ideas into things the programmers can do, get left with a list of a whole lot of good ideas and a time budget. The programmers give fedback on the features and implementation ideas and how long they thing it will take. Then we fit what features we think make the best fit with the time and "play well together" and the programmers march off. Usually they come back in a few days and say - "that one I thought was real hard was easy and that easy one I just can't do, and this other one shold work but for the life of me can;t figure ou why it doesn't. Then the playtesters come back with a handful of bugs from out in left field (like teh desert terrain button in the editor suddenly not working as a recent actual example) so now that has to be fixed. It is quite litereally a nightmare that I am fairly in awe of Davids ability to keep straight! We generally end up adding 2 weeks and 2 more weeks and finally we get to a point where other projects start falling behind and David say OK thsese features we thought we could do are out, these couple that turned out we could are in and when we fix the bugs we can fix in the next two weeks we release. Otherwise it quite literally could go on for ever. So please understand that our comments here are often preliminary and the "facts" don't show themselves and often, except for the programmers, we don't know the final feature set until we are ready to ship something. We understand and share your frustration, believe me. So understand Wild Bills frustration when he seemingly gets dumped on for bringing bad news. Shoot me if you want as I often am one of the Evil ones that have to "just say no". Often to a thing I personally want very badly, but have to leave on the floor, for now, for the good of the product overall. What Tom and Mike have done with undocumented code is nothing short of brilliant. To implement much of what you (and we) want simply takes creating a new game to do it. That is why we are moving on to Combat Leader and having to cut back on our support of SP:WaW to once or twice a year from the level of effort of 5 major and like a dozen minor realeases since 1.0 came out. As to the "proprietary" and "free" parts of the mega campaingn, there is little we can do to those of you who would give away our "for profit" games. Just remember, if you do it, you are directly responsible for hammering a nail the coffin of "real wargamming". Our business goals are modest, but our market is tiny and while you are free to copy the free part of the game if you want, if the give away the "Pay" part, and we go under, its on your conscience that you contributed to our demise. Its not that hard to copy the setup file for the game to your hard disk and transfer that to a CD. Before you add the Campaign files you bought for that buddy, think about the fact that you are hammering that nail...If we are going to ever get to teh pile of "game proposals nobody ever does" we have be successful with the ones that turn a buck. [This message has been edited by Paul Vebber (edited March 03, 2001).]



Panzer Capta -> (3/3/2001 11:51:00 PM)

Paul, i think i speak for nearly all the SPWaW community in saying that it would be a complete and utter disgrace if anyone stood in the way of the Matrix Team seeing a return in your greatly appreciated efforts (i.e., by "stealing" what you hope and deserve to make money on). I think we all understand (or should) that you need to draw a "line in the sand" with respect to SPWaW and move on to profitability you so deserve. The constant requests for additions/improvements to SPWaW are well intended, but from a business perspective, it is a vicious cycle. What you have literally given to us is priceless, and it is time to realize that WE MUST GIVE BACK. This way we all win. Regards, Panzer Captain



Charles22 -> (3/3/2001 11:56:00 PM)

Figmo/Warhorse: I'm sorry, I don't even remember the thread. Seemed it was one of those that weren't originally on that subject as I've made one or two new threads on that subject before, but I don't think that's where I saw what I described as the brainstorm. My impression was that Warhorse, or whoever it was, already knew about the process he desribes here, as indeed I knew of such a thing and considered it too much of a hassle for every campaign battle. I was wanting it automated, as indeed it automates between 40 and 80 hexes now, and the reaction I vaguely recall seemed to be based on some radical idea to do that very thing, but just have larger parameters, perhaps. Surely, if it was that easy, it would've been done a long time ago, but they never mentioned what the idea was (it must've been a flash in the pan that after about 10 seconds of scrutiny it was found impossible to work in that manner).



Wild Bill -> (3/4/2001 12:14:00 AM)

Thanks for the explanation, Charles22. Sorry I misread you. And a special thanks to Ruxius! Let me take a "chill" pill here. David says he will ask again. That gives us hope. I do hope we can get wider maps...WB ------------------ In Arduis Fidelis Wild Bill Wilder Coordinator, Scenario Design Matrix Games



Charles22 -> (3/4/2001 12:23:00 AM)

Thanks WB



ruxius -> (3/4/2001 12:39:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Thanks WB
FANTASTICO ! I like it very much when poeple succed in collaborating ! BRAVI ! And this is all !



David Heath -> (3/4/2001 12:46:00 AM)

Hi Guys Its not 100% but I do not think we are going to get larger maps in the campaigns in this build but we will see. Please remember I am always out there and I listerning... I sure Paul and Bill will say this is true. We wouldn't ask for your input if we didn't care. David



pops -> (3/4/2001 1:03:00 AM)

..looks good...what about more options for country selection in the long campaign (specificallyfor me I would like to see Canada as an option...others would undoubtably like other countries included)...is this very difficult? I am curious what graphics are in the new 450 mentioned....are these redone or new graphics...(adding new features or replacing old ones)?



rfox -> (3/4/2001 1:13:00 AM)

I don't mean to be superficial but I'm also very curious about the 450(!) new graphics being added (or is it replaced?) in the next version. Are there any screenshots available? ------------------ Rob



KG Erwin -> (3/4/2001 1:18:00 AM)

My congratulations to the team for what promises to be a vastly improved game. I take it that the logistics of pricing and distribution have not yet been fully worked out? I have no qualms about handing over my hard-earned cash for your efforts, though. I think most of us would prefer a CD over having to slog through another 300+ MB download. Again, my thanks to all you guys, but, as Tom Petty said, "the waiting is the hardest part."



rfox -> (3/4/2001 1:36:00 AM)

I have another question along with my query relating to the graphics above. In the list of improvements, #13, 14, 19, 20, 50 all refer to the computer's ability in picking out units. Does this apply to the long campaign as well as any randomly generated battle? Also, and this is something I have very much looked forward to seeing improved: You list in #20 that the AI will choose far less tanks when playing Belgium, Holland, or France. This is great! However, what about Poland circa. '39? I've played some scenarios in the long campaign where the AI chooses over half of the Polish tank reserve (for the entire nation) for a skirmish with my little Panzer battalion. Will the computer also choose less tanks for Poland? Finally, thanks so much for your hard work on this! I can't wait. ------------------ Rob



königstiger -> (3/4/2001 1:54:00 AM)

I´ve just read the improvements at tankheads side and all i can say is fantastic (especially the new graphics-editor and the new oob) and thanks again for everything! one thing i missed, and i can live without that, is the possibility to choose between the sandbags and the old v.1 foxholes for infantry in assault / defend scenarios... ..just can´t wait to get v.5 and the MC!!!



Figmo -> (3/4/2001 2:56:00 AM)

I agree rfox - and don't forget the Czechs - their tanks are REAL tuff - if I don't have some 88mm AT guns by the time I play them - it's almost impossible to beat them. Figmo



nikb -> (3/4/2001 6:09:00 AM)

All I can say is...Wow. I still pinch myself - I wonder if I'm dreaming. If I am I just hope I don't wake up! Nik



nikb -> (3/4/2001 6:12:00 AM)

test



Mike Rothery -> (3/4/2001 1:02:00 PM)

How about early to mid war infantry anti tank weapons: -less reliance on AT rifle grenades -Panzerwurfmine for Falshirmjager -Hawkins grenades -Sticky bomb -improvised jerry can bombs -hand thrown tellermine -less potency for molotov cocktails -Gammon bombs -RPG43 -Heft Hohladung magnetic grenade Can we please get the introduction dates for the Panzerfaust and Panzershreck corrected. October 43 for the 30, mid 44 for the 60 and November 44 for the 100. Panzershreck was mid to late 43 if I remember correctly. ps. the 105mm German RCL should be much easier to spot with its backblast. Mike R



zombie -> (3/4/2001 1:09:00 PM)

Hey Matrix I understand what you are saying about pirated games, so how about this, 3 friends of mine live nearby who all play this game, how about I send you 80 bucks for one copy of the game and I share it with my 4 friends? I assume this is only for the CD, no manual or hardcopy included? That way you save on 3 more copies mailed out?



degen -> (3/4/2001 1:40:00 PM)

The changes sound great and I have my $20 ready to go! Are you considering pre-ordering to avoid a rush? Probably would be a good idea. Thanks again Matrix (WB, Paul, David, Warhorse, and others) for listening to us and make this game even better than expected. All of you have been very patient despite the flood of comments and the long hours that I'm sure you are putting in. My question to all of us is, what other game company would do this? We should be so fortunate to have found a company that listens to us and considers our suggestions. While Matrix can't make all of our wants come true, to have a forum to discuss them with the designers of the game is fantastic!!! Keep it up guys! ------------------ "I would have much rather that he had given me one more division" - Rommel after receiving his field marshall baton



degen -> (3/4/2001 1:42:00 PM)

Oh, and in the spirit of making suggestions...have you added infantry casualties to the event log? It seems like this is the only event that is not reported. It's a significant omission considering that all other key actions are reported. Not a critical point, but a "nice to have" in my book. ------------------ "I would have much rather that he had given me one more division" - Rommel after receiving his field marshall baton



Charles22 -> (3/5/2001 12:43:00 AM)

Hey, wouldn't it be weird if this outsold CL (number of sales)? I would think because CL is a whole product, that it's sales would be higher than V.5 of SPWAW.



Paul Vebber -> (3/5/2001 2:59:00 AM)

To clarify, - "the game" is not for sale...the Mega-Campaigns are what we are selling, and likely a copy of all three of our free games will be included, since there is space on the CD... SPWaW version 5 is and will remain free for the downlaod. You may also copy THE GAME and distribute it, but you MAY NOT COPY AND DISTRIBUTE THE MEGA-CAMPAIGNS. If you want to buy 4 copies and give them out that is fine, or have your friends reimburse you, but PLEASE DON'T give out the games we sell!!



Rhodan -> (3/5/2001 3:19:00 AM)

At the risk of someone else having said this allready, but it would be nice if I can designate a battery of arty as counter fire only (or was that not done in those days?) Another little thing that might make life a bit easier, could the encyclopedia, once 'opened', default to the unit currently selected/highlighted?



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

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.328125