Any more patches coming?

Any more patches coming? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific

Message

Poindexter -> Any more patches coming? (2/11/2003 11:13:10 AM)
Not that I'm complaining. I just remember reading a few weeks back about a possibility that Matrix may have discovered a possible bug in their most recent patch. This is the one that involes some weird AI decisions to launch piecemeal "suicide" strikes at enemy forces. Just wondering. Not complaining. Still enjoying UV immensely.

Full Moon -> (2/11/2003 11:21:29 AM)
Quote Joel Billings "We've fixed the partial air unit problem with CVE's in the version we are currently working on. No ETA yet on the release of the patch."

Zakhal -> (2/11/2003 11:32:53 AM)
UV is good but i think its time to have som sweet witp loving allready.:)

Drex -> (2/11/2003 12:33:29 PM)
i know the next patch deals with the suicidal unescorted bomber attacks. I heard it was coming out this month but that maay be changed by now.

Veer -> (2/11/2003 2:04:49 PM)
They've fixed quite few things in the expected patch. I have a feeling this is going to be the last patch till WITP comes out, so they are going to delay its release until they're sure that they've got everything covered. Don't want another bug cropping up after the patch has been released.

Mr.Frag -> (2/11/2003 9:08:04 PM)
Whatever gets fixed or tweeked in UV will obviously make it's way into WitP in some measure or another. It's great that Matrix continues to work on UV issues instead of simply moving on to the next game, but I understand like all companies, they need to turn a profit, and thats done by selling the next game ;) Here's to a great bunch of folks who continue to listen to us, obviously they must all be insane by now :D

Admiral_Arctic -> My opinion... (2/11/2003 10:34:12 PM)
But they won't sell as many as quickly if people are not satisfied with the current one. I doubt I'll be buying WITP. I know I won't be buying Unlimited Galaxies. I don't have the confidence they can be done successfully. After buying and trying to play PacWar and Second Front and other GG games I have lost interest in their abilitiy to deliver a game that can adequately recreate the Pacific War. If UV was play tested properly, Matrix would have known it was not ready for release- but they released in anyways- six months too early. Even though UV has evolved into a good game- it is not a great game. These need fixing: AI's poor performance in air ops (and lack of player input), Lack of way points and lack of control of speed of ships. Full speed and cruising speed is very limiting, Allied bomber accuracy is too high, Docile Zeroes, Overachieving S-Boats, Minefields (if Rommel was living in the UV universe D Day would never have been tried due to the minefields stretching from Leningrad to Cairo.) I would prefer no minefields. If someone quits a game, the program should destroy their hard drive.

Full Moon -> (2/11/2003 10:37:51 PM)
[QUOTE]if Rommel was living in the UV universe D Day would never have been tried due to the minefields stretching from Leningrad to Cairo[/QUOTE] Poor Rommel, why people keep picking on him? He is being picked on HOI forum too.:( [QUOTE]If someone quits a game, the program should destroy their hard drive.[/QUOTE] :eek: :eek:

Admiral_Arctic -> (2/11/2003 11:36:40 PM)
I am a fan a Rommel. Even if he couldn't get along with his superiors (in rank at least) and ranoff on his own ventures, he did achieve big results with small resources. But Germany could not back him up in any of the important battles. if Rommel had unlimited maritime mines as you get in UV, he would have had such dense fields the Allied ships would have been wrecked.

Yamamoto -> Re: My opinion... (2/11/2003 11:59:30 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Admiral_Arctic [B]. Even though UV has evolved into a good game- it is not a great game. These need fixing: AI's poor performance in air ops (and lack of player input), Lack of way points and lack of control of speed of ships. Full speed and cruising speed is very limiting, Allied bomber accuracy is too high, Docile Zeroes, Overachieving S-Boats, Minefields (if Rommel was living in the UV universe D Day would never have been tried due to the minefields stretching from Leningrad to Cairo.) I would prefer no minefields. If someone quits a game, the program should destroy their hard drive. [/B][/QUOTE] I think UV is a great game. If your points were addressed it would be a PERFECT game, something I never expect from a game. AI performance: AIs suck in all games. The AI choosing suicidal air targets is fixed in the next patch they say. Way points and Speed: I can live without waypoints. Adding them would make it even harder for subs to pick the lucky hex a ship ends its turn in. I would like the ability to set ships’ speeds – even if it was only cruise/full. Allied bomber accuracy: agreed. It is too high. Docile Zeros: Mine seem to work fine. Any more aggressive and they would suffer unacceptably high losses. Overachieving S-Boats: It’s not the S-boats. It’s the –50% IJN ASW. Minefields: I love them. To me the worst problem with the 1.0 release was the surface combat. Remember when 1 ship vs 10 was an even fight because every time a ship was fired at it would fire back? That was ridiculous. UV has shaped up to be one of my favorite games. The support they give it is equaled by only one other game in my memory and leagues above the rest. Yamamoto

gus -> Re: Re: My opinion... (2/12/2003 1:35:18 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Yamamoto [B] AI performance: AIs suck in all games. The AI choosing suicidal air targets is fixed in the next patch they say.[/B][/QUOTE] It is probably to late to change the strategic AI in UV but I am hoping for a significant improvement for WitP. The tactical AI in UV is more or less up to the job at hand and if they fix the suicidal air attacks, especially by the Japanese level bombers, then it will probably be as good as it can get. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Yamamoto [B] Way points and Speed: I can live without waypoints. Adding them would make it even harder for subs to pick the lucky hex a ship ends its turn in. I would like the ability to set ships’ speeds – even if it was only cruise/full.[/B][/QUOTE] IMO Waypoints are esential because of the proliferation of mines and the inability to set standoff ranges for TF's. I would also like to be able to set the TF speed directly instead of having to rely on the patrol/retirement allowed toggle. The issue with subs not being able to intercept TF's as they traverse a given hex is a seperate issue that should be fixed. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Yamamoto [B] Allied bomber accuracy: agreed. It is too high.[/B][/QUOTE] Let me pile on here, not only is it too accurate but the durability of these a/c is phenomenal which allows the Allies to fly significant bombing missions 24/7/365 [QUOTE]Originally posted by Yamamoto [B] Docile Zeros: Mine seem to work fine. Any more aggressive and they would suffer unacceptably high losses.[/B][/QUOTE] Agreed [QUOTE]Originally posted by Yamamoto [B] Overachieving S-Boats: It’s not the S-boats. It’s the –50% IJN ASW. [/B][/QUOTE] It's actaully a combination of things, I believe it is a function of how and where the S-boats are employed in UV that is the real issue. The reduction in the IJN's ASW effectiveness may be have been a bit harsh but it is closer to reality than in previous versions of UV. Any submarine but especially the S-boats operating solo or in packs in shallow water/port hexes should be DEAD MEAT. Also Allied sub doctrine during 1942 was rather passive in nature and would never have allowed their precious S-boats to be used in an agressive manner. Compounding this is the nature of the captains of these vessels who were trained more in avoidance than in agressive pursuit and targeting of enemy combatants/merchants. So my solution to this would be that a 'Historical Allied sub doctrine option' be added to the game options menu. Better yet combine both Allied and Japanese sub doctrine into one single option. Furthermore increase the detection level and decrease the survivabilty of subs operating in shallow water/port hexes. This should insure that subs are used in a more historically accurate fashion. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Yamamoto [B] Minefields: I love them. [/B][/QUOTE] In terms of gameplay minefields don't actually cause too much significant damage but are more of an annoyance. However they simply have too much of an impact on the game from a psycological perspective as you constantly have to be sweeping wherever your TF's operate otherwise their impact on the game increases dramatically. My recommendation would be to keep the logistical nature of minewarfare as it is but dramatically reduce the chance of collision. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Yamamoto [B] To me the worst problem with the 1.0 release was the surface combat. Remember when 1 ship vs 10 was an even fight because every time a ship was fired at it would fire back? That was ridiculous. UV has shaped up to be one of my favorite games. The support they give it is equaled by only one other game in my memory and leagues above the rest. [/B][/QUOTE] All this being said, I was happy with UV 1.0 and am even happier with UV 2.20 a truly great game getting better with age and a promising indicator of how good WitP will be! Gus

Drex -> (2/12/2003 3:11:58 AM)
If UV hadn't come out I wonder what game I would be playing. It may not be perfect but its way ahead of other wargames in terms of playability. I even put SPWAW aside so I could play more UV. When WitP comes out I will probably concentrate on it and UV will have served its function as a precursor to WitP( realizing that they are not the same game).

m0ngoose -> What game would you be playing? (2/12/2003 3:14:33 AM)
Well, MOO3 is coming..... :)

Paul Vebber -> (2/12/2003 3:51:03 AM)
To have a group of 25 playtesters play as much UV as 5000 players can play in six months would take 100 years. Finding "game play bugs" are pretty much a function of how much you play the game. You can only do so much to work game play bugs out of a game before it is released.

Mr.Frag -> (2/12/2003 5:26:11 AM)
[QUOTE]To have a group of 25 playtesters play as much UV as 5000 players can play in six months would take 100 years[/QUOTE] You obviously haven't seen just how much some of us play UV :D

Veldor -> (2/12/2003 6:23:32 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Paul Vebber [B]To have a group of 25 playtesters play as much UV as 5000 players can play in six months would take 100 years. Finding "game play bugs" are pretty much a function of how much you play the game. You can only do so much to work game play bugs out of a game before it is released. [/B][/QUOTE] Sounds like you've found a solution. Instead of 25 playtesters playing for 100 years, you need 5000 playing for six months. :) Just remember not to promise playtesters a free copy of the final game or else you'll have no one left to sell it too, perfect or not.. No, I rather like the current model. I'd much rather have a released game quicker that I can play despite some minor bugs.. then wait so long that someone else has already put something better out or my interests have otherwise moved on... Just continue to support WITP like you have UV and make sure there aren't any "catostrophic" bugs that will make reviews bad. And then start on WITP II ASAP....

Full Moon -> Re: What game would you be playing? (2/12/2003 6:27:16 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by m0ngoose [B]Well, MOO3 is coming..... :) [/B][/QUOTE] What is MOO3? Role-playing game of cows in Texas?:D

Mr.Frag -> (2/12/2003 6:33:55 AM)
[QUOTE]What is MOO3[/QUOTE] NOT a war game, but it had it's brief moments for a space empire builder... If you like wargames which specifically model things that were, you'll hate the Masters of Orion stuff.

Joel Billings -> (2/12/2003 7:17:30 AM)
The release of the patch to testers will happen within the next 1-3 days. My guess is at least 1 week for testers and if it looks good it will come out as a beta patch at that point. It could be delayed if testers find problems that need immediate fixing. I definitely hope for at least a beta release of the patch to UV owners before the end of the month. Almost every item in the UV patch has been migrated already to WitP, although they will need testing in WitP separate of the UV testing. As soon as we go into testing with the patch I will post the items that are currently in the patch. On this patch you can blame Gary, Keith and me directly as we are responsible for 99% of the patch (of course Matrix is helping out with testing and some art). So if you like it, blame us (2by3). If you don't like it, blame us (2by3). I will say we got great help and support from many UV players that posted suggestions, problems, and especially those that sent in save game files. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but in my experience publishing over 150 titles, UV was as good or better out of the box as 90% of them. The complexities of the UV game are enormous and you could disagree with millions of details (as well as some of the major design approaches), but just for pure playability and lack of "major show stopper bugs" I thought UV was in pretty good shape at release. Hopefully it just keeps getting better. Joel

bilbow -> (2/12/2003 10:10:18 AM)
I have to agree with everything you said, Joel. Except that it was better out of the box than 98%. You are being modest. Thanks again for all the effort and support.

Veer -> Re: My opinion... (2/12/2003 3:44:13 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Admiral_Arctic [B] AI's poor performance in air ops (and lack of player input), [/B][/QUOTE] This is a crucial issue, and it's becasue the AI dosn't think. Once given an order it just follows it to the T regardless of anything. Which is why we need player input every day turn (don't know how they are going to work 7 day turns). The problem is accute only for Naval attack or sweep missions (which launch two strikes a day, as oppossed to the others which only launch one strike/day). The point is that after the first strike, the tactical situation can change but since no player input is allowed between strikes the AI simply does the same the thing again... It would be nice if the AI could be made to think, with relavent player input, but i don't know how they are going to manage it.

Poindexter -> Thanks Joel (2/13/2003 1:39:50 AM)
Appreciate the update Joel. You and the rest of the 2x3 crews dedication to making this game better is much appreciated (and admired) by me. I'm sure I speak for many others as well.

Joel Billings -> Re: Re: My opinion... (2/13/2003 1:46:25 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Veer [B]This is a crucial issue, and it's becasue the AI dosn't think. Once given an order it just follows it to the T regardless of anything. Which is why we need player input every day turn (don't know how they are going to work 7 day turns). The problem is accute only for Naval attack or sweep missions (which launch two strikes a day, as oppossed to the others which only launch one strike/day). The point is that after the first strike, the tactical situation can change but since no player input is allowed between strikes the AI simply does the same the thing again... It would be nice if the AI could be made to think, with relavent player input, but i don't know how they are going to manage it. [/B][/QUOTE] Actually, the AI does think. First, it's logic was faulty due to bad logic in the code which we have fixed. Second, much is happening that is invisible to the player so it is hard for you to judge it's thinking (weather has been made more visible in the patch but much is still less visible). Third, the AI does not does think with the same complexity as a human mind so I admit it will never be as smart as a good player. However, due to the second item above, if we gave you the limited/bad info the computer is really dealing with at the moment of a strike launch, you might make some bad decisions too. We think the patch will solve the problems in logic that were leading to very stupid attacks so at least the AI's target selection will follow our expert systems guidelines instead of doing things we totally didn't expect. By the way, players using level bombers at altitude to crush shipping will be in for a much more difficult time with the new patch (at least we think they will).

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.515625