Feature requests (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

Alikchi2 -> Feature requests (3/22/2015 1:57:35 AM)

Hey all - just wondering if there's a thread or somewhere similar where players could request bugfixes or new features.



Anthropoid -> RE: Feature requests (3/22/2015 5:30:22 AM)

I suspect you just created it for the time being! [:)]



Yaab -> RE: Feature requests (3/22/2015 7:20:47 AM)

Alikchi, you report possible bugs in the Tech Support section
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tt.asp?forumid=711



Alikchi2 -> RE: Feature requests (3/22/2015 11:58:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

I suspect you just created it for the time being! [:)]


Fair enough! Well, here goes. [:)]

I'm extremely pleased and satisfied with how the game and engine have evolved over the past decade. If there's any flaw, it's in just how much stuff is locked into the executable. I'd love to play War Plan Orange, for instance, but it's stuck with decade-old untouched code with none of the improvements of AE. Basically, modability should be expanded to extend the lifetime of the game and engine.

So here are a few things I'd like to request modability for, either through the editor or some less elegant method:

1 - Nationalities. This would allow us to do things like include Germany or other nations in alternate history scenarios. (Or just mark the historical U-boats in the pacific as German, rather than Japanese.) How about the Thais, or collaborationist Chinese, or Mongolians or South Africans or.. (etc etc). This is mostly a convenience thing, as any War in the Pacific game will essentially be two sides (I'm not crazy enough to ask for a three-sides war mode yet).

[img]http://lpix.org/1982978/nationality.png[/img]

As you can see, there are already two unused slots: 3 and 17. Opening them up to modding/editing, or the creation of additional, user-created nationality slots, would be fantastic.

2 - Scenario start dates. Scenarios cannot begin before 7 December 1941. This seems like it'd be a simple fix. Let me have my hypothetical 1936 war, or import War Plan Orange into the new engine. [:)]


I'd also like it to be easier to export scenario data as .csv or other spreadsheet file for easier editing, but that's a minor request, relatively.



Anthropoid -> RE: Feature requests (3/23/2015 1:12:11 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alikchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

I suspect you just created it for the time being! [:)]


Fair enough! Well, here goes. [:)]

I'm extremely pleased and satisfied with how the game and engine have evolved over the past decade. If there's any flaw, it's in just how much stuff is locked into the executable. I'd love to play War Plan Orange, for instance, but it's stuck with decade-old untouched code with none of the improvements of AE. Basically, modability should be expanded to extend the lifetime of the game and engine.



Oooh! +10! Very much agree.

The War Plan Orange data ported into this engine would be SWEEEETTTT!!

ADDIT: BTW, anyone know what is up with "Tankerace?" He was the WPO designer right?

I used to see him post on the forums a few years back, but haven't noticed him for a long time.

Seems this was his last post back in 2009.

quote:

The truth is I want to do one, I really, really, really, (did I mention really?) do. But for the next six months I'm writing a master's thesis. Then I'm getting married. Then I might be moving to start a doctoral program.

If I could start such a project, it would be until August before I could. Not finish, but actually start. Then assume that it took the same timeline as the original game to make, you wouldn't see it until November of 2011. Now factor in graduate school is more time consuming and that timeline will be even longer.

I could do one, but it would have to be in the future. For the next seven months I just simply will not have the time. That's not economics or me not caring about you guys, that's just the simple realities of life. And assuming that Matrix, 2by3, and the AE team greenlit the project. And such a thing would have to be a new, standalone game because the AE guys would need to be compensated, and since WitP owners had to buy a whole new game, it isn't fair if such a thing came just in expansion form for WPO owners.

I have never ruled out an AE update, far from it. But I'll be the first to admit that I don't have the time to do it now, or at least for seven months. After that, well, if everyone else approves I don't mind giving it a shot.



Alfred -> RE: Feature requests (3/23/2015 2:18:44 AM)

Quite a few threads on this topic exist.

This is one of the most "thoughtful" ones.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3153872&mpage=1&key=Tokyo%2Cbattle

Alfred



Alikchi2 -> RE: Feature requests (3/23/2015 2:45:01 AM)

An alternative would be to release the source code at some point, as Interplay did with FreeSpace 2 back in 2002. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeSpace_2_Source_Code_Project )

That would allow for community-driven improvements to the game.



rockmedic109 -> RE: Feature requests (3/23/2015 7:23:28 AM)

How about a button that checks for stupid mistakes?

Like say ordering a P-38 squadron to LRCAP a troop convoy and forget to have them use drop tanks.



tigercub -> RE: Feature requests (3/23/2015 9:00:07 AM)

running on empty rock....



sanderz -> RE: Feature requests (3/23/2015 10:05:11 AM)

improve the whole command structure stuff - did i read somewhere that it was never properly implemented the way it was originally envisioned (or did i just dream that?)



m10bob -> RE: Feature requests (3/23/2015 1:03:15 PM)

I would like the larger flattops to be able to carry four air units, to allow those 4 plane elements of either night fighters or recon planes which were historically deployed.
Both sides would benefit.



Alfred -> RE: Feature requests (3/23/2015 1:25:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

I would like the larger flattops to be able to carry four air units, to allow those 4 plane elements of either night fighters or recon planes which were historically deployed.
Both sides would benefit.


5 air units can already be carried by aircraft carriers.

Alfred



robinsa -> RE: Feature requests (3/23/2015 1:57:45 PM)

I think releasing the source code would be a good move by the publisher from their viewpoint as well. Just make it a rule that you can only modify files and not upload the whole game as a mod. This would extend the product life and improve sales. If they're worried about people making copies I can guarantee that 95-99% of the users would have no idea how to compile the source code into a working game. And even if a few tech savvy moders were to use a copied version I think the amount of content added would well make up for that loss in sales.

I think if there was a possibility to rework the land combat in this game it would improve tremendously. I'm not a great coder nor am I a great artist but I would defiantly try to help with any serious modding effort this game.



m10bob -> RE: Feature requests (3/23/2015 3:26:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

I would like the larger flattops to be able to carry four air units, to allow those 4 plane elements of either night fighters or recon planes which were historically deployed.
Both sides would benefit.


5 air units can already be carried by aircraft carriers.

Alfred

Yes, in my earlier post I did mean 5, (not 4), but I am not referring to using the editor..I mean at some point during an in-game "upgrade", the flattops should be able to allow for the 5th element, (usually 4 planes) of either night fighters or recon planes.




m10bob -> RE: Feature requests (3/23/2015 3:37:49 PM)

More requested chrome...
1.On the game preference screen, I would like a new dial which would let the players determine what percentage of damage would send the boat home..Without micro-management, I am losing too many damaged subs which refuse to come home even when over 65% damaged..Losing too many good crews and their skippers to this..

2.I would like to see an "R" placed behind the name of replenishment CVE's to kill more micro-management.
Of course I do this now in the editor..

3. On a much discussed topic from the past...I have changed my mind on this one..I would like paratrooper units to be allowed to jump in all but the worst terrain. I think as in movement penalty, jumpers might suffer an "injury percentage".

I was a jumper,(Rangers), and we really did jump in some crazy places and in crazy weather..
One of our chief tactical advantages was the ability to deploy where least expected, (in a woods perhaps), not right onto an already occupied city, (see Ste Mere Eglise)..
BTW...when I mentioned "woods", I did not mean "splinter city"(Rangers will understand), I refer to the fact each hex is 40 miles and somewhere in that huge area might be one perfect DZ..



Alfred -> RE: Feature requests (3/23/2015 11:04:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

I would like the larger flattops to be able to carry four air units, to allow those 4 plane elements of either night fighters or recon planes which were historically deployed.
Both sides would benefit.


5 air units can already be carried by aircraft carriers.

Alfred

Yes, in my earlier post I did mean 5, (not 4), but I am not referring to using the editor..I mean at some point during an in-game "upgrade", the flattops should be able to allow for the 5th element, (usually 4 planes) of either night fighters or recon planes.




Who said anything about using the editor?

Any carrier can have 5 units on board at any time. Just like they can have no units on board too. Does not entail use of editor at all. Air units are transferable.

Alfred



Alfred -> RE: Feature requests (3/23/2015 11:13:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

More requested chrome...
1.On the game preference screen, I would like a new dial which would let the players determine what percentage of damage would send the boat home..Without micro-management, I am losing too many damaged subs which refuse to come home even when over 65% damaged..Losing too many good crews and their skippers to this..

You need to re-examine how you set up sub patrols. Properly set up they will automatically return home with damage far less than 65%.

2.I would like to see an "R" placed behind the name of replenishment CVE's to kill more micro-management.
Of course I do this now in the editor..

Technically there is no such creature as a "replenishment" CVE, only "replenishment" air groups, which are set up in the editor by the scenario designer, exist. Remove them from their CVE and presto you just have a standard CVE.

3. On a much discussed topic from the past...I have changed my mind on this one..I would like paratrooper units to be allowed to jump in all but the worst terrain. I think as in movement penalty, jumpers might suffer an "injury percentage".

I was a jumper,(Rangers), and we really did jump in some crazy places and in crazy weather..
One of our chief tactical advantages was the ability to deploy where least expected, (in a woods perhaps), not right onto an already occupied city, (see Ste Mere Eglise)..
BTW...when I mentioned "woods", I did not mean "splinter city"(Rangers will understand), I refer to the fact each hex is 40 miles and somewhere in that huge area might be one perfect DZ..



Corrected for non WITP:AE II creation.

Alfred



LeeChard -> RE: Feature requests (3/24/2015 9:32:46 AM)

War Plan Orange and Uncommon Valor!!! [sm=00000436.gif]



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.140625