cWif

cWif (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion

Message

Strat -> cWif (7/28/2003 4:58:31 AM)
I downloaded this a short while ago, and although still in BETA it is promising. Sorry, just to clarify. This is not a Matrix game. It's an ADG (australian design group) boardgame "World in Flames" the computer version readily available in beta. Never played the board game but it looks very promising in beta. Don't want to insult anyone's inteligence here but this is WW2, the entire planet at (I think) 50km a hex and although it has taken (I dunno, maybe) 5 years to get this far, it has potential, even though it has no AI as yet and possibly never will, Personally I have been awaiting a game of this magnitude since the 80's but would prefer a 10 to 20km per hex scale and a more advanced production system (I love to micro manage resources etc). but this could be a decent stop-gap. When you look at all the posibilities that an AI would have to think about, all the permutations of a world war game like this it is not hard to understand the difficulties that GG and co are having with WitP in designing the AI I'm still exploring World in Flames as I write this and wondering on other peoples veiw/perspective on this (possibly) long awaited game. I hope Matrix do not mind me asking(all the above) but I have not found a specific forum for WiFC as yet and besides, wargamer's for wargamer's, I'd be gutted if I was not told about a new wargame. Strat..

Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (7/28/2003 7:19:12 AM)
The last I saw was the version 6 software myself. Not sure if it has changed much though. This was just a few months back. Basically it looks like a great idea, with a @^%$^%# horrible interface. If they can get the interface my user friendly, they might have a chance, but a small one. The market isn't very nice to games using functional but bland visual effects. If the game looks exactly like the board game graphics wise, people will slag it the same way they do the Third Reich program, and the Strategic Command program. Third Reich had problems with adequate AI at one time. SC has a better AI. But both games are games made with board gamers at heart where graphics are concerned. All things considered, I might buy a computerised WiF simply to be able to play it in a decent space friendly way. Not sure i could care less if it had an AI at all. I play a lot of those types of game solo in most cases at any rate. The computer form of Third Reich only suffers in it not being A3R really. And it and SC are not fully global in design like WiF is. Regardless of how well they might be able to make it though, I think they would have to be able to produce the game, and do it for a small price tag (like SC has). So much of the gaming crowd has gone either real time or 3d or both. There is not the same level of interest in archaic looking turn based retreads of our old board games in some cases.

Arnir -> (7/28/2003 10:24:20 PM)
I've been interested in the computer version for a very long time, but I just don't expect to see it anytime in the near to middle future. I might be overly pessimistic, but when the letter to gamers page saying the game is close but not yet done was last updated on 14th August 2001, I think perhaps things are not going well. Of course, I haven't looked at the rest of the site in a while so perhaps there is better news elsewhere.

Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (7/28/2003 11:56:00 PM)
cWiF might well be like say, Road to Moscow, a game many want, that never seems any closer to becoming a reality. I think whomever is doing it, is either not possessing enough resources, or specific purpose to get it completed. I have no direct commentary to support that though. I only know, that cWiF has basically achieved a sort of "urban legend" like quality. Some would like it, but most don't expect to ever see it appear. It's not easy selling a tired concept to some (board gaming) on a computer, with no bells or whistles. VASL proves gamers still doggedly love board games, but our numbers may or may not be sufficient. Still, I can't think of a single computer game that does global WW2 with the level of detail, and the style of WiF. (remember, I am talking about "specifically" historical turn based grand strategy).

Strat -> (7/29/2003 2:16:16 AM)
Version 7.55 is the latest, and yes it is really the same game as the original board game but as you say "space friendly" and I say accident friendly. The worst thing that ever happened to us was 3 months into Operation Barbarossa (not a WiF game, cannot remember the maker) and in august 1942 just as my pincer's were about to meet east of Moscow an unseen horror from the skies appeared, Not a Sturmovic, in my attic room and in it's panic declared war on both Soviet and Axis armies, needless to say almost all divisions and Korps were scatered north east of Leningrad and we enjoyed a (small) pigeon pie. Still, it didn't come close to satisfying me as this would have probably been the only time I had a real chance of winning this bleeding enormous game, and also the last time I managed to get a regular opponent. They are still working on it, although I must agree the interface is far from good it is still workable when you get used to it, and the auto scrolling is a tad bit pooh:rolleyes: If it ever does get released I'm fairly sure it will have a following even though it is not really suitable for pbem but instead what do you call it "hot seat" "lan" "linkup" ????? best regards Strat..

Fred98 -> (7/29/2003 5:30:56 AM)
As "hot seat" it would fail because the game is so large. It has no AI for the same reason. It must be PBEM.

Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (7/29/2003 9:54:05 PM)
I am myself, unsure if there is even any interest in creating an AI for the program. Myself, I would not even care if it had one. I would only want the program as a way of expiditing playing the game, and not requiring it to sit in line for shelf storage space. Regarding hotseat, I think playing it hotseat would be do able, but then anyone that would play it on a computer would likely already be a WiF fan. Playing on a PC would be slightly different than on a table, but the dynamics of scrolling a screen would be matched by the pleasure of sitting down comfortable while conducting one's turn I suppose. The opponent would not need to be any more active than before. Well not entirely. In A3R an opponent needs to be capable of using a variety of response oriented moves. That's one area that board games can handle where computers usually force you to don't with automatic AI controlled systems (which I would not prefer). In that respect, seeing only a monitor view would be a tremendous hassle.

Strat -> (7/30/2003 2:57:06 AM)
Les the Sarge 9-1 said. In A3R an opponent needs to be capable of using a variety of response oriented moves. I'm sorry, please excuse my ignorance, but what does "A3R" mean. Joe 98 said As "hot seat" it would fail because the game is so large. It has no AI for the same reason. I say, it would not work with PBEM because of the amount of phases per turn, but I could be wrong, depending on if you have an opponent/s that could RETURN on a regular basis and for this you really need a dedicated team of player's. However if you , the players all agreed to hook up every friday night and/or tuesday for example or whatever, and play for say, 1 to 4 hours continuous play at agreed times and dates it could be well worth the effort. Never played hot seat or anything else other than PBEM but it seem's quite logical to me. Yes the game is so large, and this is posibly why I would play it, by any means, till death do us part, or at least unconditional surrender. Love it Strat..

Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (7/30/2003 3:16:45 AM)
A3R Advanced Third Reich also the only competition out there for World in Flames. Third Reich was done for PC initial release was lacking in AI, but it is currently a faithfull recreation of the board game in a literal manner. It is also proof that cWiF should be doable. I have TR PC, but I am a firm fan of A3R myself though (numerous game enhancements were developed).

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.652344