RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (Full Version)

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



Message

Admiral Delabroglio -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (10/3/2013 8:29:57 PM)

A filter to display only units of a certain kind in not available.

How about enabling the players to chose the order in which units are displayed ?
For example, allow playes to display HQs on the top of the stack, then ARM, then MECH, and so on.
Display land units on the top during land movement or combat declaration, air units during air phases, and so on.

Best regards, and congratulations to Steve for a difficult task nearly completed.

GD (long time lurker)



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (10/3/2013 9:10:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Admiral Delabroglio

A filter to display only units of a certain kind in not available.

How about enabling the players to chose the order in which units are displayed ?
For example, allow playes to display HQs on the top of the stack, then ARM, then MECH, and so on.
Display land units on the top during land movement or combat declaration, air units during air phases, and so on.

Best regards, and congratulations to Steve for a difficult task nearly completed.

GD (long time lurker)

There are two sorts available for stacks: by unit type and by selectable. That isn't as detailed as you requested, but sorted by selectable addresses most of what you wanted.



juntoalmar -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (10/9/2013 9:16:32 AM)

This may be a bit off topic, if so, sorry in advance, but I thought it could be interesting for some of you. Specially when there are a few people talking about how good will be to get the IA in MWiF (nudge nudge wink wink [;)] ).


This Monday, starts the free online course of Game Theory from Stanford Online. You can find it here:

http://online.stanford.edu/course/game-theory-fall-2013?utm_source=email-broadcast&utm_medium=email-click&utm_campaign=october-mailer



COURSE SYLLABUS

Popularized by movies such as "A Beautiful Mind", game theory is the mathematical modeling of strategic interaction among rational (and irrational) agents. Beyond what we call 'games' in common language, such as chess, poker, soccer, etc., it includes the modeling of conflict among nations, political campaigns, competition among firms, and trading behavior in markets such as the NYSE. How could you begin to model eBay, Google keyword auctions, and peer to peer file-sharing networks, without accounting for the incentives of the people using them? The course will provide the basics: representing games and strategies, the extensive form (which computer scientists call game trees), Bayesian games (modeling things like auctions), repeated and stochastic games, and more. We'll include a variety of examples including classic games and real-world applications.


Week 1. Introduction: Introduction, overview, uses of game theory, some applications and examples, and formal definitions of: the normal form, payoffs, strategies, pure strategy Nash equilibrium, dominated strategies.

Week 2. Mixed-strategy Nash equilibria: Definitions, examples, real-world evidence.

Week 3. Alternate solution concepts: iterative removal of strictly dominated strategies, minimax strategies and the minimax theorem for zero-sum game, correlated equilibria.

Week 4. Extensive-form games: Perfect information games: trees, players assigned to nodes, payoffs, backward Induction, subgame perfect equilibrium, introduction to imperfect-information games, mixed versus behavioral strategies.

Week 5. Repeated games: Repeated prisoners dilemma, finite and infinite repeated games, limited-average versus future-discounted reward, folk theorems, stochastic games and learning.

Week 6. Coalitional games: Transferable utility cooperative games, Shapley value, Core, applications.

Week 7. Bayesian games: General definitions, ex ante/interim Bayesian Nash equilibrium.


I hope is useful for some of you!




JonBrave -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (10/18/2013 6:13:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: juntoalmar

This may be a bit off topic, if so, sorry in advance, but I thought it could be interesting for some of you. Specially when there are a few people talking about how good will be to get the IA in MWiF (nudge nudge wink wink [;)] ).


This Monday, starts the free online course of Game Theory from Stanford Online. You can find it here:

http://online.stanford.edu/course/game-theory-fall-2013?utm_source=email-broadcast&utm_medium=email-click&utm_campaign=october-mailer




@juntoalmar
I looked at this, and it seems quite interesting to me!

How exactly does the "free" work? And given that it has started, would I be too late, and/or does this course get run again?



juntoalmar -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (10/19/2013 10:54:26 AM)

Free as "free beer" for sure. Free as "free speech" you should check the copyright status of the material, I don't know. I think you can access all the materials even if the course has started, but if you have missed some of the exercises you may not get certified after complete the course (that's how it worked with a course that I had in the past). But it really depends on the course, so you'll have to check the details in the web.

These course are available periodically, so if you miss it now, you'll probably be able to take it in 4 or 6 months.




ByronBond -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/1/2013 3:23:31 PM)

You know what would REALLY be cool that could only be done with a computer - a spherical global map. The Mercator projections used for current maps create huge distortion in high latitudes (like Norway and Finland, or southern Australia), and when overlaid with fixed hex sizes, has the effect of making units move much slower and cover far less ground with a ZOC in high latitudes than they would on a constant scale map. How about an optional spherical map, that appears flat when zoomed in for unit movement and combat, but retains constant ground scale per hex everywhere?




Neilster -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/2/2013 4:20:46 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: NavyGamer

You know what would REALLY be cool that could only be done with a computer - a spherical global map. The Mercator projections used for current maps create huge distortion in high latitudes (like Norway and Finland, or southern Australia), and when overlaid with fixed hex sizes, has the effect of making units move much slower and cover far less ground with a ZOC in high latitudes than they would on a constant scale map. How about an optional spherical map, that appears flat when zoomed in for unit movement and combat, but retains constant ground scale per hex everywhere?



What? [:D]

Cheers, Neilster



arehb -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/4/2013 4:04:42 PM)

Being able to play with the classic counter set on the standard WIFFE maps is what I wish for.

For me it's great that artillery and divisions are optional, I would prefer also to play without PiF and SiF.



autarkis1967 -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/5/2013 2:08:27 AM)

Heretic, Though shall be flogged in front of the entire court. Must play with every rule you can find and include 30 or so house rules. There must be a whole day dedicated to voting on the optional rules. It is a mandate to be played in this way. All other ways are wrong and the heretics will be forced to play Nationalist China or the French.



aaatoysandmore -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/10/2013 3:57:17 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sigurd Jorsalfare

LAN play and a respectable AI.


This ^ without the LAN play as I never cared about MP aspects of a game except Combat Mission (new one) and it not having TCP/IP play for turn based players. But, I can't believe this game has no AI. All games I purchase HAVE to have an AI. Without one it's just a boring boardgame remake. I never cared for those kinds of gloss overs.

The funny thing is I remember conversation even from the dev on an AI in the game and how good it was going to be. It's gone now, but I certainly remember the thread of it like it was yesterday.



paulderynck -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/10/2013 4:03:14 AM)

Then perhaps you'll recall like it was yesterday the threads where it was announced the game would be released first without the AI and it would be developed and added later.



Neilster -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/10/2013 5:14:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: NavyGamer

You know what would REALLY be cool that could only be done with a computer - a spherical global map. The Mercator projections used for current maps create huge distortion in high latitudes (like Norway and Finland, or southern Australia), and when overlaid with fixed hex sizes, has the effect of making units move much slower and cover far less ground with a ZOC in high latitudes than they would on a constant scale map. How about an optional spherical map, that appears flat when zoomed in for unit movement and combat, but retains constant ground scale per hex everywhere?



This talk of a spherical global map is outrageous...ludicrous...preposterous [:'(]

I suggested this years ago but Steve had enough to do and he had inherited a lot of map code from the previous developer. It's long story. I still love the idea and it would be and look cool, which is why I like making these models, but they are just graphical trickery and in no way represent what is actually required.

Cheers, Neilster

[image]local://upfiles/10515/8AFA9988DC604EB09090EA738B5D7B6F.jpg[/image]



Sabre21 -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/10/2013 10:23:23 AM)

During setup, it would be nice to have a button on the setup tray that allowed you to see where all your resources are (maybe a link to the production window), so that I have a better idea on where to place units defensively and more importantly, where to place my convoys. Another option here would be to include a recommended convoy placement for those major powers that have overseas resources added to the setup instructions for the various scenarios. Ideally I would like to see both added.

Right now I really have no clue on how many convoys I need to place where as the Commonwealth player or even as the Japanese other than what is already included in the setup instructions.



warspite1 -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/10/2013 10:37:47 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

During setup, it would be nice to have a button on the setup tray that allowed you to see where all your resources are (maybe a link to the production window), so that I have a better idea on where to place units defensively and more importantly, where to place my convoys. Another option here would be to include a recommended convoy placement for those major powers that have overseas resources added to the setup instructions for the various scenarios. Ideally I would like to see both added.

Right now I really have no clue on how many convoys I need to place where as the Commonwealth player or even as the Japanese other than what is already included in the setup instructions.
warspite1

Sabre21 I am struggling with this too so until someone more sensible following up in due course, here is a list of CW resources and factories.

So for example you need 2CP in every continuous seabox from Australia to the UK if you want to use those 2 resources (the third uses the Aussie factory) - one resource to one factory. If you picked up the Sth African (2) and Rhodesian (1) res along the way, that would mean 5 CP from every sea box from South Africa to the UK.

The -15 for the UK means that you need to get 15 resources to the UK to get it to its factories to its maximum production.

Hope that helps for now.

EDIT Sorry I will try inserting the table as a picture...

[image]local://upfiles/28156/A4CE781A6A3E4DC2B558D380DA7F23EF.jpg[/image]



mjjcpa -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/10/2013 2:45:55 PM)

The Wif Newsletter "Lines of Communication, Vol.3, Issue No. 1," had an excellent article called "Getting the Butter and Guns Home."

It discusses the "Med Route v. the Cape Route."

The Med route is much shorter, but risks exposure to the low range, but dangerous Italian Navy.

I prefer the cape route. I don't even bother with both Aussie resources at first. I try to get one, and I run it the convoy west towards S Africa. Some prefer to run the convoy east to Mexico, then rail to Canada. It only uses 1 CP in each Med Zone, and 1 in the Red Sea to keep Malta in supply and get the Cyprus resource home. The Indian resources go around Africa.

Be careful stretching your convoys to the limits. I've had turns where the Brits got only a few BPs thanks to a few good sub attacks that took out a link in the chain.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/10/2013 3:07:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

During setup, it would be nice to have a button on the setup tray that allowed you to see where all your resources are (maybe a link to the production window), so that I have a better idea on where to place units defensively and more importantly, where to place my convoys. Another option here would be to include a recommended convoy placement for those major powers that have overseas resources added to the setup instructions for the various scenarios. Ideally I would like to see both added.

Right now I really have no clue on how many convoys I need to place where as the Commonwealth player or even as the Japanese other than what is already included in the setup instructions.

1 - There is a button on the setup tray for restoring Saved Setup. For most of the scenarios, for most of the major powers, that will place all your naval units on the map. You may want to rearrange where the named naval units are placed, but it will give you a reasonable starting placement for all your convoys (and HQs, and oil points). Read about saved setups for more information. Once you have your convoys where you want them (or after your first try), you can save your own setups for use in later games.

2 - There is a map in the appendices that shows where all the resources and factories are on the map by country. It also lists all the trade agreements in effect at the start of the war.

3 - The Global Map has a 'view' that lets you see all the resources and factories for a major power. It shows enemy control land masses and you can set the Convoy aspect to show where all your convoys are.



Sabre21 -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/10/2013 4:28:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

During setup, it would be nice to have a button on the setup tray that allowed you to see where all your resources are (maybe a link to the production window), so that I have a better idea on where to place units defensively and more importantly, where to place my convoys. Another option here would be to include a recommended convoy placement for those major powers that have overseas resources added to the setup instructions for the various scenarios. Ideally I would like to see both added.

Right now I really have no clue on how many convoys I need to place where as the Commonwealth player or even as the Japanese other than what is already included in the setup instructions.

1 - There is a button on the setup tray for restoring Saved Setup. For most of the scenarios, for most of the major powers, that will place all your naval units on the map. You may want to rearrange where the named naval units are placed, but it will give you a reasonable starting placement for all your convoys (and HQs, and oil points). Read about saved setups for more information. Once you have your convoys where you want them (or after your first try), you can save your own setups for use in later games.

2 - There is a map in the appendices that shows where all the resources and factories are on the map by country. It also lists all the trade agreements in effect at the start of the war.

3 - The Global Map has a 'view' that lets you see all the resources and factories for a major power. It shows enemy control land masses and you can set the Convoy aspect to show where all your convoys are.


Steve

Is that going to work when playing another player? For instance the Japanese player selects a saved setup, will that over write anything any earlier player may have set up?

I can see there may be a need for an overall scenario setup when playing multiplayer to cut down on time then all the players have to do is some minor adjustments.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/10/2013 4:49:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

During setup, it would be nice to have a button on the setup tray that allowed you to see where all your resources are (maybe a link to the production window), so that I have a better idea on where to place units defensively and more importantly, where to place my convoys. Another option here would be to include a recommended convoy placement for those major powers that have overseas resources added to the setup instructions for the various scenarios. Ideally I would like to see both added.

Right now I really have no clue on how many convoys I need to place where as the Commonwealth player or even as the Japanese other than what is already included in the setup instructions.

1 - There is a button on the setup tray for restoring Saved Setup. For most of the scenarios, for most of the major powers, that will place all your naval units on the map. You may want to rearrange where the named naval units are placed, but it will give you a reasonable starting placement for all your convoys (and HQs, and oil points). Read about saved setups for more information. Once you have your convoys where you want them (or after your first try), you can save your own setups for use in later games.

2 - There is a map in the appendices that shows where all the resources and factories are on the map by country. It also lists all the trade agreements in effect at the start of the war.

3 - The Global Map has a 'view' that lets you see all the resources and factories for a major power. It shows enemy control land masses and you can set the Convoy aspect to show where all your convoys are.


Steve

Is that going to work when playing another player? For instance the Japanese player selects a saved setup, will that over write anything any earlier player may have set up?

I can see there may be a need for an overall scenario setup when playing multiplayer to cut down on time then all the players have to do is some minor adjustments.

Saved setups are for individual major powers. Setting up one has no effect on the other major powers.



Eradanfaroth -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/13/2013 6:53:28 PM)

I don't have read the full thread of 24 pages, so please forgive me if this idea has already been submitted.

In netplay, it would be cool to have the option to load the game, not to play solitaire (encore que...) but only to review the map and the units and devising future actions and planning strategies.

I remember the days where we played the boardgame version and this was a great help to see the map during period of inactivity (between play sessions) and a pleasure too.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/13/2013 7:43:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Eradanfaroth

I don't have read the full thread of 24 pages, so please forgive me if this idea has already been submitted.

In netplay, it would be cool to have the option to load the game, not to play solitaire (encore que...) but only to review the map and the units and devising future actions and planning strategies.

I remember the days where we played the boardgame version and this was a great help to see the map during period of inactivity (between play sessions) and a pleasure too.

Finally![:D]

I knew that someone would eventually ask for this feature. I've given it the name Review. The idea is simple, you can load a NetPlay saved game and look things over. The Axis will not be able to see the US Entry chits, and neither side would be able to 'do' anything.

When I can get around to coding it I don't know. But it shouldn't be difficult to do. There will probably be a question when you restore the NetPlay game: "Resume Play or Review?"



micheljq -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/21/2013 7:18:28 PM)

Well waiting for a download only/electronical version of the game (like Matrix does for all their games), less expensive perhaps? I do not want to pay for the physical goodies, don't want them personally.

I can wait I am not in a rush, budget is restricted as of now.

Michel.



Sabre21 -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/21/2013 9:40:11 PM)

It would be nice to be able to manually create a specific convoy route from one sea zone to the next for resources and lock it in place without the system hijacking some of the convoys when multiple routes are set up. Maybe even assigning it a name or tag so it would be easy to identify which route is hauling which resource.



JohnnyBenice -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/22/2013 11:07:33 AM)

Hi folks, I just quick-read through a couple of pages and not through all of the 24 in this forum. Therefore forgive me, if I double-mention something here.

There is one thing that would dramatically increase the gameplay and that I really miss in the current version of the game (1.03). It is a mode in which you can display all units in a single hex, when you point at it with your mouse. Would that be possible in any later update?

Greets, J.B.N.



Centuur -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/22/2013 11:51:13 AM)

There is both the "units in hex" form and the fly out which you can use for this. For ports there is a tool too...

Simple click two times on a empty land hex and you get the fly out.
Two clicks on a sea area gives you the naval form. Point it in a sea area and a port and you've got it...



Dr. Foo -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/22/2013 3:33:18 PM)

Is it possible to get movement path arrows and terrain cost indicators. Something like below. You can see the path the unit will take and the cost of each hex before movement. Just a handy tool. [:)]

[image]http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm75/mjm800/Movement_zps9235c53a.png[/image]



Courtenay -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/22/2013 10:25:59 PM)

In the production summary form, it would be nice if the amount of oil needed for reorganization did not include convoys at sea. They should not be counted in the amount of oil one needs to reorganize since, as long as they stay at sea, they don't need to be reorganized and thus don't need any oil. Only when a convoy returns to port (and flips) or if it flipped in port (port strike) does a convoy need oil, and only such convoys' oil requirements should be counted.



wolf14455 -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/22/2013 11:22:57 PM)

Newer board games got rough terrain as well. Good for hilly areas with or without forest. Maybee this can be in later maps.



palad1n -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/23/2013 3:56:31 AM)

Got the game. Why isn't option 73 (Heavy weapons) going to be included? The statement in book 1 of players manual page 6 - part of post 1945 add-ons is incorrect. Heavy weapons units appear from 1938 and onwards. USSR 1939 set up can have these units. I like playing with heavy weapons in the game. Can this omission be rethought.



warspite1 -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/23/2013 8:36:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: palad1n

Got the game. Why isn't option 73 (Heavy weapons) going to be included? The statement in book 1 of players manual page 6 - part of post 1945 add-ons is incorrect. Heavy weapons units appear from 1938 and onwards. USSR 1939 set up can have these units. I like playing with heavy weapons in the game. Can this omission be rethought.
warspite1

I might be wrong but I thought heavy weapons was in AIF, PATIF and POLIF? These are NOT part of MWIF.



palad1n -> RE: What Do You Think Needs to be in World In Flames PC Game (11/24/2013 5:34:03 AM)

Yes most of the heavy weapons are units in AiF, PATiF & POLiF, but they are added to the force pools when their arrival year occurs. Basic rule is use PATiF HVYWEAPs where these have the same unit. I've attached a sample from PIONs WiF units spreadsheet. It's a bit small but I wanted to get as many units as possible in the image.

[image]local://upfiles/40893/BA83BD3677A042B3B2C12BEBF4FA7F24.jpg[/image]



Page: <<   < prev  22 23 [24] 25 26   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.328125