RE: When? (Full Version)

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



Message


BallyJ -> RE: When? (9/6/2010 7:41:16 AM)

I know this has been asked and answered before.
never the less I would like to add my wieght to this question.
In a recent game we all forgot to take the soviet german chits.
It took ages for the US to enter!!!
As a mathematician I still have grave doubts regarding this issue.
regards John




quote:

ORIGINAL: texmich

I saw somewhere that you were presently using an unlimited range of chits for US entry vs the limited set that RAW uses. If that is true I feel it is a mistake. It would increase the randomness of the US entry more than it is at this time. If all sixes were pulled US could be in by end of 1940 or pull all zeros and never enter. I know that either is not probable but with the new selection option it is now possible.







Skanvak -> RE: When? (9/6/2010 7:53:55 AM)

On this issue, I believe that most people forget that the USA enter war because Japan and Germany declare war to the US. The chit system is to represent the unknown : what if Japan and Germany never declare war on the US? It is likely that the US would not have declare war thought not certain as Roosevelt was anti-german and wanting to go to war and tension with Japan was growing for more than half a century.So the randomness is interesting.

TheMWiF system works as intended. The limit to the chit was due to physical consideration.




niclasil -> RE: When? (9/6/2010 8:57:46 AM)

I've been following this forum for years, but I never "bothered" to register until now. I just want to note - and I know I'm not the first and I know the issue seems decided, but I REALLY wish you will release this without an AI. By all means, develop the AI and re-release (perhaps do the real release when the AI is done), but PLEASE let us by this product without the AI. I'm in a stage in my life where I don't have the time and space to set up this game anymore, and my friends and I haven't been able to play for two years now. I'll gladly pay $200+ for this, with or without the AI.

A year gone by that I haven't been able to play WiF at all is a wasted year...




paulderynck -> RE: When? (9/6/2010 9:01:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: texmich

I saw somewhere that you were presently using an unlimited range of chits for US entry vs the limited set that RAW uses. If that is true I feel it is a mistake. It would increase the randomness of the US entry more than it is at this time. If all sixes were pulled US could be in by end of 1940 or pull all zeros and never enter. I know that either is not probable but with the new selection option it is now possible.


This was considered around April thru July of 2009 when similar concerns arose. Ullern and myself were able to undertake a separate initiative to study the issue and report back to Shannon, who accepted our findings.

As the designer it was Shannon's choice to utilize an infinite distribution of chits and as WiF players it was our concern that that decision did not skew the chit results. It was not enough to modify the "odds" of certain chit draws to be the same as in a WiF game because the pool of chits had become infinite. Instead we wanted to look at new odds for the appearance of each chit value that would in turn track the performance of the finite pool of chits.

Our apporach was two-fold, using both statistical analysis and a Monte Carlo computer simulation of drawing from both an infinte and a finite pool of chits, and then comparing the results, adjusting the distribution and re-running the simulation. We also examined the effect of different game strategies - 26 of them, for example aggressive Allied or Axis play, or the Axis trying to close the Med versus attacking Russia in 1941; adding in the combination of a pact between Russia and Japan; etc., etc. These broke down into 3 main categories: Barb 41, Barb 42 and Sitz.

After a great deal of analysis and somewhere around 65 million simulation runs, we were able to recommend to Shannon a set of odds for drawing chit values for each year of the game from 1939 to 1944. These odds were a blend of the results from the three main categories mentioned since they have the greatest effect on the available chit draws in the paper game.

So although it will be possible (though highly unlikely) in a game of MWiF to FREX draw two zero value or two five value chits in 1939; and the set of chits drawn will have a greater standard deviation, the overall performance of the infinite distribution of chits will closely follow the chits in WiF.

I believe Shannon is planning on including our final report on the US entry distribution within the game documentation.




Phelan -> RE: When? (9/6/2010 9:04:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Skanvak

On this issue, I believe that most people forget that the USA enter war because Japan and Germany declare war to the US. The chit system is to represent the unknown : what if Japan and Germany never declare war on the US? It is likely that the US would not have declare war thought not certain as Roosevelt was anti-german and wanting to go to war and tension with Japan was growing for more than half a century.So the randomness is interesting.

TheMWiF system works as intended. The limit to the chit was due to physical consideration.



With a game that has a set end date, I donīt find it at all "interesting" to have increased randomness to such a crucial thing as US entry. I prefer to win or lose due to skill, not random luck screwing me or my opponent. True, US entry if not dowed by the Axis can be discussed, but the context of the game is also an end date that if the Allies are to have some chance assumes a US entry about historical or first half of 42 at least.

Also, it is now more possible to be extremely lucky with the US and get an early entry, I donīt consider this a good thing either.

Playing normal WiF I have for the last 5 or 6 games used an excellent house rule that has the US pick 3 chits and keep the middle valued chit whenever it draws a chit from the pool. Does wonders to keep down extreme results in either way. If some such thing could be possible in MWIF I donīt think I would mind the unlimited pools so much.

Cheers / Phelan




Froonp -> RE: When? (9/6/2010 10:07:55 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


quote:

ORIGINAL: texmich

I saw somewhere that you were presently using an unlimited range of chits for US entry vs the limited set that RAW uses. If that is true I feel it is a mistake. It would increase the randomness of the US entry more than it is at this time. If all sixes were pulled US could be in by end of 1940 or pull all zeros and never enter. I know that either is not probable but with the new selection option it is now possible.


This was considered around April thru July of 2009 when similar concerns arose. Ullern and myself were able to undertake a separate initiative to study the issue and report back to Shannon, who accepted our findings.

As the designer it was Shannon's choice to utilize an infinite distribution of chits and as WiF players it was our concern that that decision did not skew the chit results. It was not enough to modify the "odds" of certain chit draws to be the same as in a WiF game because the pool of chits had become infinite. Instead we wanted to look at new odds for the appearance of each chit value that would in turn track the performance of the finite pool of chits.

Our apporach was two-fold, using both statistical analysis and a Monte Carlo computer simulation of drawing from both an infinte and a finite pool of chits, and then comparing the results, adjusting the distribution and re-running the simulation. We also examined the effect of different game strategies - 26 of them, for example aggressive Allied or Axis play, or the Axis trying to close the Med versus attacking Russia in 1941; adding in the combination of a pact between Russia and Japan; etc., etc. These broke down into 3 main categories: Barb 41, Barb 42 and Sitz.

After a great deal of analysis and somewhere around 65 million simulation runs, we were able to recommend to Shannon a set of odds for drawing chit values for each year of the game from 1939 to 1944. These odds were a blend of the results from the three main categories mentioned since they have the greatest effect on the available chit draws in the paper game.

So although it will be possible (though highly unlikely) in a game of MWiF to FREX draw two zero value or two five value chits in 1939; and the set of chits drawn will have a greater standard deviation, the overall performance of the infinite distribution of chits will closely follow the chits in WiF.

I believe Shannon is planning on including our final report on the US entry distribution within the game documentation.

This discussion looks like a good candidate for a new thread, doesn't it ?

And, for Paul, Good job Paul & Ullern [&o]




BallyJ -> RE: When? (9/6/2010 2:14:25 PM)

So whould I
quote:

ORIGINAL: niclasil

I've been following this forum for years, but I never "bothered" to register until now. I just want to note - and I know I'm not the first and I know the issue seems decided, but I REALLY wish you will release this without an AI. By all means, develop the AI and re-release (perhaps do the real release when the AI is done), but PLEASE let us by this product without the AI. I'm in a stage in my life where I don't have the time and space to set up this game anymore, and my friends and I haven't been able to play for two years now. I'll gladly pay $200+ for this, with or without the AI.

A year gone by that I haven't been able to play WiF at all is a wasted year...





Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: When? (9/6/2010 6:19:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BallyJ

So whould I
quote:

ORIGINAL: niclasil

I've been following this forum for years, but I never "bothered" to register until now. I just want to note - and I know I'm not the first and I know the issue seems decided, but I REALLY wish you will release this without an AI. By all means, develop the AI and re-release (perhaps do the real release when the AI is done), but PLEASE let us by this product without the AI. I'm in a stage in my life where I don't have the time and space to set up this game anymore, and my friends and I haven't been able to play for two years now. I'll gladly pay $200+ for this, with or without the AI.

A year gone by that I haven't been able to play WiF at all is a wasted year...



The AIO is not the problem.

The hundreds of interacting rules are. Combine that with a certain vagueness on how the rules are written (requiring rewriting the code once rule clarifications are received from Harry Rowland et al), and undocumented code from CWIF, and ...

I spend a lot of time reading through code to see if it follows the rules correctly, documenting the code once I have figured out what it is doing, and revising it when necessary.

For example, a better understanding of how the Chinese Communist activity limits are a function of the action choices by the USSR and Chinese meant:
1 - adding new variables to track the CC activites,
2 - writing the new variables out to/reading them from the saved game file,
3 - which meant changing the GAM file structure,
4 - revising the forms where activity limits are shown,
5 - changing the documenation in the Players Manual, and
6 - revising the on-line help files.

There were 50 places in the code where I needed to make changes. And no mistakes are ever permitted, so the modifications have to be done perfectly (carefully, with repeated checking of the logic). When I do this I always take care to choose good variable names and document what the code does, and why. Sometimes I include segments of the rules' text as part of the in-line code documentation (e.g., references to Rules As Coded - RAC - which serves as MWIF program specifications). Because the program size is approaching 400,000 lines of code, there is no way I can retain all the details about how the program works in my head for instant recall 6 months later when I want to make another change. Hence the absolute necessity for in-line documentation.

The CC stuff only took me a day and a half.

Reworking the routing of resources to factories is now going into its 5th week (I work on this 7 days a week). Besides the search algorithms, which only took a couple of days to straighten out (CWIF did those very well and I just needed to understand and document them), I needed to add a dozen new variables and make a ton of changes to the player interface to enable the players to see and modify the resources ==> factories information and routes.
---
For the AIO, there is no player interface (yay!). There are only one or two forms for each of PBEM and Netplay. The rest of the game has 150 forms with ~1500 buttons that have code that responds to the player clicking on them.




kirkgregerson -> RE: When? (9/7/2010 5:11:38 PM)

I've been reading this forum on and off for many years now. As a 'dabbling' developer, in hobby only, I have to applaud Steve and the hard work of all the testers. The scale of this project is mammoth and the scope creep has been a constant battle, but they want to make sure the product is true to WiF. [&o]

So many people are complaining about the release dates and it's making me sick. [8|]

As a computer gamer at all costs I'd like to avoid my past traumatic experience with Paradox when they released *prematurely* HOI. Yeah, I was one of many that was used as an unwilling and unknowing 'beta bitch' by Paradox. I've vowed to never by a product from them again.

So, if it takes Steve and his crew 2 more years to have a *final* product with minimal bugs (we know they can't be avoided on a project this scale), it's all good for me. Now some people that may have a shorter life expectancy and will not see the probable 2011 release date (my guess), you have my sympathy.

When this game comes out in 1 year, 2 years or whatever, I do plan to buy it as I'll give them the benefit of the doubt they won't let this loyal following down by pulling a 'Paradox' (just made up a new term [:D] ).




Skanvak -> RE: When? (9/7/2010 5:28:17 PM)

quote:

This discussion looks like a good candidate for a new thread, doesn't it ?


Good point Froonp, I think there was such a thread btw. I just hope this will be modable :) from fixed to total randomness.




niclasil -> RE: When? (9/7/2010 8:34:38 PM)

Don't get me wrong - I'm playing HoI2 and HoI3 as well, and I know very well how bad things can go when a game is released prematurely. That is not what I asked, I just wanted to say that if the game without an AI is ready a year from now, I would rather buy it then than wait another year for the AI to be developed. I'm no programmer and I don't know how long it will take or how difficult it will be to make a challenging artificial intelligence for this kind of game, but I do know that the guys from Paradox have failed time and again - and Hearts of Iron 2 has been out for 5,5 years now.




BallyJ -> RE: When? (9/7/2010 11:53:05 PM)


Again I totally agree
quote:

ORIGINAL: niclasil

Don't get me wrong - I'm playing HoI2 and HoI3 as well, and I know very well how bad things can go when a game is released prematurely. That is not what I asked, I just wanted to say that if the game without an AI is ready a year from now, I would rather buy it then than wait another year for the AI to be developed. I'm no programmer and I don't know how long it will take or how difficult it will be to make a challenging artificial intelligence for this kind of game, but I do know that the guys from Paradox have failed time and again - and Hearts of Iron 2 has been out for 5,5 years now.





Joseignacio -> RE: When? (9/8/2010 8:18:42 AM)

Sure, but Steve just said that AI is NOT the problem.




BallyJ -> RE: When? (9/8/2010 9:01:27 AM)


Yet.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

Sure, but Steve just said that AI is NOT the problem.





Joseignacio -> RE: When? (9/8/2010 9:44:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BallyJ


Yet.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

Sure, but Steve just said that AI is NOT the problem.




Maybe you are right, the weak point of many games is precisely the AI because of the huge work involved to generate a good one. Very few games offer a decent one, some of my friends say none does.

However, what I understand from Steven is that no matter how complicated will be to make an AI (and I think part of the programming may have been done already, and anyway the "rules for the AI" are being developed in various threads pendant codifying), he thinks that it can not be as bad as implementing so many rules with so many exceptions and cases.




BallyJ -> RE: When? (9/8/2010 2:39:07 PM)

Please don't get me wrong.
I am as keen as anyone to see it finished.
Just that I would buy with or without an Ai.
Good luck to all involved.
best regards

[/quote]

Maybe you are right, the weak point of many games is precisely the AI because of the huge work involved to generate a good one. Very few games offer a decent one, some of my friends say none does.

However, what I understand from Steven is that no matter how complicated will be to make an AI (and I think part of the programming may have been done already, and anyway the "rules for the AI" are being developed in various threads pendant codifying), he thinks that it can not be as bad as implementing so many rules with so many exceptions and cases.
[/quote]




Joseignacio -> RE: When? (9/8/2010 2:46:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BallyJ

Please don't get me wrong.
I am as keen as anyone to see it finished.
Just that I would buy with or without an Ai.
Good luck to all involved.
best regards



quote:

Maybe you are right, the weak point of many games is precisely the AI because of the huge work involved to generate a good one. Very few games offer a decent one, some of my friends say none does.

However, what I understand from Steven is that no matter how complicated will be to make an AI (and I think part of the programming may have been done already, and anyway the "rules for the AI" are being developed in various threads pendant codifying), he thinks that it can not be as bad as implementing so many rules with so many exceptions and cases.




Ok. [sm=00000436.gif]




ezzler -> RE: When? (9/8/2010 7:28:01 PM)

Well, having waited for about 10 years since WIF download I was about to wade in and say 'just release the damn thing before we all die!"

However, having just bought Elemental... take all the time you want.






micheljq -> RE: When? (9/8/2010 7:48:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ezz

Well, having waited for about 10 years since WIF download I was about to wade in and say 'just release the damn thing before we all die!"

However, having just bought Elemental... take all the time you want.





Hehe I am playing Everquest II MMO since june, I think I am in for a quite long time myself. [;)]




yvesp -> RE: When? (9/8/2010 9:24:41 PM)

Fact is that it will be much easier to get an AI working than pulling all the lose strings from the rules together.
Especially when a lot of information has to be presented consistently in different forms.
There is absolutely no doubt about this.
I strongly believe that it won't take Steve more than 6-9 month to pull some kind of AI.

I don't believe the AI will work as intented at that time (difficult to detect inner bugs, bad programming
or algorithm not performing as expected-), nor will it be challenging.

Still, it's possible that it will be enough to release the game, with hopes that the AI will be improved in later releases.

Especially difficult (but that won't be immediately obvious) will be the task of setting "the long plan", preparing for
it (for exemple planning production sometimes 2 years in advance), and, sometimes abandonning that
plan soon enough before it becomes absolutely obvious that it will fail. This kind of AI (long term) will require a lot
of long testing (you'll have to move the game forward to a point where either the plan starts having
effects or is aborted) ; this will be particularly true for the CW (with so many diverging focus of interest and so
little production), Japan (a lot like CW) and probably Germany (many possible strategies). The US is so rich that it
can afford mistakes (and anyway, it needs army, navy and planes!), the USSR, China or France don't have that
many choices. Italy falls somewhere in between.

Yves




DaleKent -> RE: When? (9/9/2010 5:42:15 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ezz

However, having just bought Elemental... take all the time you want.





SNAP!

But I agree.




composer99 -> RE: When? (9/10/2010 4:30:27 PM)

A lot of the discussion on this forum makes me hope no one has taken up a wager like this one for MWiF. [:D]




koontz -> RE: When? (9/14/2010 11:16:11 PM)

The biggest problem is...2012 tick tac tic tac...worlds end
according to Maya calender...





-
[;)]







paulderynck -> RE: When? (9/15/2010 5:54:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: koontz

The biggest problem is...2012 tick tac tic tac...worlds end
according to Maya calender...



Somewhere, I had a link to the Mayan End of the World Newsletter. You could buy a five-year subscription. As soon as I find it again, I'll pass it on.




Cheesehead -> RE: When? (9/15/2010 6:17:43 PM)

Gentlemen

You don't need a pre-AI release of MWiF when you can play with anyone in the world using Vassal. I've been playing WiF PBEM using Vassal for 5 years now. As long as everyone knows the rules it works like a charm. It might even be faster than most FtF games. I recently finished a game that ended with the Axis surrender in SO44 in 10 weeks. Send me a PM if you want more info.

John




BallyJ -> RE: When? (9/16/2010 2:58:14 AM)

Hello John,
I have tried to use vassal several times.
Once even with your good self.
I just can not seem to get it to work!!!!
!@@$%^%$##@
Just wish I could make it work.
regards John




karnack -> RE: When? (9/16/2010 1:09:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

I made massive changes to the Production Planning form. It now includes the option to toggle between the detailed and global maps for the form’s insert map. This is crucial for players using one monitor since they need to be able to see where the used and unused convoys are when reviewing and modifying convoy routes.



YIPES!!  You are kind of setting a standard for most people to have two monitors to play this game??!?

Just curious... I am using a 36" LCD TV as my monitor... I don't think I wanna mess with another one in my tiny one-room apartment (which is the primary purpose of playing WiF on a computer for me... that and no one to play with nearby)

Anyway, great job so far it seems.

-K




Zorachus99 -> RE: When? (9/16/2010 3:50:19 PM)

Hi BallyJ

I too had great problems with several versions of the Vassal game. Eventually I got the attention within the Vassal moderated group, and the developer was surprized at the amount of resources required to run Wif (he built it for squad leader). Wif is now a test case for Vassal, and great improvements have been made.

However without 1-2GB of RAM in your computer, you can pretty much forget an enjoyable experience, and you will end up running very slow with lots of disk thrashing from having to page memory to disk.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BallyJ

Hello John,
I have tried to use vassal several times.
Once even with your good self.
I just can not seem to get it to work!!!!
!@@$%^%$##@
Just wish I could make it work.
regards John





micheljq -> RE: When? (9/16/2010 4:16:27 PM)

I did use Vassal myself on many different computers. If you have less than 1 Gig of RAM, it is not enjoyable at all.




Skanvak -> RE: When? (9/16/2010 6:09:10 PM)

I did have good result with my cyberboard Wif Box (we play some pacific game). But, really, it is nothing compared to CWiF let alone MWiF (without AI of course).




Page: <<   < prev  69 70 [71] 72 73   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.203003