Is 3.0 a disappointment?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Is 3.0 a disappointment?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> Is 3.0 a disappointment?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Is 3.0 a disappointment? - 8/27/2000 12:33:00 AM

Fuerte

Posts: 314
Joined: 6/14/2000
From: Helsinki Finland
Status: offline

It seems that 3.0 has internet TCP/IP play, and most of the other new features are related to this, too. To me this is a disappointment, because I can't imagine spending hours on internet planning my moves. It normally takes 1-2 hours to view the last turn and make new moves. Playing a game in internet would take about a day, minimum. Steel Panthers has always been best in PBEM, and it should be that way in the future, too. I don't need another real-time stragegy game, we have those enough already (Command & Conquer etc). I may be wrong, perhaps SPWAW internet play could be a hit, but I doubt it. Another new feature is a new campaing system, and this is great for playing against computer, but not so much with PBEM. What I would like to have, is a better, faster PBEM. The following features would make 3.0 really worth something: 1) Compressed secure PBEM. Now the three turn files are almost 1 MB compressed, which takes about 2 minutes to send/receive a turn. 2) Faster and better action replay. Now the map jumps needlessly all the time, and still it is impossible to say which tank is firing in many cases. If the tank is in the bottom of map, then most the screen is black. 3) Fix PBEM bugs: disappearing troops, unable to load secure games. 4) Registered PBEM file type, so that SPWAW would load directly from e-mail program. Now I a) first click "Steel Panthers World At War v2.1" on desktop b) then get the "WAW AutoPlay Menu" c) then click "Play SPWAW" d) watch SSI and Matrix movie, until I press space e) then get "COLONEL: CHOOSE YOUR GAMEPLAY", where there is only two choises, play or quit f) click "Play SPWAW" g) click "LOAD SAVE" h) click the right PBEM (it can be difficult to say which one is the right one) i) click START Could it be any harder? All these phases would be gone if the PBEM file type was registered to SPWAW and it would load automatically. Another thing I would like to see is a better user interface. The current one is ancient. One thing which bothered me in the beginning is the entering of numbers, e.g. range. It does not display the current value anywhere, and if I press Escape or Enter to cancel without entering any numbers, the range is set to zero. This should be fixed.

_____________________________

PBEM Helper

Post #: 1

- 8/27/2000 1:10:00 AM

Dave R

Posts: 128
Joined: 10/7/2001
From: England
Status: offline

But you forget some very importent points! It's free It's done by wargamers for wargamers It's free It's been developed in direct responce to user feedback It's free There's no other game that comes near it for atmosphere, in my oppinion that is. Oh! And have I mentioned that it's free!

_____________________________

In times of war we see the worst that man has to offer. But we also see the best that man has to offer.

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 2

- 8/27/2000 1:23:00 AM

Fuerte

Posts: 314
Joined: 6/14/2000
From: Helsinki Finland
Status: offline

Yes, it is free, but the source code is not!

I agree, SPWAW is one of the best games around at the moment. Still I find it strange that people would want to have internet TCP/IP play. It is not Steel Panthers anymore. "It's life, Jim, but not as we know it."

_____________________________

PBEM Helper

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 3

- 8/27/2000 2:19:00 AM

David Heath

Posts: 3274
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Staten Island NY
Status: offline

This is a classic case of..... I don't what I want so it not good. We made MAJOR game play changes. All the internet rules can be played PBEM and Online play. The ONLY option that can not be played is the new OpFire Options. This will only work H2H or Online. What about the Victory hexex to name another. Before you kill it try it. I also agree FREE is a good thing only if it works [GRIN] David

_____________________________

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 4

- 8/27/2000 2:41:00 AM

Drake666

Posts: 313
Joined: 4/22/2000
Status: offline

Got to dessagree with you on this, I think way more people will play online then by Email, becouse its more fun that way and it makes for better play. As for taking 1-2 hours to play a turn, I dont even take a hour a turn on the largest scenario made yet, let alone 2. Most scenarios and battles I have played it takes about 10 to 15 mins to play a turn at the start and speeds up from their. The best thing about Online is doing team play. Used to play PG2 online and their was nothing like 2 vs 2 player play. [This message has been edited by Drake666 (edited August 26, 2000).]

_____________________________

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 5

- 8/27/2000 3:43:00 AM

Tankhead

Posts: 1352
Joined: 6/21/2000
From: Yukon Territory Canada
Status: offline

Heya Fuerte! Before you start wishing, dislike, want's and don't want and putting negative though about Ver..3. I would recommend that you wait till you have played the new version 3, and then you could put in your though. For one who never played Ver..3 yet should not have to many comments till he has actually played the game. This post is by no means to put you down, it is just a reminder to some real facts. Just my 2 cents.

Tankhead ------------------ Rick Cloutier [email]rcclout@telusplanet.net[/email] Coordinator: Tankhead's SPWAW Resources http://sites.netscape.net/rcclout

_____________________________

Tankhead

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 6

- 8/27/2000 5:34:00 AM

Colonel Klink

Posts: 103
Joined: 4/9/2000
From: Northern California
Status: offline

Why are you guys so sensitive. He wasn't slamming the game, merely making suggestions of how the game can be improved which benefits all. Are these improvements possible given the source code? Maybe not. That is OK. We all love this game and are Matrix Game fans for life.

_____________________________

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 7

- 8/27/2000 6:34:00 AM

Fuerte

Posts: 314
Joined: 6/14/2000
From: Helsinki Finland
Status: offline

Right Colonel, SPWAW as it is, is already more than I could have wished for a couple of months ago, when I knew nothing about this. Now that I have played it for a while, I realize that there are some things that would be relatively easy to implement, and which would make it even better. The things that I read of v3.0 didn't impress me much, but I don't want spoil your fun. I just had to say what I thought. And it is better to not expect too much, so that you will be positively surpised...

_____________________________

PBEM Helper

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 8

- 8/27/2000 6:53:00 AM

Greg McCarty

Posts: 234
Joined: 6/15/2000
From: woodbury,mn,usa
Status: offline

Fuerte: Dont dwell too much on internet play. It's just another of the many options. Spend tme with the game in your chosen mode of play. In the long run I think you will agree it is the best of its kind available today. have some fun with it. Get some miles under your belt. Greg.

_____________________________

Greg.

It is better to die on your feet
than to live on your knees.

--Zapata

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 9

- 8/27/2000 8:18:00 AM

Colonel Klink

Posts: 103
Joined: 4/9/2000
From: Northern California
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Fuerte: I realize that there are some things that would be relatively easy to implement, and which would make it even better. The things that I read of v3.0 didn't impress me much, but I don't want spoil your fun. I just had to say what I thought. And it is better to not expect too much, so that you will be positively surpised...

Fuerte, I think that all suggestions should be welcome in an open forum. Your comment about relatively easy is something that may not be necessarily true. Unless you program for the game, we just don't really know what is and what isn't possible. I've been playing since the original SP days and i can appreciate how far this game has traveled. If it wasn't for the great folks who had a vision for SP we would still be in the DOS basement looking for other tactical ww2 games to play. I agree that some of your comments would make playing easier, however i'm not at all certain they can be implemented. I like very much the idea of TCP/IP play. You could be right about the length of time required but i've shared many online hours with like-minded gamers so this is a really NICE FEATURE to have included. The main thing i don't like is when people are sometimes always considered to be "complaining" when in fact they are just trying to improve the game with their suggestions/comments/constructive criticisms. Ideas are how things change and become better.

_____________________________

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 10

- 8/27/2000 9:53:00 AM

Figmo

Posts: 556
Joined: 5/28/2000
From: Pennsylvania, USA
Status: offline

There are some nice new features in the game that will work with PBEM and any suggestion is always welcome.

But IMO - there is nothing like on-line play - you don't just sit there either while the other guy moves - you have to watch because when your opfire comes up - you've only got a few seconds to decide if you want to shoot or not - now that can be made longer - but then if the other person is too slow - it could take a long time. As to one of the new features of the game working in PBEM - I'm pretty sure the new Objective types will work in PBEM - That alone adds a lot!! I can see it now - every turn your enemy gets points for those hexes - you have to take them and hold them - and of course he'll be trying to do the same thing - not like fighting the AI - and that's just one of the Objective types. Figmo

_____________________________

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes ...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, f

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 11

- 8/27/2000 10:15:00 AM

KG Erwin

Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline

Guys, it simply sounds like Figmo is issuing a challenge to any of you guys who want to take him on in a "SPWaW Zone" match. Does one of those exist? If it does, then I'll be more than happy to participate in a team match... or is he referring to something like Age of Kings...that's for a different forum. I'm in the AoK Heaven Forums , too. "Almost heaven...West Virginia".

_____________________________

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 12

- 8/27/2000 1:19:00 PM

B52g

Posts: 115
Joined: 6/22/2000
From: Youngstown, Ohio, United States
Status: offline

I wonder, do you have to play against each other in on-line play? Or can a couple people gang up on the AI? Can you pick a scenerio thats already in the game to play? I personally have no desire to take somebody on in their own custom made tank trap. What about Campains? Does Somebody know yet?

_____________________________

John

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 13

- 8/27/2000 4:17:00 PM

Arralen

Posts: 827
Joined: 5/21/2000
Status: offline

*rant* All damn' idiots. They're getting a marvellous game for free, the programmers are adding features and squashing bugs all the time, yet they can't stop complaining ... Idiots. Means "TCP/IP included" necessarily means that you've to play online via internet? No. You can of course still play via e-mail ... or you get some of your friends together and play on LAN !! Idiots. Many "known issues" from v2.3 are dealt with in v3.0 , but they still complain what will be wrong with the game, and make dubious "suggestions" how to improve the game - while never having played v3.0, and most likely even v2.3 only 3 times or so ... Idiots .. they can't even search this forum for old postings (dating from the time when 2.0 came out), where they could see that most of their "new ideas" have been discussed long before. ... */rant* Now I feel a little better

Arralen PS: Didn't they tell you: "..and never deal with dragons" ??

_____________________________

AMD FX-4300
Gigabyte 970A-DS3P
Kingston 24GB DDR3-1600 (PC3-12800)
Asus GTX 750 Ti OC 2GB GDDR5
Seagate Barracuda SATA III 1TB
Windows 8.1

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 14

- 8/27/2000 4:41:00 PM

Fabio Prado

Posts: 503
Joined: 5/23/2000
Status: offline

Hi, Fuerte! I would like to suggest you to wait and try SPWaW 3.0 and then decide if it improved pbem or not. I'm not putting you down or anything, It just happens I'm not exactly an Internet-play fan, I like to build scenarios and make them interesting, and yes, I like playing slow (some turns now, some turns then, and it helps me to maintain a reasonable sane mind while working on a very busy schedule), so I can understand you... But I can assure you, SPWaW 3.0 will make you a happy boy, since most of the new features have a direct impact on solitaire and pbem play. The new objective types, new graphics - meaning new terrain types with multiple possibilities, on board arty, new revised OOBs and new costing values, just to name a few, will make your SPWaW playing a LOT more challenging and interesting. Just wait and see... Best regards, FAP ------------------ Fabio Prado [email]fprado@fprado.com[/email] Webmaster - The ARMOR Site!

_____________________________

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 15

- 8/27/2000 5:54:00 PM

Ed Cogburn

Posts: 1979
Joined: 7/24/2000
From: Greeneville, Tennessee - GO VOLS!
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Arralen: *rant* All damn' idiots.

[RANT] Speak for yourself. How do think SP and other products get better without constructive criticism? Are we suppose to "be happy" with a flawed game, just because its free? And no, I'm not saying SP or anything else is flawed, but they aren't perfect either. What's wrong with striving for perfection? I'm tired of knee-jerk reactions like yours. The Matrix folks *want* to hear our constructive critisms, thats how the product, and themselves, get better. This reaction of yours is just wasted bandwidth. If you have a specific problem with one of the suggestions, fine, talk about that, attack it even if you feel strongly, but jumping up and down and screaming "Idiots" at people will get *all* of us absolutely *nowhere*. Grow up. [/RANT]

_____________________________

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 16

- 8/27/2000 6:23:00 PM

laurent Favre

Posts: 35
Joined: 4/25/2000
From: France
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Ed Cogburn: [RANT] Speak for yourself. How do think SP and other products get better without constructive criticism? Are we suppose to "be happy" with a flawed game, just because its free? And no, I'm not saying SP or anything else is flawed, but they aren't perfect either. What's wrong with striving for perfection? I'm tired of knee-jerk reactions like yours. The Matrix folks *want* to hear our constructive critisms, thats how the product, and themselves, get better. This reaction of yours is just wasted bandwidth. If you have a specific problem with one of the suggestions, fine, talk about that, attack it even if you feel strongly, but jumping up and down and screaming "Idiots" at people will get *all* of us absolutely *nowhere*. Grow up. [/RANT]

Can't say better

_____________________________

When I think about TS, I'm suffocating. And you?

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 17

- 8/27/2000 6:32:00 PM

Figmo

Posts: 556
Joined: 5/28/2000
From: Pennsylvania, USA
Status: offline

KG Erwin, I think I'm in the right forum - haven't had my coffee yet - so who knows!! As to a challenge - hmmm - maybe when the game comes out - did you know they added a feature just for old guys like me - "The time Out" - when we first tried the on-line game - you had to play all the way through without a break - I was hurting!!! BTW - you can do scenarios or Generated Battles but never tried two against the AI - I'll let you know if somebody else doesn't. Figmo

_____________________________

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 18

- 8/27/2000 10:24:00 PM

Rhone

Posts: 114
Joined: 8/17/2000
Status: offline

Excellent posts by Colonel Klink and Ed Cogburn. Couldn't have said it better than that.

_____________________________

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 19

- 8/28/2000 4:17:00 AM

Wild Bill

Posts: 6821
Joined: 4/7/2000
From: Smyrna, Ga, 30080
Status: offline

No game is going to please everyone. Someone will be disappointed. Not every possible feature has been included in ANY wargame that I know of. We try to include what we can. It won't be enough for everyone. And I'm sorry if it is disappointing to anyone. I regret it, but I don't know really how to please everyone. I don't think anyone else does either. I would recommend at least giving it a try to see what within the game tickles your fancy. Don't be too quick to judge what you have not as yet seen. It may be a pleasant surprise for you. It may not. I hope the former is the case. I'm editing this because I re-read your post Fuerte. To say that the emphasis in version 3.0 is TCP/IP is incorrect. There is a lot more than that in this version that has been improved...A LOT MORE! Just the 6 type of victory objectives opens a whole new world of scenarios and campaigns that could Never be done before. Completely revised OOBs, new scenarios, multi-player battles...so much more here than just TCP/IP I've said enough.

Wild Bill ------------------ In Arduis Fidelis Wild Bill Wilder Coordinator, Scenario Design Matrix Games [This message has been edited by Wild Bill (edited August 27, 2000).]

_____________________________

In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Independent Game Consultant

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 20

- 8/28/2000 7:56:00 AM

Tombstone

Posts: 764
Joined: 6/1/2000
From: Los Angeles, California
Status: offline

I don't know if its fair to call people idiots. (especially if it can reasonably be assumed who it was directed to or in reference to.) That said, its understandable that people who love the game so much would get a little up in arms when a new and exciting feature get slammed... It's true that the feature is just in addition to the rest of the game. 3.0, I imagine, will be better than 2.3 in all respects... It's a win-win situation. No one has to get upset. And sure, there are a bunch of little things that would enhance various elements of the game. What CAN be done is infinite... Tomo

_____________________________

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 21

- 8/28/2000 8:31:00 AM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

No its not fair and I'll rap Arralon's cyber - knuckles like I did to a pair on another thread. If you visit other such sites around the web you wil find we seem to have a bit of an oasis of decorum and gentlemenly behavior here that we seem to be pushing the limits of lately. PLEASE - respect others who post if wish the same in return. No name calling or personal attacks will be tolerated. I have refrained from getting out my big black marker and edit or delete peoples posts, but continue this sort of unprofessional behavior and I will be forced to bring out the Censor Scissors. I won't let this board degenerate the way many other boards have. We welcome criticism and value your input. But it most be constructive and not argumentative or personal.

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 22

- 8/28/2000 10:29:00 AM

Drake666

Posts: 313
Joined: 4/22/2000
Status: offline

I can see why Arralon would get overheated do. Most games wount even fix bugs and you guys are not only fixing bugs but adding to the game and then someone has the gull to come along and put it down, its just crazy. [This message has been edited by Drake666 (edited August 27, 2000).]

_____________________________

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 23

- 8/28/2000 10:35:00 AM

Leibstandarte

Posts: 122
Joined: 6/19/2000
From: Austin, TX USA
Status: offline

I say that if you have a grip about the game please post it cordially and politely. If you disagree about someone else's opinion then respond in the same way. We need to make sure that bottom line we support Matrix, build the wargame community and respect others and their opinions. In this way we can keep the majority of the community happy while building up knowledge and different views on this game and others. Remember Matrix has gone way, way, way beyond what companies ten times their size have done and for free. Let's support them and keep and grips we may have with their work polite and cordial. Thanks for your time and I shall now step down from my box. ------------------ Cavalry Trooper (8th US) and Grandson of a Leibstandarte Tanker.

_____________________________

Cavalry Trooper (8th US) and Grandson of a Leibstandarte Tanker.

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 24

- 8/28/2000 11:20:00 AM

Tankhead

Posts: 1352
Joined: 6/21/2000
From: Yukon Territory Canada
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Leibstandarte: I say that if you have a grip about the game please post it cordially and politely. If you disagree about someone else's opinion then respond in the same way. We need to make sure that bottom line we support Matrix, build the wargame community and respect others and their opinions. In this way we can keep the majority of the community happy while building up knowledge and different views on this game and others. Remember Matrix has gone way, way, way beyond what companies ten times their size have done and for free. Let's support them and keep and grips we may have with their work polite and cordial. Thanks for your time and I shall now step down from my box.

AMEN to your post

well said. We all are Gentlemans "I hope" so lets behave like gentlemans. Paul said it right that most forum out there are well you know BADDD. So lets try to keep this forum the way it was intended to be Gentlemans. Or Paul nasty scissors will be out doing the nasty

Tankhead ------------------ Rick Cloutier [email]rcclout@telusplanet.net[/email] Coordinator: Tankhead's SPWAW Resources http://sites.netscape.net/rcclout

_____________________________

Tankhead

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 25

- 8/28/2000 2:39:00 PM

crazyivan

Posts: 189
Joined: 5/12/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

i am a motercyclist and love my bike dearly in my small country here in New Zealand we have a lot of them many differant bikes from every era and make and modle in cluding the pilots that ride them.but in saying this we all share a common bound of man and machine that no others have ,and no matter how others agree or diagree with our riding stlyes and bike setups the common bound allows a healthy but non attacking descusion to take place were we agree to disagree with out the slanging etc. my point is we here to have a common love for a gamming concept that makes us stand out from other gammers war is a very hard topic to dicuss and carries many opions flavouerd by race and history.it in turn is so unpredictable becaucse you have humans running it so making a game is nigh impossoble to captuer the full essance of ww2 history.this in mind makes what the guys at matrix have done to bring the war as such on our pcs nothing short of a miracal in the gamming sense .so as one let us not think we or what we have to say is any better than any other posts opions but listen with open minds type with slow hands and respond as brothers in arms. PUAL,DAVID,WB and MIKE thanks for the best game i have ever played.since its birth i have only missed 6 days of not playing at least for a hour its nothing short of fantastic.to the rest of matrix i salut your efforts and to my brother gammers many thanks for your help you all make this site a every day trip

sorry about my spelling.

_____________________________

"The best form of defence,is attack"

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 26

- 8/28/2000 9:46:00 PM

renwor

Posts: 118
Joined: 5/17/2000
From: czech republic
Status: offline

Hi all, I guess Fuerte got upset, because he is looking forward to v3.0 and is dissapointed, he cannot have it NOW!!! I personally absolutely don't care about TCP/IP implementation. I have no use for it. I believe others may have, so there is no reason why it shouln't be icluded. If TCP/IP issues would be those, which are delaying the v. 3.0 release *I* would start complaining also, but I don't think it's the case. So if anybody thinks the v 3.0 is JUST about TCP/IP and he doesnt't care about it, he is happy man, because he has it's final SPWaW release (2.3) already in hand. Me, I am anxiously waiting for v. 3.0, because of much refined OOBs, Campaigns, design options, icons, lbms, splashed bugs, tweaks etc, before I start creating my own "final" OOBs and scenarios. Oh, how I wish to have final SPWaW in my hardrive! Fuerte, I am so envious of YOU!!! And besides, I believe Matrix calls it v. 3.0 for a reason. It's not 2.3.2.51

Renwor [This message has been edited by renwor (edited August 28, 2000).]

_____________________________

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 27

- 8/28/2000 10:58:00 PM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

The delay has nothing to do with TCP/IP code. Simply trying to get as many bugs fixed as possible.

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 28

- 8/28/2000 11:56:00 PM

Fuerte

Posts: 314
Joined: 6/14/2000
From: Helsinki Finland
Status: offline

At one point I was sorry that I wrote the original message, but now that I have read the latest messages, I am relieved. So 3.0 has many other cool features besides TCP/IP, and most important, bugs are being fixed. I have to say that the subject was a mistake. 3.0 can't really be a disappointment, unless it works worse than 2.3. I'm sorry for the subject, and I understand how someones got offended at it. Also I want to say THANK YOU to Matrix... as I said, SPWAW is already much more that can be expected from a free game. The fact that I wrote the original message just shows that this game is important to me, and I hope that this keeps you guys on going!

_____________________________

PBEM Helper

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 29

- 8/29/2000 12:02:00 AM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

We want all opinions - so don't feel too bad! If you felt concerned - many others likely did too - concerns that have hopefully been somewhat relieved.

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to Fuerte)

Post #: 30