RE: 1.3 update?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: 1.3 update?

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] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: 1.3 update?

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 7:15:14 PM

tanker4145

Posts: 190
Joined: 4/19/2004
Status: offline

All I can say is thanks for the support, I wish other companies practiced it. That's why I'm not worried about buying a Matrix game on the first day, even one as complex as WITP. Even if a game isn't fully playable at first (which I haven't experienced yet from Matrix, and I have bought 3 games, not counting SPWAW), I know they will continue to support it. Yes, I hate having to restart, but it's worth it for all the good stuff they put in the patches. Plus I see myself playing this games for a few years at least via PBEM so if I have to restart a campaign now in order to have all my future games be even better, fine with me.

(in reply to Chaplain)

Post #: 91

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 7:17:26 PM

MadmanRick

Posts: 579
Joined: 4/9/2004
From: New York City, U.S.A.
Status: offline

quote:

Many games of much less complexity have ended up released in an unplayable, bug-ridden state, which was not the case with WitP.

Can anyone say Patriot by Three Sixty Pacific??? (still have THAT unplayable dog around here someplace)

I personally do not expect a game to be issued totally bug-free, I understand that a company (in this case Matrix) must balance development time versus bottom line. However, I do EXPECT a company to address at least the major bugs and to support the product for a reasonable period of time. In this respect I am quite happy with Matrix/2x3. I held off purchasing UV due to the issues that were present upon its' release, however once I purchased the game I was actually pleasantly surprised. This positive experience convinced me to purchase WitP upon release and so far I am happy with the product overall. Sure I have issues with bugs, design decisions etc., however I have not run into anything that was a "dealbreaker" for me. I am a tad disappointed that I'll have to restart my PBEM game, but again this is a momentary annoyance to me. I still believe that my $70 was well spent and I look forward to UV-Med or whatever it is they are calling it now!

Rick

_____________________________

"Our lives begin to end the moment we become silent about things that matter". Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 92

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 7:21:00 PM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

Calm down and let the betas and devs do their work in (relative) peace.

Oleg

Jeez....where from "I confess my dissapointment" does everyone seem to get "I hate WiTP and I am really freaking mad and blah blah blah blah". I was slightly disappointed in having to restart after 1.2, but no worries. But I was under the impression (and really really hoping) that that would be the only patch required restart. Is it annoying? Yes. But is it a game killer for me? No, not really.

When I used the word "buggy", it is because I at the time (I have a terrible head cold) couldn't think of a more suiting word. I do think WiTP is a great game. My only (small) beef is that I wanted to be able to blay the whole enchilada (and get my ass kicked) from day 1. Hence, I was saying that knowing what I know now, I might (but doubtfuly) have bought the game after 1.3, not 2 hours after it was posted on Digital River. Still,Witp is the best wargame I have ever played, bar none. Except Panzer General, there is a special place in my heart for Panzer General.

Its the George W. Bush syndrome...."if you are not 100% with me, you are against me" thing. I have been significantly critical of many aspects of this game, and I still am, and will still have some problems even after the 1.3 patch is out. That DOES NOT mean, however, I dislike the game or do not find it thoroughly entertaining. Some people allow their emotional attachment to a game to dominate their common sense....

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 93

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 7:33:57 PM

DrewMatrix

Posts: 1429
Joined: 7/15/2004
Status: offline

quote:

That DOES NOT mean, however, I dislike the game or do not find it thoroughly entertaining.

You could have foolled me. It may be a problem in the "articulate/inarticulate" area of discourse.

_____________________________

Beezle - Rapidly running out of altitude, airspeed and ideas.

(in reply to ZOOMIE1980)

Post #: 94

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 7:36:33 PM

strawbuk

Posts: 289
Joined: 4/30/2004
From: London via Glos
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Beezle

You could have foolled me. It may be a problem in the "articulate/inarticulate" area of discourse.

That smiley is working hard for me today..

_____________________________

Twinkle twinkle PBY
Seeking Kido Bu-tai
Flying o' the sea so high
An ill-omen in the sky
Twinkle twinkle PBY
Pointing out who's next to fry

(in reply to DrewMatrix)

Post #: 95

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 7:37:06 PM

Erik Rutins

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

Chaplain,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaplain
First of all, thanks for the wonderful support for your product. As a 30-yr wargamer, I say without reservation that WitP is the finest wargame ever produced. Just outstanding.

Thank you, the pats on the back are always good for a few more games.

quote:

I am a little troubled by the apparent decision int he 1.3 patch to go with a less realistic, more 'fun' approach to gunnery. I agree with and prefer your prior design decision - letting gunfire focus on a few targets as a means to enhance realism. In the future, let me plead with you to prefer realism to pragmatism in future patches. WitP - as you know - is a grognard product, and we love complexity/realism.

Give 1.3 a try once it's out and let us know what you think. If there is a consensus that we went too far, it can always be fine tuned a bit down the line. Our goal was not to end up with an unrealistic model, but rather to improve the realism of the daylight surface combat model.

Regards,

- Erik

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Chaplain)

Post #: 96

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 7:57:40 PM

siRkid

Posts: 6650
Joined: 1/29/2002
From: Orland FL
Status: offline

Sometimes I feel like I'm writing the United States Foreign Policy speech for the President and every word has to be scrutinized before putting down on paper. You guys kill me.

"HEY! Can't you see its broke! Fix it! FIX IT NOW!"

Ok I'll fix it.

"Hey what the HeII are you doing changing that? It was never broke in the first place! Change it back. CHANGE IT BACK NOW!"

Don't worry we would never change the model so much as to make it unrealistic. However, as you can see from this thread, not everyone can agree on what the perfect model is so we tinker with the ones that draw the most fire.

_____________________________

Former War in the Pacific Test Team Manager and Beta Tester for War in the East.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 97

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 8:04:35 PM

Central Blue

Posts: 695
Joined: 8/20/2004
Status: offline

Kid...

keep up the good work.

I always look forward to patches on the games I'm playing. It was a sad day when Talonsoft stopped work on TOAW.

Seems like there were tons for PacWar. That came out so long ago I must have got the updates from BBS's or Compuserve.

_____________________________

USS St. Louis firing on Guam, July 1944. The Cardinals and Browns faced each other in the World Series that year

(in reply to siRkid)

Post #: 98

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 8:09:45 PM

Mr.Frag

Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline

quote:

Compuserve

Oh god, don't go there ... #6.50 US an hour at 300 baud!

Sometimes I wonder how we survived back then.

(in reply to Central Blue)

Post #: 99

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 8:37:17 PM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

Personally, I can't wait for the 1.3 patch. The new surface combat model will greatly improve the realism of daylight combat. Not to mention that it suits the War Plan Orange project very well. We may yet see a Jutland in the Pacific, no?

_____________________________

Designer of War Plan Orange
Allied Naval OOBer of Admiral's Edition
Naval Team Lead for War in the Med

Author of Million-Dollar Barrage: American Field Artillery in the Great War coming soon from OU Press.

(in reply to Mr.Frag)

Post #: 100

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 8:39:15 PM

Tristanjohn

Posts: 3027
Joined: 5/1/2002
From: Daly City CA USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

quote:

Compuserve

Oh god, don't go there ... #6.50 US an hour at 300 baud!

Sometimes I wonder how we survived back then.

Everything was that much smaller . . . including our expectations. Except for the quality of our wargames, of course.

(in reply to Mr.Frag)

Post #: 101

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 8:53:02 PM

strawbuk

Posts: 289
Joined: 4/30/2004
From: London via Glos
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

quote:

Compuserve

Oh god, don't go there ... #6.50 US an hour at 300 baud!

Sometimes I wonder how we survived back then.

Better cause you would only get 300 baud of (delete as you wish;) Mog/Frag/Zoomie/TJ/mdiehl

_____________________________

Twinkle twinkle PBY
Seeking Kido Bu-tai
Flying o' the sea so high
An ill-omen in the sky
Twinkle twinkle PBY
Pointing out who's next to fry

(in reply to Mr.Frag)

Post #: 102

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 8:57:42 PM

Black Cat

Posts: 615
Joined: 7/4/2002
Status: offline

The Matrix team will not like this but combining a major Bug Fix patch with a major Enhancement patch is a HUGE mistake you and they will regret.

While the Grand Strategic Model is damm good, Matrix does not have a good record in modeling the Tactical Model in UV or this Game, that is the Bombardment, Invasions, Surface Combat, Sub/ASW, Carrier strikes, LBA Strikes, Ground Combat, etc. where the enhancement fixs are going.

It is a real act of Faith over Experience to think this time they will get it either right, or even reasonably acceptable to most experienced players.

The net result can and probably will be that to play the Game without major bugs, you need a Patch that alters the non bugged part of the Game, perhaps not well, or even better then the past non-enhanced version.

Game publisher that have gone down this road in the past, thinking it`s a time/work saver, from SSI to 360 Pacific to Atomic Games to Firaxis to Breakaway and all have regreted it, ( because it created more problems then it solved ) and their end users, the Gamers more so.

This whole approach makes me so Sad.

(in reply to Mr.Frag)

Post #: 103

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 9:14:09 PM

dr. smith

Posts: 221
Joined: 6/30/2004
From: lost in space
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kid

"HEY! Can't you see its broke! Fix it! FIX IT NOW!"

Ok I'll fix it.

"Hey what the HeII are you doing changing that? It was never broke in the first place! Change it back. CHANGE IT BACK NOW!"

It'sa tough, but every once in awhile, you should just say "NOT a Bug, working as Intended". I know y'all like listening and heeding advice from your fans, but sometimes we're just plain wrong and need to be told it.

Remember:
Kid still rocks.

< Message edited by dr. smith -- 9/29/2004 2:14:45 PM >

(in reply to siRkid)

Post #: 104

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 9:23:55 PM

Theng

Posts: 259
Joined: 12/13/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kid

Sometimes I feel like I'm writing the United States Foreign Policy speech for the President and every word has to be scrutinized before putting down on paper. You guys kill me.

Kid,

it ain't that bad, once you get quoted by the real press/radio/TV it gets really funny. This is nothing. Some people and companies are getting really touchy when they don't like what you said. I can send you some stuff if you care for it where I got some people really pissed off.

_____________________________

Molon Labe!

(in reply to siRkid)

Post #: 105

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 9:53:25 PM

dday

Posts: 64
Joined: 7/9/2004
Status: offline

mmmm keep up the good works, can't wait till 1.30 .................. mmmm 20 years pasted, ok here's your newest patch 1.0 <sign>

quote:

"HEY! Can't you see its broke! Fix it! FIX IT NOW!"

Ok I'll fix it.

"Hey what the HeII are you doing changing that? It was never broke in the first place! Change it back. CHANGE IT BACK NOW!"

(in reply to Theng)

Post #: 106

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 10:12:11 PM

esteban

Posts: 618
Joined: 7/21/2004
Status: offline

Well, as far as I can see, the devs are addressing most of the obvious bugs. It would be really nice if they could fix the convoy loading system and algorithms. I bet that would lower the time it takes to run off the average turn by 10% or so.

The big deal for me will be figuring out what is causing pilot replacements to continue to drain, (not really a bug issue, I think it has other causes), the OOB issues and the 32K + altitude bombing bug and the Aussie map. We'll see what happens with those.

(in reply to dday)

Post #: 107

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 10:22:29 PM

Oliver Heindorf

Posts: 1911
Joined: 5/1/2002
From: Hamburg/Deutschland
Status: offline

thnx for the updates erik.

_____________________________

(in reply to esteban)

Post #: 108

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 10:25:10 PM

PeteG662

Posts: 1263
Joined: 6/7/2004
Status: offline

Looks like the most popular thread today.....anxious people out there awaiting their next download? LOL

(in reply to esteban)

Post #: 109

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 11:21:17 PM

Ron Saueracker

Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Personally, I can't wait for the 1.3 patch. The new surface combat model will greatly improve the realism of daylight combat. Not to mention that it suits the War Plan Orange project very well. We may yet see a Jutland in the Pacific, no?

I'm still concerned about the sighted/unsighted feature primarily. Should be more ship type specific and if large numbers of same class vessels are involved, the sighted/unsighted should apply to divisions of them. Right now itis entirely random and each ship is regarded as individual formations, when in fact they most likely would be operating closely. At least that's how it comes across.

_____________________________

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 110

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 11:33:15 PM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

True. But from what I hear its a step in the right direction.

_____________________________

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)

Post #: 111

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 11:35:08 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

Tests run have shown a marked improvement in daylight surface combat between a balanced surface TF and an undefended/under-defended transport TF.

Night-time combat is still being discussed. Two scenerios have essentially been identified to clarify the various opinions. A transport TF caught at night in open waters, a situation which best matches the current model right now, but there is also a situation where either an anchored (and unloading/loading) transport TF in restricted waters (or Port) gets caught by a surface force. Such a force would be by definition much more vulnerable to attack.

_____________________________

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)

Post #: 112

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/29/2004 11:52:21 PM

RevRick

Posts: 2617
Joined: 9/16/2000
From: Thomasville, GA
Status: offline

quote:

Oh god, don't go there ... #6.50 US an hour at 300 baud!

Sometimes I wonder how we survived back then.

My heart bleeds.

Try communicating by teletype at 100 baud, and back then, that was positively up town. What we have now - well, it's like comparing the Santa Maria to NCC-1701E

< Message edited by RevRick -- 9/29/2004 9:52:18 PM >

_____________________________

"Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility.� ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer

(in reply to Mr.Frag)

Post #: 113

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/30/2004 12:09:31 AM

UncleBuck

Posts: 633
Joined: 10/31/2003
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: offline

*********THE SWIFT BROWN FOX JUMPED OVER THE LAZY DOG.*******1234567890

*********THE SWIFT BROWN FOX JUMPS OVER THE LAZY DOG.********1234567890

TEST COMPLETE*******

11111111112222222222333333333344444444445555555555666666666677777777778888888888999999999990000000000000

UB

_____________________________

(in reply to RevRick)

Post #: 114

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/30/2004 12:10:12 AM

DrewMatrix

Posts: 1429
Joined: 7/15/2004
Status: offline

quote:

Try communicating by teletype at 100 baud

Why you young whippersnapper. In my day we would have LOVED to have teletype. You had to box up your program, and give them to one of the slaves that the Emperor used as couriers. Then that slave would jog down the road from waystation to waystaion to the far ends of the Roman Empire delivering our programs.

The real problem was that the programs were written with a stylus on wax tablets. So any tablets we sent by runner to the eastern Provinces (Palestine or Syria) generally had the wax run before the scribes over there could transfer the date to their abacuses.

HA Teletype! If only!

_____________________________

Beezle - Rapidly running out of altitude, airspeed and ideas.

(in reply to RevRick)

Post #: 115

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/30/2004 12:27:30 AM

tsimmonds

Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline

Ha! You're lucky. We had to use sea shells to carve runes into sandstone tablets (those things could really eat up a key-punch machine, don't even think about what they did to a card reader). A good sized program would weigh around ten thousand, er, stone.

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to DrewMatrix)

Post #: 116

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/30/2004 12:30:19 AM

Mr.Frag

Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline

What next? using blood from animals to mark the message on the cave walls?

(in reply to tsimmonds)

Post #: 117

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/30/2004 12:38:26 AM

DrewMatrix

Posts: 1429
Joined: 7/15/2004
Status: offline

quote:

using blood from animals to mark the message on the cave walls

See, I new it. Mr, Frag is older than any of us!

_____________________________

Beezle - Rapidly running out of altitude, airspeed and ideas.

(in reply to Mr.Frag)

Post #: 118

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/30/2004 1:28:58 AM

drw61

Posts: 894
Joined: 6/30/2004
From: South Carolina
Status: offline

Just think, 20 years from now we will be complaining about how slow our old systems from the �Turn of the Century� were!

(Remember the TRS80s????)

(in reply to DrewMatrix)

Post #: 119

RE: 1.3 update? - 9/30/2004 1:45:07 AM

mogami

Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline

Hi, (Sigh) The Old Maastrichtian Mk-I had 1 grain of sand for CPU. Everyone was quite excited when the Campanian 3 Laptop was invented. (you placed the sand in your lap)
When the Sentonian 86 came out we could finally calculate beyond 1. (but it took a while)
My first Coniacian ZX-5 blew up before I could use it. A strong wind blew the sand away.
The fist tower was the Turonian BH9 It used a hollow piece of wood to protect the sand. You could link several together by laying on top of one another but it didn't make it any faster or able to count calculate any higher but it was handy for starting camp fires.

Did I ever tell you about my Cenomanian 3000. It was locked up for 3 years before I realized it. It was swallowed by a dinosaur after that and the first floppy was invented soon after. ................................................

_____________________________