Shannon V. OKeets
Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005 From: Honolulu, Hawaii Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: macgregor Though this thread may be premature -after all seeing this game released will be a huge accomplishment, perhaps still years away, I would like to mention that the games I find most attractive are the ones open to some degree of modification by the players, as this enlists the support of a vast pool of knowledgeable, dedicated fans. Often with remarkable results. Of course I wouldn't want you to compromise the code for that. Assuming the release will be a resounding success, perhaps after the initial sales surge has died down an editing feature could be developed and released. I find this game engine to be comprehensive, somewhat accurate, and most importantly concise. There's no conflict that couldn't be represented with this system. Ah, Greg, I disagree. With "comprehensive" and "somewhat accurate" I do agree, but your choice of "concise" as an adjective makes me think you are referring to some other game. I am starting to put in the code for Cruisers in Flames and Convoys in Flames, which are a rather natural extensions to the WIF system. The amount of code required is very large and requires a detailed understanding of all the other code in the program: new unit types, new units, new setup and scrapping, new capabilities, the list goes on. If there were a clone of myself, who possessed all the knowledge that I had before I started this project, he would be unable to make modifications to the basic program without destroying it - unless he goes through pretty much the same process that I have been going through of reading 10s of thousands of lines of code and only gently tweaking little things when he has a full understanding of all the implications. Changing software is not like editing a book, misspell one word in software and the entire program can become completely worthless (the blue screen of death). I will make the unit lists available for editing, and the starting setups too if I can figure out a way that can be automated. If you look at WIF FE set up instructions in 24.1 and 30 of the rules, you will see that there are a lot of notes, conditional statements (e.g., if you are playing with SiF, ...), and just plain text that describe the procedure. These have got to be the most complicated set up instructions for any game ever created. Designing an automated procedure such that the players could edit the data of what goes where would be a lot of work. The program has one now but it is not something that the average person would understand - and again, a missing blank in the data stream renders the setup data unintelligble to the program. As to the MWIF game engine being usable for other games, I think not. The other genres of war games that I like to play are Napoleonics and conflicts during the American Civil War. The WiF system is a terrible system for either of those time periods. The WIF engine only has applicability to pretty much what it was designed for: WW II, 2 month turns, variable impulses within a turn, corps based units with divisional supplements, 3 main branches of the armed forces (air, land, naval), light geopolitical system, and a comparable map scale. It's not that I don't want to provide players with all the items on their wish list, it is just that their wish lists have to be more realistic and less fantastic (a triple pun!).
_____________________________
Steve Perfection is an elusive goal.
|