Wishlist New Requested Features

JCrowe · #1 March 12th, 2011, 11:46 PM

Seven and fifteen - that's 21 pages en totale. And at least 17 pages of what it tallies & summarizes would be 100% familiar to anyone who's scouted through the WS forum since release. Not really breaking new ground here. And I was far from the only one to contact Malf directly - as also evidenced by discussions in this forum.

So, pretty sure they've got a list and know the issues. This request from Malf is probably more about letting jets cool than it is about harvesting unknown data points. (I'm hoping, though, that Malf has been working this nut for the last couple months and hasn't just decided to start cracking these issues. With the informational black-hole on WS, it's hard to tell what direction this thing is going.)

But what the heck. In the spirit of detente, here's a four-cent summary of mission-critical issues with WS:

The AI is hopeless.
Units are severely imbalanced.
Many unit abilities make no sense / are contra-indicative.
The Tactical Map combat system is very imbalanced.

1.) The AI is hopeless.

Although it NOW knows how to get off an island, it still has no idea how to attack (makes one strike per turn), how to defend, what units to use, how to use them, or how to manipulate game statistics to its advantage (ie. taking the most efficient route from A to B & etc. within the established game parameters). Basically, it doesn't know what to build, where to put 'em, or how to use 'em - and it fails to appreciate the importance of material acquisition (ie going 'Hitler' on everything in reach).

2.) The units are way imbalanced.

Stock unit statistics strongly (massively) favor two unit types and drive the remainder to complete and utter irrelevancy. You can win the war with just fighters; just need tanks and a couple transports to effect actual seizure of the land once cleared.

3.) Many Unit Abilities don't make sense.

Intercontinental ballistic missiles! ... that are restricted to purely inTRAcontinental strikes. Stealth units that aren't 'stealthy'. Fighter-interceptors that can't intercept on their Flag's behalf ... unless the enemy attacks them. Cruisers that can surface-to-surface land targets ... but not enemy fleets. Mobile Nuclear Ballistic Missile launchers! that don't carry nuclear ballistic missiles ... Ballistic Missile subs afflicted by the same. etc.

4.) The 'tactical' map is very imbalanced.

The way tactical combat is set up leads to seriously imbalanced results. There is no possibility of an "in-between". The winning side will always win overwhelmingly, suffering very few losses (if any at all), while the losing side loses ... well, pretty much everything plus the kitchen sink. This quickly leads to a 'virtuous' cycle - or vicious, if you're on the wrong end of it. Win one good fight, and the loser's ability to recover is severely hampered, while the victor's potential for advancement increases exponentially. And while the human player holds the advantage now, if you boost the AI's IQ without fundamentally overhauling the tactical side of the game, the computer will stomp the pants off of everyone.

Those are the biggies. Other issues are just window-dressing or lesser symptoms of these shortfalls. Fix the biggies, and pretty much all the rest will fall into place.

spillblood · #2 March 15th, 2011, 01:59 PM

Hmm, seems there's not much participation in those two new threads except two guys or so. Come on Malfador, fix this friggin' game!

spillblood · #3 March 16th, 2011, 01:15 PM

OK, seems the forum dies down again. Latest action seems to be pretty pointless. Just two people who post in this thread (SR from Shrapnel not counted)? Seems no one cares about this game anymore.

Skirmisher · #4 March 17th, 2011, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spillblood

Hmm, seems there's not much participation in those two new threads except two guys or so.

I don't have anything positive to add to this.

My intention was to just get a few tcp/ip games going with a few people. I have written off the AI as ever being a worthy opponent. Multiplayer doesn't work,so this software as it sits, is completely worthless to me.

There's nothing more to really say at this point.

spillblood · #5 March 18th, 2011, 05:56 AM

Yeah, and there's completete and utter radio silence by Malfador. Man, they could at least drop some lines here. I wonder what's happened to them.

usmcrave99 · #6 March 19th, 2011, 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spillblood

Yeah, and there's completete and utter radio silence by Malfador. Man, they could at least drop some lines here. I wonder what's happened to them.

The thread's barely been open a week, give Aaron some time. His MO during Beta testing was to collect errors, complaints, etc. all week, and then roll out a new patch each Monday.

ScottWAR · #7 March 19th, 2011, 11:29 PM

But how many weeks has it been since we have heard ANYTHING AT ALL?

His MO in beta doesnt mean anything at this point especially considering his MO now,...which is complete silence and has been since the game was released.

Maybe if he communicated with his paying customers at least as good as he communicated with the beta testers then we wouldnt be having this discussion. Then again maybe if the beta test wasnt a complete failure and the game was worth playing we wouldnt be having this discussion either.

At this point it seems there are many more qusetions about the future of this game than there are answers..........well there havent really been any answers so....................

spillblood · #8 March 21st, 2011, 08:53 AM

It should still be possible to fix the issues of the game, so the question is: Are they working on fixing them or not? And we don't get any information by Malfador, only from Shrapnel who don't seem to know if there is any progress. Malf should simply put a few lines here about the current state of the game. Any comment would be better than no comment at all. We simply don't know if they're still working on the game at the moment.
Selling the game at full price in this state also isn't very reasonable for Shrapnel, I think.
Man, I'm wondering if Shrapnel ever played the game to see if it's alright. Seems they just released it when Malf told them it was finished.

spillblood · #9 March 28th, 2011, 03:36 AM

some more suggestions:
- map wraparound (since it's a full world map)
- Bunkers are useless when there are no units around. Battles involving a bunker and no enemy units always mean you have to move up to the bunker and destroy it and it can't fight back (and always takes some hits). Maybe they should be given some attack ability, or battles involving a bunker and no troops should immediately end as a victory for the attacker.

spillblood · #10 March 28th, 2011, 03:39 AM

- AI should react to players getting too strong. At present the AI just attacks a weaker opponent (usually another AI) instead of concentrating on the player (which means an easy win for the player).