Bug: Post 1.06 Patch Bug List

[spillblood]

You could upload it at a filehoster, if you have an account, for example megaupload or rapidshare.

[spillblood]

Originally Posted by JCrowe

As per the other WS issues thread, manifesto file loaded & launched - but sent to "[email protected].", not the "ws@" address cited above in this thread. Let me know if that poses an issue and if I should re-send.

Hmm, don't know. I've used both adresses before. Send the same E-Mail to the other adress to make sure he'll get it. I think that's better.

[JCrowe]

Never used a filehoster or any of that jazz. Also discovered that your basic doc file starts off with baseline of nearly 20K, even if it's blank. Thus, I can't chop it up into multiple installments.

Well, I COULD, but there would be about forty or fifty of the things. I might be a loon, but I'm not that nuts.

On the other point, well, one could ASSUME that all roads lead to Rome, but you'd be surprised at how often that path leads to Syracuse instead. Or Bangladesh. What at first seems so near can instead be so far.

Of course, I could click the selector to 'auto' and spam the whole set of available addresses ... but the intent is to be friendly, not fanatic. Or insane.

[spillblood]

Hehe, OK. I think he got it.

[spillblood]

Originally Posted by JCrowe

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.

Just wanna quote that here 'cause I'm not sure if Malfador read the request thread. I think that belongs in this thread.
Very little participation the last time, I think. Seems Aaron's posts didn't reactivate many former participants of the forum.

[spillblood]

OK, silence of the grave again. Hope there'll be any updates soon. This forum is ****ing dead, I'd say, only 4 or 5 participants, and weeks of silence.

[Skirmisher]

Originally Posted by spillblood

OK, silence of the grave again. Hope there'll be any updates soon. This forum is ****ing dead, I'd say, only 4 or 5 participants, and weeks of silence.

This game is a lost cause.
It is over,you (we) are dreaming.

[spillblood]

Man, the current situation is: Only a few people are supposed to beta-test this half finished game. There simply can't be more bug reports than ours, 'cause no one is reading this forum except us, and no one cares about the game anymore. Sorry, can't put this any other way.

[Skirmisher]

Originally Posted by spillblood

Man, the current situation is: Only a few people are supposed to beta-test this half finished game. There simply can't be more bug reports than ours, 'cause no one is reading this forum except us, and no one cares about the game anymore. Sorry, can't put this any other way.

No need to be sorry,especially if you shelled out the money to buy it,like me.
I mean I bought the game at the beginning of january and I have not enjoyed it for 5 minutes.
Let the truth be told,this game stinks.
And as you point out, only 5 people care.

[ScottWAR]

Im still watching, hoping something comes out of this.

I am starting to consider just giving up on PC wargaming. It seems almost every game is either a game of mobile rock/paper/scissors, or so complicated to the point of choosing what brand of toothpaste the troops use. Wargames that require planning, combined arms, and dont require you to quit your job to play just dont seem to be getting made any longer.

The last three wargames I have bought have been disappointments.

-Empires of Steel----Actually a VERY good game. But it has two real issues. Only the player has to deal with fog of war and sight range,...the AI sees everything through fog of war even beyond the sight range of the units in the game,..the AI knows if you have a sub across the map from it. The second problem is the developer has taken a 'real' job, and has said he will not be making any more updates for the game barring any real big bugs. If he would fix the AI cheating issues it would not be a problem as the game is damn good every where else. But as it stands,...just another game where the developer took the money and ran without finishing the product they sold.

-Advanced Tactics Gold---- Again another really good game that really gets snakebit by one issue. The games AI cant use some of the units that are in the game. What?????? You make a wargame,...with all the usual units and somehow think its ok that the AI for the game cant use some of the units in the game,....particularly aircraft carriers. One of my favorite aspects of a game of this type is naval warfare. And this is an UPGRADE??????Maybe fixing the BIGGEST problem would have been a good idea.



-And this game,....which I dont need to really repeat the issues with.


It seems todays developers are really lacking in their ability to code a decent AI.