now, wait a minute, here

[AndrewKurtz]

Yes ... my only grip with BOA (wonderful innovative game btw). The game was getting better and better with each release and now that it is sort of 'finished', I've played it enough and has no more desire to play solo or PBEM. Sort of sad ...

I'm taking it much more slowly with AACW (only playing my second campaign at the moment)

BOA Gold is coming.

[McNaughton]

I can see both points of view, but kind of lead toward Pasternaski in some basic level (not that modding is bad, but, that the way it is being done is more 'absolute' than 'optional').

This is the sole reason why I am creating my mod the way it is. I am creating the mod, so that players can play AACW using my modded scenario, as well as playing 'original unmodded AACW' without having to make an extra copy of the game, or to reinstall.

This is why it is taking me so long, as I am not CHANGING anything, just CREATING something new alongside the original. All of my models, units, scenarios, events, etc. are all separate from the 'unmodded AACW', meaning that you can play my mod, as a separate SCENARIO, not as a separate GAME.

I don't expect that my mod 'takes over' and becomes what everyone uses, but, if AGEOD finds something that they like in it, they can freely use it. Frankly, I know that this mod will not set well with all.

I can see a problem, where mods that modify existing scenarios, and existing models, that over-write, etc., will cause confliction and confusion (especially in PBEM) where one person is using MOD-A while someone else is using MOD-C, and the PBEM does not work. Hence all of the various alias errors players are experiencing in many of the existing released mods (these won't happen if all of your changes are based on new files, not modifying existing ones).

While easy, and quick to do, this means of modding does limit one way or the other, while creating new scenarios, that use separate files that don't affect existing scenarios, does not over-write, but allows an extra choice of variation.

You can choose to play a scenario of my mod, but, if you want to play a PBEM using AGEOD's official verison (using other people's mods or not) with Pasternaski, then it is completely possible.

[jimwinsor]

Please tell me you don't want a democratic process to make mods officially part of the game. I get along with people on this board, but I honestly don't know most of you from a box of rusty nails. I definitely don't want everyone else here telling me what mods I will be using. Right now, it's in two pairs of hands, and those are hands I generally trust. Modding should be optional, and a personal decision.

I kind of prefer the enlightened despotism of Pocus to any sort of forum democracy too.

We do mods. Pocus likes one? Then he can make it official in a patch. Simple and fair.

Throwing in a formal democratic process, even a putatively advisory one...I have an eerie feeling introducing mob dynamics like that would do more harm than good.

[Jabberwock]

I enjoy most of the mods, but I definitely sympathize with pasternaki's POV. I have been playing this game since the 1.02a demo. In that time, I have certainly seen modifications to the game that I didn't like, or think were realistic, according to my vision, based on my knowledge and research; but the rest of the community seems to enjoy them, or even wants to make them worse.

Pocus and crew have to walk a fine line here. AACW is a commercial product as well as a historical simulation. They have the official vision, which is modified by commercial pressure, meaning feedback from the community about what we like, along with our contributions. I believe that is their primary reason for wanting to add more graphics to to the official game, rather than as a mod.

I am not a professional artist, I didn't go to graphic design school. I have created a few minor graphics in the past for web sites, and (supposedly) supervised some artists. This is my first major project. I do my best to make graphics that will fit in, but I recognize my limitations. I know some people may not think my drawing style fits in well or changes the look of the game too much. I will do everything in my power to accomodate those people in reverting back to their vision of the game.

There were also some mistakes made in implementing the latest version of the game. I apologize for the ones that I am responsible for. It looks like 1.07a has solved many of them, and we are headed back towards a more stable product.

pasternaski - I want to take this opportunity to say how much I have enjoyed your posts ever since I joined this forum. We may not always agree, but I always look forward to seeing what you have to say, and how you will say it.

Regards,
pointy-headed Wilbury

[pasternakski]

Let there be no misunderstanding here. I am a great fan of the work done and in progress by all the dedicated souls who seek to improve this already wonderful game. Thank you, I am in your debt.

The thrust of my remarks is merely that I wish the improvement process were rather more tightly under control and understandable - and usable - by the entire range of AACW players.

I think in particular of those who have bought the game and are trying to figure out how to play it - and, eventually, to play it well. Many, if not most, of AGEod's customers are far from mod, patch, and Internet savvy as most who post - and mod - here.

Don't lose 'em, gentlemen, their future purchases (or lack of them) may make the difference between survival or extinction of our favorite wargame desiogn, development, and publishing company. If changes are incorporated formally into patches and company-developed and sanctioned add-ons, a larger number of those looking for good computer wargames to play will stay interested.

If, however, a game becomes the province of a "community" and turns into a mod-mad mishmash of meandering multiversions (sorry about the alliteration - sometimes I just can't help myself), a lot of well-meaning potential lifetime customers are going to get frustrated and bail out.

What do I suggest? Merely this: put somebody in charge of making clear what is game and what is mod, and I mean at the level where we ALL can understand the difference.

[Hobbes]

I kind of prefer the enlightened despotism of Pocus to any sort of forum democracy too.

We do mods. Pocus likes one? Then he can make it official in a patch. Simple and fair.

Throwing in a formal democratic process, even a putatively advisory one...I have an eerie feeling introducing mob dynamics like that would do more harm than good.

I'll drink to that - to the enlightened despot! Long may he reign.

[Primasprit]

Hi pasternakski!

[...]
Whast do I suggest? Merely this: put somebody in charge of making clear what is game and what is mod, and I mean at the level where we ALL can understand the difference.

PhilThib and Pocus are in charge of this.

Game: Simply install the official patches only.
Mod: Everything else.

Cheers
Norbert

[Rafiki]

PhilThib and Pocus are in charge of this.

Game: Simply install the official patches only.
Mod: Everything else.

Indeed. It really is this simple

If you choose to listen to (read) the discussions that the modders have amongst themselves and with the devs and get your view of what is and isn't in the game distorted as a result, then I suggest staying away from such threads.

The main (only?) source for officiality are the official patches, and the release notes that follow them.

[Dunhill_BKK]

I don't really have a problem with the amount of official support provided by AGEOD for these games. I don't have any difficulty telling the difference between the official patches and the mods.

I doubt that "a lot" of people are likely to not purchase future games due to any perceived "over involvement" of the community in providing material to official patches.

What I don't like is waiting months for patches. This is the case with some games. I prefer the close involvement of the AGEOD team and their coordination with community. I'd put that as a plus in my book.

[Franciscus]

Let me chime also, if you please.

I would say that complaining is easy, specially in the internet, where we are more or less uninhibited.

Nevertheless, I would say that realistically, all options are free to us, gamers:
- If we want PC strategy gaming at it's best, we play games as AACW, sticking with the official patches if we feel that they solve bugs or issues important to us. If we do not want to bother, do not log at ageod.com and be happy
- If we want PC strat gaming at it's very best, we can participate in the forums of AGEOD, knowing that our views/ideas/problems are listen attentively by Pocus; we can stick to the official patches or participate in the betas, and we can try good mods if we choose.
- If we want another level of entertainment, with no patches/mods/rule changes, whatever, I advise you to buy a Nintendo WII (I am only half kidding - that thing is really good, you know ?).

And let's not forget that we are talking of games, that are played to give us joy and entertainment

[AndrewKurtz]

What do I suggest? Merely this: put somebody in charge of making clear what is game and what is mod, and I mean at the level where we ALL can understand the difference.

That's already done as suggested. It really is simple. Game is what is installed in an official patch. Everything else is a mod.

And as pointed out, if you don't want the know what it took to get official, don't read those threads to completion.

[LSSpam]

The thrust of my remarks is merely that I wish the improvement process were rather more tightly under control and understandable - and usable - by the entire range of AACW players.

It is tightly controlled, by Pocus. It is understandable and usable, it exists as an officially bundled patch, 1.07, stickied at the top of the forum.

I think in particular of those who have bought the game and are trying to figure out how to play it - and, eventually, to play it well. Many, if not most, of AGEod's customers are far from mod, patch, and Internet savvy as most who post - and mod - here.

It doesn't get much more straightforward then a single individual patch. The patch doesn't even have to be extracted to specific files, they even given you a handy executable.

If, however, a game becomes the province of a "community" and turns into a mod-mad mishmash of meandering multiversions (sorry about the alliteration - sometimes I just can't help myself), a lot of well-meaning potential lifetime customers are going to get frustrated and bail out.

There exists one official patch. 1.07

What do I suggest? Merely this: put somebody in charge of making clear what is game and what is mod, and I mean at the level where we ALL can understand the difference.

I don't know how much more clear everyone can make this. Numerous people have tried to explicitly lay this out. Why you persist in not understanding it is, frankly, beyond me.

Pocus is in charge
Pocus clearly marks what is "game" by including that in the patch
The patch is the "official game"
It's a sticky at the top of the forum clearly marked "Patch 1.07"
That's "the game"

It's all very centralized, straightforward, consistent, and clear.

I just, i'm at a loss at what else to tell you.

[tremy]

Had a pleasurable 1/2 hour reading this thread.
I'm sure Pasternaski posts on many forums because he enjoys the flak,apart from making serious comment.The ensuing discussion has been interesting,amusing and erudite,so out of pure cowardice I am staying out.
Now, my point.I downloaded this wonderful game within a hour or so of release and played until a few weeks ago.Why did I stop? Because I became confused.Does that help aid anyones arguement?
I happen to think that the leader mod is brilliant work ,more accurate and game improving.Now, remember that I am not an old geezer,but a VERY old geezer(according to the age poll ,the oldest),so when required to download several files and put them in several different folders,my fear of an increasingly common senile moment brings me to a halt.After all,I am one of the majority semi computer literates.My son rescued me by doing the job for me.
Questions
Will the mod work when I upgrade to 1.07c and more.
Is it to be incorporated into the official version?
Is it possible to make the mod extract autmatically to the correct folders.?
Finally,please continue these grown-up (almost) discussions for my enlightenment.When feeling brave enough,I will elaborate on my earlier post
about the problems with leader attributes.

[Adlertag]

We all see the problem, modding is a never ending story because computer games are never finished.

Just hope I won't find a "Harry Potter" Mod (True ! it exists for Civ IV ) or a "Lord of the Ring" Mod for ACW...

[swang]

The Lord of the Ring Mod (or scenario) exists on virtually every strategic game out there.

But seriously though, I participate on the forums, but haven't started a new campaign since 1.04, and I play my current one at the rate of 1 turn every week or so. Mostly because I'm too lazy to re-start a campaign, and I don't like how my current one is turning out due to the major changes that happened in the engine. I haven't installed ANY mods so far, and I don't particularly intend to. I'll wait until they either become official, or just live without.

[saintsup]

The Lord of the Ring Mod (or scenario) exists on virtually every strategic game out there.

... and IIRC curiously there is no 'Lord of the ring' 'serious' strategic game. I'm not a marketing expert but it seems that somewhere someone is missing a business opportunity ...

I made some non-statistical but conclusive (for me) analysis that there is a strong correlation between serious wargaming and the reading of some books (LOTR, Dune, ...).

[bloodybucket]

"To retain respect for sausages and laws, one must not watch them in the making."

Bismarck may or may not have said that, but to some extent I'd include AACW patches with the legal edicts and wurst.

Simovitch touched on this before. If all the forum chatter from the volunteer modders/patch helpers was hidden from my tender eyes, and the Beta patches went out to a select group of Beta testers sworn to secrecy with deep and bloody oaths, I'm sure I would think that the patch process was a clockwork machine that spit out shiny new improvements on some admirably logical schedule.

I understand the idea that one might simply put hands over ears and loudly sing "LALALALALALALALI'MNOTLISTENINGLALALALA" and only remove the blinders when the official patches are spit out, but it's hard for someone like me who is cursed with inability to pass by all those fascinating posts, and the result is that I often come away with the impression of a slapdash, noisy stream of consciousness process that is being performed by evil geniuses on speed.

I'm not so sure I really gain anything by being allowed to peek under the hood while the engine gets tweaked, but I try to remember that for every general who got a great history soundbite by saying something profound, wise and simple like "get there fustest with the mostest" there were a bunch of staff weenie officers developing bleeding ulcers and tearing out big clumps of hair trying to figure out the logistical details of how to move the mostest there furstest, and nobody really remembers them.

[Pocus]

excellent

We hear you all... Beyond the confusion generated by mods being integrated, it is understandable that people don't necessarly want major changes to a game engine which is somehow working correctly , even if we perceive these changes has an improvement (kinda like the saying 'if it works, don't fix it).

We will take greater care about that. If data are to be majorly changed as for the artillery values, we will provide a way to stay with the older ones, if possible. If a new major game rule is added, we will provide it as an option.

(just don't expect we will do that for menial things though)

[epaminondas]

Fabulous! Thank you team AGEOD.

[tc237]

Hi guys,
I love this game, AGEOD and everything they stand for, but haven't played the game in months.

An AACW campaign requires a big commitment in time (weeks/months) and mental effort from the player to be enjoyable. That's why we all love it so much.
Other smaller games don't require as much time (1-2 hours) or effort, so numerous mods/patches don't affect them as much.

That commitment to AACW can seem to be wasted if the player doesn't understand the changes or feels that he has to "start the campaign over" every few weeks. (preception is reality to the player here)

I check in on this forum every few weeks and ask myself "is the game finished yet?" Wonder how many ask the same question.

Maybe I'm not paying enough attention to the conversation.

[Henry D.]

Hi guys,
I love this game, AGEOD and everything they stand for, but haven't played the game in months.

An AACW campaign requires a big commitment in time (weeks/months) and mental effort from the player to be enjoyable. That's why we all love it so much.
Other smaller games don't require as much time (1-2 hours) or effort, so numerous mods/patches don't affect them as much.

That commitment to AACW can seem to be wasted if the player doesn't understand the changes or feels that he has to "start the campaign over" every few weeks. (preception is reality to the player here)

I check in on this forum every few weeks and ask myself "is the game finished yet?" Wonder how many ask the same question.

Maybe I'm not paying enough attention to the conversation.

Yes, this is surely a valid concern, but then again, let's be honest: In singleplayer, don't many of us at one point or the other have a feeling they'd better start the game all over again and submit to it regardless of changes in gameplay, just out of an overwhelming sense of "Damned, I could have done that much better"? Maybe I have a mild case of ADD or something, but that is how most of my singleplayers end, in any game. Multiplayer is a very good antidote against that kind of bad habit and a real test of endurance for me.

However, in our case, it is indeed perception, but not reality. Except from the lamented dropping of Div HQs, nearly all changes in the patches are relatively minor and, IMHO, all for the better in regard of creating a more realistic playing experience (and that includes the dropping of the Div HQs, but milages may of course vary on that ). At least I never felt an urge to start over just because something is now handled a little bit different than it was in the build before.

Therefore I doubt many of us will agree with Your perception there. Surely it would be better from a "perceptive" point of view if all games were thoroughly tested and a 100% "perfected" upon release, but AGEOD can't do this. Hell, looking around on the market, not even the biggest companies with the largest resources seem to be able to do this.

What would be the alternatives? Turning out one game every other decade or so, thoroughly tested and perfected by the makers and a happy few of betas for years? Not exactly feasible, even if public welfare could cover the costs of living for the team in the meantime.

Releasing games beta-tested but still open for improvement through customer input like now, but only supporting and improving them on the smallest possible scale just to ensure "continuity"? Sure, that would be the most time- and cost-efficient way for the makers themselves, but were would that lead the community? In the "best" case to exactly the chaos pasternakski fears, a vast djungle of private mods big and small, good and bad, each one improving only certain aspects of the game one way or the other and most of them not compatible with each other. In the worst case it would lead to a game which would be deemed "promising" but could attract neither a large and enduring fanbase nor offer much in terms of longtime replayability because it feels vaguely "unfinished".

No offense, please, but personally I prefer the way it is now over any other "solution" that might "look better" to the casual observer.

Regards, Henry

[Pocus]

Say 10 time fast a customer costumer.

Signed:
The Fraggle Within. (sorry can't resist Henry, now bash my feeble attempt at writing english, I desserve that)

[jimwinsor]

Mmmm, I'd say the 1.07 new blockade system (ie, by elements, modified by forts) as at least as major a change as the div HQs. I am eager to see how well it works!

[Henry D.]

Say 10 time fast a customer costumer.

Signed:
The Fraggle Within. (sorry can't resist Henry, now bash my feeble attempt at writing english, I desserve that)

Me?

Never!

That I don't get the joke is totally my own fault, I swear! I'm german! We're forbidden by criminal law to have a sense of humour and all that!

Regards, the fraggle's No.1 fan

[Pocus]

you noticed your typo, don't you?

[Jabberwock]

Mmmm, I'd say the 1.07 new blockade system (ie, by elements, modified by forts) as at least as major a change as the div HQs. I am eager to see how well it works!

So far, I love it, much more realistic.

"Hmm. That's two frigates going back for supplies and repairs, where am I going to get another two ships? How about if I use the NE squadron, then I can use some these other ships for something else."

It means that ships and squadrons that were good for blockading are more likely to get used for blockading, while the more powerful ships can either defend them, or be sent on other missions. Now if I only had some other missions where I wasn't scared to send my powerful ships . . .

[Henry D.]

you noticed your typo, don't you?

Ähh, no, I didn't. I'm way to lazy to proofread the longer of my most inane ramblings before hitting "submit".

As a matter of fact, I didn't even recall to have used the word "customer" at all, let alone having butchered it... *re-reads his post closely*

Regards, You know who

Edit: Indeed I did, damn', I'm such a wizard with words, ain't I?

[Henry D.]

Mmmm, I'd say the 1.07 new blockade system (ie, by elements, modified by forts) as at least as major a change as the div HQs. I am eager to see how well it works!

Ah, well, I said "nearly" all.

But I think, this one, even if bigger than most, is a change for the better, too.

Regards, Henry

[Jabberwock]

... and IIRC curiously there is no 'Lord of the ring' 'serious' strategic game. I'm not a marketing expert but it seems that somewhere someone is missing a business opportunity ...

I made some non-statistical but conclusive (for me) analysis that there is a strong correlation between serious wargaming and the reading of some books (LOTR, Dune, ...).

Probably a strong correlation between serious wargaming and reading, period. LOTR and Dune just happen to be classics in their genres.

[Henry D.]

Probably a strong correlation between serious wargaming and reading, period. LOTR and Dune just happen to be classics in their genres.

Yes, but I think saintsup might be up to something there. Wargaming to me is somewhat related to a certain taste for epic drama, regardless of the genre, too. After all, epic drama is what we are recreating ourselves in our wargames, be they historical or not, isn't it?

Regards, Henry