If I only had time...

[Mark Stevens]

EA's been evolving - some might prefer 'mutating' - since around 2000, with frequent changes to the OOB, map, and Event structure.

It's gratifying that some players are still bothering to suggest improvements, and it looks from the various scenario depots that the game is still getting a decent number of downloads.

However, a lot of what's been done is patching things up with chewing gum and duct tape - what's really required is a complete overhaul of the beast, using up-to-date research and taking advantage of the latest capabilities included in TOAW III.

I've always taken the view that this is very much a big picture scenario, and freely admit that it's the overall effect in which I'm interested, not the details. Plus, I don't believe that TOAW, brilliant platform that it is, can really be stretched far enough to cover WWII in Europe at all levels (the strategic war is an obvious one, but even designing an individual ground unit which will realistically mirror the equipment and other changes experienced over a period of six years is very difficult). Also, I'm not much of a PC buff, and BioEds and similar things frighten me :scream:.

I'm more than happy, once the new patch is proven, to carry on adding little widdles and tiddles here and there, in agreement with other players - there's a raft of suggestions in the threads here - but what would be ideal is if someone with an interest in the scenario, a good technical knowledge of TOAW III, historical knowledge of WWII (or a willingness to listen to other people) and a great deal of free time, were to take this over and redesign it from the ground up. I just don't have the time, although I'd be happy to expain why some decisions were taken, or otherwise help out.

Any takers?

 

[Veers]

EA's been evolving - some might prefer 'mutating' - since around 2000, with frequent changes to the OOB, map, and Event structure.

It's gratifying that some players are still bothering to suggest improvements, and it looks from the various scenario depots that the game is still getting a decent number of downloads.

However, a lot of what's been done is patching things up with chewing gum and duct tape - what's really required is a complete overhaul of the beast, using up-to-date research and taking advantage of the latest capabilities included in TOAW III.

I've always taken the view that this is very much a big picture scenario, and freely admit that it's the overall effect in which I'm interested, not the details. Plus, I don't believe that TOAW, brilliant platform that it is, can really be stretched far enough to cover WWII in Europe at all levels (the strategic war is an obvious one, but even designing an individual ground unit which will realistically mirror the equipment and other changes experienced over a period of six years is very difficult). Also, I'm not much of a PC buff, and BioEds and similar things frighten me :scream:.

I'm more than happy, once the new patch is proven, to carry on adding little widdles and tiddles here and there, in agreement with other players - there's a raft of suggestions in the threads here - but what would be ideal is if someone with an interest in the scenario, a good technical knowledge of TOAW III, historical knowledge of WWII (or a willingness to listen to other people) and a great deal of free time, were to take this over and redesign it from the ground up. I just don't have the time, although I'd be happy to expain why some decisions were taken, or otherwise help out.

Any takers?

Well, Shane(with apparent community support) was already thinking of taking on a global WWII scenario. Perhaps he (we all) will begin with Europe? Eh, Shane?

 

[L`zard]

EA's been evolving - some might prefer 'mutating' - quote]

Teenage Mutant Panzer Commanders!

Featuring Lord Mantis as Master Splinter!

Mhwahahaha!

 

[Veers]

EA's been evolving - some might prefer 'mutating' -

Teenage Mutant Panzer Commanders!

Featuring Lord Mantis as Master Splinter!

Mhwahahaha!

:laugh: :laugh:

 

[Mantis]

Teenage Mutant Panzer Commanders!

Featuring Lord Mantis as Master Splinter!

Mhwahahaha!

Hmmm. I see some possibilities... :devious:

 

[Mantis]

Well, Shane(with apparent community support) was already thinking of taking on a global WWII scenario. Perhaps he (we all) will begin with Europe? Eh, Shane?

That is a monstrous undertaking, and would only be done with complete community involvement. I would be willing to be involved in such a project, to be certain. But I am the first to admit that there is *no* possibility I could undertake such a project myself - there would have to be an incredible amount of community cooperation on this one. It would end up being more like a 'contract' - this is what the scenario needs to be, now we all need to work together to deliver it. (For my part, I'd want virtually all major decisions to be run through the community for input; we'd basically be designing this by committee).

So the real question behind this is such:

How many of you would be willing to work on such a scenario? We'd need mapmakers, events/editor guys, and a massive involvement by way of simple posts et al, providing info, sources, opinions, criticism, etc.

Thoughts?

 

[Veers]

That is a monstrous undertaking, and would only be done with complete community involvement. I would be willing to be involved in such a project, to be certain. But I am the first to admit that there is *no* possibility I could undertake such a project myself - there would have to be an incredible amount of community cooperation on this one. It would end up being more like a 'contract' - this is what the scenario needs to be, now we all need to work together to deliver it. (For my part, I'd want virtually all major decisions to be run through the community for input; we'd basically be designing this by committee).

Sounds like a good plan to me. We could have the tandem projects of Europe Aflame II and World Aflame I, with the same ideas of community involvement present. (Regarding World Aflame [or whatever it end up being called], has James/Ralph given you the down low on whether we can possibly expect the map size limit to be upped? [in which case, perhaps we should start with EA II, and then attempt WA I when the size is upped.])

So the real question behind this is such:

How many of you would be willing to work on such a scenario? We'd need mapmakers, events/editor guys, and a massive involvement by way of simple posts et al, providing info, sources, opinions, criticism, etc.

Thoughts?

I volunteer to give opinions and critisism, etc. Course, time and ability constraints will limit my other contributions.

 

[Panzerpelle]

That is a monstrous undertaking, and would only be done with complete community involvement. I would be willing to be involved in such a project, to be certain. But I am the first to admit that there is *no* possibility I could undertake such a project myself - there would have to be an incredible amount of community cooperation on this one. It would end up being more like a 'contract' - this is what the scenario needs to be, now we all need to work together to deliver it. (For my part, I'd want virtually all major decisions to be run through the community for input; we'd basically be designing this by committee).

So the real question behind this is such:

How many of you would be willing to work on such a scenario? We'd need mapmakers, events/editor guys, and a massive involvement by way of simple posts et al, providing info, sources, opinions, criticism, etc.

Thoughts?

I suggest you take command together with Mark and run it exactly like done before...No committe would work in this regard and no work would be done...But the flip side is the democratic process would be improved upon...I have tried to design together with a codesigner in two scenarios..one has never seen the light and the other has been redesigned by meself during the last years...Soo
I do not recomend a commitee runned development of the scenario..Let King Mark apoint his successor...and may the appointee be as enlighted as Mark IF he decides to surrender...(Thats a big IF....)

 

[Veers]

I suggest you take command together with Mark and run it exactly like done before...No committe would work in this regard and no work would be done...But the flip side is the democratic process would be improved upon...I have tried to design together with a codesigner in two scenarios..one has never seen the light and the other has been redesigned by meself during the last years...Soo
I do not recomend a commitee runned development of the scenario..Let King Mark apoint his successor...and may the appointee be as enlighted as Mark IF he decides to surrender...(Thats a big IF....)

I don't know, I think that the West Front '44 revision is comign along alright with a community effort being put into it.

 

[Mantis]

I do understand what Pelle is saying. "Too many chefs". But that wasn't quite exactly what I had in mind. I was more or less following what has worked so well for EA. I'm into bantering all rough spots back and forth through the community, and taking advantage of the tremendous help available here through the members and their various skills and resources, past experience and the like.

But it wouldn't be a democracy per se. There has to be a project lead, or nothing will get done. I don't envision having a community vote for every decision. I do see talking out the problem areas, listening to discussion, and trying to make the best decisions possible. This is exactly the type of thing Mark does now. He listens to us (the community), he is very open to debate and will readily change his tune if you can convince him your argument is correct. He shows great concern over what the fanbase wants to see in the scenario, but ultimately, he holds true to his feelings of what EA needs to be, and all final decisions come down to him. And quite frankly, I wouldn't have it any other way! I know without the slightest hesitation that had this scenario been (re)designed any other way, it wouldn't be the Europe Aflame that sits so close to my heart.

And secondly - if I spent the next three years learning every possible thing there was to know about the editor (moving into a commune with James, Lou and the others ) I still could not purposely create a scenario that would hold a candle to EA (no one could). Why? Because of atmosphere and immersion. You can't just decide "I'm going to create the most enjoyable scenario there is. I'll make a masterpiece"; that kind of thing just happens on it's own, you have no conscious control over it.

It's almost a lottery. You can increase your odds, by having exacting OOBs/TO&Es, painstakingly researched maps/roads/rails and the like, but ultimately you just throw it out there and hope for the best. Yes, it *is* possible to make a masterpiece - I just don't think that it comes about because someone says "make it so".



The entire point is this: I cannot replace Mark, and have no desire to do so. Even if I had all the skills myself (which I do not), I wouldn't want the job anyways. To be frank, I really believe that had I not stumbled on to EA (thanks to Dan Neely for that!), I doubt I'd even know how to play TOAW beyond noob level. I'd likely not have played the game at all in the past 4 years, I would never have found Warfare HQ (can you believe one of our more famous personalities used to call himself Cinderelmo? I'll let you guess who it was on Ulver's old board), I never would have become staff, helped start ACG.com, etc.

(break time, will continue later!)

 

[Mantis]

Ok, back from break and did some work.

As a third point, I don't mind trying to create World Aflame, or even working on a redesign on EA, but the latter will never happen in my lifetime as long as Mark is willing to continue on to some degree with EA himself. I would be glad to be part of a project that redid the event structure and such, and then handed it back to Mark. But I'd rather stop playing the game than see Mark move away from EA. (Sorry old man!)

The only consideration that could sway me on that score would be if the time ever comes that Mark is going to move on, regardless of any other factors. Under such circumstances, I would become involved directly with Europe Aflame. But let me make it perfectly clear - there is no other method I can forsee that would entail myself, or anyone, to be frank, 'taking over'.

And truth be told, I don't think it's even possible unless Mark *did* drop it. Ben did a fantastic job reworking many events, changing the OOB, etc, for his Europe Aflame II. Not to take anything away from his work, but it speaks to what I mention in my previous post. It simply is not Europe Aflame. And nothing else ever will be, until Mark officially hands off.

And for what it's worth, I hope that day never comes.

 

[Mantis]

Ok, reading over my previous posts. I guess the short of it is that when you get to the point that you've had enough, and just don't want to do this any longer, Mark, keep me in mind. This scenario is near and dear to me, and I would be absolutely honored to be 'officially' involved with Europe Aflame. I doubt there's another member who can claim to be a bigger fan, or would lavish as much love in it.

But an era will end on that day, which is why I hope I have great-grandkids playing TOAW with me before it ever comes about.

What would you think about several of us working with you to do said rewrite (taking much of the work off your shoulders, but keeping in line with your guidance and design philosophy), then handing it back?

A MUCH preferred solution, imnsho!

 

[Secadegas]

My felling is Mark isn't tired of EA or TOAW...

but I would be tired of continuosly having to answer questions like:

"I'm losing... why don't you change events to (fullfill my needs...)"
"I'm curious... why aren't 11 Hurricanes the Turkish had on 1939 on their OOB?"
"I just popped in... there are still 500 empty events... why???"
"Now that we have a new equipment database... why don't you change the game TO&E?"

 

[Mantis]

(I will always love that avatar... :laugh: )

I hear you, and agree completely. A bit of the problem with this is that a radical overhaul of the OOB/TO&E will affect playbalance - the flow of the game can change quite radically. This can be worked around, of course, but will require considerable playtesting and tweaking, methinks.

 

[Secadegas]

(...) A bit of the problem with this is that a radical overhaul of the OOB/TO&E will affect playbalance - the flow of the game can change quite radically (...)

I wasn't defending a radical overhaul... just the contrary...

 

[Mantis]

Oh no - I understand that. Sorry if I was a little unclear. I was agreeing with your comment, then going off on a tangent.

I was just further developing my earlier thoughts. A rewrite has it's plusses, but the things I mentioned are the negative aspects.