Warzone 2100 Forums

Has anyone taken the time to print out the Change Logs for all the Beta Releases, to see the progression of changes made by the current Game Developers? You have a surprise coming.

I was kind of curious as to what the Game Developers are thinking when they spend their time incorporating changes and modifications into this game, how did they arrive at their decisions, did they feel strongly about them, what motivates them, are they truly passionate about this game? How much and which ways are they using this game? In their own words in what direction is this game going while under their care?

Some of the changes I’ve seen lately are very nice and others make no common sense to me and I need those changes clarified. I’d really like to see a poll where the Testers could actually comment on the current beta changes – at least to see if everyone is as appreciative of the Game Developers efforts – but wouldn’t be really nice to get the information before you make the changes, as to ‘Proposed Changes’?

Do you think these changes make the game better or worse or you simply aren’t informed enough to make a clarified decision?

2.3: Rebalance 0.7.0.

Flashlight: ranges 6-12 -> 12-12
Pulse Laser: range 8-16 -> 14-14, damage 170 -> 165
Heavy Laser: range 5-7.5 -> 16-16, damage 350 -> 240
Pulse laser tower: price 175 -> 200
Pulse laser Hardpoint: price 250 -> 275
Heavy laser emplacement: price 225 -> 450
Scourge: range 5-16 -> 5-14, accuracy 70%-80% -> 50%-80%
Seraph: range 5-14 -> 7-15
Lancer: price 125 -> 150, accuracy 50%-60% -> 30%-60%, remove MRL prereq
Lancer Hardpoint: price 150 -> 175
Tank killer: accuracy 50%-60% -> 30%-60%
MRL: damage 30 -> 34
MRP: accuracy 45%-45% -> 40%-45%, range 5-8 -> 4-8
Mortar/Pepperpot: Splash radius 0.5 -> 1.0
Bombard/incendiary mortar: Splash radius 0.75 -> 1.25, (incen) burn radius 0.5 -> 1.25
Howitzer/Hellstorm: Splash radius 1.0 -> 1.25
Ground shaker/incendiary Howie: Splash radius 1.0 -> 1.5, (incen) burn radius 1.0 -> 1.5

All-rounder modifiers:

Cyborg 60% -> 65%, Wheels 120% -> 125%, HT 110% -> 115%, Tracks 100% -> 105%, Hover 100% -> 120%

Artillery modifiers:

Tracks 50% -> 40%, HT 70% -> 65%, Hover 100% -> 120%
Whirlwind site obsoletes Cyclone site
Cyclone site obsoletes Hurricane site
Whirlwind Hardpoint obsoletes Cyclone Hardpoint
Gauss Hardpoint obsoletes Rail Hardpoint
Gauss emplacement obsoletes Rail emplacement

In 2008, Zarel took a poll as to how players were using the game – based on a percentage table he ascertained that most of us play the Campaign and Skirmish games and very few of us waste our time on Multiplayer.

Did anyone tell the current Game Developers that a great strategy game has something other games don’t have – playability? Playability is defined by the notion that the longer a player stays interested in the game, the longer he would play it. Since there isn’t a ‘random map generator’ built for this game – availability of maps becomes crucible to the survival of this game and its playability.

It would be nice if the Game Developers had time to incorporate the maps that 13KukYNexus666 makes available in the next Beta or Final Release – but you need to test them to make sure that the ones you choose actually work with the Beta or Final since I’ve had a few crash on me, using different beta releases.

Perhaps someone has this answer. In 2.2.4 while playing skirmish games you could choose which location on a map to start from as well as color you wished to portray. You can still change your color but since the release of the Beta’s issued, that option was removed. I was wondering why the Game developers thought it was a good idea to limit playability in this game by removing that option?

My next question pertains to Monitor Resolution – is there an optimal monitor resolution for this game, in particular, for viewing the movies that explain the plot of the game? I got the high-end movies but they are blurry to the point of seeing the individual pixels and yet the audio is clear as day. I am currently set at 1280 X 1024, in the game at 1024 X 768, while the game will do 1280 X 1024, I have noticed at a lesser resolution there is less ‘game freezes’, but I have to manually change the system monitor resolution before entering the game. If I don’t, when I back out of the game, my system monitor is all screwed up and I have to reboot to clear the monition resolution.

I don’t recall having this monitor issue with other games.

Let’s go deal with some of the Research – my favorite topic.

I notice when playing a Skirmish game in which I removed the option of building Vtol Factories from the game, I am still plagued by items associated to the Vtol Factories in the Research Console – shouldn’t the AI be smart enough to know if there are no Vtol Factories being built in that game that you don’t need to see the items associated with the Vtol Factories and automatically removed those item before the start of the game?

It would speed up the game…

My final question pertains to Random Access Memory; can someone explain how this game utilizes RAM? My question stems from past experiences with software that works better if you have an almost over whelming amount of RAM installed on the system. My Graphics software comes to mind. When this game freezes periodically, it seems as if a large amount of instructions are trying to push their way through the Bus and get caught in a bottle-neck and the game remains in that limbo until all the instructions clear the Bus and regular game play ensues at its normal speed – often time these types of problems can be attribute to insufficient RAM –

A good way to test this supposition is to get a program called Cacheman. This program will optimize your computer for Game Play; I got mine at PhazeDDL. It also has an Information Tab that opens a listing box that will show you the name of every active file on your computer at any given time. It will tell you how much RAM the System is allocating to that file or program. I run this program on both of my systems while testing the game. It also puts a box in the icon tray that constantly updates the amount of free RAM your system has available for game play.

2.2.4 on my XP system uses 20.6 Megs of Ram – On my Vista system 2.3 Beta 7 uses 50.1 Megs of RAM, doesn’t seem much and doesn’t seem much like a reason why the game would periodically freeze and jerk. I have over 400 Megs of RAM sitting idly by on the XP system waiting for me to do something. I simply can’t explain it. Short of getting a bigger Bus, which isn’t going to happen.

Oh yeah before I go I want to know if anyone using a Windows Vista computer playing Beta 7 noticed a time delay between giving Trucks and Tanks instructions and actually have the unit perform the instruction, a noticeable delay, in either a Campaign or Skirmish game. I didn’t see that mentioned in the Beta 8 Change Log.

Did anyone remember to send Charlie Brown home, his dog misses him.

dragonflythecat wrote:I was kind of curious as to what the Game Developers are thinking when they spend their time incorporating changes and modifications into this game, how did they arrive at their decisions, did they feel strongly about them, what motivates them, are they truly passionate about this game? How much and which ways are they using this game? In their own words in what direction is this game going while under their care?

Of course we are.

dragonflythecat wrote:Some of the changes I’ve seen lately are very nice and others make no common sense to me and I need those changes clarified. I’d really like to see a poll where the Testers could actually comment on the current beta changes – at least to see if everyone is as appreciative of the Game Developers efforts – but wouldn’t be really nice to get the information before you make the changes, as to ‘Proposed Changes’?

For any change we feel might be contentious, we discuss them on the forums first. If we turn out to be wrong, forum users are free to make a new topic to discuss changes. If many players dislike a change, we would clearly revert it. All you have to do is ask.

We already have a poll to comment on current beta changes: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4173 - from November 21st, 2009

dragonflythecat wrote:Do you think these changes make the game better or worse or you simply aren’t informed enough to make a clarified decision?

2.3: Rebalance 0.7.0.

I made a thread about it before I committed it, and most users seemed to like the change: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4434

I don't make balance changes into polls, mostly because balancing isn't a democratic process - many users enjoying how overpowered a weapon is doesn't mean that the weapon shouldn't be nerfed, after all. However, anyone who wishes to raise an objection is free to do so, and I do try to address them.

dragonflythecat wrote:In 2008, Zarel took a poll as to how players were using the game – based on a percentage table he ascertained that most of us play the Campaign and Skirmish games and very few of us waste our time on Multiplayer.

Actually, Buginator took that poll.

dragonflythecat wrote:Did anyone tell the current Game Developers that a great strategy game has something other games don’t have – playability? Playability is defined by the notion that the longer a player stays interested in the game, the longer he would play it. Since there isn’t a ‘random map generator’ built for this game – availability of maps becomes crucible to the survival of this game and its playability.

Well, there is a random map generator: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3087

It's linked from the map utility sticky.

dragonflythecat wrote:It would be nice if the Game Developers had time to incorporate the maps that 13KukYNexus666 makes available in the next Beta or Final Release – but you need to test them to make sure that the ones you choose actually work with the Beta or Final since I’ve had a few crash on me, using different beta releases.

Sure, we could do that. Do you have any suggestions?

dragonflythecat wrote:Perhaps someone has this answer. In 2.2.4 while playing skirmish games you could choose which location on a map to start from as well as color you wished to portray. You can still change your color but since the release of the Beta’s issued, that option was removed. I was wondering why the Game developers thought it was a good idea to limit playability in this game by removing that option?

Which option? The ability to choose a location is still there, and it's in exactly the same place as it was before.

dragonflythecat wrote:My next question pertains to Monitor Resolution – is there an optimal monitor resolution for this game, in particular, for viewing the movies that explain the plot of the game? I got the high-end movies but they are blurry to the point of seeing the individual pixels and yet the audio is clear as day. I am currently set at 1280 X 1024, in the game at 1024 X 768, while the game will do 1280 X 1024, I have noticed at a lesser resolution there is less ‘game freezes’, but I have to manually change the system monitor resolution before entering the game. If I don’t, when I back out of the game, my system monitor is all screwed up and I have to reboot to clear the monition resolution.

The optimal resolution for the videos is 320x240. (The size of the small video in: http://guide.wz2100.net/ )

They're also designed to look decent in 640x480. Pumpkin used an interesting effect to make them look nice, an effect that we haven't copied yet.

dragonflythecat wrote:Let’s go deal with some of the Research – my favorite topic.

I notice when playing a Skirmish game in which I removed the option of building Vtol Factories from the game, I am still plagued by items associated to the Vtol Factories in the Research Console – shouldn’t the AI be smart enough to know if there are no Vtol Factories being built in that game that you don’t need to see the items associated with the Vtol Factories and automatically removed those item before the start of the game?

It would speed up the game…

Nope, the AI's not that smart. I'm working on improving it, of course, so maybe some day...

dragonflythecat wrote:My final question pertains to Random Access Memory; can someone explain how this game utilizes RAM? My question stems from past experiences with software that works better if you have an almost over whelming amount of RAM installed on the system. My Graphics software comes to mind. When this game freezes periodically, it seems as if a large amount of instructions are trying to push their way through the Bus and get caught in a bottle-neck and the game remains in that limbo until all the instructions clear the Bus and regular game play ensues at its normal speed – often time these types of problems can be attribute to insufficient RAM –

Sorry, don't know anything about that, but it doesn't seem like that's what's going on. The game freezing can probably mostly be attributed to bad video/sound drivers.

dragonflythecat wrote:Oh yeah before I go I want to know if anyone using a Windows Vista computer playing Beta 7 noticed a time delay between giving Trucks and Tanks instructions and actually have the unit perform the instruction, a noticeable delay, in either a Campaign or Skirmish game. I didn’t see that mentioned in the Beta 8 Change Log.

Nope, nothing's changed along those lines...

dragonflythecat wrote:Perhaps someone has this answer. In 2.2.4 while playing skirmish games you could choose which location on a map to start from as well as color you wished to portray. You can still change your color but since the release of the Beta’s issued, that option was removed. I was wondering why the Game developers thought it was a good idea to limit playability in this game by removing that option?

You didn't really mention what you think was removed, but you can still select your starting position (click the flag, click the number at the bottom).

My next question pertains to Monitor Resolution – is there an optimal monitor resolution for this game, in particular, for viewing the movies that explain the plot of the game? I got the high-end movies but they are blurry to the point of seeing the individual pixels and yet the audio is clear as day.

The movies are 320x240, and that's the best we can get, unless you want to remake all of them in better quality.

My final question pertains to Random Access Memory; can someone explain how this game utilizes RAM? My question stems from past experiences with software that works better if you have an almost over whelming amount of RAM installed on the system. My Graphics software comes to mind. When this game freezes periodically, it seems as if a large amount of instructions are trying to push their way through the Bus and get caught in a bottle-neck and the game remains in that limbo until all the instructions clear the Bus and regular game play ensues at its normal speed – often time these types of problems can be attribute to insufficient RAM –

RAM is not an issue, as you found out yourself, the game doesn't even use 100 MB. Problems are usually with lots of units, because of pathfinding and rendering.

He really needs to calm down... This is a game were people play and have fun with it. The people who deticated their time to make the game a bit better is acknowledged and they are respected for there efforts. If you don't like the game, well boo-hoo. Others like it, the developers like it (in my own opinion), and new people who find this website seem to like it as well. Just because there was some incident that canceled the Warzone 2100 product from being made and updated is just something your gonna have to live with.

GAWD

there is a video option to show the videos at the original screen size.
that makes it not stretched out.
there is also little difference between the lq and hq vids.

Zarel wrote:I don't make balance changes into polls, mostly because balancing isn't a democratic process - many users enjoying how overpowered a weapon is doesn't mean that the weapon shouldn't be nerfed, after all. However, anyone who wishes to raise an objection is free to do so, and I do try to address them.

which means that he alone decides what should and shouldn't be changed and he will take it up after the fact when you have a slim chance of changing his mind.

Zarel wrote:

dragonflythecat wrote:It would be nice if the Game Developers had time to incorporate the maps that 13KukYNexus666 makes available in the next Beta or Final Release – but you need to test them to make sure that the ones you choose actually work with the Beta or Final since I’ve had a few crash on me, using different beta releases.

Sure, we could do that. Do you have any suggestions?

how is this possible if the other map thread says

Note, only upload maps which, a) you either made, or b) you got permission from the original map author.

There can't be any exceptions to those rules, since those are the Forums rules.

Thanks for understanding.

are you saying that isn't true?

crux wrote:which means that he alone decides what should and shouldn't be changed and he will take it up after the fact when you have a slim chance of changing his mind.

Well, if you present a reasonable argument, I'm quite open to changing my mind. The problem with balance, though, is that it's impossible to please everyone, so it's one of those things for which I have to do things that some people might not like. I consult with a variety of skilled Warzone players, developers, and make threads asking for user opinions, of course, so it's not like I don't listen to anyone.

crux wrote:how is this possible if the other map thread says

Note, only upload maps which, a) you either made, or b) you got permission from the original map author.

There can't be any exceptions to those rules, since those are the Forums rules.

Thanks for understanding.

are you saying that isn't true?

Well, of course after a map has been suggested, I would ask its maker for permission before including it with Warzone.