What new MANW projects could be coming up?

[Kydoimos 916]

Hi all - just wondered what fellow MANW applicants have planned for the future? :) So many fantastic entries, I bet some amazing projects could be born from this year's endeavours!

[IndeedPete 1038]

Well, I don't think I'll be able to fully finish M.E.R.C.S. until deadline so there will be some work on that project post-MANW. Mostly small stuff, a generic sidemission generator, maybe random loot in all missions, mod support (TPW mods, AI enhancements, optional weapon packages for the shop system) and of course bugfixing - so, polishing in short.

Then I was helping out my graphics designer with his missions and it kind of has become a group project. It's a S.T.A.L.K.E.R.-like open world scenario which should support SP as well as COOP - but this project is in a very early stage from what I can tell. However, it will likely feature some systems like the shop or conv system developed during M.E.R.C.S. Plus cool anomalies!

And I already have an idea for a bigger future project taking place in the M.E.R.C.S. universe. It's just a concept for now and I don't want to give up too much information yet. But it will take place on different islands (I'm bored of Altis) utilising custom CSAT units as well as many user-made mods and packages. I intend to keep third party content as optional as possible; we'll see if that works out... Maybe it will become more an addon than a campaign - it's really just a concept for now.

Next idea would be kind of a spin-off of the latter. A gamemode that focuses on strategic gameplay, i.e. commanding larger forces, logistics, manage manpower and resources. It's just a vision for now and I'm not sure if it's possible at all. I don't expect to ever really develop this idea. However, I'd like to focus on more strategic elements than just the usual infantry / squad combat. I think Arma 3 really lacks good strategic scenarios.

Lastly, I've bought like 30 more or less new games on the last steam sale plus a new gaming machine last week so I might just take some Arma vacation and loose myself in other universes. Winter is coming and I'm well prepared for a few nice gaming sessions! :D

[Rydygier 1309]

Don't know, frankly. After quite intense first half of this year, I feel burned out. Temporary, I hope, but who knows. For now can't muster much enthusiasm for scripting anything serious, while it always was my basic motivation - to create something new and exciting.

I still have few things on my "to do" list, but currently I'm only slowly pushing forward HWS project. If I regain readiness for next adventures, then I have to continue HWS, depending, if new ideas will appear, implement improvements from it into Hetman itself, create some ports for Pilgrimage and try to do coop version (low chances of success though). Then there are some plans for Pilgrimage's sequel. And there is still some another project on early stage for hex-based strategy gameplay in turns. Not mentioning about not materialized yet at all plans, like ambitious matchmaking Hetman with ALiVE or IF's Ragnarok mission for A3. That would be all, I think. Apart of that - who knows. I've nearly always worked on my own, maybe it will be time to participate in something bigger. Currently simply can't tell if/when/which I'll do. For now nothing of these gives me any thrill...

Edited September 16, 2014 by Rydygier

[Kydoimos 916]

Interesting stuff guys! I think we'll all need a break after MANW - seriously, I'm shattered! :) @Rydygier - well done on the Mod of the Week review!!! @IndeedPete - can't wait to see how the project develops, and S.T.A.L.K.E.R sounds really fascinating!

[IndeedPete 1038]

@Kydoimos: I'm sure it will be awesome. However, I think my colleague is pretty busy at the moment (and me as well). Also, I'm more a technical advisor and coder than anything else - he does the (important) creative work. ;)

@Rydygier: Hex-based strategy? Hell yeah! I wonder how you'd do that; I hope this project becomes reality at some point.

[Rydygier 1309]

:) Yeah, those article made my Sunday. Nice surprise.

Hex-based strategy? Hell yeah! I wonder how you'd do that; I hope this project becomes reality at some point.

Bah, thing is, I do not know, if I'll do that, but something I've done already and in general I know, how to do the rest or at least I see nothing impossible ahead. Biggest unknown is opponent AI - as for board games AI I have only slight experience from A2's battlechess project, but that's not much. So roughly it seems doable, just lots of work, not much of enthusiasm for now. :)

Here is some discussion, and here latest wip picture.

Quite educational to me. Just to find out, how to display hexes in movement range I needed to figure out few quite interesting things, mostly about pathfinding.

Edited September 16, 2014 by Rydygier

[IndeedPete 1038]

That looks awesome! Really interesting project, sadly probably not fancy enough for most of the more casual players. Nontheless, interesting. Judging by the picture the few thoughts I had off the top of my head when I read your first post were more or less what you did. Finding a way to automatically divide the map into hexagons, draw some lines on the map, calculate some (more or less) general surface values for each field (like water, wood, high ground etc.), probably determining some fancy coefficients for combat and movement calculations and use ORBAT markers and side colours to visualise it. Simply brilliant because it shows another one of Arma's great possibilities. :)

Sadly, AI isn't really my major (though I find it highly interesting) but especially when you say turn-based, gaming theory (math) and related theories, models and algorithms should prove helpful to you. I assume you use some kind of probabilistic model for your AI (maybe for HETMAN as well)?

My strategic gammode approach would be real-time, focusing on logistics and resource management. I.e. building up resource connections, plan supply routes (keyword: Travelling Salesman Problem / Vehicle Routing Problem), manage personnel and assets (cash + fixed capital), investments on (financial) markets (sort of a very small simulated stock exchange), see to it to protect own convoys... - like a small economic simulator just with big bad mercenaries raiding bases, depots and convoys from time to time. Idea behind it is to simultaniously manage Arma's combat / military components and maintain a profitable business. It is just an idea for now and I have no clue if it would be fun to anyone, we'll see.

On the other hand I love creating stories, scenes and dialogoues - campaings, in short. And I'm not sure if I'd be able to find a way to combine the former with the latter...

[Rydygier 1309]

It is just an idea for now and I have no clue if it would be fun to anyone, we'll see.

Would be for me for sure. I even once started to script kind of merchant tycoon for A2, where goal was to heal ruined economy of Chernarus by trading, building factories etc. stuff, so indirectly to make the country able to maintain army big enough to repell incoming invasion, all with unstable situation, insurgents, marauders, bandits... But it was never continued, only very early wip.

(maybe for HETMAN as well)

Hetman not fits to the turn-based gameplay. This should be something genuine, that will give answer to the question "how to move given to me tokens on the board in the given situation under given rules to win". I would prefer rather to find/define set of basic, universal rules, that would result with decent cleverness than trying to script behavior for every possible situation (which is no go anyway). And I always tend to figure out solutions for myself, even, if that means reinventing the wheel (I'm not a programmer, never studied such matters). That was with pathfinding on hexagonal map. I figured out, how to do that reliably and efficient enough, then went to check, if there aren't any better solutions only to learn, so in general are used variants of exactly that approach, I found...

IMO it could be fun for some, if well done, there are some fans of old good hexes for sure, and there would be an option to resolve battles in real time 3D.

[IndeedPete 1038]

Hm, sounds interesting, why did you stop developing your tycoon?

I see to it to get it started one day; it's a buttload of work, especially when starting from scratch. To implement those ideas a good handful of GUIs are needed, as well as some kind of bird eye's view (good, that should be easy), clickable assets (heck, that might be diffcult), some (mathematical) model of a market which needs to be fair but challenging at the same time, a good driving AI (yep, and that's where it probably fails), a lot of resource management from vehicles to local population, and some kind of opponent controller/AI (maybe like an adapted HETMAN). Problem is I don't just want random ambushes and such - it would be awesome if there was a real opponent controlled by AI who actually tries to take over the player's business. Some entity who actually scouts out the player's supply routes and bases and attacks where he finds the weakest spot, forcing the player to constantly (micro-)manage his business and change his strategy. Then there should be influencing factors apart from the market, like a country's stability. If the country has a high unemployment rate and poverty spreads, random raids are more likely and resistance movements rise, threatening the player's business. On the other hand a very stable country might lead to higher taxes and lower prices due to the availability of whatever goods the player is selling. But then there are foreign investors who rather invest in stable countries while employable PMCs of course prefer unstable countries with lots of contracts. So, one should have a few strategic options to (de-)stabilise a country, keeping it somewhere between all out war and sustained peace to run a profitable business. (Yes, capitalism at its finest. ;)) That task requires a lot of balancing, let alone the development of said model behind it.

So does HETMAN just ("just" sounds a bit off here since it's actually an awesome piece of work) evaluate the current situation and develop a strategy from it or does he somehow try to predict the enemy's next move?

This should be something genuine, that will give answer to the question "how to move given to me tokens on the board in the given situation under given rules to win".

Plus the planning. The AI should be able to not only evaluate the next/current/last round but try to develop and follow a strategy over the next n rounds. Of course it should re-evaluate its current plan every round based on the player's move to see if it is still feasible and effective. I did similiar stuff with JASON and a Java agentpeak extension - it was kind of turn based, though the scenario was automated agents competing each other on auctions. And it was in a smaller environment with less complexity I'd say. Nontheless, keep up!

[Rydygier 1309]

Hm, sounds interesting, why did you stop developing your tycoon?

It's unclear to me, why I'm loosing interest (why becomes so hard to continue) for some projects while other, new one distracts/attracts me. Perhaps it was too much tedious work to do, too many uknowns, loose ties to figure out, too much other work, and then - Arma 3... It's not the only one such project. I must admit, it's a bit frustrating to me having plans, that sounds cool, but summed need years of work, which is often demotivating to me. Because in fact I'm quite impatient, so if given effect requires too much boring work, then I preffer to do something less boring instead, after all I'm doing this for fun, satisfaction, no one pays&demands. Projects I finished was either quick to do or I was from the beginning exactly knowing, what I want to achieve, and I wanted it strong enough. Later project growth is in my case mostly based on feedback, requests and user interest. But it's never known, maybe someday I find desire to continue. Such things are out of control or predictability.

as well as some kind of bird eye's view (good, that should be easy)

Idea was for something in first person view. I mean, you control the guy developing his business, riding from town to town, buying, selling, investing, hiring, fighting - all in person, no bird's view strategy, not that much GUI boredom (I hate script GUI) but something more immersive. Then also plot is easier to apply, if you want it. Of course, map with set of statistics would be needed too.

a good driving AI (yep, and that's where it probably fails)

Indeed. Any AI-driven convoys would be tragic, unless "virtual" only, which sucks.

it would be awesome if there was a real opponent controlled by AI who actually tries to take over the player's business. Some entity who actually scouts out the player's supply routes and bases and attacks where he finds the weakest spot, forcing the player to constantly (micro-)manage his business and change his strategy. Then there should be influencing factors apart from the market, like a country's stability. If the country has a high unemployment rate and poverty spreads, random raids are more likely and resistance movements rise, threatening the player's business. On the other hand a very stable country might lead to higher taxes and lower prices due to the availability of whatever goods the player is selling. But then there are foreign investors who rather invest in stable countries while employable PMCs of course prefer unstable countries with lots of contracts. So, one should have a few strategic options to (de-)stabilise a country, keeping it somewhere between all out war and sustained peace to run a profitable business. (Yes, capitalism at its finest. ) That task requires a lot of balancing, let alone the development of said model behind it.

Yep. Something like that. :) My second abandoned project, although more advanced, nearly working, was some AI insurgency vs stabilizing forces autonomous homeostat simulator (should act as independent background, that does not need player, but player can influence it). Occupant would have FOBs and sent routine/intervention patrols, towns would have hearts&minds factors, if low enough, insurgency groups in amount depending on town size could be generated and performing things like fully dynamic ambushes, hit-and-run attacks, also coordinated etc. Could be useful here. Heh, I need much, much more enthusiasm, than I have today to continue such projects...

So does HETMAN just ("just" sounds a bit off here since it's actually an awesome piece of work) evaluate the current situation and develop a strategy from it or does he somehow try to predict the enemy's next move?

Roughly. Yes, it reacts dynamically on current situation basing on own forces, designated objectives (self-designated in Big Boss mode) and known enemy presence. Apart from tons of details and factors, like support, cargo transportation, artillery, morale, personality etc. Its decisions are based on some most simply rules, like flanking, matching proper groups to proper tasks or 3:1 forces ratio at attack (economy of the forces), sometimes reverse slope tactics while defend... All additional resulting complexicity is caused by chaos of war itself. But no prediction. Only pushing towards goal and reacting on the threats. Prediction... well, that would make Hetman few times more big and complex... :) and heavy. :/ And hard to design, because how to predict, what enemy plans without any strategical background, where battle is quite extracted from any wider, operational context.

Plus the planning. The AI should be able to not only evaluate the next/current/last round but try to develop and follow a strategy over the next n rounds. Of course it should re-evaluate its current plan every round based on the player's move to see if it is still feasible and effective.

Indeed. And in the same time it must run well on PC, not some Cray supercomputer or another Deep Blue. :) Scripts are sluggish. But I wonder, if is possible to define such set of basic rules, that will effectively could replace any kind of GRAND BATTLE PLAN. Winning without a plan. That would be something (like key moves for Rubik's cube - you may succeed not knowing really, how it happened, just following simply steps, like cellular automaton). But it's perhaps about applying those basic rules on all levels, main plan, and current situation.

BTW In some sense, depending on the situation and goal, having a certain plan/beeing organized is a weakness. Plans may be predicted (but plan may take into account enemy preditction. But prediction may take into account, so plan takes into account prediction. But... :) ) or discovered and countered. If there is no visible plan behind the actions, how to prevent or counteract, if there is nothing particular to prevent or predict? Only "directed chaos". Similar - organization makes you voulnerable by introducing key, weak spots, like HQ or supply lines. And predictable due to used procedures too. Something, like "little green man" tactics, headless enemy, like decentralized amoeba without vital spots to hit (that was the goal of that insurgency homeostat simulation), also may be interesting option to follow/simulate.

Edited September 17, 2014 by Rydygier

[IndeedPete 1038]

It's unclear to me, why I'm loosing interest (why becomes so hard to continue) for some projects while other, new one distracts/attracts me. Perhaps it was too much tedious work to do, too many uknowns, loose ties to figure out, too much other work, and then - Arma 3... It's not the only one such project. I must admit, it's a bit frustrating to me having plans, that sounds cool, but summed need years of work, which is often demotivating to me. Because in fact I'm quite impatient, so if given effect requires too much boring work, then I preffer to do something less boring instead, after all I'm doing this for fun, satisfaction, no one pays&demands. Projects I finished was either quick to do or I was from the beginning exactly knowing, what I want to achieve, and I wanted it strong enough. Later project growth is in my case mostly based on feedback, requests and user interest. But it's never known, maybe someday I find desire to continue. Such things are out of control or predictability.

I know that. If it wasn't for MANW I'd probably given up long ago, doing other stuff. Sometimes I just get ideas that are not fitting my current project but I'm too impatient to write them down for later. Or I simply lose interest in Arma for a while. But MANW - and of course the user feedback and contacts I've made - somehow motivates me.

Idea was for something in first person view. I mean, you control the guy developing his business, riding from town to town, buying, selling, investing, hiring, fighting - all in person, no bird's view strategy, not that much GUI boredom (I hate script GUI) but something more immersive. Then also plot is easier to apply, if you want it. Of course, map with set of statistics would be needed too.

Just to be clear: I've meant a two way approach. Means a strategic (bird-view) and a personal view. Of course the player controlls one main character (the big boss, that must not die) but in order to scoute and manage the routes or to build bases and depots a bird view could be helpful. Just looking at boring GUIs and pushing numbers is not really fun; especially if you have a fairly powerful engine at disposal. I might go that far to make drivers and security personnel playable as well (maybe only on lower difficulty) so the player can take over a convoy driver or PMC if under attack. The gamemode should address Arma's stregths the same as it should bring in new stuff.

Indeed. Any AI-driven convoys would be tragic, unless "virtual" only, which sucks.

Well, back in A2 there was a neat little convoy control script by Norrin. Not sure if it still works in A3 but it should be reproducible / adapatable. Convoys were slow as fuck but they kept their order, stayed on route and reacted properly to attacks.

Yep. Something like that. :) My second abandoned project, although more advanced, nearly working, was some AI insurgency vs stabilizing forces autonomous homeostat simulator (should act as independent background, that does not need player, but player can influence it). Occupant would have FOBs and sent routine/intervention patrols, towns would have hearts&minds factors, if low enough, insurgency groups in amount depending on town size could be generated and performing things like fully dynamic ambushes, hit-and-run attacks, also coordinated etc. Could be useful here. Heh, I need much, much more enthusiasm, than I have today to continue such projects...

That sounds cool. You should pick it up at some point. I imagine you could fully simulate asymmetric warfare conducted by AI. HETMAN with regular forces and the other system taking care of the resistance. Could be another War Stories.^^

Roughly. Yes, it reacts dynamically on current situation basing on own forces, designated objectives (self-designated in Big Boss mode) and known enemy presence. Apart from tons of details and factors, like support, cargo transportation, artillery, morale, personality etc. Its decisions are based on some most simply rules, like flanking, matching proper groups to proper tasks or 3:1 forces ratio at attack (economy of the forces), sometimes reverse slope tactics while defend... All additional resulting complexicity is caused by chaos of war itself. But no prediction. Only pushing towards goal and reacting on the threats. Prediction... well, that would make Hetman few times more big and complex... :) and heavy. :/ And hard to design, because how to predict, what enemy plans without any strategical background, where battle is quite extracted from any wider, operational context.

Plus the fact that the strategic impact of prediction is probably very limited. Of course you could use the same routines HETMAN already uses and "just" change the input values to what HETMAN assumes about his enemy. He would so to say develop the oppenent's strategy based on what he would do and take it into account. Still, highly complex and the benefit is questionable. Would be an interesting experiment though.

Indeed. And in the same time it must run well on PC, not some Cray supercomputer or another Deep Blue. :) Scripts are sluggish. But I wonder, if is possible to define such set of basic rules, that will effectively could replace any kind of GRAND BATTLE PLAN. Winning without a plan. That would be something (like key moves for Rubik's cube - you may succeed not knowing really, how it happened, just following simply steps, like cellular automaton). But it's perhaps about applying those basic rules on all levels, main plan, and current situation.

BTW In some sense, depending on the situation and goal, having a certain plan/beeing organized is a weakness. Plans may be predicted (but plan may take into account enemy preditction. But prediction may take into account, so plan takes into account prediction. But... :) ) or discovered and countered. If there is no visible plan behind the actions, how to prevent or counteract, if there is nothing particular to prevent or predict? Only "directed chaos". Similar - organization makes you voulnerable by introducing key, weak spots, like HQ or supply lines. And predictable due to used procedures too. Something, like "little green man" tactics, headless enemy, like decentralized amoeba without vital spots to hit (that was the goal of that insurgency homeostat simulation), also may be interesting option to follow/simulate.

Well, they say that the simplest strategies are usually the best. As you say, maybe just setting some kind of super goal and then acting based on what happened before. Problem is that the AI must know where it wants to be in n rounds, so it needs to plan "Hey, I can take that harbour in three rounds which gains me this-and-that." I think an AI based on, e.g. a greedy approach (i.e. "always pick the field with the highest value from your current position and ignore fields that can't be reached yet") would be easy to implement but too predictable for the human oppenent. Plus - from a balancing point of view - there shouldn't be a dominant strategy that can beat every other. It really is a big project, I'll give you that. ;)

[Rydygier 1309]

Yep. Big projects, small motivation. :)

Well, back in A2 there was a neat little convoy control script by Norrin. Not sure if it still works in A3 but it should be reproducible / adapatable. Convoys were slow as fuck but they kept their order, stayed on route and reacted properly to attacks.

There are some ways of strict control based on step-by-step looped doMove. You can do even dynamically forming "chains" of vehicles, where follower is chasing some point just behind vehicle before him (will not try to overtake) like chain of wagons, similar to real city traffic. But that's heavy, not flexible stuff. Not tested in A3 though.

Still, highly complex and the benefit is questionable. Would be an interesting experiment though.

Probably doable, but, like you said final results may be not as spectacular as the code doing that :) . Well, in fact there is one piece of code using short term prediction, it's artillery targeting algorthm taking into acount target's movement vector including following road factor, but that's another matter.

Edited September 17, 2014 by Rydygier

[IndeedPete 1038]

There are some ways of strict control based on step-by-step looped doMove. You can do even dynamically forming "chains" of vehicles, where follower is chasing some point just behind vehicle before him (will not try to overtake) like chain of wagons, similar to real city traffic. But that's heavy, not flexible stuff. Not tested in A3 though.

Yes, but for convoys that are merely combat effective and just have the task to transport goods from A to B it's perfect. Patrols and QRFs should be able to respond fast and behave like a normal combat unit. But the transport convoys can be slow and heavy, I don't mind.

[Wiki 1558]

Well, once I finish my campaign (about 40 mission), I think I'll have a break in editing and only enjoy the MANW SP submissions ;-)

Moreover, what I'd like to do is writing scenarios for people much more skilled than me to make them for the community.

[Kydoimos 916]

@Wiki - me too! I can't wait to play the work of others! Yours, IndeedPete's, Rydygier's! There's more than a few I need to give some serious time to! Also, I think I'd really like to join a clan at some point. Miss the whole multiplayer aspect of Arma3.

P.S - 40 missions! That's insane! Well done!

[IndeedPete 1038]

Also, I think I'd really like to join a clan at some point. Miss the whole multiplayer aspect of Arma3.

Give me a shout when you find something. I'd love to try MP at some point but only in a relaxed environmet, preferebly with people I know and on a non-regular basis. I'm not really for public servers and PVP and such. When it comes to MP I'm more interested in COOP stuff.

[Wiki 1558]

@Wiki - 40 missions! That's insane! Well done!

Well, that's the plan.

ATM, only 24 are done and some of them are really short (like 5 minutes play, just intro missions - just like in CWC)

[HorribleGoat 1473]

We won't be even nearly finished with Lost Dragons when the deadline comes up so we'll just continue from there.

I too feel quite spent after the last six months and almost all free time spent with the mod. Although MANW has been a great inspirator it has also been a stress factor as we have had to really think about what aspects we need to show the most of the mods idea and our own skills and how we can make them in the deadline.

We have another project for Arma and I'll be nice to get back to that too..

[kibot 2]

Don't know, frankly. After quite intense first half of this year, I feel burned out. Temporary, I hope, but who knows. For now can't muster much enthusiasm for scripting anything serious, while it always was my basic motivation - to create something new and exciting.

and

I know that. If it wasn't for MANW I'd probably given up long ago, doing other stuff. Sometimes I just get ideas that are not fitting my current project but I'm too impatient to write them down for later. Or I simply lose interest in Arma for a while. But MANW - and of course the user feedback and contacts I've made - somehow motivates me.

This is me.

And like Kydoimos, I really miss the MP aspect of the game. I think since I started working for the MANW contest, I haven't played once in MP.

Also, I've always wanted to do something like you guys are talking about, in my way: You would control a PMC, some sort of rebellion/resistance or SF group(the background is not that important, the game mechanics are), and the game would alternate between 2 parts: Between missions, you are at your base, manage missions, ressources, logistics and personnel, maybe even have some sort of a big map where you can move your assets like a board game (but that would require A LOT of work). There would be also a "mission" part where the missions are randomly generated and where some persistence is present here as well, like having special squad members with abilities and increasing/gaining your own abilities. My ideal game would be some sort of Jagged Alliance/Brigade E5/7.62 High Calibre made into a FPS. The storyline would only be a justification for game mechanics

[IndeedPete 1038]

Also, I've always wanted to do something like you guys are talking about, in my way: You would control a PMC, some sort of rebellion/resistance or SF group(the background is not that important, the game mechanics are), and the game would alternate between 2 parts: Between missions, you are at your base, manage missions, ressources, logistics and personnel, maybe even have some sort of a big map where you can move your assets like a board game (but that would require A LOT of work). There would be also a "mission" part where the missions are randomly generated and where some persistence is present here as well, like having special squad members with abilities and increasing/gaining your own abilities. My ideal game would be some sort of Jagged Alliance/Brigade E5/7.62 High Calibre made into a FPS. The storyline would only be a justification for game mechanics

Would love to see that as it would be a consequent advancement of M.E.R.C.S. I've already implemented some of your points though I'm approaching the scenario more from a grunt perspective than a high command one. And the story plays a bigger role in it. Especially the advanced RPG elements sound interesting (since I already have a multiple choice conv system). All in all your concept sounds like a mix between my project and Lato's Hunter Six stuff. Haven't tested his project yet but he has some kind of skill system from what I read.

[haleks 8212]

Don't know, frankly. After quite intense first half of this year, I feel burned out. Temporary, I hope, but who knows. For now can't muster much enthusiasm for scripting anything serious, while it always was my basic motivation - to create something new and exciting.

Same feeling here, except I haven't released my work so far. I don't think I'll be able to gather enough support before the 28th - wich also adds to the demotivation... :(

[IndeedPete 1038]

Same feeling here, except I haven't released my work so far. I don't think I'll be able to gather enough support before the 28th - wich also adds to the demotivation... :(

*26th *trolling* :P

I've seen projects gaining a good hundred supporters in a few days. I've got no ideas how they do that, might be sub-communities, known authors or just quality, I don't know. I've been fighting over every single supporter since April or so and now I have like 99. Popularity contests are a miracle to me.^^

[HorribleGoat 1473]

Pete I see you too reached the magical 100 :D We got a weird 10 or so spurt few days ago and got over the line too. Some mods have indeed gained over thousand votes but luckily the totalmod is not a popularity contest. I hope..

[IndeedPete 1038]

Yes true, I'm in the cool club of the "promoted" people now. So, what's our thing? Cigars and Cognac? Or are we more for hookers and blow?^^

The steam rollout of my project two or three weeks ago certainly gave me a good boost, like 20-30 new supporters and a few votes - with content that had been out for weeks or even months, just on different platforms. Publishing the Beta brought the wave that took me over the magical 100 I guess. Well, in the end BI's opinion matters the most. I guess popularity depends a lot on eye candy and promotion. A mission can be really great stuff but if it doesn't have a cool overview picture or trailer people on steam will most likely ignore it. On the other hand there are quite a few "top projects" with a cool trailer and stuff but virtually no playable content - yet, they've been able to mobilise hundreds of voters and supporters, it baffles me every time I return to check up on those admittedly interesting looking entries.

Hence, I also hope that popularity alone won't lead to winning the contest. But I think I've read a few times that the jury will also take a look at the sources and judge the project from a technical point of view as well.

[Rydygier 1309]

Well, I saw most rapid support gain mostly for total conversion projects. That category no doubt is most interesting for players. Still going in hundreds and tousands in no time was surprising. I suspected some community around it. As for the rest - IMO three main factors are able to generate fast support gain: gathered wide and loyal player base/community (eg very deserved fast support gain for ALiVE), maturity of the project (like WLA, but also reduces to player base in fact) or mentioned top notch promo materials, mostly movies, that are possible especially, if followed by content of same quality (that condition of course applies to all three factors), if creator has needed skills and/or access to the skilled people - that one is based more on the promise. What is surprising, is supposed optimism manifested by submitting now, on the finish, with few weeks left, projects looking ambitious, yet marked as ALPHA. I would guess, some was misleaded by this malicious mentality to keep cards close to the chest until last moment to avoid "ideas thievery", while idea is barely a starting point, important, but still. I saw no reason to hide mine for example, not only because I do not affraid the "thieves", but mostly because ideas used wasn't so unique (sadly, this applies to the most MANW entries - I would like to see more creativity and discovering some terra incognita...), and mostly it is about good, well balanced fun provided via several months of hard work (that although doesn't not guarantee anything, but lack of it in most cases guarantee the opposite) and well thought out design decisions (I hope...). Much of this work was done only thanks to the invaluable feedback/requests/ideas from players, which wouldn't be possible, if I would prefer to keep my entry in secrecy till the last moment. Still, funny thing, at first it was barely some small side project, I've done for own pleasure in few days, not meant nor earmarked to be something that popular. Wide response, that came in time, was unexpected and pretty surprising (I could point amongst my past projects one or two looking to me at first much more promising and costing at init much more work, that never became popular and died by no feedback/interest).

For young projects, that had no any player base nor intense media promotion, main way to gather support/votes apparently is by allowing to taste it to prove, it's worthy. This way, I think, gives slow gain, but steady, if project is worthy indeed.

So, as for post-MANW projects, I wonder, how many of such unfinished entries will be still developed after deadline, and which prove to be lackluster enthusiasm and will be abandoned.

BTW, after reading contest rules and some commentaries about judgement, I somehow doubt, if popularity will play any significant role in the evaluation process, unless particular jury member will make popularity his personal significant factor. Count mostly votes in SP category, to get into final 20. Popularity may however count more to bring BI attention to the given project and people behind it.

Edited October 6, 2014 by Rydygier