Memoir'44 going to premium

[vincentt]

Hello,

As per publisher decision (and as planned), Memoir 44 is going to be a premium game starting tomorrow. Only some scenarios will be available without a premium player at the table. The scenarios are:
[BB] [2] Pegasus Bridge
[BB] [3] Sainte-Mère-Eglise
[BB] [5] Mont Mouchet
[BB] [7] Pointe-du-Hoc
[BB] [11] First Assault Wave
[BB] [16] Counter-attack on Mortain
[BB] [22] Liberation of Paris
[BB] [25] Arnhem Bridge

For people having an OL account, discussions are in progress on how balance could be converted. stay tuned!
We hope you will still enjoy the game!

Cheers

Tisaac & vincentt

[waltero]

Memoir 44 is going premium

But, but, but it's still in Beta

[Tisaac]

Memoir 44 is going premium

But, but, but it's still in Beta

So what ??
People seems to not realize that's is actually the opposite that was strange. Games are usually premium as soon as they hit beta, and here that was not the case just because we were missing some feedbacks from Asmodée.
So you guys got basically one free month and yet are still complaining ??

[waltero]

Games are usually premium as soon as they hit beta

"beta" is a test version to iron out bugs before release. If you call it a beta after you've released the game, you're not using the accepted meaning of the word. It's a bit like if you were to release a turn-based strategy game but insist on calling it a shooter.

But I'll admit, with things like early access and the fact that almost all games need patching on release day, the concept of "beta" has gotten fuzzy.

[Kartigan]

Games are usually premium as soon as they hit beta

"beta" is a test version to iron out bugs before release. If you call it a beta after you've released the game, you're not using the accepted meaning of the word. It's a bit like if you were to release a turn-based strategy game but insist on calling it a shooter.

But I'll admit, with things like early access and the fact that almost all games need patching on release day, the concept of "beta" has gotten fuzzy.

It's particularly funny when some of the things they are gating behind the paywall are what is bugged.

Like the dam scenario where you cannot sabotage the bridge, it's sort of funny to be like "You can only play the buggy scenarios if you pay!", lol.

And yes, I know the developers like to split hairs between "bugs" and "not implemented", but that is just another way of saying "bug we aren't planning to fix right now". If it isn't working the way the paper game intended it to, it's a bug.

I still appreciate the game being on here and will almost certainly go premium in the next few days expressly for the purpose of supporting the developers work (they say they get a share, it must be based off of which games "Premium" members play?), but I wish they would just remove scenarios like Schwammenauel Dam from the pool of options when playing "Random" until they have them implemented properly.

[waltero]

"You can only play the buggy scenarios if you pay!", lol.

Not only that - you can only set up the highly unbalanced scenario's if you're a non-paying customer The exact same thing that the gaming community was bellyaching (see - unfair play) about! lol.

[Tisaac]

Games are usually premium as soon as they hit beta

"beta" is a test version to iron out bugs before release. If you call it a beta after you've released the game, you're not using the accepted meaning of the word. It's a bit like if you were to release a turn-based strategy game but insist on calling it a shooter.

But I'll admit, with things like early access and the fact that almost all games need patching on release day, the concept of "beta" has gotten fuzzy.

It's particularly funny when some of the things they are gating behind the paywall are what is bugged.

Like the dam scenario where you cannot sabotage the bridge, it's sort of funny to be like "You can only play the buggy scenarios if you pay!", lol.

And yes, I know the developers like to split hairs between "bugs" and "not implemented", but that is just another way of saying "bug we aren't planning to fix right now". If it isn't working the way the paper game intended it to, it's a bug.

I still appreciate the game being on here and will almost certainly go premium in the next few days expressly for the purpose of supporting the developers work (they say they get a share, it must be based off of which games "Premium" members play?), but I wish they would just remove scenarios like Schwammenauel Dam from the pool of options when playing "Random" until they have them implemented properly.

That's your wish, but we are listening to the majority of players, and they said they rather have an incomplete scenario than no scenario (see operation crusader as well for instance, where we removed the specific medal).
And again, there is a big difference between unimplemented feature and bugs in m44. Many scenarios have some very custom rules which cannot be flagged as such in any way in the editor. As we have a finite dev time, we discussed with community to have a priority list of things to add to the game. And they clearly said that train and sabotage were very low priority compared with adding breakthrough for instance.

[diamant]

That's your wish, but we are listening to the majority of players, and they said they rather have an incomplete scenario than no scenario (see operation crusader as well for instance, where we removed the specific medal).
And again, there is a big difference between unimplemented feature and bugs in m44. Many scenarios have some very custom rules which cannot be flagged as such in any way in the editor. As we have a finite dev time, we discussed with community to have a priority list of things to add to the game. And they clearly said that train and sabotage were very low priority compared with adding breakthrough for instance.

You cannot say that the community prefers an incomplete scenario to the removal of the scenario in general, because the rules that are not implemented affect the gameplay of the scenario in very different ways.
Some incomplete scenarios become too unbalanced to still be of interest, while for others the change is small, for example when a medal-objective is removed when it was rarely obtained in accordance with the rules.

For my part, I think:
1) that a game implemented on BGA must offer features and gaming pleasure as close as possible to games played in real life;
2) if I want to play a game of Memoir '44 in real life, and I come across a scenario where I could not play by the rules for any reason (for example, if I don’t have the required material on hand), I choose another one;
3) therefore, if an incomplete or buggy scenario was still proposed on BGA, when creating a table, I want to know in order to choose another one; in particular, if a table is created with the option of randomly selecting the scenario, I do not want an incomplete or buggy scenario to be selected at random.

Finally, the official scenarios are not limited to those contained in the boxes and extensions published by Days of Wonder. A few years ago, I compiled a list of these scenarios, and many of them do not require further development.

[Tisaac]

That's your wish, but we are listening to the majority of players, and they said they rather have an incomplete scenario than no scenario (see operation crusader as well for instance, where we removed the specific medal).
And again, there is a big difference between unimplemented feature and bugs in m44. Many scenarios have some very custom rules which cannot be flagged as such in any way in the editor. As we have a finite dev time, we discussed with community to have a priority list of things to add to the game. And they clearly said that train and sabotage were very low priority compared with adding breakthrough for instance.

You cannot say that the community prefers an incomplete scenario to the removal of the scenario in general, because the rules that are not implemented affect the gameplay of the scenario in very different ways.
Some incomplete scenarios become too unbalanced to still be of interest, while for others the change is small, for example when a medal-objective is removed when it was rarely obtained in accordance with the rules.

For my part, I think:
1) that a game implemented on BGA must offer features and gaming pleasure as close as possible to games played in real life;
2) if I want to play a game of Memoir '44 in real life, and I come across a scenario where I could not play by the rules for any reason (for example, if I don’t have the required material on hand), I choose another one;
3) therefore, if an incomplete or buggy scenario was still proposed on BGA, when creating a table, I want to know in order to choose another one; in particular, if a table is created with the option of randomly selecting the scenario, I do not want an incomplete or buggy scenario to be selected at random.

Finally, the official scenarios are not limited to those contained in the boxes and extensions published by Days of Wonder. A few years ago, I compiled a list of these scenarios, and many of them do not require further development.

The balance issue is not a real one since the scenario should always be played two ways anyway. You are suggesting to remove these incomplete scenarios from the "random" choice, yet I havent seen any suggestion report for this, which is the proper way to collect players opinion through upvotes.
As per the list of scenario, recall that we are also bounded by license agreement to follow publisher directive and they currently wanted only physical boxes to be added.

[Marzacco]

Tisaac and Vincentt: Hey guys, keep up the GREAT work, upgrades, and expansions that you're doing! The Memoir 44 site is already awesome. Two buddies and I have already gone premium and believe great things are in store. Don't let the naysayers bring you down.

Now when you bring BATTLE CRY on-line, I'll champion your efforts in that venue as well!

Ready the Cannon, Fix Bayonets, and Prepare to Charge!