PBEM Playback (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Commander - Europe at War Gold



Message

targul -> PBEM Playback (8/5/2007 11:34:24 AM)

I have heard nothing from the designers if they plan to add playback or not to this game.

Please advise if you intend to add playback or not so I can decide to continue to invest time in this game or not.

It is a a good game but just not playable by PBEM and that is my primary system of play so I dont want to waste more time on this one if no playback is in its forseeable future.

Thanks



IainMcNeil -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/6/2007 8:12:12 PM)

We're planning on improving the feedback, but at the moment do not plan to do a full replay of the enemy turn. When we have a wider view of what information would be useful we can look at addressing any problems.



targul -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/6/2007 9:17:47 PM)

Thanks for your response. I will no longer play the game PBEM.

Even though this is a good game I will also not be recommending it or any of your other products as you release them.

All games with PBEM have provided a player feedback far as I an remember from 1995. This feedback is so ineffective it make PBEM unbearable. No one wants to spend 30 minutes examining every hex to see if there was any action. Important actions get totally missed. Units disappear and you know not why. Countries declare war and surrender and no notification.

Good luck with your game. Hope you can convince the rest of this populace that you do not need to provide feedback on turns but I doubt that will hold up long.



SeaMonkey -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/6/2007 9:28:47 PM)

Take it easy targ, you know it takes time to fully develop games of this genre. Simplicity isn't always that easy to inject.

Give it a few years, maybe the second edition will get there.

Until then we have SC2 and sooooooon WaW.



targul -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/6/2007 10:44:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SeaMonkey

Take it easy targ, you know it takes time to fully develop games of this genre. Simplicity isn't always that easy to inject.

Give it a few years, maybe the second edition will get there.

Until then we have SC2 and sooooooon WaW.


I may return in a couple of years if they learn how to program. They did a good job making the game but they are missing so many things that every company has it is disgusting.

The lack of playback makes PBEM totally unplayable. I have tried but trying to remember every unit on the map is just not worthwhile. This game HAD potential but the insulting way they have presented many areas are simply that insulting.
Hell I dont even know who is at war. Come on these are pretty simply things that should have been in the release. But no they wait to patch it and then put those lines for us to search for all over the map. Come on that is so silly it is unreal.

As an overall commander I need information in order to send my forces but I get NONE. This is the WORST system of PBEM in any game currently on the market.

The AI is good but none south of France is just stupid but I could live with that. Even though this makes AI games unplayable. So now I can only play via IP. I rarely have the time to sit for a game on IP. PBEM allowed me flexibility of my time.

I cant live with absolutely no knowledge of what my opponent is doing. How can you defend against someone you have never seen move a unit? How can you prepare forces when you are not told you have new equipment available for upgrade? How do you protect an area when you receive NO notification it is at war or any action has taken place?

I have an area for there arrows and it is not on my map.

I have already posted on the other game boards that I cannot recommend this game and it should be avoided since it is lacking the basics. I also mentioned the good points but without the basics still remains unplayable.

It is too bad but Slitherine will not receive anymore of my dollars.

I still compliment Slitherine on responding to my question about the lack of playback since I am sure they knew many would be unhappy with the decision to provide no feedback for PBEM. But I have seen the board messages dropping significantly since the patch which indicates not only I but many others feel the same about basic requirements.








IainMcNeil -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/7/2007 11:38:46 AM)

Targul what you say is completely false and I think you know that. We have said repeatedly we are going to improve the feedback and you keep telling people we have said the opposite. Please read what we say.

We are planning to address the problems with DOW messages, and notifications of new upgrades etc. We will be showing you everything you need to now, but in a different way to some other games. I think it will be far superior as I hate watching replays of the other players turn.

This is one of the reasons the hobby is floundering - because people are not willing to try new ideas out, they want the same old stuff rehashed and then complain its the same old stuff rehashed.



targul -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/7/2007 5:16:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

Targul what you say is completely false and I think you know that. We have said repeatedly we are going to improve the feedback and you keep telling people we have said the opposite. Please read what we say.

We are planning to address the problems with DOW messages, and notifications of new upgrades etc. We will be showing you everything you need to now, but in a different way to some other games. I think it will be far superior as I hate watching replays of the other players turn.

This is one of the reasons the hobby is floundering - because people are not willing to try new ideas out, they want the same old stuff rehashed and then complain its the same old stuff rehashed.


I do not know it to be false if I did I would not say it. I recieved your last patch where you said you would improve it and that is simply a very bad joke.

Up until I saw that piece of junk I did not complain but you breached my trust with such a horrible method of providing information.

Simply telling me who is at war and that I can upgrade units it not going to solve this for me. Had that been with this patch I might have felt you made a real effort to improve the PBEM. But with those lines which just run all over the map I can not determine what my opponent did, two I cant determine that I did not miss an action somewhere on the map, three I do not know if I lost a unit somewhere nor do I know if I lost a unit why and how it was lost.

Without a playback I will never know how the combat took place. I will never be able to determine how my opponent performs his actions which are critical to both learning and stopping them.

I do not wish to guess what is happening in the game I want to see it. I do not understand why you resist the industry standard of a playback. If you you do not know how to do it ask any of the game companies they can tell you they all do it.

I have never heard of a complaint about PBEM playback in any game. Well, I take that back I have heard of it in this game only and only in this game.

If this is your idea of inventive it is a poor shot at it. The reason this hobby is floundering is this kinda of a thing happening in every game. Providing inferior work. Not providing a completed product. Expecting the customer to then wait for patch after patch to make the game come even close to what you should have done on release.

I understand the money issues with releases. But you charged to most of any similiar game so my anticipation that the product would be closer to done also increased. But you delivered a game where PBEM is substandard and after patch indicates you are not willing to put out your best effort to make it useful. AI does not work at all south of France and even after the patch still doesnt work.

This makes two primary methods of play poor. AI & PBEM remain at extremely poor levels of play. IP play is fine it now works after the patch but I do not have the time to only play IP.

Your AI is good everywhere expect south of France but if you cannot get the remainder of this game working correctly there is no way this game can ever be good.

Therefore, since I paid for this game I shall continue to complain until you make it work correctly and completely. Now if you would like me to stop complaining I will gladly return your game for a full refund and never log onto the Commander site again.



IainMcNeil -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/7/2007 5:45:43 PM)

Targul why don't you work with us rather than against us. We are not going to do a turn playback, so keeping asking for one and saying that "any game without one is worthless" is not very productive. I understand that you are not happy with it, but there are others who are.

Have a look at the German review on gamershall. They gave Commander 10/10 for multiplayer.

We need feedback on how it could be made better. A bullet point list of the kind of information you are looking for would be very useful for this, but do not ask for a turn replay :) 



targul -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/7/2007 8:22:34 PM)

I do not care about the German review and there rating.  If they rate this game 10 out of 10 they arent very bright.  There is no AI south of France how can that be a 10.  There is no way in PBEM to track what your opponent did.  That cant be a 10.  That means 2/3 of this game are not a 10.  I would rate the game a weak 6. 

You have choosen to not due playback not because it benefits the game.  You have given no discription how you are going to provide me with the objective view of how much damage was taken and where.  How my opponent made his attacks and from where.  Sure you said you will let me know who went to war and that I can upgrade. 

I can no longer accept that you will provide the information necessary after seeing what you provided in the first patch.

You are asking me to trust that you can do what you have not been able to do so far.  You did your patch which I expected would give us information but it does not.  To require the players to memorize every unit on the map and what there strength is to know how much damage they took is just silly.  How will I know how my opponent used his air, fleet and land units when I get no way to see that.  Units get killed and I have no idea why.  Sometimes they are full strength.  Since I have no form of playback how do I know which unit attacked and did that kind of damage.  Guess? 

Even if you wrote a list 1st corps attacks 3rd corps and does 2 points of damage etc that will still be too cumbersome to find each unit see what happen.  

Tell me your great idea that is better then playback.  If it is feasible I could be challenged to keep with this argument but to say you arent going to do playback with no rational reason that is unacceptable.  Tell me how this idea will place the player more in contact with the game then seeing it happen play by play.

Your statement that you will not do a turn playback without a reason for not doing it is not going to convince me you are willing to do what it takes to make this game perform well. 

You ask for suggestions and then say "We are not going to do a turn playback"  is not a positive response.  If you want this to be positive say we are not doing a turn playback because we have a method of showing you all the action that happen during your opponents turn without doing a playback.  Then be prepared to tell us how you intend to do that.



MorningDew -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/7/2007 9:28:27 PM)

Wow. Seems like Ian is talking to a tape recorder.

Targul, they aren't going to add a Turn Reply. BUT, they are asking you what information you would look for from a replay. Spotted units? Upgrades? DOWs? Others?

They keep asking you what INFORMATION you want, not the FEATURE. They are asking WHAT, not HOW.

And you just keep asking for a Turn Replay and then acting shocked and angry when they tell you no again.

I'm sure I'll get the tape recorder reply.



HansBolter -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/7/2007 10:01:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AndrewKurtz

Wow. Seems like Ian is talking to a tape recorder.

Targul, they aren't going to add a Turn Reply. BUT, they are asking you what information you would look for from a replay. Spotted units? Upgrades? DOWs? Others?

They keep asking you what INFORMATION you want, not the FEATURE. They are asking WHAT, not HOW.

And you just keep asking for a Turn Replay and then acting shocked and angry when they tell you no again.

I'm sure I'll get the tape recorder reply.



Strange how I get just the opposite impression.

They keep asking what he wants in the way of feedback and he keeps telling them "I want a replay"......a "replay" IS the feedback he wants.

Iain comes across just as much like a broken record as targul does on this particular matter.



Vypuero -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/7/2007 11:46:45 PM)

I like to see the replay, but it is hardly a necessity.  You see what the units are and what strengths they are.  You see all units that may have attacked from a distance.  That is all you actually need to know in order to play.  Knowing the exact order that you got from strength 10 to strength 3, and how the other forces got that way, is academic.  After all, you can see where they all are NOW and you can't do anything about the PAST, so ultimately it does not really matter.  You act as if you can't even play - that is an absurd contention.  I am playing some PBEM games I don't bother much to look where I am.  I would still like replay and I like TCP/IP because I do agree it is a lot more fun to see what happened, but why is it crucial?  You never once made a case for that.  In what way must you "memorize" anything when you can see where everything is?  You cannot affect your opponent's turn.



MorningDew -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/8/2007 12:28:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


quote:

ORIGINAL: AndrewKurtz

Wow. Seems like Ian is talking to a tape recorder.

Targul, they aren't going to add a Turn Reply. BUT, they are asking you what information you would look for from a replay. Spotted units? Upgrades? DOWs? Others?

They keep asking you what INFORMATION you want, not the FEATURE. They are asking WHAT, not HOW.

And you just keep asking for a Turn Replay and then acting shocked and angry when they tell you no again.

I'm sure I'll get the tape recorder reply.



Strange how I get just the opposite impression.

They keep asking what he wants in the way of feedback and he keeps telling them "I want a replay"......a "replay" IS the feedback he wants.

Iain comes across just as much like a broken record as targul does on this particular matter.


Funny that two people can get the opposite impression.

The way I see it, "replay" is HOW he wants the feedback, not WHAT feedback he wants.

Essentially, assuming he says he wants "replay", it means he wants ALL information for feedback. So if you can get ALL information, does it have to be a replay? Could it be in text form for example? AACW does that and it works great. When you click in a text item, it takes you to the map.




MorningDew -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/8/2007 12:31:13 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vypuero

You act as if you can't even play - that is an absurd contention.  I am playing some PBEM games I don't bother much to look where I am.  I would still like replay and I like TCP/IP because I do agree it is a lot more fun to see what happened, but why is it crucial?  You never once made a case for that. 


Very well said. Replay as a requirement to play does seem absurd, but if it isn't, I'd love to know why. Maybe I'm missing something important when I play.

Note - I'm not saying information isn't critical. And I'm not saying more information isn't important (in fact, I believe Iain has asked what information is missing). I'm just saying I don't see why the information has to be delivered in replay format.



Rocko911 -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/8/2007 1:54:17 AM)

Why do they(developer) think replay is so daunting to implement? I mean Targuls points are merited. I too was disappointed by the lack of this feature and ask Iain what is there problem with implementing it?



pzgndr -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/8/2007 3:02:20 AM)

FWIW, a common complaint about Russo-German War was also lack of a playback feature. Very vocal complaints. The successor game Anglo-German War still didn't implement a playback feature but did add battle markers to the map to show where battles took place, at what odds, and the results. That's what players really want to know: what happened and where. Yeah, you can maybe figure it all out on your own, but some method of presenting combat results summaries from your opponent's turn is helpful at the start of your PBEM turn. So it's a valid point.



MorningDew -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/8/2007 6:19:03 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

FWIW, a common complaint about Russo-German War was also lack of a playback feature. Very vocal complaints. The successor game Anglo-German War still didn't implement a playback feature but did add battle markers to the map to show where battles took place, at what odds, and the results. That's what players really want to know: what happened and where. Yeah, you can maybe figure it all out on your own, but some method of presenting combat results summaries from your opponent's turn is helpful at the start of your PBEM turn. So it's a valid point.


Yes, the need for more information is a very valid point. I don't think anyone has suggested otherwise.



targul -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/8/2007 7:50:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AndrewKurtz

Wow. Seems like Ian is talking to a tape recorder.

Targul, they aren't going to add a Turn Reply. BUT, they are asking you what information you would look for from a replay. Spotted units? Upgrades? DOWs? Others?

They keep asking you what INFORMATION you want, not the FEATURE. They are asking WHAT, not HOW.

And you just keep asking for a Turn Replay and then acting shocked and angry when they tell you no again.

I'm sure I'll get the tape recorder reply.


Question is why are they so opposed to replay? It provides all the information. I have listed exactly what I want. Only reason they cant provide what I want is they refuse to do replay with no reason why other then they could care less what the customer wants it only matters to them what they want.



targul -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/8/2007 8:00:00 AM)

I also do not look at the map any longer when I play PBEM since it provides me no information.

I have to remember what the strength were and how much damage I took. I have to try and determine which units attacked and how much damage they did. These pieces of information are critical to good play. If I find certain of his units are better I know to kill them before they kill me. Now I just move my next turn since I have zero information on what my opponent did.

I can play but I cannot play with any ability since I not only have FOW which I like but an total lack of any indiciation of what my opponent does. You may like that but I prefer to watch how my opponent does things so I can prevent them in the future and learn from my game in lieu of just moving units around with no idea what is really going on.

I know I should be old enough to stop learning but when I play these games. I watch my opponents all the time and sometimes I find a trick I hadnt thought of. Least in this game since you see nothing the opponent does you certainly are assured of never improving your play.



heroes99 -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/8/2007 8:56:23 AM)

hi

understand your frustation but why dont just enjoy and have fun ..maybe you are handicap by the lack of info but you PBEM pal is having the same problem , so it is fair both of you

Cheers





HansBolter -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/8/2007 1:36:40 PM)

What Iain seems to be missing here is that effective PBEM is about recreating a "feel" of "playing" the game against a live opponent which is wholey dependent upon being able to watch said opponents turn take place. You can provide "information" regarding what took place during the opponents turn ad infinitum and never capture the feel necessary to make the feature attractive to the player without an actual replay of the opponents turn.



IainMcNeil -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/8/2007 3:06:18 PM)

It's not that we don't understand, or that we dont want to do a reply, it's that it just is not possible with the system as it is. It was not considered to be that big an issue at the design stage so the system does not support it. You may think this was a bad decision, but in every game design there are good and bad decisions. We think we got the vast majority right.

What we are trying to do is improve the game as it stands. As we cannot do a reply, what can we do to make it better?



Vypuero -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/8/2007 4:20:05 PM)

I believe replay is a lot harder to properly code than you may think - are you a programmer, do you have any clue as to what work may be involved?

Also you wrote this Targul:
I have to remember what the strength were and how much damage I took. I have to try and determine which units attacked and how much damage they did. These pieces of information are critical to good play. If I find certain of his units are better I know to kill them before they kill me. Now I just move my next turn since I have zero information on what my opponent did.
 
Now - If you have 5 strength, does it matter if you had 8 or 9 before?  either way you now have 5.
If you look at your opponent's units, you can see their strength, their org, and their stats - that is all you need to know as to how effective they are.  One unit with the exact same stats is not better than any other unit.  Your opponent does not have some magical ability to do anything that changes the numbers that are right there in front of you.




targul -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/8/2007 5:42:33 PM)

Yes if I have 5 str this turn I definitely want to know if I took 1 each from 5 attack or I only took 1 because I had 6 before. It tells me if I have a good chance of surviving the next round without augmenting the unit or not.

Actually I produced Civil War General so I am very familiar with programming and the problems it entails. If you remember that game was sold at retail stores in 95-96 time frame so I would call myself very qualified to speak on this subject. BTW the PBEM game had a replay if you remember.



targul -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/8/2007 5:46:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

It's not that we don't understand, or that we dont want to do a reply, it's that it just is not possible with the system as it is. It was not considered to be that big an issue at the design stage so the system does not support it. You may think this was a bad decision, but in every game design there are good and bad decisions. We think we got the vast majority right.

What we are trying to do is improve the game as it stands. As we cannot do a reply, what can we do to make it better?


Now this is an excellant reason for not doing playback. I will no longer complain about your not having it. I will attempt to come up with some suggestion how to provide the information in a manner that is easily recognized by me and the hopefully the players.

I have made similiar mistakes when I programmed and once imbedded in code you might find a work around but it can and would be a daunting task.

Good Luck sorry I gave you so much trouble but I needed a reason and now I have it.



MorningDew -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/8/2007 8:28:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: targul

Now this is an excellant reason for not doing playback. I will no longer complain about your not having it. I will attempt to come up with some suggestion how to provide the information in a manner that is easily recognized by me and the hopefully the players.

I have made similiar mistakes when I programmed and once imbedded in code you might find a work around but it can and would be a daunting task.

Good Luck sorry I gave you so much trouble but I needed a reason and now I have it.


A very cool reply. My guess is the PBEM play will be improved dramatically as a result in the next few months. There is no doubting your passion and nor your desire to see it done right (or as right as possible).



Krec -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/9/2007 4:13:51 AM)

CWG    one of my favorites...........still looking for a updated ver of that game.[:D]



Rocko911 -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/10/2007 4:23:51 AM)

I think some of the limitation is due to the game being based on java. Just my two cents.



targul -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/10/2007 6:55:07 AM)

I developed and produced CWG and sold it to a distribution company. Unless someone picked it up from them you will never see that update you are waiting for.



IainMcNeil -> RE: PBEM Playback (8/10/2007 11:53:14 AM)

Targul, do you still have and own the source code? How about working on a 2007 update? :) Maybe we can have a chat some time about it?

Have you heard of the www.kameleon-project.com ? This is how CEAW started! 



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.640625