Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815



Message

jclauder -> Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/4/2008 8:26:01 AM)

I continue to hope for LAN multiplayer ability to be added to the game. I have been waiting until then to play the game. It seems like a lot of patches are starting to come out and hoping LAN will be part of one of them soon.... Any chance of that?



timewalker03 -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/4/2008 1:36:49 PM)

I would put that as a big fat NO. If Marshall added lan in a patch there would be a few who would scream because he was "wasting time" on something other than PBEM. That seems to be the largest focus, that and fixing bugs that seem to never end although less than in the beginning. I could see LAN in about 2010 or 2011.[:D]



DCWhitworth -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/4/2008 1:44:38 PM)

Not sure I'd be that pessimistic about the time frame. Marshall has already said that some of the necessary code is already present in the game.

However it doesn't seem to be on the immediate road map. Last vaguely official word I've seen is that Marshall said "Never say never" on 13th August ;-)



timewalker03 -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/4/2008 10:23:19 PM)

if you go by what Erik Rutkins stated in another thread, tcp/ip play is not on the list for anytime in the near future.



timewalker03 -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/4/2008 10:24:54 PM)

this is the quaote from Erik in the is this game playable thread.

FYI, in this case TCP/IP would have added much more time to the development than PBEM. It's such a major time investment and we've found its usage to be fairly low in other releases, that I doubt it will be feasible to implement it. I'd much rather improve the PBEM system as much as we can at this point.

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
Director of Product Development and Business Relations


For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

"Si vis pacem, para bellum.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/6/2008 10:42:46 PM)

Not yet.
You will see an editor, improved PBEM and classic scenario before IP play.

BTW: It is still something that I would love to do!




jclauder -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/11/2008 10:50:19 PM)

Thanks for the response Marshall... I do hope that LAN eventually gets added... I think Matrix is missing a nich of sales by not adding it. I know ALOT of people that would buy EIA if LAN capability was functional.



Jimmer -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/12/2008 2:38:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jclauder

Thanks for the response Marshall... I do hope that LAN eventually gets added... I think Matrix is missing a nich of sales by not adding it. I know ALOT of people that would buy EIA if LAN capability was functional.

While you are very correct, I believe, I would hope that Matrix actually calls it "EIA II" or something like that. It would be a much different game, yes, and that's one good reason to change the name.

But a far better reason is to get the people who lost interest in EIA I to give it another try. An awful lot of people tried this game but gave up, at least to a degree. Right now, it is an order of magnitude better than when first released. But, basic fixes are going NOT to call people back. Something has to catch their attention, I think, and a new name will do that. IMO, anyhow.

Alternately, they could call it an "expansion" and have the same effect.

[ Edited to add the word "not" above (all caps) ]



timewalker03 -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/12/2008 3:26:42 PM)

So Jimmer under that Logic, are we going to have to pay for that version?



Jimmer -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/13/2008 1:46:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: timewalker03

So Jimmer under that Logic, are we going to have to pay for that version?

If it's done correctly? It should be an annual fee coupled with a free game. This, however, would include a server with the game being a client in a client/server model. That way, security would be impossible to compromise (if done correctly and barring bugs).

However, I doubt that this game can generate enough interest for that kind of model. If so, then I would price it as either a $40 expansion or a second game priced the same as the first. However, I think that for the latter of those, they should grant a discount for those who bought the first game.



pzgndr -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/13/2008 2:44:24 AM)

quote:

I would hope that Matrix actually calls it "EIA II" or something like that. It would be a much different game, yes, and that's one good reason to change the name.


It should not be different at all, just another protocol for transfering files. Many games already have interchangeable PBEM and TCP/IP gameplay, where players can switch back and forth if they want. No need for a new version, just an upgrade to the current version to include the additional feature. Marshall has previously described how some IP code is already in the game but some effort is needed to update it. It's on the To Do list for this game.

I would hope this game would not need an entirely new second edition, at least any time soon. Once all the currently planned fixes, enhancements and improvements are implemented, what significantly new capability would be lacking? I could see a new game or expansion based on the EiA engine for a different period. But once everything is resolved and working OK (hopefully), it should be a very stable game for quite some time.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/13/2008 12:52:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

quote:

I would hope that Matrix actually calls it "EIA II" or something like that. It would be a much different game, yes, and that's one good reason to change the name.


It should not be different at all, just another protocol for transfering files. Many games already have interchangeable PBEM and TCP/IP gameplay, where players can switch back and forth if they want. No need for a new version, just an upgrade to the current version to include the additional feature. Marshall has previously described how some IP code is already in the game but some effort is needed to update it. It's on the To Do list for this game.

I would hope this game would not need an entirely new second edition, at least any time soon. Once all the currently planned fixes, enhancements and improvements are implemented, what significantly new capability would be lacking? I could see a new game or expansion based on the EiA engine for a different period. But once everything is resolved and working OK (hopefully), it should be a very stable game for quite some time.


You're spot on here. A lot of the IP is already installed and it is simply a different data transport method. I hope to get 6-10 different games in this engine.





Jimmer -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/13/2008 4:27:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis
You're spot on here. A lot of the IP is already installed and it is simply a different data transport method. I hope to get 6-10 different games in this engine.

Understood. And, for such a thing, the current price (already paid) is appropriate.

But, TRUE TCP/IP play should have the ability to have a "server", and said server would control all of the security aspects. For example, today, people sometimes have a house rule that you have to post your land movement turn file before you start doing your battles, to prevent cheating by restarting the game. Such a thing would be impossible in a client/server arrangement. Most other security concerns could also be handled.

BUT, that doesn't mean basic TCP/IP can't be added. Actually, I would guess that if all that is done is TCP/IP, it shouldn't be a different game. But, that would be missing out on the major value of TCP/IP.

(There's a misconception that TCP/IP would speed up games dramatically. It can't do that unless the players are all connected simultaneously (more or less). I've got a game going with 3 people that are in Europe and 4 in the US. That game could not benefit greatly from TCP/IP except within a continent.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/14/2008 1:20:25 PM)

Jimmer:

You've kind of touched on why we did PBEM first and that is simply because the EiA community tends to be more global as opposed to a local gaming club. I know this is not an absolute but it seems to defeinitely be in the majority. Getting people around the world to be online at the same time is just not going to happen thus PBEM comes into play.




gwheelock -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/14/2008 8:31:02 PM)

Conversely ..  If you CAN get everyone online at the same time; PBEM play speed approaches (or at least it CAN) TCP/IP speeds



Jimmer -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/14/2008 8:46:54 PM)

Yes, Gwheelock, it would. In fact, you could automate the process right now, as is, with very little additional code (none of which would have to be in EiANW, in fact):

Create a folder which all systems can access. Call it "CommNW".

Write a bot that checks the local Commout folder for new files, say, every 30 seconds. This bot runs on the 7 local systems asynchronously from the regular game. When it finds a new file on the local system, it copies it to the server.

Write a second bot that checks the network folder for new files, say, every 30 seconds. When it finds one, it copies it to the local commin folder.

Do the same thing for the battle files, only the bots merely update both directions periodically, but when a file CHANGES, not just when one is added.

NOTE: The first part works because all files are already uniquely named. The battle files are not (if I recall correctly) uniquely named.

Also, there are some enhancements that could be made if the bots had access to the game and vice versa:

The bot could be triggered from the game, rather than running automatically and periodically.

The game could update the screen whenever the bot copies a file to the local location.

NOTE: This may or may not work with the AI playing 1-5 powers. I'm not sure how that would work. I THINK it might work the same way, but a host would have to generate the files.

I wrote a subset of the bot code some time back. However, it requires Microsoft Excel to run properly (it was a "toy" I wrote in Visual Basic for Applications). I'm sure someone could write a better routine that wouldn't require giving MS money just to have an engine. But, if anybody wants to see the macros, let me know.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/14/2008 9:48:20 PM)

Actually, you're very close to what I wanted to do which is a watchdog technology i.e. watch the commin dir until I see the next turn. Carful here Jimmer since you seem to think like me (No offense intended :-))




Jimmer -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/15/2008 1:48:21 AM)

So, does that part have code in the current game?

The next question is, "How do we find a server on which to test it out?" It has to be either on somebody's LAN or else an internet-facing server set up for the purpose (which means it's going to get blasted by hack attempts).

Hmmmmm.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/15/2008 2:38:05 AM)

There is no server element in this design just a faster PBEM transport method.



Jimmer -> RE: Any possibility of LAN in the new patches? (10/15/2008 4:27:59 PM)

By "server", I mean at least one computer to which all of the others have contact. It doesn't have to be a true "server" or even a separate system. It could be one copy of the game (the hosts?). Such a thing would be required for any form of IP action (the computer's have to communicate, and one of them has to control the action). Faster email communication fits this model if there is a central controlling mechanism (which there almost has to be).

Alternately, each copy of the game could be in contact with all others. You do this now with the battle file portion of the PBEM game. But, I think that would be extremely hard to implement in the full game. It works in the battle code because there are only two participants.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
4.46875