RE: November Update (Full Version)

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



Message

ess1 -> RE: November Update (11/22/2005 7:38:14 PM)

I fear that pbem capability is secondary for most. Hence Developers (or their "suits") leave this until last I think. Look at COG! I left a pbem game as it was rubbish.
Fortunately we have wargames - HPS, BG etc. that cater for pbem right from inception.



ktotwf -> RE: November Update (11/22/2005 11:06:41 PM)

Truth be told I couldn't care less about PBEM. Why anyone would want to do that is beyond me!



Marshall Ellis -> RE: November Update (11/22/2005 11:28:15 PM)

Hey guys:

Just a wuick FYI...

PBEM was very much at the forefront of our design and is considered by Matrix as a primary method of play. I actually covertly played a few PBEM games before I coded and it helped greatly. We recognized right away that there is a large community of EIA PBEM players out there and we designed / coded accordingly!

Thank you




Marshall Ellis -> RE: November Update (11/22/2005 11:28:45 PM)

Quick FYI that is ... :-)

Thank you



1LTRambo -> RE: November Update (11/23/2005 3:05:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pippin

Well I will say this... The AI is still going through some fixes. Changing it from incompetant to dumb is do-able.... Making it smart, is another thing....

There are some interesting traits that can be adjusted such as agressiveness etc, but for a truely smart AI would require thousands of traits, agreed?




It is refreshing to hear that strides are being made to improve the AI. That tells me the AI has the potential to be a difficult opponent and make the player work for his victory like playing other players.

Therefore, I don't agree with you, jamo262, about the AI always being crap. Also, AI is very important to the game as solitare may be the only way for some to play the game. I posted a request for players for the board game in my area and have only had one person respond. In the 10 or so years that I have owned the board game, I have only played 4 times, and each time was only for a few years into the game.[:@] I WANT TO PLAY A GAME TO COMPLETION!!!!!!
Of course, this means that to achieve my goal of EiA bliss is to play against the computer. I don't have the patience to play PBEM.

And thanks Marshall for your quick FYI. That was much needed.[:)]



Titi -> RE: November Update (11/23/2005 3:35:20 AM)

quote:

herefore, I don't agree with you, jamo262, about the AI always being crap. Also, AI is very important to the game as solitare may be the only way for some to play the game. I posted a request for players for the board game in my area and have only had one person respond. In the 10 or so years that I have owned the board game, I have only played 4 times, and each time was only for a few years into the game. I WANT TO PLAY A GAME TO COMPLETION!!!!!!



I completly disagree here. Still need to encounter a strategy game were the AI give a challenge without "cheating" by playing with different rules.

Don't mind if there is no AI, just replace it by a strong TCP/IP option that will give you instant smart opponent. Strong means that allow team play, replacement of missing player or leasing to a friend if you have a busy schedule.



1LTRambo -> RE: November Update (11/23/2005 3:41:51 AM)

I agree that TCP/IP needs to be a component of the game, just like PBEM, etc. However, IMHO the game would not be complete without a quality AI that will further set this game apart from others of the type. So if Marshall gives everybody above and beyond their expectations[:)], then he will be hailed in gaming circles for eons to come.[;)]



Pippin -> RE: November Update (11/23/2005 7:20:05 AM)

I agree an AI is important, even if it is a weak one. Having a computer version of EiA but only being able to play pbem with it would just plain suck. And I don't think you'd get many sales? Besides, for those who need to learn, the AI gives them some fun. They may not learn as FAST when vs a pro, but they certainly won't be put off from losing 99% of the time.



ktotwf -> RE: November Update (11/23/2005 9:44:17 AM)

Well, AI is extremely important for those who are - sadly enough - not gifted with friends who share an interest in the Napoleonic period. [;)]



Ursa MAior -> RE: November Update (11/23/2005 12:39:22 PM)

As a game of Grand strategy IMHO a PBEM suits it better than TCP/IP. Not to mention its resemblence on exchanging letters as a way of contemporary communication.

Although I think a GM option should be inserted, which would allow him to make moves for players who cannot or not able (temporaryly) to participate.




pzgndr -> RE: November Update (11/23/2005 2:59:22 PM)

quote:

And I don't think you'd get many sales? Besides, for those who need to learn, the AI gives them some fun.


Bingo. For me, no AI = no buy. If I want to play this or any other game solo without a computer AI, I can just buy the boardgame. If Matrix wants to sell PC games to a broad base of customers, they need to have AI.



McGuire -> RE: November Update (11/23/2005 5:54:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

Bingo. For me, no AI = no buy. If I want to play this or any other game solo without a computer AI, I can just buy the boardgame. If Matrix wants to sell PC games to a broad base of customers, they need to have AI.


No offense, but I'd like to see you playing with your new board game with people all around the globe!

I'd like to have an AI! I'm the kinda guy who likes playing against my PC (if it isn't cheating - that bloody ....) in my small dark room....

From my point of view the AI ist more than a could (or should) be but it ain't a MUST! If the AI's the only thing that's slowing Matrix down - DUMP IT!

And to the end, I'd like to put another piece of wood on the stake:
Have you Matrix-guys (e.g. Marshal) ever thought about a construction set? Like setting up the scenario as you like it?
A tool like this could be pretty useful for simulating battles, finding the right stategy etc.

Hey... It's just a thought!



Pippin -> RE: November Update (11/24/2005 12:01:43 AM)

#1 It will ship with an AI, even if it takes longer to tweak. Though, I do not have any authority to say so, I am pretty confident of this.

#2 Yes you can change how you want your corps, fleets, and depots set up. Everything from their positions to factors loaded.





Titi -> RE: November Update (11/24/2005 2:51:24 AM)

Sadly For me, it's rather no TCP/IP no buy.

EiA was not a game designed to be played by a computer and unless completely changed i can't see any way that a single man (Marsahll or anyone else) can program all in one a land tactical, naval tactical, land strategical, naval strategical and political artificial intelligence. After all the AI able to win at chess against a master is not yet done and it's only a one sided game.
AI won't be a challenge and so i don'T see any fun to even try it.

PBEM is possible currently and i won't spend around 70 CAD to buy a game only for that.

So the only real interest is TCP/IP that will allow me to play against seven opponents having the same free time as me, anywhere in the globe without having the physical limitations of travel and space.

So i'm working ont the virtue of patience knowing that for me the wait will be even longer.[;)]



Windfire -> RE: November Update (11/24/2005 3:13:11 AM)

Priorities for me are AI followed by PBEM. Very difficult to synch schedules for 7 people for real time play with jobs and peoples family commitments.



Pippin -> RE: November Update (11/24/2005 7:58:17 AM)

quote:

After all the AI able to win at chess against a master is not yet done and it's only a one sided game.


That is interesting, as Kasparov already lost to (Deep Blue?) an IBM machine almost a decade now ago.



Ursa MAior -> RE: November Update (11/24/2005 9:33:08 AM)

Yep. But chess is unfortunately way less complicated.

Windfire
No offense, but why easier is it to find 7 other people to sit by the computer for almost a whole day? Since given the complexity of the game, I dont think that a campaign with 8 countries will last less than 7-8 hours. If it is a problem to coordinate 7 other people's time to write down and send their turns why is it easier to make them sit down at the same time twice or three times a week or a month? Or you plan to substitute with other players the ones who are not available at the defined time?



McGuire -> RE: November Update (11/24/2005 11:15:10 AM)

@Pippin:
Maybe I misunderstand you, I didn't refer to my own corps. In the last board game I played France and spend about 6 hours of planning where to set up my troops, what strategy to pull to win against the Prussian and Austrian alliance.
Just to mention, this wasn't the typical first-year-war in the Grand Campain.
A construction set, where I can set up all corps (not only my own) and a usable AI would reduce this time by far! Or I could go through a couple more scenarios in the same time!

@Ursa MAior
I agree that in the scenario you discribe there is no difference! I myself wouldn't play a game with a Russian (Moscow), two Americans (New York, SanFran) and a Chinese either.
But there are 24 time areas on this globe. I can't see a reason why I shouldn't play with some people out of the same and adjecent areas. All from north to south. This way you can play at predefined times, and noone hast to stay up till late or get up in the midst of the night.
And I'd like to see you setting up the game with a couple of people from North Cape (Norway) and Cape Town (South Aftrica)!

But hey: Good Luck!



Ursa MAior -> RE: November Update (11/24/2005 1:30:49 PM)

I have a PBEM game of Uncommon Valor tm, with an american guy who lives in Japan. My time CET (GMT +1) he is GMT +9 even with 8 hours difference we can play quasi realtime (he makes his moves then I). BUt it is usually for max 2 hours, but I dont see any hinderence of PBEM compared to TCP/IP, au contraire. IMHO it is easier to find 8 players -no matter where they are- who can devote 30 minutes a day to send an email, then to find 8 people at the same time. Maybe for online MMORPGs or FPSs like Cod2 or something wich attract way more people then these gems of the napolenics era.



Windfire -> RE: November Update (11/24/2005 7:33:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ursa MAior

Yep. But chess is unfortunately way less complicated.

Windfire
No offense, but why easier is it to find 7 other people to sit by the computer for almost a whole day? Since given the complexity of the game, I dont think that a campaign with 8 countries will last less than 7-8 hours. If it is a problem to coordinate 7 other people's time to write down and send their turns why is it easier to make them sit down at the same time twice or three times a week or a month? Or you plan to substitute with other players the ones who are not available at the defined time?



I don't totally understand your comment, but versus the AI, I don't need any other players at all so there is no issue. With PBEM, each player executes their turn and mails it to the next player to execute when they have time. It doesn't have to be on a hard set scheduled time of France has to do his turn at 1700 GMT on Monday. A person who may only have an hour or so in the evening should be able to get a turn out (I am one of those people). Based on my schedule and that of alot of the people I deal with, this is easier and more conveineint than trying to sit down for 6-8 hours on a given weekend day. It also leaves those weekends free for other activities (historical miniatures) if I can get enough of the locals together (which isn't easy).



Ursa MAior -> RE: November Update (11/24/2005 9:26:38 PM)

Sorry I think I have misunderstood you. I thought you are for TCP/IP' over PBEM.




Titi -> RE: November Update (11/25/2005 5:21:35 AM)

First about Deep Blue, ok it win the match but in the controversy : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Blue Remember the last part, not the win[sm=crazy.gif]

After that iM for TCP/IP rather than PBEM for a simple reason. EiA was not designed to be played by a player at a time but by seven players at the same time.
They are alot of interactions in a turn : Call to allies, naval interception, retirement into a city, combat chit choice, call to the guard, withdrawal after a day of combat, reinforcement, insurection corps appearance ... and i'm forgetting a lot of others
In a pbem either you stop and send an email/wait for a reply so making the game running at turtle speed or brush those rules aside and so remove all the chrome making that EiA is EiA.

The only way to make CEiA look the same than EiA is by TCP/IP. AI and PBEM are changing CEiA in another game that will have very few in common with the original. It probably will look like Squad Leader Versus Advanced Squad Leader. The same core but two different games. And once you played ASL, you won't go back to SL very often.

And TCP/IP is like playing the tabletop version, but easier. Don't have to take care of distance and time to tr«vel, only having some hours in a dedicaced day per week/two weeks/month to mark in your agenda for play. What's the problem, crappy ISP aside[:@]



ktotwf -> RE: November Update (11/25/2005 8:48:40 AM)

Why is this debate going on? All three features are in the game. None of them are going to be left out, so this is really pointless.



McGuire -> RE: November Update (11/25/2005 11:22:50 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ktotwf

Why is this debate going on? All three features are in the game. None of them are going to be left out, so this is really pointless.


Yeah, well! You're right! If they're all in the game! Hey fine with me. But there were statements like: "No something - no buy!"
Replace the "something" with PBEM or TCP/IP.
And we were only discussing the advantages of the different playing modes.
From my point of view, TCP/IP is a must have (for I have the people at hand to play, but we're like 200 km apart). But still if there isn't (in reference to ktotwf: wouldn't be) TCP/IP for playing I'd still buy it!
I want this game soooo much! I'd buy it if it would only be a single player version against a rather stupid AI.



pzgndr -> RE: November Update (11/25/2005 5:03:17 PM)

quote:

But there were statements like: "No something - no buy!"


Gollygee McGuire, it really bugs you for other people to speak their mind? I specifically said, quote, "For me, no AI = no buy." For me, and probably for a lot of other potential paying customers as well. Since Matrix has already considered this and has decided to include an AI, that's fine. And yet, this issue is worthy of arguing about?

If I wanted to buy the boardgame, I would. If I wanted to play it via email with other players using ADC or something else, I would. Frankly I do not have the time. And I do not expect to have the time in the near future even when EiA gets released. I have never played the game, but I am interested in learning as time permits. An AI computer opponent is, in my humble opinion, a required condition for me to consider buying this PC game. And probably for a lot of other potential paying customers as well. And Matrix correctly recognizes this little marketing fact.

And yet, you and others persist with the anti-AI remarks and unnecessary criticisms. So be it. Fortunately, Marshall and Matrix appear determined to eventually release a PC version of the game that should appeal to ALL of us, and that's a good thing. And I will be patient until they do so. [:)]



NeverMan -> RE: November Update (11/25/2005 8:09:02 PM)

AI in this game is pointless, unless they can make it good. I am not going to pay a lot of money for a game just so I can continously pound the hell out of a silly AI, what is the point of that???? Just stupid.

TCP/IP is primary in my book. PBEM is boring and most games never get finished. Chess by mail/email is one thing, but EiA by mail/email is another thing altogether.




Titi -> RE: November Update (11/26/2005 9:21:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ktotwf

Why is this debate going on? All three features are in the game. None of them are going to be left out, so this is really pointless.


Not really, Marshall told us two weeks ago that there won't be TCP/IP at first; only if the game is a success... and i have like a doubt[&:]

Just tell him that without TCP/IP it will be a no buy for me. And if it's still the time, rather than trying the impossible and giving the artificial some kind of very limited intelligence or rather than redrawing the game to let it be played by email, it would be better IMHO to give a try to something easier like implent TCP/IP.



Grand_Armee -> RE: November Update (11/26/2005 11:53:44 PM)

I definitely intend to buy this game. I hope that it has TCP/IP, or it won't be much fun. Like COG, EIA has too many different choices to make at different intervals of each turn for good PBEM play. Then there is the problem of getting a few guys together who will send out their turns relatively quickly.

Unless EIA comes out with TCP/IP capability, COG will be the only game that can fulfill the needs of those who want a Napoleonic wargame with a diplomatic aspect.



jamo262 -> RE: November Update (11/27/2005 4:55:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ktotwf

Well, AI is extremely important for those who are - sadly enough - not gifted with friends who share an interest in the Napoleonic period. [;)]


You know ktotwf theres a community here on this forum that loves gaming in this period-you can always find someone to play with. And then theres all the cyberboard EiA and EiH and Napoleonic minatures people.

What do you think Marshall; is the web site supporting the game going to have an opponents wanted section?

What about a ranking system? That would be nice!

[8D]

People have mentioned that AI is important for learning the game and cariying things for beginners and it also can be fun until the computer starts to get wupped each time. These are all excellent points and I will conceed that some games (Civ II, and Europa Universalis if you go a small African nation) provide AI that is always very enjoyable to play against.

I am mystified about the Tcp/IP thing being seen as so essential. Could someone explain, Ive found that the game takes a while to play and playing in real time over a conection-except in peace periods- would involvea bit of waiting for the next fellow to work out his turn.

Maybe us three are slow but we manage about 2 and a half years a day-on holidays at Mandurah in the fishing shack with a couple of slabs of beer.

Perhaps the strength of this game will be that it will be able to adapt itself to different styles of playing( pbem, TCP/IP) depending on the tempo of events and available time.



gazfun -> RE: November Update (11/28/2005 11:10:59 AM)

I knew that this is the best way to go, Ive said it all along. Keep up the good work mate you a doin a beut job of it im sure
The multiplayer format that no developer has ever properly tried, this guy deserves a medal, I mean it.
See most developers believe for some reason that there is a small number of people that want this kind of jonre. BUT THERE WRONG AS ALWAYS. There is actually a large quiet majority of people waiting for something like this.
Most people really dont realise the signifignace of the Multiplayer Campaign and how this can turn gaming around, from the mindless 2 dimensional strategy types games to something like this. This is what I call a dynamic strategy game which has virtual unlimted type results, its only limited by you own imagination.
I will be using this as a basis for campaign battles using a popular software currently being used and Modded

Quote
Marshall Ellis
Hey guys:

Just a wuick FYI...

PBEM was very much at the forefront of our design and is considered by Matrix as a primary method of play. I actually covertly played a few PBEM games before I coded and it helped greatly. We recognized right away that there is a large community of EIA PBEM players out there and we designed / coded accordingly!

Thank you



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.967773