TCP/IP

[Talenn]

Yep, I have to chime in here too in support of TCP/IP play. A number of my friends picked up the game after seeing it at my house with the intention of us all being able to play it via the internet.

At that time (December), it was thought that TCP/IP would be possible sometime early in the year. I was hoping to have seen some serious progress in that department as well. I understand that other issues have cropped up etc, but I think that this item keeps going farther and farther down the list. It really wouldnt surprise me (but would greatly disappoint me) to hear that they arent going to do it until SE5 (or whatever).

Like Londo, I havent touched the game in over a month and before that, I had only been playing sporadically for a month or so before that. The AI just cant hold the interest. Even if its 'tougher' its still not 'immersive'. There is NO diplomacy with the AI. It just feels like random actions. There is no 'allied support' or joint offensives or anything other than exchange of points and that leaves it feeling rather bland after a while IMO.

Multiplayer via the internet would completely change all that. This reminds me very much of the same discussions regarding adding 'net support that occured on the Combat Mission Boards Last year. Most people thought that it was fine to just play PBEM. Well, lemme tell ya, when TCP/IP hit, these folks were AMAZED at how much it added to gameplay to be able to play 'in real time'. I think the same might occur for SE4. People will waste no time setting up games, I'm sure. And if someone were kind enough to provide a dedicated chat room for finding games, it would greatly add to the game's appeal.

Finally, if AI work is going to be done, I'd suggest some folks taking a look at EU. The AI in that is amongst the best that I've seen yet. The diplomacy and alliances feel correct. Your allies support you in war. THAT is a novel concept. And the AI doesnt cheat there either. Of course its far simpler to program the AI in a more 'static' environment, but the game itself is highly detailed and involved. If anyone is looking for a new game to bat around, I'd highly recommend it.

Anyways, here's hoping that they will get TCP/IP out sometime by summer.

Talenn

[geoschmo]

Talenn,

I understand what you are saying. When I first got SEIV I couldn't wait for TCP/IP. But I have changed my mind. If you read Fuerte's comment below it makes a good point.

If what you are wanting is to be Online and play a simultaneous multiplayer game, you can do that now. You don't need TCP/IP support to do that. It can be done via ICQ or email or ftp. Any way you can get share files between the player's machine's and the host's.

To those wanting a TCP/IP option, is there something else you are expecting beyond this? If so you may be disapointed if and when it arrives.

Geo

[lnielsen]

I would hope that the game plays like Stars! over the network. A host process monitors a location for the files. When all the turns are in the processing takes place and all players are notified that a new turn is available by a flashing minimized window icon. The idea mentioned earlier where there are lights showing who has submitted their turns is even better.

The key here is that you can run the game in the background while you are working and then pop up the game when you need to do a turn. (while at work ) It would be nice to have options like turn ends 60 seconds after the 2nd player enters their turn but no more than 10 minutes You should not have to restart the program, load turns...

Just as important, is strategic combat. You would not be doing tactical and currently the strategic combat still needs work. You need to get more feedback on what happened and why (what formation/strategy did they use) and more control options (use strategy X when fighting fighters, use Y when fighting missile ships,...)


[This message has been edited by lnielsen (edited 04 April 2001).]

[geoschmo]

All of that sounds reasonable. I guess it is kind of a hassle having to restart the game every turn.

As long as everyone realizes that TCP/IP is just going to make multi-player a little more convienent, and not actually change anything drastically.

Geo

[God Emperor]

I reiterate my main point - PBEM does not allow tactical battles. Whats the point of spending time researching and designing spiffy ships when you are forced to press the Strategic resolution button and let the computer muddle its way through combat resolution? There is nothing like coordinating your first salvo to target the enemy ships you believe to be the threat, or to watch your flagship get crippled (shield failure captain!) and to try and nurse it away from the main batte, or to bLast an enemy ships shields down as a prelude for boarding (ahhh, memories of MOO2 again)..

Also, to the guy who had bad experiences playing MOO2, I extend my sympathies.
My opponents were considerate (all of us kept an eye on the turn complete lights) and we had only occaisional disconnections, nothing like you are describing.

Finally, I do agree with the people who are suggesting that priority be given to "tidying" up the loose ends in the game. I just dont want to see TCP/IP dropped off of the agenda.

[Magus38]

I may be wrong but I think that when Londo says realtime, he simply means all players connected through a single host simultaneously. Though turns would be taken simultaneously it would remain a turn based game.

A good case in point of just how possible this would be is MOOII. Here is example of everybody playing simultaneously and the game working well, everyone knowing who is finished because there are small colour coded lights in one corner of the screen that indicate that the associated player has finished his turn by turning dark. Another good example is age of wonders; turn based strategy supporting simultaneous play through both TCP/IP and IPX/SPX (for a Novell network).

What I am saying is that while it may take quite a bit of work, it is not only compatible with the current game architecture, but there are ample precedents out there in the strategy gaming world.

[MasterDave]

I have been reading these forums and playing SE IV quite a bit for the Last couple of months, and it was this topic that finally made me feel the need to jump in and start posting. Moo2 was the first turn-based computer game that I really dove into multi-player, and it remained a strong favorite of mine for two plus years. Within about two or three weeks of playing the AI in Moo2, I had it mastered on Impossible level, and destroying the AI was getting boring. However, the ability to play against other people kept the game fun and new for years after it got boring beating up on the AI. Every time I thought I had Moo2 completely figured out, another player would show me some new dastardly ship design, or combat tactic, or race combination that would catch me by surprise, and make me a better player than before. There were so many people out there playing Moo2 that some of us formed a Kali league that was still going strong years after the game came out around November 1996 (I think we had 140 members at one point).

Moo2 did have its problems, as Belsarius has noted (I actually remember playing him in the early days). People sometimes took long turns, big battles between human players 1 and 2 could get boring for players 3,4,5 etc. We practically had to become experts at networking to get the game working over Kali. A game with five or six players did take a long time, and usually took more than one session to finish. However, despite all of this, there was very little out there that matched the sheer excitement of squaring off with an old nemisis in a climactic battle of huge fleets to decide the winner of a game. I still clearly remember the some of the specific battles I fought with some of my greatest adversaries in the Moo2 world, and some of the dastardly tactical tricks they taught me in the process.

That being said, I think that SE IV over TC/IP has the potential to be even more fun and addictive than Moo2 was. There is a far greater depth of technologies, strategies, and methods of expanding one's empire than Moo2 had. I do not think the game would take excessively long if played on a simultaneous turn, with strategic combats (if there are more than two human players that is-- with two players human vs. human tactical battles would be pretty fun as long as nobody is kept waiting for them. Human vs. computer battles with two players on line should probably be set to strategic). A simple time limit on turn length that could be set by the players beforehand would help in this aspect as well. Software technology has improved to the point where a lot of the old multiplayer bugs that plagued us Moo2 players would probably no longer be an issue.

For some reason PBEM just does not seem all that appealing to me. It seems like something of a tease to play one turn a day, and I think that the ability to play a complete game over a few evening sessions would be much more satisfying. I have been greatly anticipating the day when I could take on other SE IV geeks on-line, and have been honing my skills with just that goal in mind. The new mods and races that people are making are keeping the game pretty fun for me, but TC/IP is neccessary IMO to really hold my interest over the long term.

Hopefully the TC/IP patch is still an important priority for Malfador, as many of us SE IV fans are seriously yearning for the real challenge of playing human beings in a continuous game setting. Please don't make us wait for Moo3 to get our fix!!!

------------------
Follow the Golden Rule:
"He who has the Gold makes the rules.."

[God Emperor]

I second your comments Masterdave...
(My games only ever involved three human players max).

[Fuerte]

I am playing Steel Panthers: World At War and Combat Mission: Beyond Overlord. Originally I played only with AI or PBEM, because TCP/IP was not supported. Then both of these fine games got TCP/IP, and I surely tried it, once. The problems with TCP/IP are obvious:

* All players (two in case of SPWAW and CMBO, up to 16 in case of SE4) have to be on the computer at the same time for several hours without a break.

* What happens when someone disconnects?

* You are forced to wait for other players' turns even if you have nothing to do (in SPWAW or CMBO when someone is attacking and the other defending, usually the attacker has much more things to do than the defender).

While playing TCP/IP was fun, playing PBEM is much more comfortable, and you can actually use your brains. And if you do not know the game well enough, you can study the manual etc. TCP/IP is better for games like Unreal Tournament, where you only need quick reflexes. (Imagine playing UT by PBEM.)

------------------
PBEM

[Londo]

bump-- (pardon me)

------------------
Vir! You have made a mess of this post once again, now give me a large cup of brivari so that I may begin to forget the bad times and remember the glory of the great Centauri Republic.