Difference between PBEM and TCP/IP

[Kimball]

What is the difference between play-by-email and TCP/IP? Is it the same thing?

[SirDarwin]

No, if we had tcp/ip, you would not have to send all the files from the client-sever, server-client. You would connect to the server, play your turn, and then the next turn would happen. No worry of sending files back and forth.

[imperishable]

In IP games, one player uses his computer as the server for the game, so all others connect to him after getting his IP address.
After that it`s pretty much like hot seat playing. I like to play this way cause I can spare a few hours on a game and pbem is just way too slow.

[Kimball]

Thank you for the answers. Is TCP/IP something MM is working on, then?

[imperishable]

They better!

[Baron Munchausen]

Kimball,

TCP/IP means REAL TIME gaming. You could sit there at your PC and fight a battle in tactical mode with someone else on the other side of the country. You could spend an entire day gaming with a group of friends scattered all over the world without leaving home. Needless to say, there is a lot of interest in this. But we've not been testing anything to do with TCP/IP so don't expect it "real soon" but rather "in a while". It's not going to be a simple thing to add.

[Puke]

actually, any internet email is over IP. IP over everything.

*ducks*

[Seawolf]

I shouldn't but I am going to say it anyway.

while TCP will allow 2 or more players to do tactical battles over the net, what do the other players during that time? The game will have to wait for the combat to be over no? So really the only gain with tcp is fighting battles in tactical mode. The game will still be delayed. The more battles the more the delay.

------------------
Seawolf on the prowl

[Puke]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Seawolf:
I shouldn't but I am going to say it anyway.

while TCP will allow 2 or more players to do tactical battles over the net, what do the other players during that time? The game will have to wait for the combat to be over no? So really the only gain with tcp is fighting battles in tactical mode. The game will still be delayed. The more battles the more the delay.

---

thanks for crushing my dreams man, you are a big help. actually, the advanage of realtime IP play is psycological. even in a simu/no-tac game, if you plug everyone in and make them do their turns in real time, they will get done alot faster than if you do a 'PBEM' marathon. people tend to not send in their turns when they have to wory about dorking with the files and all, so things get delayed. if all they have to do is plug into the game and play, more gets done, and you dont have as many delays while people get destracted with other things.

even in IP, i will probably not play sequential and stick to simutanious / no tactical. I even think its more challenging putting together effective formations and orders for a fleet - anyone can command each ship to do the right thing.

[ColdSteel]

The only way complex turn based games like SE4 ever work at all with TCP/IP is if the other players get to do something interesting during the other player's turns. Set waypoints, change ship's orders, production queues, check intelligence or research, anything like that. If you just have to sit and stare at a blank screen for 20 minutes while other folks move, you go nuts.

I think that's why hotheat play always has such a big advantage. You can talk trash with your opponent while they move, or play cooperativly against the AI, watch what they're doing (if they agree), etc. It's a *social* thing. TCP/IP play in its current form is quite sterile in contrast.

Maybe if the add a cooperative play mode similar to the "Allied" play mode in Heroes of Might and Magic III it might help.

One thing is certain, unless they think it out carefully, be creative and come up with something for your brain to occupy itself with while others are moving, TCP/IP play will not be the great thing we are all anticipating. Just my 2 cents on this.