AGEOD Forums

Chris Ferrous wrote:Having experienced my first two-player scenario last night (thanks, poweraxe) I must say that I was impressed how smooth it all went, once we finally got connected, although the load time was quite long.

If you are "loading full map", the game will take several times longer to load. Uncheck the box in the configuartion.

If you think you can do the PBEM Light mode with little effort Calvinus, it would certainly be an alternative, and I could help test it.

But the real meat of MP would be in the strictly turn based mode, so perhaps this PBEM solution should get a low priority. (in what I understand is an already very limited timeframe you can devote to the game).

I understand an interaction-heavy game like this must be hell to bug-rid for MP, especially such a small project like this. I hope the guys here can help

calvinus wrote:Anyway guys, I'm considering the opportunity of developing a simple PBEM game mode (minimal interface changes, PBEM allowed only in WEGO and with no interceptions, all battles resolved strictly by AI only)... This should help a lot the game, even if depriving it of some fundamental and funny features... What's your ideas?

By eliminating reactions and interceptions the game would play more easily and more stable. However, without interceptiions and possibly reactions, some nations could not fight a winning battle-like France in '14. At least, it would be much more difficult.

Another game, Crown of Glory EE, took the route of eliminating its detailed battles (very detailed) for MP games. They actually dropped TCP altogether-it;s playable in PBEM.

BTW, I assume your mention of PBEM was really in reference to TCP multi player games?

I like the way the game plays in SP mode-ideally for me, that is how it would play in MP mode. Of course, I don't alway get what I want.

It seems to me that one current problem is that the game is unforgiving for player errors. If we can identify those things (such as invading Austria by Italy in the corporetto scenario) and fix those-either by not letting the player do it, or allowing it to go through, we will be on the way to a stable MP game.

I would suggest players that come accross what may be a recurring bugbug, to create a saved file and send it here-or to an MP support thread in the tech section. Keeping it all in one place would be a good idea.

06 Maestro wrote:
Another game, Crown of Glory EE, took the route of eliminating its detailed battles (very detailed) for MP games. They actually dropped TCP altogether-it;s playable in PBEM.

I can imagine why! Without a server, most games are unstable. And I experieced lots of connections lost even with sever-based games. Btw, I can play online only with server based games, because I have no public IP, as you know...

06 Maestro wrote:
BTW, I assume your mention of PBEM was really in reference to TCP multi player games?

I don't understand exactly the question. The pbem mode does not use the TCP multi player, only the email stuff... Each player generates the Orders file and attachs it to the email that sends to all opponents.
When each opponent has all the file(s) of any other opponent(s), he can click the End-Turn button. Each player performs the End-Turn operations on his PC, he sees all movements and battles resolved.

So I would guess it would be way too much recoding to make MP server-based?
With virtual computers and networks like Hamachi easily accessible for everybody, one with a strong computer could even pull off the trick of being a dedicated host AND playing

calvinus wrote:
I don't understand exactly the question. The pbem mode does not use the TCP multi player, only the email stuff... Each player generates the Orders file and attachs it to the email that sends to all opponents.

I did not know that you could change the game to a PBEM type-thus I thought you were just talking about some other changes.

BTW, in the Crown of Glory game the turns are sent to the last player in the game (up to 8) and he merges the files and sends out the new turn. Everyone see's their order's carried out when they open each new turn.

PBEM with more than two players can take a very long time.

Tamas wrote:So I would guess it would be way too much recoding to make MP server-based?
With virtual computers and networks like Hamachi easily accessible for everybody, one with a strong computer could even pull off the trick of being a dedicated host AND playing

A strong computer is not enough. A server based application must run on it, managing all messages dispatched from/to clients in order to guarantee the delivery of every packet. This application must also merge and do all game calculations, so making each client simply a reproduction of what is determined on the server.

This afternoon Chris Ferrous and I decided to play another game. After some connectivity issues we managed to get a game started, the 1914 scenario. Unfortunately, the game was cut short by an unexpected crash. We tried to resume the game by loading the autosave that the game had made, but this did not work for some reason.

Not giving up, we decided to start a new game, same scenario. This one went OK, until we got to a point where both of us had ended our turn but the game would not pass to the next turn. We tried reloading the game from a save I made, which worked this time, but did not solve the issue. Both of us had done all activations in the turn and pressed the button to end the turn afterwards, but the game still did not pass to the next turn.

I have attached the save of this game to this post. Maybe it can be of help to Calvinus.

That just about sums up the situation, poweraxe.

There was the issue of us both occupying Mulhouse without having incurred combat as well. Both my French stacks entered Mulhouse after forcing the defenders to retreat, but poweraxe counterattacked during his phase with a stack of his own but no battle happened, and all 3 stacks just sat there together.

The Mulhouse thing is something I had seen in the 14 MP scenario-reproducible. That was a while ago-apparently it is still there.

As this TCP play is finicky, all due care should be done in preparation. An example would be what the MP players of HoI 3 do every month or so; reinstall the game. Whenever there is an update for a mod or a new patch, everything gets a clean install. Not only is the old game un-installed, but any trace of it is physically deleted. Before re-installing, I personally think it is a good idea to run a registry cleaner and defrag the registry and hard drive. Then do a fresh install and patch up.

If the above procedure is not followed, then whatever may have been wrong in the previous install will still be there to wreck havoc. In HoI it is easy to see if something is amiss as you have a "check sum" in addition to the patch id. With WW1 we just have the version number. There could be a slight difference in the game that we don't know about from a previous install that interferes with connectivity.

I don't expect that perfect new installs will make the game perfect, but some things that we are seeing now should not be happening.

One little thing I remembered today about getting connected, if players names do not show up in the start lobby in the center box, that game is doomed to fail at some point. It can be started as long as the start button is there, but don't be surprised if you don't make it two turns.

If it would help I could make a save of a game that had the opponents name and one without (in the first month).

Good point about the 'named helmets' symbol denoting a player's participation, Maestro.

If I get to play MP again, I'll double check that situation, as I believe in my 3-4 attempts at two games with poweraxe yesterday that may have been an issue. I think it was when I was host and we crashed quickly. But I'm not sure whether it happened when poweraxe was host.

I haven't posted my savegame file because it seemed to be corrupted as it would not allow a re-start when we tried.

I started to work on the PBEM engine. I will try to deliver a beta patch 1.08M as soon as possible, in order to make you try this PBEM game mode...

Chris Ferrous wrote:Good point about the 'named helmets' symbol denoting a player's participation, Maestro.

If I get to play MP again, I'll double check that situation, as I believe in my 3-4 attempts at two games with poweraxe yesterday that may have been an issue. I think it was when I was host and we crashed quickly. But I'm not sure whether it happened when poweraxe was host.

I haven't posted my savegame file because it seemed to be corrupted as it would not allow a re-start when we tried.

You're right, it happened in the first game, which you hosted. In the game I hosted it did not happen at first, but after we needed to restart, that same problem happened while I was the host. I don't know what the cause could be, it seems quite random to me.

A first draft of the new WW1 PBEM engine is done. I haven't yet added the attack obstinacy priority stuff, and I have to do severe tests and fixes... but at least a huge amount of work is alreadey done!

Bravo

calvinus wrote:A first draft of the new WW1 PBEM engine is done. I haven't yet added the attack obstinacy priority stuff, and I have to do severe tests and fixes... but at least a huge amount of work is alreadey done!

You are something else- I will give the beta a go.

Will the TCP function of the game will remain unchanged in the M patch?

06 Maestro wrote:Will the TCP function of the game will remain unchanged in the M patch?

Yes, unchanged, unless I discover some hidden bug somewhere in the code..

Åñëè âäðóã âû ïîäûñêèâàåòå çàíèìàòåëüíóþ áåñïëàòíóþ èãðó, èãðà ïåðåäîâàÿ áåñïëàòíî - ýòî òî, ÷òî ìîæåò Âàñ çàèíòåðåñîâàòü.