NOT PLAY'N PBEM until a REPLAY works

[AP514]

Hey All

I love this game..But the PBEM gives the advantage to the HOST big time.
As the non-host you miss the Cav that moved by your troops. All I see once in awhile is a scorched earth symbol a broken Rail Icon or a report that I lost a city. leure:
I have my Cav stationed like pickets but unless the enemy runs right into the hex they are in I never know the raiders have gone by...

One of the only REASONS I bought this game is in the Forum the promise of a WEB PORTAL was made with a REPLAY option(being able to watch the turn resolution)

I Feel Cheated (well that seems to be to strong of a word)
Maybe Frustrated.........

AP514

[Jagger]

Hey All

I love this game..But the PBEM gives the advantage to the HOST big time.
As the non-host you miss the Cav that moved by your troops. All I see once in awhile is a scorched earth symbol a broken Rail Icon or a report that I lost a city. leure:
I have my Cav stationed like pickets but unless the enemy runs right into the hex they are in I never know the raiders have gone by...

One of the only REASONS I bought this game is in the Forum the promise of a WEB PORTAL was made with a REPLAY option(being able to watch the turn resolution)

I Feel Cheated (well that seems to be to strong of a word)
Maybe Frustrated.........

AP514

I would really like to see an upgrade of the PBEM system. A replay for both sides should be part of that upgrade.

IMO, whoever hosts does have an advantage with the replay. Watching the replay gives a better feel for what is happening than seeing just the end result.

[Rafiki]

Do PBEM'ers use a houserule that the hoster should not see the replay, in order to balance this?

[AP514]

Do PBEM'ers use a houserule that the hoster should not see the replay, in order to balance this?

Well, the only house rule we had in the Game I JUST GOT MY BUTT handed to me in was
1) CAV could not move more than 1 hex into Enemy territory with out a Leader.
2) The Turn After any TROOPS or MONEY Was then reported to the other side


It worked out well..I guess.
The REB might have missed a report of Troops because he sure seemed to have a lot in the East.

AP514

[Hobbes]

Hey All

I love this game..But the PBEM gives the advantage to the HOST big time.
As the non-host you miss the Cav that moved by your troops. All I see once in awhile is a scorched earth symbol a broken Rail Icon or a report that I lost a city. leure:
I have my Cav stationed like pickets but unless the enemy runs right into the hex they are in I never know the raiders have gone by...

One of the only REASONS I bought this game is in the Forum the promise of a WEB PORTAL was made with a REPLAY option(being able to watch the turn resolution)

I Feel Cheated (well that seems to be to strong of a word)
Maybe Frustrated.........

AP514

Well I think cheated is far too strong of a word. As long as the host has the "Focus on move" button set to off there is not much of a problem.

I agree PBEM could be implemented better but I can say as a host of a PBEM game the only advantage I have had is to have been able to see more river moves than my opponent and that has now been fixed.

If you have an opponent you trust I really can't see a problem with PBEM.
But AGEOD will no doubt improve the way PBEM is done.
Cheers, Chris

[D_K]

I asked about that in the wishlist and here is the answer i got.

August 22nd, 2007 #138
D_K
Conscript


Join Date: August 2007
Posts: 11


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

well....just starting out in this game, love it. always wanted a civil war strategy game. i have a friend who is interested and we always play strategy games together online. are you planning on improving the multiplayer connection aspect? as in maybe adding tcp-ip, or a better pbem system?

so far that is all i could ask for. there are lots of other good suggestions here though. keep it up guys!!!!


D_K
View Public Profile
Send a private message to D_K
Find More Posts by D_K
Add D_K to Your Buddy List

August 22nd, 2007 #139
Rafiki
AACW Wiki Administrator / Grand Campaign Project (Union)




Join Date: August 2006
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 788



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Work is in progress about better PBEM via a web portal. Dunno what the current status is on that, though.
__________________

..:: AACWWiki - your source for information about AACW ::..



..:: The Grand Campaign ..::.. Union President AAR ..::.. Comment thread ::..


Rafiki
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Rafiki
Send email to Rafiki
Find More Posts by Rafiki
Add Rafiki to Your Buddy List

August 23rd, 2007 #140
Pocus
Philippe Malacher - Lead Developer




Join Date: October 2005
Location: Lyon (France)
Posts: 7,863


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NCP should feature a TCP/IP utility named ARES (AGE Receiving & Emitting System, don't ask we have to find an acronym ). When it is done, it will be provided freely for the others games.
__________________
Never stop an enemy when he is making a mistake
Napoleon Bonaparte.

AACW patch 1.07b: http://ageoddl.telechargement.fr/latest/AACW_Patch.zip

AACW Wiki: http://ageod.nsen.ch/aacwwiki

heres the link to the page:

http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=3118&page=5

just scroll down a bit. looks like there may be a tcp/ip set up coming out in a while, will be even better then pbem i figure!!!!
thats what im hoping for!

[AP514]

If you have an opponent you trust I really can't see a problem with PBEM.
Well I think cheated is far too strong of a word. As long as the host has the "Focus on move" button set to off there is not much of a problem.
I agree PBEM could be implemented better but I can say as a host of a PBEM game the only advantage I have had is to have been able to see more river moves than my opponent and that has now been fixed.
Cheers, Chris

No, I TOTALLY TRUST MY PBEM OPPONENT......

As FAR as having the settings for the turn moves .Im not sure if he got to look at them or not ???

AP514

[jimkehn]

As host, I have the focus on move button turned off. One...it DOES give the host an advantage and Two......it takes a lot longer to get through a turn.

[saintsup]

As host, I have the focus on move button turned off. One...it DOES give the host an advantage and Two......it takes a lot longer to get through a turn.

Even as solo player I have the focus on move button turned off ... because the turn resolution is soo long that I usually do some other thing.

[saintsup]

2) The Turn After any TROOPS or MONEY Was then reported to the other side

There was a thread sometimes discussing this fact. As far as I remember, the opinion was that it would better for both gameplay and historicity to have messages informing about the conscription/money actions of the other side.

I for myself have the strong feeling that this information was at the time public.

[aryaman]

Even as solo player I have the focus on move button turned off ... because the turn resolution is soo long that I usually do some other thing.

Yes, for every relevany movement you can see there are plenty of irrelevant ones, I also do some other thing, leaving it with a high volume to hear battle sounds and I come then to watch the battle.

[Beren]

Pebm MUST be upgraded inmediatly, i can´t understand why we (the players) are not asking for this issue everyday.

I hope that napoleon campaigns would have a good pebm system... it´s a must nowadays, even a TCP-IP tool....

[Korrigan]

I hope that napoleon campaigns would have a good pebm system... it´s a must nowadays, even a TCP-IP tool....

Granted!

[Henry D.]

Do PBEM'ers use a houserule that the hoster should not see the replay, in order to balance this?

Huh, there is a way for the host to replay the turn resolution?

Regards, Henry

[Rafiki]

My bad; I meant to ask if hosts usually look at the turn resolution or not, and if it's something people include in their house/PBEM rules

[Henry D.]

My bad; I meant to ask if hosts usually look at the turn resolution or not, and if it's something people include in their house/PBEM rules

Ah, ok, I just thought I had found yet another reason to feel mightily dumb for not noticing something earlier...

For the record, although it is not forbidden by houserules (which, come to think of it, would be a good idea, though) I never watch the turn resolution, my machine is five and a half years old and life is short enough as it is...

Regards, Henry

[runyan99]

There was a thread sometimes discussing this fact. As far as I remember, the opinion was that it would better for both gameplay and historicity to have messages informing about the conscription/money actions of the other side.

I for myself have the strong feeling that this information was at the time public.

Of course. Information like this would be in the newspapers for everyone to read. Well, at least for bond issuance and the draft. Also for any foreign policy decisions like commercial concessions.

[Jagger]

I always watch the turn replays. I enjoy watching the turn play out. I also assume my opponent watches them as well if they are hosting. And it is fine by me. Not a big deal. Although I really miss watching the replay when I am not hosting.

But IMO, it is a definite advantage. I have noticed I have better results when I host and poorer results when I don't. I attribute that difference to the replay.

I know in BOA, I feel the American player should always host as the American side needs that advantage. I haven't reached a conclusion as to the advantage yet with ACW. Normally I would say the CSA player should host as the weaker side but the CSA is a lot stronger than the historical CSA. I am not sure they need the hosting advantage.

It would be much better if both could see the replay.

[Pocus]

The TCP/IP module is coming for NCP and it will works for BOA and ACW (for free). We still not have coped with the replay module though, are resources are streched thin these days (weeks, months). It will be done, that is sure, but we can't give you a deadline.

The most 'luxurious' Play by web portal is still developed, we have good hope to start internal testing in december.

[Jabberwock]

I always watch the turn replays. I enjoy watching the turn play out. I also assume my opponent watches them as well if they are hosting. And it is fine by me. Not a big deal. Although I really miss watching the replay when I am not hosting.

But IMO, it is a definite advantage. I have noticed I have better results when I host and poorer results when I don't. I attribute that difference to the replay.

I know in BOA, I feel the American player should always host as the American side needs that advantage. I haven't reached a conclusion as to the advantage yet with ACW. Normally I would say the CSA player should host as the weaker side but the CSA is a lot stronger than the historical CSA. I am not sure they need the hosting advantage.

It would be much better if both could see the replay.

CSA will certainly have more information about amphibious landings if they can see the replay. Whether this is a good or bad thing I leave to other, wiser players to decide.

I would enjoy watching the replay, but since my opponent cannot see it, I don't watch it when I host. When I get time to game out your command mod, Jagger, then I will watch it.

[Flashman007]

According to the survey taken here over 50% of the players are interested in Multiplayer in some degree or another. For me, I find that as good as the AI is, it is pathetic when compared to a human opponent. So the developers need to pay more attention to the PBEM. Unfortunately, I think that they keep biting off more than they can chew. The Web based module was promised long ago and was also a factor in my purchase, yet it waits in never land. It has been over a month since I bitched about this subject so I don't think I am exactly being a nag.

Perhaps I am mistaken but I thought that in a web based game both players would see the replay since neither was the host. Is it actually that neither player will see it?

The other issue that would seem to be an easy fix is the amount of information given out on the message log. Whether multiplayer or solo, both sides should see info about drafts and money. This info is already generated for the message log - just make it availible to both sides! This should be easy (and it would solve some other problems like run away building).

Don't get me wrong, I think this is a good game and I don't begrudge the money spent but I will hold off on the next purchase until the PBEM actually works -not a promise of it.

and for all the solo players out there- you don't know what you are missing

[Rafiki]

The Web based module was promised long ago and was also a factor in my purchase, yet it waits in never land.

In AGEod's defence, and unless I'm much mistaken, there was never given a date for when the play-by-web would be available, just that it was being worked on, and that it could be expected to take a while before becoming available.

[Pocus]

I'm sorry of your disappointment Flashman, but know that the project still hold and is still advancing. Not to the speed we wanted, but it is still alive. That being said, two things, one about multiplay and one about the poll:

- We are developing a TCP/IP module which will ease multiplay. And this module is nearly done. You will get it for free in an ACW update. Also, replay is definitively something we want to do, so once NCP is out, we will consider what are our priorties and develop accordingly new modules (cross-games modules)

- The poll you refer: This biased poll indicate that 50% never play multi and 30% mostly play solo. This leave 20% which play at least as much multi as solo.

Biased because by essence, a poll on the internet to forumers, which are by definition the part of players the most active, bias the result toward this kind of playing style. But don't ignore the vast silent crowd lying outside the forum. After all, even if there is 500 players which post or posted regularly on the forum, it is just a small fraction of all the people who bought the game (not as small as I would like as it would means better sell, but still... )

So the AI will always get a significant time of the development. And I'm still naive enough to think something can be done with an AI. Something nasty I mean (and for now I consider this is still a beginner AI).

[Flashman007]

Rafiki,

Are you a lawyer? I'm not planning a lawsuite over this. But in any event I quote:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------"

As development continues, Ageod is pleased to inform the community that we are confident to be able to offer a fully featured play by web portal for
Ageod's games, starting off with BoA and AACW within the coming months, most likely next Spring.

The web site will provide a free hosting service and will allow players to create and participate in multiplayer games with a few clicks. Schedule your game turns a on daily basis or have the web site host only when everyone has played their turn, view all your current games in a single screen with their status and next host time, receive mail alerts when new turns are ready, and more !

The service will be the starting point for additional tools that will fully automate the handling of game files and ease the everyday life of players involved in multiplayer games.
"


That was Spring 2007 they were talking about. I think it is fair for management to take some flak over this and a wiggly lawyer answer doesn't serve any purpose. I still think it is an issue that deserves management attention sooner rather than later. No I am not bashing this game or company, just nagging.

[Jagger]

Whether multiplayer or solo, both sides should see info about drafts and money. This info is already generated for the message log - just make it availible to both sides! This should be easy (and it would solve some other problems like run away building).

Adjusting the event to display drafts and money to both sides is "probably" easily done. I will take a look at it this weekend and see if it can be done.

[Rafiki]

Rafiki, Are you a lawyer?

Nope. I am a software developer and system administrator, and I've been on the other side of the table often enough to have a fair understanding of what goes on there

That was Spring 2007 they were talking about. I think it is fair for management to take some flak over this and a wiggly lawyer answer doesn't serve any purpose.

Fair enough, and I stand corrected.

That said, this must have been said long before I became active on these boards (upon the release of AACW); I should've qualified my answer with "in the time I've been here", and not left it implied

I still think it is an issue that deserves management attention sooner rather than later. No I am not bashing this game or company, just nagging.

Hehe, given AGEod's size, I'm afraid "developer attention" and "management attention" has more in common than many other places

Hopefully, the TCP/IP-thingy that Pocus is talking about should be of good help to us

[Flashman007]

Jagger- if you can pull that off I will shut up about web based multiplayer - I think it is a much more significant improvement than being able to see the replay.

Pocus- I am aware of my misleading use of the poll , after all there are lies, damn lies and statistics- but it was your poll apy:

[Jagger]

Jagger- if you can pull that off I will shut up about web based multiplayer - I think it is a much more significant improvement than being able to see the replay.

I just took a quick look. It can be done.

One event can be used to simultaneously activate both USA and CSA events/notifications under the actions section within the event file structure. So both sides can be notified of draft/money choices of one side by modding the original event.

The Kentucky events have several examples of this type of situation.

Although I am not going to be able to do anything until maybe, maybe this weekend. So if anyone else is interested in solving a little problem, have at it!

Also I disagree that notification of money/troop purchases is more important than replays for both sides. In a PBEM, simply reach an agreement with your opponent to exchange the information. The only one that can really getted burned is the newbie that doesn't know to ask. But there isn't a work-around for the lack of a replay.

[Pocus]

But there isn't a work-around for the lack of a replay.

There is a work-around (as in 'you can have the replay for both, but it involves a bit of files manipulations).

You are the host. Before processing the new turn, send it to your partner (the 5 files in a ZIP).
Process the turn as usual, watch the game turn. Send the TRN to the partner.

The partner get your 'package' and host in a temp directory, for replay purpose only. The new 'stand-alone' TRN he also get is the one to be used, and not the TRN he generated on his side.

[Flashman007]

Jagger-

Perhaps I did get a little over excited there since as you point out two players can agree to share the info on men and money - it is just easier and more accurate if drafts/volunteers/taxes/bonds would appear on both players logs.

Pocus- I am essentially a computer moron so manipulating files is not something I would look forward to. In the final analysis I am not particuarlly a fan of using the replay anyway, like others have said it takes a while and I can get most of what I want from the message log. The reason it is an issue for me is that my opponent quit due to his inability to see what was going on. Now whether he would have seen my indians and partisans scurrying around behind his lines is with a replay is another matter.

But regardless of the replay issue,the web based multiplayer feature looked wonderful and hopefully it will all work out in the end. Part of the reason I joined into the ruckas is than I do not want Multiplayer to become a minor subset to be ignored by the developer (I am refering to all developers, not particuarlly Ageod). Multiplayer is so much more engaging and challenging- once you try it, you will never go back (hint, hint to everyone) Kinda like dating real girls versus inflatable ones.