Brit

Hi guys. Thanks for the support. Just thought I'd drop in and answer a few questions. The question about the omniscient AI: I don't think it's feasible for me to get together an AI that's using real fog of war. It's something that's a real challenge to do, and getting it working properly would be quite a bit of work. And, by "working properly" I mean that the AI can compensate for this lack of knowledge with a much increased skill in playing the game. Sorry. It's not terribly uncommon to have all-knowing AIs, though I'm not offering that as an excuse so much as to say that it's an indication of the difficulty of creating a capable AI that deals with a fog of war. For example, I've caught the Civ 3 AI using information that I know he didn't have. (By the way, here's a video of the Civilization AI programmer giving a talk about the Civ 3 and Civ 4 AI, and answers some questions about information cheats. Jump to 29:00 to hear about an invasion cheat and also 49:30 when someone asks a question about information cheats.) As a game-player, I know it sucks when you see the AI doing something it shouldn't know. (As a side note, I was surprised that the Civilization AI programmer said that their AI only has 25,000 lines of code, as I'm pretty sure EOS uses more than that.) I should be posting some more reflections on things in the near future.

Hey, thanks. In a few days, I think I'll post a post mortem on the game. Also, as far as #1, I've started projects before and had other developers interested in getting involved and helping out on a volunteer basis. I've always found that volunteers tend to lose interest pretty quickly, so I haven't had much luck with people unless I'm paying them. Other developers I've talked to have come to the same conclusion. I'd be in a similar situation right now with EOS2. Anyway, I already accepted a new job. One thing I can say is that employers seem pretty interested in people who have the ambition and talent to pull off a whole product by themselves. It took less than two weeks between starting to look for a job and getting a good job offer. I'll comment on this more in the future.

Thanks for the encouragement. I'd repost what I said here (http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?p=1221373), but I don't want to start two threads.

Thanks for the encouragement. Unfortunately, I see EOS winding down. I just can't afford it anymore. Over 40% of our sales were in November and December of 2009. Sales have been declining ever since the game's release, with an occasional jump thanks to a sale. November 2010 went on record as the worst sales month to date - I earned only $370. (Multiply that by 12 months, and that works out to $4400 / year.) It's not a living wage, and I'm still in debt from developing the game in the first place. We also had some foreign contracts that were bringing in money, but they're about to end (which is why I didn't include them in the $370 figure). I've been trying to turn around sales for the last year without much success, so I just don't have much faith in accomplishing that anymore. I'd really need turn around the sales-decline trend and get a 10-fold increase in sales to earn a living and start paying down my debt. Battlefront says they've sold games through other distributors, but it doesn't make a big difference in revenue once you include their 30% cut of the sales. Steam and the Humble Bundle guys won't return my email. I'll still be around to fix bugs because I feel that I owe it to the users to fix major problems.

The AI uses a different system for setting up orders. Based on your comment, it looks like there are some differences in what the AI can do versus what the player can do with the interface. That wasn't intentional, just an unintended difference in the targeting systems. I should change one of the systems, but it's not a terribly high priority.

Notable Fixes and Improvements: - Fixed bug: nukes would sometimes explode in the wrong location - The Foreign Relations window can be resized, and the game restores the window's last size and position - Changed the AdHoc order system so units don't automatically leave forts to attack enemies - Fixed an interface bug: sometimes players couldn't target any enemies in a group when there were multiple enemies in one location - Fixed bug in the highlighting in the city-build window

The four digits after the game key are a temporary password. After the temporary password is used, it stores an 8-digit password. You generally aren't aware of the password because it's stored internally. The game uses the password to prevent other people from accessing the events if they aren't that player - it's an anti-cheating thing. When you remove a game from the EOSMessenger, it gives you the information (the player-key e.g. "MyGame-Dec01-P01" and a password e.g. "32142434"). You'll need that information to add that game back into the EOS Messenger. It sounds like you don't have it, so I'll look it up on the server. Just email me with the name of the game and your player number, and I'll send you back the password.

Okay, I'm changing the logic behind units in forts, to make it similar to the city code. Right now, if a unit is inside a city, and that unit gets a defense bonus for being there, then he won't leave the city to auto-attack. That same logic is now used if units are inside forts.

The new messenger should allow you to add games back onto the list. Do you still have the game's name, player number, and password? If not, contact me and I'll get you the information. Also, on the main interface, the event count does appear with the <!> symbol. You need to click on the game in order to see more details about the events. Let me know if the new messenger is working for you.

Just a small update. - Fixed crash: there was a bug in the 'destroy improvement' save-game code. - Fixed bug: the pause production flag was not being saved in the save-game file. - Fixed some issues and made improvements to the EOS Messenger Application - Fixed a bug in the updater You might get a validation error if you attempt to get an update right after I post this. If so, just try again in an hour. (I had some issues with the update system, but it should be working fine shortly.)

Cool, thanks!

Battlefront just confirmed to me that you should be getting the latest installer. No, there isn't an entry in the add-remove programs list.

I think I have an idea what might've caused that. I've been meaning to get back into the EOS Messenger code. I guess I'll have to now.

Hm, I'm not sure. I suppose it's possible that Battlefront linked to the latest version of the game. My suggestion would be to download it and install it to see what version number it gives you. Let me know what you find.

In that case, there are a few options: - The easiest thing to do is install the game and run "Updater.exe". It will download all the updates and apply them, bringing you up to the DRM-free version of the game. This method wouldn't require entering a registration key. - A less convenient method (in case you forget about the Updater.exe application) is to install the game, run it, insert your registration key, and when the game comes up, you press the 'get updates' key. This will download the latest version and also release your license (the one that you just entered a minute earlier). - You can also backup the entire directory right now (i.e. after you get the DRM-free version) using a zip file. This would allow you to quickly get it up and running on a new hard drive or computer without needing to download all the updates. I'd like to be able to provide players with a download link with the full installer for the latest version of the game (accessible to existing players whenever they want in the future), but I really have no way to verify anyone's purchase of the game - that's handled by Battlefront.

I'm not sure what you mean about downloading the DRM free file. If you're running version 1.01.15629, then your copy of EOS.exe is the DRM-free version.

Some production consumes resources like Iron. If you select pause production, then the city stops building things (which stops the consumption of iron) and lets you produce money instead. The cities always consume oil and food, regardless of whether they're building something.

Just put out an update to bring players up to version 1.01.15629. This will unlicense the DRM and download a DRM-free version of the game for all existing players. Also, if you buy a copy from the Battlefront store, you'll also receive the DRMless version 1.01.15629.

It sounds like we might have it up on GamersGate soon.

Battlefront tried contacting Steam a while back. It took them a while to respond, and they sort of seemed like they weren't that interested. I fired off another submission to them today. Maybe I'll have better luck.

I usually don't really build radar, because I just didn't feel like they were useful enough to justify the cost. I thought making them a little more valuable would be good. Also, it would be nice to have players thinking more about how to strategically place radar on the map (which cities and where to build airfields with radar), and have other players targeting those radar. I bumped up the submarine detection ranges a bit just to make it a little easier to do anti-submarine warfare. I'm still doing some adjustment to get it to where I want.

Notable Fixes and Improvements: - Made aircraft better about flying home automatically (when they do ad-hoc orders to attack something) - Fixed a bug in the movement rate of ballistic missiles - Added text descriptions to the range-lines of aircraft - Rules Editor: Added the ability to remove upgrades - Fixed a bug in the view-range of airfield improvements - City Improvements can now be destroyed by their owner (but only at a rate of one per turn) - Fixed Regression: Aircraft in groups wouldn't take off - Adjusted the Official Rules: . - Slowed down how quickly ballistic missiles move in the Official Rules (allowing players to see incoming missiles) . - Increased the movement range of Missile (V2) . - Renamed "Missile (V2)" to "Short Range Missile" . - Reduced the price of "Short Range Missile" and "Medium Range Missile" . - Increased the submarine-detection range of destroyers and cruisers . - Increased the radar range of the City/Airfield Radar . - The Nuclear SRBM no longer upgrades to the Nuclear ICBM . - Reduced Missiles to 1 HP

Basically, yes. This also assume the counterattacking unit is within range. (For example, artillery can attack without getting a counterattack if the other unit is distant.) That's basically correct. The game tracks who's in combat with who and then processes combat. So, there's a Tank-InfantryA combat, and a Tank-InfantryB combat going on. Over one full round, the tank gets attacked 3 times, and each infantry gets attacked 1.5 times. It's attacks get directed towards all the units it is in combat with. There is one case where this isn't the case: if a unit has combat priorities setup in the rules. For example, tactical bombers prioritize ground and sea units above other units, so it will direct all its fire against them even if there are aircraft within its combat range. Depends. Units won't automatically engage in combat against all units within their combat range. If your artillery is setup to attack ships, then it will initiate combat with a ship that's within range (not necessarily all of them). When a unit processes combat, it will distribute it's attacks among the units that it is "in combat" with. So, if you had an artillery setup to attack ships, but there is an enemy tank and two destroyers within range, what would happen is that your artillery would pick out one of the ships to attack. It would only be "in combat" with that ship. If the enemy tank attacks your artillery, then your artillery will be "in combat" with one ship and the tank - and will distribute its attacks among those two units. Yes, the "no field orders" will prevent units from attacking, but it will counterattack. If an enemy ship attacks your transport, then your transport will be "in combat" with the enemy ship. Whether or not you targeted that enemy ship is not relevant for processing combat. However, if you don't attack him and he doesn't attack you, then your transport won't be "in combat", and will stand a better chance of surviving.

Okay, I tracked down the problem and fixed it. The latest update (which includes this fix) is now available.

Yes. The AA will randomly attack a missile each "tic". (There are 100 tics in a turn.) This effectively divides his attack among all the missiles.