Innocence
-
Posts
59 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Innocence
-
-
Sorry Brit, but no - it's exactly the other way around (unless we're talking a major hyped title, like StarCraft II and like).My current interpretation of this is that gamers hear about the game first, then look for a place to buy it.If you try out Impulse and Steam you'll see first-hand why these systems generate extra sales. I've done impulse-buys on both platforms after watching the review videos - the "Buy now" link is never far away
Steam, being my personal favorite, is more than a distribution system. It's a online gaming community, including Friend's list, ingame chat, ingame awards system and more. This means, you'll see which games your friends are playing and how they're doing (awards, virtual medals
), enticing you to buy the same games to play with them. It's very much a "X-Box Live" community for non-console gamers. -
As far as I know, in Europe this only goes for Germany. Replacing it for Germans is fine by me, but please don't let the rest of Europe suffer for their censorship.If you're marketing in Europe, you might want to replace all swastikas with the iron cross. In come countries, Germany I think is one, it is illegal. They don't bother me but they do some people. -
Told you....I knew I shouldn't have mentioned Steam.....now I'm going to get murdered in my sleep by all the wargamers....great.
EDIT: In all seriousness, I just think Steam would be a good way to attract more players....all I'm say'in.
Actually Warspite2 already suggested this in the 22nd post in this thread:
If you could get this game on steam in the indie section, impulse, gamersgate, or direct2drive then I bet your sales would go sky high!I agree - with both of you
-
Sound like a good idea as a "Quick start" option. Would make the initial game more interresting.what if there was an option in the game to give players X free production right from the beginning of the game?
True, but it's sorts of a Catch 22: The multiplayer market for turn based games is very small because the traditional (IGo-UGo) implementation totally sucks with more than two players, and few developers want to develop a good multiplayer experience since the market is very small.Unfortunately multi-player is a tiny market despite the vocal protests of those who do it. -
Actually that's a good idea, although stealth-units like submarines should still be hidden.By FoW, I assume you mean more than the "map is known" option? You mean that everything on the map is visible?Imagine 10+ players at LAN party playing Empires of Steel with this option on and a projector showing the entire map and action on a big screen. Once all turns are submitted eveyone sits back together and watch the action on the big screen, laughing, cursing and shouting.
-
Ditto. Got a three and a one year old, wife, house, garden, work etc. I'm lucky if I get a few consecutive gaming hours every week (usually it's very "on, off"), and if I do it's never scheduled. PBEM is the only multiplayer experience that'll work for me.No way I will ever sit there and finish an online multiplayer game at 4 hours + in game play time. PBEM is definately a must have for me, and the implementation seems to be a good one.Somehow' date=' you have to differentiate yourself from the rest of the competition[/quote']Exactly, and the PBEM/WeGo multiplayer implementation does just that. Unfortunately like I wrote, too few people understand this model, they're totallt caught up in old-fashioned I-go-You-go turn based, which is absolutely terrible for multiplayer. -
I agree - I've bought several games on impulse on ImpulseIf you could get this game on steam in the indie section, impulse, gamersgate, or direct2drive then I bet your sales would go sky high!.Question is of course how large a percentage they charge.
-
Actually the only reason I can't "sell" EoS to my frieds is that PBEM still isn't full-featured - so I'm just waiting for that to happen
Once PBEM is ready for prime time EoS will go from being yet-another-turnbased-wargame into offering a very rare multiplayer experience!
I really think PBEM (or simultaneous turnbased multiplayer?) is the feature which should be touted the most - it's something that 99,9% of the other games do not have.
The trick is to make players understand why they need it, that this is a feature which actually makes multiplayer turnbased games playable, and that that's what sets EoS apart from other games. Most players simply do not understand the concept (being as rare as it is)
-
I suppose if the server interface is exposed, EoSM clients could be written in any language (ie. Java, Python) and thus be available on any device able to run said language.Looks great! Will you be able to write an iPhone application for this too?You wont be able to play your turn on the device, but you could easily respond to messages, trades and diplomacy anywhere you can get an Internet connection.
This type of online functionality is what is needed to bring turn based strategy games out of closed forums and lobbies and into the new millennium.
-
Fanfreakintastic!!!!Any thoughts/opinions on this? -
THANKS FOR ADDING PBEM - even if it's still rudimentary
This one came right out of the blue, I was under the impression that it wasn't even being worked on! Off to post the good news
) -
Sounds like an advanced kind of Civilization Pitboss game hosting. I like it
-
Is PBEM (or a Dedicated Host utility) still on the roadmap? :confused:
Seems like every week people are complaining that "noboby's available for multiplayer", which is hardly surprising since noone ever sits around waiting for a 5+ hour game session to begin. Well maybe in a testlab, but not in real life
For multiplayer to be a success, there needs to be an option to plan and submit orders out-of-sync with other players being online.
-
I think making effects of strategic bombing and shelling of cities and resources temporary, would be a good thing, ie. production in city and resource output will be affected the turn it's bombed, but will then return to normal. Historically casualties due to population/terror-bombing are fairly small. Targetting production centres is by far more effecient.
-
It'd be nice if it did. Would make strategic bombers more useful.No, bombing resources doesn't have an effect. -
AmenP.S Keep up the great work Brit. It is great to see someone who cares about his program. I am tired of people/companies not supporting thier software be it in forums and/or via updates.Generally I've had much better experience with support from indie programmers than larger companies, for example Taleworlds (Mount & Blade), Sean O'Connor (Slay!) and Slitherine (Conquest).
The only larger developer who show genuine dedication is Blizzard (WarCraft, StarCraft, Diablo etc.), though few support their games as badly as 4Head Studios/JoWood (The Guild)
-
Blimey, you're efficientI found and fixed the problem
-
I'm getting the exact same results. Just tried disbanding the group of 7-8 UAV's into individual units and sending them in - instant bloodbath. Two infantry, one artillery destroyed, 2 UAV's damaged.After repeated attacks where I would see smoke from bombs I was getting no effect on the ships and maybe one hit to one of my planes.I saved the game and broke them into 1 fighter group and 3 tac bomber groups. Same effect. Then I tried sending each plane in individually. Instant bloodbath both sides.
I've got a savegame (835Kb compressed). Interresting thing is watching the replay of the previous 7 turns: 6 turns of the UAV group attacking without effect, then this last turn of total carnage.
-
I agree it's a very simplified view on ship roles, which is why it fit's EoS very well: If the roles changed with technology it would lead to a more complicated game.I think this would be correct as a simplified/generic WWII view
Yes, there's no reason why advanced BBs,CRs,DDs and Subs shouldn't be able to carry missiles too.but today any naval platform can be filled with various missiles, thus making them far more potent? -
Yes, and the roles for different ships need to be defined more clearly, to motivate building different ships/combined arms.I would love to see the rock, scissors, paper (SB sinks BB sinks CR sinks DD sinks SB sinks BB) that makes navel strategy so intriguing- Battleships are floating artillery platform (useful for land bombardment), they're strong against all other surface ships, but weak against Subs and planes.
- Cruisers are strong against planes and Destroyers, but weak against Subs and Battleships.
- Destroyers are fast and strong against Subs, but weak against Battleships, Cruisers and planes.
- Subs are strong against Battleships and Cruisers, but weak against Destroyers and planes.
- Battleships are floating artillery platform (useful for land bombardment), they're strong against all other surface ships, but weak against Subs and planes.
-
Ehm, there is no way of 'reloading turns' in a PBEM game when using the wego system (as EoS does). You send in your orders and receive the result from the host. Reloading your old turn wouldn't help.In fact this system is pretty much the same as PBEM except no emailing,.....so no reloading turns etc...@Moon: Stars! games rarely lasted >100 turns, so that might be a problem as you say. The thing is, it's next to impossible to coordinate more than 3 people meeting online at an exact time, so there really needs to be an alternative asynchronous way of playing EoS for real multiplayer to be viable, if not PBEM then an online stand-alone EoS server (like PitBoss) where the players can log in and do their turns at different hours.
-
Problem is, this would either require the host to have an online server running 24/7, or require the developer/publisher to set up an online server solution for benefit of the players.You log in, do your turn, click submit, then dont need to do another turn for 24 hours or whenever the game has its daily deadline set at, unless yours was the last turn submitted for the turn, in which case you can go ahead and do your next turn after all moves and combat is resolvedThe former isn't practical for the majority of players (at least not until electricity becomes free
)The latter would likely require pay-to-play, which would kill the game. If the game was a major cash-cow (like Blizzard's StarCraft) I guess the publisher might offer the service for free, but EoS is unfortunately a niche game.
-
The problem isn't really meeting up - the problem is, as Hawk writes, that the game takes a very long time to play, a commitment which most people is unable to fullfill. Really, the only solution to fully functional multiplayer is PBEM - as we've discussed beforeAt this point, there don't seem to be very many people in the chatroom. I think I may need to add a few features to help players meet up and play.
-
Have you considered a change so that damaged units with "Sentry until repaired" orders ignore field orders? I hate having to change their field orders to 'none' when they're under repair, and change it back when they're fully healed. I've lost countless ships cause they attacked when they were repairing and very low on hitpoints.You'll be happy to know that these three things will be added in the the next update.
Marketing Blitz
in Empires of Steel
Posted
Steam's even self-promoting, ie. friends see which games you own and play, buy the same games, then their friends see what they're playing etc.