noxnoctum Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 I was REALLY happy to see this on the list of additions/improvements. My first pre-order since CMSF, 'nuff said. I can't wait to start challenging people to several hours of Ostfront fun on weekends/my days off . Sometimes you just want to spend more than 20 minutes on the same battle at a time and AI just isn't the same. I also tend to have several large chunks of free time rather than many smaller short chunks so tcp-ip wego just works for me much better in many ways. Big thanks to BFC for adding this, I know quite a few people on the forums did not think it was worth the bother, so I am thankful that BFC took the time/effort to do it for those of us who really wanted it. No replay is regrettable, but that was not the main reason I wanted tcp-ip wego, and, like Steve said, they have indeed said for a long time that it is just not doable. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noxnoctum Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 Two things: 1) Sorry, I don't see the point in this new Wego TCP/IP. How is that different from RT TCP/IP with mandatory pauses every 60 seconds? Seems that I must have missed something. 2) If BFC would assume that players have a data sharing service (eg Dropbox) available and one would accept waiting times for data transfer between turns they (BFC) could implement Wego TCP/IP with replay comparatively easy. Basically H2HH+. The difference is that it gives you the ability to play the game for longer stretches of time (rather than small chunks ala pbem), without having to deal with the headache of playing in realtime (imo it's a headache with anything over a couple platoons) The dropbox thing is an option, but it's not ideal, because of the fatal flaw that people cannot be plotting their moves simultaneously. In that respect, the dropbox option isn't really any better than hotseat (which is terrible if you've ever tried it with a friend --- unless it's coop). So again, big thank you to BFC for giving us this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poesel Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 Is that a mod or what Poesel? I'd be interested in that. It's the only thing that will keep the CMx2 engine alive for me. Cmx1 is still better. The randomness cannot be compared to. Although to enjoy I have to play defense a lot and even that have the ai assault me for challenge. No, it's not a mod. Just an idea how Wego TCP/IP with saves could work. Steve said they won't do it and frankly I think he's right. If such a thing existed there would always be one side who had to go 10x through the replay and the other waits. Then you could just play normal PBEM. Majorbly - I've never played CMx1. But I can say for sure that CMx2 is to be played against another human - either a fresh one (PBEM) or a frozen (scenario). Fresh is of course better but sometimes the freezer will have to do. Playing QBs vs the AI is a waste of time. Blowing up a tank and knowing that someone on the other side is gnashing his teeth - priceless. Doing that vs a piece of silicon - boring. With a scenario you can at least think you have outwitted the scenario creator. Play PBEM - there are maps a plenty. There's no need for a map generator. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macisle Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 I would like to say "thanks!" for the new feature. What with Wego TCP/IP, AI triggers, and damage decals, you guys have started taking the hammer to most of the big dents on my personal squeaky-wheel list. Great work and I'm sooo looking forward to this one! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majorbly50 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 No, it's not a mod. Just an idea how Wego TCP/IP with saves could work. Steve said they won't do it and frankly I think he's right. If such a thing existed there would always be one side who had to go 10x through the replay and the other waits. Then you could just play normal PBEM. Majorbly - I've never played CMx1. But I can say for sure that CMx2 is to be played against another human - either a fresh one (PBEM) or a frozen (scenario). Fresh is of course better but sometimes the freezer will have to do. Playing QBs vs the AI is a waste of time. Blowing up a tank and knowing that someone on the other side is gnashing his teeth - priceless. Doing that vs a piece of silicon - boring. With a scenario you can at least think you have outwitted the scenario creator. Play PBEM - there are maps a plenty. There's no need for a map generator. Well, you certainly have a right to your "opinion" and that's all it is is an opinion. But, I prefer the silicon ai vs a lying cheating game altering human. At least for the most part I know the ai is going to get advantages and cheats, but, I know what they are at least. I will always prefer silicon over human counterpart. Nothing about playing another human is any fun for me. I'll just stick with CMAK and CMBB, they both function very well for the game and type of game I am looking for. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Well, you certainly have a right to your "opinion" and that's all it is is an opinion. But, I prefer the silicon ai vs a lying cheating game altering human. At least for the most part I know the ai is going to get advantages and cheats, but, I know what they are at least. I will always prefer silicon over human counterpart. Nothing about playing another human is any fun for me. I'll just stick with CMAK and CMBB, they both function very well for the game and type of game I am looking for. lol I would have to agree if I were playing a "lying cheating game altering" human. On the other hand IF you find an opponent who is not (and so far NONE of my opponents have fit your description. They have all been gracious, courteous and totally honest) you have a whole other game than you have experienced against the AI. Think of just a few things the AI won't do or won't do well. Use smoke, use demo charges, coordinate artillery with infantry and armor. Actually react to what you do (though that is finally about to change). For the longest amount of time I played only against the AI for a lot of different reasons, but having found human opponents I enjoy playing against it has completely changed the game for me. I do still play against the AI, but I look forward to every single turn that comes through on a pbem so much more. I don't think that is true of CMx2 any more than CMx1. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Well, you certainly have a right to your "opinion" and that's all it is is an opinion. But, I prefer the silicon ai vs a lying cheating game altering human. At least for the most part I know the ai is going to get advantages and cheats, but, I know what they are at least. I will always prefer silicon over human counterpart. Nothing about playing another human is any fun for me. I'll just stick with CMAK and CMBB, they both function very well for the game and type of game I am looking for. Just to point out CM's AI in CMx1 and CMx2 don't cheat. We also have done a lot of things to prevent cheating in H2H play. The single biggest cheating situation is a Human vs. the AI Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 For those of you who think we added a feature that has no audience, I reference this post from the previous page. Just in case someone missed it Steve I was REALLY happy to see this on the list of additions/improvements. My first pre-order since CMSF, 'nuff said. I can't wait to start challenging people to several hours of Ostfront fun on weekends/my days off . Sometimes you just want to spend more than 20 minutes on the same battle at a time and AI just isn't the same. I also tend to have several large chunks of free time rather than many smaller short chunks so tcp-ip wego just works for me much better in many ways. Big thanks to BFC for adding this, I know quite a few people on the forums did not think it was worth the bother, so I am thankful that BFC took the time/effort to do it for those of us who really wanted it. No replay is regrettable, but that was not the main reason I wanted tcp-ip wego, and, like Steve said, they have indeed said for a long time that it is just not doable. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rastamon Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 I'm happy about it too. Thanks for adding it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majorbly50 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Just to point out CM's AI in CMx1 and CMx2 don't cheat. We also have done a lot of things to prevent cheating in H2H play. The single biggest cheating situation is a Human vs. the AI Steve Do you not have settings for +1, +2, and +3 advantage? Do you not have settings for 10%, 20%, 25% more troops etc. etc. advantage? To me that is cheating, game altering, advantages that of course I know about and set to my liking for the ai to use. Maybe that is not what you call cheating but an advantage no less. Also, what about this borg spotting so many speak of that's not suppse to be in CMx2? Isn't that a form of cheating? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFF Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Also, what about this borg spotting so many speak of that's not suppse to be in CMx2? Isn't that a form of cheating? :confused: Borg spotting? No, it's not there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macisle Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 In addition to serving already devoted players, TCP/IP Wego should also help current players turn on new folks to the game and Wego play. It'll be a heck of a lot easier to get a friend to download the demo and jump into a TCP/IP battle than to ask them to deal with PBEM on top of the game's initial learning curve. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfhand Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 If tcp/ip wego was the only improvement, or one of just a few, I would be disappointed because I will probably never use that feature. However, I am pleased to report that I continue to be amazed at the number of new features being introduced in v3 and I can't help but think there is something for just about everyone in it (with most of us being ecstatic about 99% of it). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poesel Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Do you not have settings for +1, +2, and +3 advantage? Do you not have settings for 10%, 20%, 25% more troops etc. etc. advantage? To me that is cheating, game altering, advantages that of course I know about and set to my liking for the ai to use. Maybe that is not what you call cheating but an advantage no less. Also, what about this borg spotting so many speak of that's not suppse to be in CMx2? Isn't that a form of cheating? ??? - yes, there are settings to change the parameters of the game. If you are so afraid that someone will cheat then just be the one to start the game. After that the settings can't be changed. Re 'Borg spotting': as I'm told spotting in x1 worked per side - if one of your units spoted an enemy every unit on your side had it spotted, too. In x2 spotting is per unit. If one unit spots an enemy other units won't automatically spot, too. However, spotting info is transported through C2 links over time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarquelne Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 For those of you who think we added a feature that has no audience, I reference this post from the previous page. Just in case someone missed it I'll almost certainly use it quite a bit. With CMx1 most of my multiplayer games were TCP/IP. No replays is unfortunate, but with smaller battles it shouldn't make a huge difference. I tended to play smaller battles over TCP/IP anyway. Just out of curiosity, what makes TCP/IP replays such a headache with CMx2? Sheer amount of data? A matter of not being built into the engine from the beginning? Illuminati intimidation? (If it's the last one, if you deny it or don't say anything it's OK: We'll get the message.) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pandur Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 But we've been consistently saying since about 2007 that it's just not going to happen. For the same development effort we could do dozens of other BIG features people have been asking for. ....... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 No replay means no VCR controls at all? As in your cannot even go back and forth in the last minute before pressing a button to then plot orders? Or does it mean you can't load a savegame and then play a 1-minute movie? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 I'll almost certainly use it quite a bit. With CMx1 most of my multiplayer games were TCP/IP. No replays is unfortunate, but with smaller battles it shouldn't make a huge difference. I tended to play smaller battles over TCP/IP anyway. That is our feeling too. Not perfect, obviously, but useable and preferable than doing nothing. Just out of curiosity, what makes TCP/IP replays such a headache with CMx2? Sheer amount of data? A matter of not being built into the engine from the beginning? Illuminati intimidation? (If it's the last one, if you deny it or don't say anything it's OK: We'll get the message.) The primary issue is that when the game engine's core guts were coded back in 2004/2005 it wasn't deemed practical to stream and capture the data without putting framerate into the crapper or chewing up more RAM than could be expected to exist. So Charles structured things in a way that, unfortunately, can't be undone in any practical sense. No replay means no VCR controls at all? As in your cannot even go back and forth in the last minute before pressing a button to then plot orders? Or does it mean you can't load a savegame and then play a 1-minute movie? No VCR controls at all. The data is streamed from one computer to the other. It is processed and parsed, not cached or stored, on either end. Therefore it's not possible to review, either in WeGo or in RT modes. What I'd like to see is at least 10-15 seconds worth of running data stored in RAM for instant replay. This would be true for single player and TCP/IP in either mode. I don't know if it is technically feasible, but after we move to 64bit (which will happen) it might be doable for people with significant RAM to spare. Right now we're pressing up against the 4GB limit so that right there nixes it for now. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 What I'd like to see is at least 10-15 seconds worth of running data stored in RAM for instant replay Now that would be cool. after we move to 64bit (which will happen) it might be doable for people with significant RAM to spare. That too 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jock Tamson Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 What I'd like to see is at least 10-15 seconds worth of running data stored in RAM for instant replay. This would be true for single player and TCP/IP in either mode. I don't know if it is technically feasible, but after we move to 64bit (which will happen) it might be doable for people with significant RAM to spare. Right now we're pressing up against the 4GB limit so that right there nixes it for now. Steve Hi Steve, isn't this where the dedicated server exe could come in? What I am envisaging is a server interface similar to that on, say, Arma to allow easy hosting of a scenario. One player hosts the dedi server and all players persistently connect to it to submit moves and receive replays. It calculates the outcome and produces files for the players to replay. As it would be an additional process, it has its own 3GB address space on a 32 Bit OS. Obviously there is a similarity to PBEM in terms of data transfer, but the significant advantage is that all players can plot their moves at the same time. Additionally, future developments might be:- - provide a means in the future for more than 2 players to take part in a mission - multiplayer combined arms scenarios could be built where the designer allocates particular units to player 1, player 2, player 3, etc - each player only has spotting info for what his units can see. But if players' units share a net then some "?" spotting info is made available between commands. - server parameters such as move submission time limits could be set by the host, to keep the flow of the game going eg 6 player game, platoon each, 15 minute limit for reviewing replays and and submitting moves - could be a lot of fun. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Yes, a dedicated server does fix a lot of issues. Unfortunately it causes a lot of major development problems for us. Again, it all comes down to "how much is this feature worth". To all of us, conceptually, the feature is worth a lot. Nobody disagrees about it. But when it comes to figuring out what we're going to spend our time on, it ranks very low compared to the other things people want. Which means the will is there, the technical solutions exist, but given our limited work capacity it's not practical. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jock Tamson Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Yes, a dedicated server does fix a lot of issues. Unfortunately it causes a lot of major development problems for us. Again, it all comes down to "how much is this feature worth". To all of us, conceptually, the feature is worth a lot. Nobody disagrees about it. But when it comes to figuring out what we're going to spend our time on, it ranks very low compared to the other things people want. Which means the will is there, the technical solutions exist, but given our limited work capacity it's not practical. Steve Understood. Maybe in the next generation of the engine it would be seen as a worthwhile project that might extend the appeal of the series to people who are drawn to games like Men of War Assault Squad - RTS, yes, but groggier than most and with good multiplayer arrangements. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poesel Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Yes, a dedicated server does fix a lot of issues. ... But when it comes to figuring out what we're going to spend our time on, it ranks very low compared to the other things people want. ... So I give my +1 to this to push it a but further up the list. A headless server running under Linux (like DropTeam had) would be fantastic. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mord Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 What are the benefits of moving to 64bit for the game overall? Mord. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 The major benefit of 64bit is allowing CM access to more than 4GB of RAM. The Mac is already 64bit because... well... because it has to be. As with most things Windows related, things are a lot more complicated. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.