1:1 Representation in CMx2 (Part II)

[PeterX]

"To snuff out potential incorrect reading between the lines... CMx2 will be WeGo "

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

That sounds pretty certain to me....

Then it will be a revised version. If it's WEGO how can it not be PBEM friendly? File size? I assume the majority of us have broadband.

[ February 11, 2005, 12:59 PM: Message edited by: PeterX ]

[Treeburst155]

The problem is file size, not up/down speed. Even expensive broadband packages often have limits on attachment size. My limit is 5MB.

I think you can be certain WEGO is in. Steve nipped any question of that right in the bud. There is no better way than WEGO for a company level simulation.

Treeburst155 out.

[PeterX]

OK. But I was hoping someone would address my assymetrical input theory.....

[PeterX]

OK. But I was hoping someone would address my assymetrical input theory....

[Jasper 2x]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Jasper 2x:

PBEM is a primitive feature I really could care less. What I would like to see is an in game browser something like game spy arcade that lets you find other internet games. A CM game is not that long although the set-up times can be. Thus I fail to see the value of PBEM. Just have a save feature.

The feature you are requesting....

"I would like to see is an in game browser something like game spy arcade that lets you find other internet games. "

Might mean setting up some form of BFC Command Central gaming MASTER server to co-ordinate your search request with other online active gamers.....

I suspect they may be thinking about something like this to facilitate co-play or Mulit-multi player for teams on each side, but it has been stated that won't be feature that is available in the first release of CMx2 (Game 1). They do however hope to have some form of co-play for CMx2 Game 2 and then that central server online game look up thing you are asking about maybe possible.

-tom w </font>

[Lee]

PeterX: I would address it, but your response was symmetrical.

[Treeburst155]

Originally posted by PeterX:

OK. But I was hoping someone would address my assymetrical input theory....

Hmmmm.....stirring the pot here, Steve did mention something about company level play in CM2 possibly being preferred by those who now prefer larger scenarios. An RTS at the company scale.....hmmmm. They won't attempt it. I'd never buy it if they did....too much mouse twitching.

Treeburst155 out.

[GreenAsJade]

Originally posted by Treeburst155:

The problem is file size, not up/down speed. Even expensive broadband packages often have limits on attachment size. My limit is 5MB.

I think you can be certain WEGO is in. Steve nipped any question of that right in the bud. There is no better way than WEGO for a company level simulation.

Treeburst155 out.

There are ways around this. You don't have to email the thing... put it up on a web site etc.

As 'wolf said: give us the capability to play in "non simultaneous fashion" and we'll find a way to pass the files around.

PBeM doesn't have to have the 'e' or even the 'M'. The heart of it is that I can do my turn at a different time to you. Since CMx2 is going to be revolutionary, there may be a revolution in just how that is acheieved...

GaJ.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by GreenAsJade:

There are ways around this. You don't have to email the thing... put it up on a web site etc.

GaJ.

Or get ICQ, MSN etc. which allow file transfers.

[RMC]

Originally posted by Treeburst155:

Steve did mention something about company level play in CM2 possibly being preferred by those who now prefer larger scenarios. An RTS at the company scale.....hmmmm. They won't attempt it. I'd never buy it if they did....too much mouse twitching.

Given that RT/CT games are really turn-based applications with micro-sized turns, what's to stop BTS from doing what a number of other developers have done and allow the player to choose between the 1 minute turns we have now and RT (or anything in between - 30 second turns, say)? Smaller battles could be done in RT and the bigger ones and PBEM games done turn-based. RT would lend itself to TCP/IP play better methinks.

[aka_tom_w]

I would bet the farm the current thinking for the game design parameters they are working on now DO NOT and WILL not ever include any option of ongoing, constant, never stopping REAL TIME play.

If I was to guess I would say this would have to be a fundamental game design decision that would have had to have been made right at the start of the process and since it has been made clear that the turn structure is WEGO, I would say that eliminates any possibility of real time combat simulation. IMHO

BUT I could be wrong.

(good thing I don't own a farm)

-tom w

[RMC]

I realize that particularly in the CM fan base there is a stigma associated with real time games of any sort. I also understand the majority of the forum members have no desire for such a feature. Steve has pointed out that this forum represents but a small slice of the CM user base. The majority may well be more welcoming of such a feature.

In the other thread about design, Steve is talking about the narrowness of the grog vision. He is encouraging us to think outside of the CM1 box. There are other titles that allow players to choose between real time and turn-based play modes. It does not seem unreasonable to think BTS is capable of also using such an approach. If we get solo, hotseat, PBEM and TCP/IP play options why not also TB and RT as well?

[junk2drive]

"There are other titles that allow players to choose between real time and turn-based play modes. "

And a couple of them sucked.

[RMC]

Originally posted by junk2drive:

"There are other titles that allow players to choose between real time and turn-based play modes. "

And a couple of them sucked.

And some of them didn't.

Your brilliance is truly awesome to behold.

[Edward_the_Surly]

Why not create a hybrid TCP/PBEM system? In a nutshell CMx2 would act like a server. TCP is realtime this new option I'll call it Convenience Time. I have an opponent that wants to play Convenience Time, I start QB game set the options and select Convenience Time and input my opponents IP address. I make my first turn selections and hit 'Go'. CMx2 then automatically trys to connect to my opponents PC. If it is online it connects and begins tranferring the file. If he is not online it will try every X minutes to connect. When a connection is made the file is transferred the opponent is notified and can plot the next turn and start the transfer process heading the other direction.

I was thinking the same thing while reading this thread. I could care less if CM2 had pbem or not, just so it has a way for me to complete my turns at a different time than my opponent. The only time I ever play CM solo is when I'm waiting for a file return...as I am now I could count the times I've TCP'd on one hand...

[Thomm]

I would also like some kind of continuous time capability in the new engine. Pausable, of course, at any time to give detailed orders PLUS (and that is something that I did not see in any game yet) the possibility to go back in time and review what happened at a certain location; kind of an instant replay which is not confined to turn intervals.

This would avoid movement to contact phases that take an hour (wall-clock-time) just to move into attack positions.

But I think that it is pretty clear that this is not going to happen, the reason being loss of scalability. With the turn-based solution the only real limit to force size is the patience of the player (or so it seems to me).

Continuous time would certainly place some restrictions on force size that would be undesireable.

Best regards,

Thomm

[RMC]

Originally posted by Rollstoy:

But I think that it is pretty clear that this is not going to happen, the reason being loss of scalability. With the turn-based solution the only real limit to force size is the patience of the player (or so it seems to me).

Continuous time would certainly place some restrictions on force size that would be undesireable.

The scalability problem is relative. Some players are more comfortable with a larger set of units in an RT environment than others. So I don't think there should be a hard coded limit the way the CC series had it. Let the player figure out what is too much for him in RT.

Also, like you mention this feature should be something that the player can switch into and out of on the fly. RT until contact, TB in heavy fighting, RT in the mop up phase for example. Or in a smaller scenario RT the whole time.

[Thomm]

Originally posted by RMC:

Let the player figure out what is too much for him in RT.

Hmmmm. I know what is too much for me, for example. In the RTS wargame (name withheld intentionally) where you get 20 units and maps on average 540m square, I notice that when I perform wide flanking moves I concentrate on the flanking group and leave the rest of the battlegroup unobserved for minutes. Clearly, this is a result of the real-time character of the game, and not very realistic although one might argue that it offsets the God like abilities of the player a little bit - he can only be at one place at a time.

That is not primarily a result of the number of units that are available but the large distances that have to be scrolled over and having to re-focus.

Best regards,

Thomm

[Thomm]

Originally posted by RMC:

Also, like you mention this feature should be something that the player can switch into and out of on the fly. RT until contact, TB in heavy fighting, RT in the mop up phase for example. Or in a smaller scenario RT the whole time.

Yes, that would be perfect. Plus: full replay movie available at any time!

Best regards,

Thomm

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Rollstoy:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by RMC:

Also, like you mention this feature should be something that the player can switch into and out of on the fly. RT until contact, TB in heavy fighting, RT in the mop up phase for example. Or in a smaller scenario RT the whole time.

Yes, that would be perfect. Plus: full replay movie available at any time!

Best regards,

Thomm </font>

[Jasper 2x]

I always play cm over a network TCP/IP Is the only way I play you just cant compare it to PBEM.

[RMC]

Originally posted by Rollstoy:

Clearly, this is a result of the real-time character of the game, and not very realistic although one might argue that it offsets the God like abilities of the player a little bit - he can only be at one place at a time.

Well, let me ask you this. What about that is unrealistic? I would buy inconvenient to the player, but unrealistic? Not so sure. Real commanders don't get to hover over their units. Units can go mere minutes without new orders.

Which leads to the 1 minute turn. What is so special about the 1 minute turn? Why can't it be 30 seconds? 45 seconds? 2 minutes? Perhaps BTS explained their reasoning somewhere, but I suspect it was rather arbitrary. I do remember there was an issue with the AIs ability to cope with turns longer than a minute. So the computer needs a break every minute for the AI to function well. What about the player?

Does the player need to issue an order every minute? Is he entitled to that? It is a game after all and it wouldn't be much of a game if a player didn't get to move his pieces around. Is there a realism demand here? What is the appropriate level of interaction?

Right now CM sells a level of control that is an illusion. The Emrys says he likes to spend up to an hour contemplating a single move. He and anyone else can do this do as much as they like. But once they hit go, all bets are off. It's the AIs game. 10 seconds into the turn, something may happen that renders the carefully planned order moot: a tank appears, enemy artillery hits the unit location, that hidden MG opens fire. For the next 50 seconds that unit's fate is in the hands of the AI. The player cannot give a new order. He has to wait. The CM player is not under any time pressure, but his aggregate level of control over his units is really not any greater than in an RT environment.

That is not primarily a result of the number of units that are available but the large distances that have to be scrolled over and having to re-focus.

It's not just refocusing and reorienting. It's the physical act of moving the mouse and clicking. These steps do take time. Because of that in wargaming circles RT games suffer from the perception that a large part of being a good player is being more dextrous than others, not smarter tactically. I don't think there is much merit in that notion as far as RT wargames are concerned, however much it is true in the conventional RTS build and swarm games.

[Thomm]

Originally posted by RMC:

Well, let me ask you this. What about that is unrealistic? I would buy inconvenient to the player, but unrealistic? Not so sure. Real commanders don't get to hover over their units. Units can go mere minutes without new orders.

I basically agree with you and I do not have a problem with these imposed idle phases in the RTS game (playing with 45 min. timer).

But you have to extrapolate the problem to larger forces. Then I am afraid the pauses can become arbitrarily long while the commander flies around the battlefield trying to keep his forces together. And this is what I consider unrealistic: the fact that with larger forces the order delays most likely increase in an RTS setting, while in real life intermediate command levels would keep the forces going.

The fact that the command delay is a function of the force size due to the limited capacity of the user is a give-away for a unrealistic game model.

Best regards,

Thomm

[Treeburst155]

Anything involving continuous time should have REAL time (1 minute for 1 minute) as the fastest possible speed. Players could play at 1/4,1/2,3/4 speed, etc..but time should never be allowed to pass faster than real time. I could live with this type of slow click-fest.

EDIT: On second thought, 30 seconds time passage in 60 seconds (1/2 speed) would be about as fast I could handle. This would mean all the visuals occur in slow motion. I'd rather get real time movies after an orders pause.

Treeburst155 out.

[ February 12, 2005, 11:32 AM: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]

[RMC]

Originally posted by Rollstoy:

I basically agree with you and I do not have a problem with these imposed idle phases in the RTS game (playing with 45 min. timer).

Well, I'm not so sure what the point of a pauseable real time option would be. I think the regular turn-based approach fills the need well enough. You just can't influence the events during the real time execution. I think having an RT mode simply to allow the player to artificially create sub-minute turns would be a waste.

Then I am afraid the pauses can become arbitrarily long while the commander flies around the battlefield trying to keep his forces together.

Pauses by definition are going to be arbitrarily long are they not? Flying around the battlefield is another limitation of going RT in the 3d environment. It is harder to get to the right view to issue the order the way you want. Now the player consuming a few more of his precious seconds fighting the interface. Hmm, I wonder if it this could be ameliorated a little bit by making the command delays a little shorter in RT mode than in the turn-based mode.

And this is what I consider unrealistic: the fact that with larger forces the order delays most likely increase in an RTS setting, while in real life intermediate command levels would keep the forces going.

I don't know that we can overcome this problem. It occurs in the turn-based play too. You never know how long it is going to take your unit to complete the order you gave it. So many times a unit completes it order too soon or too late and there is a delay in the turn before you can give a new order in addition to any command delay imposed by the game rules.

I was thinking that what would help would be some kind of global order or mission you could assign to individual unit or a group of units. Assign them an objective that influences how the tacAI makes decision for them. Allow a unit without an explicit order from the player to act in accordance with the player's previously expressed intent. This could be used to plug those gaps where a unit is operating without orders on default.

The fact that the command delay is a function of the force size due to the limited capacity of the user is a give-away for a unrealistic game model.

Well, sure. The bigger the force size the less manageable RT becomes and as pointed out by others, the harder it becomes for the AI to make all the calculations and juggle the glass balls. Something will have to give way and that is usually framerate/performance. That's why a game of CM's scale could never go exclusively RT, but it could offer the option to players for smaller scenarios that are more amenable to TCP/IP play.